# [OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread



## cstkl1

​
WIP, links to all bioses, tools.
























World's Fastest Intel Alder Lake


In pursuit of the World’s Fastest Intel Alder Lake CPU, we join Jon from @ElmorLabs and Shamino & Safedisk from the @ASUS ROG overclocking team.In pursuit of...




youtu.be













Overclocking Your Intel 12th Gen K CPU on Z690 motherboards – Live ASUS AiOC Demo / Walkthrough


Interested in overclocking your Intel Alder Lake 12th Gen K series CPU? Whether you have a 12900K, 12700K or 12600K we have you covered. In this live stream,...




youtu.be













Alder Lake Overclocking: What's New (COMPLETE GUIDE)


Finally, it’s here! Intel Alder Lake is the 12th generation of Intel Core processors built on the Intel 7 process technology. It’s Intel’s first high-perform...




youtu.be













​


----------



## cstkl1

FAQ



Spoiler
















































Shamino ADL Guide








ROG Z690 Overclocking Info[6815].pdf


PDF File



1drv.ms





OCTVB Guide + tools









ASUS MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME & i9-12900K GUIDE - Load...


Disclaimer ! These settings and methods are outside Intel's specifications, just like any other overclocking method. ---------------------------------------------------- For Z790/13900K click here Introduction: In a world increasingly concerned with natural resources, the watchword is...




www.overclock.net







shamino1978 said:


> if anyone wants to try out this auto tune tool for strix / maximus (windows/uefi version), guide in the link:
> start it before going to bed cause it takes pretty long.
> just to see if this has any potential.











Auto_Opt1130.zip


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com







shamino1978 said:


> this should fix this issue
> load ai opt and wait 5 seconds for autorun and answer question and leave it











AutoOptEFI1204.zip


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com







shamino1978 said:


> maximus oc pak











m14ocpak1121.zip


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com




it explains usage



https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/LGA1700/ROG_MAXIMUS_Z690_EXTREME/ROG_True_Voltician_V1.0.2.1.zip


Samsung Kits


safedisk said:


> Hello Sorry
> I got the 0806 bios from shamino and tested it.
> I just set xmp TM5 running doesn't seem to be a problem
> you can try 0806
> Thanks!











ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0806.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com






safedisk said:


> HI
> If cant boot, you need to change memory settings
> Thanks
> 
> BDIE DR 4266CL15 PROFILE





shamino1978 said:


> updated octool with blutetooth to androidphone app
> cpu/BT CTL
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OCTool0212.zip
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> android bluetooth app raw apk file
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> btctl.apk
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> flip phone to landscape when osc selected when voltician connected
> turn on both bluetooth on pc and phone
> run app on phone and run octool on pc and select connect to the device. then device will start updating.


MANUALS


----------



## cstkl1

Strix D4 SuperPi Bios


Spoiler









ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0006.7z







drive.google.com










ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0002.7z







drive.google.com







4th November 2021 - Day 1 Release Bios . Thanks to @shamino1978


Spoiler



MAXIMUS​ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-ASUS-0702.zip
ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-FORMULA-ASUS-0702.rar
ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0702.rar
ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0702.rar
ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-GLACIAL-ASUS-0702.rar

STRIX​ROG-STRIX-Z690-E-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0702.rar
ROG-STRIX-Z690-F-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0702.rar
ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0702.rar
ROG-STRIX-Z690-I-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0702.rar
ROG-STRIX-Z690-G-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0702.rar
ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0705.rar

Prime/Proart/TUF​PRIME-Z690-A-ASUS-0702.rar
ProArt-Z690-CREATOR-WIFI-ASUS-0702.rar
TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0705.rar
TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-D4-ASUS-0705.rar


10th November 2021 - D4


Spoiler



"shamino1978"

0705 (DDR4) has a bug whereby dram voltage is not applied, will post new bioses that fix this later

these ones fixed:








TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0707.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-D4-ASUS-0707.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0707.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com







15 November 2021


Spoiler






shamino1978 said:


> latest bios, includes the legacy game toggle scrolllock to sleep/wake ecores (in cpu config need to enable) among some other bug fixes.











TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0801.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-ASUS-0801.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-STRIX-Z690-I-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0801.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-STRIX-Z690-G-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0801.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-STRIX-Z690-F-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0801.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0801.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-STRIX-Z690-E-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0801.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0801.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-ASUS-0801.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-FORMULA-ASUS-0801.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-GLACIAL-ASUS-0801.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0801.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ProArt-Z690-CREATOR-WIFI-ASUS-0801.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












PRIME-Z690-A-ASUS-0801.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0801.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com







16 November 2021 - Apex


Spoiler






shamino1978 said:


> Adds specific p e core disable: also adds temparay sli key
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0072.rar





19 November 2021


Spoiler






shamino1978 said:


> 0802
> fixed the adaptive voltage interpolation issue on 0801











ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0802.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-GLACIAL-ASUS-0802.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0802.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-FORMULA-ASUS-0802.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-ASUS-0802.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com













ROG-STRIX-Z690-I-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0802.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-STRIX-Z690-E-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0802.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0802.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












PRIME-Z690-A-ASUS-0802.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-ASUS-0802.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-WIFI-ASUS-0802.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ProArt-Z690-CREATOR-WIFI-ASUS-0802.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com







> DDR4 is different version number due to a single rank Gear1 1T tweak:











TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-D4-ASUS-0002.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0002.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0002.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com








22 November 2021 - D4


Spoiler






safedisk said:


> View attachment 2533855
> 
> 
> View attachment 2533856
> 
> 
> 
> *Samsung B-DIE SR / DR MEMORY OC improvement*
> 8G X2 B-DIE 1T 15-14-14-28 4333 AIDA64 Latency 40.4ns
> 16G X2 B-DIE 2T 14-15-14-28 4000 HCI Run


ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4 BETA BIOS 0003

TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS D4 BETA BIOS 0003

TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS D4 WIFI BETA BIOS 0003



26 November 2021


Spoiler






safedisk said:


> Improve system performance


*ROG MAXIMUS Z690 Series Beta Bios 0803 UPDATE*

1. Improve system performance

ROG MAXIMUS Z690 HERO BETA BIOS 0803

ROG MAXIMUS Z690 FORMULA BETA BIOS 0803

ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX BETA BIOS 0803

ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME BETA BIOS 0803

ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME GLACIAL BETA BIOS 0803


*ROG STRIX Z690 Series Beta Bios 0803 UPDATE*

1. Improve system performance

ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI BETA BIOS 0803

ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4 BETA BIOS 0803

ROG STRIX Z690-E GAMING WIFI BETA BIOS 0803

ROG STRIX Z690-F GAMING WIFI BETA BIOS 0803

ROG STRIX Z690-G GAMING WIFI BETA BIOS 0803

ROG STRIX Z690-I GAMING WIFI BETA BIOS 0803


*TUF GAMING Z690 Series Beta Bios 0803 UPDATE*

1. Improve system performance

TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS BETA BIOS 0803

TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS D4 BETA BIOS 0803

TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS WIFI BETA BIOS 0803

TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS WIFI D4 BETA BIOS 0803


29th November 2021 - Apex|Samsung


Spoiler






shamino1978 said:


> made some updates for samsung IC's for anyone to try APEX:











ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0081.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com







30th November 2021 - Apex


Spoiler






shamino1978 said:


> Latest Apex bios:











APEX88.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com







1 December 2021 - Apex


Spoiler






shamino1978 said:


> Updated Apex Bios 0093 (fixed some XMP compatibility issues)


_APEX93.rar_


4 December 2021 - Apex


Spoiler






shamino1978 said:


> --











ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0806.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com







7 December 2021


Spoiler






shamino1978 said:


> Latest hero/extreme/strix-E test bios (improves dram oc)











ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0002.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-FORMULA-ASUS-0002.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-ASUS-0002.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-STRIX-Z690-E-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0002.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com







8 December 2021 - Apex


Spoiler






shamino1978 said:


> same
> 
> latest test bios for Apex:
> supports high voltage mode on Renasas non OC PMIC











ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0053.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com







9th December 2021 - Apex Sammy


Spoiler






shamino1978 said:


> Samsung Test Bios











samsungtest.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com







10 December 2021 - Apex Sammy + Strix i


Spoiler






shamino1978 said:


> pls try this version: - sammy test v2











ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0010.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com







shamino1978 said:


> --











ROG-STRIX-Z690-F-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0010.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com







14th December 2021 - More Sammy


Spoiler






shamino1978 said:


> samsung ddr5 users pls help me check how these go for you thx:











ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0015.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0015.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-ASUS-0015.rar
 

Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-STRIX-Z690-F-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0015.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com






> PS: ignore the sp and predictions on this version there is a bug for that, mostly for dram tests





15th December 2021 - D4


Spoiler






safedisk said:


> Hey Here


ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4 BETA BIOS 0808

ASUS PRIME Z690-P D4 BETA BIOS 0806

ASUS PRIME Z690-P WIFI D4 BETA BIOS 0806

ASUS PRIME Z690M-PLUS D4 BETA BIOS 0901

TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS D4 BETA BIOS 0808

TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS WIFI D4 BETA BIOS 0808


16th December 2021


Spoiler






shamino1978 said:


> attempts to improve xmp , fixed a core ranking / core vid reading bug.
> vmaxstress option name changed for future function
> DC LL tracked to vrm LL at auto











ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-FORMULA-ASUS-0811.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-GLACIAL-ASUS-0811.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0811.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0811.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-ASUS-0811.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com













ROG-STRIX-Z690-E-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0811.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-STRIX-Z690-I-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0811.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0811.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-STRIX-Z690-G-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0811.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com














TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-WIFI-ASUS-0811.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-ASUS-0811.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ProArt-Z690-CREATOR-WIFI-ASUS-0811.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












PRIME-Z690-A-ASUS-0811.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com






> special test bios for apex:











ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0021.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com







17th December 2021 - Strix F


Spoiler






shamino1978 said:


> --











ROG-STRIX-Z690-F-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0811.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com







21st December 2021 - Apex


Spoiler






shamino1978 said:


> you can try this bios











ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0031.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com







30th December 2021 - Apex


Spoiler






shamino1978 said:


> latest test bios for Apex:











ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0046.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com







4th Jan 2022 - Apex / Extreme


Spoiler






shamino1978 said:


> hi pls try this bios's option: -> advanced mem voltages -> VDD calculation base and MC voltage calculation base. for VDD set it to lower than 1.435v or even 1.1v if u have problem booting high voltage.











ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-9901.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com







shamino1978 said:


> try this bios











ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0050.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com







13th January 2022


Spoiler






shamino1978 said:


> synched up dramming bioses for the following:











ROG-STRIX-Z690-F-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0070.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-STRIX-Z690-E-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0070.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-ASUS-0070.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-FORMULA-ASUS-0070.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0070.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com







26th January 2022 -S3 Apex & Extreme


Spoiler






shamino1978 said:


> latest , latest, s3 resume sometimes bug fixed, etc











ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0090.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0090.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com







27th January 2022 - SLi day


Spoiler






shamino1978 said:


> the boards that support sli finally with official sli key











ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-1101.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-1101.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-GLACIAL-ASUS-1101.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com




(should be similar to what i posted just now)



> These ones that dont support sli:











TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-D4-ASUS-1003.CAP


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-ASUS-1003.CAP


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-WIFI-D4-ASUS-1003.CAP


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-WIFI-ASUS-1003.CAP


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-STRIX-Z690-I-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-1003.CAP


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-STRIX-Z690-G-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-1003.CAP


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-STRIX-Z690-F-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-1003.CAP


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-STRIX-Z690-E-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-1003.CAP


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-1003.CAP


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-1003.CAP


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-ASUS-1003.CAP


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-FORMULA-ASUS-1003.CAP


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ProArt-Z690-CREATOR-WIFI-ASUS-1003.CAP


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












PRIME-Z690-A-ASUS-1003.CAP


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com







2nd March 2022 - Maximus


Spoiler






safedisk said:


> View attachment 2550553
> 
> 
> 
> *ROG MAXIMUS Z690 Series Beta Bios 1302*
> 
> 01. Improve system compatibility.
> 02. Improve system performance.


ROG MAXIMUS Z690 HERO BETA BIOS 1302

ROG MAXIMUS Z690 FORMULA BETA BIOS 1302

ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX BETA BIOS 1302

ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME BETA BIOS 1302

ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME GLACIAL BETA BIOS 1302



8th March 2022


Spoiler






> @safedisk
> ROG MAXIMUS/STRIX Z690 Series Beta bios 1304
> 
> 👉ROG MAXIMUS Z690 Series
> 
> 01. Improve system performance


ROG MAXIMUS Z690 HERO BETA BIOS 1304





ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-ASUS-1304.7z







drive.google.com





ROG MAXIMUS Z690 FORMULA BETA BIOS 1304





ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-FORMULA-ASUS-1304.7z







drive.google.com





ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX BETA BIOS 1304





ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-1304.7z







drive.google.com





ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME BETA BIOS 1304





ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-1304.7z







drive.google.com





ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME GLACIAL BETA BIOS 1304





ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-GLACIAL-ASUS-1304.7z







drive.google.com






> 👉ROG STRIX Z690 Series
> 
> 01. Improve system performance


ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI BETA BIOS 1304





ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-1304.7z







drive.google.com





ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4 BETA BIOS 1304





ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-1304.7z







drive.google.com





ROG STRIX Z690-E GAMING WIFI BETA BIOS 1304





ROG-STRIX-Z690-E-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-1304.7z







drive.google.com





ROG STRIX Z690-F GAMING WIFI BETA BIOS 1304





ROG-STRIX-Z690-F-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-1304.7z







drive.google.com





ROG STRIX Z690-G GAMING WIFI BETA BIOS 1304





ROG-STRIX-Z690-G-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-1304.7z







drive.google.com





ROG STRIX Z690-I GAMING WIFI BETA BIOS 1304





ROG-STRIX-Z690-I-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-1304.7z







drive.google.com


----------



## Falkentyne

First!

That PCIE Unlock button is 15 years overdue. Still have nightmares from breaking those flimsy latches on I forgot, either a sandy bridge board or a core 2 extreme board...


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Falkentyne said:


> First!
> 
> That PCIE Unlock button is 15 years overdue. Still have nightmares from breaking those flimsy latches on I forgot, either a sandy bridge board or a core 2 extreme board...


That feature is fantastic. I switch to many GPUs and this will help a lot.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

ZealotKi11er said:


> That feature is fantastic. I switch to many GPUs and this will help a lot.


You pay extra $200
-ROG Accounting Team


----------



## D-EJ915

asus launch video






voltician thing is cool I guess but don't think I could really take advantage of it lol


----------



## Falkentyne

Oscilloscopes are nice to see if your VRM settings are making any changes.


----------



## Gandyman

Perth and Melbourne | Shipping Australia Wide | PLE Computers

z690 preorder in aus

Hero: $1199
Formula: $1399
Apex: $1299
Extreme: $1899

Aorus pro: $599
Aorus Ultra: $699
Aorus Master: $899
Aorus Xtreme: $1499

(Btw 12900k: $1050)

Looks like I'm buying Gigabyte this gen! The Aorus Master being $300 dollars cheaper than the Hero ... How does ASUS justify these prices?

Master vs Hero, master has more power phases, 105 amp vs 90amp stages, proper doublers vs the cheaper teamed, 10g LAN vs 2.5G LAN, More rear USB, Better onboard sound (if that matters to you). Aorus has more m.2 slots. Aorus has a full coverage aluminum backplate with heatpads on rear of the inductors. Why would anyone ever pay the Asus tax, for what is clearly a cheaper product with a better BIOS. And seeing as most people set their daily overclock and never touch it again for the life of the machine, I would say gigabyte bios is functional enough.

As a current Maximus Extreme z490 and Strix 3090 owner, even I am finding it hard to justify the price it costs to be an ASUS fanboy at this stage.


----------



## Asmodian

Gandyman said:


> Apex: $1299


That is 46.7% more than I paid total at Asus.com for the Apex in the US (after converting AUD to USD at today's rate)?! Here the Apex would be $798.95 in AUD. Not cheap, but those prices are nuts!


----------



## Shawnb99

Those are just insane prices. That PCIE unlock was the only reason I was considering ASUS again but not at those prices.
That’s more then double what the 390 series cost.
I’m not paying that


----------



## Gandyman

Asmodian said:


> That is 46.7% more than I paid total at Asus.com for the Apex in the US (after converting AUD to USD at today's rate)?! Here the Apex would be $798.95 in AUD. Not cheap, but those prices are nuts!


Perhaps I should import one o.o $800 for a premium motherboard seems worth it to me ... 1300 is way too much. Especially when the 12900k is only 1000 bucks.


----------



## kairi_zeroblade

the Z690-A strix wifi D4 is OK but its in crappy white color scheme..*** Asus..


----------



## StAndrew

Shawnb99 said:


> Those are just insane prices. That PCIE unlock was the only reason I was considering ASUS again but not at those prices.
> That’s more then double what the 390 series cost.
> I’m not paying that


No kidding... And considering the DDR5 prices... Good grief.


----------



## Thanh Nguyen

Manufactures think people hit the jackpot with meme stock this year so they jack up the price.


----------



## Shawnb99

Thanh Nguyen said:


> Manufactures think people hit the jackpot with meme stock this year so they jack up the price.


The MOASS hasn't happened yet  Likely never will be that's another discussion


----------



## Steve R

Waiting for asus z690 formula in the US. Everything is here waiting. Asked asus support and they don’t know the release date.


----------



## cstkl1

Steve R said:


> Waiting for asus z690 formula in the US. Everything is here waiting. Asked asus support and they don’t know the release date.


4th


----------



## Steve R

cstkl1 said:


> 4th


That’s for United States release? And source. Also preorder or is that release date? Pretty much all of Europe can preorder this board already and receive on November 4th as far as I know.


----------



## SuprUsrStan

Anyone see the Maximus Z690 available for preorder in the US? Newegg has the Aurus master boards and other Asus Z690 boards but no Extreme yet. I assume the Maximus Extreme board is available at launch right?


----------



## Section31

Gandyman said:


> Perth and Melbourne | Shipping Australia Wide | PLE Computers
> 
> z690 preorder in aus
> 
> Hero: $1199
> Formula: $1399
> Apex: $1299
> Extreme: $1899
> 
> Aorus pro: $599
> Aorus Ultra: $699
> Aorus Master: $899
> Aorus Xtreme: $1499
> 
> (Btw 12900k: $1050)
> 
> Looks like I'm buying Gigabyte this gen! The Aorus Master being $300 dollars cheaper than the Hero ... How does ASUS justify these prices?
> 
> Master vs Hero, master has more power phases, 105 amp vs 90amp stages, proper doublers vs the cheaper teamed, 10g LAN vs 2.5G LAN, More rear USB, Better onboard sound (if that matters to you). Aorus has more m.2 slots. Aorus has a full coverage aluminum backplate with heatpads on rear of the inductors. Why would anyone ever pay the Asus tax, for what is clearly a cheaper product with a better BIOS. And seeing as most people set their daily overclock and never touch it again for the life of the machine, I would say gigabyte bios is functional enough.
> 
> As a current Maximus Extreme z490 and Strix 3090 owner, even I am finding it hard to justify the price it costs to be an ASUS fanboy at this stage.


Australia prices are always high i have heard. Over here, i found z690 Hero and Aorus Master price difference to only be 120cad (Bestbuy at 719 and Canada Computer at 600Cad). Pre-ordered the Hero but still waiting for apex pricing


----------



## pipes

Meno dii un anno per il nuovissimo z590 e siamo già sotto con lo z690, tra 2 anni avremo lo z1090 dai de gas Intel

Inviato dal mio MI 9 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## Thanh Nguyen

Section31 said:


> Australia prices are always high i have heard. Over here, i found z690 Hero and Aorus Master price difference to only be 120cad (Bestbuy at 719 and Canada Computer at 600Cad). Pre-ordered the Hero but still waiting for apex pricing


Apex is $800 in Thailand. $720 for 12900k, so estimate for US pricing.


----------



## Section31

Thanh Nguyen said:


> Apex is $800 in Thailand. $720 for 12900k, so estimate for US pricing.


Thanks. Hopefully it lists out in US/Canada Market, It's my preferred choice out of all the Asus boards


----------



## Arni90

Falkentyne said:


> Oscilloscopes are nice to see if your VRM settings are making any changes.


It's a cool feature, but I can't fathom the point of it. If you are one of those people who actually can make use of, and tweak your VRM settings to accomodate the measurements, chances are you already have a proper 'scope.

I'm definitely going to try it out, but I doubt I'm going to get something useful out of it compared to my standard approach of maxing switching frequency and setting LLC to mid-high levels


----------



## Steve R

Interesting seen asus ama YouTube stream. Prices are $719 for Apex, $799 for formula, $999 for extreme, $1099 for glacial. All msrp. No word on release dates for United States though...


----------



## acoustic

$719 for APEX.. Jesus man. Talking about $1300-1400 just for board and chip.

This hobby is pushing people out by force. It's just gonna be the rich with parts and the rest of us on consoles if this keeps up lol


----------



## SuperMumrik

acoustic said:


> This hobby is pushing people out by force. It's just gonna be the rich with parts and the rest of us on consoles if this keeps up lol


While I see your point, there's nothing "wrong" with a Strix board and a 12600KF 😊


----------



## Section31

acoustic said:


> $719 for APEX.. Jesus man. Talking about $1300-1400 just for board and chip.
> 
> This hobby is pushing people out by force. It's just gonna be the rich with parts and the rest of us on consoles if this keeps up lol


I fear prices will only go up. It's kind of what leaning me back toward upgrade every other/major upgrade to kind of reduce the overall costs.


----------



## 12700KF

Gandyman said:


> Why would anyone ever pay the Asus tax, for what is clearly a cheaper product with a better BIOS.


There are not tho. That´s why we are buying the Asus.



Gandyman said:


> And seeing as most people set their daily overclock and never touch it again for the life of the machine, I would say gigabyte bios is functional enough.


For such people it may be enough. But for real overclockers, it´s not.


----------



## Section31

12700KF said:


> There are not tho. That´s why we are buying the Asus.
> 
> 
> For such people it may be enough. But for real overclockers, it´s not.


I just hope that the boards will support meteorlake at least. It is LGA1700.


----------



## asdkj1740

Gandyman said:


> Perth and Melbourne | Shipping Australia Wide | PLE Computers
> 
> z690 preorder in aus
> 
> Hero: $1199
> Formula: $1399
> Apex: $1299
> Extreme: $1899
> 
> Aorus pro: $599
> Aorus Ultra: $699
> Aorus Master: $899
> Aorus Xtreme: $1499
> 
> (Btw 12900k: $1050)
> 
> Looks like I'm buying Gigabyte this gen! The Aorus Master being $300 dollars cheaper than the Hero ... How does ASUS justify these prices?
> 
> Master vs Hero, master has more power phases, 105 amp vs 90amp stages, proper doublers vs the cheaper teamed, 10g LAN vs 2.5G LAN, More rear USB, Better onboard sound (if that matters to you). Aorus has more m.2 slots. Aorus has a full coverage aluminum backplate with heatpads on rear of the inductors. Why would anyone ever pay the Asus tax, for what is clearly a cheaper product with a better BIOS. And seeing as most people set their daily overclock and never touch it again for the life of the machine, I would say gigabyte bios is functional enough.
> 
> As a current Maximus Extreme z490 and Strix 3090 owner, even I am finding it hard to justify the price it costs to be an ASUS fanboy at this stage.


master has way worse specs compared to hero, watch out, although those missing features may not suit for everyone.
the only sure win of master is 10g lan.
alc1220 is said to be the same as alc4080 while hero has alc4082.
for the amount of onboard m.2 slot, yes master has it more, but hero gets you the bundled hyper m.2 pcie cards with dual slot on it and one of them can be used as gen5.... 
master is direct 19 phases, no doublers.

dude, check the specs first.


----------



## cstkl1

strix I will be a decent board


asdkj1740 said:


> master has way worse specs compared to hero, watch out, although those missing features may not suit for everyone.
> the only sure win of master is 10g lan.
> alc1220 is said to be the same as alc4080 while hero has alc4082.
> for the amount of onboard m.2 slot, yes master has it more, but hero gets you the bundled hyper m.2 pcie cards with dual slot on it and one of them can be used as gen5....
> master is direct 19 phases, no doublers.
> 
> dude, check the specs first.


hint alot of new chipset, ram etc. xmp tuning by brands are going to differ.

so dont just buy based on "spec" and then lament all that extra feature comes to naught

asus forte is no compromise of performance. none. no fakery SS clock hci with bad performance


----------



## Shawnb99

SuperMumrik said:


> While I see your point, there's nothing "wrong" with a Strix board and a 12600KF 😊


Yeah cause higher prices only ever affect the high end gear


----------



## cstkl1

Shawnb99 said:


> Yeah cause higher prices only ever affect the high end gear


theres always biostar, nzxt, asrock, colorful boards .

the asus hate really funny cause ppl want the asus bios and support but pay prices based on other aib

the support:bios ingenuity has a price. it helps for future boards etc also.


----------



## Elrick

Section31 said:


> Australia prices are always high i have heard.


Yeah, we live in the 3RD World, hence the highest price is what's always being dispensed, can't avoid this level of Living.

Only those that have a good income can support the latest craze with PC hardware. In fact we can survive almost anywhere on this Planet, regardless of where we inhabit.

This is my new fave purchase; Buy Now | ASUS ROG Strix Z690-I Gaming WIFI LGA1700 mITX Desktop Motherboard

The ONLY (worth buying) ITX motherboard that has what I've always wanted, an Optical Connection. This is where Asus shines yet again for me  .


----------



## Elrick

cstkl1 said:


> the asus hate really funny cause ppl want the asus bios and support but pay prices based on other aib
> 
> the support:bios ingenuity has a price. it helps for future boards etc also.


100% CORRECT.

Not a real Asus Fanboy here, but they do include the majority of features within their range of motherboards. All we can do is choose the size and features.

At least there is one company that makes a variety of boards and attach the very best Bios to them. As a customer, you want something that runs either high end or remains reliable over the long term.

Or until the next range of gear comes out from Asus.


----------



## Shawnb99

cstkl1 said:


> theres always biostar, nzxt, asrock, colorful boards .
> 
> the asus hate really funny cause ppl want the asus bios and support but pay prices based on other aib
> 
> the support:bios ingenuity has a price. it helps for future boards etc also.


Sure there are always other brands, but do they offer the same features as ASUS? Do they not try and copy those features for their own boards and see the ASUS can charge that much more so why can’t they and then also raises prices.

But yeah there’s other brands… None of that excuses the price increase


----------



## cstkl1

Shawnb99 said:


> Sure there are always other brands, but do they offer the same features as ASUS? Do they not try and copy those features for their own boards and see the ASUS can charge that much more so why can’t they and then also raises prices.
> 
> But yeah there’s other brands… None of that excuses the price increase


why cant u give your hardware etc free ?

or infact your money you earned this month just give it free.


----------



## cstkl1

Elrick said:


> 100% CORRECT.
> 
> Not a real Asus Fanboy here, but they do include the majority of features within their range of motherboards. All we can do is choose the size and features.
> 
> At least there is one company that makes a variety of boards and attach the very best Bios to them. As a customer, you want something that runs either high end or remains reliable over the long term.
> 
> Or until the next range of gear comes out from Asus.


yeah
like right now. everybody saying adl z690 ddr5 early adopters might have bugs..
we are in this forum and thread because there's ACTUAL fae support. even their inhouse overclocker will come here to test their findings. by that reasoning its crazy to consider giga/msi/evga

evga support is there just after a very long time due to their low man power


----------



## Shawnb99

cstkl1 said:


> why cant u give your hardware etc free ?
> 
> or infact your money you earned this month just give it free.


Is this supposed to be some counter argument? Get lost with that nonsense


----------



## cstkl1

Shawnb99 said:


> Is this supposed to be some counter argument? Get lost with that nonsense


The point u dont see it is the problem. Anyway .. this thread is getting out of line with talk of cost/ giga etc etc.. when there's a main tread or even that two other mobo threads where its more suitable


----------



## cstkl1

update on first page link to








Prezentare – ASUS ROG Maximus Z690 HERO, ASUS ROG Maximus Z690 Extreme & ASUS ROG Maximus Z690 Apex


ASUS Z690 Ehehei, dragii monstrului, dar ce avem noi aici? Se pare ca incep sa isi faca aparitia si bestiile in paginile noastre, iar astazi am pregatit un adevarat festin pentru iubitorii d…




lab501.ro


----------



## Gandyman

cstkl1 said:


> The point u dont see it is the problem. Anyway .. this thread is getting out of line with talk of cost/ giga etc etc.. when there's a main tread or even that two other mobo threads where its more suitable


Fair enough, but there's no denying the Australian prices are crazy for seemingly no reason. $1200 AUD for Hero, when the CPU is only $1065 is insane. All other brands are rougly equal to the US MSRP in Australia, excepting ASUS, who put our prices up incredibly over MSRP. I would love a ROG board, but at these prices its defiantly going to price a lot of users out.
I'm considering importing from Asia or even the USA.


----------



## Shawnb99

I wish ASUS would get rid of the Dimm.2 slot. Damn thing hot in the way of mounting my GPU vertical, looks like it’ll do the same this gen. 😩 
Can’t show off that Optimus block if it’s not vertical


----------



## Gandyman

asdkj1740 said:


> master has way worse specs compared to hero, watch out, although those missing features may not suit for everyone.
> the only sure win of master is 10g lan.
> alc1220 is said to be the same as alc4080 while hero has alc4082.
> for the amount of onboard m.2 slot, yes master has it more, but hero gets you the bundled hyper m.2 pcie cards with dual slot on it and one of them can be used as gen5....
> master is direct 19 phases, no doublers.
> 
> dude, check the specs first.


Way worse specs? I was wrong about the doublers, but the Hero not even having a backplate .. for TWELVE HUNDRED DOLLARS ... that's insane. And comparing Asus vs Giga website shows hero with 19+1 90a phases and Master with 21+1 105a phases. Hero with 6 layer PCB and Master with 8 layer. 

I'm not trying to hate on Asus by any means, I love their stuff (hence why I'm using a Maximus Extreme right now) But you can't deny that apart from the BIOS, the Gigabyte is much better value being $300 dollars cheaper here. 

Also I'm not looking forward to having Armory crate installed to control the RGB / That massive LCD screen.


----------



## asdkj1740

Gandyman said:


> Way worse specs? I was wrong about the doublers, but the Hero not even having a backplate .. for TWELVE HUNDRED DOLLARS ... that's insane. And comparing Asus vs Giga website shows hero with 19+1 90a phases and Master with 21+1 105a phases. Hero with 6 layer PCB and Master with 8 layer.
> 
> I'm not trying to hate on Asus by any means, I love their stuff (hence why I'm using a Maximus Extreme right now) But you can't deny that apart from the BIOS, the Gigabyte is much better value being $300 dollars cheaper here.
> 
> Also I'm not looking forward to having Armory crate installed to control the RGB / That massive LCD screen.


there are reasons (eg specs differences) why the price differential between these two is that huge.
again, aorus master raa229131 (19+1) with 19*raa220105 105a direct control.
hero has 8 layers pcb used, but mid loss one, compared to master's 8 layer low loss pcb. no guarantee about ddr5 oc simply based on pcb layers and material used, as you said bios tuning plays a big role here.
thunderbolt is not cheap, gen5 SSD support achieved by 4*gen5 switches are not cheap too, these are parts of the things aorus master missed.

not saying / i have never ever said m14h worths 599usd.

btw aorus ultra shares lots of similarities in aorus master, at 100usd cheaper priced.


----------



## Gandyman

asdkj1740 said:


> there are reasons (eg specs differences) why the price differential between these two is that huge.
> again, aorus master raa229131 (19+1) with 19*raa220105 105a direct control.
> hero has 8 layers pcb used, but mid loss one, compared to master's 8 layer low loss pcb. no guarantee about ddr5 oc simply based on pcb layers and material used, as you said bios tuning plays a big role here.
> thunderbolt is not cheap, gen5 SSD support achieved by 4*gen5 switches are not cheap too, these are parts of the things aorus master missed.
> 
> not saying / i have never ever said m14h worths 599usd.


Good points and explanation. I'm leaning towards the STRIX-E, but $1000 AUD for it is still really steep. I wish ASUS priced their stuff close to the USA MSRP here.


----------



## cstkl1

Shawnb99 said:


> I wish ASUS would get rid of the Dimm.2 slot. Damn thing hot in the way of mounting my GPU vertical, looks like it’ll do the same this gen. 😩
> Can’t show off that Optimus block if it’s not vertical


you are a odd guy.. lol...

i LOVE dimm m.2 especially since z590 since now its all pch nvme hence easy to have multiple windows changing etc..
and i actually have 3 sets of dimm m.2 now so can just swap os etc etc...


----------



## asdkj1740

Gandyman said:


> Good points and explanation. I'm leaning towards the STRIX-E, but $1000 AUD for it is still really steep. I wish ASUS priced their stuff close to the USA MSRP here.


you should have also considered msi force, which is similarly priced at least on newegg us, a very capable model if you care about specs.


----------



## Shawnb99

cstkl1 said:


> you are a odd guy.. lol...
> 
> i LOVE dimm m.2 especially since z590 since now its all pch nvme hence easy to have multiple windows changing etc..
> and i actually have 3 sets of dimm m.2 now so can just swap os etc etc...


Lol thank you.
I found the drives run hotter there, though that could just be my setup.
I do have a unique setup as it’s reverse ATX so going vertical means it’s upside down and gets in the way of the Dimm.


----------



## cstkl1

Shawnb99 said:


> Lol thank you.
> I found the drives run hotter there, though that could just be my setup.
> I do have a unique setup as it’s reverse ATX so going vertical means it’s upside down and gets in the way of the Dimm.


oh that. most probably.

mine active cooled cause top rad is push into the casing

previous rig was tj011 which had that 180mm fan up close and personal

z690 chipset temp arnd the same as z590


----------



## asdkj1740

Shawnb99 said:


> I wish ASUS would get rid of the Dimm.2 slot. Damn thing hot in the way of mounting my GPU vertical, looks like it’ll do the same this gen. 😩
> Can’t show off that Optimus block if it’s not vertical


dimm.2 is designed for bench table users (horizontal placement).


----------



## Shawnb99

asdkj1740 said:


> dimm.2 is designed for bench table users (horizontal placement).


So every one of there top MB’s is designed for a test bench only? 
Dimm.2 is designed for spacing issues first.


----------



## StAndrew

I know signal integrity of PCI-E 5.0 requires additional motherboard layers but is it really that much more expensive? I'm sure the chip shortage is also a factor but the DDR4 boards are a bit more reasonable (a bit...); I would think DDR5 boards would be cheaper than DDR4 boards as the DDR5 power circuitry is on the RAM stick...?


----------



## cstkl1

Shawnb99 said:


> So every one of there top MB’s is designed for a test bench only?
> Dimm.2 is designed for spacing issues first.


i do see ure point

on extreme board it was fine with two sticks dr and dimm m.2

but apex dr on 2dimm is already warm..
add another huge has dimm m.2 next to it. 
🔥


----------



## Shawnb99

cstkl1 said:


> i do see ure point
> 
> on extreme board it was fine with two sticks dr and dimm m.2
> 
> but apex dr on 2dimm is already warm..
> add another huge has dimm m.2 next to it.
> 🔥


On the Apex I can understand since it’s meant as the extreme OC board but the rest are more mainstream and don’t really need it


----------



## asdkj1740

Shawnb99 said:


> So every one of there top MB’s is designed for a test bench only?
> Dimm.2 is designed for spacing issues first.


i am not saying it is only for tesh bench use.
it is designed to be benefited by the same fan mounted on top blasting air downward so that ram sticks and dimm.2 can be cooled together at the same time.
saving spaces of course is one of the purposes.


----------



## acoustic

cstkl1 said:


> i do see ure point
> 
> on extreme board it was fine with two sticks dr and dimm m.2
> 
> but apex dr on 2dimm is already warm..
> add another huge has dimm m.2 next to it.
> 🔥


This is why I was hoping to see a PCIE5.0 M.2 slot in the normal locations to the left of the PCH. I don't want to clog up the space around my 2 DIMMs that are already smashed up on each other in a 2 DIMM board.

I think the Extreme will handle it better due to the 4 DIMM slots so more spacing when running 2 DIMMs.


----------



## Falkentyne

Dimm.2 on PCH is essential.
Easy to change or add m.2's or swap OS for memory corruption overclocking without taking the half the board apart to remove the heatsink shield.


----------



## cstkl1

acoustic said:


> This is why I was hoping to see a PCIE5.0 M.2 slot in the normal locations to the left of the PCH. I don't want to clog up the space around my 2 DIMMs that are already smashed up on each other in a 2 DIMM board.
> 
> I think the Extreme will handle it better due to the 4 DIMM slots so more spacing when running 2 DIMMs.


ppl already complaining price


Falkentyne said:


> Dimm.2 on PCH is essential.
> Easy to change or add m.2's or swap OS for memory corruption overclocking without taking the half the board apart to remove the heatsink shield.


yeah bro especially with current gpu thickness and length.


----------



## Section31

cstkl1 said:


> ppl alreasy complaining price
> 
> yeah bro especially with current gpu thickness and length.


I noticed the m.2 cooler height increased. I wonder if it will cause issues with all those active watercooled backplates being used now.


----------



## acoustic

cstkl1 said:


> ppl alreasy complaining price
> 
> yeah bro especially with current gpu thickness and length.


I'd trade the DIMM.2 for one PCIE 5.0 M.2 slot in normal location.


----------



## Section31

acoustic said:


> I'd trade the DIMM.2 for one PCIE 5.0 M.2 slot in normal location.


Reading Asus site and about gen 5 nvme support was interesting to say the least.


----------



## pipes

per me le dovrebbero aumentare un altro po quelle schede, tanto ce ne di gente suneda che le compra


----------



## Elrick

cstkl1 said:


> we are in this forum and thread because there's ACTUAL fae support. even their inhouse overclocker will come here to test their findings. by that reasoning its crazy to consider giga/msi/evga


Clearly I have never said anything within my prior statement, concerning other manufacturers. YOU made that unfortunate assumption here.

Simply love Asus BIOS above all others, who seem quite awful and confusing to use. Because Asus had conquered the BIOS realm, doesn't make them the superior manufacturer here. They simply provide far greater depth of motherboards, within any Chipset category.

Although Asrock do produce some obtuse motherboards but of course they detached themselves from Asus some years ago, but still they remain in my eyes a viable alternative compared to the awful Gigabyte junk-ware (which I had previously owned).

Personal assessments by owning some products helps to categorise to me which manufacturer resides within the reliability category, especially with this new Z690 chipset. Looking forward towards finding out about that, myself.


----------



## Gandyman

Do no z690 motherboards have dual bios? Is that a thing of the past now or am I just blind as a bat?


----------



## lordkahless

The 6 pin 12v on the Maximus boards. What cable would this be? I have a Corsair ax1600i. The manual for the new boards states the 6 pin 12v is needed for 60 watts over the Pcie 5 slot for graphics card. But if not used only 27 watts supplied. That seems odd?


----------



## cstkl1

lordkahless said:


> The 6 pin 12v on the Maximus boards. What cable would this be? I have a Corsair ax1600i. The manual for the new boards states the 6 pin 12v is needed for 60 watts over the Pcie 5 slot for graphics card. But if not used only 27 watts supplied. That seems odd?


6pin pcie


----------



## geriatricpollywog

Does the Apex still not have a backplate? It’s not on the spec sheet.

People talk up the bios on Asus boards. The Maximus boards I’ve owned (Formula 9, Apex 13) just give you all the options and say “have at it. Good luck.” Cstkl1 puts in the time and work to figure out all the optimal settings and this is extremely valuable to the community. But does Asus really deserve the credit for his hard work? I’m more impressed when the engineers who work for the motherboard companies figure out the bios and don’t rely on the power users.


----------



## Gandyman

@*cstkl1*

does Asus ADL have TVB overclocking? if so is it for P cores only?


----------



## geriatricpollywog

Another thing. When I got 4000c14 stable on the Asrock Z590, all I did was apply Cstkl1 timings. No need to adjust training algo like you need to on an Asus board. It just works. Set multipler, voltages, and memory speed and timings. That’s it. On a bios from May 2021. On a board with backplate dual lan, oled, bclk physical buttons, dual bios switch etc.


----------



## cstkl1

0451 said:


> Does the Apex still not have a backplate? It’s not on the spec sheet.
> 
> People talk up the bios on Asus boards. The Maximus boards I’ve owned (Formula 9, Apex 13) just give you all the options and say “have at it. Good luck.” Cstkl1 puts in the time and work to figure out all the optimal settings and this is extremely valuable to the community. But does Asus really deserve the credit for his hard work? I’m more impressed when the engineers who work for the motherboard companies figure out the bios and don’t rely on the power users.


dude. this is so wrong that its offensive .
please dont undervalue @shamino1978 , @safedisk and the whole rog team.

its easier to test to find a fault compare to fixing it. and its much more complicated
to think of out the box to increase performance with no cost. the FAE from asus team work tirelessly due their own passion for tech. what you see one user like me do is just a drop in the ocean of tireless work.

this has nothing to do with pricing of products etc. that has many logistical, costing based on per country based on that countries sales platform.

many brands sell extra features to entice users because its all marketing when they cant compete in actual usage. asus .. those options are given so user can exceed limitations.


----------



## cstkl1

0451 said:


> Another thing. When I got 4000c14 stable on the Asrock Z590, all I did was apply Cstkl1 timings. No need to adjust training algo like you need to on an Asus board. It just works. Set multipler, voltages, and memory speed and timings. That’s it. On a bios from May 2021. On a board with backplate dual lan, oled, bclk physical buttons, dual bios switch etc.


ocf board, support eol come 4th nov. no value in two weeks


----------



## cstkl1

all these aib to sell their products to compete with a very popular brand have to do this features that nobody needs. overengineering, etc all to stay relevant. asrock forray to consumer level is on a whim, they are oem manufacturer. tomorrow they can just close shop.

anyway i think this is enough of asus hate posting in an asus thread thats suppose to be for helping end users.

@ENTERPRISE


----------



## Gandyman

cstkl1 said:


> all these aib to sell their products to compete with a very popular brand have to do this features that nobody needs. overengineering, etc all to stay relevant. asrock forray to consumer level is on a whim, they are oem manufacturer. tomorrow they can just close shop.
> 
> anyway i think this is enough of asus hate posting in an asus thread thats suppose to be for helping end users.
> 
> @ENTERPRISE


I don't think anyone has put any "hate" here. Infact from what I can see people are praising Asus strong points. And with any discussion about a brand, price is always a good and valid discussion point, and is incredibly relevant to a pre-launch discussion to help people decide whether paying the extra price is worth it for them.

While I realize you are emotionally invested into Asus, other brands also make nice hardware, and acting like they don't is just silly. I think all of us here are aware of how good Asus is. Their reputation defiantly precedes them.

Run and cry to a Admin if you like, but this discussion here is on topic, and fair.


----------



## Blameless

Falkentyne said:


> That PCIE Unlock button is 15 years overdue. Still have nightmares from breaking those flimsy latches on I forgot, either a sandy bridge board or a core 2 extreme board...


I have twisted wire pull-strings (usually running to one of the tray/case grommets) rigged to all of my latches so I can disengage them without having to stab at them with screwdriver and risk breaking the latch or scratching the board.

It's nice to see an integrated solution, even if my piece of wire is probably a lot less expensive.



Arni90 said:


> It's a cool feature, but I can't fathom the point of it. If you are one of those people who actually can make use of, and tweak your VRM settings to accomodate the measurements, chances are you already have a proper 'scope.


It's an ease of use thing...not having to properly attach external probes makes things much simpler and even allows one to do so in a fully assembled closed-case system.



Shawnb99 said:


> I wish ASUS would get rid of the Dimm.2 slot. Damn thing hot in the way of mounting my GPU vertical, looks like it’ll do the same this gen. 😩


Physically, this was the most annoying feature of my Crosshair VIII Impact. Always felt like I was going to bump it and beak it off, and the mass of the SSD heatsinks on it really reduced the practical portability of the SFF system it was in.

Much less of an issue on a full-sized board though.


----------



## acoustic

Gandyman said:


> I don't think anyone has put any "hate" here. Infact from what I can see people are praising Asus strong points. And with any discussion about a brand, price is always a good and valid discussion point, and is incredibly relevant to a pre-launch discussion to help people decide whether paying the extra price is worth it for them.
> 
> While I realize you are emotionally invested into Asus, other brands also make nice hardware, and acting like they don't is just silly. I think all of us here are aware of how good Asus is. Their reputation defiantly precedes them.
> 
> Run and cry to a Admin if you like, but this discussion here is on topic, and fair.


I feel this thread is intended to be more of an "Owners Thread", in which case the discussion of price or value of the product is not on topic. Since cstkl is the OP, I think it's his decision on whether the discussion is off-topic or not for the thread.

I voiced my concerns/issues with the pricing (and I do think they're fair arguments) but I don't think that's what this thread is for. This thread is for owners and those who are seeking info on the ASUS boards.


----------



## cstkl1

acoustic said:


> I feel this thread is intended to be more of an "Owners Thread", in which case the discussion of price or value of the product is not on topic. Since cstkl is the OP, I think it's his decision on whether the discussion is off-topic or not for the thread.
> 
> I voiced my concerns/issues with the pricing (and I do think they're fair arguments) but I don't think that's what this thread is for. This thread is for owners and those who are seeking info on the ASUS boards.


added "owners". theres other threads in my opinion to voice out .


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Re-opened.


----------



## bscool

lordkahless said:


> The 6 pin 12v on the Maximus boards. What cable would this be? I have a Corsair ax1600i. The manual for the new boards states the 6 pin 12v is needed for 60 watts over the Pcie 5 slot for graphics card. But if not used only 27 watts supplied. That seems odd?







time stamp 34:38 min in vid. Says it is for quick charge USB C.


What JJ says in this video conflicts with what the manuals.

Edit he mentions it again at 1:06:00


----------



## Arni90

I see from the Z690 APEX manual that V_LATCH is disabled out of the box. Is there any reason you wouldn't want to enable it?


----------



## asdkj1740

lordkahless said:


> The 6 pin 12v on the Maximus boards. What cable would this be? I have a Corsair ax1600i. The manual for the new boards states the 6 pin 12v is needed for 60 watts over the Pcie 5 slot for graphics card. But if not used only 27 watts supplied. That seems odd?


that's for the front type c power charging.
27w at stock is already quite high, higher than 5v3a in general with pd3.0 ic used.
if you need full 60w power (probably got upvolted to 20v by an external ic), then you have to plug a pcie connector.
this is not new to asus, c8e has it too.
similar feature can also be found on z590 vision g.

it is strange that m14h's manual states othwerise.
the review guide of m14h does state the followings:
"One of the on-board USB headers has been literally powered
up with Quick Charge 4+ for up to 60W of charging capacity.
It was designed to work with cases that support at least 3A
power delivery, including updated models from Corsair, Lian
Li, and In Win. For DIY convenience, the header is on the right
side of the Hero, which typically puts it in closer proximity to
chassis I/O. An accompanying six-pin header supplies
necessary power to the port."

if you check c8e's manual there is a clear statement about that:
the pd_12v_pwr connector provides additional power for your pcie x16 slots AND ALSO PROVIDES POWER FOR PD3.0 SUPPORT FOR THE USB 3.2 GEN 2X2 TYPE C FRONT PANEL CONNECTOR.


----------



## cstkl1

all the manuals for asus mobos are up on website


----------



## cstkl1

Arni90 said:


> I see from the Z690 APEX manual that V_LATCH is disabled out of the box. Is there any reason you wouldn't want to enable it?


polling? 

but i think you be more interested in that new toy.


----------



## Falkentyne

Arni90 said:


> I see from the Z690 APEX manual that V_LATCH is disabled out of the box. Is there any reason you wouldn't want to enable it?


If it's like the Z590 Apex/extreme, just flip the switch to enabled. It's just a switch.
Also resetting it with the onboard switch while a stress test is running resets the values in case it reports Vmin: 0.00v or something.
You can also just use hwinfo64 which allows you to reset the min/max values.


----------



## asdkj1740

a note about m14h bottom (the third) pcie slot.
it is clearly wired x8 (from chipset) in the slot. but it is not really a x8 connectivity, namely you would not have x8 when a x16 gpu is installed on the bottom slot.

each pcie controller is x4 max, and there are 7 pcie controller in z690 chipset.
so x8 in the m14h's last slot is actually got combined by two pcie controller (x4+x4), which is meat to support two devices (x4 each) in one slot, namely the hyper m.2 card with dual m.2 slot.

in short,
one device installed in the last slot=x4 max, no x8.
two devices installed in the same last slot= x4 each, cant be x8 + x0.

so,
*Intel® Z690 Chipset*
1 x PCIe 4.0 x16 slot (supports x4, x4/x4 modes)


----------



## SuprUsrStan

Has anyone actually been able to preorder one from Newegg? It looks like almost all of the Maximus boards are "sold out" and under auto notify while virtually every other non Maximus LGA1700 board is available for preorder. Is Asus just not letting Newegg preorder their boards or are they really sold out so badly. :/


----------



## cstkl1

SuprUsrStan said:


> Has anyone actually been able to preorder one from Newegg? It looks like almost all of the Maximus boards are "sold out" and under auto notify while virtually every other non Maximus LGA1700 board is available for preorder. Is Asus just not letting Newegg preorder their boards or are they really sold out so badly. :/


yeah its weird here too. 
normally asus MY will release a press mrsp price for all tech channel. 

until now. nothing. zero. nada. bupkus.


----------



## bscool

SuprUsrStan said:


> Has anyone actually been able to preorder one from Newegg? It looks like almost all of the Maximus boards are "sold out" and under auto notify while virtually every other non Maximus LGA1700 board is available for preorder. Is Asus just not letting Newegg preorder their boards or are they really sold out so badly. :/


I am pretty sure they had stock and sold out. I have had both z690 Hero(a week or so ago when first for presale) and Apex in cart(the last few days) and just yesterday still had Apex in cart and showed 700+ other people also had it in their cart also.

Just checked now and Apex it is out of stock but 12700k I also had in cart was still there and shows 10,000+ people also have in cart.


----------



## cstkl1

bscool said:


> I am pretty sure they had stock and sold out. I have had both z690 Hero(a week or so ago when first for presale) and Apex in cart(the last few days) and just yesterday still had Apex in cart and showed 700+ other people also had it in their cart also.
> 
> Just checked now and Apex it is out of stock but 12700k I also had in cart was still there and shows 10,000+ people also have in cart.


u dint find it weird theres no press release to tech news mrsp by asus? so far prices are quoted from newegg by end user.


----------



## bscool

cstkl1 said:


> u dint find it weird theres no press release to tech news mrsp by asus? so far prices are quoted from newegg by end user.


So you don't think Newegg had them? They already sent some people 12900k so who knows.

I just know that I had it in my cart and could have checked out(pre order) but I am waiting until better ddr5 is out. I might give in and join in sooner but for now I am waiting.

Edit added screen where it save for later today but was in my cart for a couple days.

Edit 2 just going buy past when I ordered from NE preorder they went thru. I really don't know, just my experience.


----------



## lordkahless

I didn't have too much issue ordering but I was at the right place when those things dropped. I ordered Geil DDR5 4800 off Amazon about 2 weeks ago but returned it. I ordered 5200Cl38 5200 Dominator off Best Buy but returned that as well on Saturday 10/30. I had it in hand. Ended up with the "First Edition" Dominator 5200Cl36 right off Corsairs website. Got that one today delivered. It is interesting because they printed the batch number on it. Mine is 0121 and 0122 on each memory stick. I guess that is low if there are 4 possible digits. Pretty much if you weren't at your computer the moment those things dropped it wasn't going to happen.

When Newegg screwed up I ordered my 12900K at 10am mountain time on Wednesday 10/27 and it was delivered the next day on Thursday. I pre-ordered the Z690 Hero at the same time, but cancelled that after the Apex dropped on Newegg Friday evening, don't recall what time. I got the phone call from Newegg asking not to post anything about receiving it on social media.


----------



## phillyman36

lordkahless said:


> I didn't have too much issue ordering but I was at the right place when those things dropped. I ordered Geil DDR5 4800 off Amazon about 2 weeks ago but returned it. I ordered 5200Cl38 5200 Dominator off Best Buy but returned that as well on Saturday 10/30. I had it in hand. Ended up with the "First Edition" Dominator 5200Cl36 right off Corsairs website. Got that one today delivered. It is interesting because they printed the batch number on it. Mine is 0121 and 0122 on each memory stick. I guess that is low if there are 4 possible digits. Pretty much if you weren't at your computer the moment those things dropped it wasn't going to happen.
> 
> When Newegg screwed up I ordered my 12900K at 10am mountain time on Wednesday 10/27 and it was delivered the next day on Thursday. I pre-ordered the Z690 Hero at the same time, but cancelled that after the Apex dropped on Newegg Friday evening, don't recall what time. I got the phone call from Newegg asking not to post anything about receiving it on social media.
> 
> View attachment 2530785
> 
> View attachment 2530783


My Ram is numbered 149 and 150. Also Newegg sent me an email saying my pre order is delayed but didnt say how long so i may have to hike it to Microcenter Thursday morning. Wish they sent me one early insert sad face  lol My mobo is The Asus Hero.


----------



## lordkahless

phillyman36 said:


> My Ram is numbered 149 and 150. Also Newegg sent me an email saying my pre order is delayed but didnt say how long so i may have to hike it to Microcenter Thursday morning. Wish they sent me one early insert sad face lol My mobo is The Asus Hero.


Which order was delayed? The CPU or motherboard?


----------



## phillyman36

lordkahless said:


> Which order was delayed? The CPU or motherboard?


The cpu is delayed.


----------



## D-EJ915

SuprUsrStan said:


> Has anyone actually been able to preorder one from Newegg? It looks like almost all of the Maximus boards are "sold out" and under auto notify while virtually every other non Maximus LGA1700 board is available for preorder. Is Asus just not letting Newegg preorder their boards or are they really sold out so badly. :/


I saw the formula and apex available for preorder but the hero was already out of stock by the time I clicked on their email. I didn't see the extreme or glacial in stock.


----------



## lordkahless

One option I came across was Overclockers UK Product Search | OcUK ships to the US. Yesterday I loaded up the Extreme Glacial in my cart and with the DHL shipping and exchange rate it was something like $1600 or so dollars. Not sure why it would be cheaper. I didn't look that hard but they did appear to have some other Z690 boards on their too, all shipping to the US.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

lordkahless said:


> One option I came across was Overclockers UK Product Search | OcUK ships to the US. Yesterday I loaded up the Extreme Glacial in my cart and with the DHL shipping and exchange rate it was something like $1600 or so dollars. Not sure why it would be cheaper. I didn't look that hard but they did appear to have some other Z690 boards on their too, all shipping to the US.


Just no warranty though.


----------



## cstkl1

MrTOOSHORT said:


> Just no warranty though.


there is warranty.. just a hassle. u can send back to taiwan or ask your local asus sc .. there will be rma cost ..

at least thats how it works here


----------



## SuprUsrStan

I saw the other boards were up but the Maximus Extreme wasn't posted when the other Asus boards were posted and by the time I saw newegg had added them it was already as a notify. Looks like these Maximus boards are just much more popular than the other boards that are still available for preorder.


----------



## Shawnb99

So will there be options in the BIOS to turn off the unicorn puke on the Maximus Extreme? Just did a quick scan of the manual and didn't see any mentions of jumpers to turn them off manually so I'm hoping there's at least software options.

I'd like to turn it all off except the Q codes, the rest can stay dark forever


----------



## Feklar

You can turn them off via the bios.


----------



## Shawnb99

Sweet. Thanks. I want all that off


----------



## Feklar

SuprUsrStan said:


> Has anyone actually been able to preorder one from Newegg? It looks like almost all of the Maximus boards are "sold out" and under auto notify while virtually every other non Maximus LGA1700 board is available for preorder. Is Asus just not letting Newegg preorder their boards or are they really sold out so badly. :/


I placed my preorder successfully at Newegg at 9:00am on the 27th for the 12900k and for the Z90 Apex at midnight the 30th. I checked with customer service today and they both will be shipped to me on the Thursday the 4th for delivery the next day (I live 30 miles from Newegg) so we will see.


----------



## Shawnb99

Not even listed at Newegg.ca


----------



## Feklar

You can place a preorder on Newegg usa right now for an Apex.


----------



## TheOnlyGummy

Hi! I have a doubt, i preordered an Asus Z690 Extreme and i have an Asus RTX 3090 with an EK waterblock front/rear. I saw that in the main pcie slot it is very close to the m.2 heatsink with its lcd display, this heatsink is very high and beefy, and for that i have this doubt...my GPU with active backplate can fit in the main PCIE slot with m.2 heatsink?
I think it's the same with the Apex, instead, the hero have a smaller and lower heatsink and the Extreme Glacial have more space between PCIE slot and the GIGA water block.
Sorry for my wall of text, but i hope someone can solve my problem.
Ty


----------



## Shawnb99

TheOnlyGummy said:


> Hi! I have a doubt, i preordered an Asus Z690 Extreme and i have an Asus RTX 3090 with an EK waterblock front/rear. I saw that in the main pcie slot it is very close to the m.2 heatsink with its lcd display, this heatsink is very high and beefy, and for that i have this doubt...my GPU with active backplate can fit in the main PCIE slot with m.2 heatsink?
> I think it's the same with the Apex, instead, the hero have a smaller and lower heatsink and the Extreme Glacial have more space between PCIE slot and the GIGA water block.
> Sorry for my wall of text, but i hope someone can solve my problem.
> Ty


Nobody can solve this problem until someone gets their hands on one and checks. There’s a lot of us in the same boat and are eager to know if this is an issue or not.


----------



## Feklar

I think you will have an issue if you are using the active backplate with your water block. I currently have the Maximus XIII Apex and the Evga 3090 FTW3 with Ek block and active backplate. In the top slot the gpu will not fit due to the backplate hitting the m.2 heatsink above the slot. On the Apex, you can remove that heatsink and the issue is resolved. I haven't noted any increases in vrm temps at all due to this. The Hero does not have this issue since the heatsink sits lower. The oled on the Extreme may be an issue and I don't think you want to/can remove it solve the issue unfortunately.


----------



## Shawnb99

Feklar said:


> I think you will have an issue if you are using the active backplate with your water block. I currently have the Maximus XIII Apex and the Evga 3090 FTW3 with Ek block and active backplate. In the top slot the gpu will not fit due to the backplate hitting the m.2 heatsink above the slot. On the Apex, you can remove that heatsink and the issue is resolved. I haven't noted any increases in vrm temps at all due to this. The Hero does not have this issue since the heatsink sits lower. The oled on the Extreme may be an issue and I don't think you want to/can remove it solve the issue unfortunately.


That’s concerning to hear. Looks like I can’t upgrade to 690 then, not without downgrading to the Hero.


----------



## TheOnlyGummy

Shawnb99 said:


> That’s concerning to hear. Looks like I can’t upgrade to 690 then, not without downgrading to the Hero.


Or pick a new Z690 Extreme glacial....that have more space between the block and pcie 1st slot


----------



## Shawnb99

TheOnlyGummy said:


> Or pick a new Z690 Extreme glacial....that have more space between the block and pcie 1st slot


**** no. I’d rather set my money on fire and watch it burn. I will never support that hideous butt ugly utterly useless rainbow unicorn puke board. You couldn’t pay me to use that POS


----------



## Feklar

Shawnb99 said:


> That’s concerning to hear. Looks like I can’t upgrade to 690 then, not without downgrading to the Hero.


If you don't need the dimm slots, the 690 Apex will work by removing the m.2 heatsink. That's what I'm doing.


----------



## Shawnb99

I’ll have to see if I’m able to order one. With the way things are I’ll be lucky to find one in stock


----------



## Section31

Shawnb99 said:


> I’ll have to see if I’m able to order one. With the way things are I’ll be lucky to find one in stock


If Canada Computer has listed then its coming, I suspect not November 4th but cheapest places this round are Canada Computer/Bestbuy. Follow Canada Computer, its site is now listing some boards available online/in-store


----------



## musician

Hmm, any idea how well optimized BIOS for memory OC get the HERO compared to the APEX? I could really use the Thunderbolt 4 ports in the HERO, but I would like to do some memory OC as well. I don´t care about CPU OC at all tho.


----------



## Sporrdig

X


----------



## Arni90

I'm kind of wondering how much the PCIe 5.0 M.2 expansion card, PCIe 5.0 switches (for PCIE16_2), ROG True Voltician, oversized VRM with SP-capacitors, and the metal shield adds to the cost of the Maximus boards. What's the point of having a VRM with 24 power stages for a 350W (?) CPU?


----------



## asdkj1740

Arni90 said:


> I'm kind of wondering how much the PCIe 5.0 M.2 expansion card, PCIe 5.0 switches (for PCIE16_2), ROG True Voltician, oversized VRM with SP-capacitors, and the metal shield adds to the cost of the Maximus boards. What's the point of having a VRM with 24 power stages for a 350W (?) CPU?


$100 usd



musician said:


> Hmm, any idea how well optimized BIOS for memory OC get the HERO compared to the APEX? I could really use the Thunderbolt 4 ports in the HERO, but I would like to do some memory OC as well. I don´t care about CPU OC at all tho.


different layout, should not be compared at all.
but according to my sources, every mobo from every vendors kind of sucks as of today, 6200+ is hell and cpu plays a big role there.


----------



## centvalny

Hats off to team ROG for an awesome Apex board !
So much fun to clock it up.


----------



## carlhil2




----------



## Section31

asdkj1740 said:


> $100 usd
> 
> 
> different layout, should not be compared at all.
> but according to my sources, every mobo from every vendors kind of sucks as of today, 6200+ is hell and cpu plays a big role there.


Thanks for the feedback. I was leaning towards getting corsair or gksil ddr5-5200 and live with it till platform matures more and upgrades versus buying DDR5-6000 plus. Sticking with that route. That M.2 Info was long read for me, I think these mobo may have short lifespan (2years max) with lack of the m.2 pcie 5 nvme issue


----------



## 12700KF

Section31 said:


> Thanks for the feedback. I was leaning towards getting corsair or gksil ddr5-5200 and live with it till platform matures more and upgrades versus buying DDR5-6000 plus. Sticking with that route. That M.2 Info was long read for me, I think these mobo may have short lifespan (2years max) with lack of the m.2 pcie 5 nvme issue


ROG boards (well at least HERO and APEX I am 100% sure, dunno about the rest tho) have an PCIe 5.0 addon card with PCIe 5.0 SSD slot.
About the ram I am on the same boat, got Corsair 5200MHz for now. If I will be able to upgrade to 6k+ in future, sure I will at some time. But for now I am happy with the 5200.


----------



## Section31

12700KF said:


> ROG boards (well at least HERO and APEX I am 100% sure, dunno about the rest tho) have an PCIe 5.0 addon card with PCIe 5.0 SSD slot.
> About the ram I am on the same boat, got Corsair 5200MHz for now. If I will be able to upgrade to 6k+ in future, sure I will at some time. But for now I am happy with the 5200.


Going to be interesting how it plays out because if you use the add-on card, you are going 8x/8x. Only the Extreme seems to allow 16x GEN 5 + 4x Gen 5 M.2 NVME. However i don't see consumer gen 5 nvme coming out till late 2022 (announcement) and wide availability by 2023.


----------



## asdkj1740

Section31 said:


> Going to be interesting how it plays out because if you use the add-on card, you are going 8x/8x. Only the Extreme seems to allow 16x GEN 5 + 4x Gen 5 M.2 NVME. However i don't see consumer gen 5 nvme coming out till late 2022 (announcement) and wide availability by 2023.


not gen5x16 pcie + gen5x4 SSD at the same time.
hero can do "that" too.

no changes on 13th cpu, still gen5x16+gen4x4, sadly.

craftsmanship




lmao, 
ROG WARNING
ONCE ROG, FOREVER ROG.


----------



## Section31

asdkj1740 said:


> not gen5x16 pcie + gen5x4 SSD at the same time.
> hero can do "that" too.
> 
> no changes on 13th cpu, still gen5x16+gen4x4, sadly.
> 
> craftsmanship
> 
> 
> 
> 
> lmao,
> ROG WARNING
> ONCE ROG, FOREVER ROG.


That’s unfortunate. Appreciate the information. I was hopeful these boards could go to meteorlake but we probably need mobos for that. I was going to skip raptorlake Thought intel had changed but guess not.

I have the ordered hero for the record (for the hyper m.2 support with gen 5 nvme support). Looked at strix-e as well. Wasn’t easy deciding between apex, hero and strix-e.


----------



## asdkj1740

Section31 said:


> That’s unfortunate. Appreciate the information. I was hopeful these boards could go to meteorlake but we probably need mobos for that. I was going to skip raptorlake Thought intel had changed but guess not.
> 
> I have the ordered hero for the record (for the hyper m.2 support with gen 5 nvme support). Looked at strix-e as well. Wasn’t easy deciding between apex, hero and strix-e.


you may subscribe to rog bing youtube channel to support his works while waiting for nextnext gen)

yes, strix e z690 got the hyper m.2 pcie add in card too. gen5 SSD supported.
i am glad you are having troubles deciding which asus mobo you should pick. to me it is easy, damn the prices i cannot afford any of them lol.


https://www.coolpc.com.tw/tw/shop/motherboard/rog-z690/?fbclid=IwAR1eUPwG1NXoD_zzkrwqOulAHLoxezAx487CGQ-_2Koki2u4QWGPkpNAMV4


----------



## Nizzen

asdkj1740 said:


> not gen5x16 pcie + gen5x4 SSD at the same time.
> hero can do "that" too.
> 
> no changes on 13th cpu, still gen5x16+gen4x4, sadly.
> 
> craftsmanship
> 
> 
> 
> 
> lmao,
> ROG WARNING
> ONCE ROG, FOREVER ROG.


ROG=POG 😎🤓


----------



## Section31

asdkj1740 said:


> you may subscribe to rog bing youtube channel to support his works while waiting for nextnext gen)
> 
> yes, strix e z690 got the hyper m.2 pcie add in card too. gen5 SSD supported.
> i am glad you are having troubles deciding which asus mobo you should pick. to me it is easy, damn the prices i cannot afford any of them lol.
> 
> 
> https://www.coolpc.com.tw/tw/shop/motherboard/rog-z690/?fbclid=IwAR1eUPwG1NXoD_zzkrwqOulAHLoxezAx487CGQ-_2Koki2u4QWGPkpNAMV4


That’s an good choice too. My top choice is still the Apex but i think getting ahold of one here will be tough for first couple of weeks.

The z690 vrm table on googledocs has been an good read as well. Really appreciate whoever’s made it efforts too.

I was researching the whole digital 19+1+2 used by gigabyte/msi this gen and asus 20+1+2.


----------



## asdkj1740

Section31 said:


> That’s an good choice too. My top choice is still the Apex but i think getting ahold of one here will be tough for first couple of weeks.
> 
> The z690 vrm table on googledocs has been an good read as well. Really appreciate whoever’s made it efforts too.
> 
> I was researching the whole digital 19+1+2 used by gigabyte/msi this gen and asus 20+1+2.


should not pay too much attention on these vrm setup differences in my opinion, after seeing so many of them myself.
i see no point worrying about asus teamed 10+1 pwm-->20+1 power stages design, given what they have put on top of the mosfets and the PCB they have used.


----------



## cstkl1

Third Post Updated

Day 1 Release Bios . Thanks to @shamino1978

4th November 2021
MAXIMUS​
ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-ASUS-0702.zip
ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-FORMULA-ASUS-0702.rar
ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0702.rar
ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0702.rar
ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-GLACIAL-ASUS-0702.rar

STRIX​ROG-STRIX-Z690-E-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0702.rar
ROG-STRIX-Z690-F-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0702.rar
ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0702.rar
ROG-STRIX-Z690-I-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0702.rar
ROG-STRIX-Z690-G-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0702.rar
ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0705.rar

Prime/Proart/TUF​PRIME-Z690-A-ASUS-0702.rar
ProArt-Z690-CREATOR-WIFI-ASUS-0702.rar
TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0705.rar
TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-D4-ASUS-0705.rar


----------



## cstkl1

MZ690 - Apex
Bios - 0096
Gskill 2x16gb @ 6400 C30-37-37-28 1T trfc 280 @1.5v
MC - 1.35v
SA - 0.85v

12900KF - SP89 - STOCK








​
12900KF - SP89 - P Core 52|50








​


----------



## cstkl1




----------



## asdkj1740

8678


----------



## Kana Chan

They're using 268+ BCLK for this? 1:16 at 8610 100:100? or some 100:133 202+ BCLK?

oh it's gear4 102


----------



## sblantipodi

waiting my Extreme...
hope that those boards will be "ready to use" without too many problems at the start.


----------



## Daniel M

Now I just need RAM.


----------



## cstkl1




----------



## Shawnb99

Newegg.ca is showing a 12/18 date for the Apex. Is this the release date for everyone? I assume the Extreme has the same date


----------



## Feklar

My preorder for the Apex was charged today and will ship tomorrow. I am also receiving my 12900k from them tomorrow. I spoke to Newegg and they have no idea how many motherboards are coming from day to day to fill preorders so some of these dates are meaningless. Supply chains are a mess so I guess we are going to have to be patient and lucky. If only I could source some GSkill DDR5 memory.


----------



## Shawnb99

Ah thanks. Ordered the extreme through B&H as Newegg doesn't list it yet. B&H just shows it as backordered and no date.

I figured it would be a wait, least it is nice we can pre-order.


----------



## vullcan

So the Strix F is $400 and has all the ports / connections I really need at a minimum. Do the extra 4 power phases on the Hero really make a 12900k perform any differently for an extra $200?

I guess I plan to overclock it eventually for gaming (whatever gaming stable clock I can get out of a 360mm AIO / basic loop that is) but I understand these new platforms don't overclock much anyway as they are pushed pretty far out of the box.

I could save that $200 and put it towards better memory down the road, but I dont want to be kicking myself for getting the worse motherboard. If its just flashy lights, thunderbolt and some extra gizmos, well I dont really need it.


----------



## asdkj1740

vullcan said:


> So the Strix F is $400 and has all the ports / connections I really need at a minimum. Do the extra 4 power phases on the Hero really make a 12900k perform any differently for an extra $200?
> 
> I guess I plan to overclock it eventually for gaming (whatever gaming stable clock I can get out of a 360mm AIO / basic loop that is) but I understand these new platforms don't overclock much anyway as they are pushed pretty far out of the box.
> 
> I could save that $200 and put it towards better memory down the road, but I dont want to be kicking myself for getting the worse motherboard. If its just flashy lights, thunderbolt and some extra gizmos, well I dont really need it.


definitely not, especially for gaming. 
yes you should get better 360mm aio instead.
save some bucks for ddr5.

legit vrm cooling performance under 300w.








Обзор материнской платы ASUS ROG STRIX Z690-F Gaming WiFi GreenTech_Reviews


Обзор материнской платы ASUS ROG STRIX Z690-F Gaming WiFi




greentechreviews.ru


----------



## Benni231990

Hello

I have a hugh Problem i made the bios Update from yesterday for my strix F and now my System Boot only with default setting?

When i only activate the xmp Profil It dont Start (i have 5200 Cl40 memory)

When i Start to overclock the CPU by only 100mhz they also no Boot

The bios bevor 04xx ich could overclock to 5,1 allcore and 4,1 on the little cores und could use the RAM 5200 cl38 and no Problem


----------



## cstkl1

Benni231990 said:


> Hello
> 
> I have a hugh Problem i made the bios Update from yesterday for my strix F and now my System Boot only with default setting?
> 
> When i only activate the xmp Profil It dont Start (i have 5200 Cl40 memory)
> 
> When i Start to overclock the CPU by only 100mhz they also no Boot
> 
> The bios bevor 04xx ich could overclock to 5,1 allcore and 4,1 on the little cores und could use the RAM 5200 cl38 and no Problem


Try
XMP,Sync All core P core 51,Sync All core E core 39,LLC4,Ringdown Auto, Cache Min/Max Auto, Vcore Auto, Cstate Auto

_ i am not sure what LLC required for Strix-F. Or you can leave it auto._

XMP - Try setting manual SA from 0.85v increasing 0.05v every try.

Also what is your ram kit.


----------



## Benni231990

I buyed 2x Kingston fury 5200 Cl40 16 GB

What ist the highest save voltage for System agent? 1v?


----------



## shamino1978

Benni231990 said:


> I buyed 2x Kingston fury 5200 Cl40 16 GB
> 
> What ist the highest save voltage for System agent? 1v?


 can u try xmp1 not xmp2?


----------



## Benni231990

I found the Problem When i choose Manuel Mode and Set 5200mhz manuell it Boot with xmp1 and 2 no chance but the Sa vcore ist allways 0,896 now with manuel ich have 1,15 and no Problem 

Is 1,15 save?


----------



## Simkin

Getting my Apex today, still waiting for AIO and DDR5 but im gonna start putting it together.

I have two NVMe to put in, should i just install them on the M.2 slots on the motherboard, or put them in the DIMM slot?


----------



## Benni231990

Can you pls make a picture or Tell me the name What is the ram voltage i must change When i want to overclock the RAM? My xmp ist 1,25 but ich want 6000 but for this i must Set a higher voltage


----------



## shamino1978

Benni231990 said:


> I found the Problem When i choose Manuel Mode and Set 5200mhz manuell it Boot with xmp1 and 2 no chance but the Sa vcore ist allways 0,896 now with manuel ich have 1,15 and no Problem
> 
> Is 1,15 save?


1.15 is the auto rule at that frequency so its as expected.
yes its safe


----------



## shamino1978

Benni231990 said:


> Can you pls make a picture or Tell me the name What is the ram voltage i must change When i want to overclock the RAM? My xmp ist 1,25 but ich want 6000 but for this i must Set a higher voltage


its below in extremetweaker page
DRAM vdd, vddq
can try 1.25 with 1.25 or 1.25 with 1.30


----------



## Asmodian

Simkin said:


> I have two NVMe to put in, should i just install them on the M.2 slots on the motherboard, or put them in the DIMM slot?


The one near the CPU (M.2_1) is connected to the CPU, I would put the OS drive in this one.

All the rest are all connected through the chipset, so no need to use the DIMM.2 card unless you are adding more than two SSDs.


----------



## Simkin

Asmodian said:


> The one near the CPU (M.2_1) is connected to the CPU, I would put the OS drive in this one.
> 
> All the rest are all connected through the chipset, so no need to use the DIMM.2 card unless you are adding more than two SSDs.


Ok thanks!


----------



## Benni231990

i have a nother question 

ASUS promoted the new* ASUS Enhanced Memory Profile *on the STRIX F

but in the bios i cant find it? so where is it?


----------



## shamino1978

Benni231990 said:


> i have a nother question
> 
> ASUS promoted the new* ASUS Enhanced Memory Profile *on the STRIX F
> 
> but in the bios i cant find it? so where is it?


it is a backup for modules without xmp
so its a profiled xmp for non xmp dimms, if xmp is detected to be available, the bios defaults to showing xmp instead.


----------



## SuperMumrik

Are there any secret sauce bios or beta bios for the Strix-A D4? =)


----------



## MaghX

Its asus top ddr4 board so I hope it will be well supported like D5 versions


----------



## Benni231990

I have a New question 

Today i watched the New Video from the 8auer with ddr4 and ddr5 and He has overclock the ddr5 5200 to 5400 an has in aida64 read over 86000 read and 88000 write 

I have a 5200 Cl40 kit and overclock to 5600 and have 89600 read but only 78000 write?

Why i have over 10k less in write?


----------



## cstkl1

Benni231990 said:


> I have a New question
> 
> Today i watched the New Video from the 8auer with ddr4 and ddr5 and He has overclock the ddr5 5200 to 5400 an has in aida64 read over 86000 read and 88000 write
> 
> I have a 5200 Cl40 kit and overclock to 5600 and have 89600 read but only 78000 write?
> 
> Why i have over 10k less in write?


1. apex, he a pro ocer, tuned mem
2. get the latest aida beta
3. spend more time on your second/third
4. different chipset also maybe


----------



## clackersx

SuperMumrik said:


> Are there any secret sauce bios or beta bios for the Strix-A D4? =)


Check 3rd post? currently newer than Asus lists... Not sure what they ship with, perhaps the same as the post.








[OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread


WIP, links to all bioses, tools. https://youtu.be/rhdxPscpAIU https://youtu.be/MiatGZm7ioI https://youtu.be/fBrlgLZrFaI




www.overclock.net


----------



## Nizzen

Error 404


----------



## cstkl1

Nizzen said:


> Error 404


?


----------



## phillyman36

Does anyone have an issue when after you press the start button it takes like 3 to 5 seconds for the pc to start the boot sequence? Im using a Z690 Hero with a 12900k.

Edit reseated the gpu and the front panel connections all is well.


----------



## phillyman36

Do you all have resize bar enabled?


----------



## cstkl1

phillyman36 said:


> Do you all have resize bar enabled?


defaults its disable

in all of nvidia 20 games. only acV rebar works on every preset and every resolution

every other game most of it depends on re resolution and the use of dlss.


----------



## sblantipodi

ordered a Z690 Extreme


----------



## Dero79

I am planning a build with the Maximus Apex. Since the Apex is not provided with any video output, is there any reason to prefer the i9 12900K over the KF?


----------



## sblantipodi

Dero79 said:


> I am planning a build with the Maximus Apex. Since the Apex is not provided with any video output, is there any reason to prefer the i9 12900K over the KF?


iGPU helps when using QuickSync if interested.


----------



## Benni231990

today i was in the bios and want to tune a bit my ddr5 timings an i see my cache is 4,8ghz on auto but when i open aida and cpu z it says north bridge 3,6ghz ??

is the cache not the noth bridge ??


----------



## sniperpowa

Benni231990 said:


> today i was in the bios and want to tune a bit my ddr5 timings an i see my cache is 4,8ghz on auto but when i open aida and cpu z it says north bridge 3,6ghz ??
> 
> is the cache not the noth bridge ??


Under load?


----------



## Benni231990

No in idle When i Start cpuz oder Aida ist says 3,6ghz

Cpuz says under memory uncore frequenzy 3600 mhz and Aida says north bridge 3600 mhz

But When i am in the bios i have target Cache frequency 4,7ghz

Update : i run cinebench r23 and also the Ring llc clock is 3,6 GHz


----------



## shamino1978

PcdGet32


phillyman36 said:


> Does anyone have an issue when after you press the start button it takes like 3 to 5 seconds for the pc to start the boot sequence? Im using a Z690 Hero with a 12900k.
> 
> Edit reseated the gpu and the front panel connections all is well.


Yes thats the time needed for the pch to fetch. Data from ME


----------



## Falkentyne

shamino1978 said:


> PcdGet32
> Yes thats the time needed for the pch to fetch. Data from ME


Need to OC PCH...


----------



## shamino1978

Benni231990 said:


> No in idle When i Start cpuz oder Aida ist says 3,6ghz
> 
> Cpuz says under memory uncore frequenzy 3600 mhz and Aida says north bridge 3600 mhz
> 
> But When i am in the bios i have target Cache frequency 4,7ghz
> 
> Update : i run cinebench r23 and also the Ring llc clock is 3,6 GHz


Anytime the ecores are not sleeping the ring will down itself to 3.6, if it doesnt it will immediately crash since it has to keep up with the ringbus.


----------



## Benni231990

But now i looked the Cache to 4,4ghz it is the only stabile Boot and now in cpuz an Aida und hwinfo it say 4,4 When i run cinebench for example and no 3,6 so What is better auto or 4,4?


----------



## shamino1978

Benni231990 said:


> But now i looked the Cache to 4,4ghz it is the only stabile Boot and now in cpuz an Aida und hwinfo it say 4,4 When i run cinebench for example and no 3,6 so What is better auto or 4,4?


You tell me. Run the things you actually use and not syntgetic bench and see which performs better. Chances are you dont see a diff.


----------



## asdkj1740

shamino1978 said:


> You tell me. Run the things you actually use and not syntgetic bench and see which performs better. Chances are you dont see a diff.


may i know why only on the second pcie slot (pcie5.0x8 through switches) supports a gen5 ssd?
why the first pcie slot can only recognize one gen4 ssd but not one gen5 ssd?


----------



## Falkentyne

asdkj1740 said:


> may i know why only on the second pcie slot (pcie5.0x8 through switches) supports a gen5 ssd?
> why the first pcie slot can only recognize one gen4 ssd but not one gen5 ssd?
> 
> View attachment 2531431


May have something to do with the first PCIE slot being reserved for video cards running at full 5.0 x16 speed.
Probably the same reason why the second PCIE slot cannot run a video card at PCIE 5.0 x16 and instead has to run it at x8 (not sure if PCIE 4.0 x16 or PCIE 5.0x8 or PCIE 4.0 x8, sorry, but this is beyond my understanding).


----------



## asdkj1740

Falkentyne said:


> May have something to do with the first PCIE slot being reserved for video cards running at full 5.0 x16 speed.
> Probably the same reason why the second PCIE slot cannot run a video card at PCIE 5.0 x16 and instead has to run it at x8 (not sure if PCIE 4.0 x16 or PCIE 5.0x8 or PCIE 4.0 x8, sorry, but this is beyond my understanding).


i was thinking the same but if one gen4 SSD on hyper m.2 pcie card is supported on the first pcie slot then it seems GPU is not the exclusive one to the first pcie slot.
or the hyper m.2 pcie card is "faking" like a GPU. an easy test would be plugging a pciex1 wifi card into the first pcie slot to see what would happen.


hero PCB, or actually asus PCB, is a masterpiece.
msi gigabyte asrock biostar, their pcb is not too hard to understand when few rules/concepts picked up.
asus's one is pain in the ass to lots of "reviewers" / real fun!


btw i also spot two pcb / two revisions of m14h, maybe one of those is engineering sample.








edited: i was told the ixbt one is the mass production retail version.
and please note that the switches/redrivers on the back pcb are "gen4".


----------



## ruruloko

Hello colleagues, I just mounted apex with 12900kf, I get error code (d6), my graph is 3090, in things the code A0 comes out, and the graph of pcie changed, and updated or bios flash from usb to the most recent, and released all cables etc ... and I can't get video on the monitor for any output, any suggestions ??? this afternoon I should receive another 12900k no F ...... thanks for the help


----------



## cstkl1

sorry dont understand 
graph?


----------



## ruruloko

si amigo, no tengo salida de video, con error (D6), lo siento, no escribo bien el ingles

no console output devices are found


----------



## acoustic

ruruloko said:


> Hello colleagues, I just mounted apex with 12900kf, I get error code (d6), my graph is 3090, in things the code A0 comes out, and the graph of pcie changed, and updated or bios flash from usb to the most recent, and released all cables etc ... and I can't get video on the monitor for any output, any suggestions ??? this afternoon I should receive another 12900k no F ...... thanks for the help


D6 is a GPU post code -- basically saying no output detected. Are you sure cables are properly mounted? Try moving GPU to 2nd PCIE slot for troubleshooting. It could be a bad PCIE slot, or the GPU is not seated properly. I would re-seat GPU and try a different slot.

Is the 3090 brand new? If not, then it should be the motherboard is the issue, not the GPU.


cstkl1 said:


> sorry dont understand
> graph?


graph = graphics card


----------



## ruruloko

Thanks for the answer, if I changed pcie, to the second and there is no video output, I have checked the power cables of the gpu for several times, and the result has been negative, the only thing I have to try when I get the another cpu, try in case you want to boot, disassemble the cpu in case there was a bent pin, and everything to be fine .....


----------



## asdkj1740

rog bing just said in his latest video about that extra 6 pin next to 24pin should be plugged as it also provides power to cpu/vrm.


----------



## ruruloko

si la gpu es nueva, hoy eliminé la plataforma z590 ..

I do not have the 6-pin cable connected, I thought it was not necessary, as old platforms it was not, do you think that this could be the problem ???


----------



## ruruloko

I just connected the additional cable for the 6-pin pcie and nothing, error D6 ..... I have also changed the pcie from the first to the second, everything was unsuccessful.
I think it is a matter of the plate, I will wait for the second cpu to arrive and if it does not work I will process the guarantee.


----------



## cstkl1

updated second post to link to roberto octvb guide + asus oc software tools









ASUS MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME & i9-12900K GUIDE - Load...


Disclaimer ! These settings and methods are outside Intel's specifications, just like any other overclocking method. ---------------------------------------------------- For Z790/13900K click here Introduction: In a world increasingly concerned with natural resources, the watchword is...




www.overclock.net


----------



## cstkl1

Asus Enhanced Memory Profile Explained


----------



## phillyman36

Anyone using a riser card/vertical gpu attachment with their gpu and mobo? If so what brand and did you have to make any adjustments in the bios?


----------



## Falkentyne

phillyman36 said:


> Anyone using a riser card/vertical gpu attachment with their gpu and mobo? If so what brand and did you have to make any adjustments in the bios?


Only using a x4 riser for my x1 old X-fi PCIE soundcard so I can move it away from almost blocking the GPU intake fan of a triple slot 3090 (had to do this ever since Asus moved the PCIE x1 slot (presumably to not have a x1 soundcard block GPU's with heatsinks on the backplate, starting on their Z590 boards (then again I don't really know).


----------



## Nizzen

Any new beta bios for Z690 Apex?
Love from Norway


----------



## DaTraS

Most likely going to get my Strix Z690-A tomorrow, so wanted to prepare my flash drive with Windows 11 and the drivers that I need.
Problem is, I don't see any drivers on ASUS page? Do I have to rely on what Windows 11 is downloading via Windows Update (if it recognizes the ethernet to begin with) or where do I get them?


----------



## fortecosi

DaTraS said:


> Most likely going to get my Strix Z690-A tomorrow, so wanted to prepare my flash drive with Windows 11 and the drivers that I need.
> Problem is, I don't see any drivers on ASUS page? Do I have to rely on what Windows 11 is downloading via Windows Update (if it recognizes the ethernet to begin with) or where do I get them?


Yep ASUS site is somehow busy I guess. What helped me:
Click on "Features", then click again "Support", "Drivers & Tools", then select "Windows 11". This is working for me, and it shows the drivers for me that way.


----------



## clackersx

DaTraS said:


> Most likely going to get my Strix Z690-A tomorrow, so wanted to prepare my flash drive with Windows 11 and the drivers that I need.
> Problem is, I don't see any drivers on ASUS page? Do I have to rely on what Windows 11 is downloading via Windows Update (if it recognizes the ethernet to begin with) or where do I get them?


This is also handy if you wanted to manually grab latest drivers. Most of the time they are the latest direct from the manufacturer (Intel, Realtek, etc) and are usually newer than any motherboard support page.





[INDEX] All My Firmware/Drivers/Software Threads


All My Firmware/Drivers/Software Threads



rog.asus.com


----------



## DaTraS

Thank you very much. Gonna see how well that goes


----------



## cstkl1

DaTraS said:


> Thank you very much. Gonna see how well that goes


use armoury crate to install/ update drivers
and armoury crate uninstaller to remove it
clear cmos after


----------



## hey_aj

Hey everyone,

Looking at getting the Asus Z690 Maximus Extreme but I was also planning to grab an EKWB active backplate for my Strix 3090 and from the pictures and videos I have seen of the board I don't think there will be active backplate clearance on that first PCIe slot.

Can anyone confirm or deny this? Also, would there be any issues with simply mounting the 3090 to the bottom PCIe slot as they are both x16?


----------



## Zyther

Thinking of getting the Maximus Z690 Hero, Anyone have this board and run into any limitations on the board itself with Memory overclocking? And limitations on this board I will find?


----------



## Feklar

Find me any DDR5 memory to overclock and I'll let you know.


----------



## cstkl1

hey_aj said:


> Hey everyone,
> 
> Looking at getting the Asus Z690 Maximus Extreme but I was also planning to grab an EKWB active backplate for my Strix 3090 and from the pictures and videos I have seen of the board I don't think there will be active backplate clearance on that first PCIe slot.
> 
> Can anyone confirm or deny this? Also, would there be any issues with simply mounting the 3090 to the bottom PCIe slot as they are both x16?


if u have the dimensions on thickness etc. 
maybe @Falkentyne or @RobertoSampaio 
can check.


----------



## Shawnb99

hey_aj said:


> Looking at getting the Asus Z690 Maximus Extreme but I was also planning to grab an EKWB active backplate for my Strix 3090 and from the pictures and videos I have seen of the board I don't think there will be active backplate clearance on that first PCIe slot.


I'm looking at the same issue with my KPE and Optimus's block. If it doesn't fit then I'm screwed since the only vertical mount that works for me is EK's that doesn't support the active backplate atm. Hopefully I can mod it to work or I'm looking at a long wait for EK to come out with the new design


----------



## cstkl1

Shawnb99 said:


> I'm looking at the same issue with my KPE and Optimus's block. If it doesn't fit then I'm screwed since the only vertical mount that works for me is EK's that doesn't support the active backplate atm. Hopefully I can mod it to work or I'm looking at a long wait for EK to come out with the new design


do u guys mind taking a pic of the gpu installed on your mobo with the blocks and a ruler?


----------



## Shawnb99

cstkl1 said:


> do u guys mind taking a pic of the gpu installed on your mobo with the blocks and a ruler?


Will do, when I get them. It's all a waiting game now.


----------



## Falkentyne

hey_aj said:


> Hey everyone,
> 
> Looking at getting the Asus Z690 Maximus Extreme but I was also planning to grab an EKWB active backplate for my Strix 3090 and from the pictures and videos I have seen of the board I don't think there will be active backplate clearance on that first PCIe slot.
> 
> Can anyone confirm or deny this? Also, would there be any issues with simply mounting the 3090 to the bottom PCIe slot as they are both x16?


Bottom slot will run at x8.
The clearance depends on how thick the backplate heatsink is--if there is one to begin with, how far the heatsink extends down if it's a low profile heatsink, and what an "active backplate" even is. I have no experience in such things.

I can tell you that a low profile slim backplate heatsink + a 60mm Noctua fan screwed into it fits perfectly on my Z690 Extreme in the first PCIE slot, using a stock 3090 FE with the retail cooler. Sorry if that isn't much help. I know nothing about watercooling so you guys are on your own.


----------



## Feklar

hey_aj said:


> Hey everyone,
> 
> Looking at getting the Asus Z690 Maximus Extreme but I was also planning to grab an EKWB active backplate for my Strix 3090 and from the pictures and videos I have seen of the board I don't think there will be active backplate clearance on that first PCIe slot.
> 
> Can anyone confirm or deny this? Also, would there be any issues with simply mounting the 3090 to the bottom PCIe slot as they are both x16?


I had a clearance issue with the EK active backplate and the 3090 FTW3. The heatsink on the XIII Apex was too tall and made it impossible to install the card since the backplate hit the heatsink. I had to remove the top heatsink to make it work. The Extreme has a high heatsink with oled so be prepared for a possible issue.

























Top is with the stock EK backplate. Second is the height of the heatsink. Last is the GPU installed after heatsink removal.

This is only my example but others may differ depending on height of the heatsink above the slot and how wide the active backplate is where it gets close to the back edge of the card. EK told me that they intentionally recessed the active backplate there because of slot clearance. Most motherboards may not have an issue but some do. I had this issue with the XIII Apex and the Z690 Apex but not the XIII Hero.


----------



## hey_aj

Thanks for the responses everyone. I have ordered an Asus Z690 Extreme and will have to wait until it arrives before I could provide any photos but from Feklar's great photos it looks to me like I have three choices.

1. Go with an active backplate and use second PCIe slot at x8 and determine if better cooling performance outweighs loss of x16 performance.
2. Go with an active backplate and remove beautiful looking screen and heatsink above first PCIe slot to fit GPU block and losing extreme bling.
3. Do not purchase active backplate and everything will fit but possibly at detriment to Strix 3090 overclocking temps.


----------



## cstkl1

hey_aj said:


> Thanks for the responses everyone. I have ordered an Asus Z690 Extreme and will have to wait until it arrives before I could provide any photos but from Feklar's great photos it looks to me like I have three choices.
> 
> 1. Go with an active backplate and use second PCIe slot at x8 and determine if better cooling performance outweighs loss of x16 performance.
> 2. Go with an active backplate and remove beautiful looking screen and heatsink above first PCIe slot to fit GPU block and losing extreme bling.
> 3. Do not purchase active backplate and everything will fit but possibly at detriment to Strix 3090 overclocking temps.


@owikh84 your z590 extreme + strix 3090 and active B did u test fit?


----------



## SuperMumrik

Bios 0096 is the latest and greatest for Apex?


----------



## cstkl1

SuperMumrik said:


> Bios 0096 is the latest and greatest for Apex?


0702 newer. 

theres a few fix bios atm for some bugs on sp/profiles when switching out cpus.


----------



## Hulk1988

I am getting a Windows Error when I want to start TurboV_Core_1.10.19 with latest APEX Z690 Bios with Win 11. Is that known?

Do I need to enable/change any option in the BIOS to start the TurboV tool? Thank you

May be @shamino1978 can help?


----------



## cstkl1

"shamino1978"

0705 (DDR4) has a bug whereby dram voltage is not applied, will post new bioses that fix this later

these ones fixed:








TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0707.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-D4-ASUS-0707.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0707.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com


----------



## Lurifaks

Hi, I'm wondering if anyone has tried mounting the Arctic Liquid Freezer II without the LGA1700 kit? If so, how did it go. I'm still waiting for it to come ...


----------



## cstkl1

Lurifaks said:


> Hi, I'm wondering if anyone has tried mounting the Arctic Liquid Freezer II without the LGA1700 kit? If so, how did it go. I'm still waiting for it to come ...


@Falkentyne and @RobertoSampaio ..


----------



## Falkentyne

Lurifaks said:


> Hi, I'm wondering if anyone has tried mounting the Arctic Liquid Freezer II without the LGA1700 kit? If so, how did it go. I'm still waiting for it to come ...


Mounting and pressure will be wrong with 1151 kit. Spacers are bit too long.
1151 kit has 14mm spacer. 1700 has 13mm spacer.
This 1mm may not seem like much, but it affects mounting pressure (since there is a screw stop so you don't overtighten the CPU downwards on the IHS). Also the backplate is different (the socket 1700 metal backing is different than 1151/1200) so you "may" even have trouble screwing the 1151 backplate into the spacers to begin with.









ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II LGA1700 - User Manual


Get your ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II LGA1700 user manual. Detailed explanation with coloured schematics, photos, animations and videos.




support.arctic.de





You're going to have problems getting a good mount on the die.

Do you have NH-D15 or D15S? You can use Secufirm2 mount with the liquid freezer II, without the noctua spacers. Just use the backplate and screw the LFII into the bolts using the thumb screws.


----------



## kingofblog

Which ASUS DDR4 BIOS is needed for AVX-512 support? Tried out-of-box 0404 and 0605, but neither of them exposed the option, and 0705 apparently has a DDR voltage bug.


----------



## cstkl1

kingofblog said:


> Which ASUS DDR4 BIOS is needed for AVX-512 support? Tried out-of-box 0404 and 0605, but neither of them exposed the option, and 0705 apparently has a DDR voltage bug.











[OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread


WIP, links to all bioses, tools. https://youtu.be/rhdxPscpAIU https://youtu.be/MiatGZm7ioI https://youtu.be/fBrlgLZrFaI




www.overclock.net





updated 0707 bios for d4


----------



## kingofblog

Falkentyne said:


> Mounting and pressure will be wrong with 1151 kit. Spacers are bit too long.
> 1151 kit has 14mm spacer. 1700 has 13mm spacer.
> This 1mm may not seem like much, but it affects mounting pressure (since there is a screw stop so you don't overtighten the CPU downwards on the IHS). Also the backplate is different (the socket 1700 metal backing is different than 1151/1200) so you "may" even have trouble screwing the 1151 backplate into the spacers to begin with.


Do Asetek AIOs (e.g. NZXT KRAKEN) need the LGA 1700 bracket, or can I use the LGA 1200 mounting holes on ASUS? Using an Intel "125 W" stock cooler right now, and it performs just as "well" as you would expect.


----------



## Falkentyne

kingofblog said:


> Do Asetek AIOs (e.g. NZXT KRAKEN) need the LGA 1700 bracket, or can I use the LGA 1200 mounting holes on ASUS? Using an Intel "125 W" stock cooler right now, and it performs just as "well" as you would expect.


I have no way of knowing such a thing. Sorry.


----------



## phillyman36

Anyone with a Hero board feels as though that plastic shield around the audio section blocks your gpu from going in all the way? Wonder if it can be removed, I cant find any pictures of the backside of the Hero.


----------



## Asmodian

That seems like a bizarre concern since those are all very standard heights.


----------



## Lurifaks

Falkentyne said:


> Mounting and pressure will be wrong with 1151 kit. Spacers are bit too long.
> 1151 kit has 14mm spacer. 1700 has 13mm spacer.
> This 1mm may not seem like much, but it affects mounting pressure (since there is a screw stop so you don't overtighten the CPU downwards on the IHS). Also the backplate is different (the socket 1700 metal backing is different than 1151/1200) so you "may" even have trouble screwing the 1151 backplate into the spacers to begin with.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II LGA1700 - User Manual
> 
> 
> Get your ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II LGA1700 user manual. Detailed explanation with coloured schematics, photos, animations and videos.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> support.arctic.de
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You're going to have problems getting a good mount on the die.
> 
> Do you have NH-D15 or D15S? You can use Secufirm2 mount with the liquid freezer II, without the noctua spacers. Just use the backplate and screw the LFII into the bolts using the thumb screws.


Thank you for your feedback. Unfortunately I do not have a Noctua Secufirm2. The only thing I have lying around is the back plate of the Corsair H115i Platinum.

Have already asked Arctic to send PCB cover for the water pump. But no answer yet.


----------



## mattxx88

Feklar said:


> I had a clearance issue with the EK active backplate and the 3090 FTW3. The heatsink on the XIII Apex was too tall and made it impossible to install the card since the backplate hit the heatsink. I had to remove the top heatsink to make it work. The Extreme has a high heatsink with oled so be prepared for a possible issue.
> 
> View attachment 2531766
> 
> 
> View attachment 2531768
> 
> 
> View attachment 2531769
> 
> 
> Top is with the stock EK backplate. Second is the height of the heatsink. Last is the GPU installed after heatsink removal.
> 
> This is only my example but others may differ depending on height of the heatsink above the slot and how wide the active backplate is where it gets close to the back edge of the card. EK told me that they intentionally recessed the active backplate there because of slot clearance. Most motherboards may not have an issue but some do. I had this issue with the XIII Apex and the Z690 Apex but not the XIII Hero.


you are talking about gpu backplate, but i wanna ask you about Magnitude, works fine lga115x mount with asus main?
do you have enough pressure with 115x standoffs? 
i'm warried about the lower height of the lga1700 socket, even though i am actually using a 9900ks in direct die with no mount pressure issue (more or less i suppose it's the same hight as 17xx)


----------



## GtiJason

DaTraS said:


> Most likely going to get my Strix Z690-A tomorrow, so wanted to prepare my flash drive with Windows 11 and the drivers that I need.
> Problem is, I don't see any drivers on ASUS page? Do I have to rely on what Windows 11 is downloading via Windows Update (if it recognizes the ethernet to begin with) or where do I get them?


They are all here, just make sure you select Windows 10 or 11 in the dropdown menu (although they appear to work on both)





ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4 | ROG Strix | Gaming Motherboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG Global


ASUS ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI Intel LGA 1700 ATX motherboard, OptiMem III, PCIe 5.0, 16+1 power stages, WiFi 6, Intel® 2.5 Gb Ethernet, four M.2 slots, USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 USB Type-C®, SATA and Aura Sync



rog.asus.com






Spoiler: Driver Page picture


----------



## Feklar

mattxx88 said:


> you are talking about gpu backplate, but i wanna ask you about Magnitude, works fine lga115x mount with asus main?
> do you have enough pressure with 115x standoffs?
> i'm warried about the lower height of the lga1700 socket, even though i am actually using a 9900ks in direct die with no mount pressure issue (more or less i suppose it's the same hight as 17xx)


The hole pattern is not an issue since there are holes in the motherboard for both 1700 and 1151. You will need a new backplate for the Magnitude though to use with 1700 since the old one should not be used with this new socket. Contact Ek and get one from them direct. They are for sale on their website for $.01 plus shipping. I am receiving their new EK-Quantum Velocity² D-RGB - 1700 Nickel + Plexi block for my Z90 Apex in a couple of days so that is the route I'm taking. As for spring pressure it may be fine but check with them to be sure.


----------



## Lurifaks

I got tired of waiting for the Arctic Liquid Freezer II LGA1700 kit.

So I took the chance and mounted the Corsair H115i Platinum AIO on my ASUS ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI, Used corsair lga1151/1200 mounting kit

Mounted the block, took it off to see if there was any contact, it looked pretty good, but not optimal.

Temperatures are ok, but I'll wait to OC until the Arctic Liquid Freezer II LGA1700 kit arrives


----------



## Lurifaks

Which setting in bios is for Gear1 and Gear2, this is new for me coming from 9th gen.

ASUS STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI


Thanks


----------



## acoustic

Has anyone seen the APEX for sale at Microcenter USA?


----------



## kingofblog

Lurifaks said:


> Which setting in bios is for Gear1 and Gear2, this is new for me coming from 9th gen.
> 
> ASUS STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI
> 
> 
> Thanks


"Controller:Memory ratio" or something like that. It's in the main OC settings page, "AI Tweaker," near the top.


----------



## Lurifaks

kingofblog said:


> "Controller:Memory ratio" or something like that. It's in the main OC settings page, "AI Tweaker," near the top.



Thanks!

So then

1:1 = Gear1
1:2 = Gear2

I reckon


----------



## sabishiihito

acoustic said:


> Has anyone seen the APEX for sale at Microcenter USA?


I don't even see it listed as a "SOLD OUT" item, I don't think MC carries it (yet).


----------



## DaTraS

So this is where the gear setting was hiding, thank you very much.
But the other question is where the "real" Vccio is found on a Strix Z690-A.
It is not on the same page with System Agent and Ram Voltage?

To 9900K times it was always Vccio and Vccsa that had to be set for getting the memory stable.
Or does Z690 (or explicitly the Strix Z690-A) not have/need that option?


----------



## Roxa

I'm probably in the minority here but has anyone with an APEX or Extreme Z690 been able to NVlink 3090's? I received my Apex today from newegg and despite both gpus reportedly running at 8x and updating to bios 0702 I'm unable to link them in windows. Multiple driver revisions tried and messed with PCI-E related bios settings to no avail. Wondering if they just dropped support overall.


----------



## D-EJ915

Roxa said:


> I'm probably in the minority here but has anyone with an APEX or Extreme Z690 been able to NVlink 3090's? I received my Apex today from newegg and despite both gpus reportedly running at 8x and updating to bios 0702 I'm unable to link them in windows. Multiple driver revisions tried and messed with PCI-E related bios settings to no avail. Wondering if they just dropped support overall.


No SLI license on Asus z690 or Gigabyte z690. MSI is the only one with SLI support I have seen.


----------



## Roxa

D-EJ915 said:


> No SLI license on Asus z690 or Gigabyte z690. MSI is the only one with SLI support I have seen.


I was afraid of that - I saw the 4 slot spacing along with the typical additional 6 pin pci-e power connector on the board and was hoping for the best. I'm hoping the EVGA z690 Dark has support for it.


----------



## cstkl1

12代LGA1700散熱器相容性及扣具改造雜談 @ 港都狼窩 WolfLSI's Den :: 痞客邦 ::


▼Intel正式發售12代LGA1700平台，不僅扣具孔位變成78x78mm，也因為處理器高度降低(7.31mm變成6.52mm)，導致原本用於LGA1200/115x的散熱器都必須要重新設計LGA1



wolflsi.pixnet.net





just use google translate but a detailed issue on socket fittings with cooler problems etc...


----------



## Nizzen

D-EJ915 said:


> No SLI license on Asus z690 or Gigabyte z690. MSI is the only one with SLI support I have seen.


Did you try sli on z690?


----------



## D-EJ915

Nizzen said:


> Did you try sli on z690?


Manual and spec sheet is missing this section, no mention of sli or multi-gpu anywhere.










SLI requires license in bios to use from nvidia unless you use hack workaround which I don't think works anymore but you could try it I guess.


----------



## phillyman36

In the bios of my Z690 Hero the post delay is set to 3 seconds by default. Would it be ok to set the delay to 0 or is there a reason to keep it on the 3 second post delay?


----------



## asdkj1740

cstkl1 said:


> 12代LGA1700散熱器相容性及扣具改造雜談 @ 港都狼窩 WolfLSI's Den :: 痞客邦 ::
> 
> 
> ▼Intel正式發售12代LGA1700平台，不僅扣具孔位變成78x78mm，也因為處理器高度降低(7.31mm變成6.52mm)，導致原本用於LGA1200/115x的散熱器都必須要重新設計LGA1
> 
> 
> 
> wolflsi.pixnet.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> just use google translate but a detailed issue on socket fittings with cooler problems etc...











【茶茶】酷睿岂是池中物？INTEL 12代酷睿科普懒人包


现在PC市场出现了一个很有意思的反转，之前高歌猛进提升产品性能的显卡，因为单位晶体管效率提升停滞和强身健体的影响，产品更新明显趋缓，2019年发布的RTX 2060在明年还要翻新出新版。而CPU这边竞争则趋于白热化，产品更新周期也从过去一年半左右直接压缩到了三个季度。这一次INTEL信心满满地推出了第12代酷睿CPU，相应的也放出了600系列主板。今天就带大家了解一下Z690主板到底升级了那些东西。Z690芯片组规格介绍：如果以历代INTEL主板芯片组的升级幅度来衡量，Z690应该是近10年来规




www.bilibili.com




you may also check this out, this one is masterpiece.


----------



## kingofblog

> So the conclusion is there. If you want to use the old version of the fastener to support the LGA 1700 motherboard, you only need to meet the following conditions.
> 
> 1. When the motherboard does not support the old version of the fasteners, if the mounting holes of the backplane can be moved between LGA 115X and LGA 20XX, you can choose to card in the middle to support the backplane.
> 
> 2. When the motherboard does not support the old version of the fastener, the pressure plate of the radiator body needs to have a round hole to support it. (For example, the black part of nickel in the picture)
> 
> 3. When the motherboard supports the old version of the fastener, it can generally be used. However, when there are female screw heads on the backplane and cannot be worn normally, it may scratch the motherboard PCB and cause certain risks.
> 
> 4. Due to the different pressure grams, LGA 115X has a higher probability of obtaining better heat dissipation performance.
> 
> 5. Finally, it should be emphasized that due to the lower pressure grams required by the 12th generation Core CPU buckle safety regulations, the probability of using the old version of the buckle to damage the CPU will increase.


???

It seems the main problem highlighted in the article is the possibility of the cutout in the backplate not clearing the new socket, but I don't see any discussion of mounting pressure or contact.


----------



## Herald

Can you use a u12a with apex? Is there any problem with ram clearance or something?


----------



## fortecosi

Herald said:


> Can you use a u12a with apex? Is there any problem with ram clearance or something?


Hello, I use U12A with the Apex, don´ t have any issues at all. I use the chromax black version, it has backplate and mount for the 1700 already.
NH-U12A | Cooler Compatibility | Noctua Compatibility Centre


----------



## Herald

fortecosi said:


> Hello, I use U12A with the Apex, don´ t have any issues at all. I use the chromax black version, it has backplate and mount for the 1700 already.
> NH-U12A | Cooler Compatibility | Noctua Compatibility Centre


Thx, was thinking i might have some ram clearance issues. How are the temperatures?


----------



## DaTraS

So, when to expect BIOS with Legacy Game Mode? Any information from ASUS yet?


----------



## igmackenzie

Z690-A Gaming Wi-Fi board.
On boot (and Windows restart), I get a ‘keyboard not detected’ error on BIOS screen. Boot continues to Windows and everything OK. But, I couldn’t access BIOS settings.
After a lot of messing around, I discovered that if I disconnect my powered USB hub, then the message goes away and I can access BIOS. 
After even more investigating, if I put my keyboard and mouse receiver into the 3.2 Gen 2 ports, then all is good with hub and devices plugged in.
Same devices OK on my previous Z490 and Z590 boards.
Anyone got an idea on this?
0605 BIOS.


----------



## cstkl1

igmackenzie said:


> Z690-A Gaming Wi-Fi board.
> On boot (and Windows restart), I get a ‘keyboard not detected’ error on BIOS screen. Boot continues to Windows and everything OK. But, I couldn’t access BIOS settings.
> After a lot of messing around, I discovered that if I disconnect my powered USB hub, then the message goes away and I can access BIOS.
> After even more investigating, if I put my keyboard and mouse receiver into the 3.2 Gen 2 ports, then all is good with hub and devices plugged in.
> Same devices OK on my previous Z490 and Z590 boards.
> Anyone got an idea on this?
> 0605 BIOS.


update to 0707 on third post


----------



## igmackenzie

cstkl1 said:


> update to 0707 on third post


Thanks but that didn't help. Same issue.


----------



## shamino1978

latest bios, includes the legacy game toggle scrolllock to sleep/wake ecores (in cpu config need to enable) among some other bug fixes.









ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0802.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-GLACIAL-ASUS-0802.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0802.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-FORMULA-ASUS-0802.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-ASUS-0802.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com













ROG-STRIX-Z690-I-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0802.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-STRIX-Z690-E-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0802.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0802.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












PRIME-Z690-A-ASUS-0802.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-ASUS-0802.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com


----------



## geriatricpollywog

shamino1978 said:


> latest bios, includes the legacy game toggle scrolllock to sleep/wake ecores (in cpu config need to enable) among some other bug fixes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0801.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-ASUS-0801.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-I-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0801.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-G-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0801.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-F-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0801.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0801.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-E-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0801.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0801.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-ASUS-0801.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-FORMULA-ASUS-0801.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-GLACIAL-ASUS-0801.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0801.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ProArt-Z690-CREATOR-WIFI-ASUS-0801.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PRIME-Z690-A-ASUS-0801.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


Thank you! If you don't mind my asking, is there a Tuf DDR4 bios on the way? Not that I'm complaining about 4100 14-14-14-26.


----------



## igmackenzie

shamino1978 said:


> latest bios, includes the legacy game toggle scrolllock to sleep/wake ecores (in cpu config need to enable) among some other bug fixes.


Sadly, that version didn't help my issue. Basically, if I have all my devices plugged in, the keyboard is not recognised at boot by BIOS and a 'keyboard not detected' error comes up - it carries on to Windows and everything is fine - unless the keyboard is plugged into a 3.2 Gen (red) socket, then everything is good.
In addition, if I unplug certain controller devices, the issue is not there.


----------



## shamino1978

0451 said:


> Thank you! If you don't mind my asking, is there a Tuf DDR4 bios on the way? Not that I'm complaining about 4100 14-14-14-26.


what do u mean? both wifi no wifi is up there


----------



## shamino1978

D-EJ915 said:


> No SLI license on Asus z690 or Gigabyte z690. MSI is the only one with SLI support I have seen.


im told nvidia hasnt released key to any partner yet.


----------



## fortecosi

Herald said:


> Thx, was thinking i might have some ram clearance issues. How are the temperatures?


Temps during CB23 in the screenshot. Just MCE enabled. On a test bench.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

shamino1978 said:


> what do u mean? both wifi no wifi is up there


I see it now. Thanks!


----------



## dyanikoglu

fortecosi said:


> Temps during CB23 in the screenshot. Just MCE enabled. On a test bench.


Why you're using Windows 10 with 12th gen?


----------



## fortecosi

dyanikoglu said:


> Why you're using Windows 10 with 12th gen?


I use windows 11, it´s not 10.


----------



## grifers

shamino1978 said:


> what do u mean? both wifi no wifi is up there



"Select file is not proper bios!", I have this Error.

I have Tuf Gaming Plus D4 (without wifi), im select this one:

TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-ASUS-0801.rar (dropbox.com)

P.D - Im Formated my usb stick to FAT32 and problem persist

P.D 2 - Im tried another usb stick and same

P.D 3 - Tried in 2 different USB Ports in my PC and same.

P.D 4 - "bios renamer" used and same

P.D 5 - Im made clear cmos to motherboard and same 

Definitely stranger


----------



## fortecosi

grifers said:


> "Select file is not proper bios!", I have this Error.
> 
> I have Tuf Gaming Plus D4 (without wifi), im select this one:
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-ASUS-0801.rar (dropbox.com)
> 
> P.D - Im Formated my usb stick to FAT32 and problem persist
> 
> P.D 2 - Im tried another usb stick and same
> 
> P.D 3 - Tried in 2 different USB Ports in my PC and same.
> 
> P.D 4 - "bios renamer" used and same
> 
> P.D 5 - Im made clear cmos to motherboard and same
> 
> Definitely stranger


Are you sure you are trying the right BIOS file?
edit: Now just an unlikely scenario, but you "extracted" the RAR archive and the BIOS is as a .CAP file, right?


----------



## grifers

fortecosi said:


> Are you sure you are trying the right BIOS file?
> edit: Now just an unlikely scenario, but you "extracted" the RAR archive and the BIOS is as a .CAP file, right?



Ye. Download the RAR file, extract and put the "TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-ASUS-0801.cap" file on usb stick, go to BIOS/Asus Ezflash, etc.... I have already flashed bios many times ajaja. 0705 lastest one flashed fine.


----------



## fortecosi

grifers said:


> Ye. Download the RAR file, extract and put the "TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-ASUS-0801.cap" file on usb stick, go to BIOS/Asus Ezflash, etc.... I have already flashed bios many times ajaja. 0705 lastest one flashed fine.


It´s weird. Did you try 0707? Source here, spoiler, from 10th November:
[OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread | Overclock.net


----------



## Falkentyne

grifers said:


> "Select file is not proper bios!", I have this Error.
> 
> I have Tuf Gaming Plus D4 (without wifi), im select this one:
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-ASUS-0801.rar (dropbox.com)
> 
> P.D - Im Formated my usb stick to FAT32 and problem persist
> 
> P.D 2 - Im tried another usb stick and same
> 
> P.D 3 - Tried in 2 different USB Ports in my PC and same.
> 
> P.D 4 - "bios renamer" used and same
> 
> P.D 5 - Im made clear cmos to motherboard and same
> 
> Definitely stranger


You need to extract the file....
the CAP File is inside the RAR.
It sounds like you renamed it...you can't do that.
Use winrar or something.


----------



## bl4ckdot

*shamino1978 *hello, I got an issue with my Z690 APEX.
I tried different bios (including the one from today) but still the same issue. Its quite simple : whatever manual vcore I put, the board will use 50mv less (before LLC). So if I put 1.35v, use LLC4, idle voltage will be 1.3 and load 1.16v. Even on LLC8, I have less than whatever is set, by quite a lot. I was a able to compare with others users of the Apex with the same setting and my voltage is way lower before LLC.

















I was able to double check with vlatch and the VOLTICIAN, its the same thing. I need to apply way more voltage in bios to actually get what I desire.


----------



## ptuga

Is it normal to have coil whine on Asus z690 tuf?
On idle it's fixed by disabling c states, but running aida64 memory benchmark make high coil whine, nothing I do fixes it.


----------



## Falkentyne

bl4ckdot said:


> *shamino1978 *hello, I got an issue with my Z690 APEX.
> I tried different bios (including the one from today) but still the same issue. Its quite simple : whatever manual vcore I put, the board will use 50mv less (before LLC). So if I put 1.35v, use LLC4, idle voltage will be 1.3 and load 1.16v. Even on LLC8, I have less than whatever is set, by quite a lot. I was a able to compare with others users of the Apex with the same setting and my voltage is way lower before LLC.
> View attachment 2532518
> 
> View attachment 2532520
> 
> 
> I was able to double check with vlatch and the VOLTICIAN, its the same thing. I need to apply way more voltage in bios to actually get what I desire.


I cannot reproduce this at LLC8. Vcore is 9mv between what is set at both idle and load at LLC8.
Can you please clear CMOS deeply?

1. Unplug PSU from the wall (or switch the PSU switch on the back of the PSU to the off position.
2. Wait 30 seconds.
3. Press the clear CMOS button on the back panel, hold it down pressed for 30 seconds.
4. Release button, switch on the PSU switch on the back of the PSU.
5. Power on the system with the case button (or onboard "Start" button). DEL to enter BIOS.
6. Set Sync All Cores, x49 P-core ratio, E-core auto, Ring auto, set manual voltage 1.20v set. Set LLC: Level 8.

Save and exit. Enter BIOS again.
Your vcore read should be 1.199v.

Please report your results.


----------



## dyanikoglu

After latest bios on rog z690-a wifi, leds on my case started to staying on (even the disk led) after powering down the system, probably a bug?


----------



## SuperMumrik

ptuga said:


> Is it normal to have coil whine on Asus z690 tuf?


I had coil whine on Strix-A as well(running Aida was a real pita), but there is none on the Apex


----------



## cstkl1

SuperMumrik said:


> I had coil whine on Strix-A as well(running Aida was a real pita), but there is none on the Apex


Strix-A superpi32m world record by @safedisk 









safedisk`s SuperPi - 32M score: 3min 37sec 312ms with a Core i9 12900K (8P)


The Core i9 12900K (8P) @ 7358MHzscores getScoreFormatted in the SuperPi - 32M benchmark. safediskranks #null worldwide and #null in the hardware class. Find out more at HWBOT.




hwbot.org


----------



## SuperMumrik

cstkl1 said:


> Strix-A superpi32m world record by @safedisk


I'm really starting to have second thoughts on this ddr5/apex combo of mine😐
Although it's probably down to my crappy micron chips(can't get anything decent), but my Strix-a combo destroys my ddr5 setup in games. It's kinda rough to be honest 😆


----------



## cstkl1

SuperMumrik said:


> I'm really starting to have second thoughts on this ddr5/apex combo of mine😐
> Although it's probably down to my crappy micron chips(can't get anything decent), but my Strix-a combo destroys my ddr5 setup in games. It's kinda rough to be honest 😆


what rams are you running. 

the dd4 thing was due to sp32m weird nature that seems to have issues with the two channel on ddr5 dimm thing afaik


----------



## SuperMumrik

cstkl1 said:


> what rams are you running.


I got some ****ty Fury Beast 5200 dimms. To be honest, it's pretty much the 5400c34 settings in ram tuner menu as I can't do any meaningful improvements to it before it crashing.
If you scroll down to the aida results you'll see a few game benchmarks (it's Norwegian, but ddr5 is the one getting destroyed)



ADL D4 vs D5 tråden


----------



## shamino1978

D-EJ915 said:


> No SLI license on Asus z690 or Gigabyte z690. MSI is the only one with SLI support I have seen.


Adds specific p e core disable: also adds temparay sli key
ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0072.rar


----------



## Neander

Hi fellows, following here as a reader already quite a bit I have to trouble you with a question regarding G.Skill RAM as it seems quite hard to find somebody with this kits to share experiences. I got some Z5 RGB sticks on an Apex (0801) and it's completly impossible to control the RGBs on it. The G.SKill own tool does not "Sync" and Aura is not even showing them. No chance on vanilla W11 or W10 with just chipset drivers installed. Tried a lot of combinations with and without Aura/AC/G.SKill SW. Anyone here with an idea if specific settings are required or the SW / Bios is just not ready for it yet?

I really need them red for more FPS or preferable off ;P


----------



## grifers

fortecosi said:


> It´s weird. Did you try 0707? Source here, spoiler, from 10th November:
> [OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread | Overclock.net



Flashed fine this one!!!, I had 0705, now 0707......... But 0801 cant,
I used the same flashing method as with 0707. Extract the RAR file ".cap" to USB stick formated Fat32 and etc ... but nothing, same problem :"this select file is not a proper bios!".


----------



## bl4ckdot

Falkentyne said:


> I cannot reproduce this at LLC8. Vcore is 9mv between what is set at both idle and load at LLC8.
> Can you please clear CMOS deeply?
> 
> 1. Unplug PSU from the wall (or switch the PSU switch on the back of the PSU to the off position.
> 2. Wait 30 seconds.
> 3. Press the clear CMOS button on the back panel, hold it down pressed for 30 seconds.
> 4. Release button, switch on the PSU switch on the back of the PSU.
> 5. Power on the system with the case button (or onboard "Start" button). DEL to enter BIOS.
> 6. Set Sync All Cores, x49 P-core ratio, E-core auto, Ring auto, set manual voltage 1.20v set. Set LLC: Level 8.
> 
> Save and exit. Enter BIOS again.
> Your vcore read should be 1.199v.
> 
> Please report your results.


Hello,
Here are the results :

















I still have a "huge" drop for llc8


----------



## owikh84

BIOS 0801
Gear1 won't boot at DDR4-4000+.
Reverted back to 0707, it's now booting fine again.

12900K
ROG Strix Z690-A D4
2x16GB DR B-die


----------



## Anton338

What's up, folks. Just got my Z690-E in the mail last night. Got some photos of my latest build here.









I hacked my ASUS ROG Strix Z690-E to fit a large air cooler.


No, you heard me wrong, I literally took a hacksaw to the VRM heatsink in order to fit this cooler. Let me explain. It started out just like every other build... I preordered the Z690-E two weeks ago and ordered all of the other components while I waited. I found a second-hand Dark Rock Pro 4...




www.overclock.net


----------



## Thebc2

Found a single Maximus Extreme at my local Microcenter today. One step closer before I can begin my refresh. Just need to find some DDR5!

Anyone have any Optimus cpu and gpu blocks mounted on an Extreme successfully?

Pfa











Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## acoustic

Thebc2 said:


> Found a single Maximus Extreme at my local Microcenter today. One step closer before I can begin my refresh. Just need to find some DDR5!
> 
> Anyone have any Optimus cpu and gpu blocks mounted on an Extreme successfully?
> 
> Pfa
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


*** lol..

I haven't seen anything except stupid HERO..


----------



## SoldierRBT

bl4ckdot said:


> *shamino1978 *hello, I got an issue with my Z690 APEX.
> I tried different bios (including the one from today) but still the same issue. Its quite simple : whatever manual vcore I put, the board will use 50mv less (before LLC). So if I put 1.35v, use LLC4, idle voltage will be 1.3 and load 1.16v. Even on LLC8, I have less than whatever is set, by quite a lot. I was a able to compare with others users of the Apex with the same setting and my voltage is way lower before LLC.
> View attachment 2532518
> 
> View attachment 2532520
> 
> 
> I was able to double check with vlatch and the VOLTICIAN, its the same thing. I need to apply way more voltage in bios to actually get what I desire.


Same issue on my Z690 APEX. 1.35v LLC4 in BIOS. Idle 1.314-1.305v load 1.15-1.16v. It also has coil whine when running AIDA64


----------



## shamino1978

SoldierRBT said:


> Same issue on my Z690 APEX. 1.35v LLC4 in BIOS. Idle 1.314-1.305v load 1.15-1.16v. It also has coil whine when running AIDA64
> 
> View attachment 2532735


What issue? Sounds like llc4 as it is.


----------



## Falkentyne

SoldierRBT said:


> Same issue on my Z690 APEX. 1.35v LLC4 in BIOS. Idle 1.314-1.305v load 1.15-1.16v. It also has coil whine when running AIDA64
> 
> View attachment 2532735





shamino1978 said:


> What issue? Sounds like llc4 as it is.


That LLC4 is correct. I get the exact same.

The other user was having problems with LLC8...he said it was 50mv below what he set (which is not proper behavior, maybe the LLC didn't work at all?)

@SoldierRBT Please check LLC8. This is very predictable.
Set 1.20v fixed, LLC8,
Bios reading should show 1.199v and windows should show 1.199v idle and load. (should not be off by more than 9mv at most)
When you set LLC8, is load vcore still changing below idle vcore? Example: 1.20v set LLC8 --> 1.185v bios, 1.175v windows idle, 1.150v load <--this is just an example, but this should not happen.

Proper behavior would be 1.19v bios, 1.19v windows idle, 1.19v windows load.


----------



## SoldierRBT

Falkentyne said:


> Please check LLC8. This is very predictable.
> Set 1.20v fixed, LLC8,
> Bios reading should show 1.199v and windows should show 1.199v idle and load. (should not be off by more than 9mv at most)
> When you set LLC8, is load vcore still changing below idle vcore? Example: 1.20v set LLC8 --> 1.185v bios, 1.175v windows idle, 1.150v load <--this is just an example, but this should not happen.
> 
> Proper behavior would be 1.19v bios, 1.19v windows idle, 1.19v windows load.


Thanks. Tried 1.20v LLC8. Idle and and load is 1.190v in Windows. Also tested 1.40v LLC4, it idles in Windows at 1.359v and it should be close to 1.39v. Another friend with an Apex is having the same behavior









EDIT:
1.40v LLC4 idle 1.35v








1.20v LLC8 idle 1.19v


----------



## shamino1978

ptuga said:


> Is it normal to have coil whine on Asus z690 tuf?
> On idle it's fixed by disabling c states, but running aida64 memory benchmark make high coil whine, nothing I do fixes it.


cpu config/pwr mangament/accoustic noise setting/ accoustic noise mitigation enabled _ slow slew rate for IA/GT domian set Fast/4 or Fast/8


----------



## Falkentyne

SoldierRBT said:


> Thanks. Tried 1.20v LLC8. Idle and and load is 1.190v in Windows. Also tested 1.40v LLC4, it idles in Windows at 1.359v and it should be close to 1.39v. Another friend with an Apex is having the same behavior
> 
> View attachment 2532737
> 
> EDIT:
> 1.40v LLC4 idle 1.35v
> View attachment 2532738
> 
> 1.20v LLC8 idle 1.19v
> View attachment 2532739



This is how it's supposed to be. There's nothing wrong here.
That's why your CPU temp is higher in bios than in windows.
Bios isn't idle. For idle you need windows with c-states enabled.


----------



## Glottis

I have a question regarding BIOS leaks that get posted here. Are they beta builds or something? I see people have no hesitation using these files so I assume they are getting posted by Asus employee? This is probably common knowledge here but I haven't been keeping up.


----------



## Feklar

I think that guy Shamino is friends with a guy that knows a guy's cousin and he has the goods.


----------



## mattxx88

Glottis said:


> I have a question regarding BIOS leaks that get posted here. Are they beta builds or something? I see people have no hesitation using these files so I assume they are getting posted by Asus employee? This is probably common knowledge here but I haven't been keeping up.


what is Asus top boards today is thanks to that "guy Shamino"
Shamino IS Asus my friend Glottis 😅
I'm a bit puzzled that you don't know him


----------



## Glottis

mattxx88 said:


> today i receive my ddr5
> 
> what is Asus top boards today is thanks to that "guy Shamino"
> Shamino IS Asus my friend Glottis 😅
> I'm a bit puzzled that you don't know him


This is my first motherboard / CPU upgrade in 7 years (finally exciting product from Intel) so yeah, I was out of the loop. Just wanted to make sure before I start flashing BIOS files I found on forums.


----------



## BenchAndGames

@shamino1978

Hello I want to report a bug with the Asus TUF Z690 WiFI D4

Every time you turn off the PSU from the switch or took out the power cable, when booting on windows you got this WHEA-logger id 1 that meaning fatal error has ocurred and wqsant posible to fix it


I have this conclusion because I did everything you can do for test and see where is the error

List of what I did:

1. Fresh install of windows 10 and 11
2. Testing every RAM stick in every 4 slots
3. Testing every single SSD one by one
4. Testing without GPU, so I took it off from the slot and use the 12700k internal GPU
5. Disconecting every cables like USB, fan headers, also the power button and reset cable from the case
6. Bios by default, battery off
7. Every bios version that you posted inclusive the last one 0801 or something like that, also the bios that the MB are coming from the factory
8. Installing the CPU again new paste everything.
9. The CPU cooler NHD15 I didnt forced the screws just in case I did first time to much pressure on the CPU. Also using the LGA 1700 mounting kit from noctua
10. Buying a new cooler in case this noctua maybe its not perfectly compatible even I use 1700 kit, so I bought Arctic liquid freezer 2 360mm with the new 1700 LGA kit took me 1 week for ship. 
11. Testing different PSU
12. Testing different DP cable and HDMI

13. After all this I tought maybe the MB and the CPU got some issues cuz are the only 2 new piece of hardware on my system that I changed, so I RMA the 12700k and the TUF Z690 WIFI, they send me new units both of them.
14. Just for discover that the new replacement that are factory new got the exact same problem.

Im tottaly lost, I think I did evry single thing that you can do....so please tell me that something weird its on the TUF Z690 WIFI, maybe a bios bug, or maybe compatible issues that will got fixed....but I dont know what else to do.


----------



## Falkentyne

BenchAndGames said:


> @shamino1978
> 
> Hello I want to report a bug with the Asus TUF Z690 WiFI D4
> 
> Every time you turn off the PSU from the switch or took out the power cable, when booting on windows you got this WHEA-logger id 1 that meaning fatal error has ocurred and wqsant posible to fix it
> 
> 
> I have this conclusion because I did everything you can do for test and see where is the error
> 
> List of what I did:
> 
> 1. Fresh install of windows 10 and 11
> 2. Testing every RAM stick in every 4 slots
> 3. Testing every single SSD one by one
> 4. Testing without GPU, so I took it off from the slot and use the 12700k internal GPU
> 5. Disconecting every cables like USB, fan headers, also the power button and reset cable from the case
> 6. Bios by default, battery off
> 7. Every bios version that you posted inclusive the last one 0801 or something like that, also the bios that the MB are coming from the factory
> 8. Installing the CPU again new paste everything.
> 9. The CPU cooler NHD15 I didnt forced the screws just in case I did first time to much pressure on the CPU. Also using the LGA 1700 mounting kit from noctua
> 10. Buying a new cooler in case this noctua maybe its not perfectly compatible even I use 1700 kit, so I bought Arctic liquid freezer 2 360mm with the new 1700 LGA kit took me 1 week for ship.
> 11. Testing different PSU
> 12. Testing different DP cable and HDMI
> 
> 13. After all this I tought maybe the MB and the CPU got some issues cuz are the only 2 new piece of hardware on my system that I changed, so I RMA the 12700k and the TUF Z690 WIFI, they send me new units both of them.
> 14. Just for discover that the new replacement that are factory new got the exact same problem.
> 
> Im tottaly lost, I think I did evry single thing that you can do....so please tell me that something weird its on the TUF Z690 WIFI, maybe a bios bug, or maybe compatible issues that will got fixed....but I dont know what else to do.


WHEA Fatal Error event log when loading windows, with no crash, BSOD or "double reboot" happens if you had a crash from a bad overclock before.
I'm not sure if it's from a previous CPU crash or memory error crash but it's from a crash previously. I've seen this on Z590 and Z490 as well. This seems to be something related to how the BIOS handles a BSOD with something related to the UEFI.

You will notice that if you ever have a BSOD and then reboot back to BIOS and then change any setting and "Save and Exit", after you press save, it seems like the bios is very slow to respond to the restart (sometimes stopping at a "Grey" screen for about 3 seconds. This only happens after a BSOD. This may also happen if you used safe boot after a BSOD or hard lockup because the system didn't reboot on its own. It's unknown why windows keeps reporting an unrecoverable error however, after it loads _successfully_ and you reboot again without an error. Another user said the only way to remove this is to either power off, power on and then load a working BIOS profile, OR to clear CMOS and then load a bios profile.


----------



## BenchAndGames

Falkentyne said:


> WHEA Fatal Error event log when loading windows, with no crash, BSOD or "double reboot" happens if you had a crash from a bad overclock before.
> I'm not sure if it's from a previous CPU crash or memory error crash but it's from a crash previously. I've seen this on Z590 and Z490 as well. This seems to be something related to how the BIOS handles a BSOD with something related to the UEFI.
> 
> You will notice that if you ever have a BSOD and then reboot back to BIOS and then change any setting and "Save and Exit", after you press save, it seems like the bios is very slow to respond to the restart (sometimes stopping at a "Grey" screen for about 3 seconds. This only happens after a BSOD. This may also happen if you used safe boot after a BSOD or hard lockup because the system didn't reboot on its own. It's unknown why windows keeps reporting an unrecoverable error however, after it loads _successfully_ and you reboot again without an error. Another user said the only way to remove this is to either power off, power on and then load a working BIOS profile, OR to clear CMOS and then load a bios profile.


Ok I understand but if you read all the steps I did you will notice that I change the 12700k + TUF Z690 with new units , I use the warranty, all this for trying to fix that WHEA, so in this case have nothing to do with Overclock even I can tell you I did not did any overclock before and later everything was on stock.

Please just read all the steps

Installed windows on every SSD one by one, testing....refreshing bios, installing new bios, took baterry of.....after I use the warranty from above than just install CPU and MB and test again with totally new factory motherboard and bios by default....


----------



## BenchAndGames

Just to clarify I installed windows again on all the SSDs after I change CPU and MB from waranty so there is no way to save anyware any information about crashes from before


----------



## Agent-A01

Speaking of TUF, I have a 12700K plus the Z690 Tuf Wifi board.
I cannot boot anything higher than 3800 with IMC at 1:1 ratio(Gear 1) with my 16GBx2 DR B-die kit.

Hard wall at 3867 no matter what.
My buddy can do 4266 no problem on his Strix-A board with 12900K.
He is using 707 bios, I'm using latest 0801.

This same kit on my 10900K + XII Hero can easily do 4400 with my daily running at [email protected]

I find it hard to believe it's an IMC problem.
For example, for now I'm running [email protected] but I cannot boot at 3867 not even with stock timings.

Is there something I'm missing or is the Tuf board that much of a dud?

I will note that my buddy could not boot past 3733 either on bios 05xx? or something like that so hopefully bios updates can fix it for the tuf as well.

_Edit: Just saw this post, probably the same issue. I didn't try 0707_



owikh84 said:


> BIOS 0801
> Gear1 won't boot at DDR4-4000+.
> Reverted back to 0707, it's now booting fine again.
> 
> 12900K
> ROG Strix Z690-A D4
> 2x16GB DR B-die


----------



## riximFPS

grifers said:


> "Select file is not proper bios!", I have this Error.
> 
> I have Tuf Gaming Plus D4 (without wifi), im select this one:
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-ASUS-0801.rar (dropbox.com)
> 
> P.D - Im Formated my usb stick to FAT32 and problem persist
> 
> P.D 2 - Im tried another usb stick and same
> 
> P.D 3 - Tried in 2 different USB Ports in my PC and same.
> 
> P.D 4 - "bios renamer" used and same
> 
> P.D 5 - Im made clear cmos to motherboard and same
> 
> Definitely stranger


Exactly the same for me, also have the TUF z690 without wifi and get the same message when trying to flash the BIOS 0801.


----------



## edkieferlp

BenchAndGames said:


> Just to clarify I installed windows again on all the SSDs after I change CPU and MB from waranty so there is no way to save anyware any information about crashes from before


I could be wrong but try disabling fast startup setting under power plan> choose what does power button do








The Pros and Cons of Windows 10’s “Fast Startup” Mode


Windows 10’s Fast Startup (called Fast Boot in Windows 8) works similarly to the hybrid sleep mode of previous versions of Windows. By saving the operating system state to a hibernation file, it can make your computer boot up even faster, saving valuable seconds every time you turn your machine on.




www.howtogeek.com





So what this can do is you think you shudown down system but it really is not, then you hit the PSU and welll it is not a clean shutdown.


----------



## cstkl1

@safedisk shared 














ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0006.7z







drive.google.com


----------



## chispy

Guys anyone knows of a utility that works in w7 and w8.1 to change core ratio and bclk ? turbov does not work for me the one posted at hwbot , for Asus Strix D4 wifi ? It does not apply the changes when i try to change multis from 5.7Ghz to 5.8Ghz , pre-testing done on single stage. If i try to up the bclk from 100 even to 100.5 it will freeze the OS or bsod. Any help or guidance wil be really apreciate it. Thanks


----------



## cstkl1

chispy said:


> Guys anyone knows of a utility that works in w7 and w8.1 to change core ratio and bclk ? turbov does not wotk for me the one posted at hwbot , for Asus Strix D4 wifi ?


the octool in roberto thread.

click intel|control


----------



## chispy

cstkl1 said:


> the octool in roberto thread.
> 
> click intel|control



Apreciate it , thank you. Will give it a try.


----------



## BenchAndGames

edkieferlp said:


> I could be wrong but try disabling fast startup setting under power plan> choose what does power button do
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Pros and Cons of Windows 10’s “Fast Startup” Mode
> 
> 
> Windows 10’s Fast Startup (called Fast Boot in Windows 8) works similarly to the hybrid sleep mode of previous versions of Windows. By saving the operating system state to a hibernation file, it can make your computer boot up even faster, saving valuable seconds every time you turn your machine on.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.howtogeek.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So what this can do is you think you shudown down system but it really is not, then you hit the PSU and welll it is not a clean shutdown.


Yea I always turn it off from windows and also from bios, anyway I test it with this ON also when everything was on default.

Its not a BSOD or anything just that event logger, I checked the id event and its to svchost.exe


----------



## edkieferlp

BenchAndGames said:


> Yea I always turn it off from windows and also from bios, anyway I test it with this ON also when everything was on default.
> 
> Its not a BSOD or anything just that event logger, I checked the id event and its to svchost.exe


It was just a guess, I have it too and completely stock, not even XMP when I saw them in event viewer. I just disabled hibernation so we'll see what happens here too.
I am having issues with net Intel 1225v (3)(intermittent connection, disconnects while game-play) in looking around there was issues with older ones and there a frimware update but this might already be in ver 3.
here the article on it.








Network Issues with Intel® Ethernet Controller I225-V


Recommendation to update Non-Volatile Memory (NVM)




www.intel.com





So hard to get info on this platform.


----------



## DaTraS

So, any way to get the bclk to be an even 100!?
Usually it was Spread Spectrum that had to be disabled to stop the bclk being like 99.8 or such.

But the only Spread Spectrum I see on my Strix Z690-A is the "VRM Spread Spectrum" which turned off does exactly nothing to solve the problem.

The option is also linked to "CPU VRM Switching Frequency", which can be Auto'd and this reveals the Spread Spectrum setting or can be fixed manually between 250khz and 500khz.

Anyone an idea? Or was the option i would really need just cut!?


----------



## kendorf

I have TUF Z690-Plus WIFI D4 BIOS-0503. After installing BIOS-0707, I get BSOD and crash when my computer is playing games or under load. All my bios settings are the same in both versions and I'm not overclocking anything. Anyone else having this problem?


----------



## fpompert

kendorf said:


> I have TUF Z690-Plus WIFI D4 BIOS-0503. After installing BIOS-0707, I get BSOD and crash when my computer is playing games or under load. All my bios settings are the same in both versions and I'm not overclocking anything. Anyone else having this problem?


Same here, the non-Wifi TUF Z690 works fine with 0601 BIOS together with my 4x8GB CL16 3200 sticks. With 0707 they won't even boot with the same settings (BSOD in W11 almost directly, complaints that the kernel is corrupt etc). Back to 0601 it is for me


----------



## kendorf

fpompert said:


> Same here, the non-Wifi TUF Z690 works fine with 0601 BIOS together with my 4x8GB CL16 3200 sticks. With 0707 they won't even boot with the same settings (BSOD in W11 almost directly, complaints that the kernel is corrupt etc). Back to 0601 it is for me


Glad to learn that the problem is not unique to me. Then we will skip this update.


----------



## bscool

@fpompert @kendorf

If you are saving settings from old bios and loading them via .cmo file that can cause issues. Otherwise could be a bug in the bios.


----------



## Agent-A01

bscool said:


> @fpompert @kendorf
> 
> If you are saving settings from old bios and loading them via .cmo file that can cause issues. Otherwise could be a bug in the bios.


It's a bios bug. I cannot post past 3800 with my kit either.


----------



## bscool

Agent-A01 said:


> It's a bios bug. I cannot post past 3800 with my kit either.


What can you do on other bios versions?

I saw your post the other day and just wondering what you ever got to with other bios versions.


----------



## Agent-A01

bscool said:


> What can you do on other bios versions?
> 
> I saw your post the other day and just wondering what you ever got to with other bios versions.


Rolled back to 0707 and 4133 posts no problem as others have stated


----------



## mattxx88

in yours maximus/strix can you switch off all lightnings? 
in mine Strix I mini itx, bios 0702 even if i switched off Aura from bios, my ram still light up  and i hate amusement parks


----------



## bscool

mattxx88 said:


> in yours maximus/strix can you switch off all lightnings?
> in mine Strix I mini itx, bios 0702 even if i switched off Aura from bios, my ram still light up  and i hate amusement parks


No MB that I know of lets you control just the memory RGB unless you install the software in Windows so it can control it via Windows. If gskill mem the "lightest" way to control it is using the gskill software. Otherwise you have to install Armoury Crate for other mem manufactures or the ram manufacture specific software.


----------



## Neander

What ram are you using? Can't control the ram at all even with the bloatware. G.Skills says they have tested it and have no problem. Tried with all BIOS versions and fresh installs and combination no chance. G.Skills suggests doing an RMA for it but definitly not during this no stock scenario


----------



## mattxx88

bscool said:


> No MB that I know of lets you control just the memory RGB unless you install the software in Windows so it can control it via Windows. If gskill mem the "lightest" way to control it is using the gskill software. Otherwise you have to install Armoury Crate for other mem manufactures or the ram manufacture specific software.


i remember when i was on z390, switching to AURA Off inside bios, all lights turnes off, ram included

@Neander im with corsair First edition, while waiting for gskill. But my goal isnt to control them, just shut them off 😅


----------



## Neander

mattxx88 said:


> @Neander im with corsair First edition, while waiting for gskill. But my goal isnt to control them, just shut them off 😅


Would be nice if you (or somebody else) share the experiences with the G.Skill Z5 RGB as soon you can get one. Would really love to know if I have faulty hardware or sth else is off. But didn't find anybody yet with the RGB modules on preferable an Asus board...


----------



## bscool

@mattxx88 @Neander

Now that you guys mention it I do remember seeing a few other people on z690 say that no software controls it even in Windows on memory RGB. Not only on this forum but HardwareLuxx, and MSI support forum. Other RGB control was busted for some of them besides just ram.

Does your guys other RGB ports work correctly or no rgb installed to test?









[Youtube] Trident Z5 & Trident Z5 RGB - Extreme Performance DDR5 Memory


Details zu den Spezifikationen folgen in Kürze. Gruß Cody G.SKILL Deutschland Tech Support Team




www.hardwareluxx.de


----------



## shamino1978

0802
fixed the adaptive voltage interpolation issue on 0801









ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0802.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-GLACIAL-ASUS-0802.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0802.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-FORMULA-ASUS-0802.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-ASUS-0802.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com













ROG-STRIX-Z690-I-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0802.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-STRIX-Z690-E-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0802.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0802.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












PRIME-Z690-A-ASUS-0802.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-ASUS-0802.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-WIFI-ASUS-0802.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ProArt-Z690-CREATOR-WIFI-ASUS-0802.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com





DDR4 is different version number due to a single rank Gear1 1T tweak:








TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-D4-ASUS-0002.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0002.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0002.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com


----------



## Neander

@bscool 
For me board RGB as well as connected RGB devices like GPU cooler (Aura RGB Header) and case (Adressable Gen2 Header) can be controlled fine through Armoury Crate Aura or OpenRGB. DRAM is not showing up in Aura and G.Skill tool is not showing "Sync". Interesting is that when using OpenRGB it can detect the DRAM and showing it for an second before freezing up and crash the system hard during the detection of the Ene SMBus.


----------



## shrimpmaster

@shamino1978
No TUF Z690-PLUS WIFI?


----------



## shamino1978

later


----------



## dyanikoglu

.


----------



## shamino1978

shrimpmaster said:


> @shamino1978
> No TUF Z690-PLUS WIFI?


up


----------



## mattxx88

bscool said:


> @mattxx88 @Neander
> 
> Now that you guys mention it I do remember seeing a few other people on z690 say that no software controls it even in Windows on memory RGB. Not only on this forum but HardwareLuxx, and MSI support forum. Other RGB control was busted for some of them besides just ram.
> 
> Does your guys other RGB ports work correctly or no rgb installed to test?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Youtube] Trident Z5 & Trident Z5 RGB - Extreme Performance DDR5 Memory
> 
> 
> Details zu den Spezifikationen folgen in Kürze. Gruß Cody G.SKILL Deutschland Tech Support Team
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hardwareluxx.de


sry, no rgb installed for me
just fans lian li AL120 that i control with lian li controller


----------



## fpompert

Upgraded the BIOS from 0601 to 0002 on my TUF Z690 D4 non Wifi, but still refuses to boot Windows 11 with default XMP II settings and everything on Auto (not restoring settings from file, but setting everything manually). I have 4x8GB sticks of G.Skill F4-3200C16-8GVKB. Seems the BIOSs newer than 0601 tend to favor 2 DDR4 sticks only perhaps?


----------



## shrimpmaster

Installed the new 0002 on my TUF z690, before max i could do stable was 3866mhz gear 1. With single rank b-die.
I'm now running 4000mhz gear 1, on testmem5 for over 20min without any errors.1.4SA, but i'll try to lower it, I'll also try 1t.

Seems like an improvement.


----------



## mister_no

@shamino1978
No ROG Strix Z690-A Gaming WIFI *D4*?


----------



## shamino1978

mister_no said:


> @shamino1978
> No ROG Strix Z690-A Gaming WIFI *D4*?


look closely below


----------



## shrimpmaster

@shamino1978 what is this sorcery? Before I couldn't even do 4000mhz gear 1. Now not only works, but also with 1t command rate, and can get SA voltage as low as 1.3v.

Nice bios.


----------



## fpompert

fpompert said:


> Upgraded the BIOS from 0601 to 0002 on my TUF Z690 D4 non Wifi, but still refuses to boot Windows 11 with default XMP II settings and everything on Auto (not restoring settings from file, but setting everything manually). I have 4x8GB sticks of G.Skill F4-3200C16-8GVKB. Seems the BIOSs newer than 0601 tend to favor 2 DDR4 sticks only perhaps?


Removed 2 of the 4 sticks, and the 0002 BIOS boots properly with standard XMP 2 settings (cold or warm boot too). Could there be an issue here with the IMC load with 4 sticks and other tweaks?


----------



## mister_no

shamino1978 said:


> look closely below


I only see the bios for mb without "d4". Or does it mean the same thing?


----------



## shamino1978

mister_no said:


> I only see the bios for mb without "d4". Or does it mean the same thing?


refresh your browser


----------



## mister_no

shamino1978 said:


> refresh your browser


I have, several times. There is only the BIOS for the Strix a, without "D4".


----------



## owikh84

mister_no said:


> I have, several times. There is only the BIOS for the Strix a, without "D4".


Scroll down in that post bro, it is there:



shamino1978 said:


> DDR4 is different version number due to a single rank Gear1 1T tweak:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0002.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


----------



## mister_no

Sorry, I just looked at post # 2. My mistake.


----------



## ROBHANAMICI

Hi. Sorry a question. 0002 means for? I have bios 0801 for Rog-strix-z690-a-gaming-wifi-d4-asus. Do i have to download 0802 version or 0002? . 0002 version is next to 0801 version? Thank u very much


----------



## shamino1978

ROBHANAMICI said:


> Hi. Sorry a question. 0002 means for? I have bios 0801 for Rog-strix-z690-a-gaming-wifi-d4-asus. Do i have to download 0802 version or 0002? . 0002 version is next to 0801 version? Thank u very much


ignore the version number, its an equivalent for 0802


----------



## owikh84

0801 and 0002 didn't allow my B-die DR to boot at 4000+ with Gear 1, tried both 2T and 1T also same thing. Gear 2 boots fine though.
Here's my TM5 stable settings that worked easily on 0707:

12900K SP 91 - Stock
Strix Z690-A | BIOS 0707
2x16GB G.Skill F4-4000C17D-32GTRSB

4000 CL14-16-16-36-2T Gear1, VDIMM 1.60v (1.581-1.598v), SA 1.40v (1.376v):









4000 CL15-16-16-36-2T Gear1, VDIMM 1.50v (1.492v), SA Auto (1.328-1.344v):









4000 CL16-16-16-36-2T Gear1, VDIMM 1.4125v (1.403v), SA Auto (1.328-1.344v):


----------



## ROBHANAMICI

shamino1978 said:


> ignore the version number, its an equivalent for 0802



Ok thank u very much.


----------



## acoustic

Anything to note on ASUS Z690 TUF PLUS? Just grabbed one with a 12700K. Pairing with my untested GSkill Royal 4000CL16 @ 1.4v.. we'll see how far we can roll with Gear1.


----------



## shrimpmaster

acoustic said:


> Anything to note on ASUS Z690 TUF PLUS? Just grabbed one with a 12700K. Pairing with my untested GSkill Royal 4000CL16 @ 1.4v.. we'll see how far we can roll with Gear1.


I hope u get better luck with your 12700k than I did. My IMC is below average, my core is way below average
With new bios 4000mhz g1 is possible, but anything below 1.4v Sa gives errors. 3866mhz on the other hand only requires 1.2v sa
4100mhz doesn't even load windows.


----------



## acoustic

shrimpmaster said:


> I hope u get better luck with your 12700k than I did. My IMC is below average, my core is way below average
> With new bios 4000mhz g1 is possible, but anything below 1.4v Sa gives errors. 3866mhz on the other hand only requires 1.2v sa
> 4100mhz doesn't even load windows.


We shall see. Won't be able to build until later today, and hoping things line-up so I don't need to drain my loop.. lol


----------



## Agent-A01

shamino1978 said:


> up


Any thoughts on the DR issue for later bios? Myself and others cannot boot past certain frequencies like before



shrimpmaster said:


> I hope u get better luck with your 12700k than I did. My IMC is below average, my core is way below average
> With new bios 4000mhz g1 is possible, but anything below 1.4v Sa gives errors. 3866mhz on the other hand only requires 1.2v sa
> 4100mhz doesn't even load windows.


What vcore do you need for your chip @ say 5.1 ghz?


----------



## Sarzinski

shamino1978 said:


> up


0002 has serious issues with dual rank b-die.

0707 could boot 4133, 4000 was stable. 0002 takes three attempts to even boot 3866 and then throws errors almost immediately.


----------



## grifers

Hi there. How do yours see this RAM configuration?. This modules are samsung B-die (Hyperx Predator). Stock goes to 3600 Mhz and 17-19-19-39 at 1.35.




Stock 12700k..............


----------



## Jacinto1023

Anyone else having issues with crashing and freezing?

I'm getting tons, doesn't matter if its windows 10 or 11. 

I've tried the RAM sticks in all kinds of different configurations and slots. Whenever i get a crash the PC will then go into a Post 55 Code nonstop until i reset bios or remove a RAM stick. Happens with XMP on or off. I've seen tons of others having the same issues on reddit. ASUS Z690 and DDR4/DDR5

I've just upgraded to the 0802 bios so i will test that now but the weird thing is that memcheck shows no RAM issues but Post 55 code refers to RAM. I'm just so confused, is it the bios? is it Alder lake or is it my RAM?


----------



## Falkentyne

Jacinto1023 said:


> Anyone else having issues with crashing and freezing?
> 
> I'm getting tons, doesn't matter if its windows 10 or 11.
> 
> I've tried the RAM sticks in all kinds of different configurations and slots. Whenever i get a crash the PC will then go into a Post 55 Code nonstop until i reset bios or remove a RAM stick. Happens with XMP on or off. I've seen tons of others having the same issues on reddit. ASUS Z690 and DDR4/DDR5
> 
> I've just upgraded to the 0802 bios so i will test that now but the weird thing is that memcheck shows no RAM issues but Post 55 code refers to RAM. I'm just so confused, is it the bios? is it Alder lake or is it my RAM?


Exact full system specs, please?


----------



## Jacinto1023

Falkentyne said:


> Exact full system specs, please?


Intel i7 12700k
ASUS Z690 Strix Gaming E
Corsair Vengeance 32GB(16x2) DDR5 5200 RAM
EVGA RTX 3080Ti


----------



## Falkentyne

Jacinto1023 said:


> Intel i7 12700k
> ASUS Z690 Strix Gaming E
> Corsair Vengeance 32GB(16x2) DDR5 5200 RAM
> EVGA RTX 3080Ti


Thank you.
But I tried to search for this problem.

I can't find 'threads all over reddit" with this issue.
What exactly did you search for and how did you find these threads? Where are they?
Either that or the reddit search is completely busted and returns invalid results.
There's nothing on "/r/asus or r/asusrog (or whatever its called) about this.
So I guess the reddit search just doesn't work right.
Can you explain or show me how to search for this exact issue using reddit or what exact search keywords you used? Because it's not working for me.


----------



## Exilon

Something new on the Strix D4 I swapped to from a Gigabyte board:

I'm seeing all of my processors at the same C0 state except for the last 3 E-cores and CPU idle power is >25W compared to 4-6W on my previous motherboard. 
P-core C7 residency is only at 28% on average which explains the higher idle power.

Any settings I should be looking at to see why this is happening?









This is using BIOS version 0707


----------



## shrimpmaster

Agent-A01 said:


> Any thoughts on the DR issue for later bios? Myself and others cannot boot past certain frequencies like before
> 
> 
> 
> What vcore do you need for your chip @ say 5.1 ghz?


For 4.8ghz I need 1.17v minimum load vcore.


----------



## Neander

Jacinto1023 said:


> Anyone else having issues with crashing and freezing?
> 
> I'm getting tons, doesn't matter if its windows 10 or 11.
> 
> I've tried the RAM sticks in all kinds of different configurations and slots. Whenever i get a crash the PC will then go into a Post 55 Code nonstop until i reset bios or remove a RAM stick. Happens with XMP on or off. I've seen tons of others having the same issues on reddit. ASUS Z690 and DDR4/DDR5
> 
> I've just upgraded to the 0802 bios so i will test that now but the weird thing is that memcheck shows no RAM issues but Post 55 code refers to RAM. I'm just so confused, is it the bios? is it Alder lake or is it my RAM?


I had some issues with XMP too at the beginning. The system was even throwing BSODs at me during Windows installation. One tick of voltage over XMP standard on the MC solved all issues for me.


----------



## Jacinto1023

Neander said:


> I had some issues with XMP too at the beginning. The system was even throwing BSODs at me during Windows installation. One tick of voltage over XMP standard on the MC solved all issues for me.


can you please help me, where exactly in the asus bios do i do that? which specific setting and what value ?

is it DRAM Voltage i change?


----------



## acoustic

No Post code LED in 2021 should be a ****ing crime. This TUF is killing me.

I hate these cheapo boards .. lord lol.

Anyone had weird core temp readings? I'm seeing cores as low as 18c on HWInfo64 7.15-4620 beta, even though my water temp is 22c. not possible to be colder than the water


----------



## Exilon

Exilon said:


> Something new on the Strix D4 I swapped to from a Gigabyte board:
> 
> I'm seeing all of my processors at the same C0 state except for the last 3 E-cores and CPU idle power is >25W compared to 4-6W on my previous motherboard.
> P-core C7 residency is only at 28% on average which explains the higher idle power.
> 
> Any settings I should be looking at to see why this is happening?
> View attachment 2533454
> 
> 
> This is using BIOS version 0707


Fixed by uninstall TPU, setting Cstates from auto to "enabled", and switching AI to auto to fix bclk dropping. Not sure which one fixed it but I'm seeing package power where I expect it now and P-cores entering C7.


----------



## Neander

Jacinto1023 said:


> can you please help me, where exactly in the asus bios do i do that? which specific setting and what value ?
> 
> is it DRAM Voltage i change?


Select XMP 1 or 2, go down on the same page to the advanced Memory Voltage control. XMP maybe already set the Memory Controller to 1.1V. If not do so and press + once to go one step higher. Don't have the exact amount here right now should be sth like 1.1XXX V. Try again if it does not work maybe you need a tick more. If this does not work maybe sth else is off, this was just my solution but your rootcause could be sth else. As I don't know you just a reminder that even if this numbers is nothing even close to dangerous please keep in mind changing voltages should be done with care and on own risk.


----------



## Jacinto1023

Neander said:


> Select XMP 1 or 2, go down on the same page to the advanced Memory Voltage control. XMP maybe already set the Memory Controller to 1.1V. If not do so and press + once to go one step higher. Don't have the exact amount here right now should be sth like 1.1XXX V. Try again if it does not work maybe you need a tick more. If this does not work maybe sth else is off, this was just my solution but your rootcause could be sth else. As I don't know you just a reminder that even if this numbers is nothing even close to dangerous please keep in mind changing voltages should be done with care and on own risk.


Thank you, it was set to 1.2 with XMP so i added a tick extra


----------



## Neander

Jacinto1023 said:


> Thank you, it was set to 1.2 with XMP so i added a tick extra


If it was already at 1.2 you may have an other issue but still try it. On the G.Skill XMP 2 the value was at 1.1 which was a bit low for me. Maybe somebody else has an idea too.


----------



## Jacinto1023

Neander said:


> If it was already at 1.2 you may have an other issue but still try it. On the G.Skill XMP 2 the value was at 1.1 which was a bit low for me. Maybe somebody else has an idea too.


Its been good so far for like an hour. No crashes yet

Is 1.2v-1.3v safe?


----------



## Jacinto1023

Falkentyne said:


> Thank you.
> But I tried to search for this problem.
> 
> I can't find 'threads all over reddit" with this issue.
> What exactly did you search for and how did you find these threads? Where are they?
> Either that or the reddit search is completely busted and returns invalid results.
> There's nothing on "/r/asus or r/asusrog (or whatever its called) about this.
> So I guess the reddit search just doesn't work right.
> Can you explain or show me how to search for this exact issue using reddit or what exact search keywords you used? Because it's not working for me.




__
https://www.reddit.com/r/intel/comments/qp1v8e


----------



## Falkentyne

Jacinto1023 said:


> __
> https://www.reddit.com/r/intel/comments/qp1v8e


Thanks.
searching reddit for threads using their own search is worse than Klingon Pain Sticks "reeducation."


----------



## Jacinto1023

There are a few more


----------



## acoustic

shrimpmaster said:


> I hope u get better luck with your 12700k than I did. My IMC is below average, my core is way below average
> With new bios 4000mhz g1 is possible, but anything below 1.4v Sa gives errors. 3866mhz on the other hand only requires 1.2v sa
> 4100mhz doesn't even load windows.


OK, so with the 0002 BIOS, I am at 4000CL16 (xmp) @ 1.4v, with 1.28v SA. Currently running HCI Memtest. I was in Windows at 1.22v, but got an IRQL NOT LESS OR EQUAL BSOD a few minutes in.

With the original BIOS, I couldn't even post in 4000CL16 Gear2 lol.


----------



## jm600rr

Sorry if this has already been asked but on the Asus Maximus Extreme Z690 can you fit a Evga 3090 ftw3 with EK active backplate? Looking at ordering the board but the heatsink looks super close to pcie slot1 and looks pretty tall. Thanks.


----------



## RetroWave78

acoustic said:


> No Post code LED in 2021 should be a ****ing crime. This TUF is killing me.
> 
> I hate these cheapo boards .. lord lol.
> 
> Anyone had weird core temp readings? I'm seeing cores as low as 18c on HWInfo64 7.15-4620 beta, even though my water temp is 22c. not possible to be colder than the water


I completely agree, I can't believe basically none of the manufacturers had the foresight to include Post Code Readout on any of their DDR4 boards and it's been amply shown that in regards to gaming there are little to no gains from DDR5 and you can't even get DDR5 to top it off.


----------



## RetroWave78

acoustic said:


> OK, so with the 0002 BIOS, I am at 4000CL16 (xmp) @ 1.4v, with 1.28v SA. Currently running HCI Memtest. I was in Windows at 1.22v, but got an IRQL NOT LESS OR EQUAL BSOD a few minutes in.
> 
> With the original BIOS, I couldn't even post in 4000CL16 Gear2 lol.


Single or dual rank? Someone's comment from a page ago about 0802 destroying their stability vs 0707 (they had 4000 MHz stable with 0707 and now with 0802 it refuses to boot, dual rank) has me worried. 

Asus Strix-A D4


----------



## acoustic

RetroWave78 said:


> Single or dual rank? Someone's comment from a page ago about 0802 destroying their stability vs 0707 (they had 4000 MHz stable with 0707 and now with 0802 it refuses to boot, dual rank) has me worried.
> 
> Asus Strix-A D4


I'm on 2x16 DR.

I'm down to 4000 CL15 GR1 @ 1.5v vDIMM / 1.31v SA, with a couple tightened timings. I'm testing stability now with TM5 Anta777 ABSOLUT, then I'll run HCI MemTestPro overnight.


----------



## RetroWave78

Sorry for the duplicate posts, is anyone having issues simply getting memory that is on the QVL (Strix-A D4) to work at XMP?

This may be a stupid question but Asus tested the memory on their QVL at the stated XMP speeds correct?

I have these dimms, they are on the QVL, shouldn't they work at these speeds via XMP without ado? Are the problems people are having because people are trying to overclock their memory / run tightened timings or does Strix-A D4 have issues getting memory to work above 3800 MHz, even if it's on the QVL and it's rated XMP speed exceeds that?

I have these on order:

F4-4000C15Q-32GTRS-G.SKILL International Enterprise Co., Ltd. (gskill.com) 
Trident Z Royal
DDR4-4000MHz CL15-16-16-36 1.50V
32GB (4x8GB)

They are on the QVL (listed as non-Royal heat-spreader variant but it's the same memory). 

Considering they are single rank and that users have reported an improvement over 0707 (for single rank, we have some feedback that there is performance degradation for dual rank dimms) should I flash to 0802 via Flashback method on the board? I've already renamed 0802 bios appropriately and have it on USB ready to go.

Thanks for any help with this, confused and dismayed to hear that this board is having problems booting above 3800 MHz and I still don't understand if it's because people are overclocking / running tightened timings or if their memory is on the QVL with XMP speed above that and there is genuinely a problem with the board.

CPU in question is 12900k which I hear has a better IMC.


----------



## RetroWave78

acoustic said:


> I'm on 2x16 DR.
> 
> I'm down to 4000 CL15 GR1 @ 1.5v vDIMM / 1.31v SA, with a couple tightened timings. I'm testing stability now with TM5 Anta777 ABSOLUT, then I'll run HCI MemTestPro overnight.


Nice! What memory and what are they rated for / what is their XMP speed? So with 0802 there was an improvement over 0707? How do you flash the BIOS, with flashback? Should this be the first thing I do before installing anything with this board? Ok so 1.31 SA, how much should I try to start? What are your other settings? Thanks for any help with this.


----------



## acoustic

RetroWave78 said:


> Nice! What memory and what are they rated for / what is their XMP speed? So with 0802 there was an improvement over 0707? How do you flash the BIOS, with flashback? Should this be the first thing I do before installing anything with this board? Ok so 1.31 SA, how much should I try to start? What are your other settings? Thanks for any help with this.


Honestly, I'm probably not a good source of advice as I'm coming from Comet Lake which was vastly different when it comes to memory OC. I'm learning this new (RKL style) stuff as I go.

My sticks are GSkill Royal 2x16 DR 4000CL16 @ 1.4v XMP.

I went from stock BIOS which was 0222 or something to the 0002 BIOS. I did not run 0707, but may try it tomorrow for comparison. Flashed the BIOS with a USB stick thru the ASUS EZFLASH in the UEFI. I would recommend updating the BIOS because the one that came stock with my board was atrocious and missing options/features.

I started at 1.22v SA and moved up. I think I may be able to go down eventually but I'm still working on finding stable settings first. I'm heading to bed for the night but will be back to the grind tomorrow. I want to get the memory OC done before I start messing with the CPU OC.


----------



## Jacinto1023

Well after hours of no issues with this latest bios, as soon as I turn off the pc and try to turn it back on it just stays stuck on a post 55 lock. 

This is starting to get very frustrating.


----------



## Feklar

jm600rr said:


> Sorry if this has already been asked but on the Asus Maximus Extreme Z690 can you fit a Evga 3090 ftw3 with EK active backplate? Looking at ordering the board but the heatsink looks super close to pcie slot1 and looks pretty tall. Thanks.


It is doubtful it will fit due to the height of the oled/heatsink and it's close proximity to the pcie slot. Read through this thread for more posts and photos that may help.


----------



## cstkl1

RetroWave78 said:


> I completely agree, I can't believe basically none of the manufacturers had the foresight to include Post Code Readout on any of their DDR4 boards and it's been amply shown that in regards to gaming there are little to no gains from DDR5 and you can't even get DDR5 to top it off.


do not refer to this guy unless you want to limit yourself.

limitations are either on components or yourself. ppl who make excuses tend to think their limitation = everybody. they always tend resort to group identitiy distinction.. youtubers, gamers, xoc, etc to make their reasoning sound.

set a target , believe in yourself. go for it.


----------



## RetroWave78

acoustic said:


> Honestly, I'm probably not a good source of advice as I'm coming from Comet Lake which was vastly different when it comes to memory OC. I'm learning this new (RKL style) stuff as I go.
> 
> My sticks are GSkill Royal 2x16 DR 4000CL16 @ 1.4v XMP.
> 
> I went from stock BIOS which was 0222 or something to the 0002 BIOS. I did not run 0707, but may try it tomorrow for comparison. Flashed the BIOS with a USB stick thru the ASUS EZFLASH in the UEFI. I would recommend updating the BIOS because the one that came stock with my board was atrocious and missing options/features.
> 
> I started at 1.22v SA and moved up. I think I may be able to go down eventually but I'm still working on finding stable settings first. I'm heading to bed for the night but will be back to the grind tomorrow. I want to get the memory OC done before I start messing with the CPU OC.


I'm thinking of trying to update the BIOS to 0802 with the Flashback method very early on, maybe before I even install any components, just hook it up to power: 



[Motherboard] How to use USB BIOS FlashBack™? | Official Support | ASUS Global



I'm afraid to try to boot it with whatever BIOS is on there because I'm certain it's earlier than 0707.




Jacinto1023 said:


> Well after hours of no issues with this latest bios, as soon as I turn off the pc and try to turn it back on it just stays stuck on a post 55 lock.
> 
> This is starting to get very frustrating.


What board, BIOS and memory? 



cstkl1 said:


> dont refer to noobs dude.


Sorry, I'm neutral with Frame Chasers, half the time his content is cringe-worthy, like the entire intro to this video, but on the other hand, he does show that even running DDR5 at 5600 MHz Gear 2 and the slower DDR4 in Gear 1 is yielding better performance in basically every game / scenario.


----------



## cstkl1

RetroWave78 said:


> Sorry, I'm neutral with Frame Chasers, half the time his content is cringe-worthy, like the entire intro to this video, but on the other hand, he does show that even running DDR5 at 5600 MHz Gear 2 and the slower DDR4 in Gear 1 is yielding better performance in basically every game / scenario.


his content is fine.entertaining. just dont refer to it actual fact. he is just posting based on his limitation.

ddr5 tcl/twcl 36 vs 28 almost no diff.
what differes is 1T, then secondary/third followed by bandwidth via frequency.
6600 2T is slower than 6400 1T
samsung loses to hynix secondary/third

most ppl here do not limit themself.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

With a Tuf D4 I can boot 3866 and 4100. I can’t boot anything inbetween. 4100 throws errors but 3866 does not. I’m on bios 0801. Will 0802 fix this or do I need to roll back? Man this is a frustrating platform compared to RKL.


----------



## cstkl1

0451 said:


> With a Tuf D4 I can boot 3866 and 4100. I can’t boot anything inbetween. 4100 throws errors but 3866 does not. I’m on bios 0801. Will 0802 fix this or do I need to roll back? Man this is a frustrating platform compared to RKL.


welcome to 4dimm mobo.

lol


----------



## Neander

Jacinto1023 said:


> Its been good so far for like an hour. No crashes yet
> 
> Is 1.2v-1.3v safe?


Sounds not to bad. If you still facing minor issues go a bit higher. But if the freezes and crashes are gone already it's a good thing. Try to not go over 1.25, it's still save but you shouldn't need that high of MC voltage for this low spec kit to be honest. But if it runs nicely with the higher voltage you may just won the very bad IMC lottery or the board is just really bad ;P


----------



## DaTraS

DaTraS said:


> So, any way to get the bclk to be an even 100!?
> Usually it was Spread Spectrum that had to be disabled to stop the bclk being like 99.8 or such.
> 
> But the only Spread Spectrum I see on my Strix Z690-A is the "VRM Spread Spectrum" which turned off does exactly nothing to solve the problem.
> 
> The option is also linked to "CPU VRM Switching Frequency", which can be Auto'd and this reveals the Spread Spectrum setting or can be fixed manually between 250khz and 500khz.
> 
> Anyone an idea? Or was the option i would really need just cut!?


No one an idea?


----------



## fpompert

DaTraS said:


> No one an idea?


I have the same with bios 0601. Just make the fsb speed 100.250. That fixed the rounding error for me. Bios’ 0707 and up seem to fix this rounding too but I cannot use those newer versions due to my 4 stick RAM layout not booting properly.


----------



## Lurifaks

"Testing in Progress"

Strix Z690-A-D4 | BIOS 0707
i5-12600K P 52x2-51x4-50x6 , E 40
2x8GB SR-B-die
DDR4 4533MHz 19-19-19-39-1T Gear2
VDIMM 1.50v (1.492-1.510v), SA 1.35v (1.328-1.344) 












Strix Z690-A-D4 | BIOS 0707
i5-12600K P 52x2-51x4-50x6 , E 40
2x8GB SR-B-die
DDR4 4600MHz 19-19-19-39-1T Gear2
VDIMM 1.55v, SA 1.35v


----------



## acoustic

0451 said:


> With a Tuf D4 I can boot 3866 and 4100. I can’t boot anything inbetween. 4100 throws errors but 3866 does not. I’m on bios 0801. Will 0802 fix this or do I need to roll back? Man this is a frustrating platform compared to RKL.


I'm getting good POST on most speeds, just a matter of Windows stability, this is on the 0002 BIOS that Shamino posted. I will try the 0707 BIOS at some point today, since most are recommending that for DR configs.

@cstkl1 do you think RKL mem OC guides apply to ADL DDR4? I'm new to this coming from CML and it definitely seems more complicated. I've already got 4000CL16 stable in Gear1, but currently working on CL15 now. Did you ever write a RKL OC guide?


----------



## edkieferlp

Is anybody having connection issues with The Intel 1225v controller ,I tried reloading drivers and can't figure what it could be.
Problem is getting kicked from games within a min or two, very bad rubber banding, 100's of event warnings "Intel(R) Ethernet Controller (3) I225-V Network link is disconnected., ID 27. If I do a "ping -n 100 google.com" I get bunch of request timed out (always two or three in a row ending up with 5-10% packet loss.
Old system pluged in same way get 0% and all games solid connection..
researching it I only come up with fix/issue with older version of 122.








Network Issues with Intel® Ethernet Controller I225-V


Recommendation to update Non-Volatile Memory (NVM)




www.intel.com




ver3 is suppose to be fixed of this issue which is what these MB have..


----------



## cstkl1

acoustic said:


> I'm getting good POST on most speeds, just a matter of Windows stability, this is on the 0002 BIOS that Shamino posted. I will try the 0707 BIOS at some point today, since most are recommending that for DR configs.
> 
> @cstkl1 do you think RKL mem OC guides apply to ADL DDR4? I'm new to this coming from CML and it definitely seems more complicated. I've already got 4000CL16 stable in Gear1, but currently working on CL15 now. Did you ever write a RKL OC guide?


theres no guide rkl. ppl learn the limits of ddr4 with no rtl/iol holding you back
u get to understand chipset correlation etc.


----------



## dyanikoglu

edkieferlp said:


> Is anybody having connection issues with The Intel 1225v controller ,I tried reloading drivers and can't figure what it could be.
> Problem is getting kicked from games within a min or two, very bad rubber banding, 100's of event warnings "Intel(R) Ethernet Controller (3) I225-V Network link is disconnected., ID 27. If I do a "ping -n 100 google.com" I get bunch of request timed out (always two or three in a row ending up with 5-10% packet loss.
> Old system pluged in same way get 0% and all games solid connection..
> researching it I only come up with fix/issue with older version of 122.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Network Issues with Intel® Ethernet Controller I225-V
> 
> 
> Recommendation to update Non-Volatile Memory (NVM)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.intel.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ver3 is suppose to be fixed of this issue which is what these MB have..


+1 for this


----------



## chispy

SuperPi 32m world record has been broken by safedisk on a overclock gathering with Elmor and der8auer using Asus Strix Z690-A Gaming Wifi D4 + 12900k + 2x8gb Samsung B-die DDR4 kit ( Alder Lake with ddr4 combo is fast ).








safedisk`s SuperPi - 32M score: 3min 36sec 841ms with a Core i9 12900K (8P)


The Core i9 12900K (8P) @ 7330MHzscores getScoreFormatted in the SuperPi - 32M benchmark. safediskranks #null worldwide and #null in the hardware class. Find out more at HWBOT.




hwbot.org




Holy score ... 😲


----------



## bscool

RetroWave78 said:


> I completely agree, I can't believe basically none of the manufacturers had the foresight to include Post Code Readout on any of their DDR4 boards and it's been amply shown that in regards to gaming there are little to no gains from DDR5 and you can't even get DDR5 to top it off.


Here is a screenshot I took from his vid. I play csgo so to me the lows are most important. *Lows* on *ddr4 66* vs *187 ddr5*. That is huge for getting a smooth experience. Or have been reading it wrong all this time? I always look at the lows in that bench vs overall FPS. Edit I havent watched the whole vid just saw that and posted 

Edit 2 ddr5 is almost triple lows. That is crazy if correct.


----------



## edkieferlp

dyanikoglu said:


> +1 for this


Are you having same issues?


----------



## bscool

acoustic said:


> I'm getting good POST on most speeds, just a matter of Windows stability, this is on the 0002 BIOS that Shamino posted. I will try the 0707 BIOS at some point today, since most are recommending that for DR configs.
> 
> @cstkl1 do you think RKL mem OC guides apply to ADL DDR4? I'm new to this coming from CML and it definitely seems more complicated. I've already got 4000CL16 stable in Gear1, but currently working on CL15 now. Did you ever write a RKL OC guide?


"We won’t spend too much time covering the DDR4 overclocking intricacies as it’s very similar to Rocket Lake"



https://skatterbencher.com/2021/11/04/alder-lake-overclocking-whats-new/#Alder_Lake_Overclocking_Ambient_Expectations


----------



## bscool

RetroWave78 said:


> Sorry for the duplicate posts, is anyone having issues simply getting memory that is on the QVL (Strix-A D4) to work at XMP?
> 
> This may be a stupid question but Asus tested the memory on their QVL at the stated XMP speeds correct?
> 
> I have these dimms, they are on the QVL, shouldn't they work at these speeds via XMP without ado? Are the problems people are having because people are trying to overclock their memory / run tightened timings or does Strix-A D4 have issues getting memory to work above 3800 MHz, even if it's on the QVL and it's rated XMP speed exceeds that?
> 
> I have these on order:
> 
> F4-4000C15Q-32GTRS-G.SKILL International Enterprise Co., Ltd. (gskill.com)
> Trident Z Royal
> DDR4-4000MHz CL15-16-16-36 1.50V
> 32GB (4x8GB)
> 
> They are on the QVL (listed as non-Royal heat-spreader variant but it's the same memory).
> 
> Considering they are single rank and that users have reported an improvement over 0707 (for single rank, we have some feedback that there is performance degradation for dual rank dimms) should I flash to 0802 via Flashback method on the board? I've already renamed 0802 bios appropriately and have it on USB ready to go.
> 
> Thanks for any help with this, confused and dismayed to hear that this board is having problems booting above 3800 MHz and I still don't understand if it's because people are overclocking / running tightened timings or if their memory is on the QVL with XMP speed above that and there is genuinely a problem with the board.
> 
> CPU in question is 12900k which I hear has a better IMC.


Are you using gear 2 or 1 other neither work, because I would bet they QVL it for gear 2. I think around 3600 gets set for gear 2 when left on auto on most MBs.

Edit also being daisy chain board it it will limit mem OC since it easier/best to run 2x8 or 2x16. T topology does better with 4 dimms full..


----------



## acoustic

cstkl1 said:


> theres no guide rkl. ppl learn the limits of ddr4 with no rtl/iol holding you back
> u get to understand chipset correlation etc.


So with RKL/ADL, there's no more tweaking RTL/IOL? I noticed the settings look much diff in BIOS for RTL/IOL than CML did. Currently working on 4000 15-15-15-32-320 @ 1.55v VDIMM, but keep getting errors on TM5 [email protected] Test 4. Seems to correlate with tRFC, but I'm already at 320. Will continue testing.


----------



## cstkl1

m


acoustic said:


> So with RKL/ADL, there's no more tweaking RTL/IOL? I noticed the settings look much diff in BIOS for RTL/IOL than CML did. Currently working on 4000 15-15-15-32-320 @ 1.55v VDIMM, but keep getting errors on TM5 [email protected] Test 4. Seems to correlate with tRFC, but I'm already at 320. Will continue testing.


u can in adl. its the final edge to performance.


----------



## acoustic

cstkl1 said:


> m
> 
> u can in adl. its the final edge to performance.


thanks brother. I'll try it out once I tighten up 4000CL15.. I think I have a very good IMC on my 12700K compared to what others have repoted .. I raised tRFC to 340 and now it's going fine. I'm surprised to see B-Die require such high tRFC, but again .. new platform .. still learning this.


----------



## cstkl1

via facetime tuning

some noob said dr bdie stuck at 3600


----------



## acoustic

cstkl1 said:


> via facetime tuning
> 
> some noob said dr bdie stuck at 3600


hey wanna facetime me? LOL

nice job. I just figured out how to stabilize my settings .. the VDDQ voltage seems to help significantly.


----------



## Jacinto1023

RetroWave78 said:


> What board, BIOS and memory?


ASUS STRIX Z690 GAMING E
0802 bios
Corsair Vengeance 32GB DDR5 5200 RAM 

Still getting random crashes with or without XMP. I'm going to try running ram at a lower speed like 4000, i read somewhere on redditt that it helped. 

i dont know if i should RMA the RAM


----------



## acoustic

Anyone having issues with DDR4 Gear1 -- try manually setting your VDDQ TX voltage (IVR Transmitter VDDQ Voltage in BIOS) to 1.6v. max is 2.2, standard is 1.2v per BIOS but Auto will set it to 1.35v typically. I'm also, for some reason, seeing much higher transfer numbers running HCI MemTestPro than I was before. Prior to setting VDDQ to 1.6v, I was getting a steady 15000-16000MB/s. Now I'm getting 17000MB/s with only the VDDQ change.

I'm seeing much better stability at 1.6v. I have no idea if this is a safe voltage - kind of hoping to hear from someone that knows more (@shamino1978 ?), but this has greatly enhanced stability.

12700K + ASUS Z690 TUF PLUS WIFI on 0002 BIOS.


----------



## cstkl1

acoustic said:


> hey wanna facetime me? LOL
> 
> nice job. I just figured out how to stabilize my settings .. the VDDQ voltage seems to help significantly.


lol. was helping a friend who had 1 out of 10 running xmp 3600c16 dr with cold boot end up ram bsod entering windows. found the issue. so thought might as well see how far it goes. so easy 4133

the board is good enough for ddr4 . theres enough options given to fix any problems.


----------



## acoustic

cstkl1 said:


> lol. was helping a friend who had 1 out of 10 running xmp 3600c16 dr with cold boot end up ram bsod entering windows. found the issue. so thought might as well see how far it goes. so easy 4133
> 
> the board is good enough for ddr4 . theres enough options given to fix any problems.


Yeah the boards aren't terrible. This TUF is doing OK, just wish I had SP rating and some of the features I'm used to, like a POST LED and Clear CMOS button on the rear IO.

Oh, and more fan connections... I barely had enough and had to run some extensions to make it work


----------



## shamino1978

acoustic said:


> I'm seeing much better stability at 1.6v. I have no idea if this is a safe voltage - kind of hoping to hear from someone that knows more (@shamino1978 ?), but this has greatly enhanced stability.


tx vddq is fivr'ed , its almost impossible to use too much voltage on fivr rails since they trip early. you're pretty much maxed out at that 1.6v, theres a vdroop and you're more doing around 1.55v real. fivr rails never ever really do much above 1.6v even when you raise vccin to 3v lol no matter what u set.
theoretically this should be the same level as dram voltage but in practice it may not always be the case plus the fact that one may do higher dram voltage than 1.6v which is more than its capable of . what is your dram voltage?


----------



## acoustic

shamino1978 said:


> tx vddq is fivr'ed , its almost impossible to use too much voltage on fivr rails since they trip early. you're pretty much maxed out at that 1.6v, theres a vdroop and you're more doing around 1.55v real. fivr rails never ever really do much above 1.6v even when you raise vccin to 3v lol no matter what u set.
> theoretically this should be the same level as dram voltage but in practice it may not always be the case plus the fact that one may do higher dram voltage than 1.6v which is more than its capable of . what is your dram voltage?


Dram voltage is set to 1.52v. I will try matching it with dram voltage as I've found stability with 1.6v VDDQ, but will try dropping VDDQ down to 1.57v BIOS for 1.52v after vdroop. Thank you for the reply  always insightful!

I never messed with rocket lake so I'm learning a lot of things for the first time that others may have already experienced..been fun so far


----------



## MaghX

shamino1978 said:


> plus the fact that one may do higher dram voltage than 1.6v which is more than its capable of . what is your dram voltage?


What about lets say 1.67v dram? How to set vddq then?


----------



## Exilon

shamino1978 said:


> theoretically this should be the same level as dram voltage but in practice it may not always be the case plus the fact that one may do higher dram voltage than 1.6v which is more than its capable of


Yeah, I've found that my RAM is most stable at 1.4 VDDQ and 1.5 VDIMM with a Strix D4

1.45 VDDQ fails memtest 
1.50 VDDQ doesn't even boot

Not what I expected going into this.


----------



## chispy

Is cpu L2 voltage , v.core for E cores ? i have not play much with E cores. No idea if that's the one for the E cores v.core setting , this is all new and a learning experience.


----------



## Exilon

CPU L2 voltage is for the E-core L2 cluster. You want to raise it if you want to increase ring clock beyond 4.0-4.1GHz with E-cores enabled because the E-core L2 clusters run at ring frequency.


----------



## Agent-A01

edkieferlp said:


> Is anybody having connection issues with The Intel 1225v controller ,I tried reloading drivers and can't figure what it could be.
> Problem is getting kicked from games within a min or two, very bad rubber banding, 100's of event warnings "Intel(R) Ethernet Controller (3) I225-V Network link is disconnected., ID 27. If I do a "ping -n 100 google.com" I get bunch of request timed out (always two or three in a row ending up with 5-10% packet loss.
> Old system pluged in same way get 0% and all games solid connection..
> researching it I only come up with fix/issue with older version of 122.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Network Issues with Intel® Ethernet Controller I225-V
> 
> 
> Recommendation to update Non-Volatile Memory (NVM)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.intel.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ver3 is suppose to be fixed of this issue which is what these MB have..


Which driver version are you using? I had no issues with packet loss on ping command


----------



## shamino1978

MaghX said:


> What about lets say 1.67v dram? How to set vddq then?


You can only stay at 1.6 or so, setting more does nothing except cause the rail to trip and thus crash.


----------



## darth_meh

edkieferlp said:


> Is anybody having connection issues with The Intel 1225v controller ,I tried reloading drivers and can't figure what it could be.
> Problem is getting kicked from games within a min or two, very bad rubber banding, 100's of event warnings "Intel(R) Ethernet Controller (3) I225-V Network link is disconnected., ID 27. If I do a "ping -n 100 google.com" I get bunch of request timed out (always two or three in a row ending up with 5-10% packet loss.
> Old system pluged in same way get 0% and all games solid connection..
> researching it I only come up with fix/issue with older version of 122.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Network Issues with Intel® Ethernet Controller I225-V
> 
> 
> Recommendation to update Non-Volatile Memory (NVM)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.intel.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ver3 is suppose to be fixed of this issue which is what these MB have..


I've read quite a few posts recently suggesting I225-V REV3 may still has issues. With I225-V REV2 on Z490 I found some driver versions to be more stable than others. For example, I found 1.0.2.13 was stable but throughput was terrible with 1.0.2.14.

I also found that disabling Energy Efficient Ethernet (EEE) fixed my packet loss issues with certain driver versions. (On a whim I noticed it was enabled with a problematic driver version, but disabled on a stable driver version.)


----------



## darth_meh

Hi all - I was fortunate enough to acquire an Intel i9-12000K (SP90), an Asus Maximus Z690 Extreme, and Corsair Dominator DDR5 (CMT32GX5M2X5200C38) RAM.
In the BIOS I configured stock Intel settings and enabled XMP I. Everything seemed good at first, but during the Windows 11 install I kept experiencing BSODs.
I saw there was a BIOS update on the Asus website (0709) so I installed it. Tried to run the Windows 11 install again and more BSODs. Edit: I also tried the XMP II profile and experienced BSODs.

As a last resort, I disabled XMP and my system has been stable ever since. No BSODs. That was about a week ago now, and I leave my PC on.

To my surprise and chagrin, the RAM isn't on the Asus QVL list, but based on the Reddit post above it does appear running XMP @ 5200 has some bugs to be worked out. Given everything is stable @ 4800/stock speeds, it doesn't appear to be a hardware issue.


----------



## shamino1978

darth_meh said:


> Hi all - I was fortunate enough to acquire an Intel i9-12000K (SP90), an Asus Maximus Z690 Extreme, and Corsair Dominator DDR5 (CMT32GX5M2X5200C38) RAM.
> In the BIOS I configured stock Intel settings and enabled XMP I. Everything seemed good at first, but during the Windows 11 install I kept experiencing BSODs.
> I saw there was a BIOS update on the Asus website (0709) so I installed it. Tried to run the Windows 11 install again and more BSODs.
> 
> As a last resort, I disabled XMP and my system has been stable ever since. No BSODs. That was about a week ago now, and I leave my PC on.
> 
> To my surprise and chagrin, the RAM isn't on the Asus QVL list, but based on the Reddit post above it does appear running XMP @ 5200 has some bugs to be worked out. Given everything is stable @ 4800/stock speeds, it doesn't appear to be a hardware issue.


Have you tried tge 0802 listed here? I read about a user needing to set his mem controller voltage to 1.25v as well


----------



## darth_meh

shamino1978 said:


> Have you tried tge 0802 listed here? I read about a user needing to set his mem controller voltage to 1.25v as well


I haven't - in part because I wasn't sure how risky it is. Are these official/supported BIOSes from ASUS in case I need to RMA?

The XMP profile shows 1.25V, but are you saying the motherboard may not be picking it up?

Thanks for the assist.


----------



## shamino1978

It will set that only with xmp II.


----------



## darth_meh

shamino1978 said:


> It will set that only with xmp II.


Sorry - I should have noted this in my original post:

I tried both profiles (XMP I and XMP II) and experienced BSODs with both.


----------



## cstkl1

i9-12900k - SP93
MZ690 Apex - Bios 0802
Gskill 2x16gb 6400 28-37-37-28-1T 280 @1.55
SA/MC/txvdd1 - 0.9|1.45|1.45


----------



## darth_meh

shamino1978 said:


> Have you tried tge 0802 listed here? I read about a user needing to set his mem controller voltage to 1.25v as well


I also found a couple of interesting DDR5 posts on the Corsair forums:





Introducing the CORSAIR VENGEANCE DDR5 Memory


Hey everyone, We're excited to present an all-star in our DDR5 memory product lineup that is continuing our memory legacy - VENGEANCE DDR5. Optimized for Intel motherboards, packaged and designed in a compact module that suits your system all while delivering the highest frequencies, providing th...




forum.corsair.com




There's a guy saying the SPD data may be corrupt on Corsair DDR5 RAM? I guess that means it might be worth entering the timings/voltage manually?

This is less of an issue, but Corsair found that there's an Asus BIOS setting that prevents iCUE from detecting DDR5 RAM:





Icue and DDR5


Does icue not work with corsair Dominator Platinum RGB DDR5 Ram not showing up in icue. Ver 4.17.244 thanks




forum.corsair.com


----------



## shamino1978

darth_meh said:


> I also found a couple of interesting DDR5 posts on the Corsair forums:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Introducing the CORSAIR VENGEANCE DDR5 Memory
> 
> 
> Hey everyone, We're excited to present an all-star in our DDR5 memory product lineup that is continuing our memory legacy - VENGEANCE DDR5. Optimized for Intel motherboards, packaged and designed in a compact module that suits your system all while delivering the highest frequencies, providing th...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> forum.corsair.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There's a guy saying the SPD data may be corrupt on Corsair DDR5 RAM? I guess that means it might be worth entering the timings/voltage manually?
> 
> This is less of an issue, but Corsair found that there's an Asus BIOS setting that prevents iCUE from detecting DDR5 RAM:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Icue and DDR5
> 
> 
> Does icue not work with corsair Dominator Platinum RGB DDR5 Ram not showing up in icue. Ver 4.17.244 thanks
> 
> 
> 
> 
> forum.corsair.com


The option in question is spd write enabling in Tweakers paradise. Icue requires you to enable this right now.
You can set just the voltage and frequency manually and leave the timings aLone to troubleshoot this.


----------



## BenchAndGames

@*shamino1978*

For the TUF Z690 WIFI, on the last bios 0802

D4 is missing in the name, and EZ Flash doesn't want to read the file, it tells me to select a suitable file. 
Should I change the name and add D4 as are the other previous versions ?


----------



## shamino1978

BenchAndGames said:


> @*shamino1978*
> 
> For the TUF Z690 WIFI, on the last bios 0802
> 
> D4 is missing in the name, and EZ Flash doesn't want to read the file, it tells me to select a suitable file.
> Should I change the name and add D4 as are the other previous versions ?


The d 4 is 0002, you can try that.


----------



## edkieferlp

Agent-A01 said:


> Which driver version are you using? I had no issues with packet loss on ping command


latest 1.0.2.14.
I figured out the problem, I went to another house nearby to test and all went well. so I then ran a temp test modem and that fixed issues ,games run good again.

So the modem is flaky on new system but ok on old, weird.


----------



## edkieferlp

darth_meh said:


> I've read quite a few posts recently suggesting I225-V REV3 may still has issues. With I225-V REV2 on Z490 I found some driver versions to be more stable than others. For example, I found 1.0.2.13 was stable but throughput was terrible with 1.0.2.14.
> 
> I also found that disabling Energy Efficient Ethernet (EEE) fixed my packet loss issues with certain driver versions. (On a whim I noticed it was enabled with a problematic driver version, but disabled on a stable driver version.)


read my above post, I figured issue out.
But yeah I read them to and it seemed logical that ver3 still has issues.
anyway, I haven't heard of Energy Efficient Ethernet (EEE), were is that option set, just so I know. I don't think its in advance tab of driver option.


----------



## BenchAndGames

shamino1978 said:


> The d 4 is 0002, you can try that.


Im not really sure if I understand you
As far as I know there is no TUF DDR5, and D4 means DDR4, so what I mean is any bios version related until 0802 for TUF Z690 WIFI or not, they got D4 on the name as indicative, and the 0802 dosent.
But I guess is for the same board just maybe you forget to add the D4 on the file name (and thats why bios not reconize) or correct me if I'm wrong...


----------



## cstkl1

shamino1978 said:


> 0802
> fixed the adaptive voltage interpolation issue on 0801
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0802.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-GLACIAL-ASUS-0802.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0802.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-FORMULA-ASUS-0802.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-ASUS-0802.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-I-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0802.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-E-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0802.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0802.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PRIME-Z690-A-ASUS-0802.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-ASUS-0802.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-WIFI-ASUS-0802.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ProArt-Z690-CREATOR-WIFI-ASUS-0802.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DDR4 is different version number due to a single rank Gear1 1T tweak:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-D4-ASUS-0002.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0002.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0002.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com





BenchAndGames said:


> Im not really sure if I understand you
> As far as I know there is no TUF DDR5, and D4 means DDR4, so what I mean is any bios version related until 0802 for TUF Z690 WIFI or not, they got D4 on the name as indicative, and the 0802 dosent.
> But I guess is for the same board just maybe you forget to add the D4 on the file name (and thats why bios not reconize) or correct me if I'm wrong...


one sec. fixing the third post with updated 002 bios for d4


----------



## Falkentyne

So bios 0802 for Apex/Extreme seems to allow you to disable specific P and E cores. (Maybe someone can disable the cores with the worst VIDs?). And my AVX512 is still there. Intel will take AVX512 from my P cores from my cold, bony fingers.

Thank you @shamino1978


----------



## adna

shamino1978 said:


> 0802
> fixed the adaptive voltage interpolation issue on 0801
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0802.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-GLACIAL-ASUS-0802.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0802.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-FORMULA-ASUS-0802.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-ASUS-0802.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-I-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0802.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-E-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0802.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0802.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PRIME-Z690-A-ASUS-0802.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-ASUS-0802.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-WIFI-ASUS-0802.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ProArt-Z690-CREATOR-WIFI-ASUS-0802.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DDR4 is different version number due to a single rank Gear1 1T tweak:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-D4-ASUS-0002.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0002.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0002.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


ROG-STRIX-Z690-F-GAMING-WIFI please.


----------



## Garlicky

I’m using a strix-a d4, a few days ago I brought 4 sticks of sr bdie, with 2 sticks I can boot 4000 cl16 g1 stable but with 4 sticks I can barely do 3733.. Is that just the board/bios or ram? Or is it just my skills


----------



## cstkl1

Garlicky said:


> I’m using a strix-a d4, a few days ago I brought 4 sticks of sr bdie, with 2 sticks I can boot 4000 cl16 g1 stable but with 4 sticks I can barely do 3733.. Is that just the board/bios or ram? Or is it just my skills


@owikh84 has no issue running 4x3733 1T
so

Adl has imc quality
and bdie has many variants and quality diff
the best are the 10 layer pcb ones from gskill.


----------



## grifers

TUF Gaming Plus D4 here, just flashed the BIOS 0002:

Windows boots with GEAR 1 4000 mhz 16-16-16-36 2T 1.39v, VDDQ 1.39v, System Voltage on AUTO (1.35) .... there is a small performance jump in the CPU-Z benchmark, from 796 to 812 stock 12700k.

The problem comes when restarting the system, when Im restart windows it does not finish doing it, the fans sound at maximum and it does not finish restarting. I turn off the PC with the button, I turn it on again and I get a bios message with Error and press F1.

I guess these problems are normal from what I read around here with my bad English hahah. I go back to bios 0707 and everything is perfect again, even with VDDQ in auto Like system agent (4000 mhz 16-16-16-36 2T and 1.39).


----------



## Garlicky

cstkl1 said:


> @owikh84 has no issue running 4x3733 1T
> so
> 
> Adl has imc quality
> and bdie has many variants and quality diff
> the best are the 10 layer pcb ones from gskill.


Did a bit more tweaking and 3733 flat 15 is stable, though I’m still trying to get higher frequency than 3733, seems like a wall at 3733..


----------



## cstkl1

strix d4 bios no issue dr 3733 1T

seems like need alot of work to get this further along. 
guess a hardworking dude can do it.


----------



## acoustic

I can't get Halo Infinite to run XMP without crashing to desktop. Brand new windows install. I pumped SA up to 1.41 for testing and instead of a CTD, I got a hard-lock. lol yay

I'm having a rough time figuring out this new way of memory tweaking


----------



## cstkl1

acoustic said:


> I can't get Halo Infinite to run XMP without crashing to desktop. Brand new windows install. I pumped SA up to 1.41 for testing and instead of a CTD, I got a hard-lock. lol yay
> 
> I'm having a rough time figuring out this new way of memory tweaking


hence y i had help my friend. xmp _dd/dr value are my suspect.


----------



## acoustic

cstkl1 said:


> hence y i had help my friend. xmp _dd/dr value are my suspect.


They're set relatively loose compared to what I ran them on my 10900K. The only ones that seemed "sorta" tight was _sg/dg values at 7/4, but again .. 

I had left the CPU completely stock (enforced all limits) and I think that may have been part of the issue. Going to switch it up and work on the CPU, then go to the memory.

Going to find vmin for CB23 at 5.1/3.7/3.6 and go from there.


----------



## Professor DumbDumb

Garlicky said:


> I’m using a strix-a d4, a few days ago I brought 4 sticks of sr bdie, with 2 sticks I can boot 4000 cl16 g1 stable but with 4 sticks I can barely do 3733.. Is that just the board/bios or ram? Or is it just my skills


I think there is some difficulty with the Asus boards (or some Imc’s) and dual rank (seems worse with 4 sticks sr, vs 2 stick dr). I am dead steady at 3866 on the new bios with 4x8 - trying to make c13 stable enough - but cannot get the v dimm to boot past 1.54v. Just plain will not do it with all 4 slots populated (even vddq 1.6, or any vddq tx really - defaults to 1.35 - but won’t boot anything above 1.4v in DR). The thing that makes me think it’s more a board problem is that even gear 2 will not run past 3866 if all 4 slots are occupied.

Good and stable in SR at 4000 and can run higher volts - but all 4 slots populated seems to be a hard line at 3866 for me.


----------



## Jacinto1023

Is RAM bad if it fails memtest once out of 3 runs? 

I did a full run of the free version which is 4 passes and it failed the first run then it passed the next two full runs.

I'm confused, how can it fail and then pass twice after?


----------



## darth_meh

edkieferlp said:


> read my above post, I figured issue out.
> But yeah I read them to and it seemed logical that ver3 still has issues.
> anyway, I haven't heard of Energy Efficient Ethernet (EEE), were is that option set, just so I know. I don't think its in advance tab of driver option.


----------



## RetroWave78

bscool said:


> Here is a screenshot I took from his vid. I play csgo so to me the lows are most important. *Lows* on *ddr4 66* vs *187 ddr5*. That is huge for getting a smooth experience. Or have been reading it wrong all this time? I always look at the lows in that bench vs overall FPS. Edit I havent watched the whole vid just saw that and posted
> 
> Edit 2 ddr5 is almost triple lows. That is crazy if correct.







Look at the .01% lows in Microsoft Flight Simulator. They mostly trade blows. I can't tell whether or not the DDR4 is running in Gear 2 but I presume both memory types compared here are running in Gear 2. DDR4 with tighter timings in Gear 1 would be faster here.


----------



## edkieferlp

darth_meh said:


> View attachment 2533740


Dam I am blind I missed it, it is off here too.
thanks.


----------



## edkieferlp

I think I found a bug with power limits.
I had limits set to disabled, so with just that change from default setting you get 150w for both limits on a i5 12600k.
Now I went into bios and all i did was set the core ratios to per core , for per core ratio changes (I didn't change a single ratio).
save bios and power limits are maxed 40xxw for both limits. I went back in thinking the disabled limits went back to optimized but they were set as they should of to disable.

0707 bios


----------



## shrimpmaster

I think there's a bug with 0002 bios when running with single rank b-die and 2t command rate. After restarting the pc, boards stays stuck doing memory training for whatever reason. If memory is set to 1t there's no issue.


----------



## acoustic

I do not understand how to tweak RTL on ASUS 

The BIOS is very confusing to me. I'm not bashing, but the MSI Z490 was very neat and clear. With the Z690 TUF, there is a lot going on here lol.. super confused


----------



## chispy

New article by w1zzard from TPU , he test only the E cores of alder lake cpus with the P cores disable. His conclussion and findings are the E cores perform roughly equal to Skylake performance , not bad after all for such tiny package cluster of E cores  .









Intel Core i9-12900K E-Cores Only Performance Review


With Alder Lake, Intel is betting big on hybrid CPU core configurations. The Core i9-12900K has eight P(erformance) cores and eight E(fficient) cores. We were curious and tested the processor running the E-Cores only to see how well they perform against architectures like Zen 2, Zen 3, Skylake...




www.techpowerup.com





I was testing overclocking on my E cores of the 12700k using Asus Strix D4 and max i could get them to run was 45 at 46 i was getting bsod no matter volts , used my trusty dual compressor SS at -55c


----------



## geriatricpollywog

RetroWave78 said:


> Look at the .01% lows in Microsoft Flight Simulator. They mostly trade blows. I can't tell whether or not the DDR4 is running in Gear 2 but I presume both memory types compared here are running in Gear 2. DDR4 with tighter timings in Gear 1 would be faster here.


Unless you see a person talking to the camera holding the hardware in their hands, it’s probably fake.


----------



## RetroWave78

0451 said:


> Unless you see a person talking to the camera holding the hardware in their hands, it’s probably fake.


Gamers Nexus and Optimum Tech and every other reputable tech tuber worth mentioning have shown the same results. In fact Steve states that their tuned DDR4 @ 3600 MHz in Gear 1 is faster than Corsair's Dominator Platinum DDR5 @ 5200 MHz in Gear 2 and that the problem is that DDR5 cannot run in Gear 2 at the moment, although I could be mistaken. 

DDR4 in gear 1 is faster because it has much lower latency than DDR5 in Gear 2 and that having lower latency helps in CPU and Memory bound scenarios more than raw speed (Gear 2 means that 5200 MHz DDR5 is actually running at 2600 MHz at the memory controller). 











DDR5 is much faster in productivity tasks however for those who intend to have a work and gaming PC. If you don't do video editing or other memory intensive workload's then DDR5 doesn't currently provide a performance benefit over DDR4. 

I don't know why DDR5 is incapable of running in Gear 1 but this is a main part of the problem.


----------



## RetroWave78

Kind of relevant example is M.2 PCI-E 4.0 vs 3.0 storage in gaming. We are talking about double the bandwidth and read speed but load times are like 1-3 seconds faster on average. Frame Chasers, as much as he's deservingly derided, concludes this in his DDR4 vs DDR5 video, that it doesn't matter if you run DDR5 at 8GHz, given the current speed difference, accounting for latency, between DDR4 and DDR5 isn't correlating with a like amount of performance difference and therefore the limiting factor is still most likely the CPU. As faster CPU's come along, DDR5 may become more relevant.

Edit: 

It's also been pointed out that memory speed with current memory controller quality on all z690 DDR5 motherboards that speed beyond 6GHz is not feasible (they are running DDR5 at the ragged edge, many users are reporting having to underclock their DDR5 from 5200 to 4800 MHz to boot) so a motherboard and memory upgrade is in the works no matter if you choose DDR4 or DDR5 at the moment. 

Want a board to work with that 8000 MHz memory? You will need to upgrade to Z790 for the better memory controller. 

This information isn't to start a pissing contest, it's to indicate to enthusiasts that they can put together a comparably performing Alder Lake rig right now with DDR4 that is amply available.


----------



## Arni90

RetroWave78 said:


> Gamers Nexus and Optimum Tech and every other reputable tech tuber worth mentioning have shown the same results. In fact Steve states that their tuned DDR4 @ 3600 MHz in Gear 1 is faster than Corsair's Dominator Platinum DDR5 @ 5200 MHz in Gear 2 and that the problem is that DDR5 cannot run in Gear 2 at the moment, although I could be mistaken.
> 
> DDR4 in gear 1 is faster because it has much lower latency than DDR5 in Gear 2 and that having lower latency helps in CPU and Memory bound scenarios more than raw speed (Gear 2 means that 5200 MHz DDR5 is actually running at 2600 MHz at the memory controller).
> 
> I don't know why DDR5 is incapable of running in Gear 1 but this is a main part of the problem.


Comparing tuned DDR4 to JEDEC DDR5 is somewhat misleading you know...

DDR4 is faster than DDR5 at the moment because of Samsung 8Gb B-die. However, when we get a DDR5 IC where all three primary timings scale with voltage, we will see DDR5 beat DDR4 in every use case.

Also of note, the only way to get truly good DDR4 performance on Alder Lake is with single rank B-die, that means *16GB of RAM*. Unless motherboard vendors find a way to make dual rank B-die run fast in gear 1.

As for DDR5 being unable to run in gear 1, that's probably a limitation of the system agent. It seems like Alder Lake, much like Rocket Lake, has a limit to how fast the IMC can run around 2000 MHz. If you were to limit DDR5 to gear 1, that would mean a hard-limit roughly around DDR5-4000


----------



## D-EJ915

Well in a fun turn of events I plugged my keyboard and mouse into the blue ports on the apex for the first time and none of them work! Nice! Time to get a replacement from newegg, woo.


----------



## RetroWave78

Arni90 said:


> Comparing tuned DDR4 to JEDEC DDR5 is somewhat misleading you know...
> 
> DDR4 is faster than DDR5 at the moment because of Samsung 8Gb B-die. However, when we get a DDR5 IC where all three primary timings scale with voltage, we will see DDR5 beat DDR4 in every use case.
> 
> Also of note, the only way to get truly good DDR4 performance on Alder Lake is with single rank B-die, that means *16GB of RAM*. Unless motherboard vendors find a way to make dual rank B-die run fast in gear 1.
> 
> As for DDR5 being unable to run in gear 1, that's probably a limitation of the system agent. It seems like Alder Lake, much like Rocket Lake, has a limit to how fast the IMC can run around 2000 MHz. If you were to limit DDR5 to gear 1, that would mean a hard-limit roughly around DDR5-4000


So 4x8 SR is DR correct? 

I suppose I can run just two of these: F4-4000C15Q-32GTRS-G.SKILL International Enterprise Co., Ltd. (gskill.com) (4000MHz CL15-16-16-36) B-Die with a Sept 2020 manufacture date, arrives Friday, going into Strix-A D4 on 0802 (or I may try 0707 if I can get more reports as to which BIOS runs DR better). 

As for running DDR5 in Gear 1, Optimum Tech couldn't even get it to run reducing the speed down to 1300 MHz: 






Whereas he managed to get DDR4 to run at 4000 MHz Gear 1. 




D-EJ915 said:


> Well in a fun turn of events I plugged my keyboard and mouse into the blue ports on the apex for the first time and none of them work! Nice! Time to get a replacement from newegg, woo.


Have you tried the red ports. Try all the ports. Strix-A D4 owners are complaining about the same issue.


----------



## D-EJ915

RetroWave78 said:


> Have you tried the red ports. Try all the ports. Strix-A D4 owners are complaining about the same issue.


All of the ports work except the 4 blue 3.2 Gen 1 ports. I've been using the board since I got it, I just happened to plug my kb and mouse into the blue ones today.


----------



## RetroWave78

D-EJ915 said:


> All of the ports work except the 4 blue 3.2 Gen 1 ports. I've been using the board since I got it, I just happened to plug my kb and mouse into the blue ones today.


Are you talking about while booting like trying to get into BIOS or does the problem persist into Windows as well?


----------



## D-EJ915

RetroWave78 said:


> Are you talking about while booting like trying to get into BIOS or does the problem persist into Windows as well?


don't work anywhere, doesn't power any devices


----------



## Exilon

RetroWave78 said:


> So 4x8 SR is DR correct?
> 
> I suppose I can run just two of these: F4-4000C15Q-32GTRS-G.SKILL International Enterprise Co., Ltd. (gskill.com) (4000MHz CL15-16-16-36) B-Die with a Sept 2020 manufacture date, arrives Friday, going into Strix-A D4 on 0802 (or I may try 0707 if I can get more reports as to which BIOS runs DR better).
> 
> As for running DDR5 in Gear 1, Optimum Tech couldn't even get it to run reducing the speed down to 1300 MHz:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Whereas he managed to get DDR4 to run at 4000 MHz Gear 1.


16GB B-die sticks are dual sided which in my experience are easier to run than four single-sided sticks on Z690.

IMO a few 100 MHz of difference isn't worth going to single rank other than for AIDA pure RW benchmarks and idle latency. 4x SR B-die sticks have huge boosts in mixed RW bandwidth with tuned tertiaries over 2x SR B-die. Plus you get 32GB of memory.


----------



## Jacinto1023

At the moment i can only use one of my RAM sticks because i get BSOD and Memtest errors with the other stick whether its alone or with both sticks in.

Can voltage be an issue? or is it just faulty RAM?

Like if i up the voltage you think i'll be able to run both sticks? or should i just RMA it to Corsair?

Its the Corsair DDR5 5200 Vengeance 32GB Kit


----------



## RetroWave78

Exilon said:


> 16GB B-die sticks are dual sided which in my experience are easier to run than four single-sided sticks on Z690.
> 
> IMO a few 100 MHz of difference isn't worth going to single rank other than for AIDA pure RW benchmarks and idle latency. 4x SR B-die sticks have huge boosts in mixed RW bandwidth with tuned tertiaries over 2x SR B-die. Plus you get 32GB of memory.


I'm confused by your comment, are you recommending I shoot for 4x8 or be content with 2x8? Thanks.


----------



## darth_meh

Jacinto1023 said:


> At the moment i can only use one of my RAM sticks because i get BSOD and Memtest errors with the other stick whether its alone or with both sticks in.
> 
> Can voltage be an issue? or is it just faulty RAM?
> 
> Like if i up the voltage you think i'll be able to run both sticks? or should i just RMA it to Corsair?
> 
> Its the Corsair DDR5 5200 Vengeance 32GB Kit
> 
> 
> View attachment 2533823


If it was me, I would RMA. Sorry.


----------



## Jacinto1023

darth_meh said:


> If it was me, I would RMA. Sorry.


Yeah i put in a ticket but i wonder how long it will take. Do companies keep stock for RMAs?


----------



## RetroWave78

Jacinto1023 said:


> Yeah i put in a ticket but i wonder how long it will take. Do companies keep stock for RMAs?


Good luck getting replacement DDR5. I would seriously consider picking up a DDR4 board and memory. For all you know the problem could be with the board, this way you rule everything out. Also, stupid question but was the memory in question on the QVL? Is there a new BIOS? Have you tried the sticks in different slots? Have you tried increasing voltage? Is the memory in Gear 1 and not Gear 2 (see above)?


----------



## RetroWave78

D-EJ915 said:


> don't work anywhere, doesn't power any devices


Wow, that is odd, are there USB 3.2 drivers that need to be installed? If you've ruled everything out then it has to be the motherboard.


----------



## D-EJ915

RetroWave78 said:


> Wow, that is odd, are there USB 3.2 drivers that need to be installed? If you've ruled everything out then it has to be the motherboard.


no, it has nothing to do with drivers, it is not even powering devices.


----------



## Falkentyne

D-EJ915 said:


> no, it has nothing to do with drivers, it is not even powering devices.


Can you disable those USB ports in your BIOS, save, then re-enable them and see if they start working?
This shouldn't have to even be done but it's a last ditch attempt before you RMA.
An entire bank of red USB ports not working is a defect I've never seen before (then again I don't exactly read forums or reddit just looking for hardware defects specifically!)


----------



## Jacinto1023

RetroWave78 said:


> Good luck getting replacement DDR5. I would seriously consider picking up a DDR4 board and memory. For all you know the problem could be with the board, this way you rule everything out. Also, stupid question but was the memory in question on the QVL? Is there a new BIOS? Have you tried the sticks in different slots? Have you tried increasing voltage? Is the memory in Gear 1 and not Gear 2 (see above)?



I'm on the latest 0802 Bios that was posted here and yes the ram is on the QVL. 

Stick A works in every slot
Stick B fails in every slot

Both Sticks fail in 1,3 and 2,4

I'm currently only using Stick A in slot 1 and no issues. Stick B is no good. 

I have not tried Gear 1 or Gear 2. I will try that. I did up voltages but it didn't help.


----------



## RetroWave78

Jacinto1023 said:


> I'm on the latest 0802 Bios that was posted here and yes the ram is on the QVL.
> 
> Stick A works in every slot
> Stick B fails in every slot
> 
> Both Sticks fail in 1,3 and 2,4
> 
> I'm currently only using Stick A in slot 1 and no issues. Stick B is no good.
> 
> I have not tried Gear 1 or Gear 2. I will try that. I did up voltages but it didn't help.


You're probably already in Gear 2 if one of the sticks is running at 4800 MHz but I could be mistaken. You should ensure you're in Gear 2.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

Does anybody know the maximum switching frequency on the Strix DDR4?


----------



## Professor DumbDumb

0451 said:


> Does anybody know the maximum switching frequency on the Strix DDR4?


VRM max is 500


----------



## geriatricpollywog

Professor DumbDumb said:


> VRM max is 500


Thx, same as Tuf then. Is there any drawback to setting to max other than VRM heat?


----------



## Professor DumbDumb

0451 said:


> Thx, same as Tuf then. Is there any drawback to setting to max other than VRM heat?


No real downside as far as I'm aware. Has helped stabilize higher clocks for me on other boards - so I typically turn it to max (might not be the most efficient for some VRM's - but the boards I've used have all benefited).


----------



## stn1

Again, Tuned D4 CJR = Tuned D5 Micron in games with the exception of Watch Dogs Legion, which kills it with DDR5. If you already don't have b-die, there's no point of buying in on a D4 kit as Hynix/Samsung D5 is gonna destroy it, unless you're zshrooms. Also, video encoding is brutal with DDR5, it literally doubles the speed of ffmpeg encoding vs ddr4.


----------



## Jacinto1023

Is XMP not working a DDR5 or bios issue?


----------



## Siablo

TUF works with dignity!
TUF D4 Gear1 Samsung B-die 2*16









TUF D4 Gear2 Micron B-die 2*16


----------



## NO22222

Why is there a gap in the performance of my memory? Is it a problem with my memory or the reason why the motherboard is not optimized?


----------



## geriatricpollywog

NO22222 said:


> View attachment 2533831
> Why is there a gap in the performance of my memory? Is it a problem with my memory or the reason why the motherboard is not optimized?


Why is your CPU running at 2.2 ghz?


----------



## owikh84

cstkl1 said:


> @owikh84 has no issue running 4x3733 1T
> so
> 
> Adl has imc quality
> and bdie has many variants and quality diff
> the best are the 10 layer pcb ones from gskill.


My RAM is 2x8GB Royal Elite 3600 CL14 (SR B-die).
It performs better with BIOS 0002 than 0707 as below:

4000 16-16-16-36-1T Gear1 with set vdimm 1.4125v, SA and vddq at 1.35v
4000 15-16-16-36-1T Gear1 with set vdimm 1.475v, SA and vddq at 1.40v

With 4x8GB max I could overclock is 3733 14-14-14-34-1T Gear1 with set vdimm 1.5v, SA vddq auto (~1.35v)


----------



## NO22222

0451 said:


> Why is your CPU running at 2.2 ghz?


Because my power supply is a balanced option, the actual 4.7G, I have reduced my timing, these can not improve my read and write latency, my memory is 16GBX2


----------



## Exilon

RetroWave78 said:


> I'm confused by your comment, are you recommending I shoot for 4x8 or be content with 2x8? Thanks.


4x8 so you have two ranks. Having two ranks boosts effective bandwidth in read-write operations significantly. You can always bench it and see if your application benefits more from higher clock SR or DR.


----------



## cstkl1

Exilon said:


> 4x8 so you have two ranks. Having two ranks boosts effective bandwidth in read-write operations significantly. You can always bench it and see if your application benefits more from higher clock SR or DR.


not true in rkl, wont be true here. what counts is the 1T


----------



## Silent Scone

RetroWave78 said:


> Edit:
> 
> It's also been pointed out that memory speed with current memory controller quality on all z690 DDR5 motherboards that speed beyond 6GHz is not feasible (they are running DDR5 at the ragged edge, many users are reporting having to underclock their DDR5 from 5200 to 4800 MHz to boot) so a motherboard and memory upgrade is in the works no matter if you choose DDR4 or DDR5 at the moment.
> 
> Want a board to work with that 8000 MHz memory? You will need to upgrade to Z790 for the better memory controller.
> 
> This information isn't to start a pissing contest, it's to indicate to enthusiasts that they can put together a comparably performing Alder Lake rig right now with DDR4 that is amply available.


Hello,

I'm not sure where that information came from but that isn't my experience at all.

In fact I've overclocked the lacklustre 4800C38 Kingston Fury bin to 5400C34 no problem. Some boards are validated up to 6666. If this wasn't a possibility on at least some CPU samples unconditionally, then this wouldn't be the case. The problem right now is lack of availability and good memory bins.


----------



## Exilon

cstkl1 said:


> not true in rkl, wont be true here. what counts is the 1T


I ripped out two of my sticks to compare in MLC

Read-only 57GB/s -> 57GB/s (0%)
3R1W 61GB/s -> 65GB/s (6.5%)
2R1W 65GB/s -> 71GB/s (9.2%)
1R1W 58GB/s -> 67GB/s (15.5%)
S-triad like 52GB/s -> 54GB/s (3.8%)

SR B-die can pass this, sure, but then he's stuck at 16GB of memory.


----------



## cstkl1

Exilon said:


> I ripped out two of my sticks to compare in MLC
> 
> Read-only 57GB/s -> 57GB/s (0%)
> 3R1W 61GB/s -> 65GB/s (6.5%)
> 2R1W 65GB/s -> 71GB/s (9.2%)
> 1R1W 58GB/s -> 67GB/s (15.5%)
> S-triad like 52GB/s -> 54GB/s (3.8%)
> 
> SR B-die can pass this, sure, but then he's stuck at 16GB of memory.


mlc??
4x3733c14 1T better than 4k dr 2t
sr 4300 1t better than 4x3733c14 1t

1T gear 1 .. thats the only way ddr4 can compete with ddr5. ddr4 hits the imc limit. ddr5 hits the current ram chipset limit.
all bets are on ddr5.


----------



## shamino1978

adna said:


> ROG-STRIX-Z690-F-GAMING-WIFI please.











ROG-STRIX-Z690-F-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0802.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com


----------



## safedisk

*Samsung B-DIE SR / DR MEMORY OC improvement*

ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4 BETA BIOS 0003

TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS D4 BETA BIOS 0003

TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS D4 WIFI BETA BIOS 0003


8G X2 B-DIE 1T 15-14-14-28 4333 AIDA64 Latency 40.4ns
16G X2 B-DIE 2T 14-15-14-28 4000 HCI Run


----------



## satinghostrider

Great work on DDR4!

I'm wondering if my Hynix that is running at 4800C19 on my Z590 Apex would be able to pull off on the Strix Z690 D4 boards as well. Probably might need more SA/IO given its a 4 dimm board but Gear 2 doesn't really need much of that to start with. 

Getting kind of sick of the DDR5 availability and toying with the idea to get these DDR4 version instead.


----------



## owikh84

Just tested the new 0003 BIOS and I can say that it's an optimized 0002 with ability to boot at 4000 2T Gear1 with DR. However, maybe it's my RAM kits or user problem, I'm still not able to boot DR at 4133 2T and SR at 4133 1T.

My best OC so far with 0003 BIOS as below:
DR 2x16GB 4000 14-16-16-36-2T Gear1 @ 1.600v, SA 1.40v, VDDQ Auto (same as 0707)
SR 2x8GB 4000 15-16-16-36-1T [email protected] 1.500v, SA 1.40v, VDDQ 1.40v (same as 0707 and 0002)
SR 4x8GB 3733 14-14-14-34-1T Gear1 @ 1.500v, SA 1.35v, VDDQ 1.35v (same as 0707 and 0002)

Both DR (F4-4000C17D-32GTRSB) and SR (F4-3600C14D-16GTES) 2 sticks just don't want to boot above 4000 no matter how much efforts I have put. Also, 4x8GB 3800-3866 CL14 and CL16 can't boot even pumped as high as 1.60v.


----------



## cstkl1

owikh84 said:


> Just tested the new 0003 BIOS and I can say that it's an optimized 0002 with ability to boot at 4000 2T Gear1 with DR. However, maybe it's my RAM kits or user problem, I'm still not able to boot DR at 4133 2T and SR at 4133 1T.
> 
> My best OC so far with 0003 BIOS as below:
> DR 2x16GB 4000 14-16-16-36-2T Gear1 @ 1.600v, SA 1.40v, VDDQ Auto (same as 0707)
> SR 2x8GB 4000 15-16-16-36-1T [email protected] 1.500v, SA 1.40v, VDDQ 1.40v (same as 0707 and 0002)
> SR 4x8GB 3733 14-14-14-34-1T Gear1 @ 1.500v, SA 1.35v, VDDQ 1.35v (same as 0707 and 0002)
> 
> Both DR (F4-4000C17D-32GTRSB) and SR (F4-3600C14D-16GTES) 2 sticks just don't want to boot above 4000 no matter how much efforts I have put. Also, 4x8GB 3800-3866 CL14 and CL16 can't boot even pumped as high as 1.60v.


u belum mandi bunga bro...

hmm pretty confident 4133 dr can because it didnt bsod before but hmm abit lazy lol. calvin should stick to 3866 the sa/mc so low 1.25...
later the fella really bring his whole rig to my house asking oc 4133.. he already saw the diff ram tuning vs oc cpu fps diff.

might need my dr/sr rams back from ben


----------



## cstkl1

i womder.. hmm









can these clock better.. 2x8gb hynix..


----------



## Professor DumbDumb

0003 bios is an improvement with DR 4x8gb over 0002. Was able to drop 100mv off of vccsa and bump up to 3900mt (closer to in line with SR volts) now:

DR 4x8gb - vccsa1.17v, vddq tx 1.35, Vdimm1.54, [email protected],c14,14,14,26,T2,260, tight seconds/thirds. Can boot into windows at 4000 and basic tests with the same timings. Will not boot with looser timings for some reason, (even xmp 4000c14,15,15,35) - can't figure that one out. Training algorithms or rtl stuff with 4 dimms.

Still cannot raise Vdimm to >1.54 (I'm not sure there isn't some kind of voltage protection or power protection in place with 4 dimms). Will not post despite Vddq tx changes. Fine in SR.

SR is also a bit better but havn't jumped into that very deeply yet.


----------



## grifers

Hi. 0003 tested. How about these values for 24/7? are safe?. Pretty stable with memtest:




Stock 12700k. Thanks.


----------



## NO22222

The new BIOS 0003 is very bad for me. The original 4100 C15 1.55V, now I can’t even determine the stable value


----------



## skullbringer

is there a working version for z690 of turbo vcore already, that doesn't freeze the system?


----------



## Exilon

owikh84 said:


> SR 4x8GB 3733 14-14-14-34-1T Gear1 @ 1.500v, SA 1.35v, VDDQ 1.35v (same as 0707 and 0002)


Similar result on 4x8GB B-die on 0003, although I think it's partially b/c these sticks. They were already binned for [email protected] as a 2x8GB kit to begin with.


----------



## Jacinto1023

Every time i try to use XMP i get crashes, even by increasing voltages. Is this an issue with Windows 11 or Z690 boards?


----------



## Neander

As everyone is showing DDR4 here some DDR5 amateur action with G.Skill 5600 Samsungs😅 Wasn't able to get higher clocks stable so I just went on with timings only. It's probably not the limit just the point I last stopped. Maybe I test a bit more at the weekend. Tested with Karhu on 5000%


----------



## Agent-A01

Can someone with a tuf(maybe strix-a applies) with a 4000 2x16GB b-die kit test booting on frequencies of 3867/3900/4000 with Gear 1?

Even with the new bios, I cannot boot those frequencies no matter what. Post loop.

3800 works fine. 4100-4133 also will post fine with higher SA voltage. But for whatever reason there's a weird hole between 3800 and 4100.

Can't boot XMP 4000 CL17 but 3800 CL13 and 4100-4133 works at gear 1


----------



## Nizzen

Neander said:


> As everyone is showing DDR4 here some DDR5 amateur action with G.Skill 5600 Samsungs😅 Wasn't able to get higher clocks stable so I just went on with timings only. It's probably not the limit just the point I last stopped. Maybe I test a bit more at the weekend. Tested with Karhu on 5000%
> 
> View attachment 2533926


Is G.skill 5600 micron  Looks like Micron speeds...


----------



## acoustic

Agent-A01 said:


> Can someone with a tuf(maybe strix-a applies) with a 4000 2x16GB b-die kit test booting on frequencies of 3867/3900/4000 with Gear 1?
> 
> Even with the new bios, I cannot boot those frequencies no matter what. Post loop.
> 
> 3800 works fine. 4100-4133 also will post fine with higher SA voltage. But for whatever reason there's a weird hole between 3800 and 4100.
> 
> Can't boot XMP 4000 CL17 but 3800 CL13 and 4100-4133 works at gear 1


I can boot at 4000CL15 GR1 on all BIOS. The new 0003 seems to have reduced my SA requirement significantly.. will know for sure when I get home, if Halo Infinite is still running.

On the TUF


----------



## Agent-A01

acoustic said:


> I can boot at 4000CL15 GR1 on all BIOS. The new 0003 seems to have reduced my SA requirement significantly.. will know for sure when I get home, if Halo Infinite is still running.
> 
> On the TUF


You have 2x16GB? I thought you had a 4x8GB kit which may act differently


----------



## Agent-A01

cstkl1 said:


> mlc??
> 4x3733c14 1T better than 4k dr 2t
> sr 4300 1t better than 4x3733c14 1t
> 
> 1T gear 1 .. thats the only way ddr4 can compete with ddr5. ddr4 hits the imc limit. ddr5 hits the current ram chipset limit.
> all bets are on ddr5.


What is required to stabilize 1T? Just more SA?
I tried 1T just for fun and it booted no problem at 3733 but BSOD 0xD1 when loading windows.


----------



## acoustic

Agent-A01 said:


> You have 2x16GB? I thought you had a 4x8GB kit which may act differently


Nope, I'm 2x16 DR


----------



## Garlicky

Anyone with a d4 board and 0003 bios and 4x8 that can do more than 3733? I have 4 sticks of bdie and cant boot above 3733


----------



## geriatricpollywog

safedisk said:


> View attachment 2533855
> 
> 
> View attachment 2533856
> 
> 
> 
> *Samsung B-DIE SR / DR MEMORY OC improvement*
> 
> ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4 BETA BIOS 0003
> 
> TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS D4 BETA BIOS 0003
> 
> TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS D4 WIFI BETA BIOS 0003
> 
> 
> 8G X2 B-DIE 1T 15-14-14-28 4333 AIDA64 Latency 40.4ns
> 16G X2 B-DIE 2T 14-15-14-28 4000 HCI Run


I was excited to try bios 0003, but now I can't post above 3733 regardless of my timings. On bios 0002 and earlier, 4100 14-15-15-28 2T was stable.

TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS D4 WIFI
F4-4000C14D-32GTEG


----------



## Professor DumbDumb

Garlicky said:


> Anyone with a d4 board and 0003 bios and 4x8 that can do more than 3733? I have 4 sticks of bdie and cant boot above 3733


I have 2 separate sets of 4x8gb that run 3900c14 at vccsa 1.17 - can boot 4000 but its not stable


----------



## cstkl1

Professor DumbDumb said:


> I have 2 separate sets of 4x8gb that run 3900c14 at vccsa 1.17 - can boot 4000 but its not stable


i would aim for 1T rather than high clock 2T. u can test sottr


----------



## Sarzinski

Very odd behavior with 0003 for me.
My 4000 setting works and requires less SA to function, but it doesn't survive a restart. It didn't have this issue on 0707.

I've never seen something like this. Every time I apply the setting in BIOS, it boots into Windows and survives mem test etc. It's stable.

I hit restart, it bootloops. I turn off the PC, restart again, bootloops. I hit clear CMOS, apply the exact same settings again, boots every single time.

It NEVER (not once) boots after hitting restart in Windows or after turning off the PC, but it ALWAYS (every single try) boots after applying the settings in BIOS. I've tried this at least 7 times and it's 100% reproducible for me.


----------



## shamino1978

Sarzinski said:


> Very odd behavior with 0003 for me.
> My 4000 setting works and requires less SA to function, but it doesn't survive a restart. It didn't have this issue on 0707.
> 
> I've never seen something like this. Every time I apply the setting in BIOS, it boots into Windows and survives mem test etc. It's stable.
> 
> I hit restart, it bootloops. I turn off the PC, restart again, bootloops. I hit clear CMOS, apply the exact same settings again, boots every single time.
> 
> It NEVER (not once) boots after hitting restart in Windows or after turning off the PC, but it ALWAYS (every single try) boots after applying the settings in BIOS. I've tried this at least 7 times and it's 100% reproducible for me.


You can get it to retrain everytime by disabling mrc fast boot


----------



## Neander

Nizzen said:


> Is G.skill 5600 micron  Looks like Micron speeds...


It's Samsung and I'm still happy with the results


----------



## GtiJason

0451 said:


> I was excited to try bios 0003, but now I can't post above 3733 regardless of my timings. On bios 0002 and earlier, 4100 14-15-15-28 2T was stable.
> 
> TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS D4 WIFI
> F4-4000C14D-32GTEG


Welcome to the club, I posted this over on the Overclocking ADL thread
"I'm having the exact opposite happening to me on 0003. I'm 12 hours in and I'm pretty sure I just went through each and every actually binned (since z370, A2 pcb, DR and SR) B Die I own.
The only kit I have had any luck with is the one good non G.Skill kit I have, the SR 4000c14-15 @ 1.55v OLOY RGB Blade bios 0707. All of my other kits are G.Skill and all are fairly high xmp bins, all of which easily do 4800c14-13, 5066c15 and 4220c12-11 (SR) and 3900c12-11-18-180-1T - 4k+ Cold IMC MAX on RKL (DR)
I can't even boot xmp on Gear auto,1,2 SR 4000c15, 4133c17, 4400c16, 4600c19, 4800c17 or DR 4000c16-19, 4266c17-18 and 4400c17-18 DR on this new bios
Must be an error by the guy behid the keyboard thing or G.Skill thing. Obviously I have flashed and reflashed the bios and before you go and say the memory kits are degraded I can promise you they are not. Even my first kit of 3600c16 Nov 2015 A0 RJ V BDie still does 4133c12 on MOCF at 1.895v 1.25v SA 1.3v IO, exact same as the day I figured it out in 2016
the last 2 hours I went to chilled water 13-14C H2O temps to help the IMC out and no change
I have LN2 waiting but it is intended for Team Cup and I only have 25L or so
Not complaining, just sharing my exp. but my board may have an issue. It takes ungodly long to post or boot no matter what "

I just snapped a crappy pic of the ddr4 mess I made


----------



## geriatricpollywog

@GtiJason 
Odd, my TUF either boots very quickly if the settings are good, or I need to wait ~30 seconds for safe mode to kick in. I have never encountered a long boot that eventually applies my overclock like on previous MSI and AsRock boards.

#AsusProblems

My theory is that not all boards of the same SKU have the same hardware and even the unpaid interns writing the bios are unaware.


----------



## Kenji

Anyone using the Arctic Liquid Freezer II with the LGA1200 bracket on the mITX strix? How does it contact and what are your temps like?


----------



## GtiJason

0451 said:


> @GtiJason
> Odd, my TUF either boots very quickly if the settings are good, or I need to wait ~30 seconds for safe mode to kick in. I have never encountered a long boot that eventually applies my overclock like on previous MSI and AsRock boards.
> #AsusProblems
> My theory is that not all boards of the same SKU have the same hardware and even the unpaid interns writing the bios are unaware.


Yeah, it's far worse than the original slow B Die training. I'll make a vid of it sometime
In more interesting news I swapped out the mems yet again, this time for a kit I only bought to compete in the Corsair HWBot DDR4 Farewell Comp
So 1 of 1, not binned and just an average XMP. Vengeance RGB PRO 2x8gb 3600c14-16-16-36 @ 1.45v.
Flashed the BIOS back to 0707 made the bios blue with an anime wifu, and set xmp 100:133 Gear 1 and manually set DRAM V to 1.45. Auto SA + VDDQ. Disabled boot drive to jump back in bios
raised vdimm slightly and set 3733, and again back to bios set 3866. SA stayed at 1.32v ish the whole time
Finally I set 4000 and manually set 1.352v SA and booted to OS. It looked like this


Spoiler: NEW BLUE BIOS

















Spoiler: In W11 OS


----------



## safedisk

*ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4 Beta BIOS 0003*

16G X2 DR BDIE 4133 15-15-15-28 2T HCI 100% PASS

MY SETTING PROFILE





DR_BDIE_4133.7z







drive.google.com


----------



## acoustic

safedisk said:


> View attachment 2533984
> 
> 
> *ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4 Beta BIOS 0003*
> 
> 16G X2 DR BDIE 4133 15-15-15-28 2T HCI 100% PASS
> 
> MY SETTING PROFILE
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DR_BDIE_4133.7z
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


Nice setting share! I'm on an TUF so can't utilize, but any STRIX users it could be helpful.


----------



## GtiJason

acoustic said:


> Nice setting share! I'm on an TUF so can't utilize, but any STRIX users it could be helpful.


I'll post the text file, that should help you out


----------



## acoustic

GtiJason said:


> I'll post the text file, that should help you out


That would be awesome! Much appreciated


----------



## cstkl1

hmmm. same as 0707.


----------



## Kenji

Kenji said:


> Anyone using the Arctic Liquid Freezer II with the LGA1200 bracket on the mITX strix? How does it contact and what are your temps like?


@Falkentyne I see you mentioned earlier in the thread that a SecureFirm2 would work? Do you happen to have a link to which one? The standard LGA1200 one or the new LGA1700 because I actually have access to purchase these in my country. This the one? 









Buy Noctua NM-i17xx-MP78 Mounting Kit for Intel Socket LGA 1700 | Cooling | Scorptec Computers


Noctua NM-i17xx-MP78 Mounting Kit for Intel Socket LGA 1700, for Noctua CPU Coolers with 78mm Mounting Pitch at Scorptec.com.au, the online Gaming PC, server computer and technology experts. Fast delivery to Australia.




www.scorptec.com.au


----------



## cstkl1

GtiJason said:


> I'll post the text file, that should help you out


wont work on tuf.. optimem 3
diff trace layout.

u need a cpu imc that can boot 4133 auto first.


----------



## cstkl1

xmp ddr4

theres still something off. 1 out of 10 times will bsod

i seen ppl reporting same issue with ddr5 on all aib boards..thid much more frequent though

i suspect issue with voltages sa/mci/txvddq with jdec third timings which xmp are following or micron are flawed. no issue so far on hynix/samsung ddr5

rumour has it theres new micron ddr5 chipset coming soon.


----------



## Agent-A01

0451 said:


> I was excited to try bios 0003, but now I can't post above 3733 regardless of my timings. On bios 0002 and earlier, 4100 14-15-15-28 2T was stable.
> 
> TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS D4 WIFI
> F4-4000C14D-32GTEG


Interesting, 12700K too?

I've only tried the 801 bios which many have reported that they cannot boot high clocks and now you're reporting it for 0003.

I didn't try 0002 but I do know 0003 is giving me the same issues as 0801.
Cannot post >3800 or <4100 or so I do don't know what's going on.


----------



## GtiJason

acoustic said:


> Nice setting share! I'm on an TUF so can't utilize, but any STRIX users it could be helpful.


As I promised
* I'd advise anyone who's having issues, take a look at Safedisks memory training algorithms.

* Also Mode 133:100 is usually much easier to boot so if you are stuck at 3800, 4100 or even 4000 manually set it just above? Gear1/2 setting

*Tertiaries: Does not matter how good your sticks are, you will not come close to RKL/CML/CFL/ any previous platform. On several terts I am about 3 ticks higher than on the same sticks used with RocketLake. 5 and 6's are now 7's and 8's on DR, nothing you can do

* Finally, for me at least. I had to CRANK UP the voltages with DR. On SR at say 4000 1.35v SA and VDDQ are normal. On all my DR kits (with 12700kf) I need North of 1.45 and 1.5v. So far I'm stable with what I need to be. PYPrime, Y Cruncher, Super Pi, H265 4k, CBR11.5/15/20/23, 3dMark(s) etc


----------



## Jscs1992

safedisk said:


> View attachment 2533984
> 
> 
> *ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4 Beta BIOS 0003*
> 
> 16G X2 DR BDIE 4133 15-15-15-28 2T HCI 100% PASS
> 
> MY SETTING PROFILE
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DR_BDIE_4133.7z
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


How do i load this profile into my strix bios ?


----------



## cstkl1

GtiJason said:


> As I promised
> * I'd advise anyone who's having issues, take a look at Safedisks memory training algorithms.
> 
> * Also Mode 133:100 is usually much easier to boot so if you are stuck at 3800, 4100 or even 4000 manually set it just above? Gear1/2 setting
> 
> *Tertiaries: Does not matter how good your sticks are, you will not come close to RKL/CML/CFL/ any previous platform. On several terts I am about 3 ticks higher than on the same sticks used with RocketLake. 5 and 6's are now 7's and 8's on DR, nothing you can do
> 
> * Finally, for me at least. I had to CRANK UP the voltages with DR. On SR at say 4000 1.35v SA and VDDQ are normal. On all my DR kits (with 12700kf) I need North of 1.45 and 1.5v. So far I'm stable with what I need to be. PYPrime, Y Cruncher, Super Pi, H265 4k, CBR11.5/15/20/23, 3dMark(s) etc


your welcome


----------



## GtiJason

Jscs1992 said:


> How do i load this profile into my strix bios ?


Extract "DR BDIE 4133.7z" Right click/ extract to (new folder) DR BDIE 4133
You will see a file named DR BDIE4133.CMO, copy this to a usb flash drive (preferably usb 2.0)
Plug drive into your Z690 A strix D4
Power up this rig, hit Delete when you see Asus splash screen to enter bios
hit right arrow on keyboard until you get to "TOOLS" Tab, click enter
-TO LOAD .CMO bios File-
Enter "User Profile"
scroll to very bottom to load file from USB drive
navigate to DR BDie 4133.CMO file

-FOR FLASH-
select "ASUS EZ FLASH3 Utility" press enter
use arrow keys to navigate to Strix A D4 0003.CAP file on flash drive
click enter to say yes to read this file
click yes to say you backed up some MEI security TMP2.0 stuff (Im on W11 Ghost Specture using Rufus TPM bypass so I do nothing lol, just say yes
click on yes to confirm flash
hit enter when 1st part says complete
let 2nd part flash, may be a black screen
might even be a 3rd part to update MEI
just let it go until your back in the bios or in the OS (PS disconnect boot drive or disable) to make sure you end uop back in bios
If you want to be extra safe


----------



## geriatricpollywog

I just traded in my TUF for a Strix.

Strategy: buy whatever board Safedisk has. I assume it has @cstkl1 DDR4 training algorithm baked in.


----------



## GtiJason

cstkl1 said:


> your welcome


You are Safedisk, There is a reason I mentioned his name and his file 1st
But I am still at same frequency I've been stuck at 4133SR and 4k DR on Corsair and OLOY mems
Not saying cmo file is not greatly appreciated, but for DR at 4K RKL training still works
No need to be sarcastic, we here are your friends and we fought for you to be back on your throne of Ram
You are welcome !


----------



## cstkl1

GtiJason said:


> You are Safedisk, There is a reason I mentioned his name and his file 1st
> But I am still at same frequency I've been stuck at 4133SR and 4k DR on Corsair and OLOY mems
> Not saying cmo file is not greatly appreciated, but for DR at 4K RKL training still works
> No need to be sarcastic, we here are your friends and we fought for you to be back on your throne of Ram
> You are welcome !


its my algo. 

so yes you are welcome.


----------



## cstkl1

0451 said:


> I just traded in my TUF for a Strix.
> 
> Strategy: buy whatever board Safedisk has. I assume it has @cstkl1 DDR4 training algorithm baked in.


thanks dude


----------



## Jscs1992

GtiJason said:


> Extract "DR BDIE 4133.7z" Right click/ extract to (new folder) DR BDIE 4133
> You will see a file named DR BDIE4133.CMO, copy this to a usb flash drive (preferably usb 2.0)
> Plug drive into your Z690 A strix D4
> Power up this rig, hit Delete when you see Asus splash screen to enter bios
> hit right arrow on keyboard until you get to "TOOLS" Tab, click enter
> -TO LOAD .CMO bios File-
> Enter "User Profile"
> scroll to very bottom to load file from USB drive
> navigate to DR BDie 4133.CMO file
> 
> -FOR FLASH-
> select "ASUS EZ FLASH3 Utility" press enter
> use arrow keys to navigate to Strix A D4 0003.CAP file on flash drive
> click enter to say yes to read this file
> click yes to say you backed up some MEI security TMP2.0 stuff (Im on W11 Ghost Specture using Rufus TPM bypass so I do nothing lol, just say yes
> click on yes to confirm flash
> hit enter when 1st part says complete
> let 2nd part flash, may be a black screen
> might even be a 3rd part to update MEI
> just let it go until your back in the bios or in the OS (PS disconnect boot drive or disable) to make sure you end uop back in bios
> If you want to be extra safe


Thanks man really appreciate it. what do you guys a safe voltage in terms of vccsa I was under assumption that anything over 1.4 is extreme and unsafe.


----------



## GtiJason

cstkl1 said:


> its my algo.
> 
> so yes you are welcome.


Your algo
senseamp offset training disable
senseamp offset retraining disable
read timing centering 1d enable
rtl enable
TAT training disable

DR BDie 4133 Algo
SenseAmp Offset Training [Disabled]
Early ReadMPR Timing Centering 2D [Enabled]
Read MPR Training [Enabled]
Receive Enable Training [Enabled]
Write Timing Centering 1D [Enabled]
Write Voltage Centering 1D [Enabled]
Read Timing Centering 1D [Enabled]
Round Trip Latency [Enabled]
Turn Around Timing Training [Disabled]
CMD CTL CLK Slew Rate [Disabled]
Read Voltage Centering 1D [Enabled]
Vddq Training [Disabled]
Memory Test [Disabled]
DIMM SPD Alias Test [Disabled]
Receive Enable Centering 1D [Enabled]
Margin Check Limit [Disabled]


----------



## cstkl1

GtiJason said:


> Your algo
> *
> 
> *


so again your welcome. its the whole profile algo


----------



## GtiJason

cstkl1 said:


> so again your welcome. its the whole profile algo


Well then good job my friend, I really do mean it.
But If your worried about the algo being shared freely without credit
Then your issue is with whomever shared it first


----------



## acoustic

cstkl1 said:


> so again your welcome. its the whole profile algo


did you not want it to be shared?


----------



## acoustic

My current settings that are stable.

12700K @ 5.1 P -- 3.7 E -- 3.6 Cache / ASUS Z690 TUF WIFI D4 BIOS 0003 / GSKILL 2x16 DR 4000CL16 @ 1.4v XMP

Current settings @ 1.38 SA -- 1.55 VDIMM -- 1.55 VDDQ









I'd say this is stable!! Plenty of timings to work on, but this is a very good starting point of stability, imo. BIOS 0003 made this possible, and ODT 80-60-60 as well. With ODT AUTO, these exact settings will pop errors within the first two minutes of HCI MemTestPro.


----------



## owikh84

Thanks for the DR B-die 4133 profile from safedisk and algos from cstkl1.
But my DR and SR can't still boot at anything above 4000 Gear1, even with just 1 stick.
So, it's most probably my IMC being weak on this 12900K SP 91.
Gonna try it on my 12900KF SP 87 when I am free later.


----------



## cstkl1

acoustic said:


> did you not want it to be shared?


because it fails tm5 

safedisk and my es cpu can boot 4133 without this algo. 

this something that u guys need to realize


----------



## acoustic

cstkl1 said:


> because it fails tm5
> 
> safedisk and my es cpu can boot 4133 without this algo.
> 
> this something that u guys need to realize


I used your algo for 4000 with your tightened timings. I will be running tm5 overnight but so far works good


----------



## satinghostrider

cstkl1 said:


> because it fails tm5
> 
> safedisk and my es cpu can boot 4133 without this algo.
> 
> this something that u guys need to realize


Looks like everyone is using your algo then. Cause I'm using the profile posted by safedisk and it works much better. Weird no one credited your work so far. 🤔


----------



## Garlicky

Professor DumbDumb said:


> I have 2 separate sets of 4x8gb that run 3900c14 at vccsa 1.17 - can boot 4000 but its not stable


Do you mind sharing your settings please? I tweaked the ram for a good few hours but still cant boot at 3733+


----------



## acoustic

cstkl1 said:


> because it fails tm5
> 
> safedisk and my es cpu can boot 4133 without this algo.
> 
> this something that u guys need to realize


any tips to drop latency lower? I've got the cache up to 4.4Ghz, haven't tested for stability yet, but ran AIDA64.

I feel like I can't really get it much lower .. 1T will not post for me or 14-15-15. 4133 is no good either


----------



## owikh84

Try these, you should be able to get 44ns ish and 67k/63k/69k.
My DR 2x16gb 4000C17 kit needs 1.55v, SA auto (~1.35v) and Vddq 1.4v for that.


----------



## cstkl1

acoustic said:


> any tips to drop latency lower? I've got the cache up to 4.4Ghz, haven't tested for stability yet, but ran AIDA64.
> 
> I feel like I can't really get it much lower .. 1T will not post for me or 14-15-15. 4133 is no good either


tuf. optimem 2 trace layout
latency aida is nonsense. its archaic way to measure bro. look at hci avg coverage bandwidth and speed of tm5 completing or geekbench ram score.

this translate in actual fps.

stock cpu P core loaded cache = 47 which is higher than manual oc, p+e is 36
legacy scroll lock is 46.

so y oc cache unless you are chasing cb/rendering with e core loaded??

@Esenel told me BF2042 loads P core only.
so isnt stock cache better?


----------



## acoustic

cstkl1 said:


> tuf. optimem 2 trace layout
> latency aida is nonsense. its archaic way to measure bro. look at hci avg coverage bandwidth and speed of tm5 completing or geekbench ram score.
> 
> this translate in actual fps.


I have definitely noticed the increase in hci avg coverage bandwidth so that's good. I'll have to test it overnight tonight after the tighter tweaks from using your algo @ 4000.



> stock cpu P core loaded cache = 47 which is higher than manual oc, p+e is 36
> legacy scroll lock is 46.
> 
> so y oc cache unless you are chasing cb/rendering with e core loaded??
> 
> @Esenel told me BF2042 loads P core only.
> so isnt stock cache better?


I have E cores enabled so that puts my cache down to 36 when playing. I will test framerate tomorrow in that case to see if stock cache ends up being faster if i disable e cores. I will test with halo infinite -- i dont have bf2042 and dont plan on paying $59 for that beta test


----------



## Falkentyne

Stockfish likes all the cores you can throw at it


----------



## geriatricpollywog

Falkentyne said:


> Stockfish likes all the cores you can throw at it


I loaded Stockfish into the chess engine, started the engine, but my CPU did not load any cores. Am I supposed to play chess with it to load the cores?


----------



## Falkentyne

0451 said:


> I loaded Stockfish into the chess engine, started the engine, but my CPU did not load any cores. Am I supposed to play chess with it to load the cores?


Are you using Arena or another client?
In Arena, you need go to the Engine menu, Engine/UCI configuration and set the # of cores to 24.
It should save that setting and recall it later.

Then you 'activate' the engine then press "start" or "analyze" and it will start.
Use hwinfo64 to make sure all threads are loaded

BTW, theres a bug in the win11 scheduler.
If you load a program that polls sensors while CPU is at full load, it turns OFF the p-cores for several (sometimes more than several) seconds, that includes HWinfo64, OCCT, etc.

Even believe it or not, THE LICHESS WEBPAGE DOES THIS TOO.
Probably their anti cheat script running...


----------



## Falkentyne

0451 said:


> I loaded Stockfish into the chess engine, started the engine, but my CPU did not load any cores. Am I supposed to play chess with it to load the cores?


----------



## geriatricpollywog

Falkentyne said:


> View attachment 2534108
> 
> 
> View attachment 2534109
> 
> 
> View attachment 2534110


Yes I used Arena. I’ll try again when I get home.


----------



## safedisk

GtiJason said:


> You are Safedisk, There is a reason I mentioned his name and his file 1st
> But I am still at same frequency I've been stuck at 4133SR and 4k DR on Corsair and OLOY mems
> Not saying cmo file is not greatly appreciated, but for DR at 4K RKL training still works
> No need to be sarcastic, we here are your friends and we fought for you to be back on your throne of Ram
> You are welcome !


HI Bro
My other kit can also run the 4133CL15
Maybe it's your CPU problem Not sure


----------



## RetroWave78

safedisk said:


> View attachment 2533984
> 
> 
> *ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4 Beta BIOS 0003*
> 
> 16G X2 DR BDIE 4133 15-15-15-28 2T HCI 100% PASS
> 
> MY SETTING PROFILE
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DR_BDIE_4133.7z
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


Seriously, thank-you so much for this, I'm waiting for my memory to arrive and I'm sure this will be helpful.


----------



## GtiJason

QUOTE="safedisk, post: 28900266, member: 341135"]
HI Bro
My other kit can also run the 4133CL15
Maybe it's your CPU problem Not sure
[/QUOTE]
It seems to be that way since I am scaling with cold. Got chiller down to about 9C since it's cold and dry here at the moment
But RAM OC is like fishing to me, it sure beats a day at work and you can't catch em ( strong OC's) all the time every time
Then set up the Run MC Monsta SS, Was a bit worried at first since it's really only tuned for 325W - 350W max at -40C but It's crazy how high frequency can get on ADL single threaded workload
even at ambient temperatures. Also the uncore is crazy strong with the E cores disabled 1:1 for LCC is easy especially since at 5GHz the core needs 15mV more than the cache.
Can these boards run XP after patching with the Z590/690 acpi.sys file, and if so are any of these bios' made with XP in mind? Would be great fun being able to play 01 SE properly


----------



## Silent Scone

Neander said:


> As everyone is showing DDR4 here some DDR5 amateur action with G.Skill 5600 Samsungs😅 Wasn't able to get higher clocks stable so I just went on with timings only. It's probably not the limit just the point I last stopped. Maybe I test a bit more at the weekend. Tested with Karhu on 5000%
> 
> View attachment 2533926


Nice. Need that SR Samsung for 1T life


----------



## phillyman36

In the bios under Boot Configuration what do you all have your Post delay time set to?


----------



## MaghX

GtiJason said:


> Your algo
> senseamp offset training disable
> senseamp offset retraining disable
> read timing centering 1d enable
> rtl enable
> TAT training disable
> 
> DR BDie 4133 Algo
> SenseAmp Offset Training [Disabled]
> Early ReadMPR Timing Centering 2D [Enabled]
> Read MPR Training [Enabled]
> Receive Enable Training [Enabled]
> Write Timing Centering 1D [Enabled]
> Write Voltage Centering 1D [Enabled]
> Read Timing Centering 1D [Enabled]
> Round Trip Latency [Enabled]
> Turn Around Timing Training [Disabled]
> CMD CTL CLK Slew Rate [Disabled]
> Read Voltage Centering 1D [Enabled]
> Vddq Training [Disabled]
> Memory Test [Disabled]
> DIMM SPD Alias Test [Disabled]
> Receive Enable Centering 1D [Enabled]
> Margin Check Limit [Disabled]


@cstkl1 @GtiJason any tips here for 4000 1T?


----------



## cstkl1

MaghX said:


> @cstkl1 @GtiJason any tips here for 4000 1T?


cpu imc bro.
sp not a confirmation for good imc.










my retail SA 0.9v @6600.

my ES that did that 4133 d4 cannot even boot this.

some of the timings on 2nd/3rd good imc can do. not even possible on bad imc cpu on lower clock ram.


----------



## cstkl1

@bscool 
good imc bro even twr 1 can boot into windows on ddr5. its literally asking for jdec police to bust my ass and behead me on the spot. the nonsense a good imc can do in adl is crazy on 2nd/3rd .


----------



## Nizzen

Jscs1992 said:


> Thanks man really appreciate it. what do you guys a safe voltage in terms of vccsa I was under assumption that anything over 1.4 is extreme and unsafe.


For me it's over 1.6 vccsa  I had to use 1.52vccsa to run 4700c17 1t on Apex z490 with 10900k. So for me over 1.6vccsa is extreme, 1.55vccsa is high, 1.4vccsa is low for OCN veteran 
1.3vccsa is considered stock with slow memory


----------



## Jscs1992

I’m


GtiJason said:


> As I promised
> * I'd advise anyone who's having issues, take a look at Safedisks memory training algorithms.
> 
> * Also Mode 133:100 is usually much easier to boot so if you are stuck at 3800, 4100 or even 4000 manually set it just above? Gear1/2 setting
> 
> *Tertiaries: Does not matter how good your sticks are, you will not come close to RKL/CML/CFL/ any previous platform. On several terts I am about 3 ticks higher than on the same sticks used with RocketLake. 5 and 6's are now 7's and 8's on DR, nothing you can do
> 
> * Finally, for me at least. I had to CRANK UP the voltages with DR. On SR at say 4000 1.35v SA and VDDQ are normal. On all my DR kits (with 12700kf) I need North of 1.45 and 1.5v. So far I'm stable with what I need to be. PYPrime, Y Cruncher, Super Pi, H265 4k, CBR11.5/15/20/23, 3dMark(s) etc


In regards to the dram freq why was it set to 2533 mhz instead of 4133 ?


----------



## bscool

@cstkl1 @safedisk Is there any bios that is better for SR Hynix on Strix D4? I tried gskill 5333 kit I have that can do 5333-5600 on z590 but I can't get past 4600 using bios 03 to test in the Strix. Or is that just the limit of the bios/MB?

Anyone else done any testing of gear 2 and SR b die or Hynix on DDR 4 boards?


----------



## Agent-A01

Anyone have a dl link for msi dragon ball app?


----------



## bscool

@Agent-A01 

https://community.hwbot.org/topic/2...tools-for-z690/?do=findComment&comment=599488

If that link doesn't work there is another post in the same z690 section with MSI and Asus tools.


----------



## GtiJason

Jscs1992 said:


> I’m
> 
> In regards to the dram freq why was it set to 2533 mhz instead of 4133 ?


Usually the frequency gets messed up by different settings to Ai Overclock Tuner . . . aka [Manual], [Auto], [XMP I], [XMP II]

This also happens simply by the 2 ram kits having different XMP's ie 1 kit is 4000c16 and the other is say 4400c17

Another thing that will change this is the DRAM Frequency Ratio [100:133] / [100:100]. At 4000MHz 100:133 the FSB:RAM Ratio 1:30 while at 100:100 it is 1:40 and harder on the IMC
You can see this on CPU-Z Memory Tab "FSB:RAM" or by using MemTweakIT
Again this is in Gear 1 or "Memory Controller : DRAM Frequency Ratio [1:1]"


----------



## owikh84

It turns out that my 12900KF is able to do 4133 Gear1 but only with SR B-die. So far straight CL16 is stable, CL15 booted but not stable even with cstkl1's algo settings. Auto SA (~1.35v) will boot but gave errors in a few minutes. DR B-die still can't boot at 4133 even with these algos.

12900KF SP 87 - Stock
Strix Z690-A | BIOS 0003
2x8GB G.Skill F4-3600C14D-16GTESA

4133 CL16-16-16-36-1T Gear1, VDIMM 1.55v (1.545v), SA 1.45v (1.440v), VDDQ Auto (~1.35v), Algos Auto:


----------



## acoustic

My 4000CL15 GR1 went from stable to not stable in Halo Infinite, so I'm back to the drawing board. I have no idea what changed - I matched everything as it was, but there must be a value I cannot see that retrained after a boot-up and ruined it. My IMC seems extremely finicky.. I can't post at 3866 with the same settings that will post and run at 4000, even if I loosen all timings, but I can post at 100:100 3900CL15..

Cstkl's algo, 100:100 ratio and GR1 @ 3900 works so far with tight timings. I'm down to 1.35v SA and so far it's stable in Halo. This game seems to find IMC instability that stress tests aren't finding so that's good at least..

For some reason, I cannot post at 100:133 3866 GR1, even with AUTO secondary/tertiary and 16-16-16-36 2T primary. I didn't try 3733 but quite frankly, **** going down that far in mem speed.. I'm already pretty frustrated that 4000 GR1 has been such a problem - if I wanted to run **** memory speeds I would have bought a 5900x.


----------



## owikh84

acoustic said:


> My 4000CL15 GR1 went from stable to not stable in Halo Infinite, so I'm back to the drawing board. I have no idea what changed - I matched everything as it was, but there must be a value I cannot see that retrained after a boot-up and ruined it. My IMC seems extremely finicky.. I can't post at 3866 with the same settings that will post and run at 4000, even if I loosen all timings, but I can post at 100:100 3900CL15..
> 
> Cstkl's algo, 100:100 ratio and GR1 @ 3900 works so far with tight timings. I'm down to 1.35v SA and so far it's stable in Halo. This game seems to find IMC instability that stress tests aren't finding so that's good at least..
> 
> For some reason, I cannot post at 100:133 3866 GR1, even with AUTO secondary/tertiary and 16-16-16-36 2T primary. I didn't try 3733 but quite frankly, *** going down that far in mem speed.. I'm already pretty frustrated that 4000 GR1 has been such a problem - if I wanted to run *** memory speeds I would have bought a 5900x.


Since you mentioned earlier that you're stable in HCI Memtest, I would like to suggest you to run TM5 with anta777 or 1usmus profile.


----------



## cstkl1

adl ram oc hci/tm5 requires a cpu that avx2 stable vcore

u can end up ram errors if its only non avx stable if ure pushing the timings/ram to the limit testing with hci/tm5 etc.


----------



## acoustic

owikh84 said:


> Since you mentioned earlier that you're stable in HCI Memtest, I would like to suggest you to run TM5 with anta777 or 1usmus profile.


I should have mentioned it passed 3 cycles Anta777 ABSOLUT + Extreme1



cstkl1 said:


> adl ram oc hci/tm5 requires a cpu that avx2 stable vcore
> 
> u can end up ram errors if its only non avx stable if ure pushing the timings/ram to the limit testing with hci/tm5 etc.


I found that out very early on, thankfully! I've been running 1.35v LLC5 5.1/3.7/3.6cache for these tests to make sure CPU cores/cache isn't the issue. It's my IMC it seems.

It's extremely unpredictable with training. The 3900 settings went from stable in Halo and a quick 80% HCI MemTestPro, to not posting on reboot. Killing me..

Dropping down to 3766 is extremely consistent training. I think things will get better as the BIOS matures; reason why I think that, is I cannot figure out why it was so stable immediately after flashing the 0003 BIOS. I feel like the board is improperly training timings that I cannot see and/or change.


----------



## satinghostrider

bscool said:


> @cstkl1 @safedisk Is there any bios that is better for SR Hynix on Strix D4? I tried gskill 5333 kit I have that can do 5333-5600 on z590 but I can't get past 4600 using bios 03 to test in the Strix. Or is that just the limit of the bios/MB?
> 
> Anyone else done any testing of gear 2 and SR b die or Hynix on DDR 4 boards?


I'm also interested to know. I have dual rank SK Hynix that's capable of 5066C20 but I'm running 4800C19 right now on my Z590 Apex. Not sure to what extent these can even run on the D4 boards as I'm honestly getting quite peeved with DDR5 availability. At this rate, I'm feeling inclined to stick to Rocketlake for the moment but the D4 could be an option if my kit works well.


----------



## Fandorin

Is there any information about which AIOs are suitable for ASUS ROG STRIX Z690-I GAMING WIFI ?


----------



## RetroWave78

owikh84 said:


> It turns out that my 12900KF is able to do 4133 Gear1 but only with SR B-die. So far straight CL16 is stable, CL15 booted but not stable even with cstkl1's algo settings. Auto SA (~1.35v) will boot but gave errors in a few minutes. DR B-die still can't boot at 4133 even with these algos.
> 
> 12900KF SP 87 - Stock
> Strix Z690-A | BIOS 0003
> 2x8GB G.Skill F4-3600C14D-16GTESA
> 
> 4133 CL16-16-16-36-1T Gear1, VDIMM 1.55v (1.545v), SA 1.45v (1.440v), VDDQ Auto (~1.35v), Algos Auto:
> View attachment 2534228


Can DR B-Die boot at 4000 Mhz with Safedisk's CMO file / algo / profile? 

Any idea as to how these may fare for Strix-A on 0802 with Safedisk profile or is it entirely IMC lottery?: 

F4-4000C15Q-32GTRS-G.SKILL International Enterprise Co., Ltd. (gskill.com) 

Trident Z Royal
DDR4-4000MHz CL15-16-16-36 1.50V
32GB (4x8GB)


----------



## RetroWave78

acoustic said:


> My 4000CL15 GR1 went from stable to not stable in Halo Infinite, so I'm back to the drawing board. I have no idea what changed - I matched everything as it was, but there must be a value I cannot see that retrained after a boot-up and ruined it. My IMC seems extremely finicky.. I can't post at 3866 with the same settings that will post and run at 4000, even if I loosen all timings, but I can post at 100:100 3900CL15..
> 
> Cstkl's algo, 100:100 ratio and GR1 @ 3900 works so far with tight timings. I'm down to 1.35v SA and so far it's stable in Halo. This game seems to find IMC instability that stress tests aren't finding so that's good at least..
> 
> For some reason, I cannot post at 100:133 3866 GR1, even with AUTO secondary/tertiary and 16-16-16-36 2T primary. I didn't try 3733 but quite frankly, *** going down that far in mem speed.. I'm already pretty frustrated that 4000 GR1 has been such a problem - if I wanted to run *** memory speeds I would have bought a 5900x.


Accounting for ambient? Are your rads set up as positive pressure? I run my rads negative pressure pushing heat out of the case (Thermaltake View 71) with rear 140mm fan as intake bringing cool air directly across chipset and memory and up and out the top rad. I've tried running rads as intake and it increase the temps of all my peripherals by quite a bit, Sabrent Rocket 4TB went from 35C peak to 55C, memory went up 10C. 

What may boot and be MemtTest86 stable with no 400w GPU dumping it's heat into the case may not be stable with said GPU dumping it's heat into the case and an increase in ambient.

One of the variables here has to be how hot the dimms are.


----------



## NO22222

Can anyone answer why the performance is low? I have changed the BIOS memory and it hasn’t been resolved. The single-sided 8X2 is normal before. Or it is a BUG of aida64


----------



## owikh84

RetroWave78 said:


> Can DR B-Die boot at 4000 Mhz with Safedisk's CMO file / algo / profile?


My DR B-die never had issue booting at 4000 Gear1 without any profile. With Safedisk's profile (cstkl1's algo), I can still boot at 4000 but it is not stable (TM5 errors) and AIDA64 BW and latency are worse than my stable 15-16-16-36 profile (I posted here before).



RetroWave78 said:


> Any idea as to how these may fare for Strix-A on 0802 with Safedisk profile or is it entirely IMC lottery?:
> 
> F4-4000C15Q-32GTRS-G.SKILL International Enterprise Co., Ltd. (gskill.com)
> 
> Trident Z Royal
> DDR4-4000MHz CL15-16-16-36 1.50V
> 32GB (4x8GB)


No idea if anyone managed to boot 4 sticks at 4000 but with my chip the max bootable speed is 3733 CL14 and I'm still struggling with stability so far.


----------



## grifers

Final configuration for 24/7, pretty stable . 1.4v dram, 1.35 for S.A and 1.35 for VDDQ:


How do you see it? any ideas to improved secondary timmings? or there is ok?


----------



## shrimpmaster

grifers said:


> Final configuration for 24/7, pretty stable . 1.4v dram, 1.35 for S.A and 1.35 for VDDQ:
> 
> 
> 
> How do you see it?


tfaw is wrong. Minimum is RRD_s x4. twr way to high. Also I'd never use max trefi daily...


----------



## eeroo94

grifers said:


> Final configuration for 24/7, pretty stable . 1.4v dram, 1.35 for S.A and 1.35 for VDDQ:
> 
> 
> How do you see it? any ideas to improved secondary timmings? or there is ok?
> View attachment 2534264


You can try both tRRDs to 4 and TWR to 16 and go from there.


----------



## kmellz

shrimpmaster said:


> tfaw is wrong. Minimum is RRD_s x4. twr way to high. Also I'd never use max trefi daily...


Why never max daily? I'm new to intel this gen and from what I've seen it seems max it out if you have a good board, which seems to be usually ASUS that can be stable at those levels


----------



## Arni90

shrimpmaster said:


> tfaw is wrong. Minimum is RRD_s x4. twr way to high. Also I'd never use max trefi daily...


If you get refresh errors from too aggressive tREFI and tRFC, you will notice it pretty fast. It takes a couple of seconds max


----------



## cstkl1




----------



## grifers

eeroo94 said:


> You can try both tRRDs to 4 and TWR to 16 and go from there.



Thanks!!. Tweaked!:











How about you see the values/voltages for 24/7? Are safe?. Thanks.


----------



## owikh84

12900KF SP 87 - Stock
Strix Z690-A | BIOS 0003
2x8GB KLEVV Bolt XR 3600 CL18 (SR DJR)

5066 20-27-27-31-1T Gear2, VDIMM 1.60v, SA 1.40v, VDDQ 1.40v:










5333 no boot on this new platform, was able to boot up to 5600 with this kit on 11900K/Z590 Extreme.


----------



## safedisk

*ROG MAXIMUS Z690 Series Beta Bios 0803 UPDATE*

1. Improve system performance

ROG MAXIMUS Z690 HERO BETA BIOS 0803

ROG MAXIMUS Z690 FORMULA BETA BIOS 0803

ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX BETA BIOS 0803

ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME BETA BIOS 0803

ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME GLACIAL BETA BIOS 0803


*ROG STRIX Z690 Series Beta Bios 0803 UPDATE*

1. Improve system performance

ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI BETA BIOS 0803

ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4 BETA BIOS 0803

ROG STRIX Z690-E GAMING WIFI BETA BIOS 0803

ROG STRIX Z690-F GAMING WIFI BETA BIOS 0803

ROG STRIX Z690-G GAMING WIFI BETA BIOS 0803

ROG STRIX Z690-I GAMING WIFI BETA BIOS 0803


*TUF GAMING Z690 Series Beta Bios 0803 UPDATE*

1. Improve system performance

TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS BETA BIOS 0803

TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS D4 BETA BIOS 0803

TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS WIFI BETA BIOS 0803

TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS WIFI D4 BETA BIOS 0803


----------



## NO22222

0707BIOS is the strongest for me overclocking. It can stabilize the 4200 16GBX2 memory frequency test, but 0003 0803 will not work. I hope to continue to strengthen the overclocking optimization.


----------



## MikeGR7

For me it was 0002, booted [email protected] immediately but 0003 fails below 16.
Testing 0803 at the moment and will post back.


----------



## acoustic

Will try 4000CL15 GR1 again with 0803.. I had dropped down to 3733 out of frustration.


----------



## safedisk

NO22222 said:


> 0707BIOS is the strongest for me overclocking. It can stabilize the 4200 16GBX2 memory frequency test, but 0003 0803 will not work. I hope to continue to strengthen the overclocking optimization.


Hello 
Next week I will check it Can you tell me your settings?


----------



## NO22222

safedisk said:


> Hello
> Next week I will check it Can you tell me your settings?


SA 1.4V, memory 1.55V


----------



## darth_meh

i9-12900K SP90
ASUS MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME | BIOS 0702
2x16GB Corsair DDR5
Windows 11 (OS Build 22000.348)
Stock/Unable to run XMP I or XMP II

I'm experiencing an odd issue that I could use some guidance on...

I installed CPU-Z for ROG, ran the benchmark, and it ran successfully.
After running the benchmark, if I click "Submit and Compare" I immediately get a BSOD:
Bug Check 0x124: WHEA_UNCORRECTABLE_ERROR

In the Event Viewer I see:

_A fatal hardware error has occurred.

Component: PCI Express Root Port
Error Source: Advanced Error Reporting (PCI Express)

A fatal hardware error has occurred.

Component: PCI Express Root Port
Error Source: Advanced Error Reporting (PCI Express)

Primary Busevice:Function: 0x0:0x1D:0x0
Secondary Busevice:Function: 0x0:0x0:0x0
Primary Device NameCI\VEN_8086&DEV_7AB0&SUBSYS_86941043&REV_11
Secondary Device Name:

Fault bucket LKD_0x124_7_GenuineIntel_FIRMWARE_{8f87f311-c998-4d9e-a0c4-6065518c4f6d}_IMAGE_GenuineIntel.sys, type 0
Event Name: LiveKernelEvent
Response: Not available
Cab Id: 3952ec06-1f49-4ca2-9d00-67cfcd52bb25

Problem signature:
P1: 124
P2: 7
P3: ffffd5024cc23020
P4: 0
P5: 0
P6: 10_0_22000
P7: 0_0
P8: 256_1
P9: 
P10: 

Attached files:
\\?\C:\Windows\LiveKernelReports\WHEA\WHEA-20211126-1015.dmp
\\?\C:\Windows\SystemTemp\WER-12156-0.sysdata.xml
\\?\C:\ProgramData\Microsoft\Windows\WER\Temp\WER.70c9a483-bd72-45bf-8c18-3b3c658a042c.tmp.WERInternalMetadata.xml
\\?\C:\ProgramData\Microsoft\Windows\WER\Temp\WER.eb65fbc7-10a9-4e77-90af-66599511a19b.tmp.xml
\\?\C:\ProgramData\Microsoft\Windows\WER\Temp\WER.50fcf665-e9cd-4be7-8a5a-ad3c9eca3077.tmp.csv
\\?\C:\ProgramData\Microsoft\Windows\WER\Temp\WER.a77c5e43-6fb1-4f3b-91d9-e2235bcd323e.tmp.txt
\\?\C:\Windows\SystemTemp\WER.e95d868c-1c2e-4b71-9be4-1f32db877df0.tmp.WERDataCollectionStatus.txt

These files may be available here:
\\?\C:\ProgramData\Microsoft\Windows\WER\ReportArchive\Kernel_124_8e625bbfe670ca4c8b57d5dc27dfdca18e8c54_00000000_cab_e4b52c83-1671-4b51-8c87-d28bc296698d

Analysis symbol: 
Rechecking for solution: 0
Report Id: e4b52c83-1671-4b51-8c87-d28bc296698d
Report Status: 268435456
Hashed bucket: 
Cab Guid: 0

Fault bucket 0x124_4_GenuineIntel_PCIEXPRESS_UnexpectedCompletion_MalformedTLP_VENID_8086_DEVID_7AB0_IMAGE_GenuineIntel.sys, type 0
Event Name: BlueScreen
Response: Not available
Cab Id: b642f92e-24b1-4db0-b83a-c9dc310ef1a6

Problem signature:
P1: 124
P2: 4
P3: ffff940fcce2b028
P4: 0
P5: 0
P6: 10_0_22000
P7: 0_0
P8: 256_1
P9: 
P10: 

Attached files:
\\?\C:\Windows\Minidump\112621-8843-01.dmp
\\?\C:\Windows\SystemTemp\WER-12156-0.sysdata.xml
\\?\C:\Windows\MEMORY.DMP
\\?\C:\ProgramData\Microsoft\Windows\WER\Temp\WER.37d8edb4-8263-481f-81a5-57cf7453d7ca.tmp.WERInternalMetadata.xml
\\?\C:\ProgramData\Microsoft\Windows\WER\Temp\WER.6d9d2fd1-332a-4822-9db0-f3d168c5dff0.tmp.xml
\\?\C:\ProgramData\Microsoft\Windows\WER\Temp\WER.5f720358-9ffe-4570-8dee-4c10bc37faba.tmp.csv
\\?\C:\ProgramData\Microsoft\Windows\WER\Temp\WER.17a2bdfb-ebf8-45e9-905f-b42e2541de3b.tmp.txt

These files may be available here:
\\?\C:\ProgramData\Microsoft\Windows\WER\ReportArchive\Kernel_124_bd5780d16b5f324a31c91a8c9542bae032e3dc3e_00000000_cab_a1fd8cd9-e085-4f87-8ed3-e89fa414dc33

Analysis symbol: 
Rechecking for solution: 0
Report Id: 8c608161-6e7e-4ad7-84b7-d724882038cb
Report Status: 268435456
Hashed bucket: 
Cab Guid: 0_

DEV_7AB0 is the PCIEX1 slot, which I have a Sound Blaster AE-7 plugged into.

If I disable the PCIEX1 slot in Device Manager, rerun the benchmark and click "Submit and Compare" - no BSOD. I tried clearing my CMOS (powered my PC off, held CMOS reset button down for 30 seconds) but that didn't fix the issue.

I haven't tried reseating the Sound Blaster yet - I suppose that's my next move, but I'm pretty sure it's connected okay. The Sound Blaster also appears to work fine in Windows and during gaming.

Any thoughts/suggestions?


----------



## cstkl1

darth_meh said:


> i9-12900K SP90
> ASUS MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME | BIOS 0702
> 2x16GB Corsair DDR5
> Windows 11 (OS Build 22000.348)
> Stock/Unable to run XMP I or XMP II
> 
> I'm experiencing an odd issue that I could use some guidance on...
> 
> I installed CPU-Z for ROG, ran the benchmark, and it ran successfully.
> After running the benchmark, if I click "Submit and Compare" I immediately get a BSOD:
> Bug Check 0x124: WHEA_UNCORRECTABLE_ERROR
> 
> In the Event Viewer I see:
> 
> _A fatal hardware error has occurred.
> 
> Component: PCI Express Root Port
> Error Source: Advanced Error Reporting (PCI Express)
> 
> A fatal hardware error has occurred.
> 
> Component: PCI Express Root Port
> Error Source: Advanced Error Reporting (PCI Express)
> 
> Primary Busevice:Function: 0x0:0x1D:0x0
> Secondary Busevice:Function: 0x0:0x0:0x0
> Primary Device NameCI\VEN_8086&DEV_7AB0&SUBSYS_86941043&REV_11
> Secondary Device Name:
> 
> Fault bucket LKD_0x124_7_GenuineIntel_FIRMWARE_{8f87f311-c998-4d9e-a0c4-6065518c4f6d}_IMAGE_GenuineIntel.sys, type 0
> Event Name: LiveKernelEvent
> Response: Not available
> Cab Id: 3952ec06-1f49-4ca2-9d00-67cfcd52bb25
> 
> Problem signature:
> P1: 124
> P2: 7
> P3: ffffd5024cc23020
> P4: 0
> P5: 0
> P6: 10_0_22000
> P7: 0_0
> P8: 256_1
> P9:
> P10:
> 
> Attached files:
> \\?\C:\Windows\LiveKernelReports\WHEA\WHEA-20211126-1015.dmp
> \\?\C:\Windows\SystemTemp\WER-12156-0.sysdata.xml
> \\?\C:\ProgramData\Microsoft\Windows\WER\Temp\WER.70c9a483-bd72-45bf-8c18-3b3c658a042c.tmp.WERInternalMetadata.xml
> \\?\C:\ProgramData\Microsoft\Windows\WER\Temp\WER.eb65fbc7-10a9-4e77-90af-66599511a19b.tmp.xml
> \\?\C:\ProgramData\Microsoft\Windows\WER\Temp\WER.50fcf665-e9cd-4be7-8a5a-ad3c9eca3077.tmp.csv
> \\?\C:\ProgramData\Microsoft\Windows\WER\Temp\WER.a77c5e43-6fb1-4f3b-91d9-e2235bcd323e.tmp.txt
> \\?\C:\Windows\SystemTemp\WER.e95d868c-1c2e-4b71-9be4-1f32db877df0.tmp.WERDataCollectionStatus.txt
> 
> These files may be available here:
> \\?\C:\ProgramData\Microsoft\Windows\WER\ReportArchive\Kernel_124_8e625bbfe670ca4c8b57d5dc27dfdca18e8c54_00000000_cab_e4b52c83-1671-4b51-8c87-d28bc296698d
> 
> Analysis symbol:
> Rechecking for solution: 0
> Report Id: e4b52c83-1671-4b51-8c87-d28bc296698d
> Report Status: 268435456
> Hashed bucket:
> Cab Guid: 0
> 
> Fault bucket 0x124_4_GenuineIntel_PCIEXPRESS_UnexpectedCompletion_MalformedTLP_VENID_8086_DEVID_7AB0_IMAGE_GenuineIntel.sys, type 0
> Event Name: BlueScreen
> Response: Not available
> Cab Id: b642f92e-24b1-4db0-b83a-c9dc310ef1a6
> 
> Problem signature:
> P1: 124
> P2: 4
> P3: ffff940fcce2b028
> P4: 0
> P5: 0
> P6: 10_0_22000
> P7: 0_0
> P8: 256_1
> P9:
> P10:
> 
> Attached files:
> \\?\C:\Windows\Minidump\112621-8843-01.dmp
> \\?\C:\Windows\SystemTemp\WER-12156-0.sysdata.xml
> \\?\C:\Windows\MEMORY.DMP
> \\?\C:\ProgramData\Microsoft\Windows\WER\Temp\WER.37d8edb4-8263-481f-81a5-57cf7453d7ca.tmp.WERInternalMetadata.xml
> \\?\C:\ProgramData\Microsoft\Windows\WER\Temp\WER.6d9d2fd1-332a-4822-9db0-f3d168c5dff0.tmp.xml
> \\?\C:\ProgramData\Microsoft\Windows\WER\Temp\WER.5f720358-9ffe-4570-8dee-4c10bc37faba.tmp.csv
> \\?\C:\ProgramData\Microsoft\Windows\WER\Temp\WER.17a2bdfb-ebf8-45e9-905f-b42e2541de3b.tmp.txt
> 
> These files may be available here:
> \\?\C:\ProgramData\Microsoft\Windows\WER\ReportArchive\Kernel_124_bd5780d16b5f324a31c91a8c9542bae032e3dc3e_00000000_cab_a1fd8cd9-e085-4f87-8ed3-e89fa414dc33
> 
> Analysis symbol:
> Rechecking for solution: 0
> Report Id: 8c608161-6e7e-4ad7-84b7-d724882038cb
> Report Status: 268435456
> Hashed bucket:
> Cab Guid: 0_
> 
> DEV_7AB0 is the PCIEX1 slot, which I have a Sound Blaster AE-7 plugged into.
> 
> If I disable the PCIEX1 slot in Device Manager, rerun the benchmark and click "Submit and Compare" - no BSOD. I tried clearing my CMOS (powered my PC off, held CMOS reset button down for 30 seconds) but that didn't fix the issue.
> 
> I haven't tried reseating the Sound Blaster yet - I suppose that's my next move, but I'm pretty sure it's connected okay. The Sound Blaster also appears to work fine in Windows and during gaming.
> 
> Any thoughts/suggestions?


bios
what is your ram ?


----------



## darth_meh

cstkl1 said:


> bios
> what is your ram ?


BIOS = 0702
RAM = Corsair Dominator DDR5 (CMT32GX5M2X5200C38) running at stock speeds (XMP I/II crashes Windows)


----------



## cstkl1

darth_meh said:


> BIOS = 0702
> RAM = Corsair Dominator DDR5 (CMT32GX5M2X5200C38) running at stock speeds (XMP I/II crashes Windows)


update to latest bios 0803
atm it looks like faulty ram.

its on the correct dimm slots right?
try swapping the dimms,


----------



## Wolferin

Hello, can Asus fix this bug that i found with my new Strix Z690-A? I have a problem with the selection of the primary Display in the bios, see picture, i am using Bios Version 0803.

I have installed a RTX 3080 and i am using also the iGPU at the same time. At the RTX 3080 i have a 4K LG 27 Zoll connected over Display Port, at the Display Port from the Mainboard a 27 Zoll WQHD. What ever i adjust, PCIE, PEG Slot or Auto, the Primary Display (Bootscreen) is the Screen connected at the Display Port from the Mainboard. But i want that the Primary Display and Bootscreen is the Screen connected to the RTX 3080.

When i use three Screens at the same time, another Full HD Screen connected to the HDMI Port from the Mainboard, then the Primary Display is the one connected to HDMI from the Board, also no matter what i adjust in the Bios. 

Please can you check this - thank you very much.


----------



## Sarzinski

@Wolferin
What exactly is your issue/goal?

I haven't adjusted any iGPU related settings and for me it just shows the BIOS on all displays simultaneously, iGPU and 3090.

Once I go into Windows, the Windows display settings take over. Primary display and display order are applied as configured in the Windows display settings menu.


----------



## darth_meh

cstkl1 said:


> update to latest bios 0803
> atm it looks like faulty ram.
> 
> its on the correct dimm slots right?
> try swapping the dimms,


Yeah, DIMMs are in A2/B2.
I've run multiple passes of MemTest86+ in the BIOS and they pass every time.

I'm not super comfortable running a beta BIOS, but considering all of the issues I'm having I may not have a choice.


----------



## Glottis

I have a non-RAM problem  Installed 980 Pro and it's bending under the TUF heatsink. It's driving me crazy how janky this looks, even if these drives could accept a bit of deformation, this doesn't look right to me. I guess most people don't care about this as long as it works? Well I can't unsee this now and it's just always on my mind when I'm at my PC. Here's a picture of what it looks like (not my picture, but I have exact same issue). I'm thinking to just buy a sturdy heatsink that envelops the drive from both sides with a sturdy construction.


----------



## Wolferin

Sarzinski said:


> @Wolferin
> What exactly is your issue/goal?
> 
> I haven't adjusted any iGPU related settings and for me it just shows the BIOS on all displays simultaneously, iGPU and 3090.
> 
> Once I go into Windows, the Windows display settings take over. Primary display and display order are applied as configured in the Windows display settings menu.


So yes, why are the Board shows the BIOS on all three displays at the same time?

Issue/goal: I have another 7 Zoll Screen with HDMI that i normaly use for monitoring the hole System with AIDA64 Sensor Panel. The resolution from this TFT is 800x480. When i connecting this TFT on HDMI from the Board and the 4K Screen on the RTX 3080, then the 4K Screen connected to the RTX 3080 shows the 800x480 Resolution from the 7 Zoll TFT connected to the HDMI from the Board and i can read nothing in the Bios. Also on the 7 Zoll screen because it is to little.

I have a MSI Z690 and Gigabyte Z690 checked, but i send it back about a lot of other problems, but both Boards shows the Bios only on one Screen, at that screen that i have selected in the Bios.

From my side the four entrys in the Bios makes no sense, because all do the same.


----------



## darth_meh

darth_meh said:


> Yeah, DIMMs are in A2/B2.
> I've run multiple passes of MemTest86+ in the BIOS and they pass every time.
> 
> I'm not super comfortable running a beta BIOS, but considering all of the issues I'm having I may not have a choice.


I updated to 0803. Still getting WHEA_UNCORRECTABLE_ERROR BSODs when I try to submit CPU-Z validations.

I removed the Sound Blaster AE-7 and CPU-Z validation is fine. Reinstalled the Sound Blaster in the same slot - instant BSOD when I try to submit a CPU-Z validation. For kicks I installed the Sound Blaster AE-7 in the 2nd PCIEX16 slot and it also triggers WHEA_UNCORRECTABLE_ERROR errors when I try to submit CPU-Z validations. Seems like a compatibilty issue? For now it looks like I'm going to stick to onboard sound.

Still can't run XMP I/II without crashing, but I'm running at DDR5200 right now. We'll see if it remains stable. I may try increasing the memory voltages at some point because I've read some people have success getting XMP working at 1.3V or 1.35V.


----------



## bscool

NO22222 said:


> SA 1.4V, memory 1.55V


What are you setting VDDQ to? If I dont set both VDDQ and VCCSA to 1.45 to 1.5 range I cant boot past 3733 from what I remember in the little testing I have done with DR b die.

z690 Strix A d4 bios 003

Havent tried 803 yet, about to.


----------



## ES IST ZEIT

Hello
With all bios that were there, there was no restart and shutdown possible for me. The PC started randomly.
the official 0707 works perfectly. Except for ram compatibility.

Was translated with google


----------



## acoustic

bscool said:


> What are you setting VDDQ to? If I dont set both VDDQ and VCCSA to 1.45 to 1.5 range I cant boot past 3733 from what I remember in the little testing I have done with DR b die.
> 
> z690 Strix A d4 bios 003
> 
> Havent tried 803 yet, about to.


VDDQ is a major assist in making settings work -- too much or too little can cause issues though. Per Shamino, setting above 1.6v won't do anything, and the vDroop is around .50mv, so 1.55v set BIOS is actually 1.50v actual.

I'm currently using 1.4v VDDQ BIOS for 3733 GR1 14-14-14-28-270 @ 1.5 vDIMM. I also found that ODT is really important too. It made a difference on CML, but on ADL I have noticed the board is not training them very well at all, at least on the DDR4 boards. My MSI MEG Z490 ACE was training ODTs very well on its own when set to Auto .. unfortunately can't say the same for this Z690 TUF.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

How do you see P core sp?


----------



## bscool

0451 said:


> How do you see P core sp?


Under AI Features tab


----------



## geriatricpollywog

bscool said:


> Under AI Features tab


Cool, I swapped my 12700K for something with a few more e-cores…

I was bummed to see an SP rating of 84, but now I see it’s 94 P core and 66 E core. I can live with that.


----------



## Agent-A01

acoustic said:


> Dropping down to 3766 is extremely consistent training. I think things will get better as the BIOS matures; reason why I think that, is I cannot figure out why it was so stable immediately after flashing the 0003 BIOS. I feel like the board is improperly training timings that I cannot see and/or change.


I second that. Just tried 0803 and was able to post 4000CL17 xmp when I couldn't before. Couple reboots later and it won't post that speed anymore.
But as usual 3800 posts no problem every time.

I haven't tried high VDDQ, may play with that later.

Be careful with repeated failed posts. I just had a noctua A12 fan die(pwm dead stays 100% fan speed)


----------



## acoustic

Agent-A01 said:


> I second that. Just tried 0803 and was able to post 4000CL17 xmp when I couldn't before. Couple reboots later and it won't post that speed anymore.
> But as usual 3800 posts no problem every time.
> 
> I haven't tried high VDDQ, may play with that later.
> 
> Be careful with repeated failed posts. I just had a noctua A12 fan die(pwm dead stays 100% fan speed)


VDDQ is a real big help for stability - I notice different vDIMM/freq like different VDDQ. 3733 @ 1.50v VDIMM loves 1.4v VDDQ, while 4000 @ 1.55v prefers 1.55v VDDQ.

If my A12x25s die, that's just an excuse for Phantek T30s LOL


----------



## bscool

Not sure how much it helps but I disable unused dim slots on 4 slot MB. The only algorithms I set in RTL enabled and DR b die 4000c14-14-14 boots easy. Errors quickly though running memtest. Looks like 4000c14-15-15 is where Ill end up.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

What’s your guys’s P and E core SP?


----------



## cstkl1

darth_meh said:


> I updated to 0803. Still getting WHEA_UNCORRECTABLE_ERROR BSODs when I try to submit CPU-Z validations.
> 
> I removed the Sound Blaster AE-7 and CPU-Z validation is fine. Reinstalled the Sound Blaster in the same slot - instant BSOD when I try to submit a CPU-Z validation. For kicks I installed the Sound Blaster AE-7 in the 2nd PCIEX16 slot and it also triggers WHEA_UNCORRECTABLE_ERROR errors when I try to submit CPU-Z validations. Seems like a compatibilty issue? For now it looks like I'm going to stick to onboard sound.
> 
> Still can't run XMP I/II without crashing, but I'm running at DDR5200 right now. We'll see if it remains stable. I may try increasing the memory voltages at some point because I've read some people have success getting XMP working at 1.3V or 1.35V.


i using zx on apex on pcie 4x slot


----------



## darth_meh

cstkl1 said:


> i using zx on apex on pcie 4x slot


I have a ZxR I might try. I'm also running Windows 11 - are you?


----------



## cstkl1

darth_meh said:


> I have a ZxR I might try. I'm also running Windows 11 - are you?


yup win 11. 

on strix D4 also no prob with ZX ( friends)


----------



## bscool

4133c15


----------



## Dinnzy

so on a z690 apex 12900k, how exactly do you disable the e cores? Do I set the value to 0?


----------



## cstkl1

Dinnzy said:


> so on a z690 apex 12900k, how exactly do you disable the e cores? Do I set the value to 0?


yes


----------



## NO22222

bscool said:


> What are you setting VDDQ to? If I dont set both VDDQ and VCCSA to 1.45 to 1.5 range I cant boot past 3733 from what I remember in the little testing I have done with DR b die.
> 
> z690 Strix A d4 bios 003
> 
> Havent tried 803 yet, about to.


vddq is auto, 1.35V in the system


----------



## acoustic

NO22222 said:


> vddq is auto, 1.35V in the system


Try setting VDDQ 1:1 with your vDIMM or 0.50mv above. You can also try 1.40v vddq


----------



## owikh84

bscool said:


> 4133c15


Good job bro! Now you reminded me to check each DIMM slot of my Z690-A.
I tested each slot and found out that only the 4th slot (B2) is able to boot at 4133 with single stick.
The other slots no boot.

P/S: I didn't need to disable the unused slots in BIOS settings, it doesn't help.


----------



## MikeGR7

owikh84 said:


> Good job bro! Now you reminded me to check each DIMM slot of my Z690-A.
> I tested each slot and found out that only the 4th slot (B2) is able to boot at 4133 with single stick.
> The other slots no boot.
> 
> P/S: I didn't need to disable the unused slots in BIOS settings, it doesn't help.


How do you disable unused slots in BIOS? What settings is this?

Also can anyone tell me how to properly lock the fsb to 100?
Already tried putting it manually and looked for spread spectrum setting but 0003 has nothing.

On a side note i noticed that boot/reboot times are improved a bit with 0003 bios on Asus strix a.


----------



## Exilon

So the default ring behavior is 4.7 when E-cores are parked but 3.6 when they're active.

But if I set ring multi to 42x manually, it stays stuck at 42x even if E-cores are parked. Is there anyway to just push up the E-cores active multiplier without also locking down the E-cores parked multiplier?


----------



## owikh84

MikeGR7 said:


> How do you disable unused slots in BIOS? What settings is this?
> 
> Also can anyone tell me how to properly lock the fsb to 100?
> Already tried putting it manually and looked for spread spectrum setting but 0003 has nothing.
> 
> On a side note i noticed that boot/reboot times are improved a bit with 0003 bios on Asus strix a.


It's under Ai Tweaker > DRAM Timing Control.
But it doesn't work for me. I tested by physically inserting my RAM stick onto each slot and found out that only slot #4 is able to boot at 4133.

Perhaps @bscool can advise us on his bootable 4133 settings.









I'm on 0803 and BCLK 100.00 works fine for me with Ai OC Tuner set at Auto, Manual and XMP.


----------



## bscool

Here it is if anyone want to try it or look at it. 4133c15bios803.CMO


----------



## NO22222

acoustic said:


> Try setting VDDQ 1:1 with your vDIMM or 0.50mv above. You can also try 1.40v vddq


I have tried many methods and cannot continue to improve. I can open 4266 and cannot be stable, including the timing of pulling up to C18, and reducing the timing of 4200 to C15 is not stable.


----------



## Garlicky

NO22222 said:


> I have tried many methods and cannot continue to improve. I can open 4266 and cannot be stable, including the timing of pulling up to C18, and reducing the timing of 4200 to C15 is not stable.


Running these kinds of frequency on gear 1 is also dependent on luck, if you got a good imc, as a example my 12900kf's imc only goes to 4133 on sr and 3733 on 4x8 but some people's imc can do a lot more than that, might also just be my skill


----------



## Nizzen

Garlicky said:


> Running these kinds of frequency on gear 1 is also dependent on luck, if you got a good imc, as a example my 12900kf's imc only goes to 4133 on sr and 3733 on 4x8 but some people's imc can do a lot more than that, might also just be my skill


Skill and watercooling dimms does help


----------



## neurokirurgi

I'm getting WHEA 17 errors (dozens per second) on my 12900K+Z690 Hero combo, and the computer will randomly freeze during heavy CPU load (prime95, tm5, cinebench, even memtest86 in bios!). Freeze as in that the system locks up and doesn't respond to any inputs, forcing me to power it off.



Code:


A corrected hardware error has occurred.

Component: PCI Express Root Port
Error Source: Advanced Error Reporting (PCI Express)

Primary Bus:Device:Function: 0x0:0x1:0x0
Secondary Bus:Device:Function: 0x0:0x0:0x0
Primary Device Name:PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_460D&SUBSYS_86941043&REV_02
Secondary Device Name:

This corresponds with *Intel(R) PEG10 - 460D* in Device Manager, which I can only assume stands for the PCI-E slot.

This does not happen when the GPU (RTX 3080 TUF OC) is removed and I'm using the iGPU instead, nor does it happen when the GPU is seated in the lower PCI-E slot. In other words, the system is rock solid when the top PCI-E slot is unpopulated.

This happens on both 0702 and 0803 BETA bios when using default BIOS settings.

Is this a simple case of RMA, or could there be some strange compatibility issue at play here which might get fixed through future firmware updates?

full specs: 
12900K, ALF II 360mm
Z690 Maximus Hero
Kingston Fury Beast 4800 CL38 (KF548C38-16)
RTX 3080 TUF OC, separate PCI-E power cable for each 8-pin
Crucial p5 1tb + Samsung 960 Evo 500GB + 2x1TB WD Blue sata ssd + 3tb toshiba HDD
Seasonic Focus PX-750


----------



## cstkl1

neurokirurgi said:


> I'm getting WHEA 17 errors (dozens per second) on my 12900K+Z690 Hero combo, and the computer will randomly freeze during heavy CPU load (prime95, tm5, cinebench, even memtest86 in bios!). Freeze as in that the system locks up and doesn't respond to any inputs, forcing me to power it off.
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> A corrected hardware error has occurred.
> 
> Component: PCI Express Root Port
> Error Source: Advanced Error Reporting (PCI Express)
> 
> Primary Bus:Device:Function: 0x0:0x1:0x0
> Secondary Bus:Device:Function: 0x0:0x0:0x0
> Primary Device Name:PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_460D&SUBSYS_86941043&REV_02
> Secondary Device Name:
> 
> This corresponds with *Intel(R) PEG10 - 460D* in Device Manager, which I can only assume stands for the PCI-E slot.
> 
> This does not happen when the GPU (RTX 3080 TUF OC) is removed and I'm using the iGPU instead, nor does it happen when the GPU is seated in the lower PCI-E slot. In other words, the system is rock solid when the top PCI-E slot is unpopulated.
> 
> This happens on both 0702 and 0803 BETA bios when using default BIOS settings.
> 
> Is this a simple case of RMA, or could there be some strange compatibility issue at play here which might get fixed through future firmware updates?
> 
> full specs:
> 12900K, ALF II 360mm
> Z690 Maximus Hero
> Kingston Fury Beast 4800 CL38 (KF548C38-16)
> RTX 3080 TUF OC, separate PCI-E power cable for each 8-pin
> Crucial p5 1tb + Samsung 960 Evo 500GB + 2x1TB WD Blue sata ssd + 3tb toshiba HDD
> Seasonic Focus PX-750


"Seasonic Focus PX-750"

my bet


seasonic focus p 750 bsod - Google Search


----------



## Exilon

neurokirurgi said:


> I'm getting WHEA 17 errors (dozens per second) on my 12900K+Z690 Hero combo, and the computer will randomly freeze during heavy CPU load (prime95, tm5, cinebench, even memtest86 in bios!). Freeze as in that the system locks up and doesn't respond to any inputs, forcing me to power it off.
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> A corrected hardware error has occurred.
> 
> Component: PCI Express Root Port
> Error Source: Advanced Error Reporting (PCI Express)
> 
> Primary Bus:Device:Function: 0x0:0x1:0x0
> Secondary Bus:Device:Function: 0x0:0x0:0x0
> Primary Device Name:PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_460D&SUBSYS_86941043&REV_02
> Secondary Device Name:
> 
> This corresponds with *Intel(R) PEG10 - 460D* in Device Manager, which I can only assume stands for the PCI-E slot.
> 
> This does not happen when the GPU (RTX 3080 TUF OC) is removed and I'm using the iGPU instead, nor does it happen when the GPU is seated in the lower PCI-E slot. In other words, the system is rock solid when the top PCI-E slot is unpopulated.
> 
> This happens on both 0702 and 0803 BETA bios when using default BIOS settings.
> 
> Is this a simple case of RMA, or could there be some strange compatibility issue at play here which might get fixed through future firmware updates?
> 
> full specs:
> 12900K, ALF II 360mm
> Z690 Maximus Hero
> Kingston Fury Beast 4800 CL38 (KF548C38-16)
> RTX 3080 TUF OC, separate PCI-E power cable for each 8-pin
> Crucial p5 1tb + Samsung 960 Evo 500GB + 2x1TB WD Blue sata ssd + 3tb toshiba HDD
> Seasonic Focus PX-750


Turn off PEG ASPM in BIOS. It's under the platform power management settings. I was getting 3 of those per second when the GPU was active and ASPM was enabled for the slot.


----------



## neurokirurgi

Exilon said:


> Turn off PEG ASPM in BIOS. It's under the platform power management settings. I was getting 3 of those per second when the GPU was active and ASPM was enabled for the slot.


I tried disabling both PEG ASPM and PCI-E link state power management before - this reduced the WHEAs a lot (didn't stop them completely) but the system was still crashing under load when the GPU was placed in the first PCI-E slot.



cstkl1 said:


> "Seasonic Focus PX-750"
> 
> my bet
> seasonic focus p 750 bsod - Google Search


I hardly think it's the PSU since I don't think it would explain why the system works beautifully when the GPU is placed in the lower PCI-E slot. It's only when the GPU is placed in the first PCI-E slot when the troubles begin.


----------



## cstkl1

neurokirurgi said:


> I tried disabling both PEG ASPM and PCI-E link state power management before - this reduced the WHEAs a lot (didn't stop them completely) but the system was still crashing under load when the GPU was placed in the first PCI-E slot.
> 
> 
> I hardly think it's the PSU since I don't think it would explain why the system works beautifully when the GPU is placed in the lower PCI-E slot. It's only when the GPU is placed in the first PCI-E slot when the troubles begin.


best way test with another psu to rule that out


----------



## eeroo94

With Z690 TUF D4 when using AVX-512 feature e-cores disabled, there seems to be negative ratio offset of -1 during AVX-512 loads. Please give us options to disable this.


----------



## Feklar

Has anyone heard if Asus plans to release a Z90 board with DDR4 besides the entry level models? Seeing as it's impossible to acquire any DDR5 memory anywhere and looks like Q2 2022 before any availability. Sitting here with a 12900k and an Apex with no memory in sight is making me feel sad inside.


----------



## cstkl1

Feklar said:


> Has anyone heard if Asus plans to release a Z90 board with DDR4 besides the entry level models? Seeing as it's impossible to acquire any DDR5 memory anywhere and looks like Q2 2022 before any availability. Sitting here with a 12900k and an Apex with no memory in sight is making me feel sad inside.


?? ddr4 u reach imc limit
ddr5 u reach current ram chipset limit

what sa voltage u think i was using when testing this?









the room to improve push the limit on engineering on ram and board is with ddr5.


----------



## Feklar

I agree ddr5 is the way forward. Availability is the issue. Since I can't use the Apex I looking for a better z690 ddr4 temporary substitute. Team T-Force Delta 6400 DDR5 were on Newegg for a second earlier. Sold in a second. Now a new eBay listing for them. $5500. Not a joke.


----------



## cstkl1

o


Feklar said:


> I agree ddr5 is the way forward. Availability is the issue. Since I can't use the Apex I looking for a better z690 ddr4 temporary substitute. Team T-Force Delta 6400 DDR5 were on Newegg for a second earlier. Sold in a second. Now a new eBay listing for them. $5500. Not a joke.


ddr5 i wont pay for rgb. u will see y when u open the heatsink


----------



## asdkj1740

Glottis said:


> I have a non-RAM problem  Installed 980 Pro and it's bending under the TUF heatsink. It's driving me crazy how janky this looks, even if these drives could accept a bit of deformation, this doesn't look right to me. I guess most people don't care about this as long as it works? Well I can't unsee this now and it's just always on my mind when I'm at my PC. Here's a picture of what it looks like (not my picture, but I have exact same issue). I'm thinking to just buy a sturdy heatsink that envelops the drive from both sides with a sturdy construction.


this problem has been existing for a long time, especially on asus mobo and msi mobo.
asus has started to include a rubber for supporting the middle bending part of the m.2. they call it "M.2 Rubber Package". eg z690 strix a
mobo's m.2 heatsink (and the thermal pad) causes this.

so, find something soft and not conductive and place it under the m.2 for better support. and try to loosen the m.2 heatsink screws.
or, just don't use any mobo's m.2 heatsinks.
double-sided m.2 heatsink is a good thing, not for temp, but for better support.

google "m.2 bend" and see those images...


----------



## DBCooper1

neurokirurgi said:


> I'm getting WHEA 17 errors (dozens per second) on my 12900K+Z690 Hero combo, and the computer will randomly freeze during heavy CPU load (prime95, tm5, cinebench, even memtest86 in bios!). Freeze as in that the system locks up and doesn't respond to any inputs, forcing me to power it off.
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> A corrected hardware error has occurred.
> 
> Component: PCI Express Root Port
> Error Source: Advanced Error Reporting (PCI Express)
> 
> Primary Bus:Device:Function: 0x0:0x1:0x0
> Secondary Bus:Device:Function: 0x0:0x0:0x0
> Primary Device Name:PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_460D&SUBSYS_86941043&REV_02
> Secondary Device Name:
> 
> This corresponds with *Intel(R) PEG10 - 460D* in Device Manager, which I can only assume stands for the PCI-E slot.
> 
> This does not happen when the GPU (RTX 3080 TUF OC) is removed and I'm using the iGPU instead, nor does it happen when the GPU is seated in the lower PCI-E slot. In other words, the system is rock solid when the top PCI-E slot is unpopulated.
> 
> This happens on both 0702 and 0803 BETA bios when using default BIOS settings.
> 
> Is this a simple case of RMA, or could there be some strange compatibility issue at play here which might get fixed through future firmware updates?
> 
> full specs:
> 12900K, ALF II 360mm
> Z690 Maximus Hero
> Kingston Fury Beast 4800 CL38 (KF548C38-16)
> RTX 3080 TUF OC, separate PCI-E power cable for each 8-pin
> Crucial p5 1tb + Samsung 960 Evo 500GB + 2x1TB WD Blue sata ssd + 3tb toshiba HDD
> Seasonic Focus PX-750


I have a 12900K/Prime Z690-A/3090 and had those same errors as well appearing in HWINFO64. I moved my NVME from that top slot to the bottom that went through the chipset and haven't had those errors yet..


----------



## GtiJason

0451 said:


> Cool, I swapped my 12700K for something with a few more e-cores…
> 
> I was bummed to see an SP rating of 84, but now I see it’s 94 P core and 66 E core. I can live with that.


What was your 12700K ? My Kf is SP 75, with P core SP of 85 and E core SP of 57 (yuk)


----------



## geriatricpollywog

GtiJason said:


> What was your 12700K ? My Kf is SP 75, with P core SP of 85 and E core SP of 57 (yuk)


It was SP68. I don't know what the P and E core SP were.

Is P core SP normally higher than E core SP?


----------



## cstkl1

0451 said:


> It was SP68. I don't know what the P and E core SP were.
> 
> Is P core SP normally higher than E core SP?


i dont think the v/f on 12700k are comparable fo 12900k so the sp not apples to apples comparison.


----------



## bscool

I have never seen lower P core than E core. Is that even possible?


----------



## geriatricpollywog

Falkentyne said:


> View attachment 2534108
> 
> 
> View attachment 2534109
> 
> 
> View attachment 2534110


Hm, I did exactly what you said and its still not loading the cores. I'm using Stockfish 14.1, which is the version on the front page of the Stockfish website. Is that different from the version you are using?


----------



## sblantipodi

but what is the default vcore voltage on a 12900K?
is 1.2V considered a downvolt or a overvolt?


----------



## Exilon

asdkj1740 said:


> asus has started to include a rubber for supporting the middle bending part of the m.2. they call it "M.2 Rubber Package". eg z690 strix a


Yeah using those allows the heatsink pads to compress properly. Thermal pads without compression are significantly worse at thermal transfer.



sblantipodi said:


> but what is the default vcore voltage on a 12900K?
> is 1.2V considered a downvolt or a overvolt?


Depends entirely on your CPU sample and motherboard load line configuration. Higher the load line, higher the voltage CPU requests and higher the vdroop it expects.
My CPU wants 1.3v on default Intel loadlines at stock, but it can run 1.2v CB23 at .50/.97 AC/DC load line. 

The CPUs are binned at 1.1 AC/DC load line to ensure they're stable even with the lowest spec motherboards meeting minimums. Boards with lower power delivery losses and better VRM transient handling will set AC load line to lower than 1.1 and the CPU will still be stable while requesting less voltage. My gigabyte Z690 board defaulted with .7/.9 for example and power saving SVID set it even lower at .6/.9


----------



## Glottis

Exilon said:


> Yeah using those allows the heatsink pads to compress properly. Thermal pads without compression are significantly worse at thermal transfer.


I did everything according to the manual and the drive is still bending slightly. I even molded and compressed thermal pad so it's not so thick. I'm afraid that small rubber pad just isn't big or sturdy enough to support pressure from the heatsink. Really bad design by Asus, IMO.


----------



## ChaosAD

On your Apex boards have you updated the USB PD controller firmware and the Intel ME from the Asus site?


----------



## lutes1989

neurokirurgi said:


> I'm getting WHEA 17 errors (dozens per second) on my 12900K+Z690 Hero combo, and the computer will randomly freeze during heavy CPU load (prime95, tm5, cinebench, even memtest86 in bios!). Freeze as in that the system locks up and doesn't respond to any inputs, forcing me to power it off.
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> A corrected hardware error has occurred.
> 
> Component: PCI Express Root Port
> Error Source: Advanced Error Reporting (PCI Express)
> 
> Primary Bus:Device:Function: 0x0:0x1:0x0
> Secondary Bus:Device:Function: 0x0:0x0:0x0
> Primary Device Name:PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_460D&SUBSYS_86941043&REV_02
> Secondary Device Name:
> 
> This corresponds with *Intel(R) PEG10 - 460D* in Device Manager, which I can only assume stands for the PCI-E slot.
> 
> This does not happen when the GPU (RTX 3080 TUF OC) is removed and I'm using the iGPU instead, nor does it happen when the GPU is seated in the lower PCI-E slot. In other words, the system is rock solid when the top PCI-E slot is unpopulated.
> 
> This happens on both 0702 and 0803 BETA bios when using default BIOS settings.
> 
> Is this a simple case of RMA, or could there be some strange compatibility issue at play here which might get fixed through future firmware updates?
> 
> full specs:
> 12900K, ALF II 360mm
> Z690 Maximus Hero
> Kingston Fury Beast 4800 CL38 (KF548C38-16)
> RTX 3080 TUF OC, separate PCI-E power cable for each 8-pin
> Crucial p5 1tb + Samsung 960 Evo 500GB + 2x1TB WD Blue sata ssd + 3tb toshiba HDD
> Seasonic Focus PX-750



having 100% exact same issue for days
12900k+z690+3090+1000w corsair+g skills 5200


----------



## RetroWave78

Hi everyone, I'm looking for feedback with my upgrade. 

My memory and loop parts are scheduled to arrive Monday the 29th and I want to start tomorrow as it's a lot of work. I have to pull both rads and clean them with Mayhems Part 1 due to EKWB Mystic Fog fallout, I also need to disassemble and clean the 3090 FE EKWB as Mystic Crap has aggregated and solidified in the channels there. I am thinking of flashing 0803 to the new motherboard, Asus Strix-A D4, and am considering using the Flashback method, although I've never used this method, it seems like a good idea as 0803 seems to bring some stability over whatever BIOS the mobo shipped with (assuming 0606) for DR memory. I am upgrading from 8700k, looking forward to the elimination of my CPU bottlenecks in Assetto Corsa Competizione (VR, Pimax 8KX), Watch Dogs Legion and Red Dead Redemption 2 (visit Strawberry) to name a few. 

Asus BIOS Flashback without proc, memory: Guide: Asus Bios Flashback. No Processor. No RAM. No Problem. - YouTube 

Because I'm lazy and deplore having to reinstall Windows (I'm someone who makes a system image religiously every month) I am going to try keeping the current installation of Windows 10 with this method: 






I am using this memory, on the QVL: F4-4000C15Q-32GTRS-G.SKILL International Enterprise Co., Ltd. (gskill.com) 

Trident Z Royal
DDR4-4000MHz CL15-16-16-36 1.50V
32GB (4x8GB) 

Processor: 12900k 

I also have Safedisk's OC profile "DR_BDIE_4133.CMO" that I will try fairly early on. 

I intend to initially boot with 2 dimms in Slots A2 and B2, per the guidance in the manual and if it fails to boot I will try lowering the freq to 3600 MHz and working up from there. I'm looking for general voltage and overclocking advice to try to get this to boot at 4GHz with XMP timings. This is fairly good B-Die from Sept 2020. I will add the other two dimms when I get 2 stable to rule out DR. 

I'm coming from a Gigabyte motherboard, the last Asus board I had was Asus RIVBE x79 4930k from 2014, so I'm a bit rusty with Asus settings, I understand that SA (System Agent) is Asus equivalent of VCCIO and VCCSA on Gigabyte? 

I also intend to use Thermal Grizzly Conductonaut between the CPU IHS and EKWB (Supremacy 2.0, Acrylic). 

I'm looking for feedback and guidance here, if anyone has any issue with anything here please fire away. I start tearing down tomorrow, early afternoon. 

Just to confirm, is it true that to update the BIOS that no other files can be on the flash-drive? I have ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0003.CAP renamed SZ690AD4.CAP on a flash drive shared with Windows Repair Media (should I need to clean install Windows if the upgrade in place method fails). With Gigabyte, I've updated the BIOS through BIOS interface with other media on the drive, I can remove the other media on this drive to be safe as I have Windows Installation Media on two drives, I just wanted clarification on this. 

I have two separate System Images and a fully cloned boot drive to fall back on should something refuse to work and I need to throw my old motherboard back in. 

Just trying to cover all my bases here, a huge thanks in advance for any help and guidance with my preparation.


----------



## Exilon

RetroWave78 said:


> Just to confirm, is it true that to update the BIOS that no other files can be on the flash-drive? I have ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0003.CAP renamed SZ690AD4.CAP on a flash drive shared with Windows Repair Media (should I need to clean install Windows if the upgrade in place method fails). With Gigabyte, I've updated the BIOS through BIOS interface with other media on the drive, I can remove the other media on this drive to be safe as I have Windows Installation Media on two drives, I just wanted clarification on this.


If you install the CPU and RAM and boot in stock, you can use the fully featured flashing interface and name it whatever you want and place it anywhere on the USB.
Don't expect to boot 4x8GB at 4000 though.


----------



## RetroWave78

Exilon said:


> If you install the CPU and RAM and boot in stock, you can use the fully featured flashing interface and name it whatever you want and place it anywhere on the USB.
> Don't expect to boot 4x8GB at 4000 though.


That's why I'm considering using the Flashback method to flash to 0803 before adding CPU or memory as it brings stability improvement over 0707 and whatever came before it. Wont I have a better chance of booting with 0803? What if it refuses to boot (BIOS, not Windows) with two sticks? What recourse of action do I have in this situation?


----------



## bscool

@RetroWave78 I wouldnt use flashback myself. I use to always use it but after microcode not updating on z590 Apex when using flashback i have went to using ez flash via bios and that is what most use.

I also wouldnt use that safedisk profile, that was more for people to test 2x16 to see if it worked. No point usin with 4x8 in my opinion but do as you see fit.

Also do not mix cmo file from different bios versions. It may work but can cause issues.

And using ez flash you can have other files on the drive. It wont let you flash the wrong bios.


----------



## Stove

lutes1989 said:


> having 100% exact same issue for days
> 12900k+z690+3090+1000w corsair+g skills 5200


My games are closing randomly. Setup: 12900 + Hero + Kingston 5200 + EVGA 3080 (1 year old) + SB ZXR + Corsair HX1000i + 2 m2 + Commander pro


----------



## Exilon

Stove said:


> My games are closing randomly. Setup: 12900 + Hero + Kingston 5200 + EVGA 3080 (1 year old) + SB ZXR + Corsair HX1000i + 2 m2 + Commander pro


Did you disable PEG ASPM in BIOS and on the OS side?


----------



## RetroWave78

bscool said:


> @RetroWave78 I wouldnt use flashback myself. I use to always use it but after microcode not updating on z590 Apex when using flashback i have went to using ez flash via bios and that is what most use.
> 
> I also wouldnt use that safedisk profile, that was more for people to test 2x16 to see if it worked. No point usin with 4x8 in my opinion but do as you see fit.
> 
> Also do not mix cmo file from different bios versions. It may work but can cause issues.
> 
> And using ez flash you can have other files on the drive. It wont let you flash the wrong bios.


Ok I will try to boot into BIOS with whatever BIOS it shipped with and use EZ Flash there. 

Isn't 4x8 SR effectively DR? So Safedisk's profile is no good? I'm fairly certain the profile in question for 0803, If I'm mistaken please correct me.


----------



## bscool

@RetroWave78 I only know about the cmo that was for 003 4133c15. Maybe there is an 803 cmo also. You can use them but it not recommended to do so with different bios versions.

Try it and see what happens.I know I have used them before with different bios version and sometimes it works and sometimes weird things happen like wifi will disappear from the bios.

It is not a big deal if it doesnt work, just safe boot or clear cmos and retry different settings.


----------



## raad11

Does 0803 include the DDR4 memory improvements from 0003?


RetroWave78 said:


> I also have Safedisk's OC profile "DR_BDIE_4133.CMO" that I will try fairly early on.


Where can we get that?

Also, 4 sticks puts more stress on the motherboard/IMC than 2 dual rank. Almost everyone has reported that. The board doesn't use T-Topology, it uses daisy chain.


----------



## BenchAndGames

neurokirurgi said:


> I'm getting WHEA 17 errors (dozens per second) on my 12900K+Z690 Hero combo, and the computer will randomly freeze during heavy CPU load (prime95, tm5, cinebench, even memtest86 in bios!). Freeze as in that the system locks up and doesn't respond to any inputs, forcing me to power it off.
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> A corrected hardware error has occurred.
> 
> Component: PCI Express Root Port
> Error Source: Advanced Error Reporting (PCI Express)
> 
> Primary Bus:Device:Function: 0x0:0x1:0x0
> Secondary Bus:Device:Function: 0x0:0x0:0x0
> Primary Device Name:PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_460D&SUBSYS_86941043&REV_02
> Secondary Device Name:
> 
> This corresponds with *Intel(R) PEG10 - 460D* in Device Manager, which I can only assume stands for the PCI-E slot.
> 
> This does not happen when the GPU (RTX 3080 TUF OC) is removed and I'm using the iGPU instead, nor does it happen when the GPU is seated in the lower PCI-E slot. In other words, the system is rock solid when the top PCI-E slot is unpopulated.
> 
> This happens on both 0702 and 0803 BETA bios when using default BIOS settings.
> 
> Is this a simple case of RMA, or could there be some strange compatibility issue at play here which might get fixed through future firmware updates?
> 
> full specs:
> 12900K, ALF II 360mm
> Z690 Maximus Hero
> Kingston Fury Beast 4800 CL38 (KF548C38-16)
> RTX 3080 TUF OC, separate PCI-E power cable for each 8-pin
> Crucial p5 1tb + Samsung 960 Evo 500GB + 2x1TB WD Blue sata ssd + 3tb toshiba HDD
> Seasonic Focus PX-750


Dont desesperate Im getting the same error 315x WHEA id 17 errors in 2 seconds
I have TUF Z690 WIFI version

But Im sure its not from you GPU, pay atention how to detect exactly from wich device is:

In your case its looks like comign from
DEV_460D

So go to
Device Manager --> System devices --> Click on "*Intel(R) PEG10 - 460D*" (The problem device) once.
Then click on the "View" Panel --> Select "Device by connection"

And than you will able to see exactly wich device is conected to that port, im preaty sure its your M2 Samsung 960 Evo 500GB.

If is this the case, try take out that M2 and test it, if is saying that on *Intel(R) PEG10 - 460D *its your video card I dont know, but definitly somethign weird happaning with this Asus Boards, cuz as I said I have same problem.

But in my case is my NVMe device WD Black SN850 1GB that it on the PCI-root with the WHEA errors.

But I dont have freeze or anything, for me its working ok its just this anoying WHEA error sometimes like 300x times in 1 sec.....make no sense....

I hope bios or sata firmware will fix this.

_*EDIT: I can see here we are like 4 or 5 with the same issue, all we have asus boards so something bad with thise boards*_


----------



## raad11

I got the WHEA errors too. SN850 1TB. I got them in M.2_3 slot, but not M2._4 slot. And also so far not in M.2_1 slot. I also turned option 'Native ASPM' to 'Enabled' in BIOS (PEG ASPM was already on Disabled for me). Then I turned off PCI Express Link power management in Windows in both Balanced and High Performance profiles. So far no more WHEA errors.

All else fails, put the drives in Gen 3 mode and the errors should stop that way too.


----------



## BenchAndGames

raad11 said:


> I got the WHEA errors too. SN850 1TB. I got them in M.2_3 slot, but not M2._4 slot. And also so far not in M.2_1 slot. I also turned option 'Native ASPM' to 'Enabled' in BIOS (PEG ASPM was already on Disabled for me). Then I turned off PCI Express Link power management in Windows in both Balanced and High Performance profiles. So far no more WHEA errors.
> 
> All else fails, put the drives in Gen 3 mode and the errors should stop that way too.


Yeah so its mote than confirmed its related to the compatibility with M2 devices, I have the same SN850 with the same problem.

I yested so far 2 different M2 conection but in both of them I got the WHEA.
Its just when I plug in into 1 M2, will change the root name devicr, but checking it on device manager right how I described above will show me that always it is the SN 850 no matter in what M2 slot I install, will just change the PCI root.

Also its a totally new NVMe drive with 4 hours ik total cuz I just replaced it thinking that the old one was defective...seems like asus boards are defective

As you can see in this picture, in this case the SN850 wich is that WDS100T1X0E-00AFY0 it is installed on the M2_3 and the PCI-E root got the name of 7AC8, but before I had it installed on the M2_4 and the PCI-E root named was like 7AC4 , but holding the same WDS100T1X0E-00AFY0 (SN850)


----------



## Alberto_It

XMP profile (my memory have got two 4800 and 5200Mhz) don't work, the PC freezes completely.

Tried Apex profile 5400 2x16Go, it works but the frequency stuck on 4800.

Windows 11 latest build, all bios 0803 settings are stock

@shamino1978 @RobertoSampaio what I have to do?


----------



## raad11

raad11 said:


> Does 0803 include the DDR4 memory improvements from 0003?
> 
> Where can we get that?
> 
> Also, 4 sticks puts more stress on the motherboard/IMC than 2 dual rank. Almost everyone has reported that. The board doesn't use T-Topology, it uses daisy chain.


I guess not. 0803 is worse for me for memory than 0707. I had 2x16GB DR B-Die booting and passing TM5 at 4000 Gear 1 (14-16-16-29) and now it won't even POST with 3900 Gear 1 14-15-15-28 (which also passed on 0707) with even higher SA/VDDQ voltages. 

Gonna try 0003 now


----------



## NO22222

BenchAndGames said:


> Yeah so its mote than confirmed its related to the compatibility with M2 devices, I have the same SN850 with the same problem.
> 
> I yested so far 2 different M2 conection but in both of them I got the WHEA.
> Its just when I plug in into 1 M2, will change the root name devicr, but checking it on device manager right how I described above will show me that always it is the SN 850 no matter in what M2 slot I install, will just change the PCI root.
> 
> Also its a totally new NVMe drive with 4 hours ik total cuz I just replaced it thinking that the old one was defective...seems like asus boards are defective
> 
> As you can see in this picture, in this case the SN850 wich is that WDS100T1X0E-00AFY0 it is installed on the M2_3 and the PCI-E root got the name of 7AC8, but before I had it installed on the M2_4 and the PCI-E root named was like 7AC4 , but holding the same WDS100T1X0E-00AFY0 (SN850)
> 
> View attachment 2534741


You can try to install the chipset driver in a clean way,Tutorial here[DRIVERS] Intel Chipset/MEI/SATA/VMD (1xx/2xx/3xx/4xx/5xx/6xx) (asus.com)


----------



## BenchAndGames

NO22222 said:


> You can try to install the chipset driver in a clean way,Tutorial here[DRIVERS] Intel Chipset/MEI/SATA/VMD (1xx/2xx/3xx/4xx/5xx/6xx) (asus.com)


More clean than windows fresh install ? Naah....not a driver issue, its a bios/firmware issue. Im not only me as you can see we are few with same issue


----------



## cstkl1

BenchAndGames said:


> Yeah so its mote than confirmed its related to the compatibility with M2 devices, I have the same SN850 with the same problem.
> 
> I yested so far 2 different M2 conection but in both of them I got the WHEA.
> Its just when I plug in into 1 M2, will change the root name devicr, but checking it on device manager right how I described above will show me that always it is the SN 850 no matter in what M2 slot I install, will just change the PCI root.
> 
> Also its a totally new NVMe drive with 4 hours ik total cuz I just replaced it thinking that the old one was defective...seems like asus boards are defective
> 
> As you can see in this picture, in this case the SN850 wich is that WDS100T1X0E-00AFY0 it is installed on the M2_3 and the PCI-E root got the name of 7AC8, but before I had it installed on the M2_4 and the PCI-E root named was like 7AC4 , but holding the same WDS100T1X0E-00AFY0 (SN850)
> 
> View attachment 2534741


odd i have a sn850 on apex on gen 4 with cpu
a 980 pro , adata xpg sx 8200 on pch

no whea. been using this setup since october. added the 980 pro later to check a whea claim on the dimm m.2


----------



## geriatricpollywog

I’m not seeing any WHEA errors on my Strix D4 running both 980pro in Gen4 slots. Maybe I’ll pop them into my chipset slots for extra overclocking.


----------



## darth_meh

BenchAndGames said:


> More clean than windows fresh install ? Naah....not a driver issue, its a bios/firmware issue. Im not only me as you can see we are few with same issue


Yeah, my SoundBlaster AE-7 is triggering PCI Express WHEA errors too. It worked fine with my ASUS Z490 board. There's either a serious UEFI/firmware issue here or the motherboard is fubar. I'm contemplating just returning all of this Z690 hardware because I wasn't expecting to be a beta tester.


----------



## raad11

raad11 said:


> I guess not. 0803 is worse for me for memory than 0707. I had 2x16GB DR B-Die booting and passing TM5 at 4000 Gear 1 (14-16-16-29) and now it won't even POST with 3900 Gear 1 14-15-15-28 (which also passed on 0707) with even higher SA/VDDQ voltages.
> 
> Gonna try 0003 now


Weird, 0003 doesn't work for me either. Can't even post at 3900 Gear 1. Seems like a more severe version of what I observed earlier where the system just can't get stable with a manual CPU and memory overclock at the same time when using dual rank sticks. Except I could at least run 3900 Gear 1 at Auto (1.35/1.35) SA/VDDQ voltages on 0707. I can't even post that in 0003, even when pushing voltage to 1.45/1.45


----------



## BenchAndGames

cstkl1 said:


> odd i have a sn850 on apex on gen 4 with cpu
> a 980 pro , adata xpg sx 8200 on pch
> 
> no whea. been using this setup since october. added the 980 pro later to check a whea claim on the dimm m.2


The thing is, its random at least in my case I cannot reproduce it, but seems like 1 per day and that 1 its like 200+ WHEA errors in 1 single second...

All of them pointing at the SN850 nvme


----------



## darth_meh

Alberto_It said:


> XMP profile (my memory have got two 4800 and 5200Mhz) don't work, the PC freezes completely.
> 
> Tried Apex profile 5400 2x16Go, it works but the frequency stuck on 4800.
> 
> Windows 11 latest build, all bios 0803 settings are stock
> 
> @shamino1978 @RobertoSampaio what I have to do?


I was able to get my memory running at 5200 by setting the frequency manually, but I'm only able to run stock timings. XMP I and XMP II causes BSOD. Some people have reported increasing the DRAM voltage to 1.3V or 1.35V helps. If you read through these forums and on Reddit there are quite a few people having DDR5 XMP issues. I'm hoping a UEFI update will fix it soon.


----------



## cstkl1

BenchAndGames said:


> The thing is, its random at least in my case I cannot reproduce it, but seems like 1 per day and that 1 its like 200+ WHEA errors in 1 single second...
> 
> All of them pointing at the SN850 nvme


most probably can be solved with tuning the rams


----------



## Alberto_It

darth_meh said:


> I was able to get my memory running at 5200 by setting the frequency manually, but I'm only able to run stock timings. XMP I and XMP II causes BSOD. Some people have reported increasing the DRAM voltage to 1.3V or 1.35V helps. If you read through these forums and on Reddit there are quite a few people having DDR5 XMP issues. I'm hoping a UEFI update will fix it soon.


Thank you, I hope on a UEFI UPDATE


----------



## BenchAndGames

cstkl1 said:


> most probably can be solved with tuning the rams


What have to do the RAMS here ? Maybe you are confusing the posts..im talking about SSD issue. That is triggered with factory bios non XMP, or whatever.

Anyway I can see we are actually more than I tought every time new guy claiming having the same issue


----------



## raad11

I am kind of amazed at how bad 0003/0803 are for dual rank memory. I can't post anything that worked on previous BIOS or that worked easily on single rank.

Edit: Are there any 2x16GB B-Die Single Rank kits?


----------



## cstkl1

raad11 said:


> I am kind of amazed at how bad 0003/0803 are for dual rank memory. I can't post anything that worked on previous BIOS or that worked easily on single rank.
> 
> Edit: Are there any 2x16GB B-Die Single Rank kits?


hmm buzz me via pm. free atm.
facetime foc tuning.


----------



## bscool

raad11 said:


> I am kind of amazed at how bad 0003/0803 are for dual rank memory. I can't post anything that worked on previous BIOS or that worked easily on single rank.
> 
> Edit: Are there any 2x16GB B-Die Single Rank kits?


I skipped to 03 and 803, just tried 707 and so far much better. Finally booted 4226 DR. Boots faster and easier than 03 or 803. Also can leave VCCSA and VDDQ on auto or 1.35v where the other two need 1.45sa and 1.5q to boot 4133. Couldnt boot 4266 on 03 or 803. Need to test stability next.


----------



## neurokirurgi

BenchAndGames said:


> Dont desesperate Im getting the same error 315x WHEA id 17 errors in 2 seconds
> I have TUF Z690 WIFI version
> 
> But Im sure its not from you GPU, pay atention how to detect exactly from wich device is:
> 
> In your case its looks like comign from
> DEV_460D
> 
> So go to
> Device Manager --> System devices --> Click on "*Intel(R) PEG10 - 460D*" (The problem device) once.
> Then click on the "View" Panel --> Select "Device by connection"
> 
> And than you will able to see exactly wich device is conected to that port, im preaty sure its your M2 Samsung 960 Evo 500GB.
> 
> If is this the case, try take out that M2 and test it, if is saying that on *Intel(R) PEG10 - 460D *its your video card I dont know, but definitly somethign weird happaning with this Asus Boards, cuz as I said I have same problem.
> 
> But in my case is my NVMe device WD Black SN850 1GB that it on the PCI-root with the WHEA errors.
> 
> But I dont have freeze or anything, for me its working ok its just this anoying WHEA error sometimes like 300x times in 1 sec.....make no sense....
> 
> I hope bios or sata firmware will fix this.
> 
> _*EDIT: I can see here we are like 4 or 5 with the same issue, all we have asus boards so something bad with thise boards*_


The Intel(R) PEG10 - 460D doesn't have any devices under it right now when the GPU in is the second slot.










That standard NVM express controller has to be the 960 Evo since it's connected in M.2_3, my main OS drive (the Crucial P5) is under PCI Express root port #13 - 7AB4 since it's in the M.2_1 slot.

It gives me some comfort that I'm not alone with this, hopefully it's a mobo firmware issue that can be fixed via update. There are others with the same issue here: ROG Strix z690A Gaming WiFi WHEa 17 Errors

I had some windows integrity violations that I couldn't fix through SFC and DISM so I have to reinstall Windows again. After that, I think I'm set for a while since everything else seems to be working now that the GPU is in the second slot. This certainly hasn't been the weekend I was hoping for so far, I thought I'd be tweaking memory and overclocking the CPU by about now.


----------



## bscool

bscool said:


> I skipped to 03 and 803, just tried 707 and so far much better. Finally booted 4226 DR. Boots faster and easier than 03 or 803. Also can leave VCCSA and VDDQ on auto or 1.35v where the other two need 1.45sa and 1.5q to boot 4133. Couldnt boot 4266 on 03 or 803. Need to test stability next.


Now @raad11 has me talking to myself. lol As soon as i tried memtest it error with 4266c16 VSSA and VSSQ @1.35 or auto. Tried going into bios and manually settiing 1.45 and 1.5 and no boot, so that is interesting. Will have to play it more tomorrow. Getting late.


----------



## Agent-A01

raad11 said:


> I am kind of amazed at how bad 0003/0803 are for dual rank memory. I can't post anything that worked on previous BIOS or that worked easily on single rank.
> 
> Edit: Are there any 2x16GB B-Die Single Rank kits?


I agree 0803 is argue-ably worse than previous revisions but I never did try 0707.. I should try it at this point

I used to have these set as following on the last 0801(IIRC) vs current 0803

Voltages = same for both
DDR = 1.48
SA = 1.22
VDDQ = 1.35

tRDWR_SG = 10 > 13
tRDWR_SG = 10 > 13
tRDWR_DR = 10 > 13
tRDWR_DD = 10 > 13
tWRWR_DR = 6 > 7

Board was 100% stable before but will not post these old values on 0803 bios.
I did find out that tWRWR = 6 will boot with approx 1.47~ VDDQ when before it was fine at stock 1.35v

Mentioned before, used to could boot 4000 reliably. With the past couple bios that's been impossible.
0803 worked fine once at XMP 4000 CL17 @ Gear 1 but after a reboot it would never post again at that speed.

Can do CL13-13-13-22 at 3800 but impossible to boot at 3866... No way that's a cpu limitation as i could still boot 4133(with lots of memory errors)

Another thing, a user mentioned skew settings of 80-60-60.. Does not work for my DR kit.
Makes training take forever. 80-40-40 works great.

One last thing. 
This board/bios has just killed another Noctua A12 fan. Repeated testing of various things has somehow killed the PWM controllers on the fans. Those two fans are now stuck at 100% because the board detects them as PWM but it's dead.
Setting them as DC will allow them to idle normally.

I'm pretty positive they are dead because swapping another a12 in the same header is fine. Moving the bad fan to another header results in 100% fan speed.

Not fun losing $60 from a bios update. Unless it's just another bios bug introduced with this 0803 version.
Anyways be careful with repeated tests. Hopefully it's not a widespread issue.


----------



## Alberto_It

All with DDR4 lol, I'm wondering why have you choose a platform born for DDR5. Just curiosity


----------



## raad11

bscool said:


> Now @raad11 has me talking to myself. lol As soon as i tried memtest it error with 4266c16 VSSA and VSSQ @1.35 or auto. Tried going into bios and manually settiing 1.45 and 1.5 and no boot, so that is interesting. Will have to play it more tomorrow. Getting late.


Try turning off mrc fast boot.

0801 should be like 0707. But 0801 has that voltage problem. I went back to 0707 and booted 4000 Gear 1 CL14 no problem on DR. Now trying error testing.


----------



## raad11

@Agent-A01 I've been wondering what are safe operable ranges for SA and VDDQ voltage. I've never gone over 1.45 for either


----------



## geriatricpollywog

Alberto_It said:


> All with DDR4 lol, I'm wondering why have you choose a platform born for DDR5. Just curiosity


Show me your 3DMark benchmark scores, then I’ll put it in perspective for you


----------



## SuperMumrik

Alberto_It said:


> All with DDR4 lol, I'm wondering why have you choose a platform born for DDR5. Just curiosity


If you are lucky enough to get some DDR5 dimms, it's more than likely ****ty micron ic's that's slower than the worst binned SR B-dies you could possibly get.


----------



## RetroWave78

bscool said:


> @RetroWave78 I only know about the cmo that was for 003 4133c15. Maybe there is an 803 cmo also. You can use them but it not recommended to do so with different bios versions.
> 
> Try it and see what happens.I know I have used them before with different bios version and sometimes it works and sometimes weird things happen like wifi will disappear from the bios.
> 
> It is not a big deal if it doesnt work, just safe boot or clear cmos and retry different settings.


Great info and help, I'm so confused, I trust your guidance, somehow I assumed people were referring to 0803 when they were stating 0003. I will delete Safedisk's .CMO file. Also, reading the other comments that followed yours, it seems people are having better luck with DR memory on 0707 so I will probably try that first. 



raad11 said:


> Does 0803 include the DDR4 memory improvements from 0003?
> 
> Where can we get that?
> 
> Also, 4 sticks puts more stress on the motherboard/IMC than 2 dual rank. Almost everyone has reported that. The board doesn't use T-Topology, it uses daisy chain.


I apologize, I confused the two, there is no .CMO file for 0803 that I'm aware of. Great info on 4 sticks, I thought that the stress was the same as 2x 16GB DR. 



raad11 said:


> I guess not. 0803 is worse for me for memory than 0707. I had 2x16GB DR B-Die booting and passing TM5 at 4000 Gear 1 (14-16-16-29) and now it won't even POST with 3900 Gear 1 14-15-15-28 (which also passed on 0707) with even higher SA/VDDQ voltages.
> 
> Gonna try 0003 now


Great information, I will try 0707 then, thanks! 



raad11 said:


> I am kind of amazed at how bad 0003/0803 are for dual rank memory. I can't post anything that worked on previous BIOS or that worked easily on single rank.
> 
> Edit: Are there any 2x16GB B-Die Single Rank kits?


Thanks for the information! No not that I'm aware of.


----------



## Agent-A01

raad11 said:


> @Agent-A01 I've been wondering what are safe operable ranges for SA and VDDQ voltage. I've never gone over 1.45 for either


I believe intel spec max for SA is 1.52v and VDDQ is listed at 1.2 Typ+5%. That would be 1.35v.

Obviously people are running much higher so who knows what the true max is..
I wouldn't want to run 1.5+ SA though.

Little bit of interesting tid bid I found looking at the voltage limits.



> _*Any system memory (SM) interface signal that goes to a memory in which it is not*_
> *connected to any actual memory devices (such as SODIMM connector is unpopulated,
> or is single-sided) is tri-stated. The benefits of disabling unused SM signals are:
> • Reduced power consumption.
> • Reduced possible overshoot/undershoot signal quality issues seen by the
> processor I/O buffer receivers caused by reflections from potentially unterminated
> transmission lines.
> When a given rank is not populated, the corresponding control signals (CLK_P/
> CLK_N/CKE/ODT/CS) are not driven.
> 
> Unused signals should be disabled to save power and reduce electromagnetic
> interference. This includes all signals associated with an unused memory channel.
> Clocks, CKE, ODT, and CS signals are controlled per DIMM rank and will be powered*
> _*down for unused ranks*_


May be a good idea to manually do this in the bios. I know you can disable unused DRAM channels but I have no idea if it sets these respective values to 0/off.


----------



## Stove

Exilon said:


> Did you disable PEG ASPM in BIOS and on the OS side?
> View attachment 2534720


On bios was ok, I`ve changed on w11. I disable Resize-Bar on BIOS too. With this changes I managed to finish a full game on BF 2042. Thx. Today I´ll try some more.


----------



## ES IST ZEIT

Hello
which timings are important for latency?
I do not come under 52ns.


----------



## cstkl1

ES IST ZEIT said:


> Hello
> which timings are important for latency?
> I do not come under 52ns.


theres a bug on windows 11
best install windows on default load optimozed settings

if not something odd happens which result in aida latency being higher
for example i am 48.8-49ns
bugged 54-55ns wont come down

tested this few times,

so installed totally default no ram oc .. or anything
later only load your profile or xmp etc.


----------



## lolhaxz

PSA - Anyone suffering a _very faint_ hissing/helicopter sounding noise floor on their audio output on ALC4082... seems ASUS bundled Realtek driver is screwed - it's particularly noticeable during silence if you are headphones user.

Install 2299 from here -> Microsoft Update Catalog (any of the 691KB ones) 

Extract CAB and goto device manager, and point search for updated drivers at extracted folder.

Deafening silence afterwards <3


----------



## lolhaxz

neurokirurgi said:


> The Intel(R) PEG10 - 460D doesn't have any devices under it right now when the GPU in is the second slot.
> 
> View attachment 2534745
> 
> 
> That standard NVM express controller has to be the 960 Evo since it's connected in M.2_3, my main OS drive (the Crucial P5) is under PCI Express root port #13 - 7AB4 since it's in the M.2_1 slot.
> 
> It gives me some comfort that I'm not alone with this, hopefully it's a mobo firmware issue that can be fixed via update. There are others with the same issue here: ROG Strix z690A Gaming WiFi WHEa 17 Errors
> 
> I had some windows integrity violations that I couldn't fix through SFC and DISM so I have to reinstall Windows again. After that, I think I'm set for a while since everything else seems to be working now that the GPU is in the second slot. This certainly hasn't been the weekend I was hoping for so far, I thought I'd be tweaking memory and overclocking the CPU by about now.


Not that it probably helps in your particular case.... but I was getting event viewer spewing these exact WHEA errors too, from the same device... removed the driver, no change.

Then I realized. These boards are PCIE4 and I'm using a riser cable - clearly its not PCIE Gen4 capable... locked GPU slot to Gen3 - errors went away....

Short story - perhaps try locking the suspect device to Gen3... see if that helps. (will atleast tell you its a Gen3/Gen4/compatibility issue - which it most likely is.)

Welcome to ASUS products - you are the BETA tester...


----------



## Nizzen

lolhaxz said:


> Not that it probably helps in your particular case.... but I was getting event viewer spewing these exact WHEA errors too, from the same device... removed the driver, no change.
> 
> Then I realized. These boards are PCIE4 and I'm using a riser cable - clearly its not PCIE Gen4 capable... locked GPU slot to Gen3 - errors went away....
> 
> Short story - perhaps try locking the suspect device to Gen3... see if that helps. (will atleast tell you its a Gen3/Gen4/compatibility issue - which it most likely is.)
> 
> Welcome to ASUS products - you are the BETA tester...


I'm a happy betatester for Asus. Best betabioses of any brand. Actually the best bioses


----------



## neurokirurgi

lolhaxz said:


> Not that it probably helps in your particular case.... but I was getting event viewer spewing these exact WHEA errors too, from the same device... removed the driver, no change.
> 
> Then I realized. These boards are PCIE4 and I'm using a riser cable - clearly its not PCIE Gen4 capable... locked GPU slot to Gen3 - errors went away....
> 
> Short story - perhaps try locking the suspect device to Gen3... see if that helps. (will atleast tell you its a Gen3/Gen4/compatibility issue - which it most likely is.)
> 
> Welcome to ASUS products - you are the BETA tester...


I tried forcing all slots to both gen 3 and gen 4, it had no effect.

The only thing that somewhat alleviated the issues was disabling ASPM and link state power management in BIOS, this reduced the amount of WHEA's but I still had freezes.

Since there are multiple people with the same or similar issues on these ASUS boards, my guess is that it's some sort of a compatibility problem which hopefully can be solved with a BIOS update.


----------



## cstkl1

Nizzen said:


> I'm a happy betatester for Asus. Best betabioses of any brand. Actually the best bioses


same here.
rather than having no support like the other brands.


----------



## lolhaxz

Nizzen said:


> I'm a happy betatester for Asus. Best betabioses of any brand. Actually the best bioses


Clearly so am I - seeing as last 4 boards have been ASUS.

Maybe it's worse with other vendors, I cringe when I think about normies using some of these boards out the box however... haha

ie, Broken XMP voltages on D4 (I also have one of these) and on this Extreme, XMP sets memory controller voltage to something stupid like 300.xxx, lucky I spotted it before save/reboot ... bugs that probably shouldn't occur/get past in-house testing.


----------



## shamino1978

lolhaxz said:


> Clearly so am I - seeing as last 4 boards have been ASUS.
> 
> Maybe it's worse with other vendors, I cringe when I think about normies using some of these boards out the box however... haha
> 
> ie, Broken XMP voltages on D4 (I also have one of these) and on this Extreme, XMP sets memory controller voltage to something stupid like 300.xxx, lucky I spotted it before save/reboot ... bugs that probably shouldn't occur/get past in-house testing.


that is the problem with the xmp profile by the vendor, they flashed the mc voltage with wrong out of range values.


----------



## raad11

shamino1978 said:


> that is the problem with the xmp profile by the vendor, they flashed the mc voltage with wrong out of range values.


Hi Shamino, is there something we're doing wrong with this new 0803/0003 BIOS? A few of us are getting better dual rank performance out of 0707. Were there supposed to be mem OC improvements for DR on those versions?


----------



## shamino1978

raad11 said:


> Hi Shamino, is there something we're doing wrong with this new 0803/0003 BIOS? A few of us are getting better dual rank performance out of 0707. Were there supposed to be mem OC improvements for DR on those versions?


the mrc version is newer but newer is not always better for all scenarios. as you can guess by reading, often changes can help some and harm others, often you cannot fit everyone's setup. this has to be looked into again.


----------



## bscool

raad11 said:


> Try turning off mrc fast boot.
> 
> 0801 should be like 0707. But 0801 has that voltage problem. I went back to 0707 and booted 4000 Gear 1 CL14 no problem on DR. Now trying error testing.


Thanks that did it and just a short run of memtest it runs fine @4266c16 DR [email protected] [email protected] Will test more later. Anyone who skipped 707 on Strix d4 needs to try it. Best one so far for me.

Also had weird issue on 003 where it would crash unless I set a static/manual v core voltage.


----------



## darth_meh

lolhaxz said:


> XMP sets memory controller voltage to something stupid like 300.xxx, lucky I spotted it before save/reboot


Hold up - what memory kit is doing that?? And how did you catch it.


----------



## darth_meh

lolhaxz said:


> Short story - perhaps try locking the suspect device to Gen3... see if that helps. (will atleast tell you its a Gen3/Gen4/compatibility issue - which it most likely is.)
> 
> Welcome to ASUS products - you are the BETA tester...


I tried setting my Sound Blaster AE-7 to Auto/Gen1/2/3 and saw WHEA errors with every setting. Wondering if I should exchange my motherboard while I'm still in the return window. I also downgraded to Windows 10 thinking maybe it was a Windows 11 issue, but that didn't make a difference either.


----------



## darth_meh

Noticed this Windows 11 optional update - any idea what this is?


----------



## darth_meh

@shamino1978 wondering if you have any insight into these PCIEX WHEA errors people are reporting?


----------



## shamino1978

darth_meh said:


> @shamino1978 wondering if you have any insight into these PCIEX WHEA errors people are reporting?


seems like mostly centered around wd nvme gen4, will look into that also


----------



## edkieferlp

darth_meh said:


> Noticed this Windows 11 optional update - any idea what this is?
> View attachment 2534792


That's for the Intel MEI .


----------



## BenchAndGames

neurokirurgi said:


> The Intel(R) PEG10 - 460D doesn't have any devices under it right now when the GPU in is the second slot.
> 
> View attachment 2534745
> 
> 
> That standard NVM express controller has to be the 960 Evo since it's connected in M.2_3, my main OS drive (the Crucial P5) is under PCI Express root port #13 - 7AB4 since it's in the M.2_1 slot.
> 
> It gives me some comfort that I'm not alone with this, hopefully it's a mobo firmware issue that can be fixed via update. There are others with the same issue here: ROG Strix z690A Gaming WiFi WHEa 17 Errors
> 
> I had some windows integrity violations that I couldn't fix through SFC and DISM so I have to reinstall Windows again. After that, I think I'm set for a while since everything else seems to be working now that the GPU is in the second slot. This certainly hasn't been the weekend I was hoping for so far, I thought I'd be tweaking memory and overclocking the CPU by about now.


But did you change the M2 slot for any of you device since the WHEA error that you posted the first time that shows PEG10 - 460D ?

More easy, are you still getting WHEA reports from this PEG10 - 460D even if you dont have any device connected to it ?


----------



## raad11

Anyone know if putting NVME drive in top slot will affect CPU's L3 latency? Like in Aida64 benchmark?


----------



## RetroWave78

What is the nature of this PCI-E Gen 4 WHEA error, does it occur only when one of the M.2 slots is occupied, is it a particular slot, or does it happen even when the slots are unoccupied? Currently my boot drive is a 2TB M.2, I'm planning on starting work tomorrow on the upgrade (Asus Strix-A D4), should I install the OS to a SATA drive instead? 

What motherboards exactly are affected by this? Thanks.


----------



## darth_meh

RetroWave78 said:


> What is the nature of this PCI-E Gen 4 WHEA error.


I have an ASUS ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME.
I have M.2_2 and M.2_3 populated with NVME Samsung 980 Pros.
I have a NVIDIA 3090FE in PCIEX16_1.
I only get WHEA_UNCORRECTABLE_ERRORs when I put my Sound Blaster AE-7 in the PCIEX16_2 or PCIEX1 slot.
🤷‍♂️


----------



## BenchAndGames

I have TUF Z690 WIFI D4 and 2x NMVe WD SN750&SN850 testing different M2 slots but always for me it triggered the WHEA related to the slot where SN850 its installed. Apart of that, I have another WHEA error id 3 that its has nothing to do with anything, just triggered out of no were when I unplug power cable from the PC.

But I have to say, I have no BSOD, freeze or crash, for me the system its totally stable even with this anoying WHEA´s....

But I think I will just return this board and go for MSI .... because already I RMA this board and the NVMe SN850 because of the WHEAs and still getting them with the new replacement units.


----------



## raad11

I put my SN850 from M.2_1 back into M.2_3 and I got the WHEA errors in Windows again.


----------



## Exilon

M.2_1 would be from the CPU and M.2_3 from the PCH. Is ASPM off for both?


----------



## Agent-A01

I jumped on the 0707 bandwagon with good results.

TLDR everyone skip any other bios on Samsung DR b-die.

So before I could not post above 3800 gear 1.
Now 4133 Gear 1 is possible.

I've elected to drop down to 4000 because my IMC requires too much SA voltage, about 1.5v.

Final results
4000 CL14-15-15-20
1.53 VDIMM
1.3 SA
1.47 VDDQ











While not as good as my 10900K, I'm pretty happy with the final results.

Hopefully future bios will be better.


----------



## raad11

Exilon said:


> M.2_1 would be from the CPU and M.2_3 from the PCH. Is ASPM off for both?


It was left on Auto for PCH (with PCIe power management disabled in Windows), but I guess that's not enough to ensure it's off.

On another note, I took out the NVME drive, booted off a SATA drive, and my L3 latency in Aida64 went back to ~13.5ns. Then I put in the NVME, booted off the SATA and L3 latency went up into mid-14s, then I ran it again while browsing the NVME drive in Explorer during the L3 latency test and it got the 15-16ns.

Who knew, running an NVME drive (as boot drive) increases L3 latency in Aida64 by about 2ns. Having any NVME drive increases by about 0.5-1.0ns depending on use.


----------



## Cam1

Am i missing something, or it looks normal ?
bios can't post with ram @4000

If Ram is not stable does it impact the benchmark?


----------



## Agent-A01

Cam1 said:


> Am i missing something, or it looks normal ?
> bios can't post with ram @4000
> 
> If Ram is not stable does it impact the benchmark?


What SA volt? I don't see it in the picture

And no typically memory errors won't cause the performance to be worse.

A couple things.

You have tRAS set incorrectly which will induce stability problems.
tRAS minimum value must be tRCD + tRTP which is 27 in your case.

You will get better performance by tweaking the secondaries and tertiaries


----------



## cstkl1

i9-12900k -SP93
Asus MZ690 Apex - 0802
Gskill 2x16gb 6400 c28-37-37-28-1T 280
Asus Strix Rtx 3080ti stock


----------



## cstkl1

bye bye ddr4


----------



## bscool

@raad11 I am having issues also with 1tb SN850 drive being in top NVME slot(havent tried other slots). I noticed if booting from Sata drive and I have WD SN850 NVME in top slot, it will not boot. Remove SN850 and boots. Replace SN850 with Samsung 970 Evo boots from the Sata drive.

When booting from SN850 get check disk a lot of times on boot up if Sata drive connected.


MB z690 Strix A D4 bios 707


----------



## cstkl1

bscool said:


> @raad11 I am having issues also with 1tb SN850 drive being in top NVME slot(havent tried other slots). I noticed if booting from Sata drive and I have WD SN850 NVME in top slot, it will not boot. Remove SN850 and boots. Replace SN850 with Samsung 970 Evo boots from the Sata drive.
> 
> When booting from SN850 get check disk a lot of times on boot up if Sata drive connected.
> 
> 
> MB z690 Strix A D4 bios 707


is this with load default also ?

my apex sn850 is ok. i have two 6tb hdd, two other gen4/gen 3 on dimm m.2 via pch
my friends an850 d4 strix is fine. he also two hdd and another gen 3 nvme

can u clear cmos. secure boot clear the keys..


----------



## bscool

cstkl1 said:


> is this with load default also ?
> 
> my apex sn850 is ok. i have two 6tb hdd, two other gen4/gen 3 on dimm m.2 via pch
> my friends an850 d4 strix is fine. he also two hdd and another gen 3 nvme
> 
> can u clear cmos. secure boot clear the keys..


I already cleared cmos and secure boot keys. I havent tried running auto defaults. I will try that but I really doubt it is that as just adding the WD drive is when I have issues. But I will run defaults to check and report back.

Edit just cleared CMOS and loaded defaults and still wont boot from Sata drive with WD SN850 in top NVME slot.


----------



## arrow0309

Hi, I have a Strix A incoming, quick question.
Can I still use my EK Velocity with the lga 1200 backplate given the extra 4 holes around the cpu? Like 100% safe and ok? Or not / a temporary thing?
I've already ordered from the EK shop the free lga 1700 bracket but it's gonna take another week or so to arrive.
What am I supposed to do?
What do you guys use for your Supremacy / Velocity blocks?


----------



## Garlicky

Yes, it’s perfectly fine


----------



## SuperMumrik

arrow0309 said:


> What do you guys use for your Supremacy / Velocity blocks?


Temps are pretty much the same om my old supremacy evo block between the 1200 and 1700 backplate


----------



## shamino1978

made some updates for samsung IC's for anyone to try APEX:








 ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0081.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com


----------



## MaghX

@shamino1978 any chance for more updates for bdie SR 1T? Im testing it on strix-a: 0707 was very bad, 0003 almost perfect and TM5 stable for at least 20-30mins but never fully stable regardless of voltages and ODT tweaks. 0803 no improvements and also a little worse results


----------



## wkamil

Agent-A01 said:


> You have tRAS set incorrectly which will induce stability problems.
> tRAS minimum value must be tRCD + tRTP which is 27 in your case.


15 (tRCD) + 15 (tRTP) is 27?


----------



## Falkentyne

geriatricpollywog said:


> Hm, I did exactly what you said and its still not loading the cores. I'm using Stockfish 14.1, which is the version on the front page of the Stockfish website. Is that different from the version you are using?
> 
> View attachment 2534688


Press the analyze button?


----------



## Agent-A01

wkamil said:


> 15 (tRCD) + 15 (tRTP) is 27?


Where are you getting 15 from? tRTP in the quoted post was 12.

12 + 15 is 27.



bscool said:


> I already cleared cmos and secure boot keys. I havent tried running auto defaults. I will try that but I really doubt it is that as just adding the WD drive is when I have issues. But I will run defaults to check and report back.
> 
> Edit just cleared CMOS and loaded defaults and still wont boot from Sata drive with WD SN850 in top NVME slot.


Maybe I'm having the opposite issue lol.

From my old z490 build, I have two samsung nvme drives. 970evo plus and 980 pro and an old 850evo sata boot drive.

970Evo plus was the current boot drive. 980 pro was added afterwards in the second nvme slot.

Now the current system has the 980 pro in the top most nvme slot, 970e evo in the next one.

My system will not boot from the 970 evo after migrating to z690.
ASUS bios doesn't show it as bootable even though it boots on the old z490 system.

If I plug my old sata boot drive in it _boots_ from it instead. But the OS is still running off the 970 evo.
Weird stuff. I was lucky I never erased that sata drive as I wouldn't have been able to boot.


----------



## Exilon

What triggers AVX offset? I'm not able to get CB23 to do it, handbrake x265, or FMA3 Prime95


----------



## wkamil

Agent-A01 said:


> Where are you getting 15 from? tRTP in the quoted post was 12.
> 
> 12 + 15 is 27.


OMG, my mistake  tRP is 15... Sorry


----------



## bscool

@Agent-A01 @cstkl1 @raad11 It looks like for me it is related to being previous installs from z590 drives(didnt clean install just updated z690 drivers and unistalled old drivers on OS). I used another spare sata I had a did clean install and now no issues with WD SN850 in top NVME slot. So just info in case it helps someone else.

Using the same drives in z590 caused no issues.

tried to be lazy and save time, always cost time in the end hehe

Note the clean install on new Sata is Win10 and the previous was Win11 so that might be part of it. So many variables?

Edit #2 Tried Clean install Win11 on Sata and all works fine.


----------



## beardlessduck

Hi all,

I have Asus Strix-F with 64GB of DDR5 5200 CL38 and this PC has been a nightmare for me. Easily the worst experience I've had with an Intel platform in 20 years. While most of the issues are somewhat resolved, the RAM remains unstable.

Can someone help me get this RAM somewhat stable? Unfortunately, I have 2x 32GB kits instead of a 64GB kit due to supply issues. Obviously this isn't ideal but I can't even get this RAM stable at DDR5 4800 CL42. I was told at Micro Center that 2 32GB kits would work fine but I called Corsair and they basically told me I was on my own to try to get it working. They don't even have stock for RMAs if one of the kits is defective.

I've tried every BIOS since the day 1 BIOS to 0803.

I've tried XMP 1, XMP 2, Auto, changing timings (but just guessing)...

I have two of these kits: VENGEANCE® 32GB (2x16GB) DDR5 DRAM 5200MHz C38 Memory Kit — Black

Any advice? Is there a RAM timing calculator out there somewhere?

I am currently stable-ish at DDR5 4400 CL42 but that is really not great.

Thanks!


----------



## raad11

bscool said:


> @Agent-A01 @cstkl1 @raad11 It looks like for me it is related to being previous installs from z590 drives(didnt clean install just updated z690 drivers and unistalled old drivers on OS). I used another spare sata I had a did clean install and now no issues with WD SN850 in top NVME slot. So just info in case it helps someone else.
> 
> Using the same drives in z590 caused no issues.
> 
> tried to be lazy and save time, always cost time in the end hehe


Glad that worked out. I wonder what happened. All the drives were GPT, right? Were you forcing it to boot from the correct drive in BIOS and it still wouldn't go?

I've done that myself (my current Windows is from 2017 and two systems ago) and it's usually worked


----------



## raad11

beardlessduck said:


> Hi all,
> 
> I have Asus Strix-F with 64GB of DDR5 5200 CL38 and this PC has been a nightmare for me. Easily the worst experience I've had with an Intel platform in 20 years. While most of the issues are somewhat resolved, the RAM remains unstable.
> 
> Can someone help me get this RAM somewhat stable? Unfortunately, I have 2x 32GB kits instead of a 64GB kit due to supply issues. Obviously this isn't ideal but I can't even get this RAM stable at DDR5 4800 CL42. I was told at Micro Center that 2 32GB kits would work fine but I called Corsair and they basically told me I was on my own to try to get it working. They don't even have stock for RMAs if one of the kits is defective.
> 
> I've tried every BIOS since the day 1 BIOS to 0803.
> 
> I've tried XMP 1, XMP 2, Auto, changing timings (but just guessing)...
> 
> I have two of these kits: VENGEANCE® 32GB (2x16GB) DDR5 DRAM 5200MHz C38 Memory Kit — Black
> 
> Any advice? Is there a RAM timing calculator out there somewhere?
> 
> I am currently stable-ish at DDR5 4400 CL42 but that is really not great.
> 
> Thanks!


How is it with just one pair (2x16 for 32) in the system?


----------



## beardlessduck

It works at the XMP profile speed with just one kit.


----------



## bscool

raad11 said:


> Glad that worked out. I wonder what happened. All the drives were GPT, right? Were you forcing it to boot from the correct drive in BIOS and it still wouldn't go?
> 
> I've done that myself (my current Windows is from 2017 and two systems ago) and it's usually worked


Yep it just wont boot with the Win11 sata from z590 with WD SN850 in top slot. Remove sn850 and the Win11 sata would boot. But I can boot from SN850 with Win11 sata connected. Maybe something to do with Win11 secure boot, not sure but Win10 Sata works.


----------



## bscool

@raad11 Is your drives clean install or old OS and you just plugged in the drives?

Edit it looks like you are saying they are from 2017, I bet that is the issue.

Who knows I may be premature it works for now. I will report back if I have issues again.


----------



## Exilon

beardlessduck said:


> It works at the XMP profile speed with just one kit.


You're running 2DPC which has significantly lower rated clocks, so running them at 4400/4800/5200 is considered overclocking.
Additionally, the XMP voltages are binned for 1DPC so they'll be insufficient for your configuration.
Try pushing up VCCSA, VDD, and VDDQ up from stock XMP values.


----------



## beardlessduck

Exilon said:


> You're running 2DPC which has significantly lower rated clocks, so running them at 4400/4800/5200 is considered overclocking.
> Additionally, the XMP voltages are binned for 1DPC so they'll be insufficient for your configuration.
> Try pushing up VCCSA, VDD, and VDDQ up from stock XMP values.
> 
> View attachment 2534965


Thank you, I will try this.

Any recommendations for settings? I am pretty new to setting these values manually and I'm not really sure where to start.


----------



## Agent-A01

bscool said:


> @Agent-A01 @cstkl1 @raad11 It looks like for me it is related to being previous installs from z590 drives(didnt clean install just updated z690 drivers and unistalled old drivers on OS). I used another spare sata I had a did clean install and now no issues with WD SN850 in top NVME slot. So just info in case it helps someone else.
> 
> Using the same drives in z590 caused no issues.
> 
> tried to be lazy and save time, always cost time in the end hehe
> 
> Note the clean install on new Sata is Win10 and the previous was Win11 so that might be part of it. So many variables?


Yeah for me if I go into bios the 970 evo doesn't show up as a bootable device. In the bios if you select choose boot device it returns "No bootable device found"
So I have to have the old sata drive plugged into it then it shows 850 as the bootable device.

But it's not booting from it. For whatever reason, the Windows boot manager on the 970 evo is invisible to the bios.



beardlessduck said:


> Thank you, I will try this.
> 
> Any recommendations for settings? I am pretty new to setting these values manually and I'm not really sure where to start.


Try VDIMM, VDDQ, and VCCSA all set to 1.35v.

If no post, try VCCSA at 1.4v


----------



## cstkl1

bscool said:


> @Agent-A01 @cstkl1 @raad11 It looks like for me it is related to being previous installs from z590 drives(didnt clean install just updated z690 drivers and unistalled old drivers on OS). I used another spare sata I had a did clean install and now no issues with WD SN850 in top NVME slot. So just info in case it helps someone else.
> 
> Using the same drives in z590 caused no issues.
> 
> tried to be lazy and save time, always cost time in the end hehe
> 
> Note the clean install on new Sata is Win10 and the previous was Win11 so that might be part of it. So many variables?


yeah. 
theres odd things also on install. wrote here somewhere. i have to install loadoptimized with all secure boot enabled etc. if not aida latency will shoot up


----------



## beardlessduck

Agent-A01 said:


> Yeah for me if I go into bios the 970 evo doesn't show up as a bootable device. In the bios if you select choose boot device it returns "No bootable device found"
> So I have to have the old sata drive plugged into it then it shows 850 as the bootable device.
> 
> But it's not booting from it. For whatever reason, the Windows boot manager on the 970 evo is invisible to the bios.
> 
> 
> 
> Try VDIMM, VDDQ, and VCCSA all set to 1.35v.
> 
> If no post, try VCCSA at 1.4v


Thanks, I tried this at CL42 / 4800 but my memory test failed after 14 seconds still.

If anyone has some timing tips, that would be greatly appreciated.

It really sucks because there is seemingly no way to correct this. I can't get another kit due to supply issues and I can't find any speed that this RAM will work at.


----------



## Exilon

Agent-A01 said:


> But it's not booting from it. For whatever reason, the Windows boot manager on the 970 evo is invisible to the bios.


I had a similar issue with two NVMe drives because one of them got mapped Intel RST VMD automatically...



beardlessduck said:


> If anyone has some timing tips, that would be greatly appreciated.


You need to provide your configuration including the timings you're currently trying to run if you want specific tips.


----------



## beardlessduck

Exilon said:


> I had a similar issue with two NVMe drives because one of them got mapped Intel RST VMD automatically...
> 
> 
> 
> You need to provide your configuration including the timings you're currently trying to run if you want specific tips.


I dropped it to DDR5 4200 to get it to boot at all.

Here are my settings:



http://imgur.com/a/NQprSdU


I've tried CL / tRCD / tRP up to 42 and tried DDR5 4200, 4400, 4800, 5200 with no luck

Tried voltages up to 1.4 with no luck.


----------



## Agent-A01

Exilon said:


> I had a similar issue with two NVMe drives because one of them got mapped Intel RST VMD automatically...


That was a good idea but I just checked and I already disabled VMD controller.
Maybe it's just early bios bug, like PTT can't be disabled either.



beardlessduck said:


> Thanks, I tried this at CL42 / 4800 but my memory test failed after 14 seconds still.
> 
> If anyone has some timing tips, that would be greatly appreciated.
> 
> It really sucks because there is seemingly no way to correct this. I can't get another kit due to supply issues and I can't find any speed that this RAM will work at.


What memory test are you using? Certain tests are better at finding issues with ram voltage, SA voltage etc.


----------



## beardlessduck

Agent-A01 said:


> That was a good idea but I just checked and I already disabled VMD controller.
> Maybe it's just early bios bug, like PTT can't be disabled either.
> 
> 
> 
> What memory test are you using? Certain tests are better at finding issues with ram voltage, SA voltage etc.


I'm using AIDA64 in Windows and the built in memtest86.

The most recent crash was in AIDA64.

With the settings I posted above (DDR5 4200 / CL38 / 1.35V), I'm currently ~20 min stable in an AIDA64 memory test.


----------



## bscool

@Agent-A01 to disable PTT go the Trusted Computing, Security tab and set disable and then PTT is disabled in Windows. That way Windows 11 cant be installed.


----------



## RetroWave78

bscool said:


> @raad11 I am having issues also with 1tb SN850 drive being in top NVME slot(havent tried other slots). I noticed if booting from Sata drive and I have WD SN850 NVME in top slot, it will not boot. Remove SN850 and boots. Replace SN850 with Samsung 970 Evo boots from the Sata drive.
> 
> When booting from SN850 get check disk a lot of times on boot up if Sata drive connected.
> 
> 
> MB z690 Strix A D4 bios 707





bscool said:


> @Agent-A01 @cstkl1 @raad11 It looks like for me it is related to being previous installs from z590 drives(didnt clean install just updated z690 drivers and unistalled old drivers on OS). I used another spare sata I had a did clean install and now no issues with WD SN850 in top NVME slot. So just info in case it helps someone else.
> 
> Using the same drives in z590 caused no issues.
> 
> tried to be lazy and save time, always cost time in the end hehe
> 
> Note the clean install on new Sata is Win10 and the previous was Win11 so that might be part of it. So many variables?
> 
> Edit #2 Tried Clean install Win11 on Sata and all works fine.


Great info and just in time as I was planning on upgrading today but am feeling under the weather so may postpone. Did you ensure the hard-disk controller is generic to Windows in Device Manager as shown at 1:16 mark here beforehand?






This will be the first time I've tried moving the OS from one chipset to another and I'm very apprehensive, to hear that this motherboard (Strix-A D4) may present issues with M.2 slots has me even more worried. I have cloned my M.2 boot drive to a SATA drive expressly for this scenario, I will add that to Sata Port 0 and ensure that the hard-disk is generic before proceeding with the OS transfer, making sure to use the same Sata Port on the new drive if the M.2 drive refuses to work or even be recognized in BIOS. What sucks is that moving the M.2 drive to other M.2 slots means draining the loop to remove the GPU to get to the drive. Reading other comments here, it seems that many are having issues with particular M.2 drives not working with this board on 0707. I've read a few comments indicating problems with the top slot behind the primary PCI-E slot. Your update indicating newfound success clean installing has me wondering if the M.2 slots are legitimately borked or if people are, like myself, lazy and trying to migrate their current working version of Windows to the new motherboard without making necessary precautions.

I also tried to install the Asus LAN driver but after unpacking Intel_LAN_Driver_V1.0.2.14_WIN10_WIN11_64-bit.zip and clicking on AsusSetup.exe nothing happens except my existing Ethernet adapter becomes disabled. I've tried this a few times and will just have multiple copies of this driver on both flash-drive and the new boot drives so I can connect to the internet early on.

What are the other settings I need to be mindful of, I believe current drive format is GPT so I'm good here, should I enable or disable Secure Boot? Thanks for any help with this.


----------



## bscool

@RetroWave78 It is not so much an issue of the Strix D4 I am doing a no no. I was using 2 old OS's from previous systems and using seperate OS on each drive(win10 and Win11 insider). It "should" work but still not a "best" practice. If you are just using a single OS I dont think you will have any issue.

And yeah I went back and double checked and the Win11 insider that has issues with SN850 has generic Sata driver installed. It could be a Insider issue also since not official release. I admit I am doing a lot of things you shouldnt do and I wouldnt suggest 

The system works fine now. It is the Win11 insider that is causing issues as far as I can tell.


----------



## bscool

@RetroWave78 I wonder how many that are having issues did clean install?


----------



## RetroWave78

bscool said:


> @RetroWave78 I wonder how many that are having issues did clean install?


Good question, I'm about to experience this first-hand, I have postponed the project to tomorrow, luck would have it that I am dealing with some nausea this morning, feels like a stomach bug. I'm not messing with my PC unless I'm at full health, too much to go wrong, need to be careful and mindful. Glad you sorted your issues out, I've had so many issues with Windows refusing to boot in the past, it really really sucks when you don't know what the problem is.


----------



## Agent-A01

bscool said:


> @Agent-A01 to disable PTT go the Trusted Computing, Security tab and set disable and then PTT is disabled in Windows. That way Windows 11 cant be installed.


Yep Disabled there but if you go to the sub menu IIRC in PCH it shows PTT = Enabled.

If you set it to disabled and save it posts twice and re-enables it.


----------



## bscool

Agent-A01 said:


> Yep Disabled there but if you go to the sub menu IIRC in PCH it shows PTT = Enabled.
> 
> If you set it to disabled and save it posts twice and re-enables it.


Yes but in Windows it is disable and you will not be able to install Win11.

TPM will not be displayed in Device Manager.

Edit you do not need to disable PTT, doing what I showed disables it even though it shows enabled. This goes for other bios besides Asus. MSI I know it works the same and I would guess Gigabyte etc.


----------



## raad11

Yeah I think @bscool problem may be due to multiple boot drives. I've swapped Windows installs between chipsets (Intel Z68 to Ryzen B450 and Intel Z270 to Z390 to Z690) without problems before, but those were the only drive in the system until I got everything up and running. But this is not best practice lol, it just happens to work now usually


----------



## Alberto_It

shamino1978 said:


> made some updates for samsung IC's for anyone to try APEX:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0081.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


I have got the Asus Z690 Apex paired with Kingston Fury Beast 5200Mhz CL 40 32gb kit that have Micron chips as 90% of DDR5 on the market. Can you please make some improvements on the bios?


----------



## RetroWave78

raad11 said:


> Yeah I think @bscool problem may be due to multiple boot drives. I've swapped Windows installs between chipsets (Intel Z68 to Ryzen B450 and Intel Z270 to Z390 to Z690) without problems before, but those were the only drive in the system until I got everything up and running. But this is not best practice lol, it just happens to work now usually


Can you refer to a guide or is the video guide I referred to earlier a good one to go by? My biggest concern is that I'm using M.2 and there are reports from other users, I believe corroborated by Shamino, that there may be issues with the M.2 slots on this board (Stix-A D4, will try to use BIOS Flasback to flash 0707 before installing any hardware). Some are experiencing some slots refusing to work, others are indicating WHEA errors emanating from the M.2 boot drive itself. I'm equally worried that should I need to try to resort to using a cloned SATA boot drive that Windows will have issues seeing it or recognizing it as a boot drive as the original drive is M.2 and going by the video guide I referred to in an earlier post, the creator places emphasis on ensuring that the boot drive goes to the same SATA port on the new motherboard.


----------



## bscool

@RetroWave78 z690 being so new no one can tell you what to do in my opinion. Best thing to do is clean install other than that you are gambling. In the end it will be ok. You way over thinking it. Just do what you think is best and figure it out as you go. Lol that is my 2 cents.


----------



## raad11

RetroWave78 said:


> Can you refer to a guide or is the video guide I referred to earlier a good one to go by? My biggest concern is that I'm using M.2 and there are reports from other users, I believe corroborated by Shamino, that there may be issues with the M.2 slots on this board (Stix-A D4, will try to use BIOS Flasback to flash 0707 before installing any hardware). Some are experiencing some slots refusing to work, others are indicating WHEA errors emanating from the M.2 boot drive itself. I'm equally worried that should I need to try to resort to using a cloned SATA boot drive that Windows will have issues seeing it or recognizing it as a boot drive as the original drive is M.2 and going by the video guide I referred to in an earlier post, the creator places emphasis on ensuring that the boot drive goes to the same SATA port on the new motherboard.


I cloned a NVME boot drive onto a SATA 2.5" and the Strix D4 had no issues with it. That video is overly cautious but that's the best way to be


----------



## cstkl1

so i guess problem solved gents?? 
thats one headache off @shamino1978 plate


----------



## Jubeishock

Hi, Im proud to join in this betatester family  TT

I own 12700 k , 3090 , Z690 strix gaming - a d4 and having many issues. To be honest this is my first Asus motherboard (always used Gigabyte or MSI) and very bad start.
Anyone could help me a while? 

My current problems are:

-When Ive received the motherboard comes with a strange bios (0404) Ive used XPM profiles without problems, after that decided update to the latest bios (0707) and now cant use any XMP profile, my pc restart, freeze, etc. Using the auto setting work fine, my Ram is Gskill ddr4 3200 4 slots 4x8GB (32GB). There is any way to fix this? or RMA issue?
-When switch on the PC usually the qled motherboard shows white color, Ive checked the manual and it says is due any GPU error but my GPU works fine and tried with 2 different GPU to check but the light persist. Is due any bios config?

Thanks in advance


----------



## shamino1978

Latest Apex bios:








APEX88.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com


----------



## shamino1978

Jubeishock said:


> Hi, Im proud to join in this betatester family  TT
> 
> I own 12700 k , 3090 , Z690 strix gaming - a d4 and having many issues. To be honest this is my first Asus motherboard (always used Gigabyte or MSI) and very bad start.
> Anyone could help me a while?
> 
> My current problems are:
> 
> -When Ive received the motherboard comes with a strange bios (0404) Ive used XPM profiles without problems, after that decided update to the latest bios (0707) and now cant use any XMP profile, my pc restart, freeze, etc. Using the auto setting work fine, my Ram is Gskill ddr4 3200 4 slots 4x8GB (32GB). There is any way to fix this? or RMA issue?
> -When switch on the PC usually the qled motherboard shows white color, Ive checked the manual and it says is due any GPU error but my GPU works fine and tried with 2 different GPU to check but the light persist. Is due any bios config?
> 
> Thanks in advance


have u tried the 0003 or 0803 in this thread?


----------



## lolhaxz

Is AVX offset broken on Extreme board? I am setting AVX offset 1 (or anything other than 0, auto = 0) and per core mode 53x for 1-8 and 40x 1-8 with AVX offset 1x, yet it still shows clocks as 5.3GHz under heavy AVX load (eg, Prime95) which it will really only do at 5.2GHz while bouncing off temp limit set to 95C every 4-5 seconds ... infact having the AVX offset to anything other than 0 = crashing in even a real light load like Cinebench R23 where it always passes with offset = 0.

It does not appear to be affecting the reported clocks at all according to all tools, and it behaves like it is inducing _massive_ transients. (not visible in tools, but stability wise)

Bios 0702


----------



## MaghX

shamino1978 said:


> Latest Apex bios:


Please dont forget about ddr4 users


----------



## Jubeishock

shamino1978 said:


> Latest Apex bios:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> APEX88.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


Not yet, whats the difference between 0003/ 0803 , are same?

Thanks


----------



## darth_meh

cstkl1 said:


> so i guess problem solved gents??
> thats one headache off @shamino1978 plate


Doesn't explain why I get WHEA errors when I plug my SoundBlaster AE-7 into a PCIEX slot, but I realize I'm in the minority of users using one.

I picked up an APEX last night so I'm going to see if I have better luck with it with respect to this issue and XMP. Based on this thread it's clear the APEX is getting more BIOS development effort, and it's arguably better hardware.


----------



## cstkl1

darth_meh said:


> Doesn't explain why I get WHEA errors when I plug my SoundBlaster AE-7 into a PCIEX slot, but I realize I'm in the minority of users using one.
> 
> I picked up an APEX last night so I'm going to see if I have better luck with it with respect to this issue and XMP. Based on this thread it's clear the APEX is getting more BIOS development effort, and it's arguably better hardware.


both d4 and apex is fine with ZX.


----------



## darth_meh

Well, I wasn’t expecting this…








Thanks Amazon


----------



## cstkl1

darth_meh said:


> Well, I wasn’t expecting this…
> View attachment 2535065
> 
> Thanks Amazon


pretty board. perfect for velocity 2


----------



## darth_meh

cstkl1 said:


> pretty board. perfect for velocity 2


Except I ordered an Apex. 😁


----------



## acoustic

darth_meh said:


> Except I ordered an Apex. 😁


I guess you lucked out? LOL


----------



## shamino1978

if anyone wants to try out this auto tune tool for strix / maximus (windows/uefi version), guide in the link:








Auto_Opt1130.zip


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com




start it before going to bed cause it takes pretty long.
just to see if this has any potential.


----------



## edkieferlp

shamino1978 said:


> if anyone wants to try out this auto tune tool for strix / maximus (windows/uefi version), guide in the link:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Auto_Opt1130.zip
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> start it before going to bed cause it takes pretty long.
> just to see if this has any potential.


Would that work on the TUF Z690 Plus D4 too?


----------



## Jubeishock

It's normal into motherboard qled shows white?
My GPU is in perfect condition and used 2 different GPU with the same issue.


----------



## shamino1978

edkieferlp said:


> Would that work on the TUF Z690 Plus D4 too?


no sorry i have to use some EC functions on the ROG, easier this way.


----------



## bscool

Jubeishock said:


> It's normal into motherboard qled shows white?
> My GPU is in perfect condition and used 2 different GPU with the same issue.


I get the white led when mem oc fails and it just freezes/locks. Could be something with that were it is freezing or do you mean it is posting to windows and staying on?

Did you try the normal trouble prodecures of 1 or 2 stick of ram and then try different slots to see if you can narrow it down or flash back to older bios you said worked?


----------



## beardlessduck

Anyone know if RAM compatibility will be better in the future? I am considering selling my 12900k / DDR5 / Strix-F for any other platform. I've already lost any productivity benefits over the life of this PC due to all the issues. I've wasted far more time than I could ever hope to save by any speed increases over my 9900k system.

It seems like at least with the Strix-F, 64GB of RAM is just not possible without sacrificing a lot of speed.


----------



## beardlessduck

shamino1978 said:


> if anyone wants to try out this auto tune tool for strix / maximus (windows/uefi version), guide in the link:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Auto_Opt1130.zip
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> start it before going to bed cause it takes pretty long.
> just to see if this has any potential.


Where is AI Optimized Enable??


----------



## GtiJason

Jubeishock said:


> It's normal into motherboard qled shows white?
> My GPU is in perfect condition and used 2 different GPU with the same issue.


For me I get the white led and it says there for a good minute, then it boots
Bios 0707 is actually pretty good, did you flash this bios from within the bios using EZ Flash 3 in the "Tools" tab ?
If not you might want to check the that you are on 16.0.15.1545 in the bios default Advanced loading screen


----------



## Jubeishock

bscool said:


> I get the white led when mem oc fails and it just freezes/locks. Could be something with that were it is freezing or do you mean it is posting to windows and staying on?
> 
> Did you try the normal trouble prodecures of 1 or 2 stick of ram and then try different slots to see if you can narrow it down or flash back to older bios you said worked?


Yeah posting to windows and still on.

Also when I switch on the pc there is a big delay turning on my keyboard (steelseries apex 7) and many times is pretty difficult enter into the bios due this. Is there any bios config to remove this delay?
I still remembering my old gigabyte z370 once you press the power button all components start, now with this mobo, first mobo start, then keyboard, the soundcard, then monitor....


----------



## bscool

beardlessduck said:


> Anyone know if RAM compatibility will be better in the future? I am considering selling my 12900k / DDR5 / Strix-F for any other platform. I've already lost any productivity benefits over the life of this PC due to all the issues. I've wasted far more time than I could ever hope to save by any speed increases over my 9900k system.
> 
> It seems like at least with the Strix-F, 64GB of RAM is just not possible without sacrificing a lot of speed.


How could anyone know what the future holds? also it can be down specific MB model or models of ram and MB combo.

Never buy the newest thing if you need dependibility and reliablity. Go with tried and true. That goes for more than just PCs.

As an example one of the Asus z590 MB had issues with 2x16 or 2x32 ram and to this day I still dont think it is fix. You can go on Asus form and see tons of complaints. It is not just Asus any manufacture will have some issues with products.

And from what I know with ddr5 running 4x16 is only rated to 4200 or 4400? What are you running your mem at?


----------



## Jubeishock

GtiJason said:


> For me I get the white led and it says there for a good minute, then it boots
> Bios 0707 is actually pretty good, did you flash this bios from within the bios using EZ Flash 3 in the "Tools" tab ?
> If not you might want to check the that you are on 16.0.15.1545 in the bios default Advanced loading screen


I'm using 0707 but when switch on xmp my ram crash..


----------



## beardlessduck

bscool said:


> How could anyone know what the future holds? also it can be down specific MB model or models of ram and MB combo.
> 
> Never buy the newest thing if you need dependibility and reliablity. Go with tried and true. That goes for more than just PCs.
> 
> As an example one of the Asus z590 MB had issues with 2x16 or 2x32 ram and to this day I still dont think it is fix. You can go on Asus form and see tons of complaints. It is not just Asus any manufacture will have some issues with products.
> 
> And from what I know with ddr5 running 4x16 is only rated to 4200 or 4400? What are you running your mem at?


I'm basically wondering if work is being done towards getting RAM working at advertised speeds. If not, then I need to look at switching platforms.

Yes, it's better to wait if you need something to work reliably but is it too much to ask for the RAM to work at the speed advertised? There is no indication from Asus, Intel or Corsair that we can't use 4 sticks at the advertised speed.

Knowing that some work was being done to help with this would put me a little more at ease.


----------



## bscool

@beardlessduck I understand. I looked at Puget Systems and it looks like they are running 4x16 @4400 ddr5. Is yours a kit of 4 or did you combine 2 kits? If combining kits that is probably part of it.


----------



## darth_meh

So I picked up an Apex this afternoon and just finished installing it. I upgraded the BIOS to 0803 right off the bat.

So far, it appears to be behaving the exact same as my Extreme - only it boots quite a bit faster:

XMP I/II BSODs, but I can run stable at DDR5200 with auto timings
My Sound Blaster AE-7 still causes WHEA BSODs when I submit CPU-Z validations

So I moved my Sound Blaster AE-7 back to my Z490 Extreme, which I've been running for about 18 months without an issue. I'm able to submit CPU-Z validations without a WHEA BSOD, but as soon as I use the Sound Blaster (like play a sound) the system hard locks. Crazy - I've never had issues with it before. When I plug my Sound Blaster ZxR into my Z490 Extreme and run the same test, it's fine. So I've narrowed the issue down to one of the following:

I have a really old hardware revision of the AE-7 that has PCIEX compatibility issues
Creative Labs isn't following the PCIEX spec with the AE-7
My AE-7 is zapped

I haven't tried moving my ZxR to my Z690, but based on these results I'm pretty confident it would be fine. Likewise I think I've ruled out PCIEX issues with the ASUS Z690 platform.

Now I just need to decide if I'm going to keep the Extreme or the Apex...


----------



## Jscs1992

Hey guys

im on asus strix a and 0707 bios and im trying to get 4133 15-16-16-32 cm 2 stable on testmem5 extreme and im having a hard time any suggestions.

i have my
Dram: 1.57
Vccsa: 1.4
VDDQ: 1.4


----------



## beardlessduck

bscool said:


> @beardlessduck I understand. I looked at Puget Systems and it looks like they are running 4x16 @4400 ddr5. Is yours a kit of 4 or did you combine 2 kits? If combining kits that is probably part of it.


I combined 2 kits against my better judgement. I was told at Micro Center that it would work no problem.

It would be a bummer if 4400 was the best I could get out of these.


----------



## darth_meh

beardlessduck said:


> I combined 2 kits against my better judgement. I was told at Micro Center that it would work no problem.
> 
> It would be a bummer if 4400 was the best I could get out of these.


I've never had issues combining DDR4 kits, but considering DDR5 is so new the rules are being rewritten by early adopters like us. 
I can't even run my Corsair Dominator at XMP I/II timings without crashing. If I manually set the memory frequency to DDR5200 and use auto timings I'm stable (at least so far).
BIOS updates may improve memory compatibility over time. I'm also hoping better DDR5 memory will be available in the future.


----------



## beardlessduck

darth_meh said:


> I've never had issues combining DDR4 kits, but considering DDR5 is so new the rules are being rewritten by early adopters like us.
> I can't even run my Corsair Dominator at XMP I/II timings without crashing. If I manually set the memory frequency to DDR5200 and use auto timings I'm stable (at least so far).
> BIOS updates may improve memory compatibility over time. I'm also hoping better DDR5 memory will be available in the future.


Are you using 1 kit?

Also, where are people getting the Z690 compatible MSI Dragon Ball?


----------



## Exilon

beardlessduck said:


> It would be a bummer if 4400 was the best I could get out of these.








ROG STRIX Z690-F GAMING WIFI | ROG Strix | Gaming Motherboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG Global


ASUS ROG STRIX Z690-F GAMING WIFI Intel LGA 1700 ATX motherboard, DDR5, PCIe 5.0, 16+1 power stages, WiFi 6E, Intel® 2.5 Gb Ethernet, four M.2 slots, USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 USB Type-C®, SATA and Aura Sync



rog.asus.com





This is the only 4x16GB configuration on the QVL for your motherboard but that's at 1.1v

CORSAIRCMK64GX5M4A4400C36(ver 3.43.01)4x 16GB44004400SSMicron36-36-36-721.11,2,4

It might help if you posted more info like this so people can see all your voltages.












darth_meh said:


> I've never had issues combining DDR4 kits, but considering DDR5 is so new the rules are being rewritten by early adopters like us.


My DDR4 B-die 2x8GB 4133 kit doesn't boot anywhere near XMP settings when doubled up.


----------



## Feklar

Has anyone noticed that Newegg has removed all DDR5 memory from their website?


----------



## darth_meh

Feklar said:


> Has anyone noticed that Newegg has removed all DDR5 memory from their website?


No, but I noticed Corsair removed their "Notify Me" links for all of their DDR5 memory.
I can think of two possibilties - serious supply issues or incoming recalls.


----------



## Feklar

They're probably making a new section on their website called the "Can't Touch This" section for the things you want but can't get.


----------



## bscool

beardlessduck said:


> Are you using 1 kit?
> 
> Also, where are people getting the Z690 compatible MSI Dragon Ball?







__





MSI Dragon Ball / Dragon Power Tools for Z690?


I saw some picture of ver 1.0.0.08 of MSI Dragon Ball and also a working Dragon Power Version for Z690. Anyone here can provide me a link for Download? On chinese websites i can only find ver 1.0.0.03 which does not work for Z690.



community.hwbot.org


----------



## beardlessduck

bscool said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MSI Dragon Ball / Dragon Power Tools for Z690?
> 
> 
> I saw some picture of ver 1.0.0.08 of MSI Dragon Ball and also a working Dragon Power Version for Z690. Anyone here can provide me a link for Download? On chinese websites i can only find ver 1.0.0.03 which does not work for Z690.
> 
> 
> 
> community.hwbot.org


Thanks!

Any way to verify the safety of these?


----------



## bscool

beardlessduck said:


> Thanks!
> 
> Any way to verify the safety of these?


Yeah dont use it. Lol not sure what to tell you.


----------



## bscool

@beardlessduck Why dont you use the Asus memtweakit, same thing.


----------



## beardlessduck

bscool said:


> @beardlessduck Why dont you use the Asus memtweakit, same thing.


I think all of the information is in here -- this is hwinfo64 below. It passed an AIDA64 memory test but is still acting weird. 

It's so hard to troubleshoot because I don't know if my general PC weirdness is caused by a Windows 11 issue, a CPU compatibility issue, or my RAM. I changed too many things at once 😅

I would greatly appreciate any advice anyone has to optimize my RAM.


----------



## bscool

@beardlessduck Not even close you need memtweakit or dragon ball if you want to show your timings so people can help you. Memtweak it has 4 pages of settings.

You have to dive in if you want to do mem setting manually. Plan on spending weeks learning if you want to do it. LOTS and LOTs of time reading and tryin setting and voltages.

With 4x16 you are in for a nightmare. I have some expeirence with mem OC and I wouldnt start with ddr5 and 4x16. You will need meds soon if you do


----------



## Falkentyne

darth_meh said:


> So I picked up an Apex this afternoon and just finished installing it. I upgraded the BIOS to 0803 right off the bat.
> 
> So far, it appears to be behaving the exact same as my Extreme - only it boots quite a bit faster:
> 
> XMP I/II BSODs, but I can run stable at DDR5200 with auto timings
> My Sound Blaster AE-7 still causes WHEA BSODs when I submit CPU-Z validations
> 
> So I moved my Sound Blaster AE-7 back to my Z490 Extreme, which I've been running for about 18 months without an issue. I'm able to submit CPU-Z validations without a WHEA BSOD, but as soon as I use the Sound Blaster (like play a sound) the system hard locks. Crazy - I've never had issues with it before. When I plug my Sound Blaster ZxR into my Z490 Extreme and run the same test, it's fine. So I've narrowed the issue down to one of the following:
> 
> I have a really old hardware revision of the AE-7 that has PCIEX compatibility issues
> Creative Labs isn't following the PCIEX spec with the AE-7
> My AE-7 is zapped
> 
> I haven't tried moving my ZxR to my Z690, but based on these results I'm pretty confident it would be fine. Likewise I think I've ruled out PCIEX issues with the ASUS Z690 platform.
> 
> Now I just need to decide if I'm going to keep the Extreme or the Apex...


I have a Soundblaster X-fi Fatal1ty Titanium PCIE (on a riser card, so my 3090 FE has room) in the x4 slot and I don't get any BSOD WHEA's when submitting validations.
I also have a USB Creative Super X-fi Amp plugged into USB as well.

I don't know what sound chip the AE-7 uses. 
What happens if you go to the sound properties for the soundcard (in the sound panel in control panel?) and disable soundblaster enhancements?


----------



## bscool

@beardlessduck The other thing is so few people are running 4x16 ddr5 you are not going to get much help or feedback because so few people have a setup that can help you. You need to set voltages manually and I havent messed with ddr5 but it is more involved than ddr4 and 4x16 with ddr4 is difficult enough.


----------



## Exilon

beardlessduck said:


> I think all of the information is in here -- this is hwinfo64 below. It passed an AIDA64 memory test but is still acting weird.
> 
> It's so hard to troubleshoot because I don't know if my general PC weirdness is caused by a Windows 11 issue, a CPU compatibility issue, or my RAM. I changed too many things at once 😅
> 
> I would greatly appreciate any advice anyone has to optimize my RAM.


Do you get any improvement by raising VCCSA from 0.9v? What RAM frequency can you hit at 1.3v?


----------



## beardlessduck

bscool said:


> @beardlessduck Not even close you need memtweakit or dragon ball if you want to show your timings so people can help you. Memtweak it has 4 pages of settings.
> 
> You have to dive in if you want to do mem setting manually. Plan on spending weeks learning if you want to do it. LOTS and LOTs of time reading and tryin setting and voltages.
> 
> With 4x16 you are in for a nightmare. I have some expeirence with mem OC and I wouldnt start with ddr5 and 4x16. You will need meds soon if you do


LOL nuts... I can't even find memtweakit or dragon ball from a safe location.



Exilon said:


> Do you get any improvement by raising VCCSA from 0.9v? What RAM frequency can you hit at 1.3v?


I'll try this, I thought I had it set to 1.35 though.


----------



## Exilon

beardlessduck said:


> I'll try this, I thought I had it set to 1.35 though.


Ok, also set IMC VDD to match VDD. Right now it's 1.2v vs 1.335v


----------



## bscool

@beardlessduck memtweakit came with your MB in the software or should have. It also posted on this site by Asus testers so i dont know how much more safe it can get.

Also have you done the basics like just running 2 sticks? I was just over at the Asus support forum and it looks like many people have issues even running 2x16 on ddr5 4 dim boards. I wonder if you also have issues with just 2 dims?






ASUS ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX | APEX 14


--- For Ambient behavior and DDR5 Voltage Basics there is already a perfect guide by Falkentyne in the ASUS ROG forum -> LINK -- - BCLK Buttons On the new Apex there are BCLK +/- Buttons For the onboard bclk buttons you will need to manually enable them in bios/tweakers paradise - Measurement ...



community.hwbot.org





You can see Asus employee also post in that thread @safedisk so it is good to go.


----------



## beardlessduck

Exilon said:


> Ok, also set IMC VDD to match VDD. Right now it's 1.2v vs 1.335v


Thanks, I'll try that. VCCSA to 1.3v didn't change anything for me but I only tested a few configurations. I'll mess with it some more.



bscool said:


> @beardlessduck memtweakit came with your MB in the software or should have. It also posted on this site by Asus testers so i dont know how much more safe it can get.
> 
> Also have you done the basics like just running 2 sticks? I was just over at the Asus support forum and it looks like many people have issues even running 2x16 on 4 dim boards. I wonder if you also have issues with just 2 dims?


Just 2 sticks does work. Any configuration of two sticks in any two matching slots seems okay at XMP II.

I looked on the Asus website and couldn't find memtweakit. I looked in Armoury Crate too. I'd be okay to grab it on here from a trusted source too but I didn't find it searching the forum. 

Thanks for the help, I have a starting point now. It's tough with memory to know which direction to go... we can add more voltage, loosen timings of a TON of different settings, lower the frequency. At what point is it better to loosen timings vs lower frequency? 

Good times...


----------



## bscool

@beardlessduck I edited my last post go to that link and look for tools. Also that is good you can get 2 dims working in any slot. Better than some. I think you will get it working, it will just take some tinkering. You are in new territory with ddr5 along with 4x16. I think even if you only get 4400-4600 with decent timings you will be doing ok. As more people get ddr5 it will help so people can share info and settings. Most will be running 2 stick though for high clocks.


----------



## beardlessduck

bscool said:


> @beardlessduck I edited my last post go to that link and look for tools. Also that is good you can get 2 dims working in any slot. Better than some. I think you will get it working, it will just take some tinkering. You are in new territory with ddr5 along with 4x16. I think even if you only get 4400-4600 with decent timings you will be doing ok. As more people get ddr5 it will help so people can share info and settings. Most will be running 2 stick though for high clocks.


Thanks, this is perfect.

Yeah, if i can get 4600 with okay timings or even 4400, i will just leave it for awhile.


----------



## BenchAndGames

Anyone knows what the WHEA-LOGGER EVENT ID 3 means ?

Im not able to find any single one on the internet, non on google search, non reddit, no where....

It shows sometimes on boot only, nothing happens nothing strange.

Saying like this: 
Hardware event. More info its describbed on the event. 
Its triggered as a event Information, not a error or warning.

I apreciate if somebody knows about it or can find more info cuz for me google dont want want to show me any single result about it.


----------



## WhoBelieveTofu

4x16 is too hard 
miss t-type


----------



## Jubeishock

If I use 4 ram slots with any xmp profile my windows start without issues, but when I play any games, close the game or freeze my PC. But when I switch to 2 ram slots can use xmp II.
My ram is GSkill trident z ddr4 3200.

Do you think guys this can be solved due future bios updates or is clearly a RMA?


----------



## cstkl1

@Jubeishock 

can u show me your memtweakit

which mobo?


----------



## Gandyman

Does anyone know if there's a Strix-E BIOS floating around newer than 0702?


----------



## Lurifaks

Gandyman said:


> Does anyone know if there's a Strix-E BIOS floating around newer than 0702?











[OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread


WIP, links to all bioses, tools. https://youtu.be/rhdxPscpAIU https://youtu.be/MiatGZm7ioI https://youtu.be/fBrlgLZrFaI




www.overclock.net






26 November


----------



## Stove

darth_meh said:


> I haven't tried moving my ZxR to my Z690, but based on these results I'm pretty confident it would be fine. Likewise I think I've ruled out PCIEX issues with the ASUS Z690 platform.
> 
> Now I just need to decide if I'm going to keep the Extreme or the Apex...


I`ve got a ZXR on my 690 Hero and there´s no problem.


----------



## Jubeishock

cstkl1 said:


> @Jubeishock
> 
> can u show me your memtweakit
> 
> which mobo?


Sure but where can download memtweakit? 

My mobo is Rog Strix Z690 - a gaming wifi d4

Thanks


----------



## Gandyman

Lurifaks said:


> [OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread
> 
> 
> WIP, links to all bioses, tools. https://youtu.be/rhdxPscpAIU https://youtu.be/MiatGZm7ioI https://youtu.be/fBrlgLZrFaI
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 26 November


Oh don't know how I missed that. Tyvm!


----------



## MaghX

shamino1978 said:


> if anyone wants to try out this auto tune tool for strix / maximus (windows/uefi version), guide in the link:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Auto_Opt1130.zip
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> start it before going to bed cause it takes pretty long.
> just to see if this has any potential.


Tried to run it but Im not sure if it works. When I boot to uefi version it shows _press esc or it will run startup.nsh_ but after that I can see only one "-" on the screen, no progress info or something, my aio is also very quiet so Im not sure if it is working. Could you please describe what should I expect?


----------



## shamino1978

Updated Apex Bios 0093 (fixed some XMP compatibility issues)
_APEX93.rar_


----------



## shamino1978

MaghX said:


> Tried to run it but Im not sure if it works. When I boot to uefi version it shows _press esc or it will run startup.nsh_ but after that I can see only one "-" on the screen, no progress info or something, my aio is also very quiet so Im not sure if it is working. Could you please describe what should I expect?


you shd see this









but yesterday night i ran it and it's end results are too good as it seems much easier to pass in UEFI so i need to trace it and see how to be more stringent or if i missed something.


----------



## Woklbokl

I testet this yesterday and i couldn't enter anything at "Enter number of minutes for stress test, minimum 1 minute:".
Tried several Keyboards as well


----------



## shamino1978

Woklbokl said:


> I testet this yesterday and i couldn't enter anything at "Enter number of minutes for stress test, minimum 1 minute:".
> Tried several Keyboards as well


can u reboot and try again?


----------



## MaghX

shamino1978 said:


> you shd see this


Looks like I have finally started FullPipeline.efi but I have the same issue as @Woklbokl - I can press ESC and manually write and run FullPipeline.efi (so my keyboard is working here) but cannot enter number of minutes


----------



## Woklbokl

shamino1978 said:


> can u reboot and try again?


Reboots don't help


----------



## shamino1978

ok ill check that


----------



## robertr1

@shamino1978 what's the latest/best bios for mem tuning (bdie SR) for the Prime DDR4 board?

Unless i missed it there was no 0002 bios for the Prime board with the 1T SR tweak? 






Maximus Z690 and Alder Lake: Modern CPUs require Modern Overclocking Solutions - Page 2


Asus Z690, Maximus series and Alder Lake: The best tools for the best FPS. First, let me start by thanking Shamino @ ROG Asus for allowing me and the other testers to put this exciting new hardware through its paces and experiment with the new overclocking features and architecture changes...



rog.asus.com


----------



## warbucks

Jscs1992 said:


> Hey guys
> 
> im on asus strix a and 0707 bios and im trying to get 4133 15-16-16-32 cm 2 stable on testmem5 extreme and im having a hard time any suggestions.
> 
> i have my
> Dram: 1.57
> Vccsa: 1.4
> VDDQ: 1.4
> View attachment 2535133
> View attachment 2535133


Set tRFC to 360 and tREFI to auto for now, this will ensure they aren't the issue. Work on tightening up your secondaries (tFAW, tRRD_S/L, tWTR_S/L first).

Try these to start, run a full testmem5 and if you pass then tighten further:
tRRD_S = 6
tRRD_L = 6
tFAW = 24
tWRT_L = 12 (controlled by tWRRD_sg, reduce it until desired value)
tWRT_S = 4 (controlled by tWRRD_dg, reduce it until desired value)

On bios 0707 you may need to increase VDDQ voltage. Try 1.45V.


----------



## Hulk1988

I got finally the super rare TeamGroup DDR5 6400MHZ from OC UK. And already disappointed. *The Apex is not able to run it stable with XMP1. *
I am able to go into Windows and able to work 3-4 minutes. After that I get a freeze.

The RAM is listed under 6400 in ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX | ROG Maximus | Gaming Motherboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG Global

Changing back to Auto BIOS settings fixing it.

@shamino1978

Is there a fix planned for this, please? Any idea how to fix that? Do I need to increase the voltage from 1.35 to 1.4? Thank you 

*EDIT: FIXED WITH THE NEW BIOS 0903. BIG THANKS!*


----------



## tiboor

hello guys, i got a z690 strix gaming A
i have a known good trident z 3200mhz cl16 ram. 2x8gb
i cant set xmp, xmp2. it does not want to boot, throws me to post fail bios page.
if i set it manually, even then it does not want to work always. sometimes when i restart pc, it does not boot, untill i do a cmos reset. then im without oc memory again. 
i have to set dram frequency, timings, voltage, then it kind of works.


----------



## Nizzen

Hulk1988 said:


> I got finally the super rare TeamGroup DDR5 6400MHZ from OC UK. And already disappointed. *The Apex is not able to run it stable with XMP1. *
> I am able to go into Windows and able to work 3-4 minutes. After that I get a freeze.
> 
> The RAM is listed under 6400 in ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX | ROG Maximus | Gaming Motherboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG Global
> 
> Changing back to Auto BIOS settings fixing it.
> 
> @shamino1978
> 
> Is there a fix planned for this, please? Any idea how to fix that? Do I need to increase the voltage from 1.35 to 1.4? Thank you
> 
> View attachment 2535204


Tried the new 0093 bios?








APEX93.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com


----------



## Hulk1988

Nizzen said:


> Tried the new 0093 bios?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> APEX93.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com





Nizzen said:


> Tried the new 0093 bios?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> APEX93.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


Uhh from where is that? Great. I will try it directly. Is there a changelist?  You give me hope, hehe


----------



## Nizzen

Hulk1988 said:


> I got finally the super rare TeamGroup DDR5 6400MHZ from OC UK. And already disappointed. *The Apex is not able to run it stable with XMP1. *
> I am able to go into Windows and able to work 3-4 minutes. After that I get a freeze.
> 
> The RAM is listed under 6400 in ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX | ROG Maximus | Gaming Motherboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG Global
> 
> Changing back to Auto BIOS settings fixing it.
> 
> @shamino1978
> 
> Is there a fix planned for this, please? Any idea how to fix that? Do I need to increase the voltage from 1.35 to 1.4? Thank you
> 
> View attachment 2535204


Nice!


Hulk1988 said:


> Uhh from where is that? Great. I will try it directly. Is there a changelist?  You give me hope, hehe


"Updated/fixed XMP profiles"
From the one and only Shamino king


----------



## cstkl1

Nizzen said:


> Nice!
> 
> "Updated/fixed XMP profiles"
> From the one and only Shamino king


apex dont need xmp. xmp = youtubers

edit
might get ban again.


----------



## mister_no

Wasn't it earlier that you should change tWR with TWRPRE? If I change TWRPRE on my Asus Z690-A, tWR remains unchanged. :-( Or should I adjust tWR directly with the current generation and leave TWRPRE on "Auto"?


----------



## Nizzen

cstkl1 said:


> apex dont need xmp. xmp = youtubers
> 
> edit
> might get ban again.


All we need is enthusiasts on OCN/internet that share knowledge 🤩


----------



## ES IST ZEIT

Can i Use VDDQ 1.5V AND SA 1.42 V 
FOR 24/7 
OR IS IT TO HIGH 


SORRY FOR BAD ENGLISH


----------



## cstkl1

Nizzen said:


> All we need is enthusiasts on OCN/internet that share knowledge 🤩


the 6400c28 1T profile will be auctioned.

j/k. i think ppl will achieve it. then they will appreciate it..

ppl will come back one day laugh at 64002t garbage that thought it was the same as 1T. that wont even beat 62001T










even this is garbage against 6400c28 1T


----------



## Hulk1988

cstkl1 said:


> the 6400c28 profile will be auctioned.
> 
> j/k. i think ppl will achieve it


I would pay if you share your knowledge and helping with making my 6400 Ram better 

@Nizzen BIG THANKS! also to @shamino1978 for the great support

It seems that the new Bios 0093 is fixing my stability problem and I am able to run the 6400mhz RAM with XMP1 settings. 30 Minutes in Windows + 20 minutes Benchmark at the moment. All good.


----------



## cstkl1

Hulk1988 said:


> I would pay if you share your knowledge and helping with making my 6400 Ram better
> 
> @Nizzen BIG THANKS! also to @shamino1978 for the great support
> 
> It seems that the new Bios 0093 is fixing my stability problem and I am able to run the 6400mhz RAM with XMP1 settings. 30 Minutes in Windows + 20 minutes Benchmark at the moment. All good.


first free knowledge. wc them. they are very hot.


----------



## bscool

Looks like Team took the crown from Gskill for Ugly ram  I kid I kid it is beauuuuuuuitiful.


----------



## cstkl1

bscool said:


> Looks like Team took the crown from Gskill for Ugly ram  I kid I kid it is beauuuuuuuitiful.


err when desperate.. ppl have to make do bro


----------



## wkamil

shamino1978 said:


> if anyone wants to try out this auto tune tool for strix / maximus (windows/uefi version), guide in the link:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Auto_Opt1130.zip
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> start it before going to bed cause it takes pretty long.
> just to see if this has any potential.


It boots from usb and hangs right after a question of stress test duration... What am I doing wrong?


----------



## shamino1978

wkamil said:


> It boots from usb and hangs right after a question of stress test duration... What am I doing wrong?


should be a bug , i will need to find time to work on it, you can try the windows version if you want.


----------



## Hulk1988

shamino1978 said:


> should be a bug , i will need to find time to work on it, you can try the windows version if you want.


No joke. One of the reasons why I buy always ASUS Top boards is because of you, shamino. Really appreciated.


----------



## postem

Asmodian said:


> That is 46.7% more than I paid total at Asus.com for the Apex in the US (after converting AUD to USD at today's rate)?! Here the Apex would be $798.95 in AUD. Not cheap, but those prices are nuts!


You dont even know brazilian prices. 900US$ for hero. 1072$ for Apex. Its like they are forcing customers to do that. Anyway i taken the tuf, "only" 490$, damn brazilian taxes


----------



## wkamil

shamino1978 said:


> should be a bug , i will need to find time to work on it, you can try the windows version if you want.


I will  But if it will cold reset, what will happen after restart? It will start automatically and continue the test?


----------



## Jscs1992

warbucks said:


> Set tRFC to 360 and tREFI to auto for now, this will ensure they aren't the issue. Work on tightening up your secondaries (tFAW, tRRD_S/L, tWTR_S/L first).
> 
> Try these to start, run a full testmem5 and if you pass then tighten further:
> tRRD_S = 6
> tRRD_L = 6
> tFAW = 24
> tWRT_L = 12 (controlled by tWRRD_sg, reduce it until desired value)
> tWRT_S = 4 (controlled by tWRRD_dg, reduce it until desired value)
> 
> On bios 0707 you may need to increase VDDQ voltage. Try 1.45V.


hey i am trying these out now I do twrt_s on msi dragon is twtr the same ?


----------



## darth_meh

Falkentyne said:


> I have a Soundblaster X-fi Fatal1ty Titanium PCIE (on a riser card, so my 3090 FE has room) in the x4 slot and I don't get any BSOD WHEA's when submitting validations.
> I also have a USB Creative Super X-fi Amp plugged into USB as well.
> 
> I don't know what sound chip the AE-7 uses.
> What happens if you go to the sound properties for the soundcard (in the sound panel in control panel?) and disable soundblaster enhancements?


Thanks for trying this. At this point I'm pretty convinced it's an issue with the AE-7. Either my card is faulty or there's a design flaw with their PCIEX architecture. I read AMD users were plagued by WHEA errors when using the AE series as well somewhat recently. Enhancements are disabled. I also tried disabling PCIEX power management.


----------



## darth_meh

shamino1978 said:


> Updated Apex Bios 0093 (fixed some XMP compatibility issues)
> _APEX93.rar_


I updated to 0093 and still get BSODs when I enable XMP.
With XMP enabled, Cinebench R23 crashes during the first pass.
With XMP disabled, but running at DDR5200/auto timings, it runs for 10 minutes without a hitch.

Also, this is the first BIOS update where I lost video during the update, which was pretty scary. Fortunately, it seems fine after the update reboot.

Question for the seasoned OC'ers out there: once you experience a bluescreen/hard lock, do you typically reinstall Windows to rule out OS corruption in subsequent tests? Or is that pretty uncommon?


----------



## GtiJason

Jscs1992 said:


> hey i am trying these out now I do twrt_s on msi dragon is twtr the same ?


tWTR_S is just tWTR on Dragon
I run WTR_L at 6 and _S at 1 on most kits, some need 2


----------



## GtiJason

darth_meh said:


> I updated to 0093 and still get BSODs when I enable XMP.
> With XMP enabled, Cinebench R23 crashes during the first pass.
> With XMP disabled, but running at DDR5200/auto timings, it runs for 10 minutes without a hitch.
> 
> Also, this is the first BIOS update where I lost video during the update, which was pretty scary. Fortunately, it seems fine after the update reboot.
> 
> Question for the seasoned OC'ers out there: once you experience a bluescreen/hard lock, do you typically reinstall Windows to rule out OS corruption in subsequent tests? Or is that pretty uncommon?


I do not BSOD, Hard lock and sudden restart/shutdown are very common in the world of OC


----------



## warbucks

Jscs1992 said:


> hey i am trying these out now I do twrt_s on msi dragon is twtr the same ?


Yes, Dragon Ball shows it as tWTR.


----------



## fortecosi

edit: not important anymore


----------



## cstkl1

i9-12900k - SP93
Asus MZ690 Apex - 00093
Gskill 2x16gb 6666 36-39-39-28 2T 280 @1.55
SA|tx vddq|mc - 0.9|1.45|1.45


----------



## Jubeishock

darth_meh said:


> Thanks for trying this. At this point I'm pretty convinced it's an issue with the AE-7. Either my card is faulty or there's a design flaw with their PCIEX architecture. I read AMD users were plagued by WHEA errors when using the AE series as well somewhat recently. Enhancements are disabled. I also tried disabling PCIEX power management.


I own an AE9 and haven't such errors , when I had that whea errors was due had 4 ram slots occupied, once removed 2 ram modules solved that.
I'm with a 12700k GSkill 3200 ddr4 strix z690 gaming a d4


----------



## CornerJack

First tests with Teamgroup 6400 CL40 stock + 12900K stock + ROG Maximus Z690 APEX (0093)
Thanks Shamino for this BIOS !


----------



## darth_meh

Jubeishock said:


> I own an AE9 and haven't such errors , when I had that whea errors was due had 4 ram slots occupied, once removed 2 ram modules solved that.
> I'm with a 12700k GSkill 3200 ddr4 strix z690 gaming a d4


Have you tried running the CPU-Z benchmark and submitting it for validation? That’s the only way I’ve been able to reproduce the issue.


----------



## Jubeishock

darth_meh said:


> Have you tried running the CPU-Z benchmark and submitting it for validation? That’s the only way I’ve been able to reproduce the issue.


Yeah, when I submit crash.


By the way anyone know if there any problem if you mix samsung and hynix ram? I own 4 GSkill modules 2 Samsung and 2 hynix


----------



## darth_meh

Jubeishock said:


> Yeah, when I submit crash.


It does crash? If so do you get a WHEA error?


----------



## darth_meh

Jubeishock said:


> By the way anyone know if there any problem if you mix samsung and hynix ram? I own 4 GSkill modules 2 Samsung and 2 hynix


The conventional wisdom is you shouldn’t mix kits. I imagine mixing chips would set you up for even more issues.


----------



## cstkl1

dreams do come true

i9- 12900k - SP 93
Asus MZ690 Apex - 0093
Gskill 2x16gb 6666 28-39-39-28-296 2T


----------



## beardlessduck

Jubeishock said:


> Yeah, when I submit crash.
> 
> 
> By the way anyone know if there any problem if you mix samsung and hynix ram? I own 4 GSkill modules 2 Samsung and 2 hynix


I can't get 4 sticks that are almost sequential in serial numbers to run together stably. Two different brands will be rough.


----------



## beardlessduck

cstkl1 said:


> dreams do come true
> 
> i9- 12900k - SP 93
> Asus MZ690 Apex - 0093
> Gskill 2x16gb 6666 28-39-39-28-296 2T


That's pretty amazing at CL28 especially.


----------



## Jubeishock

darth_meh said:


> It does crash? If so do you get a WHEA error?


Yes getting that error.


----------



## Jubeishock

[QUOTE = "beardlessduck, publicación: 28904793, miembro: 518574"]
No puedo hacer que 4 palos que son casi secuenciales en números de serie funcionen juntos de manera estable. Dos marcas diferentes serán difíciles.
[/CITA]
Thanks, got it


----------



## Jubeishock

beardlessduck said:


> I can't get 4 sticks that are almost sequential in serial numbers to run together stably. Two different brands will be rough.


Thanks, got it


----------



## darth_meh

Jubeishock said:


> Yes getting that error.


Thanks for confirming. It's nice to know I'm not the only one, and this seems to point at the AE-series and/or a bug in CPU-Z validation.


----------



## Jubeishock

darth_meh said:


> Thanks for confirming. It's nice to know I'm not the only one, and this seems to point at the AE-series and/or a bug in CPU-Z validation.


I think is cpu z error, which mobo and ram are you using?


----------



## darth_meh

Jubeishock said:


> I think is cpu z error, which mobo and ram are you using?


I'm able to reproduce the issue with 3 different motherboards.


----------



## cstkl1

beardlessduck said:


> That's pretty amazing at CL28 especially.


apex = makes dreams a reality. 

doesnt need stories postings. it just does what its told to do. screenshot of fulfilling your wishes bro. 

lol.


----------



## ES IST ZEIT

cstkl1 said:


> i9-12900k - SP93
> Asus MZ690 Apex - 00093
> Gskill 2x16gb 6666 36-39-39-28 2T 280 @1.55
> SA|tx vddq|mc - 0.9|1.45|1.45


How can i Download this memtest ?
Have you links ?


----------



## beardlessduck

cstkl1 said:


> apex = makes dreams a reality.
> 
> doesnt need stories postings. it just does what its told to do. screenshot of fulfilling your wishes bro.
> 
> lol.


The Apex looks awesome. I'd swap out my Strix-F if it had 4 RAM slots. It seems like it's getting the most attention.

For now I just gave up on my RAM. It's not even 100% stable at DDR5 4000 CL38 so I'm just planning to keep this PC until I can replace it with something better.


----------



## cstkl1

ES IST ZEIT said:


> How can i Download this memtest ?
> Have you links ?


its a gui launcher of memtestpro

so u need to buy the app and then use this


beardlessduck said:


> The Apex looks awesome. I'd swap out my Strix-F if it had 4 RAM slots. It seems like it's getting the most attention.
> 
> For now I just gave up on my RAM. It's not even 100% stable at DDR5 4000 CL38 so I'm just planning to keep this PC until I can replace it with something better.


the 0093 will be passed down retuned for all chipset / boards. just wait for awhile. it might help


----------



## beardlessduck

cstkl1 said:


> its a gui launcher of memtestpro
> 
> so u need to buy the app and then use this
> 
> the 0093 will be passed down retuned for all chipset / boards. just wait for awhile. it might help


That would be amazing if there was some hope that it would improve in the future on the same hardware.

I'm okay with buying a new motherboard or RAM but the RAM isn't available and there doesn't seem to be a motherboard that is compatible with 4 sticks at a reasonable speed yet.


----------



## Jubeishock

Is normal games close if I have xmp enabled?
I'm desperate
My mobo z690 strix gaming a d4


----------



## darth_meh

Jubeishock said:


> Is normal games close if I have xmp enabled?
> I'm desperate
> My mobo z690 strix gaming a d4


I can't run XMP stable with Corsair Dominator DDR5200 RAM.
I've read posts from several others experiencing the same issue.
If you're having stability issues running XMP, you can try:

Updating your BIOS
Entering the frequency, voltage, and timings manually
Try increasing your VDD/VDDQ voltage to 1.3V or 1.35V
Wait for the next BIOS release with fixes


----------



## Jubeishock

darth_meh said:


> I can't run XMP stable with Corsair Dominator DDR5200 RAM.
> I've read posts from several others experiencing the same issue.
> If you're having stability issues running XMP, you can try:
> 
> Updating your BIOS
> Entering the frequency, voltage, and timings manually
> Try increasing your VDD/VDDQ voltage to 1.3V or 1.35V
> Wait for the next BIOS release with fixes


I'll try, also another issue quite annoying it's pretty difficult start my PC into the bios, pressing repeated times Del or F2 but can't run at the first time, sometimes need to restart my PC multiple time to enter, is there any tip or bios config to solve this? 

Thanks


----------



## darth_meh

Jubeishock said:


> I'll try, also another issue quite annoying it's pretty difficult start my PC into the bios, pressing repeated times Del or F2 but can't run at the first time, sometimes need to restart my PC multiple time to enter, is there any tip or bios config to 2 solve this?
> 
> Thanks


Just mash the DEL or F2 key before the screen appears.


----------



## Jubeishock

darth_meh said:


> Just mash the DEL or F2 key before the screen appears.


Asus boot screen appears sometimes, maybe after 3 - 4 reboots show, is strange.

I'm not sure is my mobo is ok or defective, just I've entered in the bios and seen this mobo comes with 2 bios logos, asus logo and se7en logo? Is this from asus too? Or maybe someone added his custom logo and returned the mobo cause could be defective?

Thanks


----------



## darth_meh

Jubeishock said:


> I've entered in the bios and seen this mobo comes with 2 bios logos, asus logo and se7en logo? Is this from asus too? Or maybe someone added his custom logo and returned the mobo cause could be defective?


Yeah, that Se7en logo isn't normal. It does sound like you received a secondhand motherboard.


----------



## Garlicky

darth_meh said:


> Yeah, that Se7en logo isn't normal. It does sound like you received a secondhand motherboard.


These mb comes with the se7en logo in the bios as a option by default...


----------



## jomama22

You can also change the duration for which you have time to enter bios in the settings. Believe it's either in "my favorites" and or tools.


----------



## Agent-A01

@Falkentyne 

I've found out your favorite stress test, Minecraft, requires AVX2 stability to even boot now.

I was playing around with "gaming" voltage stability only to see max clocks and the older version of Minecrafts were a good stability test for that scenario.

Now Minecraft 1.18 requires aprox .05-.06 more vcore to not crash/bsod on startup vs previous versions.
It's practically a quick prime95 avx2 test that sees ~240w of load.


----------



## MikeGR7

Jubeishock said:


> Asus boot screen appears sometimes, maybe after 3 - 4 reboots show, is strange.
> 
> I'm not sure is my mobo is ok or defective, just I've entered in the bios and seen this mobo comes with 2 bios logos, asus logo and se7en logo? Is this from asus too? Or maybe someone added his custom logo and returned the mobo cause could be defective?
> 
> Thanks


se7en logo is normal, included by Asus.


----------



## Falkentyne

Agent-A01 said:


> @Falkentyne
> 
> I've found out your favorite stress test, Minecraft, requires AVX2 stability to even boot now.
> 
> I was playing around with "gaming" voltage stability only to see max clocks and the older version of Minecrafts were a good stability test for that scenario.
> 
> Now Minecraft 1.18 requires aprox .05-.06 more vcore to not crash/bsod on startup vs previous versions.
> It's practically a quick prime95 avx2 test that sees ~240w of load.


Is this with E cores enabled or disabled?


----------



## Agent-A01

Falkentyne said:


> Is this with E cores enabled or disabled?


Disabled.

I was aiming for a 5.2 all core stable(in games) but that seems impossible with minecraft requiring avx2 stable clocks. My vmin for games(highly threaded) is aprox 1.3v for 5.1 all core, and around 1.35v~ for 5.2.

But to not BSOD at 5.1 in minecraft, I require 1.46v set with LLC 4 which puts the vmin around 1.35-.36. So in games I'm sitting at over .1v more than I need to be stable in.
5.2 is another ball park for minecraft, would need at least 1.5v set.

Ring is 4.8 with 4000CL14 Gear 1.
I've tried lowering ring/memory clocks just to see if I would be able to pass minecraft but doesn't help at all.


----------



## Falkentyne

Agent-A01 said:


> Disabled.
> 
> I was aiming for a 5.2 all core stable(in games) but that seems impossible with minecraft requiring avx2 stable clocks. My vmin for games(highly threaded) is aprox 1.3v for 5.1 all core, and around 1.35v~ for 5.2.
> 
> But to not BSOD at 5.1 in minecraft, I require 1.46v set with LLC 4 which puts the vmin around 1.35-.36. So in games I'm sitting at over .1v more than I need to be stable in.
> 5.2 is another ball park for minecraft, would need at least 1.5v set.
> 
> Ring is 4.8 with 4000CL14 Gear 1.
> I've tried lowering ring/memory clocks just to see if I would be able to pass minecraft but doesn't help at all.


With E cores disabled, Minecraft seems to require the same vcore to not BSOD randomly on load (assuming you repeatedly test it over and over) as you need to not BSOD or crash in Cinebench R15.
Oddly enough, R20/R23, both which use AVX (unknown if R23 uses AVX2 or not) seems to require a bit less vcore than R15, while on older CPU's (skylake etc), R15 would always require less vcore. But neither R15 nor Minecraft use AVX at all, so it's probably SSE instructions.


----------



## Falkentyne

Agent-A01 said:


> Disabled.
> 
> I was aiming for a 5.2 all core stable(in games) but that seems impossible with minecraft requiring avx2 stable clocks. My vmin for games(highly threaded) is aprox 1.3v for 5.1 all core, and around 1.35v~ for 5.2.
> 
> But to not BSOD at 5.1 in minecraft, I require 1.46v set with LLC 4 which puts the vmin around 1.35-.36. So in games I'm sitting at over .1v more than I need to be stable in.
> 5.2 is another ball park for minecraft, would need at least 1.5v set.
> 
> Ring is 4.8 with 4000CL14 Gear 1.
> I've tried lowering ring/memory clocks just to see if I would be able to pass minecraft but doesn't help at all.


You're on a 12700k right?
So you're having problems getting Minecraft stable at 5.2 ghz with the E's disabled.
I sort of have the same issue at 5.3 ghz with the E cores disabled on a 12900k (QS chip), but I think Minecraft can load stable enough at 1.323v minimum load voltage, but it reaches 100C trying.
Funny enough, 5.3 ghz with the E cores enabled requires less voltage to load minecraft than it does with the E cores disabled--go figure that one out...


----------



## Agent-A01

Falkentyne said:


> With E cores disabled, Minecraft seems to require the same vcore to not BSOD randomly on load (assuming you repeatedly test it over and over) as you need to not BSOD or crash in Cinebench R15.
> Oddly enough, R20/R23, both which use AVX (unknown if R23 uses AVX2 or not) seems to require a bit less vcore than R15, while on older CPU's (skylake etc), R15 would always require less vcore. But neither R15 nor Minecraft use AVX at all, so it's probably SSE instructions.


Yes, this is with repeated tests of booting Minecraft.

Latest P95 avx2 needs a very similar set voltage as Minecraft does(the latest 1.18)



Falkentyne said:


> You're on a 12700k right?
> So you're having problems getting Minecraft stable at 5.2 ghz with the E's disabled.
> I sort of have the same issue at 5.3 ghz with the E cores disabled on a 12900k (QS chip), but I think Minecraft can load stable enough at 1.323v minimum load voltage, but it reaches 100C trying.
> Funny enough, 5.3 ghz with the E cores enabled requires less voltage to load minecraft than it does with the E cores disabled--go figure that one out...


Yes 12700K. Couldn't justify the price of the 12900K when I planned on disabled E cores anyways.

Yes. Having issues with the new version that just released.

Needs at least .05-.06v MORE than the previous minecraft release. 
I don't know why that is and it sure seems to be using a lot of power for a program that doesn't use AVX(unless they added it, why else would it be that much harder to pass?)

Try it out if you haven't, maybe you will see similar results. 1.18 vs 1.17
Maybe this is a candidate for tweaking for TVB because it spikes the temps up high like you said.

Speaking of temps, I'm having an issue where there's a big delta between hottest and coldest SP cores, 18c. 
My Aquacomputer Kuplex kryos needs the LGA 1700 kit. I don't think I have optimal contact.


----------



## cstkl1

https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLnDpYGzMyaDXrexOz8btb0ksWJ52mT5_V



voltician.


----------



## cstkl1

ES IST ZEIT said:


> How can i Download this memtest ?
> Have you links ?


thank @safedisk for sharing this. 









_RunmemtestPro5.0.2860.443.7z


7Z File



1drv.ms





again reminder buy memtestpro and place the exe in the gui folder.


----------



## Jubeishock

darth_meh said:


> Yeah, that Se7en logo isn't normal. It does sound like you received a secondhand motherboard.





Garlicky said:


> These mb comes with the se7en logo in the bios as a option by default...





MikeGR7 said:


> se7en logo is normal, included by Asus.


Thanks all guys, This is my first Asus MOBO and that was strange for me. 

Related ERP, fast boot (bios) and POST delay Im lost, what should I select if I dont wanna have my mobo and keyboard lights turned on? s4+s5? s5? 
For fast boot enabled, disabled? Im using a NVME drive for windows 
For Post delay how do u set this guys? 1, 3, 0 Seconds? 

Thanks again, much appreciated


----------



## lolhaxz

cstkl1 said:


> https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLnDpYGzMyaDXrexOz8btb0ksWJ52mT5_V
> 
> 
> 
> voltician.


The absolutely most disgusting piece of programming I have seen from ASUS yet - and that is saying something.... It's over 400MB of pure rubbish.

It works... but boy is it grad student level stuff.

I'd love their products so much more if the software wasn't just garbage wrappers


----------



## sblantipodi

shamino1978 said:


> made some updates for samsung IC's for anyone to try APEX:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0081.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


shamino but are you an Asus Employee?
Are those firmware some sort of BETA firmware before the official release?


----------



## cstkl1

sblantipodi said:


> shamino but are you an Asus Employee?
> Are those firmware some sort of BETA firmware before the official release?


he is apex
he makes your dream comes true


----------



## edkieferlp

Got a quick question on SA VID shown in HWinfo64. If my memory is right when I first booted using default bios settings (no XMP), the SA VID was 1.2v same as DRAM voltage. When I set XMP 1 ([email protected] Crucial Ballistix) SA VID went to 1.35v same as DRAM, is that to high?
I see others running much lower SA voltages. I have no plan going over 4000.
MB is TUF Z690 PLUS Wifi D4.

PS: The system seems stable and running good, just wanted to know if that SA seems high for ram speed, Oh I am in gear1 mode if that matters.


----------



## cstkl1

edkieferlp said:


> Got a quick question on SA VID shown in HWinfo64. If my memory is right when I first booted using default bios settings (no XMP), the SA VID was 1.2v same as DRAM voltage. When I set XMP 1 ([email protected] Crucial Ballistix) SA VID went to 1.35v same as DRAM, is that to high?
> I see others running much lower SA voltages. I have no plan going over 4000.
> MB is TUF Z690 PLUS Wifi D4.
> 
> PS: The system seems stable and running good, just wanted to know if that SA seems high for ram speed, Oh I am in gear1 mode if that matters.


its a balancing act between dram voltage imc and sa based on set of tcl:twcl you use. tighter sets generally better performance at expense of higher sa etc. 

test it out.


----------



## cstkl1

samsung 6kc36 on Apex tm5

try xmp
sa offset manual
vdd,tx vddq 1.25
mc try 1.15

in dram timing menu try dll_bswel 22


----------



## Feklar

Jubeishock said:


> I'll try, also another issue quite annoying it's pretty difficult start my PC into the bios, pressing repeated times Del or F2 but can't run at the first time, sometimes need to restart my PC multiple time to enter, is there any tip or bios config to solve this?
> 
> Thanks


No need to press the delete key multiple times. Hold down the delete key until you get to bios then releasei t.


----------



## edkieferlp

cstkl1 said:


> its a balancing act between dram voltage imc and sa based on set of tcl:twcl you use. tighter sets generally better performance at expense of higher sa etc.
> 
> test it out.


Ok, thanks.
I should of posted at least primary timings (cl=16, rcd=18, rp=18, ras=38, rc=56, CR2).


----------



## Martin778

Which XMP is best to use on 2x16GB 4kc16 Bdie kit in terms of stability?
I can boot 2x16GB 4000-4133 Gear1 on my 12900K and Z690A D4 but something needs more juice for stability.
I now run 1.26 SA and 1.26 IvR Transmitter (VDDQ?) and the "0002" BIOS.

+
Got it, 1.26/1.26 SA/VDDQ did the trick for 100% memtest coverage at 4000C16.


----------



## ChaosAD

Anyone else has an issue with saving the bios profile in txt? Put USB, enter BIOS,Tools->Asus User Profile->Load/Save profile and hit Ctrl+F2, i dont know why but it doesnt work. Changed usb flash drives, changed usb ports nothing. I get the message to save, i press save and doesnt do anything :/


----------



## MaghX

ChaosAD said:


> hit Ctrl+F2


Just hit F2


----------



## ChaosAD

MaghX said:


> Just hit F2


Same, doesnt work, get the prompt witht the bar to save, press save and nothing happens.


----------



## nimachoopani

My board model's is asus strix z690-A bios v.707 and I have four Spectrix d50 8g 4133. I tried 4133 gear 2 and 4000 gear 1 and 2 but I got no stability. now my system is somehow stable on 3600 on gear 1 and 16 19 19 40 2T but I get 1 to 3 error in each test .when I use 2 dimm 4133 and 4400 on gear 2 are stable. Do you have any idea how can I get stability on 4 dimm on 4000?


----------



## cstkl1

nimachoopani said:


> My board model's is asus strix z690-A bios v.707 and I have four Spectrix d50 8g 4133. I tried 4133 gear 2 and 4000 gear 1 and 2 but I got no stability. now my system is somehow stable on 3600 on gear 1 and 16 19 19 40 2T but I get 1 to 3 error in each test .when I use 2 dimm 4133 and 4400 on gear 2 are stable. Do you have any idea how can I get stability on 4 dimm on 4000?


hynix?


----------



## nimachoopani

cstkl1 said:


> hynix?


micron but don't know which di they are


----------



## cstkl1

nimachoopani said:


> micron but don't know which di they are


no comment. never touched microns before


----------



## jomama22

ChaosAD said:


> Same, doesnt work, get the prompt witht the bar to save, press save and nothing happens.


It won't show within the bios that the file is present/saved off. But if you did save it off, you will see the txt stored on the USB when in windows


----------



## shamino1978

wkamil said:


> It boots from usb and hangs right after a question of stress test duration... What am I doing wrong?


this should fix this issue








AutoOptEFI1204.zip


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com




load ai opt and wait 5 seconds for autorun and answer question and leave it


----------



## Grendel602

lutes1989 said:


> having 100% exact same issue for days
> 12900k+z690+3090+1000w corsair+g skills 5200


I am having the same exact issue wtih Asus Z690-A Gaming WIFI, 12900K, and 3090. Samsung 980 PRO in first M2 slot.

Only thing other than worked to remove the errors and full functionality was setting the PCIE slot to GEN 3 in BIOS. But then you don't get the GEN 4 bandwidth. OTherwise turning off native power management got rid of the WHEA 17 error but crushed GPU performance for some reason in 3DMark and in real world games.

It is an Intel 460D PEG 10 Chipset error over the PCIE bus. Probably requires driver updates for MOBO and/or Chipset.


----------



## mycell24

Hi, i have tried the 0803 from Asus official Website, but system run into error (z690 Extreme) - start the safe mode. I testet Ram configs Auto, XMP1, XMP2, but nothing changes. In 0702 it runs.


> DDR 5 Kingston Fury 5200 C40


Edit:
One of the USB 3 Frontpanel Connectors are not listet in the EZ Flash Utility U32G1_E43, in Windows it works. I must try an other USB Port from the Second Connector ...E12. Is this normal?


----------



## Grendel602

BenchAndGames said:


> Yeah so its mote than confirmed its related to the compatibility with M2 devices, I have the same SN850 with the same problem.
> 
> I yested so far 2 different M2 conection but in both of them I got the WHEA.
> Its just when I plug in into 1 M2, will change the root name devicr, but checking it on device manager right how I described above will show me that always it is the SN 850 no matter in what M2 slot I install, will just change the PCI root.
> 
> Also its a totally new NVMe drive with 4 hours ik total cuz I just replaced it thinking that the old one was defective...seems like asus boards are defective
> 
> As you can see in this picture, in this case the SN850 wich is that WDS100T1X0E-00AFY0 it is installed on the M2_3 and the PCI-E root got the name of 7AC8, but before I had it installed on the M2_4 and the PCI-E root named was like 7AC4 , but holding the same WDS100T1X0E-00AFY0 (SN850)
> 
> View attachment 2534741



The error has nothign to do specifically with the NVMe drive. My PEG 10 connection is linked to HD Audio Controller and my GPU and I get the errors a lot. I'm certain this is a mobo or intel chipset driver issue for PEG 10 460D.


----------



## beardlessduck

shamino1978 said:


> this should fix this issue
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AutoOptEFI1204.zip
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> load ai opt and wait 5 seconds for autorun and answer question and leave it


Where is this setting in BIOS?


----------



## Woklbokl

shamino1978 said:


> this should fix this issue
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AutoOptEFI1204.zip
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> load ai opt and wait 5 seconds for autorun and answer question and leave it


Tested with this new version. Still cannot type anything after startup.nsh is running. Tried several keyboards again


----------



## BenchAndGames

Grendel602 said:


> The error has nothign to do specifically with the NVMe drive. My PEG 10 connection is linked to HD Audio Controller and my GPU and I get the errors a lot. I'm certain this is a mobo or intel chipset driver issue for PEG 10 460D.


Not really a driver issue, it is related to ASUS motherboards or Asus bios exclusive, with how PCI-E ports are working...
I had this WHEA´s on TUF Z690 WIFI D4, some other users with ROG APEX, with ROG-A D4, others with PRIME, so what we all had in common is the ASUS boards.

Now I changed to MSI MAG Z690 Tomahawk and I have 0 problems atm, while with the ASUS TUF from the first day I had +300 WHEA´s per sec related to that PCI-E port...


----------



## beardlessduck

Woklbokl said:


> Tested with this new version. Still cannot type anything after startup.nsh is running. Tried several keyboards again


This happens to me too but it works after a reboot. First boot won't let me type but second boot works.

I didn't mess with it too much though because my PC isn't stable at stock yet.


----------



## GtiJason

ChaosAD said:


> Same, doesnt work, get the prompt witht the bar to save, press save and nothing happens.


Gotta name it first if you haven't


----------



## chispy

Guys i got a question and need some help. I'm on Asus Strix D4 , when i try to OC the bclk more than .050 on the bios wehen i boot into windows the core clocks of my 12900kf are stuck at 3.9Ghz  , turboV does not work when this happens , only if i lower the bclk .020 on the bios it will work ? Any ideas what i'm doing wrong or what settings i need to adjust ? Thank you in advanced , i have not play with this set up over one week. Bios is 0707.


----------



## Clay333

Has anyone updated their BIOS while having Windows 11 installed? In Tech Yes City's review for the Asrock Z690 Tiachi he stated that updating BIOS on Z690 with Windows11 installed will brick your OS install. I have a Strix Z690-A and with Windows 11 installed on a SN850. I completely forgot to update my BIOS until 2 weeks after building the system and really don't want to have to do a new Windows install.

I can't find any other information about this issue other than that one video. I would really like to update since I am still on 0404, but don't want to dedicate hours to getting everything installed and setup again if there is anyway around it.


----------



## cstkl1

Clay333 said:


> Has anyone updated their BIOS while having Windows 11 installed? In Tech Yes City's review for the Asrock Z690 Tiachi he stated that updating BIOS on Z690 with Windows11 installed will brick your OS install. I have a Strix Z690-A and with Windows 11 installed on a SN850. I completely forgot to update my BIOS until 2 weeks after building the system and really don't want to have to do a new Windows install.
> 
> I can't find any other information about this issue other than that one video. I would really like to update since I am still on 0404, but don't want to dedicate hours to getting everything installed and setup again if there is anyway around it.


always load optimize. 
save exit. enter back bios then update
or use bios flashback

i been updating bios like every 2 days testing since october.. so.. dunno what dat dude is talkinh about.


----------



## cstkl1

chispy said:


> Guys i got a question and need some help. I'm on Asus Strix D4 , when i try to OC the bclk more than .050 on the bios wehen i boot into windows the core clocks of my 12900kf are stuck at 3.9Ghz  , turboV does not work when this happens , only if i lower the bclk .020 on the bios it will work ? Any ideas what i'm doing wrong or what settings i need to adjust ? Thank you in advanced , i have not play with this set up over one week. Bios is 0707.


voltage manual or auto?
bclk aware thingy switch auto or disabled the setting near cache


----------



## cstkl1

BenchAndGames said:


> Not really a driver issue, it is related to ASUS motherboards or Asus bios exclusive, with how PCI-E ports are working...
> I had this WHEA´s on TUF Z690 WIFI D4, some other users with ROG APEX, with ROG-A D4, others with PRIME, so what we all had in common is the ASUS boards.
> 
> Now I changed to MSI MAG Z690 Tomahawk and I have 0 problems atm, while with the ASUS TUF from the first day I had +300 WHEA´s per sec related to that PCI-E port...


some was not fresh install windows
some was creative ae soundcard

common thing is 95% z690 ocn user here is asus... the other 5% are having their own prob. 

1. full setup? gpu?? 
2. are you using riser? 
3. nvme? soundcard? 
4. fresh install ? 
5. does it happen on jdec? 
6. bios?? tried all?
7. what rams you have? chipset?

just weird i dont have it. the other d4 rig friends doesnt have it
both rigs are ram, cpu superstable


----------



## GtiJason

Clay333 said:


> Has anyone updated their BIOS while having Windows 11 installed? In Tech Yes City's review for the Asrock Z690 Tiachi he stated that updating BIOS on Z690 with Windows11 installed will brick your OS install. I have a Strix Z690-A and with Windows 11 installed on a SN850. I completely forgot to update my BIOS until 2 weeks after building the system and really don't want to have to do a new Windows install.
> 
> I can't find any other information about this issue other than that one video. I would really like to update since I am still on 0404, but don't want to dedicate hours to getting everything installed and setup again if there is anyway around it.


Flashed bios on Strix A D4 and MSI A Pro many times, both running W11, 1 on SN750 and other on sata ssd. Zero problems


----------



## GtiJason

chispy said:


> Guys i got a question and need some help. I'm on Asus Strix D4 , when i try to OC the bclk more than .050 on the bios wehen i boot into windows the core clocks of my 12900kf are stuck at 3.9Ghz  , turboV does not work when this happens , only if i lower the bclk .020 on the bios it will work ? Any ideas what i'm doing wrong or what settings i need to adjust ? Thank you in advanced , i have not play with this set up over one week. Bios is 0707.


Maybe when you change baseclock it's changing the AI Overclock Tuner setting ?
I doubt it's changing anything in the CPU menu under the Advanced Tab but might as well check... or it's just a ****ty bug


----------



## beardlessduck

Wow, I just swapped out my Strix-F for a Maximus Formula and it is a night and day difference.

The Strix wouldn't even boot at DDR5 5200 -- I was running it at 4000 just to have it somewhat stable.

The Maximus has built in profiles and it booted on the first attempt. The built in profile is even better than XMP!

I'm currently running a stability test but it's significantly better based on my testing so far. If you want to use 64GB (4 sticks) of DDR5 at relatively high speed, the Maximus is the way to go. The Strix-F is probably not the way to go.

Thank you to Asus to providing these profiles.

Update:
The stress test failed after about an hour but it's a huge improvement over the Strix.



http://imgur.com/a/Irj0ANj


----------



## beardlessduck

Clay333 said:


> Has anyone updated their BIOS while having Windows 11 installed? In Tech Yes City's review for the Asrock Z690 Tiachi he stated that updating BIOS on Z690 with Windows11 installed will brick your OS install. I have a Strix Z690-A and with Windows 11 installed on a SN850. I completely forgot to update my BIOS until 2 weeks after building the system and really don't want to have to do a new Windows install.
> 
> I can't find any other information about this issue other than that one video. I would really like to update since I am still on 0404, but don't want to dedicate hours to getting everything installed and setup again if there is anyway around it.


I've updated my BIOS several times with Windows 11 installed and did not have to reinstall.


----------



## Clay333

cstkl1 said:


> always load optimize.
> save exit. enter back bios then update
> or use bios flashback
> 
> i been updating bios like every 2 days testing since october.. so.. dunno what dat dude is talkinh about.


Great, thanks for the help. I don't have much of a grasp on the TPM, so when I saw that video it had me concerned. 

Is there a BIOS for the Strix Z690-A that is generally agreed upon to be the best? I see there is 0003 which has optimizations for B-die stability and 0803, both of which are beta.
I also noticed that there are 2 different versions for the 0803 (ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI BETA BIOS 0803 & ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4 BETA BIOS 0803 ). That sems a little confusing because as far as I know all Strix Z690-A boards are DDR4 (D4), why are there 2 different versions?


----------



## bscool

@Clay333 d4 means for ddr4 the other Strix A is ddr5


----------



## IronAge

@shamino1978

is it possible to receive a Beta Bios for the Maximus Extreme with the changes included with 0093 ?

folks need a Bios with better Support for Samsung IC for the extreme too,

would be appreciated very much, since there quite a few G.Skill Kits with Samsng IC been shipped by german etailers and most people have trouble running them @ XMP unless they have an Apex with 0093 flashed.


----------



## Jubeishock

Resizable bar isn't working, just activated into the bios but in Nvidia control panel shows as "off" 
Using bios 0707 strix gaming a D4


----------



## shamino1978

IronAge said:


> @shamino1978
> 
> is it possible to receive a Beta Bios for the Maximus Extreme with the changes included with 0093 ?
> 
> folks need a Bios with better Support for Samsung IC for the extreme too,
> 
> would be appreciated very much, since there quite a few G.Skill Kits with Samsng IC been shipped by german etailers and most people have trouble running them @ XMP unless they have an Apex with 0093 flashed.











ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0806.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com


----------



## mattxx88

shamino1978 said:


> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0806.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


this works for all maximus and strix family or just apex and extreme?


----------



## Jubeishock

Anyone could confirm if resizable bar work? 
Can't enable. I've tried enabling csm, disabling, 4g decode, etc. Still showing as off in Nvidia control panel. 

Rtx 3090


----------



## MaghX

cstkl1 said:


> thank @safedisk for sharing this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _RunmemtestPro5.0.2860.443.7z
> 
> 
> 7Z File
> 
> 
> 
> 1drv.ms
> 
> 
> 
> 
> again reminder buy memtestpro and place the exe in the gui folder.


I have memtestpro, its working fine but when I start this gui via RunMemtest.exe and click burn it start counting up time but coverage is all the time 0%, cover speed 0 too and last log: System status : Opening → Burning.

Im doing something wrong here?


----------



## cstkl1

MaghX said:


> I have memtestpro, its working fine but when I start this gui via RunMemtest.exe and click burn it start counting up time but coverage is all the time 0%, cover speed 0 too and last log: System status : Opening → Burning.
> 
> Im doing something wrong here?


did u place memtestpro.exe in the same folder?


----------



## cstkl1

Jubeishock said:


> Anyone could confirm if resizable bar work?
> Can't enable. I've tried enabling csm, disabling, 4g decode, etc. Still showing as off in Nvidia control panel.
> 
> Rtx 3090


it works on strix D4 and apex. on strix rtx 3080,3080ti and 3090 
load optimize.. just enable rebar.


----------



## MaghX

cstkl1 said:


> did u place memtestpro.exe in the same folder?


Yes, in the settings memtestpro 7.0 is selected, memory is actually allocated and cpu is doing something as I can see in hwinfo, looks like everything is working but no info about progress.
I have also tried to delete config.cfg but it didnt help


----------



## cstkl1

MaghX said:


> Yes, in the settings memtestpro 7.0 is selected, memory is actually allocated and cpu is doing something as I can see in hwinfo, looks like everything is working but no info about progress.
> I have also tried to delete config.cfg but it didnt help


the ram mb amount. you exceeded whats available.


----------



## MaghX

Tried also 4 threads with 1GB ram each, always 0% coverage and speed, very strange. In the original memtestpro I can see everything


----------



## cstkl1

MaghX said:


> Tried also 4 threads with 1GB ram each, always 0% coverage and speed, very strange. In the original memtestpro I can see everything


you got to try dude. maybe run admin comp mode etc. 
win 11 has alot of things that prevent access


----------



## IronAge

mattxx88 said:


> this works for all maximus and strix family or just apex and extreme?


This one is for Apex only,

@shamino1978 

can we have this for the extreme and maybe Hero as well pleaaaaaze ? 

anyways, for the great support muchas gracias senor.


----------



## mattxx88

IronAge said:


> This one is for Apex only,
> 
> @shamino1978
> 
> can we have this for the extreme and maybe Hero as well pleaaaaaze ?
> 
> anyways, for the great support muchas gracias senor.


but shamino has quoted your post where you were asking for the bios for the extreme, linking the Apex bios, so maybe he meant that it was good anyway


----------



## wkamil

Jubeishock said:


> Anyone could confirm if resizable bar work?
> Can't enable. I've tried enabling csm, disabling, 4g decode, etc. Still showing as off in Nvidia control panel.
> 
> Rtx 3090


rx6800xt works


----------



## owikh84

Jubeishock said:


> Anyone could confirm if resizable bar work?
> Can't enable. I've tried enabling csm, disabling, 4g decode, etc. Still showing as off in Nvidia control panel.
> Rtx 3090


Strix-A BIOS 0707 + Strix 3080 + Win11, resizable bar is working fine here.
Just enable it from the top menu of the BIOS.


----------



## ES IST ZEIT

Hello does someone have the problem that everything is done over 5ghz allcore BSOd? I need 1.234v allcore for 5ghz. as soon as I set 5.1 GHz no matter what voltage (tested up to 1.48v) I get into windows but cbr23 allways BSOD or memtest as well. my sp 87 powerlimits disable. can it be that it is on the p8 12v plug only have a p8 CPU?

Water temp. Is 24 Grad 
I think No temperature Problem 

Sorry for Bad Englisch
Have a Nice day


----------



## skullbringer

what's best apex bios for samsung ddr5 atm?


----------



## cstkl1

skullbringer said:


> what's best apex bios for samsung ddr5 atm?


try 0806


----------



## cstkl1

ES IST ZEIT said:


> Hello does someone have the problem that everything is done over 5ghz allcore BSOd? I need 1.234v allcore for 5ghz. as soon as I set 5.1 GHz no matter what voltage (tested up to 1.48v) I get into windows but cbr23 allways BSOD or memtest as well. my sp 87 powerlimits disable. can it be that it is on the p8 12v plug only have a p8 CPU?
> 
> Water temp. Is 24 Grad
> I think No temperature Problem
> 
> Sorry for Bad Englisch
> Have a Nice day


load optimize
manual
sync all P core 51
llc4 cpu 1.48 cant boot?


----------



## skullbringer

cstkl1 said:


> try 0806


cheers, had not seen this was posted but found it quickly via thread search.

seems more stable already on auto xmp than earlier bios versions with extra Vsa and Vmc


----------



## acoustic

cstkl1 said:


> always load optimize.
> save exit. enter back bios then update
> or use bios flashback
> 
> i been updating bios like every 2 days testing since october.. so.. dunno what dat dude is talkinh about.


Lol right?

There is no reason a BIOS update should brick your Win11 install. That's complete nonsense


----------



## MaghX

shamino1978 said:


> this should fix this issue
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AutoOptEFI1204.zip
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> load ai opt and wait 5 seconds for autorun and answer question and leave it


Thank you, issue fixed for me.

What about this optimistic results which you mentioned previously? I got insanely high ratio from first few heavy load tests, continue testing right now

Some tips from me, maybe for future versions?

user defined starting point like 5.0 all-core, this will save a lot of time
option to skip e core tests
EDIT: some tests are repeated few times for ecores, lets say it ends in 41 for 1 ecore and then will move on to 2 ecore usage for example 38, 39, 40, 41 all stable but for every iteration will be info "setting coreX to 41" so it just tested all ecores 41 few times.


----------



## kmellz

acoustic said:


> Lol right?
> 
> There is no reason a BIOS update should brick your Win11 install. That's complete nonsense


Probably talking about that if you have all the security stuff enabled, and win drive encrypted, if you flash bios your keys will be lost and you're ****ed unless you have the recovery key


----------



## ES IST ZEIT

cstkl1 said:


> load optimize
> manual
> sync all P core 51
> llc4 cpu 1.48 cant boot?


Boot and then bosd
Bios ia 0707

Windows is Clean always over 5ghz 
1.234v(CBR 23)

Dont stable


I think sp87 its mit so Bad 

5ghz @


----------



## darth_meh

shamino1978 said:


> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0806.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


After updating to 0806 and loading defaults, I started tweaking a few settings, and then all the sudden the BIOS froze - PC wouldn't respond to keyboard or mouse input. When I was finally able to configure everything, Cinebench R23 blue screened after a few minutes.

I reverted back to 0803 and the BIOS froze again, so I cleared CMOS and now I'm running Cinebench R23 again to test for stability. So far so good. 

In hindsight maybe I should have cleared the CMOS after updating to 0806, but I need a stable PC. I think I'm going to stick with official releases going forward.


----------



## Jubeishock

owikh84 said:


> Strix-A BIOS 0707 + Strix 3080 + Win11, resizable bar is working fine here.
> Just enable it from the top menu of the BIOS.
> View attachment 2535600


I did but doesnt work, loaded optimized defaults, enabled there, saved, is strange...
Should I need activate into Nvidia control panel menu?



Apologies, just forgot update GPU bios ,

Now works.

Thanks


----------



## asdkj1740

lolhaxz said:


> Is AVX offset broken on Extreme board? I am setting AVX offset 1 (or anything other than 0, auto = 0) and per core mode 53x for 1-8 and 40x 1-8 with AVX offset 1x, yet it still shows clocks as 5.3GHz under heavy AVX load (eg, Prime95) which it will really only do at 5.2GHz while bouncing off temp limit set to 95C every 4-5 seconds ... infact having the AVX offset to anything other than 0 = crashing in even a real light load like Cinebench R23 where it always passes with offset = 0.
> 
> It does not appear to be affecting the reported clocks at all according to all tools, and it behaves like it is inducing _massive_ transients. (not visible in tools, but stability wise)
> 
> Bios 0702


i have the same problem too but not on asus mobo, frequencies under avx loads are out of control...


----------



## skullbringer

have the opposite issue on apex with 0806 where with avx512 enabled and p core static clock, the cores drop by x1 in p95 small ffts or linx with "IA: max turbo limit yes" in hwinfo


----------



## Martin778

Will there be any "fix" for the heatsink layout on the ROG boards considering mount of the Liquid Frezer II with LGA1700 mount still hits the VRM heatsink? (at least on the Strix Z690A D4). Same goes for the bottom plastic cover of the pump, one has to remove it as it collides with the heatsink.
It's a great board but that buildup around the socket is awful, the 2 fan headers below the socket are also difficult to unplug because of the VRM and M.2 heatsinks around.


----------



## Falkentyne

skullbringer said:


> have the opposite issue on apex with 0806 where with avx512 enabled and p core static clock, the cores drop by x1 in p95 small ffts or linx with "IA: max turbo limit yes" in hwinfo


I don't have 0806 for the Extreme, but I verified that on 0802, AVX512 offset is hardwired at 1 (there's no BIOS option to change this at all).
Also the AVX2 guardband scale factor seems to change the avx512 guardband scale factor and not the AVX2 one. Although It's unclear whether it still applies the guardband to AVX1/2 despite that.

I think(?) in a much older BIOS, the AVX512 offset was 0? (I don't remember).


----------



## edkieferlp

skullbringer said:


> have the opposite issue on apex with 0806 where with avx512 enabled and p core static clock, the cores drop by x1 in p95 small ffts or linx with "IA: max turbo limit yes" in hwinfo


I am seeing that limit too with stock clocks on 12600k.
It is constant on with prime95 load but even idling with just browser open it is flashing on "IA Max turbo limit".
I am also using latest beta of HWinfo64.
The thing with my IA max turbo limit is it is running max clocks fine (4900) so you see it drop a bin but for me I don't. I think it might be on 12600 there no TVB feature like 12700 and 12900k.

Edit: the prime95 version I was using is 26.6 which has no AVX code AFAIK.


----------



## bscool

Martin778 said:


> Will there be any "fix" for the heatsink layout on the ROG boards considering mount of the Liquid Frezer II with LGA1700 mount still hits the VRM heatsink? (at least on the Strix Z690A D4). Same goes for the bottom plastic cover of the pump, one has to remove it as it collides with the heatsink.
> It's a great board but that buildup around the socket is awful, the 2 fan headers below the socket are also difficult to unplug because of the VRM and M.2 heatsinks around.


I am using that cooler on same mb without issues. It is very close but there is a tiny gap.

Edit added pic; I have the NVME heatsink off because of testing and switching between different drives and OSes.

Edit 2 Also before installing LF2 I was using Raystorm with custom loop and 1151 install bracket and going with LF2 and lga 1700 mount dropped temps approx 15c under load so it is making good contact and doesnt hit anything on setup. CPU 12900kf using AI OC in bios 1.35 llc6 for context.


----------



## Skinnered

Guys, I have just installed the Apex motherboard and I can't find an option to disable the onboard intel gfx and onboard audio.

I looked under onboard devices configuratio, but I only see usb audio?

And should I enable the sa gna device?
Last, is there no option to disable eist anymore?

I hope somebody can help, I won't want to boot till these devices are off and prevent windows installing drivers for it when I don't use them.


----------



## bscool

@Skinnered All the CPU power saving options are under Advancded/CPU tab as far as I know. Also yeah USB is the audio. I dont think there has been a disable intel gfx on Apex for long time that I know of. I dont remember it being on the last 2 gens anyway.

Edit I leave gna off unless you need it, if you needed it you would know.


----------



## Skinnered

/\ @bscool, thanks 

I now will read this thread first if I get bsod's.


----------



## Martin778

Uhm, if the Apex is still the Apex I know - it shouldn't even have power stages for the iGPU, hence it has no video output.

By the way, you're right - there is a sheet of paper of clearance. Have to say that so far the LF II with triple A12x25's performs magically on the 12900K.


----------



## ChaosAD

bscool said:


> Edit 2 Also before installing LF2 I was using Raystorm with custom loop and 1151 install bracket and going with LF2 and lga 1700 mount dropped temps approx 15c under load so it is making good contact and doesnt hit anything on setup. CPU 12900kf using AI OC in bios 1.35 llc6 for context.


Thats good news for me since i use Raystorm with custom loop and 1151 install bracket and max at 95C at P52/E41 1.25v. Also my cores has a 14C difference, hope with lga 1700 mount and EK velocity2 will get more even temps across the cores other than the temp drop. P53 all core is doable then


----------



## Martin778

Just for reference:








Brand new Arctic LF II 360, LGA1700 mounting kit, Kryonaut Extreme TIM, 3x Noctua NF-A12x25 fans, open case with roughly 19*C ambient.
Memory running 2x16GB 4000 15-15-15-35-2T Gear1 with 1.275 SA / VDDQ and 1.50VDIMM.
Test was the latest Prime95 SmallFFT AVX for 10+ minutes, the temperature stabilized very quickly though.
Interesting that ASUS defaults to MCE and no AVX offset but the E-cores do get -2 AVX offset.


----------



## edkieferlp

Martin778 said:


> Just for reference:
> View attachment 2535651
> 
> 
> Brand new Arctic LF II 360, LGA1700 mounting kit, Kryonaut Extreme TIM, 3x Noctua NF-A12x25 fans, open case with roughly 19*C ambient.
> Memory running 2x16GB 4000 15-15-15-35-2T Gear1 with 1.275 SA / VDDQ and 1.50VDIMM.
> Test was the latest Prime95 SmallFFT AVX for 10+ minutes, the temperature stabilized very quickly though.
> *Interesting that ASUS defaults to MCE and no AVX offset but the E-cores do get -2 AVX offset.*


AFAIK, AVX offset only works on P cores not E cores. I don't see E cores down-clocking.


----------



## Martin778

That's what I thought too...yet E-cores are the ones that down-clock in AVX.


----------



## edkieferlp

Martin778 said:


> That's what I thought too...yet E-cores are the ones that down-clock in AVX.


hmm, do you have two AVX offset options in bios, one for P an E cores?
There might be some other reason it down-clocking.

I found this alder-lake guide with a lot of info, the guy seems to know his stuff, maybe check it out. not much is out there info wise.


----------



## lolhaxz

"official" 0803 on Maximus Extreme.

AVX2 Offset = User specify, 1x - still does nothing, testing with 52x P, 41x E per core ratios (ie all set to 52x and 41x)

Also with Kingston Fury crappy 4800MHz CL38 micron sticks (KF548C38BBK2-32), if I touch anything relating to memory, the system becomes unstable, especially after it has been running for some time... raising L2 Voltage 20-30mv _seems_ to make it slightly more stable... but it still ends up crashing.

1.25-1.3v 5200MHz and every timing auto, XMP or 5200MHz tuned timings, same result... They boot and intermittently pass at 5600MHz so it's not like they're running at the bleeding edge at 5200MHz... not yeeting tRefi etc etc.

Ie. It will do Memtest86/Karthu/OCCT memory test for several hours, then you can start a game and it will crash on launch, or browser tabs coming up with Awww Snap, reporting memory/cache related type errors... seems related to uptime. It's crashing within a few hours.

4800MHz auto = bulletproof.

Exact same behavior on 0702

They are on QVL, which _sigh_... I suppose only covers it running at stock speeds of course.


----------



## MikeS3000

So I'm back to Intel after a few year on Ryzen. Man is there a lot to learn. I played around all day with 12700k and Asus ROG Strix Z690-A Gamin Wife D4. I have a really good Arctic LF II 420 cooler. I have tuned my RAM to DDR 3800 (basically same settings as I had on AMD) and then used AI Optimizer in the BIOS to overclock along with OCTVB +1. The Optimizer sets up to 3 P-cores at 5300 mhz and the E-Cores between 3900 and 4000 mhz. That gives me 5400 mhz for lightly threaded tasks and CB 23 holds at 5.1 and 3.9. I played around with manually setting adaptive voltage and per core ratios without much additional luck. Is AI Optimizer just this good nowadays? Any benefits to tweaking the Ring Bus? Mine is currently on Auto.


----------



## Grendel602

ChaosAD said:


> Thats good news for me since i use Raystorm with custom loop and 1151 install bracket and max at 95C at P52/E41 1.25v. Also my cores has a 14C difference, hope with lga 1700 mount and EK velocity2 will get more even temps across the cores other than the temp drop. P53 all core is doable then


Yep, also hitting those temps with my 1151 setup. Have my EKV2 on order as well.


----------



## fortecosi

lolhaxz said:


> "official" 0803 on Maximus Extreme.
> 
> AVX2 Offset = User specify, 1x - still does nothing, testing with 52x P, 41x E per core ratios (ie all set to 52x and 41x)


Just note that not every AVX2 workload trigger the offset, maybe it´s the case?


----------



## lolhaxz

fortecosi said:


> Just note that not every AVX2 workload trigger the offset, maybe it´s the case?


I'm sure Prime95 AVX SmallFFT is meant to trigger the offset  - which is what I was testing with.

I hope that is the case, that much lighter loads do not trigger AVX offset like they used to, that would actually make it useful.... but to date, I have not seen it have any impact on any workload under any circumstance at all in my configuration so I couldn't say


----------



## Falkentyne

AVX512 has a fixed -1 offset because Intel capped the max AVX2 ratio at x51 for heavy workloads (certain instructions). AVX512 wasn't officially supported, so to bypass the AVX2 issue, AVX512 always bins down by -1 as a workaround around this issue. Otherwise Stockfish chess, Prime95 and Linpack would be limited to x51. (this doesn't seem to affect "normal" AVX workloads like Cinebench). This seems to be Intel's doing.


----------



## sippo

Is tempetarure for Chipset at 71 is normal after 2h? Fresh start 56.











At fresh start:


----------



## lolhaxz

sippo said:


> Is tempetarure for Chipset at 71 is normal after 2h? Fresh start 56.


Mine sits at about 63C - this problem, it creeping into 60's-70's has plagued ASUS for the last couple of gen's - they use SUPER thick thermal pads... in the past I have shimmed it or ground down the mounting posts (to move it closer) and dropped temp by 15-20C but can't really be bothered and they're also now single piece heatsinks.

I haven't ever had any problems I have proved to be caused by setting the PCH voltage to 0.9v (from 1.05v).. undervolting the 0.85v rail appears to mess with the voltage reporting... reducing the voltage only shaves a few C off however.


----------



## darth_meh

Well, I thought I was stable running my Apex + Corsair Dominator DDR5 memory at DDR5200 only (not XMP), but that turned out not to be the case.
While I could run Cinebench R23 for 30 minutes and game all day at that speed, Prime 95 hard locked immediately.
Now I'm running at DDR4800 and Prime95 has been running for about 9 hours so far without an issue.

I am running Corsair Dominator DDR5 kit CMT32GX5M2X5200C38, which isn't on the QVL list for some reason.
This kit was supposedly better for overclocking (it has an Extreme OC PMIC - whatever that means). I guess XMP is too Extreme - LOL.

I'm running BIOS 0803. I've never had so many issues with a new PC build...


----------



## edkieferlp

sippo said:


> Is tempetarure for Chipset at 71 is normal after 2h? Fresh start 56.


My TUF Z690 PLUS is staying around 50-51c , that is in a case Lancool mesh II, which has pretty good cooling.

Could it be the NVMe driver heat is transferring to PCH, as the higher end MB have huge HS cover wide area.


----------



## Martin778

Mine is at 56*C with slight airflow and open LL O11D XL case, PC has been running for few days straight.


----------



## RobertoSampaio

PCH Maximus Extreme at idle 65C


----------



## Agent-A01

edkieferlp said:


> My TUF Z690 PLUS is staying around 50-51c , that is in a case Lancool mesh II, which has pretty good cooling.
> 
> Could it be the NVMe driver heat is transferring to PCH, as the higher end MB have huge HS cover wide area.


I idle around 39c in a 24~c ambient. I did replace the stock thermal as it was cheap looking.


----------



## edkieferlp

Agent-A01 said:


> I idle around 39c in a 24~c ambient. I did replace the stock thermal as it was cheap looking.


So you removed the thermal pad and used paste?
I see there two corner screws holding it.


----------



## Agent-A01

edkieferlp said:


> So you removed the thermal pad and used paste?
> I see there two corner screws holding it.


No I used a quality pad, thermal conductivity of IIRC 10+ w/mk. The stock pad is a cheap one, probably like 2-3 w/mk max.
You can't use paste there because the gap is roughly 1mm.

As for removal, at least for the tuf there are 2 screws on the back of the board that screw into the heatsink. You would have to remove the board from the case to get to it.


----------



## edkieferlp

Agent-A01 said:


> No I used a quality pad, thermal conductivity of IIRC 10+ w/mk. The stock pad is a cheap one, probably like 2-3 w/mk max.
> You can't use paste there because the gap is roughly 1mm.
> 
> As for removal, at least for the tuf there are 2 screws on the back of the board that screw into the heatsink. You would have to remove the board from the case to get to it.


Ok, thanks for info, I didn't look at the chipset HS much when installing MB, I will probably just leave it as low 50c is fine with me.


----------



## tiboor

can you guys help me?
i have 12900k with asus 690 A d4 mobo
gskill 2x8gb cl16 ram 3200,mhz
bios 0707
i cant get xmp working. even when i set manually the voltage, 3200 mhz, and timings, it does not boot. but when i set 3100mhz, it does boot, and work. my question is, why isnt it work with xmp, or even when i manually set?


----------



## bscool

@tiboor Are you in the correct mem slots? a2 and b2?

Many try to put the mem on the closer slots when they need to be in correct slots to run higher timings. If that is not the issues hard to say.


----------



## cstkl1

i9-12900k - SP93
Asus MZ690 Apex - Bios 0806
G.Skill 2x16gb 6600 28-37-37-28 280 1T @1.65
SA|txvddq|mc - 0.9 |1.45|1.45

if only could buy better rams


----------



## Feklar

Well at least you have some ram. Most have none.


----------



## tiboor

bscool said:


> @tiboor Are you in the correct mem slots? a2 and b2?
> 
> Many try to put the mem on the closer slots when they need to be in correct slots to run higher timings. If that is not the issues hard to say.


yes im in the correct slot.


----------



## sblantipodi

My Maximus Extreme is getting the dust due to DDR5 unavailability


----------



## bscool

tiboor said:


> yes im in the correct slot.


Then I would test each stick individually and then switch slots and find out if 1 memory dim is weak or 1 slot is weaker. I have had kits were 1 stick was bad but it usually wouldnt even boot with the defective stick in. But you have to start somewhere.

It sounds like something is defective though that a 2x8 3200c16 kit wont boot XMP. That should be no problem. Bent CPU pins, defective ram module or ram slot would be my guess.


----------



## asdkj1740

edkieferlp said:


> So you removed the thermal pad and used paste?
> I see there two corner screws holding it.


asus uses super thick thermal pad... paste is so thin...
you may add some paste on both side of the thermal pad, just dont replace the thermal pad.
bga chipsets are fragile. proper mounting pressure is essential to keep all soldering points intact.

get aorus master instead if pch temp to you is too concerning, aorus master pch temp at idle is less than 40c (room temp 22c).


----------



## darth_meh

i9-12900K | Noctua nh-u12a chromax.black
Asus Z690 Apex | 0803 BIOS
Corsair Dominator DDR5
Everything Auto (XMP fails)

I guess this means my hardware is good, right? 31 hours of Prime95 Large FFTs


----------



## acoustic

31hours with high temps at 1.3v and (assuming) 220+ watts? Enjoy your degraded processor.. lol


----------



## darth_meh

acoustic said:


> 31hours with high temps at 1.3v and (assuming) 220+ watts? Enjoy your degraded processor.. lol


Those temp spikes were very transient - on average it was running between 65-70C.


----------



## RobertoSampaio

darth_meh said:


> Those temp spikes were very transient - on average it was running between 65-70C.


You can run these frequencies with less vcore.
Vcore average of 1.19v is for P52x/E41x with a sp90+
P49x/E38x you can run with 1.1v I guess


----------



## darth_meh

RobertoSampaio said:


> You can run these frequencies with less vcore.
> Vcore average of 1.19v is for P52x/E41x with a sp90+
> P49x/E38x you can run with 1.1v I guess


Thank you. My processor is SP90. I don't intend to run Prime95 24x7 - I was just testing for stability. Particularly memory stability because I haven't been able to run XMP stable.


----------



## cstkl1

darth_meh said:


> Thank you. My processor is SP90. I don't intend to run Prime95 24x7 - I was just testing for stability. Particularly memory stability because I haven't been able to run XMP stable.


bios 0806


----------



## RobertoSampaio

darth_meh said:


> Thank you. My processor is SP90. I don't intend to run Prime95 24x7 - I was just testing for stability. Particularly memory stability because I haven't been able to run XMP stable.


Prime and others stress sw are not to be used to run 31hs... And not with everything in AUTO.
If you pass 5 to 10 min you cpu is stable... More than that, you are testing your cooler, not your CPU.
If you want to run everything AUTO do not remove the power limits.


----------



## edkieferlp

RobertoSampaio said:


> Prime and others stress sw are not to be used to run 31hs... And not with everything in AUTO.
> If you pass 5 to 10 min you cpu is stable... More than that, you are testing your cooler, not your CPU.
> If you want to run everything AUTO do not remove the power limits.


Hi Roberto, I wanted say thank you for all your help on these forums. I have been just reading and taking it all in as much as possible.
I don't plan to OC much as I have air cooler (NH-U14S), probably just try rain in on voltage a bit and maybe 5ghz on per core on a 12600k.
My question is on SP rating, I have TUF Z690 PLUS Wifi D4 and it seems it doesn't rate SP for CPU, is there any other 3rd party software that does that?

I would like to know the rating if possible.


----------



## ChaosAD

edkieferlp said:


> My question is on SP rating, I have TUF Z690 PLUS Wifi D4 and it seems it doesn't rate SP for CPU, is there any other 3rd party software that does that?
> 
> I would like to know the rating if possible.


Sadly you cant check your SP rating on a TUF board and there is no software that can do that. SP rating is exclusive on the maximus boards.


----------



## darth_meh

cstkl1 said:


> bios 0806


When I upgraded to 0806 the BIOS started locking up. I have no idea why...
After the update, I loaded optimized defaults, changed the memory frequency, started paging through some screens, and then it froze.
I changed the DDR memory frequency to 5200 (which I now know isn't stable), but I didn't apply the changes yet.


----------



## darth_meh

RobertoSampaio said:


> If you pass 5 to 10 min you cpu is stable... More than that, you are testing your cooler, not your CPU.


I've run into situations where Prime95 has failed 8+ hours into a test. In those cases, it was almost always bad memory or a bad PSU.
I guess it just depends on your definition of "stable."


----------



## RobertoSampaio

darth_meh said:


> I've run into situations where Prime95 has failed 8+ hours into a test. In those cases, it was almost always bad memory or a bad PSU.
> I guess it just depends on your definition of "stable."


You are completely right!

If your PC is going to control a nuclear power plant, it's better to be sure it's stable... LOL.
I don't care if my PC crashes once a month... And it crashes, probably because I'm changing its configurations all the time...
By other hand, when I mount a PC to my wife, it's better that it is stable as a nuke power plant DCS. LOL


----------



## cstkl1

darth_meh said:


> When I upgraded to 0806 the BIOS started locking up. I have no idea why...
> After the update, I loaded optimized defaults, changed the memory frequency, started paging through some screens, and then it froze.
> I changed the DDR memory frequency to 5200 (which I now know isn't stable), but I didn't apply the changes yet.


did u load optimize and then flash? 
so 0803 you are better?


----------



## darth_meh

cstkl1 said:


> did u load optimize and then flash?
> so 0803 you are better?


I upgraded to 0806, then after the update I loaded optimized defaults.
When it froze, I went back to 0803 and it still locked up.
I then cleared the CMOS and 0803 appears to be stable at Auto for everything.

I didn't try clearing my CMOS after updating to 0806. In hindsight maybe I should have tried that, but that experience kinda scared me away from trying beta BIOS updates. Not sure why clearing the CMOS would be necessary after a BIOS update.

I was on 0093 before that - not sure if that had something to do with it.


----------



## acoustic

You should always clear CMOS before and after a BIOS update, imo. Things just seem to go smoother that way.

I doubt it had to do with the BIOS being a beta - I didn't have any issues on my TUF, and I tried all the BIOS' lolol


----------



## MikeS3000

I've been running my new 12700k on 0707 on the Strix-A D4 and it's working fairly well. I have 4x8gb Hynix DJR memory and it runs with the same timings at 3800 speed as I ran my Ryzen setup without errors. I can only boot up to 3900 in Gear 1. The ram boots at 4000 in gear 2. Is the newer 0803 BIOS allowing for higher IMC frequency or am I just out of luck in my 12700k?


----------



## Larkonian

shamino1978 said:


> you shd see this
> 
> 
> but yesterday night i ran it and it's end results are too good as it seems much easier to pass in UEFI so i need to trace it and see how to be more stringent or if i missed something.





shamino1978 said:


> you shd see this
> View attachment 2535179
> 
> 
> but yesterday night i ran it and it's end results are too good as it seems much easier to pass in UEFI so i need to trace it and see how to be more stringent or if i missed something.


I also tried the UEFI version (1204) and the settings I got were not stable at all. Keep in mind, the AI optimized BIOS settings are not stable for me either, it does work with a optimism scale of 96 which drops the all-core frequency down from 5200 to 5100.

I will try the windows version next.


----------



## cstkl1

darth_meh said:


> I upgraded to 0806, then after the update I loaded optimized defaults.
> When it froze, I went back to 0803 and it still locked up.
> I then cleared the CMOS and 0803 appears to be stable at Auto for everything.
> 
> I didn't try clearing my CMOS after updating to 0806. In hindsight maybe I should have tried that, but that experience kinda scared me away from trying beta BIOS updates. Not sure why clearing the CMOS would be necessary after a BIOS update.
> 
> I was on 0093 before that - not sure if that had something to do with it.


did u load optimize save and enter back bios and then only flashed?


----------



## darth_meh

cstkl1 said:


> did u load optimize save and enter back bios and then only flashed?


No - I didn't load optimized defaults BEFORE flashing. Are you supposed to?


----------



## Falkentyne

d


darth_meh said:


> No - I didn't load optimized defaults BEFORE flashing. Are you supposed to?


You should.


----------



## darth_meh

Falkentyne said:


> You should.


Good to know. I've never done that or had issues not doing it.


----------



## cstkl1

darth_meh said:


> No - I didn't load optimized defaults BEFORE flashing. Are you supposed to?


yes. especially win 11


----------



## Agent-A01

ChaosAD said:


> Sadly you cant check your SP rating on a TUF board and there is no software that can do that. SP rating is exclusive on the maximus boards.


I don't know why they thought it was a good idea to remove that from any of the boards. It's not like the tuf is incapable of displaying it as if you go the v/f page it literally shows a readout of the CPU.
I bet there's a way to toggle it easily if say someone like shamino wanted to do it.


----------



## cgrado

Just posting to turn on notifications, and re-introduce myself. Going to pick up one of the Glacial boards as soon as I can find one in stock. Happy Overclocking and I'll be reading all of your problems and solutions! Picked up my 12900KF already.


----------



## Agent-A01

cgrado said:


> Just posting to turn on notifications, and re-introduce myself. Going to pick up one of the Glacial boards as soon as I can find one in stock. Happy Overclocking and I'll be reading all of your problems and solutions! Picked up my 12900KF already.


Waste of money. The chipset/vrm does not need extra cooling.


----------



## cgrado

Agent-A01 said:


> Waste of money. The chipset/vrm does not need extra cooling.


Think so? Does the glacial block also cover the processor, or is a separate CPU WB still needed?


----------



## Agent-A01

cgrado said:


> Think so? Does the glacial block also cover the processor, or is a separate CPU WB still needed?


Yes, otherwise what would be the point? Lol.
It covers VRM, CPU, chipset. Chipset and VRM do not need to be cooled so you are adding more heat to the loop for no reason.

I guess if you have a $1K to throw away go for it but it's not going to add any real benefits other than looks.


----------



## jomama22

Agent-A01 said:


> Yes, otherwise what would be the point? Lol.
> It covers VRM, CPU, chipset. Chipset and VRM do not need to be cooled so you are adding more heat to the loop for no reason.
> 
> I guess if you have a $1K to throw away go for it but it's not going to add any real benefits other than looks.


Not to mention you would get better performance from an actual cpu block.


----------



## kingofblog

The Asus SVID behavior makes no sense. When I leave everything at stock/optimized defaults, the Vcore is 1.35 V in light loads (e.g. TM5) and rises to 1.37-1.39 V in heavy loads (e.g. x264). As soon as I change the core frequency in the BIOS, even if it's only to 4.9 GHz (stock), the voltage response completely changes. Now Vcore is 1.38 V in light loads, and it falls to 1.33-1.35 V in heavy loads and crashes.

Using Strix Z690-A BIOS 0707. Why can't this **** BIOS just follow the god damned V/f curve? Even the options under "SVID behavior" do completely different things as soon as the core frequency setting is changed.


----------



## Jubeishock

Is there any issue if I mix Gskill Hynix and Samsung Ram?


----------



## cgrado

jomama22 said:


> Not to mention you would get better performance from an actual cpu block.


Thanks! Yeah, it's cheaper to just get a single CPU block and the regular Maximus for sure. Didn't know if NB overheating was still a thing


----------



## Falkentyne

kingofblog said:


> The Asus SVID behavior makes no sense. When I leave everything at stock/optimized defaults, the Vcore is 1.35 V in light loads (e.g. TM5) and rises to 1.37-1.39 V in heavy loads (e.g. x264). As soon as I change the core frequency in the BIOS, even if it's only to 4.9 GHz (stock), the voltage response completely changes. Now Vcore is 1.38 V in light loads, and it falls to 1.33-1.35 V in heavy loads and crashes.
> 
> Using Strix Z690-A BIOS 0707. Why can't this **** BIOS just follow the god damned V/f curve? Even the options under "SVID behavior" do completely different things as soon as the core frequency setting is changed.


You're using a Strix so you don't have die sense voltage. Your vcore sensor is always going to report higher vcore than the real vcore because there is a resistance drop (impedance) from the VRM to the CPU socket.

Also SVID behavior=Auto changes the AC/DC Loadline values depending on your Loadline Calibration level you set, as well as the CPU multiplier. You should be able to see the ACDC values in the OCtool, under "Monitoring", that's been posted here if it works on the Strix (also posted on HWbot in the Apex thread).

If that OCtool doesn't work on the Strix, use HWinfo64 and go to the CPU section in the main window page (Not in sensors) and it should show in the CPU information.









Dropbox - File Deleted


Dropbox is a free service that lets you bring your photos, docs, and videos anywhere and share them easily. Never email yourself a file again!




www.dropbox.com





If you aren't happy with how the auto settings work you can just set them yourself. But you do not want to set a high value (>0.6 mOhms) for AC Loadline at the same time as an aggressive value (low mOhms==higher LLC level) of Loadline Calibration. Example: LLC3 + ACLL 0.61 is quite good. LLC1 probably needs ACLL 0.8 mOhms. LLC5 + ACLL 0.4 mohms may be decent. LLC6+ACLL 1.1 mOhms for example is something you should NEVER, ever set (this will literally put you at 1.6v at idle).

Basic rule of thumb is the stronger your LLC level, the less you want ACLL to be. The weaker your LLC level, the higher you want ACLL to be, but for LLC1, I would not go above 0.8 mOhms on ACLL.


----------



## shamino1978

Latest hero/extreme/strix-E test bios (improves dram oc)









ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0002.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-ASUS-0002.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com













ROG-STRIX-Z690-E-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0002.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com


----------



## kingofblog

Falkentyne said:


> You're using a Strix so you don't have die sense voltage. Your vcore sensor is always going to report higher vcore than the real vcore because there is a resistance drop (impedance) from the VRM to the CPU socket.
> 
> Also SVID behavior=Auto changes the AC/DC Loadline values depending on your Loadline Calibration level you set, as well as the CPU multiplier. You should be able to see the ACDC values in the OCtool, under "Monitoring", that's been posted here if it works on the Strix (also posted on HWbot in the Apex thread).
> 
> If that OCtool doesn't work on the Strix, use HWinfo64 and go to the CPU section in the main window page (Not in sensors) and it should show in the CPU information.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dropbox - File Deleted
> 
> 
> Dropbox is a free service that lets you bring your photos, docs, and videos anywhere and share them easily. Never email yourself a file again!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you aren't happy with how the auto settings work you can just set them yourself. But you do not want to set a high value (>0.6 mOhms) for AC Loadline at the same time as an aggressive value (low mOhms==higher LLC level) of Loadline Calibration. Example: LLC3 + ACLL 0.61 is quite good. LLC1 probably needs ACLL 0.8 mOhms. LLC5 + ACLL 0.4 mohms may be decent. LLC6+ACLL 1.1 mOhms for example is something you should NEVER, ever set (this will literally put you at 1.6v at idle).
> 
> Basic rule of thumb is the stronger your LLC level, the less you want ACLL to be. The weaker your LLC level, the higher you want ACLL to be, but for LLC1, I would not go above 0.8 mOhms on ACLL.


The exact same LLC level and AC/DC LL results in a different voltage as soon as I change the frequency from Auto. No matter what I enter into the LLC, SVID, and LL fields, I can't get the same voltage response between stock all-core 4.9 GHz boost and sync-all-cores 4.9 GHz frequency.

Voltage response in light load:


Code:


TM5 SVID Debugging
            Auto    Typic.  Worst   Fail    Trained
Stock       1.35    1.315   1.35    1.43    1.296
OC LLC3     1.385   1.385   1.43    --      1.385

AC_LL Sensitivity
LLC         AC_LL   Vtm5   Vx264
OC LLC3     0.37    1.385
OC LLC3     0.26    1.368  1.332
OC LLC3     0.15    1.35   1.314 <-- ?
Stock LLC3  Auto    1.35   1.394 <-- ?
Stock LLC3  0.15    1.27

To get the same low-load voltage, I need to lower AC_LL to 0.15 after setting the core frequency, but this of course crashes under high load. Likewise, when I apply the same LLC3 and AC_LL=0.15 to stock frequency, the voltage falls through the floor and is also unstable. I compared the package temperature and VRM output power to confirm that the voltage response really was changing between stock and sync-all-cores 4.9 GHz.

I haven't overclocked a damn thing, so why is the BIOS changing all my voltages? Why can't I get the original voltage response back, no matter how many settings I change? At stock, the voltage rises with load. When the frequency is set manually, the voltage drops with load instead. There is no AC_LL value I can set to match these two.


----------



## ES IST ZEIT

Hello . Sufficient for normal overclocking (up to 5.2 GHz) 1x 8 pin power plug? or are 2 necessary? i have a be quiet straight power 850w but only have 1 connection? reason is because i have everything over 5ghz get bsod To make it short, 1 connection is sufficient for private overclocking?
Have a Nice day


----------



## Spiriva

shamino1978 said:


> Latest hero/extreme/strix-E test bios (improves dram oc)


Thank you!

I could set my corsair 5200mhz to 5600-38-39-39-48 with this new bios!
1.350v


----------



## wesley8

shamino1978 said:


> Latest hero/extreme/strix-E test bios (improves dram oc)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0002.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-ASUS-0002.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-E-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0002.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


except formula?


----------



## xRuBiCoNx

shamino1978 said:


> Latest hero/extreme/strix-E test bios (improves dram oc)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0002.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-ASUS-0002.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-E-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0002.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


Hey 
Do you have also a BIOS for the Z690 Formula?
Are Samsung RAM fixes included (Trident Z5 CL36 especially)?


----------



## neurokirurgi

shamino1978 said:


> Latest hero/extreme/strix-E test bios (improves dram oc)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0002.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-ASUS-0002.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-E-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0002.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


My man. Thanks, I'll give 0002 a try and see if my OEM Micron sticks manage 5600. Wasn't really possible with 0702.


----------



## adna

shamino1978 said:


> Latest hero/extreme/strix-E test bios (improves dram oc)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0002.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-ASUS-0002.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-E-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0002.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


Please for ROG-STRIX-Z690-F-GAMING-WIFI


----------



## asdkj1740

Jubeishock said:


> Is there any issue if I mix Gskill Hynix and Samsung Ram?


probably, bsod.


----------



## ChaosAD

ES IST ZEIT said:


> Hello . Sufficient for normal overclocking (up to 5.2 GHz) 1x 8 pin power plug? or are 2 necessary? i have a be quiet straight power 850w but only have 1 connection? reason is because i have everything over 5ghz get bsod To make it short, 1 connection is sufficient for private overclocking?
> Have a Nice day


Yes no problem at all. I ran 5.2 all core with only 1x8pin.


----------



## Falkentyne

kingofblog said:


> The exact same LLC level and AC/DC LL results in a different voltage as soon as I change the frequency from Auto. No matter what I enter into the LLC, SVID, and LL fields, I can't get the same voltage response between stock all-core 4.9 GHz boost and sync-all-cores 4.9 GHz frequency.
> 
> Voltage response in light load:
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> TM5 SVID Debugging
> Auto    Typic.  Worst   Fail    Trained
> Stock       1.35    1.315   1.35    1.43    1.296
> OC LLC3     1.385   1.385   1.43    --      1.385
> 
> AC_LL Sensitivity
> LLC         AC_LL   Vtm5   Vx264
> OC LLC3     0.37    1.385
> OC LLC3     0.26    1.368  1.332
> OC LLC3     0.15    1.35   1.314 <-- ?
> Stock LLC3  Auto    1.35   1.394 <-- ?
> Stock LLC3  0.15    1.27
> 
> To get the same low-load voltage, I need to lower AC_LL to 0.15 after setting the core frequency, but this of course crashes under high load. Likewise, when I apply the same LLC3 and AC_LL=0.15 to stock frequency, the voltage falls through the floor and is also unstable. I compared the package temperature and VRM output power to confirm that the voltage response really was changing between stock and sync-all-cores 4.9 GHz.
> 
> I haven't overclocked a damn thing, so why is the BIOS changing all my voltages? Why can't I get the original voltage response back, no matter how many settings I change? At stock, the voltage rises with load. When the frequency is set manually, the voltage drops with load instead. There is no AC_LL value I can set to match these two.


Sync all cores x49 isn't the same as Auto x49.
Auto x49 will run some cores at 5.1 ghz at light load if you have c-states enabled. So the ACDC loadlines must be different. The board won't change the ACDC loadlines at runtime.
And don't use ACLL 0.15 with LLC3. This will make the E cores crash in Stockfish and you will hard lock then get an OCP-like power off then on from hardware reset (WHEA uncorrectable error).
Such a setting may work with E cores disabled. 
The lowest setting I found that works at x49 sync all cores with LLC3 is ACLL 0.45. 0.40 would randomly lockup and power off in Stockfish.


----------



## MikeS3000

Just some feedback on different BIOS versions. I'm on DDR4 with Strix-A. Flashed 0803 last night and ran TM5 1usmus for 20 cycles. I got a thread error on cycle 3 and the test stopped and then I ran again this time 1 memory error at 10 cycles. When I was using the same settings on 0707 I could pass TM5 with no issues at 20 cycles. Is the consensus still that 0707 is the best bios for this board so far?


----------



## neurokirurgi

neurokirurgi said:


> My man. Thanks, I'll give 0002 a try and see if my OEM Micron sticks manage 5600. Wasn't really possible with 0702.


Well you guys have been hard at work over there at Asus since these sticks booted 5600 40-42-40-50 with tertiaries on auto, and Karhu is at ~1200% as we speak (before with 0702 it would always fail at 7%), if this does 10 000%, I'll start tightening timings down. 👍


----------



## MikeS3000

One more topic, anyone getting crackling audio out of onboard audio from your speakers using Windows 11? Hard to explain but when I open a program and it requires a permission answer, that audio is delayed and crackles a bit when you hear the tone/chime. Once a song gets going I don't notice it. It crackles a lot while booting Windows as well. Now I am using Razer software for my headphones and it will route the speaker audio through its THX output. I tried selecting the THX audio and then tried just selecting speakers and the same result. I had the same setup on my AMD x570 board and no audio issues. Wondering if it is driver related from Reatek.


----------



## cstkl1

MikeS3000 said:


> Just some feedback on different BIOS versions. I'm on DDR4 with Strix-A. Flashed 0803 last night and ran TM5 1usmus for 20 cycles. I got a thread error on cycle 3 and the test stopped and then I ran again this time 1 memory error at 10 cycles. When I was using the same settings on 0707 I could pass TM5 with no issues at 20 cycles. Is the consensus still that 0707 is the best bios for this board so far?


if its bdie it could be temps.


----------



## chispy

MikeS3000 said:


> Just some feedback on different BIOS versions. I'm on DDR4 with Strix-A. Flashed 0803 last night and ran TM5 1usmus for 20 cycles. I got a thread error on cycle 3 and the test stopped and then I ran again this time 1 memory error at 10 cycles. When I was using the same settings on 0707 I could pass TM5 with no issues at 20 cycles. Is the consensus still that 0707 is the best bios for this board so far?



So far yes , in my own extensive testing as i tested rigorously every single bios for this Strix D4 , the best bios based on my own testing it's 0707 , but Shamino just released a new bios for it and we need to test it and provide feedback - Bios 0808 for Asus Strix z690 D4 ddr4 mobo latest bios just posted by Peter ( shamino ) , thank you. - ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0808.rar


----------



## Wolferin

In Bios 0808 for Strix Z690-A D4 is old microcode version 0x12 - in Bios 0803 is 0x15! Why?


----------



## ChaosAD

MikeS3000 said:


> One more topic, anyone getting crackling audio out of onboard audio from your speakers using Windows 11? Hard to explain but when I open a program and it requires a permission answer, that audio is delayed and crackles a bit when you hear the tone/chime. Once a song gets going I don't notice it. It crackles a lot while booting Windows as well. Now I am using Razer software for my headphones and it will route the speaker audio through its THX output. I tried selecting the THX audio and then tried just selecting speakers and the same result. I had the same setup on my AMD x570 board and no audio issues. Wondering if it is driver related from Reatek.


I use the Apex onboard sound atm with optical out and i have no issues at all. Sometimes the volume of youtube videos change a little, no idea why, but other than that its flawless.


----------



## dyanikoglu

chispy said:


> So far yes , in my own extensive testing as i tested rigorously every single bios for this Strix D4 , the best bios based on my own testing it's 0707 , but Shamino just released a new bios for it and we need to test it and provide feedback - Bios 0808 for Asus Strix z690 D4 ddr4 mobo latest bios just posted by Peter ( shamino ) , thank you. - ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0808.rar


what is source for the bios? I don't see shamino posting it here.


----------



## Agent-A01

dyanikoglu said:


> what is source for the bios? I don't see shamino posting it here.


From the ASUS forum Z690 thread.
Maximus Z690 and Alder Lake: Modern CPUs require Modern Overclocking Solutions - Page 4


----------



## beardlessduck

I don't see the new BIOS for the Maximus Formula. Am I missing it or has it not been posted yet?


----------



## MikeS3000

cstkl1 said:


> if its bdie it could be temps.


It's 4x8gb Hynix DJR at DDR 3800 speed in Gear 1. Those sticks have been extremely forgiving and never errored at the same timings on my AMD X570 and 3900x, 5800x and 5900x that I have used. I'm going to try that 0808 BIOS or roll back to 0707 and test again. I also have only been able to post up to 3900 mt/s on Gear 1 so far on any bios. 4000 posts in gear 2 but not in Gear 1 with various voltages tried. Could just be a weak IMC on my 12700k


----------



## arrow0309

The best or latest bios for Strix A D4 and 2x16gb b-die dual rank (F4-3600C16D-32GTZR)?


----------



## Garlicky

chispy said:


> So far yes , in my own extensive testing as i tested rigorously every single bios for this Strix D4 , the best bios based on my own testing it's 0707 , but Shamino just released a new bios for it and we need to test it and provide feedback - Bios 0808 for Asus Strix z690 D4 ddr4 mobo latest bios just posted by Peter ( shamino ) , thank you. - ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0808.rar


Could you post the link again? This link isn't working


----------



## bscool

chispy said:


> So far yes , in my own extensive testing as i tested rigorously every single bios for this Strix D4 , the best bios based on my own testing it's 0707 , but Shamino just released a new bios for it and we need to test it and provide feedback - Bios 0808 for Asus Strix z690 D4 ddr4 mobo latest bios just posted by Peter ( shamino ) , thank you. - ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0808.rar





arrow0309 said:


> The best or latest bios for Strix A D4 and 2x16gb b-die dual rank (F4-3600C16D-32GTZR)?


Agree with @chispy so far 707 is best for me, havent tested 808.


----------



## HvacGuru

Tested 808 and had random crashes for no reason. Same voltages were used. Back to good old 707.


----------



## Exilon

kingofblog said:


> The exact same LLC level and AC/DC LL results in a different voltage as soon as I change the frequency from Auto. No matter what I enter into the LLC, SVID, and LL fields, I can't get the same voltage response between stock all-core 4.9 GHz boost and sync-all-cores 4.9 GHz frequency.
> 
> Voltage response in light load:
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> TM5 SVID Debugging
> Auto    Typic.  Worst   Fail    Trained
> Stock       1.35    1.315   1.35    1.43    1.296
> OC LLC3     1.385   1.385   1.43    --      1.385
> 
> AC_LL Sensitivity
> LLC         AC_LL   Vtm5   Vx264
> OC LLC3     0.37    1.385
> OC LLC3     0.26    1.368  1.332
> OC LLC3     0.15    1.35   1.314 <-- ?
> Stock LLC3  Auto    1.35   1.394 <-- ?
> Stock LLC3  0.15    1.27
> 
> To get the same low-load voltage, I need to lower AC_LL to 0.15 after setting the core frequency, but this of course crashes under high load. Likewise, when I apply the same LLC3 and AC_LL=0.15 to stock frequency, the voltage falls through the floor and is also unstable. I compared the package temperature and VRM output power to confirm that the voltage response really was changing between stock and sync-all-cores 4.9 GHz.
> 
> I haven't overclocked a damn thing, so why is the BIOS changing all my voltages? Why can't I get the original voltage response back, no matter how many settings I change? At stock, the voltage rises with load. When the frequency is set manually, the voltage drops with load instead. There is no AC_LL value I can set to match these two.


Are you checking VID or the Nuvoton sensor? What are the applied AC_LL and DC_LL HWinfo sees under Auto? 










Make sure you lock the TVB Voltage Optimization state to Enabled or Disabled as well.


----------



## kingofblog

Exilon said:


> Are you checking VID or the Nuvoton sensor? What are the applied AC_LL and DC_LL HWinfo sees under Auto?
> 
> View attachment 2536187
> 
> 
> Make sure you lock the TVB Voltage Optimization state to Enabled or Disabled as well.


AC_LL on stock is 0.6. I overrode DC_LL to 1.1 so that the package power readouts would be correct, but it doesn't affect Vcore. After setting a core frequency, AC_LL changes to 0.37, but the idle voltage is actually higher than before. I'm checking the "Vcore" reading under ASUS EC in HWiNFO. I didn't touch the TVB settings, but there are no profiles defined.

In any case, the biggest behavior W.T.F is that on stock frequency, when I run a light all-core load, the voltage is lower (1.35 V) than a heavy all-core load (1.38+ V), but when I change the frequency setting, the heavy voltage is lower than the light voltage. I couldn't find any setting in the BIOS that explains this behavior.

If I use XTU to change the frequency from 49x to 50x, the voltage response matches stock, with light load Vcore being lower than heavy AVX Vcore. The issue with this approach is that it uses the 49x VID for the new 50x frequency and is therefore unstable.


----------



## Exilon

kingofblog said:


> If I use XTU to change the frequency from 49x to 50x, the voltage response matches stock, with light load Vcore being lower than heavy AVX Vcore. The issue with this approach is that it uses the 49x VID for the new 50x frequency and is therefore unstable.


When I set CPU Core/Cache voltage to adaptive and use XTU to change multiplier, the VID change and power changes like how I expect it.


----------



## Falkentyne

kingofblog said:


> AC_LL on stock is 0.6. I overrode DC_LL to 1.1 so that the package power readouts would be correct, but it doesn't affect Vcore. After setting a core frequency, AC_LL changes to 0.37, but the idle voltage is actually higher than before. I'm checking the "Vcore" reading under ASUS EC in HWiNFO. I didn't touch the TVB settings, but there are no profiles defined.
> 
> In any case, the biggest behavior W.T.F is that on stock frequency, when I run a light all-core load, the voltage is lower (1.35 V) than a heavy all-core load (1.38+ V), but when I change the frequency setting, the heavy voltage is lower than the light voltage. I couldn't find any setting in the BIOS that explains this behavior.
> 
> If I use XTU to change the frequency from 49x to 50x, the voltage response matches stock, with light load Vcore being lower than heavy AVX Vcore. The issue with this approach is that it uses the 49x VID for the new 50x frequency and is therefore unstable.


Idle voltage is higher than before is normal because you are no longer at stock.

Enable Thermal Velocity Boost Voltage Optimizations and your low idle voltage will be back.
The Auto rules for this setting defaults to enabled at pure stock. Change anything and it's disabled (TVB = disabled sets the CPU VID at the 100C point, based on TVB being enabled. This is NOT the same as OCTVB).


----------



## kingofblog

Exilon said:


> When I set CPU Core/Cache voltage to adaptive and use XTU to change multiplier, the VID change and power changes like how I expect it.


I actually see the same thing whether I change multiplier in XTU or BIOS. The VID and Vcore are exactly the same for 49x, 50x, and 51x, which doesn't seem right. I do observe a different VID for 52x, but it's only 25 mV higher.



Falkentyne said:


> Idle voltage is higher than before is normal because you are no longer at stock.
> 
> Enable Thermal Velocity Boost Voltage Optimizations and your low idle voltage will be back.
> The Auto rules for this setting defaults to enabled at pure stock. Change anything and it's disabled (TVB = disabled sets the CPU VID at the 100C point, based on TVB being enabled. This is NOT the same as OCTVB).


Thanks so much! I had no idea this was a thing. Is the "velocity" voltage adjustment controlled by the CPU PCode? Also, changing the LLC setting doesn't seem to update AC_LL, which stays at 0.37 on auto no matter what. I did work out the math, and if I set AC_LL back to 0.6 on LLC3, it should indeed raise my loaded voltage back to 1.4-ish.


----------



## Falkentyne

kingofblog said:


> I actually see the same thing whether I change multiplier in XTU or BIOS. The VID and Vcore are exactly the same for 49x, 50x, and 51x, which doesn't seem right. I do observe a different VID for 52x, but it's only 25 mV higher.
> 
> 
> Thanks so much! I had no idea this was a thing. Is the "velocity" voltage adjustment controlled by the CPU PCode? Also, changing the LLC setting doesn't seem to update AC_LL, which stays at 0.37 on auto no matter what. I did work out the math, and if I set AC_LL back to 0.6 on LLC3, it should indeed raise my loaded voltage back to 1.4-ish.


I can't help with the ACLL Behavior. You're on your own there.

No it raises base CPU VID by a certain amount every 1C increase up to 100C (or you can say it reduces CPU VID every 1C decrease, starting at 100C). The amount of this decrease is larger at higher multipliers and is disabled somewhere between x39 to x43 or lower. This feature has been on Intel chips ever since Skylake. It really only got taken notice of on 9900k, and it may not even have been able to be disabled on previous chips unless you used RW Everything to change the MSR directly. If this option is disabled, the CPU VID acts like it is at the 100C point (higher temps mean you need more voltage to be stable, and vice versa, which is the point of this setting).

It's worth noting that the default V/F points shown are based on the 100C VID point being used (as well as ACDC LL= 0.01 mOhms).


----------



## shamino1978

beardlessduck said:


> I don't see the new BIOS for the Maximus Formula. Am I missing it or has it not been posted yet?











ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-FORMULA-ASUS-0002.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com


----------



## kingofblog

Falkentyne said:


> I can't help with the ACLL Behavior. You're on your own there.
> 
> No it raises base CPU VID by a certain amount every 1C increase up to 100C (or you can say it reduces CPU VID every 1C decrease, starting at 100C). The amount of this decrease is larger at higher multipliers and is disabled somewhere between x39 to x43 or lower. This feature has been on Intel chips ever since Skylake. It really only got taken notice of on 9900k, and it may not even have been able to be disabled on previous chips unless you used RW Everything to change the MSR directly. If this option is disabled, the CPU VID acts like it is at the 100C point (higher temps mean you need more voltage to be stable, and vice versa, which is the point of this setting).
> 
> It's worth noting that the default V/F points shown are based on the 100C VID point being used (as well as ACDC LL= 0.01 mOhms).


Thanks. I set AC_LL to 0.6 with LLC3 and turned the TVB on again. I can confirm the voltages are back to normal. Regarding the VID for 49-51x, those are still all set to the same value. I did read somewhere that there is a separate VID for the ring. Could my VID problem be because 47x ring requires more volts than 50x core? Is there any way to see the ring VID?


----------



## beardlessduck

shamino1978 said:


> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-FORMULA-ASUS-0002.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


Love you 🥰🥰

Edit:

Tried the built in 4x Micron stick 5200 profile (4x 16GB SR) -- failed in less than 10 min of stress test (failed faster than BIOS 0803)
Tried XMP 1 and 2 at 5200 -- both failed in less than 10 min of stress test
Tried 5200 with timings set to 42-40-40-84, voltages bumped to 1.3v, everything else Auto -- failed after about 10 min
Tried setting to 4400 with everything else on Auto, except for voltages bumped to 1.3v and that seems stable (improvement over BIOS 0803 for me)
Tried setting to 4800 with everything else on Auto, except for voltages bumped to 1.3v and that seems stable (big improvement over BIOS 0803 for me)

I'll test some more


----------



## Zyther

Hey All,

Picked up a z690 Hero, first time owning a Asus board since P4 days.

Is there any bios settings I should enable/disable for extra performance etc.
Also asus anysoftware I should avoid installing, asus create, sonicradar etc?


----------



## Tigra456

@shamino1978
Do you have a fixed Bios for the z690-f and the 6000 c36 / 5600 c36 Trident Z5 ?

greetings and thx


----------



## MaghX

kingofblog said:


> AC_LL on stock is 0.6. I overrode DC_LL to 1.1 so that the package power readouts would be correct


how do you know when it is correct?


----------



## Neander

For the Apex anybody know some details?:

Is version 0806 released on the official site the same as 0806 Beta released here? 
Does 0806 contain the changes for Samsung ICs promoted with the 00XX branch like the latest 0093 or are these not yet merged back?

It's a bit hard to follow especially with the different branches  Thanks!


----------



## Jubeishock

Hi guys, anyone have a black screen after a bios update? I always have this, after an update I'm forced to restart the computer twice.


----------



## shamino1978

Neander said:


> For the Apex anybody know some details?:
> 
> Is version 0806 released on the official site the same as 0806 Beta released here?
> Does 0806 contain the changes for Samsung ICs promoted with the 00XX branch like the latest 0093 or are these not yet merged back?
> 
> It's a bit hard to follow especially with the different branches  Thanks!


same

latest test bios for Apex:
supports high voltage mode on Renasas non OC PMIC 








ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0053.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com


----------



## Nizzen

shamino1978 said:


> same
> 
> latest test bios for Apex:
> supports high voltage mode on Renasas non OC PMIC
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0053.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


So high voltage on like Corsair Dominator micron ddr5?


----------



## Hulk1988

shamino1978 said:


> same
> 
> latest test bios for Apex:
> supports high voltage mode on Renasas non OC PMIC
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0053.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


Big thanks again for the super support!

Is it possible to get a list with tested RAM from you? Or you were able to test them all?

I have also a question related to the future. I see some news about 7000 RAM which will be available next year. Possible to get a official support for these frequences for the Apex via BIOS support or is 6600 the maximum?

From the Apec Tech Spec website:
" 2 x DIMM, Max. 64GB, DDR5 6600(OC)/6400(OC)/ 6200(OC)/ 6000(OC)/ 5800(OC)/ 5600(OC)/ 5400(OC)/ 5200(OC)/ 5000(OC) / 4800 Non-ECC, Un-buffered Memory*"

Thank you!


----------



## shamino1978

Nizzen said:


> So high voltage on like Corsair Dominator micron ddr5?


it should already be oc pmic so even before you should have been able to blast it, no?


----------



## shamino1978

Hulk1988 said:


> Big thanks again for the super support!
> 
> Is it possible to get a list with tested RAM from you? Or you were able to test them all?
> 
> I have also a question related to the future. I see some news about 7000 RAM which will be available next year. Possible to get a official support for these frequences for the Apex via BIOS support or is 6600 the maximum?
> 
> From the Apec Tech Spec website:
> " 2 x DIMM, Max. 64GB, DDR5 6600(OC)/6400(OC)/ 6200(OC)/ 6000(OC)/ 5800(OC)/ 5600(OC)/ 5400(OC)/ 5200(OC)/ 5000(OC) / 4800 Non-ECC, Un-buffered Memory*"
> 
> Thank you!


i dont know, the bottleneck is somewhat equally distributed between the MC and the dram ic now.
use better ic's the freq goes up , use a better imc the freq also goes up. 
Is it possible to get a list with tested RAM from you? Or you were able to test them all?
sorry i dont have such a list, there are many people testing and i change setups too often.
as for 6800, i think people will get there soon, but its matching the right cpu with the right pair of dram mostly.


----------



## cstkl1

Jubeishock said:


> Hi guys, anyone have a black screen after a bios update? I always have this, after an update I'm forced to restart the computer twice.


load optimize. save and then flash.


----------



## kingofblog

MaghX said:


> how do you know when it is correct?


Compare VRM power (under "ASUS EC") with CPU IA power (near package power) in HWiNFO. They should be nearly the same.


----------



## matique

shamino1978 said:


> Latest hero/extreme/strix-E test bios (improves dram oc)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0002.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-ASUS-0002.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-E-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0002.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


Any love for z690-i?


----------



## theo_yells

Anyone have experience with G.Skill DDR5-6000 40-40-40-76 (F5-6000U4040E16GX2-TZ5RK) and Maximus Z690 Apex (Bios ver. 0806)? I'm unable to make it boot safely on Auto AND XMP I & 2. With manually high VDD/VDDQ/etc set and following the ROG Alderlake OC guide, I can set it to 6000 and other frequencies and make it pass memtest86 which is built into the motherboard but BSOD/corrupts in windows and TM5 extreme fails every time. Currently set at 4800 40-40-40-77 with 1.3v just to get it to boot and run semi-stable. Testing each stick individually, one stick passes XMP in memtest86 in each DIMM slot but the other stick failed both tests in loop 2 and 4 of memtest86. Neither stick can boot up into windows alone without suddenly shutting down or BSOD. Any advice would be appreciated before I consider these sticks defective or just plain unsupported (since supported memory is hynix and micron on apex support).


----------



## shamino1978

theo_yells said:


> Anyone have experience with G.Skill DDR5-6000 40-40-40-76 (F5-6000U4040E16GX2-TZ5RK) and Maximus Z690 Apex (Bios ver. 0806)? I'm unable to make it boot safely on Auto AND XMP I & 2. With manually high VDD/VDDQ/etc set and following the ROG Alderlake OC guide, I can set it to 6000 and other frequencies and make it pass memtest86 which is built into the motherboard but BSOD/corrupts in windows and TM5 extreme fails every time. Currently set at 4800 40-40-40-77 with 1.3v just to get it to boot and run semi-stable. Testing each stick individually, one stick passes XMP in memtest86 in each DIMM slot but the other stick failed both tests in loop 2 and 4 of memtest86. Neither stick can boot up into windows alone without suddenly shutting down or BSOD. Any advice would be appreciated before I consider these sticks defective or just plain unsupported (since supported memory is hynix and micron on apex support).


what if u set PMIC current capability to max in Advanced Memory Voltage


----------



## Neander

Had some tries with G.Skill DDR5-6000 36 with Samsung today on the Apex and it's a rough experience. It's posting and getting to windows but nothing close to stable. XMP 1&2 is unusable. Adjusting VDD(Q) , SA and MC leads to a "stable" Windows but every Memtest throws errors in a few minutes to seconds. Have to try more manual tweeking but no way to run these out of the box.


----------



## Falkentyne

shamino1978 said:


> it should already be oc pmic so even before you should have been able to blast it, no?


I thought all Micron sticks were limited to 1.435v max, because High voltage mode (>1.435v) didn't work correctly (or at all)on Micron?
It's now working with your bios magic?


----------



## Brandur

Neander said:


> Had some tries with G.Skill DDR5-6000 36 with Samsung today on the Apex and it's a rough experience. It's posting and getting to windows but nothing close to stable. XMP 1&2 is unusable. Adjusting VDD(Q) , SA and MC leads to a "stable" Windows but every Memtest throws errors in a few minutes to seconds. Have to try more manual tweeking but no way to run these out of the box.


Same for me, I don‘t know what to tweak anymore…


----------



## Tigra456

Okay my 6000 CL 36 Trident don’t run on my Strix Z690-F with XMP it’s able to boot but no game is startable.
Tried to set XMP off an everything on Auto and 5200… blue screens too.

Fast Help would be great.


----------



## lsaint012001

Brandur said:


> Same for me, I don‘t know what to tweak anymore…


I have the same set, try this bios its nothing special it's just the asus tweaked settings for samsung 6000. I did TM5 for about an hour and then stopped. But at the very least I have been running these settings for a few days and haven't had a BSOD or a memory error 






apex-6000.CMO







drive.google.com


----------



## Zyther

Tigra456 said:


> Okay my 6000 CL 36 Trident don’t run on my Strix Z690-F with XMP it’s able to boot but no game is startable.
> Tried to set XMP off an everything on Auto and 5200… blue screens too.
> 
> Fast Help would be great.



are you on 0803 bios? If so try a older one


We'll be back.


----------



## Fantik

Hi, I have a Z690 Extreme and a 3090 Strix. I want to know if I can install the 3090 EK back plate and use the 1st slot of my MB?
Thanks in advance.


----------



## Tigra456

Zyther said:


> are you on 0803 bios? If so try a older one
> 
> 
> We'll be back.


Okay that’s an option…


----------



## kingofblog

kingofblog said:


> I actually see the same thing whether I change multiplier in XTU or BIOS. The VID and Vcore are exactly the same for 49x, 50x, and 51x, which doesn't seem right. I do observe a different VID for 52x, but it's only 25 mV higher.


@Exilon @Falkentyne I figured this one out. I disabled E-cores, but this causes my ring ratio max to rise to 47x. The default core-ring offset is -2, but the V/f curve for ring is higher than core on my 12900k (and maybe others). I read back the core and ring V/f curves separately by playing with the ring-downbin setting and TVB optimizations disabled, and reading back the EC-reported voltage (LLC3, AC_LL 0.6):



Code:


Ratio    Vcore    Vcache
43        --        1.217
44        --        1.252
45        --        1.296
46        --        1.35
47        --        1.394
48        1.217    --
49        1.26    --
50        1.305    --
51        1.35
52        1.396

It's clear to me that the core and cache match at -5 offset rather than -2, and this means that my core is getting overvolted by ~140 mV, which is stupidly high. Is it possible to change the ring offset from 2 to 5 anywhere? I couldn't find such an option in the BIOS, and my only alternatives are to increase my core multiplier to 52x, which still doesn't fix the problem for lower frequencies, or try to undervolt my ring by 140 mV, which is unlikely to succeed.


----------



## shamino1978

Neander said:


> Had some tries with G.Skill DDR5-6000 36 with Samsung today on the Apex and it's a rough experience. It's posting and getting to windows but nothing close to stable. XMP 1&2 is unusable. Adjusting VDD(Q) , SA and MC leads to a "stable" Windows but every Memtest throws errors in a few minutes to seconds. Have to try more manual tweeking but no way to run these out of the box.


can u try this?








samsungtest.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com


----------



## Herald

Neander said:


> Had some tries with G.Skill DDR5-6000 36 with Samsung today on the Apex and it's a rough experience. It's posting and getting to windows but nothing close to stable. XMP 1&2 is unusable. Adjusting VDD(Q) , SA and MC leads to a "stable" Windows but every Memtest throws errors in a few minutes to seconds. Have to try more manual tweeking but no way to run these out of the box.


Oh great, I have an Apex and waiting for my 6000c36 samsung's. Tough luck

A bit strange that, Gskill has these kits as being supported by Apex in their QVL








F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK F5-6000U3636E16GA2-TZ5RK - QVL - G.SKILL International Enterprise Co., Ltd.


Check to see if your motherboard model is on the QVL for F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK F5-6000U3636E16GA2-TZ5RK. Trident Z5 RGB DDR5-6000 CL36-36-36-76 1.30V 32GB (2x16GB) Intel XMP.




www.gskill.com


----------



## Neander

shamino1978 said:


> can u try this?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> samsungtest.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


Thanks for this I did some more testing already with this as well as with 0806 as reference already yesteray. Some datapoints:

0053:
XMP1: SA (Auto) 2,4V - MC (Auto) 1,35V - VDD(Q) (XMP) 1,3V
Post - Check, Windows - Check, Karhu - Failed <1Min

XMP2: SA (Auto) 2,4V - MC (XMP) 1,1V - VDD(Q) (XMP) 1,3V
Post - Check, Windows - BSOD, Karhu - NA

XMP2: SA (Auto) 2,4V - MC (Manual) 1,2V - VDD(Q) (XMP) 1,3V
Post - Check, Windows - Check, Karhu - 1100%/20Min then Error

XMP2: SA (Auto) 2,4V - MC (Manual) 1,21V - VDD(Q) (XMP) 1,3V
Post - Check, Windows - Check, Karhu - 1500%/25Min Stable 

But the same points above are true for 0806. For me it looks like that these sticks are highly sensible on the MC voltage. The vendor settings of 1.1V with XMP 2 is far to low and BSODs right during the boot or shortly after. The XMP1 Auto setting with the 1,35V on MC delivers error in seconds. This also matches with the Asus?/Peter Tan OC Guidelines that some memory ICs do not like >1.25v MCVDD.


----------



## cstkl1

Neander said:


> Thanks for this I did some more testing already with this as well as with 0806 as reference already yesteray. Some datapoints:
> 
> 0053:
> XMP1: SA (Auto) 2,4V - MC (Auto) 1,35V - VDD(Q) (XMP) 1,3V
> Post - Check, Windows - Check, Karhu - Failed <1Min
> 
> XMP2: SA (Auto) 2,4V - MC (XMP) 1,1V - VDD(Q) (XMP) 1,3V
> Post - Check, Windows - BSOD, Karhu - NA
> 
> XMP2: SA (Auto) 2,4V - MC (Manual) 1,2V - VDD(Q) (XMP) 1,3V
> Post - Check, Windows - Check, Karhu - 1100%/20Min then Error
> 
> XMP2: SA (Auto) 2,4V - MC (Manual) 1,21V - VDD(Q) (XMP) 1,3V
> Post - Check, Windows - Check, Karhu - 1500%/25Min Stable
> 
> But the same points above are true for 0806. For me it looks like that these sticks are highly sensible on the MC voltage. The vendor settings of 1.1V with XMP 2 is far to low and BSODs right during the boot or shortly after. The XMP1 Auto setting with the 1,35V on MC delivers error in seconds. This also matches with the Asus?/Peter Tan OC Guidelines that some memory ICs do not like >1.25v MCVDD.


u ran SA 2.4v 

thats bye bye cpu


----------



## Brandur

Thank you for your testing. I somehow have the feeling, that the fix for the Samsung ICs with the Asus bios will take a long time to properly work stable .
In other forums people report, that the Samsung ICs work fine on MSI boards 🤔.


----------



## Tigra456

Found the Asus OC guide for DDR5 but in the Voltage List are Only Samsung 2xSR 6400 und 4xSR 6000. Maybe it’s possible to post the 2xSR 6000 C36 safe / healthy voltages ?


----------



## flyleaf_

Same issues here btw, no stability at all with XMP1 & 2 for G.Skill 6000 CL36 (Apex Z690) even with "SamsungTest" BIOS.


----------



## Neander

cstkl1 said:


> u ran SA 2.4v
> 
> thats bye bye cpu


Ofc it was 1,24V thanks for the hint


----------



## lsaint012001

shamino1978 said:


> can u try this?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> samsungtest.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


No Errors so far 

XMP 2
round trip latency enabled
Dll_bwsell 22

vdd 1.35
vdq 1.35
MC 1.25 (that may be overkill)









also excuse the messy desktop


----------



## Nizzen

What is the difference about G.skill 6000c36 and 6000c40? Is it both samsung IC or maybe c36 is Hynix?


----------



## flyleaf_

Nizzen said:


> What is the difference about G.skill 6000c36 and 6000c40? Is it both samsung IC or maybe c36 is Hynix?


Seems to be both Samsung IC.


----------



## Benni231990

i have a super dumb qustion i updated my strix F to bios 0803

so what is the difference i see nothing ?? or whats new?


----------



## ChaosAD

Just an update, today upgraded and tested the VF curve offset with latest 0053 bios on my Apex. Works flawless as it should. Before ,with 0707 and 0803, i had issues with VF#6 not reducing my vcore no matter the value i entered.
So if anyone has the same problem just update and you are golden.


----------



## cstkl1

updated 2nd post

shamino adl guide









ROG Z690 Overclocking Info[6815].pdf


PDF File



1drv.ms


----------



## edkieferlp

cstkl1 said:


> updated 2nd post
> 
> shamino adl guide
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG Z690 Overclocking Info[6815].pdf
> 
> 
> PDF File
> 
> 
> 
> 1drv.ms


Is that link right, it brings me to Onedrive.


----------



## cstkl1

edkieferlp said:


> Is that link right, it brings me to Onedrive.


??


----------



## cstkl1

this the end goal gentlemen. get a ram:cpu that can daily this.. we are good.


----------



## edkieferlp

cstkl1 said:


> ??
> View attachment 2536428


Ok, that guide I already DL from somewhere, your link didn't work for me maybe cause I don't have onedrive access.
Don't worry about if it works for others.


----------



## SuperMumrik

cstkl1 said:


> this the end goal gentlemen


God Damn! I need those Hynix sticks ASAP 😁


----------



## GanMenglin

does anyone can explain the parameter dll_bwsell?


----------



## cstkl1

GanMenglin said:


> does anyone can explain the parameter dll_bwsell?


works diff for diff chipset. try auto first.
theres no one value to fit everybody.


----------



## asdkj1740

cstkl1 said:


> updated 2nd post
> 
> shamino adl guide
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG Z690 Overclocking Info[6815].pdf
> 
> 
> PDF File
> 
> 
> 
> 1drv.ms


CPU Vcore FIVR????


----------



## Jubeishock

Is there any compatibility issue with Samsung ddr4 modules? when I restart the computer sometimes get a black screen and I've forced to restart twice


----------



## ChaosAD

This CVS feature mentioned in the guide seems very interesting but i dont think i can find it in bios.


----------



## Silent Scone

edkieferlp said:


> Ok, that guide I already DL from somewhere, your link didn't work for me maybe cause I don't have onedrive access.
> Don't worry about if it works for others.











ROG Z690 Overclocking Info[6815].pdf







drive.google.com





In case anyone else is looking.


----------



## mattxx88

shamino1978 said:


> Latest hero/extreme/strix-E test bios (improves dram oc)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0002.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-ASUS-0002.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-E-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0002.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


Shamino-San, nothing for Strix I ?


----------



## Arni90

cstkl1 said:


> works diff for diff chipset. try auto first.
> theres no one value to fit everybody.


That's fine and all, but is this a performance-related value, or a stability-related one?
Is higher better, or is it just a matter of finding whatever works?


----------



## bscool

Jubeishock said:


> Is there any compatibility issue with Samsung ddr4 modules? when I restart the computer sometimes get a black screen and I've forced to restart twice


It sounds like you might have a problem somewhere. I saw one of your other posts about when doing a bios update/flash you were stuck at a black screen. A bios update will take a long time(7-10min+) and should always end up at a screen saying press F1 or something like that to enter bios. A black screen means it is still in progress or something went wrong if stays at a black screen for say 20min or more. Just my 2 cents.

Maybe try loading defaults or clear bios, remove battery etc and try reflashing with defaults loaded?

I am using z690 Srtix A d4 with dr b die with no issues. Currently on bios 707 and best so far for me. Haven't tried 808. No need as right now 707 works great 4133c15-15--15.


----------



## cstkl1

Jubeishock said:


> Is there any compatibility issue with Samsung ddr4 modules? when I restart the computer sometimes get a black screen and I've forced to restart twice


xmp ?fastboot on? hybernate sleep in os?
armoury crate installed?


----------



## dante`afk

how does one enable the LED lights on the apex left of the cpu socket?



SuperMumrik said:


> God Damn! I need those Hynix sticks ASAP 😁



as long as he never posts his super secret timings ....


----------



## shamino1978

flyleaf_ said:


> Same issues here btw, no stability at all with XMP1 & 2 for G.Skill 6000 CL36 (Apex Z690) even with "SamsungTest" BIOS.


pls try this version:









ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0010.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com


----------



## Alberto_It

What do you think about this setting? It is not mine. It's stable with Micron chips?


----------



## asdkj1740

flyleaf_ said:


> Same issues here btw, no stability at all with XMP1 & 2 for G.Skill 6000 CL36 (Apex Z690) even with "SamsungTest" BIOS.


can you finish aida64 benchmark at xmp6000?


----------



## Benni231990

i have a question 

in the bios i set the RGB to stealth when my pc is off so no rgb is on but it never accept the setting? has anybody a fix or help for me ?


----------



## shamino1978

Tigra456 said:


> @shamino1978
> Do you have a fixed Bios for the z690-f and the 6000 c36 / 5600 c36 Trident Z5 ?
> 
> greetings and thx











ROG-STRIX-Z690-F-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0010.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com


----------



## shamino1978

matique said:


> Any love for z690-i?











ROG-STRIX-Z690-I-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0010.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com


----------



## bscool

Benni231990 said:


> i have a question
> 
> in the bios i set the RGB to stealth when my pc is off so no rgb is on but it never accept the setting? has anybody a fix or help for me ?


If you have Armoury Crate Installed it can override bios setting or cause issues. So make sure AC is set correctly. If you don't have AC installed could be defective MB.

If no AC installed I would try clear CMOS(turn off psu, remove bios battery) and maybe reflash bios if all else fails.


----------



## Tigra456

shamino1978 said:


> ROG-STRIX-Z690-F-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0010.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


I will check it later thank you


----------



## Zyther

What is the latest most stable bios for the Hero? People are saying 803 is unstable


----------



## adna

shamino1978 said:


> ROG-STRIX-Z690-F-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0010.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


very thank.i'll try with micron chip in value ram

@ver.803
5800-36-41-41-46 2t 1.35v.
12900kf+SZ690F
sa | vdd | vddq | imc [bios set]
0.9 | 1.35 | 1.35 | 1.1


----------



## Nizzen

adna said:


> very thank.i'll try with micron chip in value ram
> 
> @ver.803
> 5800-36-41-41-46 2t 1.35v.
> 12900kf+SZ690F
> sa | vdd | vddq | imc [bios set]
> 0.9 | 1.35 | 1.35 | 1.1
> 
> View attachment 2536676
> 
> View attachment 2536677


What adata stick is this?


----------



## SuperMumrik

Anyone recognise the ic's in this stick? 🤔


----------



## Arni90

SuperMumrik said:


> Anyone recognise the ic's in this stick? 🤔
> View attachment 2536680




Edit: I misremembered, it's Spectek


----------



## Arni90

Getting some really weird behaviour with 12900K, Z690 Apex, and some Kingston Fury Beast (Micron) 4800 CL38.
The sticks will scale with voltage, both in terms of timings and frequency. 5600 34-40-34-2T will boot to Windows with high voltage mode enabled and 1.40 VDD / 1.50 VDDQ (plus some CPU voltages)
For some reason, Channel B reports significantly lower RTL than Channel A, at least when looking at MemTweakIt
The 12900K worked perfectly fine with an MSI PRO Z690-A DDR4 before.

However, the system will freeze, then reboot, whenever I run any kind of workload that's somewhat memory-intensive in Windows. Nothing is logged in event viewer except a sudden shutdown and recovery.
This happens regardless if I overclock the memory or not.
This applies to games, Karhu, testmem5, and HCI. Karhu is particularly bad in that it will almost always crash in less than 10 minutes.

What I've tried so far:
Each DIMM was tested separately in each memory slot, same issue (I don't have access to another pair of DIMMs)
VCCSA 1.20V, Memory Controller Voltage 1.25V, VDDQ TX 1.25V, mem VDD 1.20V, mem VDDQ 1.25V, mem current limit 7.8A
BIOS 0806 and 0052
Different PSU
Disabled all onboard devices
Removed USB

Currently testing 0231 (launch BIOS), it has currently beaten my Karhu record by 20 minutes, but I won't be able to monitor the progress for the next hours.
If anyone has any other suggestions, I'd very much like to hear them, as I'm stumped


----------



## SuperMumrik

Elaborate please? It would be nice to know how to recognise those generic d5 sticks


----------



## adna

Nizzen said:


> What adata stick is this?


adata ddr5-4800








[email protected]


----------



## Arni90

SuperMumrik said:


> Elaborate please? It would be nice to know how to recognise those generic d5 sticks


My mistake, I remembered the S as being short for SK Hynix, it's Spectek


----------



## lowmotion

Spectek is the cheap label from Micron. My Adata 4800 have Micron chips.


----------



## safedisk

ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX DDR5 MEMORY OC TEST
Memory AIR 7000 2T 32-40-40-30 Tight Timing Ambient Temp

AIDA64
READ 112.03 GB/s
Write 107.82 GB/s
COPY 106.86 GB/s
LATENCY 47.7ns

SA AUTO
MC AUTO
VDD 1.56
VDDQ 1.5


----------



## satinghostrider

safedisk said:


> View attachment 2536695
> 
> 
> View attachment 2536696
> 
> 
> View attachment 2536697
> 
> 
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX DDR5 MEMORY OC TEST
> Memory AIR 7000 2T 32-40-40-30 Tight Timing Ambient Temp
> 
> AIDA64
> READ 112.03 GB/s
> Write 107.82 GB/s
> COPY 106.86 GB/s
> LATENCY 47.7ns


Looks like everyone was wrong that those kits with E suffix somewhere in the model number was Samsung B-Die. Seems like it could be Hynix too. I've just received the Trident Z5 RGB 6000C40E yet to powerup. Crossing my fingers it could be Hynix.

Great job pushing these on air @safedisk !
Very impressive hope you can try to run them at 1T soon.


----------



## shamino1978

Voltician on the cap beside the dram ic if pmic at 750khz switching during memtest , voltage set = 1.3000v, when set to 1500khz, the huge undershoot disappears


----------



## ChaosAD

Arni90 said:


> Getting some really weird behaviour with 12900K, Z690 Apex, and some Kingston Fury Beast (Micron) 4800 CL38.
> The sticks will scale with voltage, both in terms of timings and frequency. 5600 34-40-34-2T will boot to Windows with high voltage mode enabled and 1.40 VDD / 1.50 VDDQ (plus some CPU voltages)
> For some reason, Channel B reports significantly lower RTL than Channel A, at least when looking at MemTweakIt
> The 12900K worked perfectly fine with an MSI PRO Z690-A DDR4 before.
> 
> However, the system will freeze, then reboot, whenever I run any kind of workload that's somewhat memory-intensive in Windows. Nothing is logged in event viewer except a sudden shutdown and recovery.
> This happens regardless if I overclock the memory or not.
> This applies to games, Karhu, testmem5, and HCI. Karhu is particularly bad in that it will almost always crash in less than 10 minutes.
> 
> What I've tried so far:
> Each DIMM was tested separately in each memory slot, same issue (I don't have access to another pair of DIMMs)
> VCCSA 1.20V, Memory Controller Voltage 1.25V, VDDQ TX 1.25V, mem VDD 1.20V, mem VDDQ 1.25V, mem current limit 7.8A
> BIOS 0806 and 0052
> Different PSU
> Disabled all onboard devices
> Removed USB
> 
> Currently testing 0231 (launch BIOS), it has currently beaten my Karhu record by 20 minutes, but I won't be able to monitor the progress for the next hours.
> If anyone has any other suggestions, I'd very much like to hear them, as I'm stumped


I have the exact same combo but with just one 16gb Kingston dimm. If you want me to try something just tell me.


----------



## Arni90

shamino1978 said:


> Voltician on the cap beside the dram ic if pmic at 750khz switching during memtest , voltage set = 1.3000v, when set to 1500khz, the huge undershoot disappears
> View attachment 2536699



Is there some kind of documentation available for where you're supposed to plug in the Voltician and how to use it? The motherboard manual only denotes a header on the motherboard. I've figured that Tool.exe is the needed launcher.

There are several jumpers on it, what do they do?


----------



## shamino1978

Arni90 said:


> Is there some kind of documentation available for where you're supposed to plug in the Voltician and how to use it? The motherboard manual only denotes a header on the motherboard. I've figured that Tool.exe is the needed launcher.
> 
> There are several jumpers on it, what do they do?


maximus oc pak








m14ocpak1121.zip


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com




it explains usage



https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/LGA1700/ROG_MAXIMUS_Z690_EXTREME/ROG_True_Voltician_V1.0.2.1.zip


----------



## adna

same setting
@0010
first touch look ok.but...









ps. can boot with high voltage mode : enable , i'll try it again later

@0803 again. look good


----------



## sblantipodi

guys, is there some guide on how to do 51GHz/40GHz on all cores? 
Using a Z690 Extreme here.


----------



## Arni90

ChaosAD said:


> I have the exact same combo but with just one 16gb Kingston dimm. If you want me to try something just tell me.


Thank you for the offer, but if you're not having similar issues I'm not sure it would help.

I'm having these issues at stock, non-XMP


----------



## skullbringer

shamino1978 said:


> pls try this version:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0010.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


thank you. with this bios, for the first time I managed to run s16b at 6000 mbps tm5 error-free 2 reboots in a row

just used samsung profile in bios at the very bottom of the list 

ddr5 is starting to be fun


----------



## flyleaf_

shamino1978 said:


> pls try this version:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0010.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


Sadly no change, XMP1&2 + ASUS OC Profile throwing errors in Karhus.


----------



## theo_yells

shamino1978 said:


> what if u set PMIC current capability to max in Advanced Memory Voltage


maximum DRAM Current Capability value is 7.87500, is it safe to set that?? also the APEX bios v.0010 no progress/change for the samsung gskill 6000c40 kit. Errors on xmp 1, 2. boot to safe mode on (training failure) on asus oc profiles.


----------



## Falkentyne

flyleaf_ said:


> Sadly no change, XMP1&2 + ASUS OC Profile throwing errors in Karhus.


Why is your mem controller only 1.1v and vccsa only 0.90v?
Try 1.25v and 1.10v


----------



## Neander

Falkentyne said:


> Why is your mem controller only 1.1v and vccsa only 0.90v?
> Try 1.25v and 1.10v


XMP2 sets the MC to 1.1V for me too. It way to low but thats in the XMP profile


----------



## Hulk1988

safedisk said:


> View attachment 2536695
> 
> 
> View attachment 2536696
> 
> 
> View attachment 2536697
> 
> 
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX DDR5 MEMORY OC TEST
> Memory AIR 7000 2T 32-40-40-30 Tight Timing Ambient Temp
> 
> AIDA64
> READ 112.03 GB/s
> Write 107.82 GB/s
> COPY 106.86 GB/s
> LATENCY 47.7ns
> 
> SA AUTO
> MC AUTO
> VDD 1.56
> VDDQ 1.5


Do I see it right here that some GSkill 6000 have Samsung and some have SK Hynix?


----------



## Benni231990

@adna

can you pls share or show your second and third timing with your micron 5800 steup?


----------



## flyleaf_

Falkentyne said:


> Why is your mem controller only 1.1v and vccsa only 0.90v?
> Try 1.25v and 1.10v


I didn't post anything regarding this values - I did try multiple things, 1.2 - 1.35v mem controller & vccsa 1.1 - 1.25v - nothing really works over multiple reboots.


----------



## xl_digit

Z690 Apex with 0010 Bios
SA: 1.22 / IMC : 1.25 / VDD + VDDQ : 1.40
Gkill F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK @ 6000 CL32-35-35-52 1T

*







*


----------



## Falkentyne

xl_digit said:


> Z690 Apex with 0010 Bios
> SA: 1.22 / IMC : 1.25 / VDD + VDDQ : 1.43
> Gkill F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK @ 6000 CL32-35-35-52 1T
> 
> *
> View attachment 2536779
> *


NBD.


----------



## Arni90

Arni90 said:


> Getting some really weird behaviour with 12900K, Z690 Apex, and some Kingston Fury Beast (Micron) 4800 CL38.
> The sticks will scale with voltage, both in terms of timings and frequency. 5600 34-40-34-2T will boot to Windows with high voltage mode enabled and 1.40 VDD / 1.50 VDDQ (plus some CPU voltages)
> For some reason, Channel B reports significantly lower RTL than Channel A, at least when looking at MemTweakIt
> The 12900K worked perfectly fine with an MSI PRO Z690-A DDR4 before.
> 
> However, the system will freeze, then reboot, whenever I run any kind of workload that's somewhat memory-intensive in Windows. Nothing is logged in event viewer except a sudden shutdown and recovery.
> This happens regardless if I overclock the memory or not.
> This applies to games, Karhu, testmem5, and HCI. Karhu is particularly bad in that it will almost always crash in less than 10 minutes.
> 
> What I've tried so far:
> Each DIMM was tested separately in each memory slot, same issue (I don't have access to another pair of DIMMs)
> VCCSA 1.20V, Memory Controller Voltage 1.25V, VDDQ TX 1.25V, mem VDD 1.20V, mem VDDQ 1.25V, mem current limit 7.8A
> BIOS 0806 and 0052
> Different PSU
> Disabled all onboard devices
> Removed USB
> 
> Currently testing 0231 (launch BIOS), it has currently beaten my Karhu record by 20 minutes, but I won't be able to monitor the progress for the next hours.
> If anyone has any other suggestions, I'd very much like to hear them, as I'm stumped


Update

0231 worked fine, and 0010 also seems to work fine, must have been a bad flash.


----------



## Tigra456

shamino1978 said:


> ROG-STRIX-Z690-F-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0010.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


Thx, but was not able to let the 6000 c36 pass the prime95 ram test only with choose XMP1…Now trying with Dram VDD and Dram VDDQ 1.35…
If that works I will try 3-4 hours Memtest


----------



## edkieferlp

New official posted TUF Z690 PLUS wifi D4 bios 0807
I don't think that was posted here.


----------



## Linkle

What is the difference between 0807 and 0808 on z690 A GAMING WIFI D4?


----------



## safedisk

Hulk1988 said:


> Do I see it right here that some GSkill 6000 have Samsung and some have SK Hynix?


Yes it's a mix
can't seem to tell the difference between samsung and hynix by product name not sure


----------



## satinghostrider

I think looks like 6000cl36 is guaranteed Samsung B-Die while 6000cl40 there is a chance it could be either Hynix or Samsung B-Die now that we know 6000cl40 could be a mix.


----------



## AKX

Hello I have Strix Z690-A D4, and G.Skill F4-3200C14D-16GTZR, 8GB x 2, DDR4 3200 CL14 Samsung B-die. I had zero luck running them stable with XMP1 or XMP2 with any official or beta BIOS released in this thread, and had to run them at a pathetic DDR4 2132 CL15 setting.

Can anyone advice how I can get them stable with XMP?

TIA


----------



## Zyther

@shamino1978 
Isn’t the bios meant to update the ME firmware? I noticed in bios the version didn’t change


----------



## adna

Benni231990 said:


> @adna
> 
> can you pls share or show your second and third timing with your micron 5800 steup?


i'm trying ver.0010


----------



## cstkl1

AKX said:


> Hello I have Strix Z690-A D4, and G.Skill F4-3200C14D-16GTZR, 8GB x 2, DDR4 3200 CL14 Samsung B-die. I had zero luck running them stable with XMP1 or XMP2 with any official or beta BIOS released in this thread, and had to run them at a pathetic DDR4 2132 CL15 setting.
> 
> Can anyone advice how I can get them stable with XMP?
> 
> TIA


set SA/MC 1.25

set all dd/dr 4


----------



## Falkentyne

adna said:


> i'm trying ver.0010
> View attachment 2536847


What are your VCCSA / Memory Controller (MC), / VDD / VDDQ voltages you are using for this sort of Micron Magic?
I thought 5800 was impossible on Micron.

You have "High Voltage Mode"=enabled also? If so, what exact voltages are set?


----------



## asdkj1740

xl_digit said:


> Z690 Apex with 0010 Bios
> SA: 1.22 / IMC : 1.25 / VDD + VDDQ : 1.40
> Gkill F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK @ 6000 CL32-35-35-52 1T
> 
> *
> View attachment 2536779
> *


where to download the latest asrock timing software 4.0.13?
thanks


----------



## RobertoSampaio

sblantipodi said:


> guys, is there some guide on how to do 51GHz/40GHz on all cores?
> Using a Z690 Extreme here.











ASUS MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME & i9-12900K GUIDE - Load...


Disclaimer ! These settings and methods are outside Intel's specifications, just like any other overclocking method. ---------------------------------------------------- For Z790/13900K click here Introduction: In a world increasingly concerned with natural resources, the watchword is...




www.overclock.net


----------



## shamino1978

Zyther said:


> @shamino1978
> Isn’t the bios meant to update the ME firmware? I noticed in bios the version didn’t change
> View attachment 2536845
> 
> 
> View attachment 2536846


Nope, you have to do it yourself.


----------



## tiboor

Hello
i got a 12900k with asus z690 A d4 motherboard.
i have a know good trident z 2x8gb 3200mhz ram kit.
if i set xmp it does not post at all. if i set manually still does not post. so i tried to lower it to 3100mhz and it does work. also works with 3300mhz. voltage bumped to 1.37 instead of 1.35.
also disabled fast boot, so it has more time to train mem.
what can this be? on asus compatibility site there is 16.18.18.36 ram as supported, mine is 38. can this be the problem?


----------



## fpompert

Tried the official 0807 BIOS for the TUF Z690 Plus D4, but like *every *BIOS since 0601 this does not boot Windows 11 properly with XMP-II and my 4x8GB 3200 Gskill modules. I read people disabling XMP and enter everything manually, could this fix things perhaps? I am happy to stay at 0601, but already I see microcode updates. At some point I would like an upgrade that works


----------



## adna

Falkentyne said:


> What are your VCCSA / Memory Controller (MC), / VDD / VDDQ voltages you are using for this sort of Micron Magic?
> I thought 5800 was impossible on Micron.
> 
> You have "High Voltage Mode"=enabled also? If so, what exact voltages are set?


@5800MHz.
sa | mc | vdd | vddq = 0.9 | 1.1 | 1.35 | 1.35
Yes,I set "high voltage mode" = enable
ps. 1st time to play 12th gen with 12700kf. I can't play 5800MHz.with same setting.

When I plus vdd/vddq to 1.4/1.4(just a quick setting for boot test)
5800-36-40-40-46 (press down trcd/trp = 40)








5866-36-42-42-46 (relax trcd/trp =42/42 ,trfc = auto)


----------



## MikeS3000

fpompert said:


> Tried the official 0807 BIOS for the TUF Z690 Plus D4, but like *every *BIOS since 0601 this does not boot Windows 11 properly with XMP-II and my 4x8GB 3200 Gskill modules. I read people disabling XMP and enter everything manually, could this fix things perhaps? I am happy to stay at 0601, but already I see microcode updates. At some point I would like an upgrade that works


I'm testing 0807 now on Strix-A Gaming Wifi. 0707 has been rock stable so far. Already on 0807 I got 1 annoying WHEA 17 error regarding PCIE Root Port that caused the system to freeze and then the graphics driver to recover (never had this on 0707). I previously had the IGP enabled with my discrete graphics card and I don't know if this caused the WHEA error so it is now disabled and so far no WHEA. I failed TM5 when I set XMP I and then keyed in some custom timings and bumped speed from XMP 3600 to 3800 (again this was rock stable on 0707) I'm Testing TM5 right now using XMP II and keying in the same custom values to see if ASUS is tweaking some secondary or tertiary auto timings in a strange way that is causing memory errors when using XMP I. Very strange behavior.


----------



## Jubeishock

This Asus z690 gen is a disaster, all mobos broken, crowded of issues.


----------



## cstkl1

Jubeishock said:


> This Asus z690 gen is a disaster, all mobos broken, crowded of issues.


----------



## Lurifaks

MikeS3000 said:


> I'm testing 0807 now on Strix-A Gaming Wifi. 0707 has been rock stable so far. Already on 0807 I got 1 annoying WHEA 17 error regarding PCIE Root Port that caused the system to freeze and then the graphics driver to recover (never had this on 0707). I previously had the IGP enabled with my discrete graphics card and I don't know if this caused the WHEA error so it is now disabled and so far no WHEA. I failed TM5 when I set XMP I and then keyed in some custom timings and bumped speed from XMP 3600 to 3800 (again this was rock stable on 0707) I'm Testing TM5 right now using XMP II and keying in the same custom values to see if ASUS is tweaking some secondary or tertiary auto timings in a strange way that is causing memory errors when using XMP I. Very strange behavior.


You mean bios 0808 ? So far the first bios that let me run 4x8 sr bdie 3600-14-14-14 with this 12600k i have.
But still no 3900+ gear1 with 2x8 sr bdie. I blame my 12600k for that


----------



## GtiJason

Jubeishock said:


> This Asus z690 gen is a disaster, all mobos broken, crowded of issues.


Have you used Gigabyte, ASRock and MSI boards yet ?
From what I can see the problems are with Intel and Microsoft and the only brand on top of these bugs is ASUS
MSI has been decent as well, but Gigabyte is like trying to daily an Alpha build
Shamino and XOC/OC crew such as Safedisk, cstkl1, RobertoSampio and Falkentyne are invaluable to the community
and the only other crew that comes close is ASRock but only for whatever board is being used for XOC. OC Formula / Aqua 2dimm


----------



## RobertoSampaio

Jubeishock said:


> This Asus z690 gen is a disaster, all mobos broken, crowded of issues.


That's it....
First time I drove a Ferrari I though my fiat was better... LOL.


----------



## GtiJason

Lurifaks said:


> You mean bios 0808 ? So far the first bios that let me run 4x8 sr bdie 3600-14-14-14 with this 12600k i have.
> But still no 3900+ gear1 with 2x8 sr bdie. I blame my 12600k for that


BIOS 0808 was made to help 4 SR Dimms



https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/BIOS/ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0807.ZIP


----------



## Lurifaks

GtiJason said:


> https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/BIOS/ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0807.ZIP


Thanks, missed that one


----------



## skullbringer

Falkentyne said:


> What are your VCCSA / Memory Controller (MC), / VDD / VDDQ voltages you are using for this sort of Micron Magic?
> I thought 5800 was impossible on Micron.
> 
> You have "High Voltage Mode"=enabled also? If so, what exact voltages are set?


seconding this, could only ever get my microns stable at 5600 max


----------



## Zyther

shamino1978 said:


> Nope, you have to do it yourself.


Thanks. Is 0002 the latest bios for the hero?


----------



## marti69

cstkl1 said:


> Strix D4 SuperPi Bios
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0006.7z
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0002.7z
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4th November 2021 - Day 1 Release Bios . Thanks to @shamino1978
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> MAXIMUS​ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-ASUS-0702.zip
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-FORMULA-ASUS-0702.rar
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0702.rar
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0702.rar
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-GLACIAL-ASUS-0702.rar
> 
> STRIX​ROG-STRIX-Z690-E-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0702.rar
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-F-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0702.rar
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0702.rar
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-I-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0702.rar
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-G-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0702.rar
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0705.rar
> 
> Prime/Proart/TUF​PRIME-Z690-A-ASUS-0702.rar
> ProArt-Z690-CREATOR-WIFI-ASUS-0702.rar
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0705.rar
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-D4-ASUS-0705.rar
> 
> 
> 10th November 2021 - D4
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> "shamino1978"
> 
> 0705 (DDR4) has a bug whereby dram voltage is not applied, will post new bioses that fix this later
> 
> these ones fixed:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0707.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-D4-ASUS-0707.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0707.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 15 November 2021
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0801.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-ASUS-0801.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-I-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0801.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-G-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0801.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-F-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0801.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0801.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-E-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0801.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0801.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-ASUS-0801.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-FORMULA-ASUS-0801.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-GLACIAL-ASUS-0801.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0801.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ProArt-Z690-CREATOR-WIFI-ASUS-0801.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PRIME-Z690-A-ASUS-0801.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0801.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 16 November 2021 - Apex
> 19 November 2021
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0802.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-GLACIAL-ASUS-0802.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0802.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-FORMULA-ASUS-0802.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-ASUS-0802.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-I-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0802.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-E-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0802.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0802.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PRIME-Z690-A-ASUS-0802.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-ASUS-0802.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-WIFI-ASUS-0802.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ProArt-Z690-CREATOR-WIFI-ASUS-0802.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-D4-ASUS-0002.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0002.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0002.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 22 November 2021 - D4
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4 BETA BIOS 0003
> 
> TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS D4 BETA BIOS 0003
> 
> TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS D4 WIFI BETA BIOS 0003
> 
> 
> 
> 26 November 2021
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> *ROG MAXIMUS Z690 Series Beta Bios 0803 UPDATE*
> 
> 1. Improve system performance
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 HERO BETA BIOS 0803
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 FORMULA BETA BIOS 0803
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX BETA BIOS 0803
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME BETA BIOS 0803
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME GLACIAL BETA BIOS 0803
> 
> 
> *ROG STRIX Z690 Series Beta Bios 0803 UPDATE*
> 
> 1. Improve system performance
> 
> ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI BETA BIOS 0803
> 
> ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4 BETA BIOS 0803
> 
> ROG STRIX Z690-E GAMING WIFI BETA BIOS 0803
> 
> ROG STRIX Z690-F GAMING WIFI BETA BIOS 0803
> 
> ROG STRIX Z690-G GAMING WIFI BETA BIOS 0803
> 
> ROG STRIX Z690-I GAMING WIFI BETA BIOS 0803
> 
> 
> *TUF GAMING Z690 Series Beta Bios 0803 UPDATE*
> 
> 1. Improve system performance
> 
> TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS BETA BIOS 0803
> 
> TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS D4 BETA BIOS 0803
> 
> TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS WIFI BETA BIOS 0803
> 
> TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS WIFI D4 BETA BIOS 0803
> 
> 
> 29th November 2021 - Apex|Samsung
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0081.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 30th November 2021 - Apex
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> APEX88.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1 December 2021 - Apex
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> _APEX93.rar_
> 
> 
> 4 December 2021 - Apex
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0806.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 7 December 2021
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0002.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-FORMULA-ASUS-0002.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-ASUS-0002.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-E-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0002.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 8 December 2021 - Apex
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0053.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 9th December 2021 - Apex Sammy
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> samsungtest.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 10 December 2021 - Apex Sammy + Strix i
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0010.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-F-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0010.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


any bios 0010 release for z690 hero?


----------



## Jubeishock

cstkl1 said:


> View attachment 2536866


Dont be so brave... sorry for my *SIN*

Problems using *separated *gskill modules, 2 x 8 gb samsung - computer crashes, cant use any XMP profile
2x 8 gb hynix same.

Corsair Vengeance RGB PRO 32GB (2x16GB) DDR4 3600, same problems (just purchased) 

Whea errors, BSOD errors, pci e issues, problems with soundcards, bios issues, etc.

swapped PSU, replaced my 3090 for another GPU , reinstalled windows 11, installed windows 10, etc etc etc.

Maybe is my computer, or if not what else?


----------



## Wolferin

GtiJason said:


> Have you used Gigabyte, ASRock and MSI boards yet ?
> From what I can see the problems are with Intel and Microsoft and the only brand on top of these bugs is ASUS
> MSI has been decent as well, but Gigabyte is like trying to daily an Alpha build
> Shamino and XOC/OC crew such as Safedisk, cstkl1, RobertoSampio and Falkentyne are invaluable to the community
> and the only other crew that comes close is ASRock but only for whatever board is being used for XOC. OC Formula / Aqua 2dimm


Year, and in the new 0807 Bios is old Intel microcode, great Asus!


We'll be back.


----------



## Jubeishock

RobertoSampaio said:


> That's it....
> First time I drove a Ferrari I though my fiat was better... LOL.


When you start a Ferrari wont come with black screens


----------



## bscool

@Jubeishock Did you test 1 stick in a slot at a time and find if you have a slot with an issues or all slots have the same issues when enabling XMP. If it is all slots it could be MB or CPU. Without multiple components(like MB and CPU) it is hard to trouble shoot.

It is not just Asus I see people complain about MSI and Gigabyte yet the same components work for other people. It is like that every generation. Someone has a problem with MSI and all MSI MB are junk, someone else has a problem with Asus and all Asus are junk.

Edit also if using a riser cable try removing it.


----------



## Jubeishock

bscool said:


> @Jubeishock Did you test 1 stick in a slot at a time and find if you have a slot with an issues or all slots have the same issues when enabling XMP. If it is all slots it could be MB or CPU. Without multiple components(like MB and CPU) it is hard to trouble shoot.
> 
> It is not just Asus I see people complain about MSI and Gigabyte yet the same components work for other people. It is like that every generation. Someone has a problem with MSI and all MSI MB are junk, someone else has a problem with Asus and all Asus are junk.


Not yet, I'll try that.

Thanks for the tip


----------



## Arni90

Jubeishock said:


> Dont be so brave... sorry for my *SIN*
> 
> Problems using *separated *gskill modules, 2 x 8 gb samsung - computer crashes, cant use any XMP profile
> 2x 8 gb hynix same.
> 
> Corsair Vengeance RGB PRO 32GB (2x16GB) DDR4 3600, same problems (just purchased)
> 
> Whea errors, BSOD errors, pci e issues, problems with soundcards, bios issues, etc.
> 
> swapped PSU, replaced my 3090 for another GPU , reinstalled windows 11, installed windows 10, etc etc etc.
> 
> Maybe is my computer, or if not what else?


Try flashing launch BIOS, then flashing the newest BETA again. This fixed some weird issues on my Z690 APEX


----------



## bscool

Jubeishock said:


> Not yet, I'll try that.
> 
> Thanks for the tip


Also you have to use A2 and B2 slots when using 2 sticks.


----------



## acoustic

Arni90 said:


> Try flashing launch BIOS, then flashing the newest BETA again. This fixed some weird issues on my Z690 APEX


I have never had issues with flashing BIOS, but seems like quite a few people have had some strangeness when flashing with Z690.

Clear CMOS
Load Optimized Defaults
Flash with BIOS FLASHBACK or through EZFLASH

Works every time for me. I had a corrupted BIOS file on my MSI Z490 ACE once, but using USB drive for the flashback fixed that.


----------



## Tigra456

Oh I only loaded optimized defaults and then flash… damn will try it again with cmos reset…


----------



## edkieferlp

fpompert said:


> Tried the official 0807 BIOS for the TUF Z690 Plus D4, but like *every *BIOS since 0601 this does not boot Windows 11 properly with XMP-II and my 4x8GB 3200 Gskill modules. I read people disabling XMP and enter everything manually, could this fix things perhaps? I am happy to stay at 0601, but already I see microcode updates. At some point I would like an upgrade that works


I am on TUF Plus wifi D4 with Crucial Basittix [email protected] and XMPI and XPMII work fine, this is on 0707 bios.
I haven't tried other versions.
It is only 2 sticks of 8gig each, 16 total.


----------



## grifers

Bios 0807 tested with asus tuf gaming plus d4 z690. It's a bios similar to the 0707 version, I don't like it very much. For me, for today the best version is the 0003, better memory overclock, better stability in the memory overclock, and more performance in single core processor 12700k (stock) in the cpu-z benchmark:

0708 and 0807 = 795 points
0003 and 0803 = 810 points

Please ASUS, take the path of version 0003 for the following bios versions!

P.D - 4000 Mhz 16-16-16-36 1T at 1.4


----------



## Toy47

grifers said:


> Bios 0807 tested with asus tuf gaming plus d4 z690. It's a bios similar to the 0707 version, I don't like it very much. For me, for today the best version is the 0003, better memory overclock, better stability in the memory overclock, and more performance in single core processor 12700k (stock) in the cpu-z benchmark:
> 
> 0708 and 0807 = 795 points
> 0003 and 0803 = 810 points
> 
> Please ASUS, take the path of version 0003 for the following bios versions!
> 
> P.D - 4000 Mhz 16-16-16-36 1T at 1.4


I'm also finding BIOS 0003 the best for my setup.

TUF WIFI D4
12600kf @ 50 allcore Adaptive voltage +0.005 offset
GSkill 3200 C14 2x8GB

My Memory overclock is 4000 C16 17 17 30 1t 
SA 1.35v Vdimm 1.50 VDDQ 1.40

With every other BIOS I struggle with stability even setting 2t and loosening the timings.


----------



## shrimpmaster

Toy47 said:


> I'm also finding BIOS 0003 the best for my setup.
> 
> TUF WIFI D4
> 12600kf @ 50 allcore Adaptive voltage +0.005 offset
> GSkill 3200 C14 2x8GB
> 
> My Memory overclock is 4000 C16 17 17 30 1t
> SA 1.35v Vdimm 1.50 VDDQ 1.40
> 
> With every other BIOS I struggle with stability even setting 2t and loosening the timings.


Same here. 0003 and 0803 both allowed for 1T. Every other bios can't set 1T gear 1.


----------



## TomCom205

I still can't get my G.Skill RAM 6000 CL36

to work on the ASUS ROG Z690 Extreme.

I had it running for like 9 hours with 1,25Volt VDD an VDDQ and about 8 runs of TM5 (extreme)
one cold reboot and it is not longer working.

The 0002 Bios and 0803 Bios both change after a cold reboot they maybe not work with Settings that have been working well before.

Hopefully this is going to be fixed soon.

XMP1 or XMP2 is not working at all.


----------



## flyleaf_

TomCom205 said:


> I still can't get my G.Skill RAM 6000 CL36
> 
> to work on the ASUS ROG Z690 Extreme.
> 
> I had it running for like 9 hours with 1,25Volt VDD an VDDQ and about 8 runs of TM5 (extreme)
> one cold reboot and it is not longer working.
> 
> The 0002 Bios and 0803 Bios both change after a cold reboot they maybe not work with Settings that have been working well before.
> 
> Hopefully this is going to be fixed soon.
> 
> XMP1 or XMP2 is not working at all.


After more testing on my part I can 100% confirm this behavior on my Apex. Even with some manual tweaks to timings and voltage it can run >10000% Karhu Mem Test and after the next reboot it is unstable even in tasks outside of memory stress testing, also throws errors within a few % of Karhu.


----------



## Jubeishock

bscool said:


> Also you have to use A2 and B2 slots when using 2 sticks.


Yeah I did that


----------



## darth_meh

Jubeishock said:


> This Asus z690 gen is a disaster, all mobos broken, crowded of issues.


Disaster might be overstating it, but there are clearly quite a few bugs that need to be ironed out. It's called the early adopter tax, and it isn't unique to Asus. If you aren't an OC'ing enthusiast that loves BIOS tweaking, this has undoubtably been a frustrating launch since basic stuff like XMP doesn't work for a number of people. Fortunately, Asus (shamino) is rolling out fixes pretty rapidly - just give it a few months and I'm sure a lot of these issues will be resolved. For now I'm running everything stock (XMP off) and at least it's stable.

Also, since you referenced "sound cards not working" and I was the one that reported that issue, I just wanted to point out that I confirmed my Sound Blaster AE-7 also has issues with my Asus Z490 Extreme board... so it doesn't appear to be Z690 specific. It's something with AE series sound cards (and possibly Asus BIOS compatibility) as far as I can tell. I ran my AE-7 for over a year in my Z490 PC without an issue. There seems to be something very specific about the CPU-Z validation process that triggers the issue, and I've been working with the author of CPU-Z and Creative Labs to resolve it. Since it works fine outside of this use case, I'm still using it in my Asus Z690 Apex for the time being.


----------



## eeroo94

grifers said:


> Bios 0807 tested with asus tuf gaming plus d4 z690. It's a bios similar to the 0707 version, I don't like it very much. For me, for today the best version is the 0003, better memory overclock, better stability in the memory overclock, and more performance in single core processor 12700k (stock) in the cpu-z benchmark:
> 
> 0708 and 0807 = 795 points
> 0003 and 0803 = 810 points
> 
> Please ASUS, take the path of version 0003 for the following bios versions!
> 
> P.D - 4000 Mhz 16-16-16-36 1T at 1.4


Is it boosting to 5Ghz with 0003 bios?


----------



## acoustic

flyleaf_ said:


> After more testing on my part I can 100% confirm this behavior on my Apex. Even with some manual tweaks to timings and voltage it can run >10000% Karhu Mem Test and after the next reboot it is unstable even in tasks outside of memory stress testing, also throws errors within a few % of Karhu.


I will say the training on Z690 seems very unpredictable and difficult to tame. I also have had settings pass 4000% HCI MemTestPro and multiple Anta777 Extreme+ABSOLUT cycles, then one reboot and it all goes to hell.

What I can't figure out is what settings are training differently. I had a photo of the timings that worked, and after rebooting, everything still matches. I don't know if values that we can't see are changing or something.. but it feels that way.


----------



## shamino1978

flyleaf_ said:


> After more testing on my part I can 100% confirm this behavior on my Apex. Even with some manual tweaks to timings and voltage it can run >10000% Karhu Mem Test and after the next reboot it is unstable even in tasks outside of memory stress testing, also throws errors within a few % of Karhu.


i can replicate this on some ES 6400 C36 samsungs, it displays the following behavior:

when system/dram is cool, i save exit to 6400 (mrc fast boot enabled so only trains at this time)
then everything is ok boot os fine start memtest fine.
as memtest heats up the memory after some time, 1 of 2 things may happen when i click stop. 1) it will bsod as it transitions to no load . 2) no it wont. at which i will very quickly press reset to replicate the reboot issue.

for case1: if i set switching freq to 1.5MHz, the bsod when click stop doesnt seem to happen.

at this time as the system reboots without retraining with the dram hot, it will throw a bsod when entering the os.
IF i replace reset with RETRY button, the bsod doesnt seem to happen.

2) Reboot hot and retrain (by selecting mrc fast boot disabled)
in this situation, the training may pass and the dram gets unstable at postcode 31/4f, and even if not, the training result wont be good and will throw errors.

it almost looks as if low load + hot temp is unstable on this set.


----------



## TomCom205

shamino1978 said:


> i can replicate this on some ES 6400 C36 samsungs, it displays the following behavior:
> 
> when system/dram is cool, i save exit to 6400 (mrc fast boot enabled so only trains at this time)
> then everything is ok boot os fine start memtest fine.
> as memtest heats up the memory after some time, 1 of 2 things may happen when i click stop. 1) it will bsod as it transitions to no load . 2) no it wont. at which i will very quickly press reset to replicate the reboot issue.
> 
> for case1: if i set switching freq to 1.5MHz, the bsod when click stop doesnt seem to happen.
> 
> at this time as the system reboots without retraining with the dram hot, it will throw a bsod when entering the os.
> IF i replace reset with RETRY button, the bsod doesnt seem to happen.
> 
> 2) Reboot hot and retrain (by selecting mrc fast boot disabled)
> in this situation, the training may pass and the dram gets unstable at postcode 31/4f, and even if not, the training result wont be good and will throw errors.
> 
> it almost looks as if low load + hot temp is unstable on this set.


Well right now for the Samsung G.Skill 6000CL36 at the ASUS Z690 Extreme it look a little bit different.
It seems like the Training doesn't work if it's all cold...

Like you start the testsession all over the day and finish ...next day you restart you computer with settings that you think they might work but ... surprise ;-) they don't work at all.

i had disabled mrc fast boot and also enable MCH fullcheck didn't help i can't use the settings that have been workling, maybe because the memory was warmed up.

Not sure if the Fix for the Sammy Sticks is allready in the 0002 or is there coming a nother Bios for it?

thankx in advanced


----------



## asdkj1740

flyleaf_ said:


> After more testing on my part I can 100% confirm this behavior on my Apex. Even with some manual tweaks to timings and voltage it can run >10000% Karhu Mem Test and after the next reboot it is unstable even in tasks outside of memory stress testing, also throws errors within a few % of Karhu.


got a pack of 6000u3636e yesterday. cant even finish running aida64 benchmark at xmp6000.
tm5 instant bsod/reboot
i was blaming gigabyte mobo(bios) sucks.


----------



## skullbringer

so when will the issues with forced avx throttling be finally fixed? it's been a month since launch...

on 0806 bios it only happens with avx512 enabled, but on 0010 it also happens with avx512 disabled (avx2 enabled)

surely this can't be intended behavior, can it?


----------



## kendorf

fpompert said:


> Tried the official 0807 BIOS for the TUF Z690 Plus D4, but like *every *BIOS since 0601 this does not boot Windows 11 properly with XMP-II and my 4x8GB 3200 Gskill modules. I read people disabling XMP and enter everything manually, could this fix things perhaps? I am happy to stay at 0601, but already I see microcode updates. At some point I would like an upgrade that works


If I enable xmp, both 0707 and 0807 do not work properly. My memories are corsair vengeance led 3200 mhz.


----------



## asdkj1740

shamino1978 said:


> i can replicate this on some ES 6400 C36 samsungs, it displays the following behavior:
> 
> when system/dram is cool, i save exit to 6400 (mrc fast boot enabled so only trains at this time)
> then everything is ok boot os fine start memtest fine.
> as memtest heats up the memory after some time, 1 of 2 things may happen when i click stop. 1) it will bsod as it transitions to no load . 2) no it wont. at which i will very quickly press reset to replicate the reboot issue.
> 
> for case1: if i set switching freq to 1.5MHz, the bsod when click stop doesnt seem to happen.
> 
> at this time as the system reboots without retraining with the dram hot, it will throw a bsod when entering the os.
> IF i replace reset with RETRY button, the bsod doesnt seem to happen.
> 
> 2) Reboot hot and retrain (by selecting mrc fast boot disabled)
> in this situation, the training may pass and the dram gets unstable at postcode 31/4f, and even if not, the training result wont be good and will throw errors.
> 
> it almost looks as if low load + hot temp is unstable on this set.


should we worry about pmic's temp? where exactly is "spd hub temp" reported on hwinfo measuring?


----------



## 愁流ac

Can`t see much efficiency increasing between these setup,maybe it`s the best I can reach,with only a tower radiator.= =


----------



## shamino1978

skullbringer said:


> so when will the issues with forced avx throttling be finally fixed? it's been a month since launch...
> 
> on 0806 bios it only happens with avx512 enabled, but on 0010 it also happens with avx512 disabled (avx2 enabled)
> 
> surely this can't be intended behavior, can it?


avx frequency behavior is out of control on adl, much more on "unofficial 512".
we have already done the best we can to patch avx256 when you run a manual frequency. 
the "intended behavior" is worse that what you are seeing, you can verify on other boards.


----------



## skullbringer

shamino1978 said:


> avx frequency behavior is out of control on adl, much more on "unofficial 512".
> we have already done the best we can to patch avx256 when you run a manual frequency.
> the "intended behavior" is worse that what you are seeing, you can verify on other boards.


meaning root cause is intel ucode problem?


----------



## Falkentyne

skullbringer said:


> meaning root cause is intel ucode problem?


 Without Shamino's workarounds, 256 bit AVX code was capped at 5.1 ghz via pcode. This is Intel's doing.


----------



## adna

i try to see 6k with micron
plus voltage and relax timings is way to see it.

[email protected]
12900kf+SZ690F
sa | mc | vdd | vddq = 1.1 | 1.25 | 1.5 | 1.5


----------



## mattxx88

skullbringer said:


> so when will the issues with forced avx throttling be finally fixed? it's been a month since launch...
> 
> on 0806 bios it only happens with avx512 enabled, but on 0010 it also happens with avx512 disabled (avx2 enabled)
> 
> surely this can't be intended behavior, can it?
> 
> View attachment 2536920


this happends with CB20/23 also? 
cause im getting crazy about this since weeks, cannot run a CB over 5.2ghz, always downclock


----------



## joshpdemesa

neurokirurgi said:


> I'm getting WHEA 17 errors (dozens per second) on my 12900K+Z690 Hero combo, and the computer will randomly freeze during heavy CPU load (prime95, tm5, cinebench, even memtest86 in bios!). Freeze as in that the system locks up and doesn't respond to any inputs, forcing me to power it off.
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> A corrected hardware error has occurred.
> 
> Component: PCI Express Root Port
> Error Source: Advanced Error Reporting (PCI Express)
> 
> Primary Bus:Device:Function: 0x0:0x1:0x0
> Secondary Bus:Device:Function: 0x0:0x0:0x0
> Primary Device Name:PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_460D&SUBSYS_86941043&REV_02
> Secondary Device Name:
> 
> This corresponds with *Intel(R) PEG10 - 460D* in Device Manager, which I can only assume stands for the PCI-E slot.
> 
> This does not happen when the GPU (RTX 3080 TUF OC) is removed and I'm using the iGPU instead, nor does it happen when the GPU is seated in the lower PCI-E slot. In other words, the system is rock solid when the top PCI-E slot is unpopulated.
> 
> This happens on both 0702 and 0803 BETA bios when using default BIOS settings.
> 
> Is this a simple case of RMA, or could there be some strange compatibility issue at play here which might get fixed through future firmware updates?
> 
> full specs:
> 12900K, ALF II 360mm
> Z690 Maximus Hero
> Kingston Fury Beast 4800 CL38 (KF548C38-16)
> RTX 3080 TUF OC, separate PCI-E power cable for each 8-pin
> Crucial p5 1tb + Samsung 960 Evo 500GB + 2x1TB WD Blue sata ssd + 3tb toshiba HDD
> Seasonic Focus PX-750


Also had this issue. What was your fix/workaround?


----------



## Crow77

Just flashed bios 0807 on my strix d4, it's garbage, can't run XMP 3200 14c gear 1 without it bricking itself on a reboot from windows. Back on 0707 at 3800 gear 1. Asus really need to sort their bios game out.


----------



## Falkentyne

adna said:


> i try to see 6k with micron
> plus voltage and relax timings is way to see it.
> 
> [email protected]
> 12900kf+SZ690F
> sa | mc | vdd | vddq = 1.1 | 1.25 | 1.5 | 1.5
> View attachment 2536929


Can this pass TM5 stable?
Also please try this.



https://mersenne.org/ftp_root/gimps/p95v307b9.win64.zip


Large FFT memory stress test: AVX/AVX2/AVX512 Disabled, ADL compatible version, should be able to pass 30min without hard lock/random threads crashing.


----------



## cstkl1

skullbringer said:


> so when will the issues with forced avx throttling be finally fixed? it's been a month since launch...
> 
> on 0806 bios it only happens with avx512 enabled, but on 0010 it also happens with avx512 disabled (avx2 enabled)
> 
> surely this can't be intended behavior, can it?
> 
> View attachment 2536920


i can make some deduction on this
this is by intel btw

rkl had issues when avx disable.. the cpu seems to have like "fast path" prime goes bonkers fast and high TS cpu score
in bios 11xx mc 40 or 4c this was fixed

now i am wondering how they fixed it and whether that "fix" was transferred over.

its a intel microcode problem.

just guessing here.


----------



## Falkentyne

mattxx88 said:


> this happends with CB20/23 also?
> cause im getting crazy about this since weeks, cannot run a CB over 5.2ghz, always downclock


Are you using per core overclock/specific core adaptive voltage?
if so, increase VR Voltage Limit to 1720mv
R23 downclocking has nothing to do with the AVX 512 issue.


----------



## Falkentyne

cstkl1 said:


> i can make some deduction on this
> this is by intel btw
> 
> rkl had issues when avx disable.. the cpu seems to have like "fast path" prime goes bonkers fast and high TS cpu score
> in bios 11xx mc 40 or 4c this was fixed
> 
> now i am wondering how they fixed it and whether that "fix" was transferred over.
> 
> its a intel microcode problem.
> 
> just guessing here.


I remember that problem.
If you disabled AVX2 and AVX1 (both of them right?) in the BIOS, prime95 would calculate the FFT's too fast.
But if you disabled them in the prime95 stress test options, it calculated them the normal speed.

But I forgot if the same problem happened if you set in the local.txt file for prime95: "CPUSupportsFMA3=0", "CPUSupportsAVX512F=0" and "CPUSupportsAVX=0" with the avx options enabled in the BIOS, rather than disabling it in the stress test options (and not the local.txt file). I can't remember anymore.


----------



## cstkl1

shamino1978 said:


> avx frequency behavior is out of control on adl, much more on "unofficial 512".
> we have already done the best we can to patch avx256 when you run a manual frequency.
> the "intended behavior" is worse that what you are seeing, you can verify on other boards.


@Falkentyne


Falkentyne said:


> I remember that problem.
> If you disabled AVX2 and AVX1 (both of them right?) in the BIOS, prime95 would calculate the FFT's too fast.
> But if you disabled them in the prime95 stress test options, it calculated them the normal speed.
> 
> But I forgot if the same problem happened if you set in the local.txt file for prime95: "CPUSupportsFMA3=0", "CPUSupportsAVX512F=0" and "CPUSupportsAVX=0" with the avx options enabled in the BIOS, rather than disabling it in the stress test options (and not the local.txt file). I can't remember anymore.


maybe now that "heated exchange" in intel
we are seeing the problems.

all i know is ram training i dont mess with stability of vf 1-#5 with low ac and i train ram wifh p+e.


----------



## raad11

Does anyone know how gimped the BIOS is on the Asus Prime Z690M-Plus D4? Can you adjust v/f curve and overclock it like a Maximus/Strix?


----------



## mattxx88

Falkentyne said:


> Are you using *per core overclock/specific core adaptive voltage*?
> if so, increase VR Voltage Limit to 1720mv
> R23 downclocking has nothing to do with the AVX 512 issue.


This

i thought it was related to avx2 too, ill try as you said


----------



## theo_yells

APEX Bio ver 0010, Gskill 6000c40 samsung no luck, ordered gskill 6000c36 samsung and it came today. Same problems from 6000c40, can't use xmp or asus mem profiles stable/errorfree. Some manual settings with auto still unstable. Convinced either my board doesn't like samsung sticks or it's defective. Where the hynix at? uwu.


----------



## Agent-A01

There a way to disable spread spectrum on the tuf? Or possible to enable functionality to disable it in a newer bios


----------



## shamino1978

asdkj1740 said:


> should we worry about pmic's temp? where exactly is "spd hub temp" reported on hwinfo measuring?


Exactly what it says, the spd hub, it contains the eeprom and is the bridge between the mb and the pmic. The temp of the pmic is not the most important since it can run 100+c but it heating up the dram ic is the concern for stability. There is no precise readback for the pmic temp only if it is below a few range such as 85c.


----------



## adna

Falkentyne said:


> Can this pass TM5 stable?
> Also please try this.
> 
> 
> 
> https://mersenne.org/ftp_root/gimps/p95v307b9.win64.zip
> 
> 
> Large FFT memory stress test: AVX/AVX2/AVX512 Disabled, ADL compatible version, should be able to pass 30min without hard lock/random threads crashing.


Now.I can not pass tm5. I have some problem with vdd/vddq over 1.5v.may be try later.


----------



## Falkentyne

adna said:


> Now.I can not pass tm5. I have some problem with vdd/vddq over 1.5v.may be try later.


Thank you for your feedback!

What is the highest you can pass TM5 stable? the 5800 mhz one?

you had two of them.

"When I plus vdd/vddq to 1.4/1.4(just a quick setting for boot test)
5800-36-40-40-46 (press down trcd/trp = 40)" <--is this stable?

or the 5800 36/41/41/46 ?

(@5800MHz.36-41-41-46, CR2, 6/4/383/65535/twr=27, trtp=12, tfaw=16, tcke=6, twcl=34
sa | mc | vdd | vddq = 0.9 | 1.1 | 1.35 | 1.35)


----------



## adna

Falkentyne said:


> Thank you for your feedback!
> 
> What is the highest you can pass TM5 stable? the 5800 mhz one?
> 
> you had two of them.
> 
> "When I plus vdd/vddq to 1.4/1.4(just a quick setting for boot test)
> 5800-36-40-40-46 (press down trcd/trp = 40)" <--is this stable?
> 
> or the 5800 36/41/41/46 ?
> (
> @5800MHz.36-41-41-46, CR2, 6/4/383/65535/twr=27, trtp=12, tfaw=16, tcke=6, twcl=34
> sa | mc | vdd | vddq = 0.9 | 1.1 | 1.35 | 1.35)


Yes.5800MHz. pass TM5 and Karhu @BIOS 0803 with both 
36-41-41-46-1.35v. and 36-40-40-46-1.40v. but 0803 can't use high voltage mode

when bios 0010 is come. i try it. and first touch I post at #1,136
same setting I can't pass tm5. but, 0010 can use high voltage mode
then I back to 0803. it look good again.

I think. if I want to see 6000MHz.with micron chip. it need high voltage mode
and I try 0010 again. 6000MHz. can boot. But can't pass tm5

next step. I,ll try test bios 0010 @5800/5866 another setting with TM5 and karhu. 
got the result. I'll let you know and post it here.


----------



## neurokirurgi

shamino1978 said:


> i can replicate this on some ES 6400 C36 samsungs, it displays the following behavior:
> 
> when system/dram is cool, i save exit to 6400 (mrc fast boot enabled so only trains at this time)
> then everything is ok boot os fine start memtest fine.
> as memtest heats up the memory after some time, 1 of 2 things may happen when i click stop. 1) it will bsod as it transitions to no load . 2) no it wont. at which i will very quickly press reset to replicate the reboot issue.
> 
> for case1: if i set switching freq to 1.5MHz, the bsod when click stop doesnt seem to happen.
> 
> at this time as the system reboots without retraining with the dram hot, it will throw a bsod when entering the os.
> IF i replace reset with RETRY button, the bsod doesnt seem to happen.
> 
> 2) Reboot hot and retrain (by selecting mrc fast boot disabled)
> in this situation, the training may pass and the dram gets unstable at postcode 31/4f, and even if not, the training result wont be good and will throw errors.
> 
> it almost looks as if low load + hot temp is unstable on this set.


I think I've been seeing the same behavior my OEM Micron sticks after setting them to run at 5600. Karhu is stable, TM5 is stable, ezpz. But whenever the sticks got hot (I have a RAM fan on them so that SPD hub temps shouldn't exceed 45c, but still), there's a fairly good chance of a low load BSOD (driver irql, page fault, so definitely memory related). This happened lots of times when I used a desktop shortcut to reboot to BIOS right after a longer gaming session.

I set my switching frequency to 1MHz and gave it a bit more voltage (bumped both VDD and VDDQ by 0.02 so that they are now 1.35/1.40) and I haven't seen any since. Do you happen to know what the switching frequency is typically set at by the PMIC vendors? My Micron sticks have Renesas PMICs.


----------



## shamino1978

750khz most times, you can check with octool


----------



## grifers

eeroo94 said:


> Is it boosting to 5Ghz with 0003 bios?


Hi, I think so, 810 points in gpu-z single core is 5 ghz score, right? Screenshot of hwinfo passing cinebench single core, look at it:



Stock 12700k


----------



## asdkj1740

shamino1978 said:


> Exactly what it says, the spd hub, it contains the eeprom and is the bridge between the mb and the pmic. The temp of the pmic is not the most important since it can run 100+c but it heating up the dram ic is the concern for stability. There is no precise readback for the pmic temp only if it is below a few range such as 85c.


thank you for the info.
i have seen some d5 kit having thermal pads for pmic & spd hub area and some does not. should we simply put a fan on top of the ram sticks?


----------



## MikeS3000

If anyone else has noticed noisy pops and clicks with the onboard audio on their Z690-A Gaming Wifi board, then download this: ALC4080/ALC4082 audio FW update tool release. Asus put out a fix a few days ago. You must run as administrator or it will not find your audio device. This has settled down the line out to my speakers wonderfully.


----------



## shamino1978

asdkj1740 said:


> thank you for the info.
> i have seen some d5 kit having thermal pads for pmic & spd hub area and some does not. should we simply put a fan on top of the ram sticks?


Actice cooling never hurts right? Even on ddr4 it makes a diff


----------



## flyleaf_

Update from my testing with G.Skill 6000 CL36 and the Apex MoBo.

It seems like I found stable settings (BIOS 0010). I loaded XMP2, changed Memory Controller Voltage from 1.1 to 1.225 and Memory Switching Frequency to 1.5 MHz. Even after >10 Reboots in different temperature conditions (from like >60°C Memory to "cold boot") it seems to work flawlessly. I'm not sure if it's just about the Switching Frequency or something else.


----------



## asdkj1740

shamino1978 said:


> Actice cooling never hurts right? Even on ddr4 it makes a diff


i think so, but it seems difficult to cool down the pmic area if the stick has no thermal pads contacting there.
and trizdentz5 seems to have no pmic cooling...


----------



## Silent Scone

neurokirurgi said:


> I think I've been seeing the same behavior my OEM Micron sticks after setting them to run at 5600. Karhu is stable, TM5 is stable, ezpz. But whenever the sticks got hot (I have a RAM fan on them so that SPD hub temps shouldn't exceed 45c, but still), there's a fairly good chance of a low load BSOD (driver irql, page fault, so definitely memory related). This happened lots of times when I used a desktop shortcut to reboot to BIOS right after a longer gaming session.
> 
> I set my switching frequency to 1MHz and gave it a bit more voltage (bumped both VDD and VDDQ by 0.02 so that they are now 1.35/1.40) and I haven't seen any since. Do you happen to know what the switching frequency is typically set at by the PMIC vendors? My Micron sticks have Renesas PMICs.


Hello,

I've seen similar with Micron when the IC is pushed near its limit. I found bumping VDDQTX actually helped with stability when the modules get warmer, or after a retrain.

Also found that 4F can often be drowned out with more SA, however, mileage may vary


----------



## Falkentyne

neurokirurgi said:


> I think I've been seeing the same behavior my OEM Micron sticks after setting them to run at 5600. Karhu is stable, TM5 is stable, ezpz. But whenever the sticks got hot (I have a RAM fan on them so that SPD hub temps shouldn't exceed 45c, but still), there's a fairly good chance of a low load BSOD (driver irql, page fault, so definitely memory related). This happened lots of times when I used a desktop shortcut to reboot to BIOS right after a longer gaming session.
> 
> I set my switching frequency to 1MHz and gave it a bit more voltage (bumped both VDD and VDDQ by 0.02 so that they are now 1.35/1.40) and I haven't seen any since. Do you happen to know what the switching frequency is typically set at by the PMIC vendors? My Micron sticks have Renesas PMICs.


Which memory switching frequency? There are three of them in the memory options. (I believe I'm using your 5600 micron settiings).

I set them all to 1 mhz and stability dropped to the bucket. Fortnite crashed instantly and Pime95 30.7 b9 large FFT threads all instant crashed. Had to set them back to auto.


----------



## Agent-A01

@Falkentyne 

Did you ever test out minecraft 1.18vmin for 5.2/5.3?

I just tried out two new 12900Ks. Both were better than the 12700K by a significant amount.

For 5.2 the best 12900K of the two only requires 1.17~vmin for minecraft stability. The other 12900K requires 1.23v.
The 12700K required a vmin of around 1.36 just for 5.1 ! 5.2 would be >1.4v

I feel like this better 12900K is a pretty decent sample versus average but with a TUF board I don't know my SP rating.
If you get a chance to test minecraft out at 5.2/5.3 I'd like to use it as a comparision for a general SP guesstimate.


----------



## Silent Scone

Hello,

Apex with Micron Kingston Fury 4800C38. No active airflow, hardline build so not benchtable. Modules tapping out at around 63c. 

Fairly quick and dirty but have been using for the last week. All sub-timings board-controlled.

Per C 54/53/52
Adaptive 1.37v
Cache 40
E Core 41 Sync

IMCVVD 1.25
SA 1.2
VDD 1.35
VDDQ 1.4
TX VDDQ 1.4
Tweak Mode 1
5400 CAS 36-39-36-52 2T.


----------



## TomCom205

flyleaf_ said:


> Update from my testing with G.Skill 6000 CL36 and the Apex MoBo.
> 
> It seems like I found stable settings (BIOS 0010). I loaded XMP2, changed Memory Controller Voltage from 1.1 to 1.225 and Memory Switching Frequency to 1.5 MHz. Even after >10 Reboots in different temperature conditions (from like >60°C Memory to "cold boot") it seems to work flawlessly. I'm not sure if it's just about the Switching Frequency or something else.


@shamino1978 
Is there somewhere an 0010 Bios for the Asus Z690 Extreme with that fix above?


----------



## Tigra456

shamino1978 said:


> ROG-STRIX-Z690-F-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0010.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


sorry bad response.It is not possible to load XMP1 on the Gskill 6000 CL36 and pass Prime95 RAM Benchmark.
Also With VDD Und VDDQ on 1.35 v…

But im able to pass Prime95 with slowing the Sticks down to 5600 CL36 and VDD / VDDQ 1.25 -rest on auto….

Im not a RAM-Pro but it’s not possible to load XMP1 with the 0010 and know it’s rockstable…
Maybe this bios part needs some love again ?

Thank you and Greetings


----------



## wesley8

shamino1978 said:


> ROG-STRIX-Z690-F-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0010.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


Any love for formula？


----------



## GtiJason

Could we possibly see this , or is the translation wrong. ROG podcast in Germany with Roman is what he's talking about.
This board would be very popular, especially if the price could be between 5 and $600 USD.
Either way sign me up for one asap since I now have a strong IMC 12900k and many great kits of DDR4


----------



## Falkentyne

neurokirurgi said:


> I think I've been seeing the same behavior my OEM Micron sticks after setting them to run at 5600. Karhu is stable, TM5 is stable, ezpz. But whenever the sticks got hot (I have a RAM fan on them so that SPD hub temps shouldn't exceed 45c, but still), there's a fairly good chance of a low load BSOD (driver irql, page fault, so definitely memory related). This happened lots of times when I used a desktop shortcut to reboot to BIOS right after a longer gaming session.
> 
> I set my switching frequency to 1MHz and gave it a bit more voltage (bumped both VDD and VDDQ by 0.02 so that they are now 1.35/1.40) and I haven't seen any since. Do you happen to know what the switching frequency is typically set at by the PMIC vendors? My Micron sticks have Renesas PMICs.


Hi, you didn't see my question?


----------



## Agent-A01

GtiJason said:


> Could we possibly see this , or is the translation wrong. ROG podcast in Germany with Roman is what he's talking about.
> This board would be very popular, especially if the price could be between 5 and $600 USD.
> Either way sign me up for one asap since I now have a strong IMC 12900k and many great kits of DDR4
> View attachment 2537230


I don't think so. I think Intel has told AiBs to not make enthusiast DDR4 boards..

None exist. They are all ~$300 or less. Also, a DDR4/DDR5 board could exist but none do.. Wonder why.


----------



## cstkl1

since ppl are posting Pcore oc geekbench 3

i9-12900k -SP93 - P53|50
Asus Maximus Apex - Bios 0806
2x16gb 6666 c28-37-37-28 1T @1.65
Geekbench Mem - 14087


----------



## shamino1978

pmic loadline seems to be about 10Mohms









at 1.1v and 4800 the peak to peak is much smaller


----------



## geriatricpollywog

Agent-A01 said:


> I don't think so. I think Intel has told AiBs to not make enthusiast DDR4 boards..
> 
> None exist. They are all ~$300 or less. Also, a DDR4/DDR5 board could exist but none do.. Wonder why.


I’m just glad the Strix D4 exists, it doesn’t cost $700, it slays at core and memory overclocking, and Shamino is releasing bioses for it regularly.


----------



## Vidas

What is roughly the best mem oc that you can expect with gear 1 command rate 1 on Strix-A d4? in presumably 0707 bios. seems a lot of people are running command rate 2 but that destroys performance for me in muh game. have a 3200cl14 1.35v 2x16gb DR bdie kit, havent been successful past 3333 14-14-14-34 c1 g1 with cranked voltages, 12700k(sp 88) tho gonna order a 129k next week, but Ive only put like 45 minutes into the strix-a so far. 
also wheres the setting to pick my own boot logo? like set it to be a bitmap file from a fat32 drive, a custom one? I just see seven and default. se7en is beautiful and all but I've been using the same boot logo for 13 years and shes not that beautiful.
thanks for all the info in this thread, just read through a good 20 pages worth.
p.s. no post code screen on a $350 motherboard for a damn consumer platform, not even hedt socket, is criminal.


----------



## Agent-A01

Vidas said:


> What is roughly the best mem oc that you can expect with gear 1 command rate 1 on Strix-A d4? in presumably 0707 bios. seems a lot of people are running command rate 2 but that destroys performance for me in muh game. have a 3200cl14 1.35v 2x16gb DR bdie kit, havent been successful past 3333 14-14-14-34 c1 g1 with cranked voltages, 12700k(sp 88) tho gonna order a 129k next


What game and do you have before after 1T vs 2T FPS numbers?

I highly doubt your 3333 1T is even close to 3800+ 2T

As for 1T. Max is around 3733/3800. I haven't seen more than that.


----------



## sugi0lover

wrong post, sorry for it.
delete plz~


----------



## bscool

@sugi0lover That is SR. @Vidas asked about DR b die.


----------



## sugi0lover

bscool said:


> @sugi0lover That is SR. @Vidas asked about DR b die.


Oops. I will delete the post~


----------



## Silent Scone

Hello,

More Micron daily testing with mediocre KF548C38BB-16

Dialing in 5200C34 with conservative CPU voltages.

Per C 54/53/52
Adaptive 1.37v
Cache 40
E Core 41 Sync

IMCVVD 1.1
SA 1.04 [Auto]
VDD 1.30
VDDQ 1.35
TX VDDQ 1.35

5200 CAS 34-39-35-52 2T.


----------



## neurokirurgi

Falkentyne said:


> Which memory switching frequency? There are three of them in the memory options. (I believe I'm using your 5600 micron settiings).
> 
> I set them all to 1 mhz and stability dropped to the bucket. Fortnite crashed instantly and Pime95 30.7 b9 large FFT threads all instant crashed. Had to set them back to auto.


Sorry for the late reply, yesterday was F1 day .

I just set VDD and VDDQ switching frequency. Didn't touch VDDP, it's still on auto.

I checked what OC tool reported auto switching frequency as, and it's 750KHz. OC tool reports 1000 after I changed it, so it's definitely working.



Silent Scone said:


> Hello,
> 
> I've seen similar with Micron when the IC is pushed near its limit. I found bumping VDDQTX actually helped with stability when the modules get warmer, or after a retrain.
> 
> Also found that 4F can often be drowned out with more SA, however, mileage may vary


I followed the rule VDDQTX = MAX(VDD, VDDQ), and so with VDD = 1.33 and VDDQ = 1.38, I've used VDDQTX = 1.38

I have kept my SA at around 1.1-1.15, haven't seen any benefits from running it higher. I guess I could check where my board wants to put on auto, but I doubt there's a large difference. I could give 1.25 a try and see what happens. This board seems to be really slow at training 5600. 5400 goes by fairly quickly but 5600 is dog slow.


----------



## asdkj1740

shamino1978 said:


> Exactly what it says, the spd hub, it contains the eeprom and is the bridge between the mb and the pmic. The temp of the pmic is not the most important since it can run 100+c but it heating up the dram ic is the concern for stability. There is no precise readback for the pmic temp only if it is below a few range such as 85c.


how accurate are hwinfo's vdd and vddq voltages monitoring?
i keep seeing one of my sticks' vdd bouncing between the voltage i set like 1.4v and 1.05v.
thank you.


----------



## shamino1978

asdkj1740 said:


> how accurate are hwinfo's vdd and vddq voltages monitoring?
> i keep seeing one of my sticks' vdd bouncing between the voltage i set like 1.4v and 1.05v.
> thank you.


thats quite impossible to be true, most likely it just reads the last ADC reading from say the 1.0 LDO voltage. because there is only one register to read from , software has to keep switching the channels to read vdd/vddq etc and the register needs time to update to the target channel so there may arise a synchronization issue now and then


----------



## asdkj1740

shamino1978 said:


> thats quite impossible to be true, most likely it just reads the last ADC reading from say the 1.0 LDO voltage. because there is only one register to read from , software has to keep switching the channels to read vdd/vddq etc and the register needs time to update to the target channel so there may arise a synchronization issue now and then


in bios the vdd monitoring is fine. 
it just happened when i set 1.4v vdd. when i set it 1.45v it would not bounce back 1.05v in hwinfo anymore.
thank you!


----------



## cstkl1

asdkj1740 said:


> in bios the vdd monitoring is fine.
> it just happened when i set 1.4v vdd. when i set it 1.45v it would not bounce back 1.05v in hwinfo anymore.
> thank you!


have u tried octool/pmic/telematry?


----------



## Sarzinski

GtiJason said:


> Could we possibly see this , or is the translation wrong. ROG podcast in Germany with Roman is what he's talking about.
> This board would be very popular, especially if the price could be between 5 and $600 USD.
> Either way sign me up for one asap since I now have a strong IMC 12900k and many great kits of DDR4
> View attachment 2537230


The translation is wrong. He is advertising the ROG podcast by saying that he asked them questions like if there will be an Apex DDR4.

I've skipped through the ROG podcast episode he's referring to and found the question. The Asus guy says he doesn't know anything about an extreme OC DDR4 board. Not in an evasive way, he straight up says that he hasn't heard anything about that and that as far as he knows the Strix D4 will be the highest end DDR4 board available. That's pretty much a 99% no.

https://open.spotify.com/show/4Q4QH43SLp8XJbP6GOOMnw 19:40


----------



## Jacinto1023

Ok guys im lost and confused here. 

Was running the 8002 bios on the Strix Gaming E board with 32GB Corsair Vengeance 5200 RAM. One stick is bad so I RMA'd it and im still waiting for it thanks to FedEx but thats another story.

So the one stick I had that works was in slot 2 going from left to right. I updated to the 0002 bios and now that stick won't boot no matter what and I had to move it to slot 3 for it to boot. XMP never worked but atleast before I was able to manually input timing and voltage and get 5200 to work on the one stick in bios 8002 in slot 2.

Now with bios 0002 I can't even manually set ram settings. Only default settings will boot the PC and like I said it now has to be in slot 3 or it won't work. 

Just for ****s and giggles I went back to bios 8002 that was fine before and now it won't even work how it used to. No manual settings. Slot 2, nothing. 

Literally the only thing that works now is slot 3 and default settings for RAM.

I can't do nothing till the new set of RAM comes in. Anyone have any ideas? Should I go get a new board tomorrow and see if its the mobo? They have them in stock near me.


----------



## Falkentyne

Jacinto1023 said:


> Ok guys im lost and confused here.
> 
> Was running the 8002 bios on the Strix Gaming E board with 32GB Corsair Vengeance 5200 RAM. One stick is bad so I RMA'd it and im still waiting for it thanks to FedEx but thats another story.
> 
> So the one stick I had that works was in slot 2 going from left to right. I updated to the 0002 bios and now that stick won't boot no matter what and I had to move it to slot 3 for it to boot. XMP never worked but atleast before I was able to manually input timing and voltage and get 5200 to work on the one stick in bios 8002 in slot 2.
> 
> Now with bios 0002 I can't even manually set ram settings. Only default settings will boot the PC and like I said it now has to be in slot 3 or it won't work.
> 
> Just for ****s and giggles I went back to bios 8002 that was fine before and now it won't even work how it used to. No manual settings. Slot 2, nothing.
> 
> Literally the only thing that works now is slot 3 and default settings for RAM.
> 
> I can't do nothing till the new set of RAM comes in. Anyone have any ideas? Should I go get a new board tomorrow and see if its the mobo? They have them in stock near me.


Unplug power completely from the wall, then press clear CMOS for 30 seconds (if there is only CLR RTC or CLR CMOS pin block on the motherboard instead of a physical button, use a spare LN2 jumper block cap (if you have one), or use a screwdriver and short the pins for 30 seconds).


----------



## shamino1978

samsung ddr5 users pls help me check how these go for you thx:








ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0015.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0015.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-ASUS-0015.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-STRIX-Z690-F-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0015.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com





PS: ignore the sp and predictions on this version there is a bug for that, mostly for dram tests


----------



## Jacinto1023

Falkentyne said:


> Unplug power completely from the wall, then press clear CMOS for 30 seconds (if there is only CLR RTC or CLR CMOS pin block on the motherboard instead of a physical button, use a spare LN2 jumper block cap (if you have one), or use a screwdriver and short the pins for 30 seconds).



Tried it and it was just able to get me to boot into windows with one ram stick in slot 3. I can't use any other slots or use xmp or any manual ram settings.

I'm at the point im about to return this board and RAM(if it ever arrives) and just go DDR4. Because I have no idea what's going on, if its the board or ram and its frustrating!


----------



## Falkentyne

Jacinto1023 said:


> Tried it and it was just able to get me to boot into windows with one ram stick in slot 3. I can't use any other slots or use xmp or any manual ram settings.
> 
> I'm at the point im about to return this board and RAM(if it ever arrives) and just go DDR4. Because I have no idea what's going on, if its the board or ram and its frustrating!


Either a plain bad board, damaged RAM slots (this isn't likely) or bent CPU pins is my guess.


----------



## Silent Scone

Jacinto1023 said:


> Tried it and it was just able to get me to boot into windows with one ram stick in slot 3. I can't use any other slots or use xmp or any manual ram settings.
> 
> I'm at the point im about to return this board and RAM(if it ever arrives) and just go DDR4. Because I have no idea what's going on, if its the board or ram and its frustrating!


Hello,

What about with no XMP or no overclocking? I've noticed some users have over torqued the new 1700 Quantum blocks from EKWB. Check that the cooler and motherboard stand off screws are not overtightened, also check for bent pins and that the CPU is seated correctly as Falkentyne suggests.


----------



## matique

shamino1978 said:


> samsung ddr5 users pls help me check how these go for you thx:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0015.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0015.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-ASUS-0015.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-F-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0015.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


Could I get one for z690i? I've 5600c36 and 6000c36 sticks to test.


----------



## blautemple

shamino1978 said:


> samsung ddr5 users pls help me check how these go for you thx:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0015.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0015.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-ASUS-0015.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-F-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0015.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


Awesome, after work I will give it a try.

I'm using a Z690 Hero with 5600 C36 Trident Z5...


----------



## shamino1978

matique said:


> Could I get one for z690i? I've 5600c36 and 6000c36 sticks to test.


need to collect some feedback from others first.


----------



## matique

shamino1978 said:


> need to collect some feedback from others first.


No worries man, thanks for all the hard work in the background. For what it's worth, I've had both sticks stable with 0803 and 0010. However, I do face a certain issue.

1) Ram fully stable, tm5 extreme test + karhu. Went to game, fully stable.
2) Went to game, turned off pc.
3) Turned pc back on a few minutes later, and started seeing instability. Tested TM5, lots of errors at previous stable setting. Rebooting and retraining did not help.
4) Loaded optimised defaults and xmp 1, booted, checked stability, all okay.
5) Manually input timings primaries / secondaries / tertiaries, testing stability in between (1 cycle tm5 extreme each time. Once tertiaries stable, tested full 3 cycles. All stable again, including during gaming.

This only happened once, with 0010 bios w/ 6000c36 sticks pushed to 6200c32. I've since rebooted and gamed a few times without issue.

5600c36 pushed to 6000c32 cr1
6000c36 pushed to 6200c32 cr1
SA 1.24 | MC 1.3 | vddq 1.42 | txvddq 1.42


----------



## Falkentyne

matique said:


> No worries man, thanks for all the hard work in the background. For what it's worth, I've had both sticks stable with 0803 and 0010. However, I do face a certain issue.
> 
> 1) Ram fully stable, tm5 extreme test + karhu. Went to game, fully stable.
> 2) Went to game, turned off pc.
> 3) Turned pc back on a few minutes later, and started seeing instability. Tested TM5, lots of errors at previous stable setting. Rebooting and retraining did not help.
> 4) Loaded optimised defaults and xmp 1, booted, checked stability, all okay.
> 5) Manually input timings primaries / secondaries / tertiaries, testing stability in between (1 cycle tm5 extreme each time. Once tertiaries stable, tested full 3 cycles. All stable again, including during gaming.
> 
> This only happened once, with 0010 bios w/ 6000c36 sticks pushed to 6200c32. I've since rebooted and gamed a few times without issue.
> 
> 5600c36 pushed to 6000c32 cr1
> 6000c36 pushed to 6200c32 cr1
> SA 1.24 | MC 1.3 | vddq 1.42 | txvddq 1.42


Someone said changing the memory switching frequency helped (either when RAM was warm or RAM was cold, I forgot).
Try changing VDDQ switch and VDD Switch to between 1 mhz to 1.5 mhz (1 to 1.5). Do NOT touch VPP switching frequency (or maybe do it if it works idk). Blue screens will like you if you change VPP switching frequency


----------



## sippo

shamino1978 said:


> samsung ddr5 users pls help me check how these go for you thx:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0015.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0015.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-ASUS-0015.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-F-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0015.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PS: ignore the sp and predictions on this version there is a bug for that, mostly for dram tests


Hey, 
Is there a chance for formula version?


----------



## lowmotion

As he told the four mb above are for alpha testing samsung and after the results you get one for your board.

Waiting for z690i too.


----------



## bushkila

shamino1978 said:


> samsung ddr5 users pls help me check how these go for you thx:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0015.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0015.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-ASUS-0015.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-F-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0015.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PS: ignore the sp and predictions on this version there is a bug for that, mostly for dram tests


Big Thanks for your Work!
But I'am Missing 0010 for the Formula!
So i can't Test my 6000 CL36 G.Skills...


----------



## xl_digit

@shamino1978 : here some feedback from my side.

APEX with 0015 BIOS - 6000 CL32-35-35-52 1T
11000% Karhu, 20 runs TM5, 1h GSAT stable


----------



## Tigra456

shamino1978 said:


> samsung ddr5 users pls help me check how these go for you thx:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0015.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0015.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-ASUS-0015.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-F-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0015.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PS: ignore the sp and predictions on this version there is a bug for that, mostly for dram tests


Maybe for the Z690-F Wifi too ?


----------



## blautemple

Tigra456 said:


> Maybe for the Z690-F Wifi too ?


The 4th Bios is for the Z690-F Wifi


----------



## Tigra456

Ahh right…,

(danke dir)


----------



## shamino1978

xl_digit said:


> @shamino1978 : here some feedback from my side.
> 
> APEX with 0015 BIOS - 6000 CL32-35-35-52 1T
> 11000% Karhu, 20 runs TM5, 1h GSAT stable
> 
> View attachment 2537443


thank you


----------



## Tigra456

Z690-F...Bios 0015.... XMP 1.... Prime95, 307b9, LargeFFTs... Errors....


----------



## Garlicky

What is the best bios for the strix-a if I'm running 4x8 sr


----------



## Silent Scone

Tigra456 said:


> View attachment 2537447
> 
> 
> Z690-F...Bios 0015.... XMP 1.... Prime95, 307b9, LargeFFTs... Errors....


Hello,

If your objective is to isolate the memory bus don't use Prime.


----------



## Tigra456

What else I should use to test ?
I’m not a RAM pro 

with 10900k and 4000 cl16 sticks Prime was good enough for testing ?


----------



## cstkl1

Tigra456 said:


> View attachment 2537447
> 
> 
> Z690-F...Bios 0015.... XMP 1.... Prime95, 307b9, LargeFFTs... Errors....


do not use turbo/aisuite with hwinfo etc open

your error could be anything.


----------



## Tigra456

Then again only with HW ?


----------



## cstkl1

Tigra456 said:


> What else I should use to test ?
> I’m not a RAM pro
> 
> with 10900k and 4000 cl16 sticks Prime was good enough for testing ?


hci, karhu, tm5

if u want to use prime try fft112 all avx off to check third timings/ basic voltage coherence


----------



## Silent Scone

Tigra456 said:


> What else I should use to test ?
> I’m not a RAM pro
> 
> with 10900k and 4000 cl16 sticks Prime was good enough for testing ?


Either Ramtest or TM5. Personally always use Karhu Ramtest.


RAM Test - Karhu Software


----------



## cstkl1

Tigra456 said:


> Then again only with HW ?


just becareful cause u might kill your cpu. 

overall cpu side is like rkl u can test stability pretty quickly .


----------



## Tigra456

cstkl1 said:


> just becareful cause u might kill your cpu.
> 
> overall cpu side is like rkl u can test stability pretty quickly .


Kill my cpu ? How ?
Only want to report temps and voltages so I can give a feedback of stability …?


----------



## cstkl1

Tigra456 said:


> Kill my cpu ? How ?
> Only want to report temps and voltages so I can give a feedback of stability …?


i meant using tools to change vcore etc with other monitoring tools open


----------



## Tigra456

Ah okay. Only wanted to show voltages with AI Suite… then i not longer use it for showing voltages.

Update: TM5, bios 0015, XMP1 After 3,5 min bluescreen and a PC reboot….


----------



## Xenon2

2xApex, 2x12900k, 2x G.Skill 6000 CL36

Bios 0015, the XMP1 profile does not work, throws an error in Karu after a minute. I don't even need to think about OC ..


----------



## Jacinto1023

Silent Scone said:


> Hello,
> 
> What about with no XMP or no overclocking? I've noticed some users have over torqued the new 1700 Quantum blocks from EKWB. Check that the cooler and motherboard stand off screws are not overtightened, also check for bent pins and that the CPU is seated correctly as Falkentyne suggests.


Yes I've tried with no xmp or no overclocking. It might post 1 out of 30 times or else it just sits in a constant 55 loop. 

I have the EKWB 240 AIO. Uses thumb screws and then screws with springs I guess to prevent over tightening it. I can try backing it out and tighten it a bit less. Also check for bent pins.


----------



## Lurifaks

Garlicky said:


> What is the best bios for the strix-a if I'm running 4x8 sr


For me it`s 0808 beta bios provided by shamino78 for 4x8sr 
Can`t fin original post , but : 









[Official] Intel Z690 / Z790 DDR4 Daily Memory Overclock


There is a Shamino 0808 bios available for the Strix Z690-A Wifi D4! Link to post on Asus forum This solved all my G1 problems! Where I couldn't get G1 to run higher than 3733MT on 4x8 before, now I'm running 4000MT-15-15-15-30-CR2! Currently testing with TM5, timings are work in progress...




www.overclock.net


----------



## Xidder

Hi, does anybody has a clue about correct DC-LL values (matching LLC#1 to 4) for a z690 Strix Gaming-F?


----------



## flyleaf_

shamino1978 said:


> need to collect some feedback from others first.


Hi,

BIOS 0015 on Apex Z690 with G.Skill 6000 CL36 (Samsung) RAM:
XMP1 - Karhu Error after 375%
XMP2 - not tested yet, should I?


----------



## shamino1978

flyleaf_ said:


> Hi,
> 
> BIOS 0015 on Apex Z690 with G.Skill 6000 CL36 (Samsung) RAM:
> XMP1 - Karhu Error after 375%
> XMP2 - not tested yet, should I?


ok thx i will keep working on it


----------



## Muad_Dib69

shamino1978 said:


> ok thx i will keep working on it


Ni Hao Shamino,

For information with my formula and gskill 6000cas36 no booting with bios 803. Booting in xmp1 with bios 0002 but crashing all the time in windows. So i put back my kingtson 4800.

Just for my curiosty what are you tuning in the bios to make it stable?


----------



## Jacinto1023

Okay I reseated the cpu and aio. No bent pins or anything weird.

Will only post with RAM stick in slot 3 with default bios settings. XMP will put it into a code 55 loop.


----------



## safedisk

ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4

I tested 0808 bios
G.SKILL Samsung B-DIE 16G x2 Gear1 2T 4266 15-16-16-28

SA 1.4
DRAM VOLTAGE 1.55
VDDQ 1.5


----------



## LancerB1

safedisk said:


> ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4
> 
> I tested 0808 bios
> G.SKILL Samsung B-DIE 16G x2 Gear1 2T 4266 15-16-16-28
> 
> SA 1.4
> DRAM VOLTAGE 1.55
> VDDQ 1.5


Cool results. Can you share your CMO profile?


----------



## Jacinto1023

I'm baffled here.

Stick A won't boot in slot 1 and 2.
Stick A will only boot in slot 3 with default bios settings.
Stick A will boot with xmp in slot 4 but gave errors in HCI Memtest and eventually crashed.

What is going on here? Looks like I can only use slot 3 and 4 if I use default bios settings for RAM. Is this a mobo or ram issue?

I'm on bios 8001 Strix Gaming E board

Replacement RAM is on the way. Should I also get a replacement Mobo?


----------



## blautemple

shamino1978 said:


> ok thx i will keep working on it


Trident Z5 5600C36 on Z690 Hero

XMP1:Error After 11min in TestMem5 with 1usmus_v3 config

Thanks for your support.


----------



## bscool

Jacinto1023 said:


> I'm baffled here.
> 
> Stick A won't boot in slot 1 and 2.
> Stick A will only boot in slot 3 with default bios settings.
> Stick A will boot with xmp in slot 4 but gave errors in HCI Memtest and eventually crashed.
> 
> What is going on here? Looks like I can only use slot 3 and 4 if I use default bios settings for RAM. Is this a mobo or ram issue?
> 
> I'm on bios 8001 Strix Gaming E board
> 
> Replacement RAM is on the way. Should I also get a replacement Mobo?


Sorry if you have already been thru this or know this but you need to use slots a2 and b2 when using 2 sticks. I didnt follow all your trouble shooting post so disregard if you know and already tried this.


----------



## blautemple

blautemple said:


> Trident Z5 5600C36 on Z690 Hero
> 
> XMP1:Error After 11min in TestMem5 with 1usmus_v3 config
> 
> Thanks for your support.


Now I tried XMP2 but raised MC Voltage to 1,3V and it is looking way better:









Edit: Wait I just realized that TestMem5 wasn‘t running properly after the 3rd cycle…
Edit2: Just did a retest, since the first one failed, and now there was an error after 5min:









Now I will try XMP1 but with 1,25V VDD/VDDQ...


----------



## MikeGR7

safedisk said:


> View attachment 2537477
> 
> 
> View attachment 2537478
> 
> 
> View attachment 2537479
> 
> 
> ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4
> 
> I tested 0808 bios
> G.SKILL Samsung B-DIE 16G x2 Gear1 2T 4266 15-16-16-28
> 
> SA 1.4
> DRAM VOLTAGE 1.55
> VDDQ 1.5


Thank you so much for this info!
Appreciating all your efforts!

On another note i have a question:

CPU-Z states you're using F4-3600C14 - 16GTESA and that's probably the correct reading because it is in your system's photo.
But MemTestPro states you're using F4-4000C16 - 16GVK, is it a bug??


----------



## eeeven

safedisk said:


> View attachment 2537478
> 
> 
> View attachment 2537479
> 
> 
> ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4
> 
> I tested 0808 bios
> G.SKILL Samsung B-DIE 16G x2 Gear1 2T 4266 15-16-16-28
> 
> SA 1.4
> DRAM VOLTAGE 1.55
> VDDQ 1.5


Nice Results there! Can you give us some information about your Results on BIOS 0707? Did you manage to run 4266 also on 0707 or is this Bios Version dependent? I mean just because of new BIOS Version the IMC is not turning into gold.

Thanks!


----------



## bscool

MikeGR7 said:


> Thank you so much for this info!
> Appreciating all your efforts!
> 
> On another note i have a question:
> 
> CPU-Z states you're using F4-3600C14 - 16GTESA and that's probably the correct reading because it is in your system's photo.
> But MemTestPro states you're using F4-4000C16 - 16GVK, is it a bug??


Dang good catch, I hope Asus didnt pull a Gigabyte 

Edit no wonder look at his date, @safedisk is in the future 2023, cheating  Time travelers 😄


----------



## Vidas

Agent-A01 said:


> What game and do you have before after 1T vs 2T FPS numbers?
> 
> I highly doubt your 3333 1T is even close to 3800+ 2T
> 
> As for 1T. Max is around 3733/3800. I haven't seen more than that.


Thank you, thats what I wanted to know. The game is World of Warcraft. I don't play anymore but it's what I build around. Weird I know but It's just my thing. You may be correct, I'm not that confident. At heart the game is mostly a draw call benchmark but does have a couple unique quirks beyond what you would see from a purely synthetic draw call bench. From my amateur benches I've found latency decides 1% lows and minimum, bandwidth impacts maximum frames(3600c16 1t/g2 max 272.2, 3100c16 1t/g1 255 but 11.5% better .1% lows) and .1% lows are what matter here. FPS is all over the place with some zones 400 fps yet others 160 so you need to get those lows up as high as possible. I don't have any current original comparisons for CR just off hand experience of performance collapsing from 2t. When I got my new 3200 14-14-14-34 1.35 DR kit to boot at xmp on gigabyte and benched it vs 3600c16 SR the performance was worse because I had the new kit in 2t. Thought I wasted $230 at first but when I set it to 1t they performed similarly(cant find the numbers). I've also seen comments in the z690 mem oc thread saying 1t is the only way d4 can compete with d5. 
Some data for how ram scales in the game on RKL here with 3333c14 outperforming 4600c17(prob 3333 1t & 4600 2t? dont think rkl can do 4600 g1 t1) 
*Intel 11600k & 11400 tested in WoW overclock and ram scaling*

I'm hesitant to sink a huge amount of time into tuning right now as I'm going to be ordering a 12900k in a week or two and sending that effectively broken gigabyte board and 12700k it came with back to b&h. Hopefully i9 has a superior IMC and the week after that I have nearly the optimal cpu loop coming which will allow much higher volts and clocks. Dual d5 in serial+good cpu block. Planned to put in some quick and dirty settings to see what this new motherboard can do compared to my old one and presumed I wanted 1t. All the testing and the eventual work around I found for the never ending mem training loop on the gigabyte board(can see in my post history) were done with 1t as the target but as it stands the strix is putting up the same numbers, 3333 14141434 1t g1, doesnt matter how high I set the dram volts. I can make another user profile for high bandwidth 2t for other games. I'm only looking for game stable btw, wont be compiling any kernels or rendering any waifus.

Got more than one day off this week for the first time in a year so I'm going to go try to play around a bit with the bios to get a feel for how mem oc works on a motherboard that isnt BROKEN. plan to change the mem training algorithms to the settings I saw included with a 4133 DR bios user profile from user SafeDisk, increase vccsa and vdd, change to 133 instead of 100 as that was much easier to boot on old board and see what the lowest timings I need at 1.55v on dram to get 3733 1t to work. Do you have any suggestions for other settings to change? What should I set the imc volts at or leave it to auto? Think I should change any of the secondary timings that come with the xmp profile? Also does disabling the e cores and cranking the ring ratio help the IMC boot better frequencies at all? I know it drops latency overall. I will tune it up much tighter with lower volts and sutff after i9 and loop are installed.


----------



## jomama22

bscool said:


> Dang good catch, I hope Asus didnt pull a Gigabyte
> 
> Edit no wonder look at his date, @safedisk is in the future 2023, cheating  Time travelers 😄


Most likely spd flashed or es sample with multiple xmp tiers


----------



## Jacinto1023

bscool said:


> Sorry if you have already been thru this or know this but you need to use slots a2 and b2 when using 2 sticks. I didnt follow all your trouble shooting post so disregard if you know and already tried this.


Tried stick in every configuration possible. Will not boot. 

Only boots with one stick but its being weird. Certain bios made it only work in the second ram slot and now a different bios only allows it to work in slot 3 and 4. XMP either wont boot or crashes if it does.

I just dont know if its the motherboard or RAM


----------



## Agent-A01

safedisk said:


> View attachment 2537477
> 
> 
> View attachment 2537478
> 
> 
> View attachment 2537479
> 
> 
> ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4
> 
> I tested 0808 bios
> G.SKILL Samsung B-DIE 16G x2 Gear1 2T 4266 15-16-16-28
> 
> SA 1.4
> DRAM VOLTAGE 1.55
> VDDQ 1.5


Any chance for a Tuf 0808?


----------



## Agent-A01

Vidas said:


> Thank you, thats what I wanted to know. The game is World of Warcraft. I don't play anymore but it's what I build around. Weird I know but It's just my thing. You may be correct, I'm not that confident. At heart the game is mostly a draw call benchmark but does have a couple unique quirks beyond what you would see from a purely synthetic draw call bench. From my amateur benches I've found latency decides 1% lows and minimum, bandwidth impacts maximum frames(3600c16 1t/g2 max 272.2, 3100c16 1t/g1 255 but 11.5% better .1% lows) and .1% lows are what matter here. FPS is all over the place with some zones 400 fps yet others 160 so you need to get those lows up as high as possible. I don't have any current original comparisons for CR just off hand experience of performance collapsing from 2t. When I got my new 3200 14-14-14-34 1.35 DR kit to boot at xmp on gigabyte and benched it vs 3600c16 SR the performance was worse because I had the new kit in 2t. Thought I wasted $230 at first but when I set it to 1t they performed similarly(cant find the numbers). I've also seen comments in the z690 mem oc thread saying 1t is the only way d4 can compete with d5.
> Some data for how ram scales in the game on RKL here with 3333c14 outperforming 4600c17(prob 3333 1t & 4600 2t? dont think rkl can do 4600 g1 t1)
> *Intel 11600k & 11400 tested in WoW overclock and ram scaling*
> 
> I'm hesitant to sink a huge amount of time into tuning right now as I'm going to be ordering a 12900k in a week or two and sending that effectively broken gigabyte board and 12700k it came with back to b&h. Hopefully i9 has a superior IMC and the week after that I have nearly the optimal cpu loop coming which will allow much higher volts and clocks. Dual d5 in serial+good cpu block. Planned to put in some quick and dirty settings to see what this new motherboard can do compared to my old one and presumed I wanted 1t. All the testing and the eventual work around I found for the never ending mem training loop on the gigabyte board(can see in my post history) were done with 1t as the target but as it stands the strix is putting up the same numbers, 3333 14141434 1t g1, doesnt matter how high I set the dram volts. I can make another user profile for high bandwidth 2t for other games. I'm only looking for game stable btw, wont be compiling any kernels or rendering any waifus.
> 
> Got more than one day off this week for the first time in a year so I'm going to go try to play around a bit with the bios to get a feel for how mem oc works on a motherboard that isnt BROKEN. plan to change the mem training algorithms to the settings I saw included with a 4133 DR bios user profile from user SafeDisk, increase vccsa and vdd, change to 133 instead of 100 as that was much easier to boot on old board and see what the lowest timings I need at 1.55v on dram to get 3733 1t to work. Do you have any suggestions for other settings to change? What should I set the imc volts at or leave it to auto? Think I should change any of the secondary timings that come with the xmp profile? Also does disabling the e cores and cranking the ring ratio help the IMC boot better frequencies at all? I know it drops latency overall. I will tune it up much tighter with lower volts and sutff after i9 and loop are installed.


Well If I had WoW I'd compare some numbers for you. I don't think 1T is beating my 4000C14 setup in 1% or .1% lows but who knows.

Gigabyte is having issues with DDR4 according to buildzoid so you'll have better luck with another brand for sure.

As for suggestions. If you are aiming for 1T, you won't need a ton of SA voltage as max frequency will be limited. Maybe try 1.25-1.3SA.
VDDQ isn't that important unless you are tweaking timings very tight, especially tertiaries in my experience.

Dram ratio 100:100 and 100:133 should perform similar in my experience and according to ASUS guide i read.

If you are gaming only, disable e cores. Additional ring frequency will be beneficial. Expect around 4.8ghz with reasonable voltages.
E cores ON you'll be limited to 4.2 or so.

BTW I did the same thing, 12700K > 12900k. 12900K has a better IMC for sure.

I bought two 12900ks for testing. Selling the other one I have if you want it. Only a couple hours of use.


----------



## Jacinto1023

Okay went to bios 8002 and i got both sticks to actually boot together but they arent in dual channel. they are running in slot 3 and 4


----------



## darth_meh

Jacinto1023 said:


> Okay went to bios 8002 and i got both sticks to actually boot together but they arent in dual channel. they are running in slot 3 and 4


I think if I were you, I would try swapping motherboards just to rule it out - especially if you're still within your return window.
Asus doesn't have an awesome reputation when it comes to RMAs.


----------



## Jacinto1023

darth_meh said:


> I think if I were you, I would try swapping motherboards just to rule it out - especially if you're still within your return window.
> Asus doesn't have an awesome reputation when it comes to RMAs.


Yeah i already reserved the same board at Micro center. Going to go pick it up and test it out. If it works then great, i return the other back to newegg. As for the DDR5 replacement coming in, i guess i can just keep it and wait till 4 sticks are more stable but then again if its not the motherboard and ends up being the ram then i just send the bad one back to corsair.


----------



## safedisk

MikeGR7 said:


> Thank you so much for this info!
> Appreciating all your efforts!
> 
> On another note i have a question:
> 
> CPU-Z states you're using F4-3600C14 - 16GTESA and that's probably the correct reading because it is in your system's photo.
> But MemTestPro states you're using F4-4000C16 - 16GVK, is it a bug??


Hello
I think it's a SPD issue with the My 3600CL14 KIT
other kit is no problem 4000CL17 KIT 🤣


----------



## owikh84

12900K SP 87 (X141) - Stock
Strix Z690-A | BIOS 0808
2x16GB G.Skill F4-4000C17D-16GTRSB

4133 CL16-16-16-34-2T Gear1, VDIMM 1.50v, SA 1.45v, VDDQ 1.45V:









Edit: another run with better timings
4133 CL16-16-16-32-2T Gear1, VDIMM 1.50v, SA 1.45v, VDDQ 1.45V:


----------



## adna

i gave up ver.0010 with micron 
can't to pass tm5/karhu with no error. with same step same setting
Now.thank Shamino for new 0015. i'll try.


----------



## safedisk

LancerB1 said:


> Cool results. Can you share your CMO profile?


HI
If cant boot, you need to change memory settings
Thanks

BDIE DR 4266CL15 PROFILE


----------



## safedisk

Agent-A01 said:


> Any chance for a Tuf 0808?


Hey Here  

ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4 BETA BIOS 0808

ASUS PRIME Z690-P D4 BETA BIOS 0806

ASUS PRIME Z690-P WIFI D4 BETA BIOS 0806

ASUS PRIME Z690M-PLUS D4 BETA BIOS 0901

TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS D4 BETA BIOS 0808

TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS WIFI D4 BETA BIOS 0808


----------



## safedisk

eeeven said:


> Nice Results there! Can you give us some information about your Results on BIOS 0707? Did you manage to run 4266 also on 0707 or is this Bios Version dependent? I mean just because of new BIOS Version the IMC is not turning into gold.
> 
> Thanks!


I think 0808 bios is better. I'll share the 0707 result later when have time
Thanks


----------



## eeeven

Thanks - so far this will be my 24/7:

4.133 16-16-16-28-280

SA 1.425V (BIOS)
TX VDDQ 1.460V (BIOS)
VDIMM 1.537V (BIOS) w/o Fan!


----------



## Sarzinski

safedisk said:


> HI
> If cant boot, you need to change memory settings
> Thanks
> 
> BDIE DR 4266CL15 PROFILE


Could someone with a Strix D4 export it as .txt?


----------



## sneida

i got the chance to upgrade to a 32gb kit (2x16gb) 4000 cl16-16-16 @ 1.4v.

is it to be expected that it won't be stable when just loading the xmp profile or manually setting it to 4000 cl16-16-16 (both CR2)?

Throwing errors in TM5 instantly. (TUF, 12700k)

works with 3600 cl16-16-16 @ 1.375 cr2, throws errors after some time with same setting cr1.

update: figured out the problem with my system-auto set voltages (e.g. sa vid) were too high-1.35 does not work, both 1.2 and 1.25 do (not tried to lower it further yet). 3600 cl14 t1 some sub timings optimized (~50ns latency) is a start at least.


----------



## bscool

Sarzinski said:


> Could someone with a Strix D4 export it as .txt?


If think of it later. Trust me there is no magical setting I tried and it is normal stuff he has set. Just he has top bin IMC and ram etc. The profile has sa set to 1.4v and vddq 1.5v dram 1.55v.

Also must have a fairly cool ambient air temp(ac blowing towards it or just cold tremps) as his temps on things are a good 4-5c lower than mine and I currently am running open case with fans at 100%(my ambient is around 21c/70f). So temps play a role. I can get to about 50% on memtestpro with 4266c15-15-15 and error from temps hitting 44c on mem. I think it is temps anyway, as other mem setting in past test on this platform error around that 44c mark for me. Trying 4266c16-16-16 now.


----------



## adna

@0015 | Micron chip
1st test seemly good for me
[email protected]
[email protected] 1.35v.
sa | mc | vdd | vddq = 0.9 | 1.1 | 1.35 |1.35


----------



## Sarzinski

bscool said:


> If think of it later. Trust me there is no magical setting I tried and it is normal stuff he has set. Just he has top bin IMC and ram etc. The profile has sa set to 1.4v and vddq 1.5v dram 1.55v.
> 
> Also must have a fairly cool ambient air temp(ac blowing towards it or just cold tremps) as his temps on things are a good 4-5c lower than mine and I currently am running open case with fans at 100%(my ambient is around 21c/70f). So temps play a role. I can get to about 50% on memtestpro with 4266c15-15-15 and error from temps hitting 44c on mem. I think it is temps anyway, as other mem setting in past test on this platform error around that 44c mark for me. Trying 4266c16-16-16 now.


Thanks, but I already found someone. Attached it if someone else is interested.

As you said it's pretty much everything on Auto besides basic voltages and obviously timings. I assumed he did some crazy training algos or ODTs or whatever, but nope.

I'll try the 0808 on TUF later, either 0808 is the magic BIOS or he just has the best IMC ever created.


----------



## cstkl1

bscool said:


> If think of it later. Trust me there is no magical setting I tried and it is normal stuff he has set. Just he has top bin IMC and ram etc. The profile has sa set to 1.4v and vddq 1.5v dram 1.55v.
> 
> Also must have a fairly cool ambient air temp(ac blowing towards it or just cold tremps) as his temps on things are a good 4-5c lower than mine and I currently am running open case with fans at 100%(my ambient is around 21c/70f). So temps play a role. I can get to about 50% on memtestpro with 4266c15-15-15 and error from temps hitting 44c on mem. I think it is temps anyway, as other mem setting in past test on this platform error around that 44c mark for me. Trying 4266c16-16-16 now.


make sure your cpu oc stable enough to pass avx2 zero throttle etc

you dont need algos once asus tuned the rams better with retail cpus

the previous algos were experimental.


----------



## bscool

It seems like it is temps for me. Same setting I have been trying but would get errors around 50%. Lowered room temp a couple degrees and passed 4266c16. When my memory gets over approx 44c seems much more likely to error for me.

4266c16-16-16

Strix A d4 808
sa 1.4
vdda 1.5
dram 1.55
mem kit gskill ripjaw 4000c14-15-15 2x16


----------



## diyw

Hi guys, new here. I just wanted to post my settings that have gotten me stable for now in case it could help anyone. XMP 1 and 2 never worked for me. Memory would fail memtest86 on test 2 constantly no matter which slot or stick. Was having freezing/BSODs/crashes on Windows 11. I have since installed Windows 10 because of instability issues with virtualization and possible driver issues. I am still unable to load bluestacks without my PC completely freezing, so I'm not sure if there is a virtualization issue with alder lake or maybe my CPU voltages need tweaked.

I'm able to pass memtest86 and prime95 with no errors with the settings below:
Z690 Strix E with BIOS 002 from shamino
Multi Core Enhancement - Auto let BIOS decide
Trident Z5 5600 Samsung with XMP off
5600mhz 36-36-36-76
VDD - 1.35
VDDQ - 1.35
MC - 1.2

I haven't really messed around with dialing in the voltages. I feel like they voltages should be lower since they were advertised with XMP at 1.2v. I'm open to tweaking if anyone has any suggestions.


----------



## Agent-A01

bscool said:


> It seems like it is temps for me. Same setting I have been trying but would get errors around 50%. Lowered room temp a couple degrees and passed 4266c16. When my memory gets over approx 44c seems much more likely to error for me.
> 
> 4266c16-16-16
> 
> Strix A d4 808
> sa 1.4
> vdda 1.5
> dram 1.55
> mem kit gskill ripjaw 4000c14-15-15 2x16


What VDIMM and SA did you need to go 4133 > 4266?


----------



## Brandur

Is it normal, that the Voltage of the G.Skill 6000 CL36 vary that much under load? When i play a game, one Stick is perma at 1.41V and the other on 1.38V (both set to 1.4V in BIOS).

Sometimes the Voltage on both Sticks drop to 1.365V...

Just tested with my Dominator and the Voltage there is more constant. In Bios it is set to 1.25V and under Load it is perma at 1.245V. So not so much difference/drops, like with the G.Skill.


----------



## EconomyFishFinger

Hi all,

I have a Asus z690 Formula, 12900KF and some TeamGroup DDR5 6400MHz ram.

Been having issues getting the ram stable, updated to the 0002 version bios and xmp profile 1 appears to be working (xmp2 is just a no go)

Anyone have any tips for voltages for this ram or the board for getting some tighter timings? Tried increasing voltages from the stock 1.35v upwards of 1.45 and it doesnt appear to help.

Also, one thing which is seriously bugging me is that I just cannot for the life of me get the RGB on the ram o sync at all with any software . Just a rainbow fest which is somewhat annoying.

regards!


----------



## morph.

EconomyFishFinger said:


> Hi all,
> 
> I have a Asus z690 Formula, 12900KF and some TeamGroup DDR5 6400MHz ram.
> 
> Been having issues getting the ram stable, updated to the 0002 version bios and xmp profile 1 appears to be working (xmp2 is just a no go)
> 
> Anyone have any tips for voltages for this ram or the board for getting some tighter timings? Tried increasing voltages from the stock 1.35v upwards of 1.45 and it doesnt appear to help.
> 
> Also, one thing which is seriously bugging me is that I just cannot for the life of me get the RGB on the ram o sync at all with any software . Just a rainbow fest which is somewhat annoying.
> 
> regards!


What's the 002 version for formula? The newest one I have for the formula is 803

Have you tried armoury crate (beware lotta bloatware)

Waiting on @shamino1978 to release 015 or newer for the z690 formula etc..


----------



## Martin778

Finally got some DDR5's (poop kingstons 4800 but sitll...) to get my Z690 Apex up and running and holy smokes, that AI OC stuff is...genius. Just set 1 thing to enabled and it boosts to 5.5 single 5.2 all core. That's a SP88 chip (SP97 on perf cores). The temps are perfectly fine in Cine R23 (measured 83*C at 286W).
Have a set of GSkill 6000 C36 on the way though.


----------



## EconomyFishFinger

morph. said:


> What's the 002 version for formula? The newest one I have for the forumla is 803
> 
> Have you tried armoury crate (be were lotta bloatware)


Its the one shared here from Shamino1978:








ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-FORMULA-ASUS-0002.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com





Yeah tried everything, armorycrate, aurasync (old versions), several other popular tools. Its pretty annoying!


----------



## morph.

Martin778 said:


> Finally got some DDR5's (poop kingstons 4800 but sitll...) to get my Z690 Apex up and running and holy smokes, that AI OC stuff is...genius. Just set 1 thing to enabled and it boosts to 5.5 single 5.2 all core. That's a SP88 chip (SP97 on perf cores). The temps are perfectly fine in Cine R23 (measured 83*C at 286W).
> Have a set of GSkill 6000 C36 on the way though.


whats your vid/vcore voltages look like though?


----------



## Martin778

This is how it looks like with AI OC enabled:
Power plan set to max performance currently, hence not much downclocking. Haven't touched anything else in BIOS yet, noticed XMP disables itself and goes to "Manual" with AI enabled but the memory keeps the XMP clocks.


----------



## EconomyFishFinger

Martin778 said:


> Finally got some DDR5's (poop kingstons 4800 but sitll...) to get my Z690 Apex up and running and holy smokes, that AI OC stuff is...genius. Just set 1 thing to enabled and it boosts to 5.5 single 5.2 all core. That's a SP88 chip (SP97 on perf cores). The temps are perfectly fine in Cine R23 (measured 83*C at 286W).
> Have a set of GSkill 6000 C36 on the way though.


SP97? wow, I got really unlucky and only got SP78. Not sure what i'll manage out of my chip


----------



## Benni231990

here my gskill 6000 cl40 VDD/VDDQ 1.43V | SA 1.22V | MC 1.3V

i have no idear if this timings are tight or not every help is welcome to get better timing or a setting with 6400 or more

6400 want boot even with 1.55 VDD/VDDQ



















samsung absolut potato chips i hope asus release a new bios with increase for samsung chips

or exist a newer bios for samsung chips? i only use the official from the asus site


----------



## Tigra456

Check 0015 if your board is listed or the 0010 before.
Links are here in the Thread


----------



## Jacinto1023

Okay so it ended up being the motherboard!

Both ram sticks now work and i can also use XMP.

Now do i keep the RMA Ram set that i payed for in advance and go 64GB lol i mean i just use it for gaming.


----------



## sblantipodi

Hi all. I have installed two Samsung SSD on my DIMM.2 slot on my Z690 Extreme board.
Drives boots well and I can use them in windows
But Samsung macigian says that there is no nvme drives
If I go into bios into the nvme section it says the same. It's like if that SSDs are not seen as nvme drives. Why?


----------



## dante`afk

safedisk said:


> View attachment 2536695
> 
> 
> View attachment 2536696
> 
> 
> View attachment 2536697
> 
> 
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX DDR5 MEMORY OC TEST
> Memory AIR 7000 2T 32-40-40-30 Tight Timing Ambient Temp
> 
> AIDA64
> READ 112.03 GB/s
> Write 107.82 GB/s
> COPY 106.86 GB/s
> LATENCY 47.7ns
> 
> SA AUTO
> MC AUTO
> VDD 1.56
> VDDQ 1.5


care you share your cmo/txt file for this? 

appreciated


----------



## Falkentyne

Jacinto1023 said:


> Okay so it ended up being the motherboard!
> 
> Both ram sticks now work and i can also use XMP.
> 
> Now do i keep the RMA Ram set that i payed for in advance and go 64GB lol i mean i just use it for gaming.


If it's Samsung or Hynx RAM, you can make a killing scalping it on ebay and just keep 32 GB for yourself.
If it's micron I mean do whatever. RMA it, sell it at cost or keep it for when you need 64 GB. But keep in mind by the time you _need_ 64 GB, there will be 7000+ XMP kits out or maybe 8600+ Gear 4 kits...


----------



## shamino1978

attempts to improve xmp , fixed a core ranking / core vid reading bug.
vmaxstress option name changed for future function
DC LL tracked to vrm LL at auto









ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-FORMULA-ASUS-0811.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-GLACIAL-ASUS-0811.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0811.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0811.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-ASUS-0811.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com













ROG-STRIX-Z690-E-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0811.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-STRIX-Z690-I-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0811.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0811.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0812.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-STRIX-Z690-G-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0811.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-STRIX-Z690-F-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0811.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com













TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-WIFI-ASUS-0811.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-ASUS-0811.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ProArt-Z690-CREATOR-WIFI-ASUS-0811.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












PRIME-Z690-A-ASUS-0811.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com





special test bios for apex:








ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0021.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com


----------



## Eaton

shamino1978 said:


> attempts to improve xmp , fixed a core ranking / core vid reading bug.
> vmaxstress option name changed for future function
> DC LL tracked to vrm LL at auto
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-FORMULA-ASUS-0811.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-GLACIAL-ASUS-0811.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0811.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0811.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-E-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0811.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-I-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0811.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0811.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-G-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0811.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-WIFI-ASUS-0811.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-ASUS-0811.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ProArt-Z690-CREATOR-WIFI-ASUS-0811.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PRIME-Z690-A-ASUS-0811.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> special test bios for apex:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0021.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


Is there anything new for the Z690 Hero?


----------



## Bladed

shamino1978 said:


> attempts to improve xmp , fixed a core ranking / core vid reading bug.
> vmaxstress option name changed for future function
> DC LL tracked to vrm LL at auto
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0811.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


Is this for the D4 version? I am probably doing something wrong but I tried to update the Strix Z690-A with the EzFlash utility. It keeps saying "Selected File is not a proper BIOS!".

I tried: using the Asus renaming tool, using the unnamed file, manually adding "D4" to the end of the file name (The renamed file didn't have D4), and manually renaming the file.


----------



## shamino1978

Bladed said:


> Is this for the D4 version? I am probably doing something wrong but I tried to update the Strix Z690-A with the EzFlash utility. It keeps saying "Selected File is not a proper BIOS!".
> 
> I tried: using the Asus renaming tool, using the unnamed file, manually adding "D4" to the end of the file name (The renamed file didn't have D4), and manually renaming the file.


No it is not


----------



## adna

shamino1978 said:


> attempts to improve xmp , fixed a core ranking / core vid reading bug.
> vmaxstress option name changed for future function
> DC LL tracked to vrm LL at auto
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-FORMULA-ASUS-0811.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-GLACIAL-ASUS-0811.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0811.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0811.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-E-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0811.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-I-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0811.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0811.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-G-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0811.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-WIFI-ASUS-0811.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-ASUS-0811.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ProArt-Z690-CREATOR-WIFI-ASUS-0811.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PRIME-Z690-A-ASUS-0811.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> special test bios for apex:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0021.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


for strix-f please


----------



## Baasha

Can you explain how AI OC works or how to get it to work? Do we first "Load Optimized Defaults" and then just click "Enable" on AI OC (which tab is it under)?

We don't have to change anything else? 



Martin778 said:


> This is how it looks like with AI OC enabled:
> Power plan set to max performance currently, hence not much downclocking. Haven't touched anything else in BIOS yet, noticed XMP disables itself and goes to "Manual" with AI enabled but the memory keeps the XMP clocks.
> View attachment 2537731


----------



## Jacinto1023

Falkentyne said:


> If it's Samsung or Hynx RAM, you can make a killing scalping it on ebay and just keep 32 GB for yourself.
> If it's micron I mean do whatever. RMA it, sell it at cost or keep it for when you need 64 GB. But keep in mind by the time you _need_ 64 GB, there will be 7000+ XMP kits out or maybe 8600+ Gear 4 kits...


Which ones are Samsung or Hynx Ram?


----------



## bscool

Agent-A01 said:


> What VDIMM and SA did you need to go 4133 > 4266?


The only change was I had to lower sa from 1.45 to 1.4. But I wouldnt put too much into passing 1 or even 2 different memory test. Now trying some other things it is unstable. Like y cruncher and aida mem and cache stress test shows errors. I haven't tried raising sa back up from 1.4 to 1.45 but I dont think it is a good long term mem setup for me anyway. Seems right on the edge. I will probably go back toi 4133c15 as that has been solid.

4266c16 was very temp sensitive. I would probably need to water cool the sticks. Much over 43-44c on mem temps much more likely to throw errors on my setup.


----------



## Silent Scone

Jacinto1023 said:


> Which ones are Samsung or Hynx Ram?


Check in CPUZ, SPD tab should tell you the IC


----------



## Zyther

Would a bios setting somewhere caused this on win 11. Clean install, latest drivers
Z690 Hero (Bios 0002), 12900k
no CPU OC
XMP1 4800 cl40


----------



## Cam1

@shamino1978








TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-WIFI-ASUS-0811.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com





This is not working for my Motherboard, i tried to rename it with "BIOSRenamer.exe" but this doesn't help.

Using TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-WIFI with the official 0807 atm


----------



## satinghostrider

Guys, what bios would be recommended to load for my new setup with Trident Z5 RGB 6000CL40? I've lost count of the various bios posted. I know there is 0803 now by Shamino but there also is some special test bios 0021 which doesn't really mention what's baked into it. I'm assuming my 6000CL40 would be Samsung though there might be a miraculous chance it could be Hynix. Which bios would you load? Thanks in advance!


----------



## morph.

satinghostrider said:


> View attachment 2537815
> 
> 
> Guys, what bios would be recommended to load for my new setup with Trident Z5 RGB 6000CL40? I've lost count of the various bios posted. I know there is 0803 now by Shamino but there also is some special test bios 0021 which doesn't really mention what's baked into it. I'm assuming my 6000CL40 would be Samsung though there might be a miraculous chance it could be Hynix. Which bios would you load? Thanks in advance!


V0811 shamino just dropped.

AFAIK the 6000’s are Samsung. 6200+ Are generally SK Hynix.


----------



## satinghostrider

morph. said:


> V0811 shamino just dropped.


Sorry my earlier post should read as 0811 not 0803. On another note, is there any more details of the 0021 special test bios? Doesn't seem to indicate any change log/improvements.


----------



## Tigra456

shamino1978 said:


> attempts to improve xmp , fixed a core ranking / core vid reading bug.
> vmaxstress option name changed for future function
> DC LL tracked to vrm LL at auto
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-FORMULA-ASUS-0811.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-GLACIAL-ASUS-0811.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0811.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0811.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-ASUS-0811.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-E-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0811.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-I-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0811.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0811.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0812.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-G-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0811.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-WIFI-ASUS-0811.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-ASUS-0811.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ProArt-Z690-CREATOR-WIFI-ASUS-0811.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PRIME-Z690-A-ASUS-0811.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> special test bios for apex:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0021.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


I will wait for the response, if the 6000 c36 will run now with XMP 1 before I ask for my z690-F…


----------



## Silent Scone

Zyther said:


> Would a bios setting somewhere caused this on win 11. Clean install, latest drivers
> Z690 Hero (Bios 0002), 12900k
> no CPU OC
> XMP1 4800 cl40


Hello,

Does it happen with XMP disabled?


Connect your USB devices methodically by plugging in one at a time to see if a certain device is at fault.


----------



## edkieferlp

Cam1 said:


> There is a DDR5 version of the Tuf Z690 PLUS WIFI ?


Not that I can see on ASUS website, all TUF Z690 PLUS are D4, I think Shamino1978 TUF bios should have D4 at end but I have not tried them (0811)


----------



## edkieferlp

Baasha said:


> Can you explain how AI OC works or how to get it to work? Do we first "Load Optimized Defaults" and then just click "Enable" on AI OC (which tab is it under)?
> 
> We don't have to change anything else?


this vid explains it.


----------



## Zyther

Silent Scone said:


> Hello,
> 
> Does it happen with XMP disabled?
> 
> 
> Connect your USB devices methodically by plugging in one at a time to see if a certain device is at fault.


I think i possibly found the issue, was cpu core parking, ive disabled all the cores from parking and it seems to of stopped, will test more later


----------



## Xenon2

@shamino1978

*Thanks for your work !!*

Bios 0021
The XMP1 profile now seems to work, even after repeated restart and changes in the BIOS settings.

Short test :


----------



## morph.

Hey @shamino1978 what's the difference with v0015/v0021 vs v0811 to pair with gskill sammy 6000 c36?


----------



## flyleaf_

@shamino1978 
BIOS 0811 - Apex - G.Skill 6000 CL36 -> XMP1 passed 1000% Karhu for the first time, test is still running while I'm at work. Will try reboots under different temperature conditions later today but it's definitely an improvement on my setup. Thanks for your help!


----------



## shamino1978

morph. said:


> Hey @shamino1978 what's the difference with v0015/v0021 vs v0811 to pair with gskill sammy 6000 c36?


same but i just added a few tweaks at higher frequency , you may not reach that frequency.


----------



## sblantipodi

guys, all the wake up features on my LAN is disabled, same for the mouse / keyboard
but my PC continue to turn on and then off very fast when is in suspend mode.

what can it be?


----------



## Benni231990

@shamino1978

i used a STRIX F and with your bios 0015 i can to the first time boot 6400 with samsung but i cant make it stable since with stock timings but it goes in the right way maybe you make a nother samsung bios and then maybe it will stable 

and is 1T so much better whan 2T? give 1T more performance?


----------



## edkieferlp

sblantipodi said:


> guys, all the wake up features on my LAN is disabled, same for the mouse / keyboard
> but my PC continue to turn on and then off very fast when is in suspend mode.
> 
> what can it be?











Top 5 Solutions to Computer Turns on by Itself Windows 10


Don’t know how to fix the issue of computer turns on by itself. This post shows you 5 fixes to PC turns on by itself.




www.minitool.com


----------



## darth_meh

Zyther said:


> Would a bios setting somewhere caused this on win 11. Clean install, latest drivers
> Z690 Hero (Bios 0002), 12900k
> no CPU OC
> XMP1 4800 cl40


If you have HWInfo64 running in the background, it can cause higher DPC latency.


----------



## Silent Scone

Benni231990 said:


> @shamino1978
> and is 1T so much better whan 2T? give 1T more performance?


Hello,

You should always opt for 1T if/where possible


----------



## Zyther

@Silent Scone 

Seems to be it was possibly core parking, which I thought got disabled in high performance power plan. 
Force it to be disabled, much better


----------



## morph.

shamino1978 said:


> same but i just added a few tweaks at higher frequency , you may not reach that frequency.


Thanks once again!

@shamino1978 - I've noticed some bugs or inconsistencies between 0803 and 0811 that you might be able to confirm/check.

I've noticed the * asterixis doesn't seem to be highlighting the correct favoured cores "best cores" - under configuring specific core ratio limit area.

Inconsistencies between the AI optimised detection for the core VID's, I suspect 0811 is not displaying it properly.

v0803:









v0811:


----------



## shamino1978

this IS what it should have looked like
thank you


----------



## sugi0lover

After flashing 0025 Bios, SP got increased from 103 to 104. 



















For fun, my friend's SP103 turned to the below when he flashed to bios 0015 yesterday.
This is a bug since he reflashed and it got back to SP 103.


----------



## LionAlonso

Anyone can explain what vmaxstress does? What means “clip” the frequency?


----------



## shamino1978

LionAlonso said:


> Anyone can explain what vmaxstress does? What means “clip” the frequency?


its an old knob from last gen, doesnt do anything this gen.


----------



## blautemple

It is getting better with every bios but even the newest threw an error after 15:30min TestMem5 1usmus Preset:
XMP1 5600 C36


----------



## X909

shamino1978 said:


> attempts to improve xmp , fixed a core ranking / core vid reading bug.
> vmaxstress option name changed for future function
> DC LL tracked to vrm LL at auto


My TUF WiFi says "selected file is not a proper BIOS"


----------



## LionAlonso

X909 said:


> My TUF WiFi says "selected file is not a proper BIOS"


Yeah seems to be for ddr5 version of the board?¿
Happens to everyone who has tuf


----------



## Baasha

@shamino1978 thank you very much. will try the latest BIOS and report back.

Finally got 5.2Ghz P-Core, 4.0Ghz E-Core, 4.2Ghz Ring stable last night w/ 1.35V V-core @ LLC6. I also tested 5.3Ghz P-Core last night and it was stable, or so I thought. This morning, when I tried benching again, got BSOD "CLOCK_WATCHDOG_TIMEOUT" multiple times with all other settings the same. Even tried 1.375V v-core in BIOS and same thing.  This was on BIOS 0015 for the Z690 Maximus Extreme.


----------



## diyw

shamino1978 said:


> attempts to improve xmp , fixed a core ranking / core vid reading bug.
> vmaxstress option name changed for future function
> DC LL tracked to vrm LL at auto
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-E-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0811.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


This one did it! XMP1 and AI OC running stable. Multiple Memtest86 and Cinebench passes without issue. I'll keep an eye out for any more issues.

Thanks shamino!


----------



## wkamil

BIOS 0812 for Z690Stirx D4 has 99,8 Mhz blck bug...


----------



## Muad_Dib69

bios 811 it boot in xmp1 (gskill 6000cas36), no error so far. I tried to use asus memory profile samsung 6000 cas 32. PC doesnt boot. back to default.
What is the best, xmp 1 or 2 ? what are the difference?

edit:after 12min i start to have errors... memory at 64°


----------



## diyw

Muad_Dib69 said:


> bios 811 it boot in xmp1 (gskill 6000cas36), no error so far. I tried to use asus memory profile samsung 6000 cas 32. PC doesnt boot. back to default.
> What is the best, xmp 1 or 2 ? what are the difference?


When you click on the setting it tells you at the bottom. XMP1 is the ASUS optimized XMP profile, XMP2 just loads the default profile from the DIMM it seems.


----------



## Muad_Dib69

Yes i read that, but how to really see the difference? There is a database inside bios with all kind of info? so maybe it's why xmp2 is better, no?


----------



## Brandur

Tested the new 0811 Bios with the G.Skill 6000 CL36 and XMP1 and got craches in browsing and in Game. Set IMC and SA Voltages manual and set VDD and VDDQ frequenzy to max. and now it seems to be running. I will test it further...


----------



## MikeS3000

Woo hoo! Bios 0812 for Strix-A D4 passed 3 cycles of TM5 Anta777 extreme finally! I used the same settings as what passed on 0707 and this is the first BIOS since 0707 that did not introduce new memory errors. If only I could boot at 4000 mhz Gear 1. That's not going to happen on my 12700k.


----------



## wkamil

MikeS3000 said:


> Woo hoo! Bios 0812 for Strix-A D4 passed 3 cycles of TM5 Anta777 extreme finally! I used the same settings as what passed on 0707 and this is the first BIOS since 0707 that did not introduce new memory errors. If only I could boot at 4000 mhz Gear 1. That's not going to happen on my 12700k.


Do you have same 99,8Mhz blck issue? I've reverted to 803 and blck is 100Mhz again...


----------



## shamino1978

wkamil said:


> Do you have same 99,8Mhz blck issue? I've reverted to 803 and blck is 100Mhz again...


not sure if its "back" but i can simply explain it and you can simply understand it.
usually tradition holds that when user selects a manual bclk, the bclk is set to 100.0 with spread sprectrum disabled. means theres no usual % downspread.
for SS details google.
this gen, for mid range boards that use the internal clock generator from the processor, intel did not expose any mechanisms for disabling spread spectrum so it will always be enabled. what we patched was simply offseting by 0.025 from whatever is set. 
so rather than wait for us to patch, simply patch it yourself,


----------



## wkamil

shamino1978 said:


> not sure if its "back" but i can simply explain it and you can simply understand it.
> usually tradition holds that when user selects a manual bclk, the bclk is set to 100.0 with spread sprectrum disabled. means theres no usual % downspread.
> for SS details google.
> this gen, for mid range boards that use the internal clock generator from the processor, intel did not expose any mechanisms for disabling spread spectrum so it will always be enabled. what we patched was simply offseting by 0.025 from whatever is set.
> so rather than wait for us to patch, simply patch it yourself,


I can offset for sure, but 803 BIOS have 100Mhz and 812 have 99,8 with same settings (blck manual to 100).


----------



## LionAlonso

shamino1978 said:


> not sure if its "back" but i can simply explain it and you can simply understand it.
> usually tradition holds that when user selects a manual bclk, the bclk is set to 100.0 with spread sprectrum disabled. means theres no usual % downspread.
> for SS details google.
> this gen, for mid range boards that use the internal clock generator from the processor, intel did not expose any mechanisms for disabling spread spectrum so it will always be enabled. what we patched was simply offseting by 0.025 from whatever is set.
> so rather than wait for us to patch, simply patch it yourself,


Hi, is there an option for offset BCLK in tuf d4?


----------



## shamino1978

Muad_Dib69 said:


> Yes i read that, but how to really see the difference? There is a database inside bios with all kind of info? so maybe it's why xmp2 is better, no?


xmp1 only loads these from xmp profile:
dram freq
primaries
vdd
vddq
rest by MB calculations

xmp2 loads addtionally:
vpp
mc voltage 
TRFC and a few other timings

if a vendor forgets to program certain portions such as leaving mc voltage unprogrammed, then you may get something like this when xmp2 : (from another angle , its a question of who you trust more to set the right timings/voltages, MB vendor or dram vendor)


----------



## shamino1978

LionAlonso said:


> Hi, is there an option for offset BCLK in tuf d4?


what? you know simple addition right? to get 100.0 set (100.0 + 0.25 )


----------



## skullbringer

blautemple said:


> It is getting better with every bios but even the newest threw an error after 15:30min TestMem5 1usmus Preset:
> XMP1 5600 C36
> View attachment 2537860


is your vdd/vddq supposed to be only 1.2 V ?


----------



## blautemple

Yes


skullbringer said:


> is your vdd/vddq supposed to be only 1.2 V ?


Yes, that‘s my kit:








G.Skill Trident Z5 silber DIMM Kit 32GB, DDR5-5600, CL36-36-36-76 ab € 227,99 (2023) | Preisvergleich Geizhals Deutschland


✔ Preisvergleich für G.Skill Trident Z5 silber DIMM Kit 32GB, DDR5-5600, CL36-36-36-76 ✔ Produktinfo ⇒ Typ: DDR5 DIMM 288-Pin, on-die ECC • Takt: 5600MHz • Module: 2x 16GB • JEDEC: PC5-44800U… ✔ Speicher ✔ Testberichte ✔ Günstig kaufen




geizhals.de


----------



## Muad_Dib69

shamino1978 said:


> xmp1 only loads these from xmp profile:
> dram freq
> primaries
> vdd
> vddq
> rest by MB calculations
> 
> xmp2 loads addtionally:
> vpp
> mc voltage
> TRFC and a few other timings
> 
> if a vendor forgets to program certain portions such as leaving mc voltage unprogrammed, then you may get something like this when xmp2 : (from another angle , its a question of who you trust more to set the right timings/voltages, MB vendor or dram vendor)


Thanks you so much for the explanation. So the xmp2 should be better because it's set by dram vendor they should now what to apply on the dram, no?


----------



## bscool

z690 Strix d4 2x16

Much lower sa and vddq needed for my settings.

Previous bios version I needed sa 1.4 to 1.45 and vddq 1.5v

NO CPU oc @ defaults

Strix A d4 812

4133c15-15-15-35

sa 1.35
vddq 1.35
dram 1.55
mem kit gskill ripjaw 4000c14-15-15 2x16


----------



## Agent-A01

shamino1978 said:


> what? you know simple addition right? to get 100.0 set (100.0 + 0.25 )


Hey boss, can we get a TUF 0812 like the strix-a D4?

I noticed 0811 versions were posted but I cannot flash the tuf 0811.. No DDR5 tuf variant exists that I'm aware of so not sure why it doesn't work.

Thanks!


----------



## darth_meh

Muad_Dib69 said:


> Thanks you so much for the explanation. So the xmp2 should be better because it's set by dram vendor they should now what to apply on the dram, no?


I believe the screenshot he included was a DRAM vendor's XMP2 profile.
351 volts is probably pushing it, but YMMV.


----------



## shamino1978

Muad_Dib69 said:


> Thanks you so much for the explanation. So the xmp2 should be better because it's set by dram vendor they should now what to apply on the dram, no?


My answer will be biased so no comment. And not all boards like the same setting , while the board knows what ram is on it , the ram does not know which board it is on.


----------



## fortecosi

Muad_Dib69 said:


> Thanks you so much for the explanation. So the xmp2 should be better because it's set by dram vendor they should now what to apply on the dram, no?


In the Asus + Shamino case, I would trust much more to MB than a dram vendor. See the magic the Shamino is doing with the BIOS. While I can´t see a dram vendors update the SPD of my ram anyhow.


----------



## MikeGR7

Agent-A01 said:


> .....that I'm aware of ....
> 
> Thanks!


Just accept there may be models that you are not aware of and only flash files that have the correct product numbers on the title.
No one bothers to answer you and a couple other posts complaining about flashing not working let's pause for a second, you have a tuf D4. Like D4. NO D4 = NO BUENO. Wait for bios D4 okay.


----------



## opt33

trying to figure best pcie use on z690 maximus hero (12900k) for 3080ti at 16x, intel optane pcie for os (win 11), and seagate firecuda 530 pcie4 gaming drive, then 1 minimal use backup ssd via sata connection.

via mobo manual (pic) assuming:

pciex 16 g5-1 3080ti gpu (16x)
pciex16 g5-2 empty so gpu stays 16x
pciex16 (g4) intel optane pcie drive for OS 

For gaming drive ? of m2.1, m2.2 or m2.3. m2.2 is listed as both pcie 3 and 4, so not sure which is correct. Not sure if I use m2.1 if that makes gpu 8x or not. 
Then have to install one other 1tb ssd via sata connector for minimal use backup drive

going to sleep now, but will look in am if anyone has any suggestions, thanks in advance. otherwise ill just trial and error like had to with previous gb board.


----------



## Baasha

How does the 1usmus preset compare to the anta777? any particular reason you are using 1usmus as opposed to the more popular anta777 "extreme"?



blautemple said:


> It is getting better with every bios but even the newest threw an error after 15:30min TestMem5 1usmus Preset:
> XMP1 5600 C36
> View attachment 2537860


----------



## Baasha

Flashed 0811 BIOS today and the computer is rock solid at 5.2/4.0/4.2.

Trying to fine tune the RAM - how long do we have to run Karhu and/or MemTest5 to be considered stable (I mostly game and do some content creation)?

@shamino1978 I have the 32gb G-Skill Trident Z5 RGB 5600 C36 kit. Have it running at 6000Mhz with SA at 1.25V and VDD/VDDQ at 1.44V. Is this safe? Seems stable so far (have to do some more testing). I'm on the Asus RoG Maximus Z690 Extreme MoBo.


----------



## Ichirou

Baasha said:


> How does the 1usmus preset compare to the anta777? any particular reason you are using 1usmus as opposed to the more popular anta777 "extreme"?


Personal preference mostly. I use 1usmus myself, and system is perfectly stable. It's shorter than anta777, which is a more thorough hammer.
When you're tweaking every single secondary/tertiary, it can get very time consuming to do 2+ hour tests per timing change.


----------



## Falkentyne

Baasha said:


> Flashed 0811 BIOS today and the computer is rock solid at 5.2/4.0/4.2.
> 
> Trying to fine tune the RAM - how long do we have to run Karhu and/or MemTest5 to be considered stable (I mostly game and do some content creation)?
> 
> @shamino1978 I have the 32gb G-Skill Trident Z5 RGB 5600 C36 kit. Have it running at 6000Mhz with SA at 1.25V and VDD/VDDQ at 1.44V. Is this safe? Seems stable so far (have to do some more testing). I'm on the Asus RoG Maximus Z690 Extreme MoBo.


System agent isn't a problem. You can try reducing it slowly down to 1.15v to see if you maintain stability. Apparently, yeeting the E cores at the same time as overclocking memory may require higher VCCSA.
Most of the DDR5 datasheets specify a maximum operating voltage of 1.45v-1.50v on VDD/VDDQ, so as long as you can keep it cool, it shouldn't be a problem. Remember this platform is WAY too new. No one is going to be able to tell you what the "max" longterm voltages are because no one knows. Intel obviously does and they aren't going to tell you. You aren't going to find out until someone starts slowly frying their chips. Yet I still see people asking. If you want to be 100% safe, run jedec/XMP. If you want to be reasonable, don't exceed the maximum operational voltages. This is listed on page 1 for all to see (I'm surprised you haven't seen it). 








*Official* Intel DDR5 OC and 24/7 daily Memory Stability...


Let it begin, boys... @cstkl1 @Nizzen @PhoenixMDA http://www.adata.com/us/ https://gskill.com/ There's this guide: MemTestHelper/DDR4 OC Guide.md at oc-guide · integralfx/MemTestHelper While it's written for DDR4, and the specific timing recommendations don't really apply...




www.overclock.net





What's still shocking to me is that I post this stuff and people STILL ask 'what's the max safe voltage'. Anyone exceeding anything mentioned in any datasheet is "You're on your own." Besides why do you want to yeet things to 1.6v anyway for a couple of more FPS if you're not doing some hwbot or world record OC contest runs? Just stay below the absolute max limits and wait for someone else to fry their hardware at 1.6v, and if no one fries or degrades anything in 6 months, then yeet stuff some more. 
Some people have money to buy multiple chips, multiple memory kits, costing thousands of dollars and don't even care since they're rich. Not everyone is so fortunate.


----------



## Agent-A01

MikeGR7 said:


> Just accept there may be models that you are not aware of and only flash files that have the correct product numbers on the title.
> No one bothers to answer you and a couple other posts complaining about flashing not working let's pause for a second, you have a tuf D4. Like D4. NO D4 = NO BUENO. Wait for bios D4 okay.


No need to point out the obvious. I've seen many people post the same things and I had no problems flashing the same bios.
Typically user error and just as I said, no DDR5 TUF variant exists in ASUS product sku list.

Only DDR4 WIFI and non wifi. So the no D4 in the title is a moot point.

.... and yes, maybe there's a tuf D5 variant in the chinese market but they wouldn't be on this website trying to download it.


----------



## MikeGR7

Agent-A01 said:


> No need to point out the obvious. I've seen many people post the same things and I had no problems flashing the same bios.
> Typically user error and just as I said, no DDR5 TUF variant exists in ASUS product sku list.
> 
> Only DDR4 WIFI and non wifi. So the no D4 in the title is a moot point.
> 
> .... and yes, maybe there's a tuf D5 variant in the chinese market but they wouldn't be on this website trying to download it.


Okay okay, not going to insist.
You asked and you got an answer but it wasn't an answer you liked lol
Just know this, if it has no D4 it is not for your board.

Feel free to try to flash the non D4 file a hundred times more to take the user error variable out of the way.


----------



## Agent-A01

MikeGR7 said:


> Okay okay, not going to insist.
> You asked and you got an answer but it wasn't an answer you liked lol
> Just know this, if it has no D4 it is not for your board.
> 
> Feel free to try to flash the non D4 file a hundred times more to take the user error variable out of the way.


Are you deliberately trying to be an ass hat?
You haven't told me anything I don't already know. That's why I explicitly asked for a D4 variant because the posted one doesn't work.

I'll repeat what I just said.

There have been many people with the same board that said they couldn't flash BIOS posted by Shamino, with D4 in the name. I had no issues flashing those BIOS, multiple times.
That can be attributed to people flashing a wifi vs non wifi.

So of course I'll try it out myself.

I'll also point out that many BIOS posted here sometimes have typos that but have flashed with no problems.
I've exclusively used ASUS boards since P55 so I can say with experience on these 'beta' bios that typos happen.

Lastly, since no TUF DDR5 variant exists(try finding one) in the current market you can see why I would assume that with that and the previous information I laid out why no D4 in the name could just be a typo.

So yes, I can now safely deduce that there _may_ possibly be D5 TUF variants floating around or there was a mistake in creating the bios..

But yeah feel free to post 100 more times with stupid comments like that. /s


----------



## Agent-A01

Delete


----------



## NO22222

shamino1978 said:


> My answer will be biased so no comment. And not all boards like the same setting , while the board knows what ram is on it , the ram does not know which board it is on.


Intel Rapid Storage Technology, this will be turned on by default, which will cause inability to enter the system or affect system installation, so this should be turned off by default


----------



## EconomyFishFinger

Anyone have an SP78 12900KF that has any sort of headroom?

If so what settings voltageetc are you using?
I'm really struggling to get a stable overclock with mine. Cooling is not an issue, using a Quantum velocity2 block with a nexxxos 1080mm radiator. Think I have lost the silicone lottery?


----------



## Silent Scone

EconomyFishFinger said:


> Anyone have an SP78 12900KF that has any sort of headroom?
> 
> If so what settings voltageetc are you using?
> I'm really struggling to get a stable overclock with mine. Cooling is not an issue, using a Quantum velocity2 block with a nexxxos 1080mm radiator. Think I have lost the silicone lottery?


What are you using to test stability?


----------



## EconomyFishFinger

Silent Scone said:


> What are you using to test stability?


This is from the xtu cpu stress testing suite. I haven't yet been able to progress to prime or occt yet. 

Regards


----------



## Silent Scone

EconomyFishFinger said:


> This is from the xtu cpu stress testing suite. I haven't yet been able to progress to prime or occt yet.
> 
> Regards


Have you tried going to the AI Tweaker page? Should tell you everything you need to know. What are your SP ratings?


----------



## flyleaf_

flyleaf_ said:


> @shamino1978
> BIOS 0811 - Apex - G.Skill 6000 CL36 -> XMP1 passed 1000% Karhu for the first time, test is still running while I'm at work. Will try reboots under different temperature conditions later today but it's definitely an improvement on my setup. Thanks for your help!


Update: Karhu showed an error after ~2000%, way better but not quite 100% stable.


----------



## Muad_Dib69

darth_meh said:


> I believe the screenshot he included was a DRAM vendor's XMP2 profile.
> 351 volts is probably pushing it, but YMMV.





shamino1978 said:


> My answer will be biased so no comment. And not all boards like the same setting , while the board knows what ram is on it , the ram does not know which board it is on.





fortecosi said:


> In the Asus + Shamino case, I would trust much more to MB than a dram vendor. See the magic the Shamino is doing with the BIOS. While I can´t see a dram vendors update the SPD of my ram anyhow.


Ok thanks for the explanation. So there is really a database in the MB that put the right settings. For the gskill 6000 cas 36 it still not perfect then. some errors at stock but still stable in real world. But even the small cas 32 form asus OC prest profile doesn't boot. Shamino1978 if you need any test from me feel free to ask.


----------



## Silent Scone

flyleaf_ said:


> Update: Karhu showed an error after ~2000%, way better but not quite 100% stable.


Is it a gaming system? 1000-1500% coverage in Karhu is plenty. Everyone has their own pseudo-science methodology (including me) but with coverage, you need to draw a line somewhere if pushing. I think 1000% is plenty where data integrity isn't critical.

The DIMMs won't get worked that hard and lest not forget that it's possible to throw an error and the system flip a bit at any time if you run for long enough. As always, this is each to their own.


----------



## matique

thank you shamino for the latest 0811 bios. Was able to push my ram from 6000c32 stable to 6200c32. Previously on 0802 it wouldn't even boot 6200. Base sticks are 5600c36.


----------



## shamino1978

Tigra456 said:


> I will wait for the response, if the 6000 c36 will run now with XMP 1 before I ask for my z690-F…











ROG-STRIX-Z690-F-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0811.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com


----------



## Tigra456

@Shamino
You have a testbios for the Z690-F ?
Wanna try my luck…

haha… same time … thx


----------



## TomCom205

This Bios Version 0811 is working great on the *ROG Z690 Extreme* XMP1 and also the presets are working well.
Just strange the Voltage VDD and VDDQ it's sometimes not really understandable for example:
VDD 1.39V will not work and 1.365 Volt work well. While the whole time VDDQ stays at 1.4V.
This is also for the Sammy Kits.

This I guess makes it for alots of people hard to understand while the Presets suggest you to Set the Voltage to the upper Limits...

I thank you already for the quick Support here.


----------



## X909

Agent-A01 said:


> Hey boss, can we get a TUF 0812 like the strix-a D4?


YAAAA  Testing Testing Testing....

My observations if it helps... (TUF D4 WiFi, 4x DR B-DIE G.Skill 3200C14, so 64 GB): currently I have it running at 3466C14 with tight subs and its 10h error free in RAM-Test. Sometimes after retraining it fails quickly, dont know why. Yesterday I managed to boot it with 3866 (1.15V SA, 1.375V VDDQTX, 1.445V VDD). Never seen this before. If I change something, it denies to Post even if I change back. Loading Optimized Defaults helps then. Its a bit of a random behaviour.

Do you have any tips for me?


----------



## Arni90

Muad_Dib69 said:


> Thanks you so much for the explanation. So the xmp2 should be better because it's set by dram vendor they should now what to apply on the dram, no?


That's assuming DRAM vendors know what they're doing 🤔

I purchased a pair of Kingston 4800CL38 "Fury Beast" sticks, they can do 5400CL36


----------



## Grimley

X909 said:


> YAAAA  Testing Testing Testing....
> 
> My observations if it helps... (TUF D4 WiFi, 4x DR B-DIE G.Skill 3200C14, so 64 GB): currently I have it running at 3466C14 with tight subs and its 10h error free in RAM-Test. Sometimes after retraining it fails quickly, dont know why. Yesterday I managed to boot it with 3866 (1.15V SA, 1.375V VDDQTX, 1.445V VDD). Never seen this before. If I change something, it denies to Post even if I change back. Loading Optimized Defaults helps then. Its a bit of a random behaviour.
> 
> Do you have any tips for me?


What command rate can you get these 4 dimms to do? I've not been able to push my 4 sticks "F4-3200C14D" beyond 3200 without crashing  and I can only do 2T with them, I cannot get 1T


----------



## X909

Grimley said:


> What command rate can you get these 4 dimms to do? I've not been able to push my 4 sticks "F4-3200C14D" beyond 3200 without crashing  and I can only do 2T with them, I cannot get 1T


2T. Booted 1T up to 3466 some day but throws errors over errors. But I never expected 1T to work with 4 Ranks per channel.

Try 1.1 SA, 1.35 VDDQTX and 1.445 VDDQ with XMP1-Timings at 3400. Should work.


----------



## Grimley

X909 said:


> 2T. Booted 1T up to 3466 some day but throws errors over errors. But I never expected 1T to work with 4 Ranks per channel.
> 
> Try 1.1 SA, 1.35 VDDQTX and 1.445 VDDQ with XMP1-Timings at 3400. Should work.


Sorry to ask a noob question, but what will the increase in voltage for the SA, VDDQTX and VDDQ do over time? I've not really played around with these much before, mainly just normal vCore or RAM voltage.

Do you mind also just confirming the names of these options in the TUF Gaming BIOS? I have the same one as you


----------



## shamino1978

Tigra456 said:


> @Shamino
> You have a testbios for the Z690-F ?
> Wanna try my luck…
> 
> haha… same time … thx


check my post again


----------



## shamino1978

TomCom205 said:


> This Bios Version 0811 is working great on the *ROG Z690 Extreme* XMP1 and also the presets are working well.
> Just strange the Voltage VDD and VDDQ it's sometimes not really understandable for example:
> VDD 1.39V will not work and 1.365 Volt work well. While the whole time VDDQ stays at 1.4V.
> This is also for the Sammy Kits.
> 
> This I guess makes it for alots of people hard to understand while the Presets suggest you to Set the Voltage to the upper Limits...
> 
> I thank you already for the quick Support here.


its not really "understandable". you can feel for the trend by multiple testing and get a feel for what your setup likes.
its not just the high or low voltage but the combination of all voltages that make up the setup.
i mean vdd/vddq/txvddq/mc_volt/SA.
having the right combi alone can buy you +200+mhz.
there should ideally be a database setup for this contributed by users such as yourself.


----------



## darth_meh

Hi @shamino1978 - 
This may be a stupid question, but I'm curious what's involved with "improve XMP" behind the scenes. Is this a matter of testing various memory kits, making timing/voltage tweaks to find what settings are stable, and updating some kind of internal BIOS database? Or is more a matter of tweaking BIOS memory timing/voltage algorithms and bug fixing? Given the huge variation of hardware and variables at play, I imagine it's quite the challenge...


----------



## shamino1978

darth_meh said:


> Hi @shamino1978 -
> This may be a stupid question, but I'm curious what's involved with "improve XMP" behind the scenes. Is this a matter of testing various memory kits, making timing/voltage tweaks to find what settings are stable, and updating some kind of internal BIOS database? Or is more a matter of tweaking BIOS memory timing/voltage algorithms and bug fixing? Given the huge variation of hardware and variables at play, I imagine it's quite the challenge...


thats more, information for people behind the scenes, cant elaborate too much on that sorry. but your guesses are included, what we expose in the dram timing pages are also within the scope and many others, outside of it.


----------



## Tigra456

shamino1978 said:


> check my post again


Done. 6000c36 one over hour Prime Small FTTs no errors like the other bios before. Max RAM Temp around 60 Degree. Will share a Screen later and Check with other tools again. So i can say - thank you very much to this point.


----------



## truehighroller1

@shamino1978

If my rtls are 71-73-73-73 does that mean it's not technically lining up correctly? Should it be 71-71-73-73 or 71-71-71-71?

I'm starting to wonder more and more if I should get a 2 x 16gb instead of using my 4 x 8gb kit. I'd just hate to get another kit for no gain really.


----------



## X909

Grimley said:


> Sorry to ask a noob question, but what will the increase in voltage for the SA, VDDQTX and VDDQ do over time? I've not really played around with these much before, mainly just normal vCore or RAM voltage.
> 
> Do you mind also just confirming the names of these options in the TUF Gaming BIOS? I have the same one as you


These are the Voltages for the System Agent (Memory Controller), the Memory Interface of your CPU and the Memory itself. You definitely need to tune this to see clocks above 3200 Mhz with 4 DIMMs.


----------



## kmellz

@shamino1978 
Any specific reason cpu fan always defaults to minimum 60% after loading a profile on a fresh flash? (rog strix D4) My profile has 50% minimum on all fans, but after (flashback) flashing I have to do a q-fan tune before I can set it below 60%
New bios seems awesome!


----------



## X909

....and regarding the fans: my TUF doesnt allow to configure the CPU Fan Speed to 0%. But I would like to stop the (2nd) pump attached to it when the machine idles...


----------



## shamino1978

truehighroller1 said:


> @shamino1978
> 
> If my rtls are 71-73-73-73 does that mean it's not technically lining up correctly? Should it be 71-71-73-73 or 71-71-71-71?
> 
> I'm starting to wonder more and more if I should get a 2 x 16gb instead of using my 4 x 8gb kit. I'd just hate to get another kit for no gain really.


how so?
doesnt it make sense that the rtl is trained by rank precisely because the rank margins and delay time needed is not uniform?


----------



## truehighroller1

shamino1978 said:


> how so?
> doesnt it make sense that the rtl is trained by rank precisely because the rank margins and delay time needed is not uniform?


Sounds like you're saying it's okay then? Sorry language barrier. 

I appreciate everything you're doing.


----------



## shamino1978

truehighroller1 said:


> Sounds like you're saying it's okay then? Sorry language barrier.
> 
> I appreciate everything you're doing.


yes itsfine
thanks!


----------



## skullbringer

there is still some weirdness with s16b when you go to the limit. some boots it's completely stable for an hour tm5, then you go into bios, force memory training again and it errors after a few minutes im tm5.

I also checked all timings with "intel mem timings" in tool.exe, all identical, even terminations, rtls etc...


----------



## shamino1978

skullbringer said:


> there is still some weirdness with s16b when you go to the limit. some boots it's completely stable for an hour tm5, then you go into bios, force memory training again and it errors after a few minutes im tm5.
> 
> I also checked all timings with "intel mem timings" in tool.exe, all identical, even terminations, rtls etc...


The inconsistencies have plagued me ever since I started on ddr5, more prominent on micron an samsung when I push them, hynix not as bad but still there. .sux more when yiu need to tune them because you often get misled with changes you make. Welcome to the party .


----------



## skullbringer

shamino1978 said:


> The inconsistencies have plagued me ever since I started on ddr5, more prominent on micron an samsung when I push them, hynix not as bad but still there. .sux more when yiu need to tune them because you often get misled with changes you make. Welcome to the party .


thank you for confirming!! feels pretty much same as 4800+ on rkl with hynix djr...

so rocket lake really was early access for alder lake... oh, intel


----------



## bartomedia

What is mem vtt called on the Strix A D4?


----------



## Tigra456

@shamino1978 Thank you.


ASUS Z690-F Gaming Wifi
12700K
G.Skill 6000 CL 36 RGB 32GB @XMP 1

Pic 1 - Prime95 Large FTTs (i forgot to disable AVX)
Pic 2 - Testmem5

So i would say stable to this point ? Now i would go quit stresstests and go back to my daily gaming use...
Or do i need more Tests to get sure about stability ?


----------



## sblantipodi

I have just both 64GB of Corsair Dominator 5600MHz C36 (4x16GB).
Using a Z690 Extreme mobo...

If I don't enable XMP RAM works well, if I enable XMP, it doesn't boot 

Why?


----------



## blautemple

Tigra456 said:


> @shamino1978 Thank you.
> 
> 
> ASUS Z690-F Gaming Wifi
> 12700K
> G.Skill 6000 CL 36 RGB 32GB @XMP 1
> 
> Pic 1 - Prime95 Large FTTs (i forgot to disable AVX)
> Pic 2 - Testmem5
> 
> So i would say stable to this point ? Now i would go quit stresstests and go back to my daily gaming use...
> Or do i need more Tests to get sure about stability ?


No, TestMem5 ran way too short. Use 1usmus or anta777 Extreme config and let it run for at least one hour. I highly doubt that the XMP Profil is really stable.


----------



## shamino1978

sblantipodi said:


> I have just both 64GB of Corsair Dominator 5600MHz C36 (4x16GB).
> Using a Z690 Extreme mobo...
> 
> If I don't enable XMP RAM works well, if I enable XMP, it doesn't boot
> 
> Why?


you are not going to get that with 4 sticks.
all xmp profiles i see now are based on 2 sticks.
you need to lower that to 5200 or so.


----------



## Pennyw1s0r

Prime Z690-A/0811 Once a max CPU temp has been set, the last value saved remains active it seems, even after setting to Auto again.
Trident Z5 6000cl36 running fine on XMP1 since a few hours, hope it remains stable


----------



## skullbringer

sblantipodi said:


> I have just both 64GB of Corsair Dominator 5600MHz C36 (4x16GB).
> Using a Z690 Extreme mobo...
> 
> If I don't enable XMP RAM works well, if I enable XMP, it doesn't boot
> 
> Why?


xmp profiles that come with a kit are only intended for that kit, not multiple at the same time.

you should maybe be able to get 5600 dual rank running, but definitely needs manual tuning.


----------



## sblantipodi

shamino1978 said:


> you are not going to get that with 4 sticks.
> all xmp profiles i see now are based on 2 sticks.
> you need to lower that to 5200 or so.


thanks for the answer shamino. I appreciate it.

If I enable XMP I can't change frquency on my maximus extreme z690.
what settings should I use to get 5200MHz?


----------



## Muad_Dib69

blautemple said:


> No, TestMem5 ran way too short. Use 1usmus or anta777 Extreme config and let it run for at least one hour. I highly doubt that the XMP Profil is really stable.


indeed i try anta777 extreme and it crashes in 2 sec bios 811 gskill 6000 cas36 xmp1

but it's stable for normal usage


----------



## sblantipodi

skullbringer said:


> xmp profiles that come with a kit are only intended for that kit, not multiple at the same time.
> 
> you should maybe be able to get 5600 dual rank running, but definitely needs manual tuning.


ok, I need to understand what to change on my maximus...


----------



## LionAlonso

Muad_Dib69 said:


> indeed i try anta777 extreme and it crashes in 2 sec bios 811 gskill 6000 cas36 xmp1
> 
> but it's stable for normal usage


If it crashes so early u may get OS corrupted.


----------



## Martin778

2x16 G.Skill 6000 C36, both XMP I and II unusable, crashing at desktop. Z690 APEX w. 0811 BIOS.
MEMORY_MANAGEMENT bsods but in an odd manner, seems to happen mostly at idle...now trying MemTestPro and also showing errors (starting at around 12%).
CPU also tested fine with HyperX Beast 4800C38 kit. @shamino1978 is the 'special BIOS' for the APEX safe to use? No funky overvolt thingies?


----------



## Muad_Dib69

LionAlonso said:


> If it crashes so early u may get OS corrupted.


why ? it worked perfectly with other ram and i have small error with basic version of tmm5, full crash with extrem profile (i tried only once). why blamming the os?


----------



## LionAlonso

Muad_Dib69 said:


> why ? it worked perfectly with other ram and i have small error with basic version of tmm5, full crash with extrem profile (i tried only once). why blamming the os?


Im not blaming anyone.
Im just saying that with that kind of stability on ram, ur OS “could” get corrupted long or even short therm.
Keep it in mind if u have valuable things.


----------



## edkieferlp

sblantipodi said:


> ok, I need to understand what to change on my maximus...


You should be able to set XMP1, then go into dram timings and manually edit the values to match or just write down primary timings.
Then with XMP off make sure the ram timings match what you wrote or saved before(leave all timings below primary on auto).
then change the ram freq to 5200 or start at 4400 as I think that is Intel 4 stick support freq and work your way up the freq steps.
Also note the 3 voltages when you had XMP, ram voltage, SA and VDDQ, so manually edit those to match the XMP ones.


----------



## Muad_Dib69

ok, i have run full sfc scan and co, no problem


----------



## sblantipodi

this is my default bios settings.










If I manually set the frequency to 5200MHz I can boot but CPUZ always shows 2000MHz.
Isn't a DDR at 2000MHz operating at 4GHz? 

If yes why?

I see 2001 MHz in CPU with default bios settings and by manually setting 5200MHz, why?


----------



## asdkj1740

shamino1978 said:


> The inconsistencies have plagued me ever since I started on ddr5, more prominent on micron an samsung when I push them, hynix not as bad but still there. .sux more when yiu need to tune them because you often get misled with changes you make. Welcome to the party .


would you explain more about whats going on with that particular gskill 6000u3636e//6000u4040e trident z5 samsung kits? 
it seems messed up across almost all mobo vendors.
should we expect other brand's samsung 6000mhz or above d5 kit would experience the same instability even with just xmp enabled?
these kits are super expensive now and very difficult to get and most likely being sold in bundle, once it is bought then it is pain in the ass to return it and get another d5 kit.

appreciate your works, thanks for the help!


----------



## edkieferlp

sblantipodi said:


> this is my default bios settings.
> 
> View attachment 2538056
> 
> 
> If I manually set the frequency to 5200MHz I can boot but CPUZ always shows 2000MHz.
> Isn't a DDR at 2000MHz operating at 4GHz?
> 
> If yes why?
> 
> I see 2001 MHz in CPU with default bios settings and by manually setting 5200MHz, why?


Are you setting AI OC tweaker to manual?
After you make changes go right back in bios and check the settings are ok.
Yes, your pic shows 4000mhz not 5200 (2600).

I don't have your MB so I don't know all settings but it should be straightforward.


----------



## Martin778

asdkj1740 said:


> would you explain more about whats going on with that particular gskill 6000u3636e//6000u4040e trident z5 samsung kits?
> it seems messed up across almost all mobo vendors.
> should we expect other brand's samsung 6000mhz or above d5 kit would experience the same instability even with just xmp enabled?
> these kits are super expensive now and very difficult to get and most likely being sold in bundle, once it is bought then it is pain in the ass to return it and get another d5 kit.
> 
> appreciate your works, thanks for the help!


I hope not...I've just sold my 'slow' 4800C38 kit today and grabbed that 6000C36 kit hoping it would be comparable to B-Die, being Samsung.


----------



## Baasha

First time seeing your post with the limits etc.

Okay, so I'm well below the limits for VDD/VDDQ then at 1.44V. Temps on the DIMMs hit 51C at the hottest (hours of Karhu and then MemTest5 w/ anta777 profile).

I'm stable at 6000mhz CL38 with those settings so will try to bump up VDD/VDDQ to 1.46V or 1.48V. Would like to bring SA down to at least 1.20V so will have to test that as well.

Will eventually upgrade to a SK Hynix kit (want 6400Mhz stable or better) but for now, this Samsung kit is just fine.

Thanks.



Falkentyne said:


> System agent isn't a problem. You can try reducing it slowly down to 1.15v to see if you maintain stability. Apparently, yeeting the E cores at the same time as overclocking memory may require higher VCCSA.
> Most of the DDR5 datasheets specify a maximum operating voltage of 1.45v-1.50v on VDD/VDDQ, so as long as you can keep it cool, it shouldn't be a problem. Remember this platform is WAY too new. No one is going to be able to tell you what the "max" longterm voltages are because no one knows. Intel obviously does and they aren't going to tell you. You aren't going to find out until someone starts slowly frying their chips. Yet I still see people asking. If you want to be 100% safe, run jedec/XMP. If you want to be reasonable, don't exceed the maximum operational voltages. This is listed on page 1 for all to see (I'm surprised you haven't seen it).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Official* Intel DDR5 OC and 24/7 daily Memory Stability...
> 
> 
> Let it begin, boys... @cstkl1 @Nizzen @PhoenixMDA http://www.adata.com/us/ https://gskill.com/ There's this guide: MemTestHelper/DDR4 OC Guide.md at oc-guide · integralfx/MemTestHelper While it's written for DDR4, and the specific timing recommendations don't really apply...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What's still shocking to me is that I post this stuff and people STILL ask 'what's the max safe voltage'. Anyone exceeding anything mentioned in any datasheet is "You're on your own." Besides why do you want to yeet things to 1.6v anyway for a couple of more FPS if you're not doing some hwbot or world record OC contest runs? Just stay below the absolute max limits and wait for someone else to fry their hardware at 1.6v, and if no one fries or degrades anything in 6 months, then yeet stuff some more.
> Some people have money to buy multiple chips, multiple memory kits, costing thousands of dollars and don't even care since they're rich. Not everyone is so fortunate.


----------



## sblantipodi

sblantipodi said:


> this is my default bios settings.
> 
> View attachment 2538056
> 
> 
> If I manually set the frequency to 5200MHz I can boot but CPUZ always shows 2000MHz.
> Isn't a DDR at 2000MHz operating at 4GHz?
> 
> If yes why?
> 
> I see 2001 MHz in CPU with default bios settings and by manually setting 5200MHz, why?




I have tried with another kit also.
I have 2 banks of Patriot 4800MHz C40, even with the two patriot I have the same problem.


----------



## sblantipodi

edkieferlp said:


> Are you setting AI OC tweaker to manual?
> After you make changes go right back in bios and check the settings are ok.
> Yes, your pic shows 4000mhz not 5200 (2600).
> 
> I don't have your MB so I don't know all settings but it should be straightforward.


yes tried it, no luck.


----------



## Carillo

This seems to be the best I could do with my Samsung kit

6200 Cl32 1T---- 1,45VDD/1,48VDDQ 1,20SA / 1,25MC

Any tips ? Hove to improve ? 










Edit: Improved latency :


----------



## Brandur

I have a question for RAM experts. Is it normal behaviour, that the VDD/VDDQ Voltage (if set to 1.3V in BIOS) frequently varies and is different from each Ram Stick?

One of my Ram Sticks has VDD from 1.245V-1.305V and the other Ram Stick has VDD from 1.290-1.320V? Is it normal or is there something wrong?

Also total power varies between each Ram Stick. One has 0.125W in idle and load 4.375W and the other Ram Stick has 0.375W in idle and load 4.875W.


----------



## Falkentyne

BTW in the new 0811 Shamino Bios, the AVX 256 instructions is capped at x51 multiplier again (or a fixed -1 offset) at x52 multiplier (idk about higher as I instant hardlock/BSOD in Stockfish at any higher than x52)
(Stockfish (@shamino1978 loves trolling me by calling this smallfish or bonefish), Prime95, etc). To fix this and get your x52 multiplier back, set the AVX512 offset to -1 in the BIOS (this is a new option), which restores the AVX256 instructions fixed offset workaround for >x51 multiplier. 

Now you can have your AVX512 instructions for RPCS3 emulators without an offset again, and your Stockfish Super Extreme Falkentyne Stable Stress Testing for your yeeted SP100 chips at >x52 multiplier.


----------



## Carillo

Brandur said:


> I have a question for RAM experts. Is it normal behaviour, that the VDD/VDDQ Voltage (if set to 1.3V in BIOS) frequently varies and is different from each Ram Stick?
> 
> One of my Ram Sticks has VDD from 1.245V-1.305V and the other Ram Stick has VDD from 1.290-1.320V? Is it normal or is there something wrong?
> 
> Also total power varies between each Ram Stick. One has 0.125W in idle and load 4375W and the other Ram Stick has 0.375W in idle and load 4875W.


i would love to see a ram-stick that pulls 4 kilo watts 😂


----------



## Brandur

Sorry forgot the "." 

Any answers to my question?


----------



## Carillo

Brandur said:


> Sorry forgot the "."
> 
> Any answers to my question?


Yeah i understood that, could not resist  Look at my picture, both stick is at 1.45 VDD in bios, but raises VDD on one stick as you can see on timing config


----------



## Arni90

Brandur said:


> I have a question for RAM experts. Is it normal behaviour, that the VDD/VDDQ Voltage (if set to 1.3V in BIOS) frequently varies and is different from each Ram Stick?
> 
> One of my Ram Sticks has VDD from 1.245V-1.305V and the other Ram Stick has VDD from 1.290-1.320V? Is it normal or is there something wrong?
> 
> Also total power varies between each Ram Stick. One has 0.125W in idle and load 4.375W and the other Ram Stick has 0.375W in idle and load 4.875W.


I'm seeing similar results with my Micron DIMMs

Still plugging away slowly, but this is probably somewhat close to "stable" in my case








I'll probably get my hands on some better sticks next year, which will probably be slightly more impressive.


----------



## sblantipodi

shamino1978 said:


> you are not going to get that with 4 sticks.
> all xmp profiles i see now are based on 2 sticks.
> you need to lower that to 5200 or so.


the only things I can get stable is 4.4GHz.
but what is the point of DDR5 if I can't go past 4.4GHz on 4 banks?

DDR5 at 4.4GHz is much slower than DDR4 am I wrong?
are there some tweaks you can suggest?

thank you


----------



## j o e

I have an issue with my 2x corsair dominator 5200 c40 16 gb sticks, I'm running xmp at the rated timmings and voltage. every time I restart the computer I get a code 55 which is memory... however if I shut the power supply off and turn it on again it will boot into windows no problem. I just flashed the motherboard to the latest bios and the problem didnt go away. I reseated the ram also and I have the same problem. I just tried running the ram at 4000mhz no luck. also the computer is totally stable in memtest at 5200. The computer runs fine and is stable. I have no overclock on the cpu yet, it’s just annoying having to cycle my psu after every restart


----------



## cstkl1

i9-12900k - SP93 
Asus MZ690 Apex - Bios 0806
2x16gb G.Skill 6600 28-37-37-28 1T 280 @1.65
SA|MC|txvddq = 0.9|1.55|1.55


----------



## Agent-A01

cstkl1 said:


> i9-12900k - SP93
> Asus MZ690 Apex - Bios 0806
> 2x16gb G.Skill 6600 28-37-37-28 1T 280 @1.65
> SA|MC|txvddq = 0.9|1.55|1.55


How is tRAS 28 possible?

For DDR4 tRAS minimum floor value is tRTP + tRP. 
Has DDR5 changed that?


----------



## Tigra456

blautemple said:


> No, TestMem5 ran way too short. Use 1usmus or anta777 Extreme config and let it run for at least one hour. I highly doubt that the XMP Profil is really stable.











Is it possible to say witch voltage or timing produce a error like this ?
How I said, it’s XMP1

greetings


----------



## cstkl1

Agent-A01 said:


> How is tRAS 28 possible?
> 
> For DDR4 tRAS minimum floor value is tRTP + tRP.
> Has DDR5 changed that?


rkl/adl tras floor is
gear 1 14,
gear 2 28. 26 is actually stable but saw no diff

it follows through from rkl both hynix chipset. samsung ddr5 no idea.

tras 28 ddr5 hynix was started by me after i formulated few timing relation for es cpu. 
it seemed true that rkl timings some had transferred over

theres jdec formulation vs chipset/imc architecture


----------



## Alberto_It

After two weeks of trying my profile I think that there is something wrong.

Maybe on P-Cores and E-Cores frequency that I have set up on the bios.

I use OCTVB and others values suggest on the guide of @RobertoSampaio 

But I have encountered on Cinebench 23 temperatures until 85 C degrees that I think gives me lower performance than expected.

Also Time Spy Cpu score is under 21000 points









Result not found







www.3dmark.com





Suggestions? 

I share my Bios settings


----------



## cstkl1

Alberto_It said:


> After two weeks of trying my profile I think that there is something wrong.
> 
> Maybe on P-Cores and E-Cores frequency that I have set up on the bios.
> 
> I use OCTVB and others values suggest on the guide of @RobertoSampaio
> 
> But I have encountered on Cinebench 23 temperatures until 85 C degrees that I think gives me lower performance than expected.
> 
> Also Time Spy Cpu score is under 21000 points
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Result not found
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.3dmark.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Suggestions?
> 
> I share my Bios settings


TS/FS are two buggy benchmarks for cpu.


----------



## Alberto_It

cstkl1 said:


> TS/FS are two buggy benchmarks for cpu.


I have asked for suggestions, if there's something that I can adjust on my settings for better performance. 

TS is buggy only for me? I've seen several scores of users with my same Cpu boost frequency or lower and they obtain a better score. All over 21000. Big difference between mine and your


----------



## shamino1978

asdkj1740 said:


> would you explain more about whats going on with that particular gskill 6000u3636e//6000u4040e trident z5 samsung kits?
> it seems messed up across almost all mobo vendors.
> should we expect other brand's samsung 6000mhz or above d5 kit would experience the same instability even with just xmp enabled?
> these kits are super expensive now and very difficult to get and most likely being sold in bundle, once it is bought then it is pain in the ass to return it and get another d5 kit.
> 
> appreciate your works, thanks for the help!


If its consistent across all boards pls report this to dram vendor, we cannot be responsible for everything. Thanks


----------



## Nizzen

j o e said:


> I have an issue with my 2x corsair dominator 5200 c40 16 gb sticks, I'm running xmp at the rated timmings and voltage. every time I restart the computer I get a code 55 which is memory... however if I shut the power supply off and turn it on again it will boot into windows no problem. I just flashed the motherboard to the latest bios and the problem didnt go away. I reseated the ram also and I have the same problem. I just tried running the ram at 4000mhz no luck. also the computer is totally stable in memtest at 5200. The computer runs fine and is stable. I have no overclock on the cpu yet, it’s just annoying having to cycle my psu after every restart


Try to boot one stick. Use dimm slot 2 far away from the cpu. Test both dimms.
What motherboard?

Try to reseat cpu, if both sticks working, but not all dimmslots.


----------



## Merkor

shamino1978 said:


> If its consistent across all boards pls report this to dram vendor, we cannot be responsible for everything. Thanks


I think, what asdkj1740 means is, that these G.Skill Kits and/or Samsung sticks with high frequency and low timings are causing problems on all Z690 based mainboards in general. It is not a matter of blaming Asus for everything.

I am still waiting for my G.Skill to fire up my Z690 Hero, but these reports of XMP instability are really frustrating. So it would be great to hear, if there is hope, that all of these problems can be sorted out by your BIOS magic in the near future or if there even appears to be a hardware failure with the sticks, which G.Skill is not admitting.


----------



## Nizzen

Merkor said:


> I think, what asdkj1740 means is, that these G.Skill Kits and/or Samsung sticks with high frequency and low timings are causing problems on all Z690 based mainboards in general. It is not a matter of blaming Asus for everything.
> 
> I am still waiting for my G.Skill to fire up my Z690 Hero, but these reports of XMP instability are really frustrating. So it would be great to hear, if there is hope, that all of these problems can be sorted out by your BIOS magic in the near future or if there even appears to be a hardware failure with the sticks, which G.Skill is not admitting.


Is it legal to use XMP here on OCN? 👽🙈


----------



## satinghostrider

Nizzen said:


> Is it legal to use XMP here on OCN? 👽🙈


Better question would be is it legal to use jedec standard on OCN? Lol


----------



## cstkl1

hynix.. 
tcl on ddr5 doesnt behave like ddr4
infact lower tcl has less reliance to cpu imc but requires high dram vdd. 

DDR5 gets very hot so this not a reliable way atm to set low tcl high vdd. 

put aside aida pretty numbers theres actually no significant impact say c28 vs say c36 on ddr5

high tcl introduces issues with cpu imc.. sa etc. 
low tcl requires ddr5 active cooling.

so see what u can take from this in regards to samsung ddr5. my solution was clear.. wc the baskets go high vdd low tcl.

running these external test config etc . how sure are u these errors are not heat or other factor related cpu etc .. it doesnt seem to be timings.


----------



## shamino1978

Merkor said:


> I think, what asdkj1740 means is, that these G.Skill Kits and/or Samsung sticks with high frequency and low timings are causing problems on all Z690 based mainboards in general. It is not a matter of blaming Asus for everything.
> 
> I am still waiting for my G.Skill to fire up my Z690 Hero, but these reports of XMP instability are really frustrating. So it would be great to hear, if there is hope, that all of these problems can be sorted out by your BIOS magic in the near future or if there even appears to be a hardware failure with the sticks, which G.Skill is not admitting.


thats what weve been trying to do all this while right, but there will come a point of time when you will run into overfitting problems. if you attempt to force fit certain setups you break other setups. thats why we read some ddr4 users say this bios is better , another say that. and why cmo profiles shared do not work on some setups. even at gear2 that imc plays an important role as well and theres no way you can know how it will work on another imc.


----------



## Exilon

I posted this in the 12900K CPU thread but it might of interest to other Strix users.
I was having idle restart issues and @Xiph mentioned that theirs was resolved by re-loading defaults and manually applying every setting instead of using a saved profile from an earlier BIOS version.

I did so and found that the idle restarts are gone but the CPU would no longer hit 400/500MHz P/E core idle at these C-states settings:

CPU C-states [Enabled]
Enhanced C-states [Enabled]
Package C State Limit [Cpu Default]










Were there some power settings not exposed through the UI being loaded? Is that even how the user profiles work?


----------



## Martin778

So...should I return that Samsung 6000c36 kit and get a Hynix one?
Is Hynix currently the meta for DDR5?


----------



## asdkj1740

Nizzen said:


> Is it legal to use XMP here on OCN? 👽🙈


this kit can be a mess even at 4800 default.



Merkor said:


> I think, what asdkj1740 means is, that these G.Skill Kits and/or Samsung sticks with high frequency and low timings are causing problems on all Z690 based mainboards in general. It is not a matter of blaming Asus for everything.
> 
> I am still waiting for my G.Skill to fire up my Z690 Hero, but these reports of XMP instability are really frustrating. So it would be great to hear, if there is hope, that all of these problems can be sorted out by your BIOS magic in the near future or if there even appears to be a hardware failure with the sticks, which G.Skill is not admitting.


not trying to blame any mobo vendors.
since i have noticed these users feedback, i have been kept tracking asus websites and i have not seen these 6000u3636e kits got listed in asus qvl at least on apex.
as far as i know gskill is the one who put asus Maximus series z690 models into their qvl listed on their product page.
should we still have faith in Samsung die which is coming up (soon?) among other ram vendors such as team / adata / corsair d5 kit?

again, the rated xmp profile, not talking about manual tweaks, not complaining zero additional oc headroom.
and again, i believe everyone here is grateful to mobo vendors and power users here, who make oc.net unique.


----------



## Muad_Dib69

asdkj1740 said:


> this kit can be a mess even at 4800 default.
> 
> 
> not trying to blame any mobo vendors.
> since i have noticed these users feedback, i have been kept tracking asus websites and i have not seen these 6000u3636e kits got listed in asus qvl at least on apex.
> as far as i know gskill is the one who put asus Maximus series z690 models into their qvl listed on their product page.
> should we still have faith in Samsung die which is coming up (soon?) among other ram vendors such as team / adata / corsair d5 kit?
> 
> again, the rated xmp profile, not talking about manual tweaks, not complaining zero additional oc headroom.
> and again, i believe everyone here is grateful to mobo vendors and power users here, who make oc.net unique.


It's true they are not officially supported on my formula neither.

I have sent an email to gskill support asking if they are doing something not not


----------



## matique

Carillo said:


> This seems to be the best I could do with my Samsung kit
> 
> 6200 Cl32 1T---- 1,45VDD/1,48VDDQ 1,20SA / 1,25MC
> 
> Any tips ? Hove to improve ?
> 
> View attachment 2538076
> 
> 
> Edit: Improved latency :
> 
> View attachment 2538077


5K ring...ecores disabled? Those timings are already tighter than mine haha. With 4.0 ring I'm at 53ns.


----------



## LionAlonso

Alberto_It said:


> After two weeks of trying my profile I think that there is something wrong.
> 
> Maybe on P-Cores and E-Cores frequency that I have set up on the bios.
> 
> I use OCTVB and others values suggest on the guide of @RobertoSampaio
> 
> But I have encountered on Cinebench 23 temperatures until 85 C degrees that I think gives me lower performance than expected.
> 
> Also Time Spy Cpu score is under 21000 points
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Result not found
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.3dmark.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Suggestions?
> 
> I share my Bios settings


Disable vbs and hypervisor.
Also disable virtualisation in bios.


----------



## ThinbinJim

asdkj1740 said:


> this kit can be a mess even at 4800 default.
> 
> 
> not trying to blame any mobo vendors.
> since i have noticed these users feedback, i have been kept tracking asus websites and i have not seen these 6000u3636e kits got listed in asus qvl at least on apex.
> as far as i know gskill is the one who put asus Maximus series z690 models into their qvl listed on their product page.
> should we still have faith in Samsung die which is coming up (soon?) among other ram vendors such as team / adata / corsair d5 kit?
> 
> again, the rated xmp profile, not talking about manual tweaks, not complaining zero additional oc headroom.
> and again, i believe everyone here is grateful to mobo vendors and power users here, who make oc.net unique.


Could be flawed testing on G.skill's part. I achieved 1600% HCI coverage over night, and BSOD on the same windows session within 10 minutes using google chrome with my 6000 C40 samsungs. If they validated using only HCI memtest, then that could explain the huge instability in regular use at xmp. The kit is VERY wonky and could error at 4800 C40 full jedec in TM5 extreme1 anta777. 
Good to see some progress on the bios side with Shamino's help and hope this is a fixable problem.


----------



## cstkl1

Alberto_It said:


> I have asked for suggestions, if there's something that I can adjust on my settings for better performance.
> 
> TS is buggy only for me? I've seen several scores of users with my same Cpu boost frequency or lower and they obtain a better score. All over 21000. Big difference between mine and your


CB is a good benchmark quite consistent. 

3dmark theres os etc consideration to get better scores. dont fall into that never ending pit hole


----------



## Tigra456

XMP 1 - 6000 C36.

VDD and VDDQ from 1,3 to 1,35 Volt.(specs from the the Asus DDR5 OC Guide)

SA 1,25
TXVDDQ 1,35
MC 1,25

Hope that’s a level we can call it „stable“ 
…


----------



## sblantipodi

Tigra456 said:


> XMP 1 - 6000 C36.
> 
> VDD and VDDQ from 1,3 to 1,35 Volt.(specs from the the Asus DDR5 OC Guide)
> 
> SA 1,25
> TXVDDQ 1,35
> MC 1,25
> 
> Hope that’s a level we can call it „stable“
> …
> 
> View attachment 2538241


Can you link me to the Asus ddr5 oc guide please?

Where are those settings? Thanks.


----------



## Tigra456

link to the pdf guide is here in this thread…


----------



## Nizzen

Martin778 said:


> So...should I return that Samsung 6000c36 kit and get a Hynix one?
> Is Hynix currently the meta for DDR5?


Where to get Hynix LOL
Hynix is meta "impossible to find" 
Yes Hynix is better than Mircon and Samsung today.


----------



## Agent-A01

Replaced the thermal tape on my 4000CL17 kit with thermal pads. Reduced temperatures by 3c.
41C to 38c running CL14 4000 Gear1 @ 1.52v.

I was seeing random errors when >41c on occasion so I guess it was worth the trouble lol.
4133 was too temperature sensitive so I'll try it again.


----------



## Martin778

That's B-Die for you! The temp-primadonna's when OC'ed, mine always got wonky and would throw random errors in memtest above 40*C.
Makes you want those massive Thermalright HR07's again...I doubt these will even cover the IC on taller DDR4 PCB's, though.

@Nizzen I hope someone will make a new "DDR5 x-die finder" soon, just like with B-Die.


----------



## sblantipodi

My Dominator Platinum 5600MHz C36 set the 
"Memory Controller Voltage" to 1.2V a
and the
"Memory VPP Voltage" to 1.8V.

Is this safe for daily use?

Asus bios shows Memory Controller Voltage in yellow, this is why I'm worried.


----------



## sblantipodi

Tigra456 said:


> View attachment 2538248
> 
> link to the pdf guide is here in this thread…


is there something like this for "5600MHz memory"?
I have four kits of Dominator 5600MHz C36 Samsung memory and I'm struggling getting 4.8GHz stable.

what a crap those DDR5. never tought that they can be so bad.


----------



## Martin778

I just noticed "Samsung 2x8 SR - 1.435V VDD / VDDQ" vs 1.25/1.30 for Hynix.
That's a big OOF, for me everything above 1.35V feels sketchy  At least now I can boot XMP 1 and run Aida64 without BSODing but 65ns is piss poor and literally going back to Athlon64 era latency.
Thinking about sending them back but where can one get Hynix kits? I'd otherwise be left with 2x8GB 4800C40's for some time again, these were like 80-85ns...










And they are still unstable and get scorching hot for DDR's, lord almighty...even at 1.435V:








They seem to act like B-Die = hit x temp and get errors as the first 15% went error free and then it started.


----------



## Nizzen

Martin778 said:


> I just noticed "Samsung 2x8 SR - 1.435V VDD / VDDQ" vs 1.25/1.30 for Hynix.
> That's a big OOF, for me everything above 1.35V feels sketchy  At least now I can boot XMP 1 and run Aida64 without BSODing but 65ns is piss poor and literally going back to Athlon64 era latency.
> Thinking about sending them back but where can one get Hynix kits? I'd then be left with 2x8GB 4800C40's for some time again, these were like 80-85ns...
> View attachment 2538262
> 
> 
> And they are still unstable and get scorching hot for DDR's, lord almighty...even at 1.435V:
> View attachment 2538263
> 
> They seem to act like B-Die = hit x temp and get errors as the first 15% went error free and then it started.


Do something with that temp. Fan over dimms= win.
I load 6000c32 1t samsung Apex profile, and it's stable with 0.95 SA
Using g.skill 6000c40


----------



## Martin778

What are your other voltages? The weird thing is, that if I don't bump up the voltages massively, they will crash displaying desktop.


----------



## Nizzen

Martin778 said:


> What are your other voltages? The weird thing is, that if I don't bump up the voltages massively, they will crash displaying desktop.


48c max on dimms after 1 hour BF 2042 
120mm low rpm over dimms.


----------



## Martin778

Hmm, I went to the BIOS, saw two 6000 Samsung profiles (what is the difference?) but neither post.


----------



## Nizzen

Martin778 said:


> Hmm, I went to the BIOS, saw two 6000 Samsung profiles (what is the difference?) but neither post.


last 6k is c32. First is like c38 or something


----------



## Martin778

Ok, it trained now:


----------



## matique

Nizzen said:


> last 6k is c32. First is like c38 or something


Both should be c36/40 depending on your sticks. Xmp1 has motherboard calculate some auto settings, xmp2 uses values from your ram manufacturer.


----------



## Nizzen

matique said:


> Both should be c36/40 depending on your sticks. Xmp1 has motherboard calculate some auto settings, xmp2 uses values from your ram manufacturer.


I'm talking about Apex memory profiles presets


----------



## Martin778

Correct, these are custom ASUS profiles, not using XMP. I've tried Memtest and it can pass 7-10% without errors (hey, it's already a start!) but they need airflow for sure. Both idle at 39.8*C.
Maybe I should buy these tiny 40mm Noctua fans and glue them together, then I'd only need a bracket to attach them.


----------



## Nizzen

Martin778 said:


> Correct, these are custom ASUS profiles, not using XMP. I've tried Memtest and it can pass 7-10% without errors (hey, it's already a start!) but they need airflow for sure. Both idle at 39.8*C.
> Maybe I should buy these tiny 40mm Noctua fans and glue them together, then I'd only need a bracket to attach them.








Alseye Pc Fan Ddr Memory Cooler With Dual 60mm Fan Pwm Ram Cooler - Buy Alseye,Ram Cooler,Ddr Memory Cooler Product on Alibaba.com


Alseye Pc Fan Ddr Memory Cooler With Dual 60mm Fan Pwm Ram Cooler - Buy Alseye,Ram Cooler,Ddr Memory Cooler Product on Alibaba.com



www.alibaba.com





+

2x
*Noctua NF-A6x25 FLX 60mm*


----------



## Agent-A01

1.53 VDIMM
1.21 SA
1.48 VDDQ


----------



## Martin778

I'd probably have to cut them up a bit to fit on the 2 DIMM Apex. 
Just noticed something weird, when using that ASUS OC RAM profile and having AI OC on I was suddenly getting artifacts on the screen, mostly in the middle. Finally it BSOD'ed with Driver DMA Violation and had much trouble POSTing again.
Doesn't seem GPU related though: 




Will play with it some more later on, but will probably end up returning it.


----------



## beardlessduck

Any recommendations on the best settings for 4x Micron 16GB 5200 sticks on 0811?

I tried XMP 1 and it failed after about 6-7 min in memtest86.

Currently trying the built in profile for 4x Micron 16GB sticks at 5200, but the timings are actually tighter than XMP so I don't have a lot of faith. I'm having trouble understanding why the built in profile has such tight timings when RAM compatibility is so bad. Wouldn't it be more likely to work at the XMP rated speed than faster?

Are we waiting for BIOS updates, RAM profile updates, or should we plan to replace our RAM in the future? Or will we need to replace the whole motherboard in the future?

I'm thankful that Asus is trying to make improvements but all these compatibility issues are killing my productivity.

Edit: Built in profile for 4x Micron sticks @5200 failed after 8 min


----------



## matique

Nizzen said:


> I'm talking about Apex memory profiles presets


Oops, my bad!


----------



## D-EJ915

beardlessduck said:


> Any recommendations on the best settings for 4x Micron 16GB 5200 sticks on 0811?
> 
> I tried XMP 1 and it failed after about 6-7 min in memtest86.
> 
> Currently trying the built in profile for 4x Micron 16GB sticks at 5200, but the timings are actually tighter than XMP so I don't have a lot of faith. I'm having trouble understanding why the built in profile has such tight timings when RAM compatibility is so bad. Wouldn't it be more likely to work at the XMP rated speed than faster?
> 
> Are we waiting for BIOS updates, RAM profile updates, or should we plan to replace our RAM in the future? Or will we need to replace the whole motherboard in the future?
> 
> I'm thankful that Asus is trying to make improvements but all these compatibility issues are killing my productivity.
> 
> Edit: Built in profile for 4x Micron sticks @5200 failed after 8 min


The overclocking profiles are for "good" sticks aka better than usual so won't work too well with average or not so great sticks. I'd load them up then try lowering the frequency a bit to see if they work with that speed.


----------



## beardlessduck

D-EJ915 said:


> The overclocking profiles are for "good" sticks aka better than usual so won't work too well with average or not so great sticks. I'd load them up then try lowering the frequency a bit to see if they work with that speed.


Thanks, I was thinking that might be a good idea.

I would LOVE a safe mode profile for 4 sticks...


----------



## owikh84

Nizzen said:


> Alseye Pc Fan Ddr Memory Cooler With Dual 60mm Fan Pwm Ram Cooler - Buy Alseye,Ram Cooler,Ddr Memory Cooler Product on Alibaba.com
> 
> 
> Alseye Pc Fan Ddr Memory Cooler With Dual 60mm Fan Pwm Ram Cooler - Buy Alseye,Ram Cooler,Ddr Memory Cooler Product on Alibaba.com
> 
> 
> 
> www.alibaba.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> +
> 
> 2x
> *Noctua NF-A6x25 FLX 60mm*


Exactly what I'm using for my test bench, but I modded it a bit so that these fans sit closer the the RAM sticks and below the RAM cooler fan bracket.


----------



## Agent-A01

owikh84 said:


> Exactly what I'm using for my test bench, but I modded it a bit so that these fans sit closer the the RAM sticks and below the RAM cooler fan bracket.
> 
> View attachment 2538291


Whats your max temps under TM5 or whatever?


----------



## owikh84

Agent-A01 said:


> Whats your max temps under TM5 or whatever?


Om Z590, 4x8GB DDR4 4133 17-17-17-37-2T at 1.4v. HCl memtest
Without fans: 59c
With fans: 45c

Ambient: 30c here
So, that's 14c reduction in temps


----------



## the_patchelor

since my Coffee Lake days on good old Gene XI, I cool my overclocked memory with a small 3D printed fan "bridge", easy to plug on my test bench AIO thumb screws...


----------



## skullbringer

Both my kits start throwing intermittent errors when load cycling, when they are not actively cooled, at above 1.435V pretty exactly, curiously. 
Turning up Fsw helps, but in turn also makes the dimms run a tiny bit hotter, which again makes the issue worse. Seems like a pretty stupid idea to have the voltage source and consumer share the same passive cooling, for overclocking at least.

Still trying to get any S16B OC stable across at least 2 re-trainings, testing 6000 32-37-54 1T 1.42 V atm. The loosened tRCD seems to eliminate the boot-to-boot/ training-to-training weirdness 

Intel needs to get their heads out of their butts. Sure, even "XMP is overclocking" and all that jazz, but this hurts your image as a gamer/overclocker-friendly platform. And the IMC just simply having a "bad day" every other day, caused by auto settings that are locked from users or mobo vendors, but also Intel not fixing it themselves since RKL, is just an ignorant **** move. imho


----------



## Martin778

I've been reading that it was Intel who rushed the launch of Alder Lake and DDR5 while DRAM mfg's tried to delay it further into 2022.
I ran MTP overnight at 4800C40 JEDEC speed up to 900% to see if my sticks could've been defective, but no - the sticks are fine so far.


----------



## Silent Scone

Nizzen said:


> 48c max on dimms after 1 hour BF 2042
> 120mm low rpm over dimms.
> 
> View attachment 2538266


There's roughly a 10-15c disparity between gaming and running Karhu in my system with no airflow over the DIMMs (around 65c @ 1.35v)

That said, it's really whatever works for your use case. Seasonal overclocking is a real thing for some users if their overclock is conditional enough to need active airflow on the modules lol. I don't think that's an issue for Norway 😀




Martin778 said:


> I've been reading that it was Intel who rushed the launch of Alder Lake and DDR5 while DRAM mfg's tried to delay it further into 2022.
> I ran MTP overnight at 4800C40 JEDEC speed up to 900% to see if my sticks could've been defective, but no - the sticks are fine so far.


These transitions are rarely ever smooth. Haswell-E and DDR4 had some major issues running ratios above 2666 due to how Intel was tying certain things in. Getting these things to market is often the best medicine to see exactly what works and what doesn't, as no two systems are identical and it comes down to a signal alignment issue.


----------



## Martin778

With DDR5's we're getting big heat output as a bonus too, I've tried the 6000 C32 CR1 ASUS profile again and it passes without problems, but only with airflow. 
At least up to 52*C these sticks are stable:


----------



## skullbringer

Gear 2 on Rocket Lake was also broken with certain ICs at higher frequencies, same training lottery randomness. (i don't mean the issues at xmp for s16b specifically)


----------



## sblantipodi

beardlessduck said:


> Thanks, I was thinking that might be a good idea.
> 
> I would LOVE a safe mode profile for 4 sticks...


I have 4 sticks of 5600MHz C36 Dominator (Samsung chip) and I can't go past 4.4GHz.
I spent 1K of ram to go slower than cheap DDR4.


----------



## Arni90

Silent Scone said:


> Seasonal overclocking is a real thing for some users if their overclock is conditional enough to need active airflow on the modules lol. I don't think that's an issue for Norway 😀


In the eastern parts of Norway, we often see 25C during summer to -10C during winter, I've definitely experienced "winter-stable" overclocks before. The differences are more exaggerated if you live further away from the sea, or in the northern parts of the country, Lillehammer and Kautokeino come to mind as two examples of this.


----------



## Carillo

6600 Cl34 Project Samsung  Watercooled  

1 Error HCI  Will try working more on this profile, but damn, it takes time. Peace out for now  

RAM : G.skill (Samsung) F5-6000U4040E16G


----------



## kingofblog

sblantipodi said:


> I have 4 sticks of 5600MHz C36 Dominator (Samsung chip) and I can't go past 4.4GHz.
> I spent 1K of ram to go slower than cheap DDR4.


Stock frequency is 3600 MT/s for 2DPC. Congratulations on your 22% overclock!


----------



## Martin778

I doubt's it's 3600 2DPC for DDR5 ;-)


----------



## kmellz

Well I, hopefully, found a solution to my random reboot problems, setting DC/AC_LL to auto mostly, but also limiting e-cores to default 3.8ghz max.. they're rated at SP57 so ugh. Not worth the hassle trying to stabilize them higher honestly.
Currently running 5.2ghz all core, LLC2, -50mv undervolt on VF11, vcore around 1.4 in cb23. Been increasing RAM from 3900mhz which seemed to decrease the reboots/increase stability earlier, currently at 4100mhz 1T and seems stable, I wasn't running super low AC_LL settings as that seems to be a problem for ram, it was around 0.25+ depending on what LLC level I was trying. 0.2 and lower is what I saw around here as really bad for stability.
Might give that a go later I guess, but working around the auto LL settings seems easier at the moment.

Also, does messing with the LL settings also change what the board sees for power levels etc? Or just us in hwinfo for example. 
Since at these auto LL settings, it's going higher in vcore, and socket power draw than earlier, but ends up at about the same, or slightly lower, temperatures. So if it's tricked to think that it's drawing less than my set limit and therefore running hotter etc with manual settings.


----------



## LionAlonso

kmellz said:


> Well I, hopefully, found a solution to my random reboot problems, setting DC/AC_LL to auto mostly, but also limiting e-cores to default 3.8ghz max.. they're rated at SP57 so ugh. Not worth the hassle trying to stabilize them higher honestly.
> Currently running 5.2ghz all core, LLC2, -50mv undervolt on VF11, vcore around 1.4 in cb23. Been increasing RAM from 3900mhz which seemed to decrease the reboots/increase stability earlier, currently at 4100mhz 1T and seems stable, I wasn't running super low AC_LL settings as that seems to be a problem for ram, it was around 0.25+ depending on what LLC level I was trying. 0.2 and lower is what I saw around here as really bad for stability.
> Might give that a go later I guess, but working around the auto LL settings seems easier at the moment.
> 
> Also, does messing with the LL settings also change what the board sees for power levels etc? Or just us in hwinfo for example.
> Since at these auto LL settings, it's going higher in vcore, and socket power draw than earlier, but ends up at about the same, or slightly lower, temperatures. So if it's tricked to think that it's drawing less than my set limit and therefore running hotter etc with manual settings.


Vcore at 1.4v at full load cb23?
that seem very hight to me, also in LLC2.
You can cool it well?
Editi: sorry, didnt saw it was 12700k
I guess they bin them hard.


----------



## EconomyFishFinger

kmellz said:


> Well I, hopefully, found a solution to my random reboot problems, setting DC/AC_LL to auto mostly, but also limiting e-cores to default 3.8ghz max.. they're rated at SP57 so ugh. Not worth the hassle trying to stabilize them higher honestly.
> Currently running 5.2ghz all core, LLC2, -50mv undervolt on VF11, vcore around 1.4 in cb23. Been increasing RAM from 3900mhz which seemed to decrease the reboots/increase stability earlier, currently at 4100mhz 1T and seems stable, I wasn't running super low AC_LL settings as that seems to be a problem for ram, it was around 0.25+ depending on what LLC level I was trying. 0.2 and lower is what I saw around here as really bad for stability.
> Might give that a go later I guess, but working around the auto LL settings seems easier at the moment.
> 
> Also, does messing with the LL settings also change what the board sees for power levels etc? Or just us in hwinfo for example.
> Since at these auto LL settings, it's going higher in vcore, and socket power draw than earlier, but ends up at about the same, or slightly lower, temperatures. So if it's tricked to think that it's drawing less than my set limit and therefore running hotter etc with manual settings.


Just wondering where we can see the SP rating of the e-cores? In the bios I can only find the SP rating for the P-cores?

regards


----------



## Muad_Dib69

There is another place in the bios where you can find details, like AI something


----------



## ddev

Hey guys, running Asus d4 + 12900kf and have terrible issue that i still cant resolve, around the month, using different bios and settings.
So my settings:
[email protected]/4E/4.3R SP87 360aio latest bios/win11 - LLC3, acdc 0.25/0.9, cpu voltage auto, VRM settings extreme and max out, voltage optimization off, c-state auto.
[email protected] - 1.40 sa, 1.45vq, 1.55v dram
Ram seems stable, was testing tm5 with configs a lot. Also i tried a lot of linx/linpack/aida/intelextreme/realbench/geekbench/ycruncher 2.5b test and many other software that was fully stable. Everything is ok (mostly gaming and video encoding) but when i use avx2 latest prime smallfft(medium and high ffts tests are fine) or latest occt with same settings or cruncher avx2 small ffts tests, im getting bluescreen in few seconds with watchdog timeout, meant not enough voltage.
I tried to set stock ring and e cores, no matter, tried vrm settings and tried to change acdc to 0,3/0.8 and lower, making min voltage higher but still getting watchdogs
One thing that i find helpfull is to set acdc auto and to set higher llc like 5, making 300w with avx2 on stock and it works but unacceptable for me. My min voltage is around 1.25 now, seems like avx2 smallffts needs around 1.3+. I read a lot of posts here about prime testing with low voltage like 1.2 etc and its all mostly fine here so idk whats im doing wrong. All tips and ideas to make my system work are welcome!
Tried hours and days to make it stable still cant find an optimal voltage for my board for avx2, thinking much about rma this asus crap.


----------



## D-EJ915

Martin778 said:


> I doubt's it's 3600 2DPC for DDR5 ;-)


from intel:



http://imgur.com/ELmQwfT


----------



## bscool

@ddev bios 812? i know you said latest but it is hard to find sometimes in the wall of bios releases. So just checking


----------



## Agent-A01

bscool said:


> @ddev bios 812? i know you said latest but it is hard to find sometimes in the wall of bios releases. So just checking


Still waiting on an 0812 for TUF sadface.jpg

4133 is 100% stable for a couple days then for whatever reason it will just spit out errors for no reason randomly.
Would also like lower VDDQ like you said you were able to reduce it.

BTW have you messed with ODTs?


----------



## bscool

Agent-A01 said:


> Still waiting on an 0812 for TUF sadface.jpg
> 
> 4133 is 100% stable for a couple days then for whatever reason it will just spit out errors for no reason randomly.
> Would also like lower VDDQ like you said you were able to reduce it.
> 
> BTW have you messed with ODTs?


No I havent. I see some on Asus and MSI talk about setting them but I havent. Have you?


----------



## newls1

i need some help from the pros here please... I have been trying to lock my RTL's to 71/71 on both MC's.. Sometimes the PC sets them both to 71 but most of the time I get 71/73. Can someone please show me how to make the adjustment to the mem training so both RTL's train to 71... here is a pic


----------



## Agent-A01

bscool said:


> No I havent. I see some on Asus and MSI talk about setting them but I havent. Have you?


Testing it now to see if it helps.

If you can test a voltage where it's on the edge of stability, you may get stable results by finding the correct setup for your kit.
Try these two and see if either helps. 80-40-34 and 80-48-0


----------



## bscool

@Agent-A01 I use to set them on z490 but never saw much gain from setting them on z590. I might try it sometimes. thanks


----------



## Bims

neurokirurgi said:


> I'm getting WHEA 17 errors (dozens per second) on my 12900K+Z690 Hero combo, and the computer will randomly freeze during heavy CPU load (prime95, tm5, cinebench, even memtest86 in bios!). Freeze as in that the system locks up and doesn't respond to any inputs, forcing me to power it off.
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> A corrected hardware error has occurred.
> 
> Component: PCI Express Root Port
> Error Source: Advanced Error Reporting (PCI Express)
> 
> Primary Bus:Device:Function: 0x0:0x1:0x0
> Secondary Bus:Device:Function: 0x0:0x0:0x0
> Primary Device Name:PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_460D&SUBSYS_86941043&REV_02
> Secondary Device Name:
> 
> This corresponds with *Intel(R) PEG10 - 460D* in Device Manager, which I can only assume stands for the PCI-E slot.
> 
> This does not happen when the GPU (RTX 3080 TUF OC) is removed and I'm using the iGPU instead, nor does it happen when the GPU is seated in the lower PCI-E slot. In other words, the system is rock solid when the top PCI-E slot is unpopulated.
> 
> This happens on both 0702 and 0803 BETA bios when using default BIOS settings.
> 
> Is this a simple case of RMA, or could there be some strange compatibility issue at play here which might get fixed through future firmware updates?
> 
> full specs:
> 12900K, ALF II 360mm
> Z690 Maximus Hero
> Kingston Fury Beast 4800 CL38 (KF548C38-16)
> RTX 3080 TUF OC, separate PCI-E power cable for each 8-pin
> Crucial p5 1tb + Samsung 960 Evo 500GB + 2x1TB WD Blue sata ssd + 3tb toshiba HDD
> Seasonic Focus PX-750


Hi,
I have a Asus Strix Z690-A and a 12700KF, and do also get a lot of WHEA 17 errors connected to the "Intel(R) PEG10 - 460D"!
Have you found a solution, or is the only way to fix it by placing the GPU in the GEN3 PCIE port? 
Br,


----------



## newls1

newls1 said:


> i need some help from the pros here please... I have been trying to lock my RTL's to 71/71 on both MC's.. Sometimes the PC sets them both to 71 but most of the time I get 71/73. Can someone please show me how to make the adjustment to the mem training so both RTL's train to 71... here is a pic
> View attachment 2538388


@Falkentyne ....... Can you help PLEASE!!??


----------



## Falkentyne

newls1 said:


> @Falkentyne ....... Can you help PLEASE!!??


How am I supposed to help?


----------



## newls1

Falkentyne said:


> How am I supposed to help?


do you know how to lock in a specific RTL on a asus board? post # 1545


----------



## Martin778

D-EJ915 said:


> from intel:
> 
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/ELmQwfT


Oh wow, this is extremely poor if true. That will be borderline DDR4-2133 / 2666 performance right there.


----------



## Falkentyne

newls1 said:


> do you know how to lock in a specific RTL on a asus board? post # 1545


No.


----------



## newls1

damn it. i give up on this then!


----------



## D-EJ915

Martin778 said:


> Oh wow, this is extremely poor if true. That will be borderline DDR4-2133 / 2666 performance right there.


it is their stock jedec settings so yes should be similar to those


----------



## ahmedmo1

Just got my Corsair DDR5 5200 and ASUS Z690-I from someone else used. The motherboard arrived with ~7 bent pins and a bit of thermal grease stains on some pins (fortunately not conductive).

Really aggravating. Just ordered a USB microscope and precision tweezers. Will try to bend back into place and try with a 12700K. So annoying.


----------



## kmellz

LionAlonso said:


> Vcore at 1.4v at full load cb23?
> that seem very hight to me, also in LLC2.
> You can cool it well?
> Editi: sorry, didnt saw it was 12700k
> I guess they bin them hard.


Yeah feels high to me also, but temps are as I said same or better than when I was tuning LL, then it was around 1.34 something.. so it's kinda weird.
SP on the P-cores is 95-97 something, but I think it's the board yeeting the voltage, it increases a lot from 51->52 ratio, will try to tweak it some more


----------



## Nizzen

newls1 said:


> do you know how to lock in a specific RTL on a asus board? post # 1545


Enable "roundtrip latency" Then rtl is ok enough.


----------



## newls1

Nizzen said:


> Enable "roundtrip latency" Then rtl is ok enough.


will try it out once i find that setting... im so used to MSI!


----------



## Nizzen

newls1 said:


> will try it out once i find that setting... im so used to MSI!


 Dram Timing Settings ---> Memory Training Algorithms ---> _Round Trip Latency_ [Enable]


----------



## neurokirurgi

Bims said:


> Hi,
> I have a Asus Strix Z690-A and a 12700KF, and do also get a lot of WHEA 17 errors connected to the "Intel(R) PEG10 - 460D"!
> Have you found a solution, or is the only way to fix it by placing the GPU in the GEN3 PCIE port?
> Br,


I reseated the CPU and the cooler, and the problem went away. Seeing as some Z690 boards and sockets can bend with the CPU installed (the backplate is supposed to counter that), I think I screwed up the mount the first time.


----------



## newls1

Nizzen said:


> Dram Timing Settings ---> Memory Training Algorithms ---> _Round Trip Latency_ [Enable]


thank you very much


----------



## sblantipodi

D-EJ915 said:


> from intel:
> 
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/ELmQwfT


I still don't understood what RANK is...
is there someone with an asus motherboard that can tell me how to set rank 1 or rank 2?

is the setting where I can choose 1:1 or 1:2?
or it's the latency 1T or 2T?


----------



## marti69

whats the best bios for ram oc on maximus hero and samsung g.skill?


----------



## newls1

Nizzen said:


> Dram Timing Settings ---> Memory Training Algorithms ---> _Round Trip Latency_ [Enable]


didnt do a single thing... RTL's are still 71/73 and i want them at 71/71 . Guess "auto" for this setting is actually "enable"... Thanks for trying though, much appreciated


----------



## Nizzen

newls1 said:


> didnt do a single thing... RTL's are still 71/73 and i want them at 71/71 . Guess "auto" for this setting is actually "enable"... Thanks for trying though, much appreciated


Did you set RTL auto before enable roundtrip? I though Manual RTL/IOL was for z490/z390 only? 
Looks like round trip latency enable is the "rule". Don't bother with it other than set enabled. There is other settings to get better performance


----------



## newls1

Nizzen said:


> Did you set RTL auto before enable roundtrip? I though Manual RTL/IOL was for z490/z390 only?
> Looks like round trip latency enable is the "rule". Don't bother with it other than set enabled. There is other settings to get better performance


Please share your wisdom! what else can I do then? My mem is tweaked as best as my knowledge goes. I just noticed (via aida64) that when the board trains 71/71 for RTL's, my latency is 43.x but when the board trains 71/73 RTL's im at 45.x. Ive spent all day trying to lock in the RTL's at 71/71 but cant figure it out to save a puppies life! Here is a shot of my mem timings, if you see anything out of the norm, please feel free to offer advice, y'all are way smarter then me!


----------



## Nizzen

newls1 said:


> Please share your wisdom! what else can I do then? My mem is tweaked as best as my knowledge goes. I just noticed (via aida64) that when the board trains 71/71 for RTL's, my latency is 43.x but when the board trains 71/73 RTL's im at 45.x. Ive spent all day trying to lock in the RTL's at 71/71 but cant figure it out to save a puppies life! Here is a shot of my mem timings, if you see anything out of the norm, please feel free to offer advice, y'all are way smarter then me!
> 
> View attachment 2538453


Try to swap dimms. Change the order. Best dimm should always be in the first slot. Maybe better luck.
If you get 71/71, try to stop training in bios? "fastboot" or whatever it's called. Can't remember. Maybe someone else knows how to stop training.


----------



## IronAge

marti69 said:


> whats the best bios for ram oc on maximus hero and samsung g.skill?


0811


----------



## newls1

Nizzen said:


> Try to swap dimms. Change the order. Best dimm should always be in the first slot. Maybe better luck.
> If you get 71/71, try to stop training in bios? "fastboot" or whatever it's called. Can't remember. Maybe someone else knows how to stop training.


ive done everything BUT swap dimms... great idea, i shall try that when i get off shift day after tomorrow.. thank you


----------



## D-EJ915

sblantipodi said:


> I still don't understood what RANK is...
> is there someone with an asus motherboard that can tell me how to set rank 1 or rank 2?
> 
> is the setting where I can choose 1:1 or 1:2?
> or it's the latency 1T or 2T?


no, ranks is memory stick type. right now we have 1 rank 16gb and 2 rank 32gb


----------



## owikh84

I'm now officially jumping on the DDR5 bandwagon, with two kits of Trident Z5 RGB 6000C36 and Z690 Hero coming from Strix Z690-A D4. DDR5 kits are easily obtainable in my country, either ready stock or on weekly pre-order basis.

On the preliminary run, 4x16GB are not bootable at 6000 but I haven't tried lowering the RAM frequency etc. The voltages I followed shamino's blue ADL OC guide as below and loosening the timings etc, but it still can't boot at 6000 with four sticks. I do understand that these recommendations are for "Maximus Extreme" series so just wanted to try my luck with the Hero. Anyway this week I will also receive my pre-ordered Extreme so will give a try on that new board as well.










So I decided to run with just two sticks (2x16GB). Basically I just loaded the Samsung 2x16GB 6000 CL32 preset provided in the Hero, changed to 1T and lowered the MC voltage from 1.335v to 1.275v. So far looks stable before I go higher frequency etc.

12900K SP88 - Stock
Maximus Z690 Hero | BIOS 0811
G.Skill F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK
2x16GB DDR5-6000 32-35-35-52-2T @ VDD/VDDQ 1.435v | SA 1.25v | MC 1.275v









Edit: oh yeah I forgot to mention that XMP #2 worked without error while XMP #1 will give error in less than 5 minutes of TM5.


----------



## TomCom205

@shamino1978 
Just testing around with the 0811 Bios on Hynix DDR5 Kit (ADATA 6000) with the ROG Extreme

there seems to be a BUG setting the SA Voltage.
Leaving the SA On Auto it was posting and the Bios says ~1.225Volt
if i try setting this manual it is not posting at all. (Detect Memory)
If i set it to Offset 0.02500 it was posting and showed something above 0,9Volt
it tryed using an offset ~ 0.1500 not posting ...
So i wanted to go back and set the Offset to 0,02500 not posting

After this i could only set it back to Auto to get it post.
It also seems like it isn't posting if i set a manuell Voltage above (I'm almost sure it was working when i used G.Skill with Samsung)

I did go back to 0803 and it is workling well if i set the SA Voltage i need to the RAM Kit.
But out of the Box XMP1 wasn't working on the Xtreme with Hynix.


----------



## shamino1978

View attachment 2538468


there musta been a typo
its not possible 4x16 6g


----------



## sblantipodi

shamino1978 said:


> View attachment 2538468
> 
> 
> there musta been a typo
> its not possible 4x16 6g


I have 4x16GB Samsung and with that settings I'm not even stable at 4.8GHz, leave alone 6GHz.
Don't know where shamino get that values


----------



## Smaz

I have two problems since switching to Alder Lake that I did not have with my previous 8700k. 

I have an aorus 3080 to which I connect a 2k 240hz monitor in DP and an old TV via HDMI as a second monitor. 
The two devices connected directly to the graphics card in the 8700k worked correctly but in Alder lake (Asus rog strix D4) if I put the 
two devices on the graphics card I only see the old TV via hdmi. 
To be able to use the monitor and the TV at the same time I have to put the monitor to the graphics card and the TV to the HDMI socket 
of the motherboard and it only works if the cable is in place before loading the bios, once in windows If I plug in the cable, the TV doesn't work.

The other problem is that since I am in Alder Lake my monitor (Samsung G7) never turns on automatic, I have to press the button and I am sure 
it will be a bios adjustment but I can not find it.
I have tried all the bios that have been published in this forum and the same thing happens to me with all of them. I have tested the priority 
settings of the system graphics in bios and it does not matter what you put it is always the same

Any have an idea???


----------



## Tigra456

@shamino1978 
Also my 6000 c36 set is only Testmem5 (Anta777stable with the voltages of the Asus guide. Voltages for 4x Samsung in the list.

But here and there are Blue Screens … don’t know why…

some users reported about changing dram voltages while testing… is that something about the stability ?
@Brandur 
Maybe you can explain again, what happens exactly ?


----------



## Wolferin

shamino1978 said:


> View attachment 2538468
> 
> 
> there musta been a typo
> its not possible 4x16 6g


Again my question to you, why are in the latest Biosversions for Strix 690-A D4 is older Intel Microcode? In Beta Bios 0803 is new 0x15, in Official 0807 is older 0x12, in Beta 0812 is older 0x12, why?


----------



## dev x264

Hello guys.
Is there new bios for prime z690-p?
I think it trains ddr5 terribly at 0605 bios


----------



## cstkl1

owikh84 said:


> View attachment 2538459
> 
> 
> I'm now officially jumping on the DDR5 bandwagon, with two kits of Trident Z5 RGB 6000C36 and Z690 Hero coming from Strix Z690-A D4. DDR5 kits are easily obtainable in my country, either ready stock or on weekly pre-order basis.
> 
> On the preliminary run, 4x16GB are not bootable at 6000 but I haven't tried lowering the RAM frequency etc. The voltages I followed shamino's blue ADL OC guide as below and loosening the timings etc, but it still can't boot at 6000 with four sticks. I do understand that these recommendations are for "Maximus Extreme" series so just wanted to try my luck with the Hero. Anyway this week I will also receive my pre-ordered Extreme so will give a try on that new board as well.
> 
> View attachment 2538468
> 
> 
> So I decided to run with just two sticks (2x16GB). Basically I just loaded the Samsung 2x16GB 6000 CL32 preset provided in the Hero, changed to 1T and lowered the MC voltage from 1.335v to 1.275v. So far looks stable before I go higher frequency etc.
> 
> 12900K SP87 - Stock
> Maximus Z690 Extreme | BIOS 0811
> G.Skill F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK
> 2x16GB DDR5-6000 32-35-35-52-2T @ VDD/VDDQ 1.435v | SA 1.25v | MC 1.275v
> 
> View attachment 2538460
> 
> 
> Edit: oh yeah I forgot to mention that XMP #2 worked without error while XMP #1 will give error in less than 5 minutes of TM5.


@Baasha


----------



## Bladed

Hey, just sharing some results after 10 days of tuning. Turns out, the most stable bios for my Z690 Strix-A D4 was Bios version 605. I'm running 4x16Gb @ 3600Mhz 14-14-34 1.45v, 12700k. Didn't have to do any tuning on bios 605, stock XMP1 worked. Ram is Oloy Blade, Aida64 shows mem latency is 55.5ns. Ran Aida64 stability test for 1hour 1 min and 37 seconds to confirm it is stable.

I spent 8-10 hours a day, some days more, over the past 10 days trying to manually tune this on versions 707, 807, 808, and 812 (as well as the stock bios that came on it, which was ver. 2xx). Most stable I could get it before was ver. 808 with SA @1.329, VDDQ @1.205, DRAM @1.45625, and Gear 1. Those settings passed memtest64 2 times (4 passes each time) but failed on the third run and failed within 2 min 34 seconds on Aida 64. Couldn't get those results again with the same settings, kept failing within 15 seconds after that.


Huge thanks to everyone in this thread!


----------



## lolhaxz

Anyone having the experience with the Strix D4 that even stock, walk away and leave it running/idling for 4-5 hours... and it just doesn't "wake up" when you come to move the mouse/hit keys on the keyboard.

Ie, not talking about standby (standy disabled), just display blanking... acts as tho screen is no longer connected. It's clearly crashing as network is no longer reachable afterward... but no BSOD, bluescreen, reboot or anything in the event viewer log.... just... dead.

This is at 100% stock, except XMP - Kingston Fury Renegade 3600/CL16 1.35v 16-20-20 (KF436C16RB1K2/32) - Tried 1T/2T, both behave exactly the same (and both pass memtest)

Passes Memtest (all tests / 4 passes) across multiple reboots no problems at all.

Tried almost all the release bioses since launch, none have changed the behavior.


----------



## Tradition

Just sharing i have a 12700k and a z690m-plus d4
i had to edit the blck to 99 in other to get a higher memory clock my IMC wont do 4000 only 3900 so i settle in the middle 3960 here is my configs
my voltage drops to 1.26 under load
im using micron e-die memory


----------



## stn1

Tuf d4, 0808, cant boot dr bdie above 1.55v. Even 1.56v no boot. Djr on earlier bios worked fine at 1.75v. Is it sticks or bios?
Ambient.


----------



## Phat Monkey

@shamino1978
*Bios 0811 Feedback *
Blue screens system when using XMP 1 while launching a game, prior bios 803 would launch a game but after 10 mins the game would crash, I also tried Timing 1 and 2. XMP 2 blue screens on start up. I noticed some people with 64g of ram seem to be having more problems than others using XMP on the new ROG MAXIMUS Z690 HERO. I have now disabled XMP again, system running fine

_Windows 11 | Rog Maximus Z690 Hero | i9-12900 | Corsair Vengeance DDR5 4800mhz 64GB | MSI 3090 SUPRIM X | Quantum 2626 | Focusrite 18i20 Gen3_


----------



## bscool

stn1 said:


> Tuf d4, 0808, cant boot dr bdie above 1.55v. Even 1.56v no boot. Djr on earlier bios worked fine at 1.75v. Is it sticks or bios?
> Ambient.


I am on Strix d4 z690. I noticed the same about some voltages not booting. I use 1.55v dram going 1.56 no boot and then 1.58v+ on b die then it would boot. Seems like there is a "dead" zone. I dont remember the exact voltages but you get the idea. 

Same with Hynix that I could run 5333 to 5600 on z590 I couldnt get past 4600 on Strix a d4 z690. I didnt spend a lot of time on gear 2 hynix. But I have seen people with Hynix running 5000+ memtest stable so I know it is possible on Strix d4 just something I am missing.

Also on bios 812 gear 2 DR b die even running 4266 tough but I can run 4133c15 gear 1 easy. Same memory ran 4400-4533 gear 2 RKL. I didnt mess with memory algos, I know they helped on z590 for gear 2 DR b die.


----------



## skullbringer

Falkentyne said:


> BTW in the new 0811 Shamino Bios, the AVX 256 instructions is capped at x51 multiplier again (or a fixed -1 offset) at x52 multiplier (idk about higher as I instant hardlock/BSOD in Stockfish at any higher than x52)


seems like a hard limit at x51 for avx256 and avx512

on earlier bios versions, I think it was 0806, i could at least sustain avx256 at x53 in LinX. Hopefully shamino's magic makes it back into a coming release


----------



## stn1

skullbringer said:


> seems like a hard limit at x51 for avx256 and avx512
> 
> on earlier bios versions, I think it was 0806, i could at least sustain avx256 at x53 in LinX. Hopefully shamino's magic makes it back into a coming release


Set -1 avx512 offset


----------



## Falkentyne

skullbringer said:


> seems like a hard limit at x51 for avx256 and avx512
> 
> on earlier bios versions, I think it was 0806, i could at least sustain avx256 at x53 in LinX. Hopefully shamino's magic makes it back into a coming release


Set avx512 -1 offset in bios.

There also seems to be an issue with the avx2 workaround patch activating after a cold boot (any boot where the case button power LED turns off and back on). Warm boots are fine. (Symptom is 2 cores running at the correct multiplier while the others downbin to x51). You can reload the patch by using the OCtool going to controls and enter in the same cpu all core ratio you are on and hitting apply once. (note: changing ratios will deactivate the patch until you set the same ratio a second time).


----------



## skullbringer

but how, I can't type in -1 and also pressing - from 0 doesn't do anything?


----------



## Alberto_It

I just bought one kit of 32Gb DDR5 6000 Cl36 memory by G. Skill 

I own a Z690 Apex with Bios 0806, there are any problems with the XMP profile or I have to do something?

Waiting suggestions @shamino1978 @RobertoSampaio @cstkl1 

Thank you in advance


----------



## Agent-A01

stn1 said:


> Tuf d4, 0808, cant boot dr bdie above 1.55v. Even 1.56v no boot. Djr on earlier bios worked fine at 1.75v. Is it sticks or bios?
> Ambient.


The bios I believe.
My maximus hero xii had no issues with these sticks but there are certain voltages this board will not post on for whatever reason.


----------



## Martin778

Alberto_It said:


> I just bought one kit of 32Gb DDR5 6000 Cl36 memory by G. Skill
> 
> I own a Z690 Apex with Bios 0806, there are any problems with the XMP profile or I have to do something?
> 
> Waiting suggestions @shamino1978 @RobertoSampaio @cstkl1
> 
> Thank you in advance


Well...at the moment neither XMP works on these. Have the same board and memory, XMP1 extemeely unstable, XMP2 would also randomly crash. 
Load the 6000MHz C32 ASUS OC profile and make sure you have active cooling on your RAM.


----------



## EconomyFishFinger

Anyone else have the Team Group Delta RGB 6400 Cl40 kit and managed to get a decent tweak on it?

I have a z690 formula here and wondering if anyone else has had much luck or point me in a good direction for settings?

regards


----------



## yahfz

EconomyFishFinger said:


> Anyone else have the Team Group Delta RGB 6400 Cl40 kit and managed to get a decent tweak on it?
> 
> I have a z690 formula here and wondering if anyone else has had much luck or point me in a good direction for settings?
> 
> regards


I have it but i can’t even get to windows without bsoding. I’m on Apex 0811


----------



## Falkentyne

yahfz said:


> I have it but i can’t even get to windows without bsoding. I’m on Apex 0811


Has anyone with an Extreme, Hero or Formula had problems with these exact same 6000 CL36/40 Samsung dimms?


----------



## morph.

@shamino1978 and all the ram guru's, I'm on the latest bios v0811 on the z690 formula and I've been running GEIL (Micron) 2x16 SR 5200 C34-38-38-78 on XMP 1 without any issues (3 weeks with daily reboots) till yesterday...

Yesterday I decided to see if I can increase the running speed up to 5400 but wasn't unable to train/boot it even when adding VDDD, VDDQ, MC to around 1.3-1.35v or running the pre-set 5400 memory profile manually.

Now here is the frustrating part... I haven't been able to since go back down to my default XMP1 or XMP2 profile of 5200 without BSODing after logging in.

I've tried reseating the ram multiple times.
I've switched the ram to each other's respective slots.
I've re-loaded bios to optimised defaults.
I've tried increasing VDDD, VDDQ, MC, SA voltages for the 5200 profile.

At the moment I'm settling for 5000mhz any idea why it is suddenly behaving like this? I know it's early days but 5200 is a pretty moderate speed it's not like we are talking about 6000+ so I was very surprised this happened even with XMP.

I've run mem test at 300% and passed it perfectly fine a few times previosuly... I suspect it might be something to do with the memory training however I've run the xmp1 5200 profile for nearly 3 weeks without issue with v0803 & v0811 until I decided to try and increase the ram speed yesterday. I've basically burnt a day trying to get it back to 5200 but every time it loads into windows post-login it BSOD's  Any help, pointers or tips would be greatly appreciated.

Got a set of g.skill z5 2x16 6000 c36 coming before Christmas hopefully... But now scared it might become a very expensive paperweight.


----------



## EconomyFishFinger

yahfz said:


> I have it but i can’t even get to windows without bsoding. I’m on Apex 0811


Ahh that sucks. How is the RGB working for you? I cannot get the RGB to work at all, just rainbow effects. No software I use will let me set the colour of these Team Group 6400 modules


----------



## yahfz

Falkentyne said:


> Has anyone with an Extreme, Hero or Formula had problems with these exact same 6000 CL36/40 Samsung dimms?


Did you mean to quote someone else? We have Hynix 6400 CL40. And i know one guy with Strix itx that can't get it stable with XMP.



EconomyFishFinger said:


> Ahh that sucks. How is the RGB working for you? I cannot get the RGB to work at all, just rainbow effects. No software I use will let me set the colour of these Team Group 6400 modules


I haven't gotten the RGB to work anywhere. Didn't try much though just some aura install/reinstalls. I wanted to disable it to lower temps. Does XMP work properly for you?


----------



## morph.

Alberto_It said:


> I just bought one kit of 32Gb DDR5 6000 Cl36 memory by G. Skill
> 
> I own a Z690 Apex with Bios 0806, there are any problems with the XMP profile or I have to do something?
> 
> Waiting suggestions @shamino1978 @RobertoSampaio @cstkl1
> 
> Thank you in advance


try bios v0811


----------



## criznit

Martin778 said:


> Well...at the moment neither XMP works on these. Have the same board and memory, XMP1 extemeely unstable, XMP2 would also randomly crash.
> Load the 6000MHz C32 ASUS OC profile and make sure you have active cooling on your RAM.


I can't even get into windows with the profile or XMP with F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5K on the Maximus Hero board. I'm using 0811 as well. I will wait it out until the kinks get fixed.


----------



## neurokirurgi

Nizzen said:


> Alseye Pc Fan Ddr Memory Cooler With Dual 60mm Fan Pwm Ram Cooler - Buy Alseye,Ram Cooler,Ddr Memory Cooler Product on Alibaba.com
> 
> 
> Alseye Pc Fan Ddr Memory Cooler With Dual 60mm Fan Pwm Ram Cooler - Buy Alseye,Ram Cooler,Ddr Memory Cooler Product on Alibaba.com
> 
> 
> 
> www.alibaba.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> +
> 
> 2x
> *Noctua NF-A6x25 FLX 60mm*


I have that Alseye RAM fan, are you saying it's possible to replace the fans on it? If it is, how easy is it? One of the fans on my unit is clearly louder than the other.


----------



## TomCom205

yahfz said:


> I have it but i can’t even get to windows without bsoding. I’m on Apex 0811


I have them, too. Teamgroup 6400 CL40 2X16gB Kit.

On the ROG Extreme I can't get them to Work at All. Errors within 1 min at TM5.
I was hoping the might work better then the Samsungs I had before but seems like they not work any better.

Also no RGB working.


----------



## Falkentyne

Nizzen said:


> Alseye Pc Fan Ddr Memory Cooler With Dual 60mm Fan Pwm Ram Cooler - Buy Alseye,Ram Cooler,Ddr Memory Cooler Product on Alibaba.com
> 
> 
> Alseye Pc Fan Ddr Memory Cooler With Dual 60mm Fan Pwm Ram Cooler - Buy Alseye,Ram Cooler,Ddr Memory Cooler Product on Alibaba.com
> 
> 
> 
> www.alibaba.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> +
> 
> 2x
> *Noctua NF-A6x25 FLX 60mm*


How do you remove the original fans to replace them with the Noctuas? I have the ALSEYE unit also.


----------



## Alberto_It

criznit said:


> I can't even get into windows with the profile or XMP with F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5K on the Maximus Hero board. I'm using 0811 as well. I will wait it out until the kinks get fixed.


@shamino1978 here need a fix for Z690 boards for this kit of DDR5 memory. Only on this thread we are more than one user who can't setup XMP profile. My kit F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK it will come to me today.

Motherboard that I use is Z690 Apex actually with 0806 bios

Thank you in advance from me and I think from the community


----------



## owikh84

criznit said:


> I can't even get into windows with the profile or XMP with F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5K on the Maximus Hero board. I'm using 0811 as well. I will wait it out until the kinks get fixed.


Did you see my post? Hero BIOS 0811. So far I tested two kits, both are stable with XMP #2 and 6000 C32 profile.








[OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread


Hi, I have a Asus Strix Z690-A and a 12700KF, and do also get a lot of WHEA 17 errors connected to the "Intel(R) PEG10 - 460D"! Have you found a solution, or is the only way to fix it by placing the GPU in the GEN3 PCIE port? Br, I reseated the CPU and the cooler, and the problem went away...




www.overclock.net





Or maybe because previously I binned my IMC on my Strix D4. FYI, not all 12900K's are able to boot at DDR4-4133+ on Gear 1 but only this particular chip is capable of doing that.


----------



## Mad1137

Should I change from z690 hero to apex ? Coz I can't Oc more then 6000 my kits 5600 c36 ( or I m just bad ...


----------



## shamino1978

Alberto_It said:


> @shamino1978 here need a fix for Z690 boards for this kit of DDR5 memory. Only on this thread we are more than one user who can't setup XMP profile. My kit F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK it will come to me today.
> 
> Motherboard that I use is Z690 Apex actually with 0806 bios
> 
> Thank you in advance from me and I think from the community


you can try this bios








ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0031.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com


----------



## ZeroStrat

Mad1137 said:


> Should I change from z690 hero to apex ? Coz I can't Oc more then 6000 my kits 5600 c36 ( or I m just bad ...


I'm able to run 6200MT/s on my Hero, whereas 6400MT/s is not possible. No voltage, no timings adjustment can help. Seems to be a hard wall.


----------



## Alberto_It

ZeroStrat said:


> I'm able to run 6200MT/s on my Hero, whereas 6400MT/s is not possible. No voltage, no timings adjustment can help. Seems to be a hard wall.


Hey dude, you're CapFrameX? Thanks for the tips on Twitter and add me! Lol


----------



## ZeroStrat

Alberto_It said:


> Hey dude, you're CapFrameX?


Hey! Yeah, I am the CapFrameX guy. ^^


----------



## Alberto_It

ZeroStrat said:


> Hey! Yeah, I am the CapFrameX guy. ^^


You are my idol 💪


----------



## Silent Scone

Have a set of F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5K on the way for the Apex today, so will be posting some results soon.


----------



## TitanicFreak

Mad1137 said:


> Should I change from z690 hero to apex ? Coz I can't Oc more then 6000 my kits 5600 c36 ( or I m just bad ...


Apex isn't much better. I'm over here with both a 6000 C36 and 6000C40 kit and I only just got them stable at XMP. Though I'm on 0811 still. Maybe those special bioses are a little better.


----------



## neurokirurgi

6000 cl36 G.skills here. While 6200 can post, it’s nowhere near stable, it seems to be a bit all over the place. Sometimes it trains better, allowing normal use with some degree of stability (still not Karhu or TM5 stable), sometimes it so unstable it flat out refuses to boot to windows or gets stuck at POST.

I’m on 0811 on my Hero.


----------



## yahfz

@shamino1978 Everybody I know with the TEAMGROUP DELTA 6400C40 (SKU: FF3D532G6400HC40BDC01) haven't been able to get XMP working, including me (I'm on the APEX but I have seen it happening on the HERO and STRIX ITX too). They either won't post or if they do, they'll BSOD when getting to windows. I have tested myself several bioses, 0806, 0811, 0021, 0051, 0031 (yep, the one you just posted) . None worked, the best i was able to do was get into windows properly by tweaking RTT's but will immediately error on any memtest software or bsod when testing stability.


----------



## satinghostrider

TitanicFreak said:


> Apex isn't much better. I'm over here with both a 6000 C36 and 6000C40 kit and I only just got them stable at XMP. Though I'm on 0811 still. Maybe those special bioses are a little better.


Did you use XMP1 or XMP2?


----------



## Muad_Dib69

on Formula 811 xmp1 gskill 600cas36 boot but crash sometimes. I have moved voltage to 1.35v instead of 1.30v, it seems stable now.
The ASUS samsung 6000cas32 profile don't boot even if i increase the voltage.


----------



## Mad1137

Guys , 1.4 vdd and vddq it's save for using daily ?? On memory


----------



## Phat Monkey

I have to run my RAM at 4266mhz (XMP1) (corsair DDR5 4800) in order to have a stable system while gaming. 4400 works fine with no BSOD until u run a game, then anything over that is an instant BSOD. Best game to test so far is Watch Dogs Legion as it triggers the problems faster, Valhalla will take 10-15 mins.
Windows 11 | Rog Maximus Z690 Hero | i9-12900K | Corsair DDR5 4800mhz 64GB | MSI 3090 SUPRIM X | Quantum 2626 | Focusrite 18i20


----------



## crossbone

DDR5 Support with the Apex or ASUS Z690 Lineup in general really is all over the place. MSI handles this much better right now. Hope ASUS can get it fixed.

Unify-X has all the Samsung Kits, even the 6000 CL36 on its QVL - the Apex does not. And I can report, the unify-x just loads xmp (GSKILL/Samsung 6000C36) and runs fine. Here the QVL of the Unify-X for a Sneak Peak. They also tested some nice ADATA 6800 C34 Kits - cant wait till these get released, first kit sub 10ns I see.
MSI MEG Z690 UNIFY-X Gaming Motherboard ATX - Intel 12th Gen Processors - 19+2 Phase, DDR5, PCIe 5.0


----------



## ZeroStrat

crossbone said:


> MSI handles this much better right now. Hope ASUS can get it fixed.


Not sure about it. From what I know all brands are affected.


----------



## Nizzen

crossbone said:


> DDR5 Support with the Apex or ASUS Z690 Lineup in general really is all over the place. MSI handles this much better right now. Hope ASUS can get it fixed.
> 
> Unify-X has all the Samsung Kits, even the 6000 CL36 on its QVL - the Apex does not. And I can report, the unify-x just loads xmp (GSKILL/Samsung 6000C36) and runs fine. Here the QVL of the Unify-X for a Sneak Peak. They also tested some nice ADATA 6800 C34 Kits - cant wait till these get released, first kit sub 10ns I see.
> MSI MEG Z690 UNIFY-X Gaming Motherboard ATX - Intel 12th Gen Processors - 19+2 Phase, DDR5, PCIe 5.0


I can repport that Corsair 5200 micron, g.skill 5600, 6000c40/36 works on Apex 
Ps: I don't run xmp, and never will 

Where is the best place for Msi unify x beta bioses?
Link?


----------



## TomCom205

yahfz said:


> @shamino1978 Everybody I know with the TEAMGROUP DELTA 6400C40 (SKU: FF3D532G6400HC40BDC01) haven't been able to get XMP working, including me (I'm on the APEX but I have seen it happening on the HERO and STRIX ITX too). They either won't post or if they do, they'll BSOD when getting to windows. I have tested myself several bioses, 0806, 0811, 0021, 0051, 0031 (yep, the one you just posted) . None worked, the best i was able to do was get into windows properly by tweaking RTT's but will immediately error on any memtest software or bsod when testing stability.


 Same here on the Extreme ... not Working at all.


----------



## sandisk13

Hello I'm testing GSKILL XMP1 CL36 6000 on APEX 0031, and i'm fully stable till 65 degrees on DIMMs.When i'm hitting this barrier TM5 is splitting errors. Also after adding active cooling (noctua fan), max temp is 55 and it's stable after 1h TM5 Extreme. It's seems that instability have direct connection with DDR5 temps.


----------



## bscool

QVL? I wouldnt put too much faith into any vendors QVL. Especaiily at higher freqencies. You IMC and tuning skill will play more of a role than anything.


----------



## ZeroStrat

bscool said:


> QVL? I wouldnt put too much faith into any vendors QVL. Especaiily at higher freqencies. You IMC and tuning skill will play more of a role than anything.


Yeah, there's actually one guy (who I know) with an Unify-X on the Intel OC discord server with the same problems (memory training issues). So for me at least there's no brand with perfectly running hardware.

Btw, I ordered an Unify-X today. Gonna test this soon and let you know what's going on.


----------



## criznit

owikh84 said:


> Did you see my post? Hero BIOS 0811. So far I tested two kits, both are stable with XMP #2 and 6000 C32 profile.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread
> 
> 
> Hi, I have a Asus Strix Z690-A and a 12700KF, and do also get a lot of WHEA 17 errors connected to the "Intel(R) PEG10 - 460D"! Have you found a solution, or is the only way to fix it by placing the GPU in the GEN3 PCIE port? Br, I reseated the CPU and the cooler, and the problem went away...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net


I did see your post and was able to get the profile to work! I had to change the CR to 2N to get it to post though.


----------



## Silent Scone

Hello,

Sticks in, quick and dirty tinker using Elmor's 6000 profile.

Maximum achievable coverage increases with reduced DIMM temps. Ergo, use active airflow where possible if pushing.

F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5K (6000-C36)
Apex 0811
Per Core 54/53/52
E-Core 41
Cache 40
VDD 1.44
VDDQ 1.44v
VDDQTX 1.44v
VCCSA 1.23 [Auto]
MC VDD 1.3v











Tweaks to CPU voltages. 

MC VVD 1.2v
VCCSA 1.1v


----------



## cstkl1

ZeroStrat said:


> Yeah, there's actually one guy (who I know) with an Unify-X on the Intel OC discord server with the same problems (memory training issues). So for me at least there's no brand with perfectly running hardware.
> 
> Btw, I ordered an Unify-X today. Gonna test this soon and let you know what's going on.


all i know mobo side is overengineered this time to handle everything

problem is on the ram binning or cpu imc

hynix 
6400c28 1T superstable took a month to check and fix 

6600c28 1T still has few problematic scenarios which pales compared to 6400 stability..
octvb, high cache P core oc etc. a month in. still not done.


----------



## Grendel602

neurokirurgi said:


> I reseated the CPU and the cooler, and the problem went away. Seeing as some Z690 boards and sockets can bend with the CPU installed (the backplate is supposed to counter that), I think I screwed up the mount the first time.



If you go to the ASUS support forums you can see that they acknowledge the WHEA 17 error and are working with INTEL on a fix.


----------



## owikh84

Okay these two 6000 C36 kits are not identical. The other kit requires a slight bump on the SA 1.275v compared to 1.25v on the first kit that I shared here not long ago. Auto SA of 1.25v will give random error within 5-10 mins on TM5. Basically, I just loaded the 6000 CL32 Samsung profile and adjusted the SA and MC voltages.

12900K SP88 - Stock
Maximus Z690 Hero | BIOS 0811
G.Skill F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK
2x16GB DDR5-6000 32-35-35-52-2T @ VDD/VDDQ 1.435v | SA 1.275v | MC 1.275v


----------



## Muad_Dib69

owikh84 said:


> Okay these two 6000 C36 kits are not identical. The other kit requires a slight bump on the SA 1.275v compared to 1.25v on the first kit that I shared here not long ago. Auto SA of 1.25v will give random error within 5-10 mins on TM5. Basically, I just loaded the 6000 CL32 Samsung profile and adjusted the SA and MC voltages.
> 
> 12900K SP88 - Stock
> Maximus Z690 Hero | BIOS 0811
> G.Skill F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK
> 2x16GB DDR5-6000 32-35-35-52-2T @ VDD/VDDQ 1.435v | SA 1.275v | MC 1.275v
> View attachment 2538720


So you really just load xmp1 load asus profile, changed adjusted the SA and MC voltages??? and it starts?
I have a formula and it don't even start when I load the asus profile... I can try to load it and change SA and MC first....


----------



## owikh84

Muad_Dib69 said:


> So you really just load xmp1 load asus profile, changed adjusted the SA and MC voltages??? and it starts?
> I have a formula and it don't even start when I load the asus profile... I can try to load it and change SA and MC first....


It's Auto (XMP off), just set the 1:2, DDR4-6000, load Samsung 6000 CL32 profile etc, adjust the SA and MC. 
Save and reboot that's all.


----------



## Muad_Dib69

Ok I will try tonight thanks


----------



## Benni231990

here are my final GSkill 6000 CL40 settings

VDD/VDDQ 1.43V | SA 1.25 | MC 1.3

like i say samsung absolute potato chips


----------



## kmellz

Heh, well... I changed vcore (and also cache) from auto to adaptive, hadn't actually checked that enough and thought auto was fine with everything else tuned? And that it was for even more fine-tuning and turbo boost extra juice etc.
Buut, now I'm sitting nicely at a lot lower voltage, also settled on 5.1/4.0 instead of 5.2, since 5.2 requires a goddamn amazing amount of vcore it seems.


----------



## marti69

hello i guys i have weird issue with kingstone value ram kits (hynix shipps) i can do [email protected] 32 35 35 52 no issue stable with 1.435v VDD/VDDQ dram high voltage disable but when i unable high dram voltage they wont boot even with same voltage 1.435 or higher i have maximus z690 hero with bios 0811 anyone knows why this rams wont boot with high voltage enable?


----------



## blautemple

Maybe the pmic doesn‘t support it.


----------



## stn1

blautemple said:


> Maybe the pmic doesn‘t support it.


Defo BIOS issue. I had inhouse AORUS Hynix kits with 1.5v XMP, it wouldn't work with High Voltage Mode either, posted 6667 at 1.45


----------



## EconomyFishFinger

TomCom205 said:


> Same here on the Extreme ... not Working at all.





yahfz said:


> @shamino1978 Everybody I know with the TEAMGROUP DELTA 6400C40 (SKU: FF3D532G6400HC40BDC01) haven't been able to get XMP working, including me (I'm on the APEX but I have seen it happening on the HERO and STRIX ITX too). They either won't post or if they do, they'll BSOD when getting to windows. I have tested myself several bioses, 0806, 0811, 0021, 0051, 0031 (yep, the one you just posted) . None worked, the best i was able to do was get into windows properly by tweaking RTT's but will immediately error on any memtest software or bsod when testing stability.


I have XMP working with the 811 bios for the z690 formula.

I have also just finished a 24 hour Techpowerup Memtest64 run with no errors, with the ram sitting at 6400Mhz with the timings CL36, 38, 38, 84.

VDD set at 1.45v, VDDQ set at 1.35v, VDDQ TX set at 1.45v, MC set at 1.35v

Kept my 12900KF at 5Ghz while testing these.

I have managed to get these to boot and run a few games at 6600Mhz stock ti mings. But I'll admit i'm basically just plugging random numbers as I am not too good with tuning RAM timings so wouldnt know where to start with any other timings.


----------



## marti69

stn1 said:


> Defo BIOS issue. I had inhouse AORUS Hynix kits with 1.5v XMP, it wouldn't work with High Voltage Mode either, posted 6667 at 1.45


oh i didnt know about the pmic lol i heard asus had a workaround.


----------



## asdkj1740

bscool said:


> QVL? I wouldnt put too much faith into any vendors QVL. Especaiily at higher freqencies. You IMC and tuning skill will play more of a role than anything.


qvl should be referring to rated xmp? 
is 6000mhz cl36 or cl40 really too high/tight for ddr5 and binned cpu with good imc is a must for xmp 6000mhz cl36 or cl40?


----------



## asdkj1740

crossbone said:


> DDR5 Support with the Apex or ASUS Z690 Lineup in general really is all over the place. MSI handles this much better right now. Hope ASUS can get it fixed.
> 
> Unify-X has all the Samsung Kits, even the 6000 CL36 on its QVL - the Apex does not. And I can report, the unify-x just loads xmp (GSKILL/Samsung 6000C36) and runs fine. Here the QVL of the Unify-X for a Sneak Peak. They also tested some nice ADATA 6800 C34 Kits - cant wait till these get released, first kit sub 10ns I see.
> MSI MEG Z690 UNIFY-X Gaming Motherboard ATX - Intel 12th Gen Processors - 19+2 Phase, DDR5, PCIe 5.0


wrong. i have seen msi beta bios saying fixing samsung kit stability/xmp profile/samsung die instability at default.
and yes as you said msi has the kits listed, which is even more problematic than asus.


----------



## bscool

asdkj1740 said:


> qvl should be referring to rated xmp?
> is 6000mhz cl36 or cl40 really too high/tight for ddr5 and binned cpu with good imc is a must for xmp 6000mhz cl36 or cl40?


I dont know anything about ddr5. Just saying in general it is only relevant at lower clocks. Like z390 or z490 Apex listed 4800c18 but none of my CPUs IMC could run 4800c18. Had to wait for RKL IMC to run them 5000+ on cml 4600c17 was it for my IMCs.


----------



## asdkj1740

yahfz said:


> @shamino1978 Everybody I know with the TEAMGROUP DELTA 6400C40 (SKU: FF3D532G6400HC40BDC01) haven't been able to get XMP working, including me (I'm on the APEX but I have seen it happening on the HERO and STRIX ITX too). They either won't post or if they do, they'll BSOD when getting to windows. I have tested myself several bioses, 0806, 0811, 0021, 0051, 0031 (yep, the one you just posted) . None worked, the best i was able to do was get into windows properly by tweaking RTT's but will immediately error on any memtest software or bsod when testing stability.


asus hero z690 qvl lists this kit and it is said this kit is with micron dies, at 6400mhz??



bscool said:


> I dont know anything about ddr5. Just saying in general it is only relevant at lower clocks. Like z390 or z490 Apex listed 4800c18 but none of my CPUs IMC could run 4800c18. Had to wait for RKL IMC to run them 5000+ on cml 4600c17 was it for my IMCs.


i dont know that too. if 6000mhz is too much for ddr5 for now, i would simply sell my z690 and d5 kit and then buy d4 z690.
that kind of instability is not acceptable and i need my pc for work. i cannot take bsod every day.


----------



## yahfz

asdkj1740 said:


> asus hero z690 qvl lists this kit and it is said this kit is with micron dies, at 6400mhz??


They even got that part wrong… The kit is obviously hynix.


----------



## EconomyFishFinger

yahfz said:


> They even got that part wrong… The kit is obviously hynix.


Definitely Hynix


----------



## asdkj1740

yahfz said:


> They even got that part wrong… The kit is obviously hynix.


thank you. i was thinking team+hynix would be fine/better in terms of stability....


----------



## Silent Scone

F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5K (6000-C36)

6200 CAS 32-35-35-52-1T
Apex 0811
Per Core 54/53/52
E-Core 41
Cache 40
VDD 1.435v
VDDQ 1.435v
VDDQTX 1.435v
VCCSA 1.1v
MC VDD 1.2v


----------



## RONIN1759

shamino1978 said:


> Adds specific p e core disable: also adds temparay sli key
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0072.rar


Any issue updating to this 0072 from version 0806 any new updated versions with sli key? Please and thank you.


----------



## Jetlain

12900K, ASUS Z690 AEPX, RTX 3090 NVLINK

The RTX 3090 cards are showing up in device manager and in GeForce Experience under my rig but SLI option not appearing in NVIDIA control panel. 
11900K and Z590 APEX had no SLI issues.
ASUS support assistant told me that the Z690 APEX does not support SLI.










btw I found 12900+Z690+RTX 3090 NVLINK users in 3dmark hall of fame. How did this guy enable SLI mode?
Time Spy does not support explicit multiadapters.


----------



## Benni231990

can anybody say why we have perfomance differenc on ddr5 benchmarks on apex and maximum and the strix?

has the strix lower or bader components? or why are the benchmark worse whan on apex and maximus on the same speed?

and has the 0811 the newest intel microcode ?

@Jetlain that normal ASUS dont have the sli license for z690 so you cant get sli on a ASUS z690 board on normal way i think this only get with a hack or a custom bios or a custom driver maybe


----------



## cstkl1

Jetlain said:


> View attachment 2538829
> 
> 
> 12900K, ASUS Z690 AEPX, RTX 3090 NVLINK
> 
> The RTX 3090 cards are showing up in device manager and in GeForce Experience under my rig but SLI option not appearing in NVIDIA control panel.
> 11900K and Z590 APEX had no SLI issues.
> ASUS support assistant told me that the Z690 APEX does not support SLI.
> 
> View attachment 2538830
> 
> 
> btw I found 12900+Z690+RTX 3090 NVLINK users in 3dmark hall of fame. How did this guy enable SLI mode?
> Time Spy does not support explicit multiadapters.


check 3rd post bios history


----------



## cstkl1

Benni231990 said:


> can anybody say why we have perfomance differenc on ddr5 benchmarks on apex and maximum and the strix?
> 
> has the strix lower or bader components? or why are the benchmark worse whan on apex and maximus on the same speed?
> 
> and has the 0811 the newest intel microcode ?
> 
> @Jetlain that normal ASUS dont have the sli license for z690 so you cant get sli on a ASUS z690 board on normal way i think this only get with a hack or a custom bios or a custom driver maybe


should be same unless apex did 1T
better users who knows how to benchmark use apex. 
thats all.


----------



## Agent-A01

So for me ODT 80-48-34 seems to work pretty well.

4133 Gear 1 15-15-15-28

1.50 VDIMM
1.37SA
1.35VDDQ











I've found if you try to really tighten tertiaries, you need way more VDDQ.
Worth it? Probably not.


----------



## LionAlonso

Agent-A01 said:


> So for me ODT 80-48-34 seems to work pretty well.
> 
> 4133 Gear 1 15-15-15-28
> 
> 1.50 VDIMM
> 1.37SA
> 1.35VDDQ
> 
> 
> View attachment 2538839
> 
> 
> I've found if you try to really tighten tertiaries, you need way more VDDQ.
> Worth it? Probably not.


Your ODT is for Bdie? 
what improvement u got from auto?


----------



## Malinkadink

How high are people able to run their ring ratio with e cores disabled? Using the D4 Strix I can do 4ghz on the ring but need 1.25v on SA to not get errors in P95 with large data sets. If leaving ring on auto it goes to 4.5Ghz but will BSOD me even just running a game. Don't know if future BIOS updates will help or maybe i just have an awful IMC in the 12700k. It's likely that I can run the ring higher if i disabled XMP (DDR4 3200CL14) and not need as much SA, just not sure what the upper bounds for "safe" SA values are.


----------



## Bladed

Malinkadink said:


> How high are people able to run their ring ratio with e cores disabled? Using the D4 Strix I can do 4ghz on the ring but need 1.25v on SA to not get errors in P95 with large data sets. If leaving ring on auto it goes to 4.5Ghz but will BSOD me even just running a game. Don't know if future BIOS updates will help or maybe i just have an awful IMC in the 12700k. It's likely that I can run the ring higher if i disabled XMP (DDR4 3200CL14) and not need as much SA, just not sure what the upper bounds for "safe" SA values are.


My D4 Strix sets SA to 1.329v when using auto settings with XMP 1, I'd imagine that should be relatively safe, so 1.25v should be safe enough.

That said, I can't get XMP to be stable on any bios version. 605 has been the closest to stable so far, but TM5 gives 2 errors and I get random app crashes and BSODs.


----------



## sugi0lover

Malinkadink said:


> How high are people able to run their ring ratio with e cores disabled? Using the D4 Strix I can do 4ghz on the ring but need 1.25v on SA to not get errors in P95 with large data sets. If leaving ring on auto it goes to 4.5Ghz but will BSOD me even just running a game. Don't know if future BIOS updates will help or maybe i just have an awful IMC in the 12700k. It's likely that I can run the ring higher if i disabled XMP (DDR4 3200CL14) and not need as much SA, just not sure what the upper bounds for "safe" SA values are.


With e cores disabled, I can bench with ring ratio of 5.3Ghz. I haven't tried higher ratio, so it may go higher.
Anyway, this 12900K is SP103.


----------



## cstkl1

i9 12900k - SP93
Asus MZ690 Apex - Bios 0806
2x16gb 6600 28-37-37-28-1T @1.65v
SA | txvddq | MC - 0.9v | 1.55v | 1.55v


----------



## Robert Tee Builder

ZeroStrat said:


> Not sure about it. From what I know all brands are affected.


 They won't fix this until the next reiteration of the board. Butter memory support for the z790. I'm not a fan of MSI But they have way better memory support. This year I'm not buying a new processor just because I knew it's gonna have so many issues. Between the cpu makers the silicon quality and board manufacturers. When ddr5 is been out for more than a year then I will upgrade. I'll just have to stick with my ddr4 32gb 4400 c19.


----------



## morph.

Silent Scone said:


> F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5K (6000-C36)
> 
> 6200 CAS 32-35-35-52-1T
> Apex 0811
> Per Core 54/53/52
> E-Core 41
> Cache 40
> VDD 1.435v
> VDDQ 1.435v
> VDDQTX 1.435v
> VCCSA 1.1v
> MC VDD 1.2v
> 
> View attachment 2538799


whats your RAM cooling?


----------



## cstkl1

morph. said:


> whats your RAM cooling?


----------



## yahfz

cstkl1 said:


> i9 12900k - SP93
> Asus MZ690 Apex - Bios 0806
> 2x16gb 6600 28-37-37-28-1T @1.65v
> SA | txvddq | MC - 0.9v | 1.55v | 1.55v


mind posting the CMO for this?


----------



## cstkl1

yahfz said:


> mind posting the CMO for this?


hynix
testing bios 021 next.


----------



## Silent Scone

morph. said:


> whats your RAM cooling?


A fan for the time being


----------



## yahfz

cstkl1 said:


> hynix
> testing bios 021 next.


i mean the .cmo file, with the user profile.


----------



## cstkl1

yahfz said:


> i mean the .cmo file, with the user profile.


not for sharing atm. 
atleast until ppl stop copying and start ocing testing their ram chipset .


----------



## yahfz

Weird, i thought the point of this community was to share and learn. but ok


----------



## cstkl1

yahfz said:


> Weird, i thought the point of this community was to share and learn. but ok


weird

i think i shared more than enough and got screwed over more than enough by ppl who quote such things. community doesnt pay da electricity bill and time.

so waiting for ppl to share their actual findings of their own work instead of trying to get some copy settings to work. thats when its "share and learn" begins

also i dont get why you want that cmo profile since u have samsung.

whatever significant findings i share with the fae for all u guys. they test to see its valid or not.


----------



## yahfz

cstkl1 said:


> weird
> 
> i think i shared more than enough and got screwed over more than enough by ppl who quote such things. community doesnt pay da electricity bill and time.
> 
> so waiting for ppl to share their actual findings of their own work instead of trying to get some copy settings to work. thats when its "share and learn" begins
> 
> also i dont get why you want that cmo profile since u have samsung.
> 
> whatever significant findings i share with the fae for all u guys. they test to see its valid or not.


1- I don't have Samsung, i have Hynix.
2- I did share my findings and i've been trying to get it to work, i've been on working on it since i got my parts 2 days ago, working on them non-stop, so why are you assuming i'm waiting for people to do all the work for me? That's very weird and sounds like you're projecting / had that **** happen between you and some random user and now you're using that crap against me.
3- I'm not interested in screwing over anybody, i'm here to learn, the best way to learn is to see what you're doing wrong by reading / checking other users settings and applying them to your own to see if they help.


----------



## cstkl1

yahfz said:


> 1- I don't have Samsung, i have Hynix.
> 2- I did share my findings and i've been trying to get it to work so why are you assuming i'm waiting for people to do all the work for me? That's very weird and sounds like you're projecting / had that **** happen between you and some random user and now you're using that crap against me.
> 3- I'm not interested in screwing over anybody, i'm here to learn, the best way to learn is to see what you're doing wrong by reading / checking other users settings and applying them to your own to see if they help.


hynix my bad. eye sight after tuning so long.

just read up on your 30 odd post, shouldnt u get your rams working properly first. if you cant get 6400c28 .. forget 6600c28

and u said community. i quoted community,
this is y i dislike talking about this cause ppl like to interchange "we" and "i" when its always actually "i". glad we got that cleared up.

anyway again as i posted this over and over and over. ddr5 has unknowns. on timing formulation of hynix etc,
formulate and test. find a way for it to work or ease up on the timings.

then we can start seeing difference. atm i find on discord more informative since ppl actually formulate their own. their variation is really unique.

both my cpus have diff subs


----------



## Nizzen

Jetlain said:


> View attachment 2538829
> 
> 
> 12900K, ASUS Z690 AEPX, RTX 3090 NVLINK
> 
> The RTX 3090 cards are showing up in device manager and in GeForce Experience under my rig but SLI option not appearing in NVIDIA control panel.
> 11900K and Z590 APEX had no SLI issues.
> ASUS support assistant told me that the Z690 APEX does not support SLI.
> 
> View attachment 2538830
> 
> 
> btw I found 12900+Z690+RTX 3090 NVLINK users in 3dmark hall of fame. How did this guy enable SLI mode?
> Time Spy does not support explicit multiadapters.


You need the apex bios with sli key...

I think it's this one:

0072

ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0072.rar

Report back


----------



## morph.

Asus (@shamino1978) Configured bios memory settings for 2x16dr Samsung, wasn't able to post with 1t but 2t looked okay any tips on what I can do to make it boot with 1T I know I'm using a formula so it will be harder than the apex to achieve this... - Will likely tighten this a little further and hopefully have it run at 6200 when I get motivated!


----------



## Jetlain

Nizzen said:


> You need the apex bios with sli key...
> 
> I think it's this one:
> 
> 0072
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0072.rar
> 
> Report back



Thanks! 3090 SLI works fine with 0072 bios.


----------



## cstkl1

morph. said:


> Asus (@shamino1978) Configured bios memory settings for 2x16dr Samsung, wasn't able to post with 1t but 2t looked okay any tips on what I can do to make it boot with 1T I know I'm using a formula so it will be harder than the apex to achieve this... - Will likely tighten this a little further and hopefully have it run at 6200 when I get motivated!
> 
> View attachment 2538895


dllbswel


----------



## owikh84

SA 0.9v 

12900K SP88 - Stock
Maximus Z690 Hero | BIOS 0811
G.Skill F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK
2x16GB DDR5-6000 32-35-35-52-2T @ VDD/VDDQ/TX VDDQ 1.435v | SA 0.9v | MC 1.275v


----------



## Tradition

Can we have 07xx version of bios for z690m plus d4? the 0901 wont let the IMC go to 4000 the old 06xx from asus website will but then its not stable on core
was hoping the middle on would


----------



## joshpdemesa

Jetlain said:


> Thanks! 3090 SLI works fine with 0072 bios.


great! what BIOS were you on before? I'm wondering if later BIOS versions also have the temporary SLI key.


----------



## cstkl1




----------



## morph.

cstkl1 said:


> dllbswel


What’s a good value I can try it’s currently on auto to get 1t? Thanks bro.


----------



## ChaosAD

cstkl1 said:


>


You get better time with e cores disabled?


----------



## cstkl1

morph. said:


> is that a value I need to adjust to potentially get 1T working and if so approximately what? Thanks bro.


atm just try something bro. my results differ from others. but thats the start.

it could be my unique ram situation. most ppl auto was fine.


----------



## cstkl1

ChaosAD said:


> You get better time with e cores disabled?


avx512 to kick in.


----------



## criznit

owikh84 said:


> SA 0.9v
> 
> 12900K SP88 - Stock
> Maximus Z690 Hero | BIOS 0811
> G.Skill F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK
> 2x16GB DDR5-6000 32-35-35-52-2T @ VDD/VDDQ/TX VDDQ 1.435v | SA 0.9v | MC 1.275v
> View attachment 2538907


How are you getting the latency so low? With the same setup and an SP93 12900k, I can only do 60ns.


----------



## Martin778

I doubt it as well, I get 56-57ns even running 1T.


----------



## Nizzen

criznit said:


> How are you getting the latency so low? With the same setup and an SP93 12900k, I can only do 60ns.


Disable background programs. Hwinfo alone is like 5-10ns 🤪


----------



## Jetlain

joshpdemesa said:


> great! what BIOS were you on before? I'm wondering if later BIOS versions also have the temporary SLI key.


I tried 0806, 0811, 0031 and all failed. SLI only works with 0072.
I scored 36 614 in Time Spy


----------



## Martin778

I'm starting to lose track of which BIOS is the latest and which one does what.


----------



## Benni231990

the last bios i know is the 0811 right?

but i have no idear if this bios has the new intel microcode


----------



## skullbringer

loads with many memory requests perform a lot better with e cores off and then you can enable avx512 additionally. asus even does that on auto when e cores are off. plus with e cores off, you can raise the ring clock by like 500 MHz or more

cinebench is pretty much the only benchmark where e cores aren't worthless


----------



## orbitech

Waiting on my set of Gskill 6000MHz CL36 the day after tomorrow to test them finally with my Apex. Currently on the latest official 0811 bios. Should I stay with this or use another bios?


----------



## Agent-A01

LionAlonso said:


> Your ODT is for Bdie?
> what improvement u got from auto?


.2 less vdimm. VDDQ is lower too.

Also trains much faster


----------



## dyanikoglu

Does GSkill Trident Z5 6000 CL36 (Non RGB) currently work with Z690-E ? I'm planning get this combo, but seems like there are some issues with XMP profiles?


----------



## shifted

Is downgrading BIOS as simple as running the Flashback with the BIOS you want to use on Asus motherboards?


----------



## bscool

shifted said:


> Is downgrading BIOS as simple as running the Flashback with the BIOS you want to use on Asus motherboards?


Yes or even ez flash in the bios should work to go back to older bios.


----------



## imrankhanm607

If anyone wants to test out this Strix / Maximus autotune tool (windows/UEFI version), follow the instructions in the link: run it before going to bed because it takes a long time.


----------



## ObscureEmpyre

Hi. Is anyone else getting WHEA errors (event ID 20) by the thousands? I’ve tried using my Asus ROG Strix Z690-F Gaming WiFi and Prime Z690-A motherboards, and I’m constantly getting them. Not only have I tried those two motherboards, I’ve also tried two 12700Ks, two PSUs, two SSDs (one m.2 NVMe and one 2.5” SATA), and two kits of DDR5. I’ve also got a Gigabyte Z690 Aorus Master with a 12900K, and no issues with WHEA errors. As for the Asus boards, I’ve tried stock settings and XMP for the RAM. Still getting errors. The only “bandaid” fix I’ve come across that seems to stop them is to disable ASPM in the BIOS and turn off the PCIE link power management in the Windows advanced power profile settings. I know I’m not the only one getting WHEA errors like this, but every other Reddit or forum thread I’ve come across seems to state WHEA 17 errors. Hoping someone here might know something I don’t.


----------



## Falkentyne

ObscureEmpyre said:


> Hi. Is anyone else getting WHEA errors (event ID 20) by the thousands? I’ve tried using my Asus ROG Strix Z690-F Gaming WiFi and Prime Z690-A motherboards, and I’m constantly getting them. Not only have I tried those two motherboards, I’ve also tried two 12700Ks, two PSUs, two SSDs (one m.2 NVMe and one 2.5” SATA), and two kits of DDR5. I’ve also got a Gigabyte Z690 Aorus Master with a 12900K, and no issues with WHEA errors. As for the Asus boards, I’ve tried stock settings and XMP for the RAM. Still getting errors. The only “bandaid” fix I’ve come across that seems to stop them is to disable ASPM in the BIOS and turn off the PCIE link power management in the Windows advanced power profile settings. I know I’m not the only one getting WHEA errors like this, but every other Reddit or forum thread I’ve come across seems to state WHEA 17 errors. Hoping someone here might know something I don’t.


Yes disabling the PCIE link power management fixes it. Asus is aware of this (it was them who suggested this fix) and they are working with Intel on a solution. This seems to be more than just a regular BIOS bug.


----------



## Silent Scone

orbitech said:


> Waiting on my set of Gskill 6000MHz CL36 the day after tomorrow to test them finally with my Apex. Currently on the latest official 0811 bios. Should I stay with this or use another bios?


I would stay on 0811 and see how you get on first. I've not had much trouble at all on 0811 with that kit, although as with all things memory-related CPU depending.


----------



## ObscureEmpyre

Falkentyne said:


> Yes disabling the PCIE link power management fixes it. Asus is aware of this (it was them who suggested this fix) and they are working with Intel on a solution. This seems to be more than just a regular BIOS bug.


I just checked my Gigabyte BIOS and ASPM is disabled by default with the latest BIOS. I guess they had figured out the bandaid approach, if it is an Intel issue and not board-brand-specific. Meanwhile, even with BIOS version 8011 for the Strix F is still defaulted to enabled. Anyway, thanks for the reply.


----------



## morph.

@shamino1978 and all what’s the difference between maximus tweak mode 1 and 2 with v0811?


----------



## owikh84

criznit said:


> How are you getting the latency so low? With the same setup and an SP93 12900k, I can only do 60ns.





Martin778 said:


> I doubt it as well, I get 56-57ns even running 1T.


Windows diagnostic mode with no software running in the background. 
And not sure if this gonna helps, my CPU is running at stock clocks (P- and E-cores auto), with ring clock boosting up to 4.7GHz (auto).


----------



## morph.

Silent Scone said:


> F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5K (6000-C36)
> 
> 6200 CAS 32-35-35-52-1T
> Apex 0811
> Per Core 54/53/52
> E-Core 41
> Cache 40
> VDD 1.435v
> VDDQ 1.435v
> VDDQTX 1.435v
> VCCSA 1.1v
> MC VDD 1.2v
> 
> View attachment 2538799


Damnit I cant even post with 6000 1t.
With 6200 2t posts fine but constant bsod's and ive been cranking up the main voltages to no avail...

With ddr4 I enabled trace centring to help train 1t here and there cant seem to find that option here.


----------



## Garlicky

Updated to bios 0808, still no luck going past 3733. Could it just be my imc being bad?


----------



## bscool

Garlicky said:


> Updated to bios 0808, still no luck going past 3733. Could it just be my imc being bad?


I dont remeber your spec. just looked at old post. 4x8 b die? I recently tried 2x8 to help someone else trouble shoot on strix d4 z690 and bios 812 doesnt work well with sr b die. I saw on hwbot a0/a1 sr b die work fine with 812 though. I went back to bios 707 and it works good with 2x8 a2 sr b die. Didnt try 4x8. I saw someone post 4000c15 with b die 4x8 on strix d4 bios 002.









[Official] Intel Z690 / Z790 DDR4 Daily Memory Overclock


1.14 couldn't boot 3800c14 xmp, 4000c17 memory try it profile loaded but caused irq not less or equal bsod. back to 1.15u3 and i can boot 3800c14 xmp easily.




www.overclock.net


----------



## Garlicky

bscool said:


> I dont remeber your spec. just looked at old post. 4x8 b die? I recently tried 2x8 to help someone else trouble shoot on strix d4 z690 and bios 812 doesnt work well with sr b die. I saw on hwbot a0/a1 sr b die work fine with 812 though. I went back to bios 707 and it works good with 2x8 a2 sr b die. Didnt try 4x8. I saw someone post 4000c15 with b die 4x8 on strix d4 bios 002.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Official] Intel Z690 / Z790 DDR4 Daily Memory Overclock
> 
> 
> 1.14 couldn't boot 3800c14 xmp, 4000c17 memory try it profile loaded but caused irq not less or equal bsod. back to 1.15u3 and i can boot 3800c14 xmp easily.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net


Ok, I'll give 0002 a try.


----------



## Garlicky

Well, no luck. even worse than 0808. I think its just my imc


----------



## bscool

Garlicky said:


> Well, no luck. even worse than 0808. I think its just my imc


It sounds like it. I am helping someone with a z690 d4 and he can only run 2x8 sr b die 4000c14. cant even boot 4133c15 or 4133c16. not that it is bad but not great for 12900k and 4000c14 gskill 2x8.


----------



## Silent Scone

morph. said:


> Damnit I cant even post with 6000 1t.
> With 6200 2t posts fine but constant bsod's and ive been cranking up the main voltages to no avail...
> 
> With ddr4 I enabled trace centring to help train 1t here and there cant seem to find that option here.


Anything over 6K will come down to the CPU, there may even be a few CPUs that won't do that but from what information is available most should. And as always the Apex topology makes some scenarios easier.

If it's the C40 6000 kit, I know a few users have struggled. Try cranking down, too. Things like System Agent can still hurt stability if pushed too far up high on the frequency side of things.


----------



## morph.

Silent Scone said:


> Anything over 6K will come down to the CPU, there may even be a few CPUs that won't do that but from what information is available most should. And as always the Apex topology makes some scenarios easier.
> 
> If it's the C40 6000 kit, I know a few users have struggled. Try cranking down, too. Things like System Agent can still hurt stability if pushed too far up high on the frequency side of things.


I was all set to get the apex board this time round but the white formula board aesthetics was just too good to pass up 

It's the c36 kit so I'm not really pushing it past the xmp standards too much other than at this stage tightening the timings.

I have since my previous posts lowered the SA to around 1.135v and running a quick OCCT mem test right now to see how that goes.


----------



## Alberto_It

Silent Scone said:


> Anything over 6K will come down to the CPU, there may even be a few CPUs that won't do that but from what information is available most should. And as always the Apex topology makes some scenarios easier.
> 
> If it's the C40 6000 kit, I know a few users have struggled. Try cranking down, too. Things like System Agent can still hurt stability if pushed too far up high on the frequency side of things.


Do you have F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK kit and Apex board? Which version of Bios do you recommend and what settings should I do to get the stable XMP profile? @Silent Scone


----------



## morph.

Alberto_It said:


> Do you have F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK kit and Apex board? Which version of Bios do you recommend and what settings should I do to get the stable XMP profile? @Silent Scone


v0811 is the go-to currently.


----------



## Nizzen

morph. said:


> I was all set to get the apex board this time round but the white formula board aesthetics was just too good to pass up
> 
> It's the c36 kit so I'm not really pushing it past the xmp standards too much other than at this stage tightening the timings.
> 
> I have since my previous posts lowered the SA to around 1.135v and running a quick OCCT mem test right now to see how that goes.


Try 0.95SA. I'm using that on 6000c30 tweaked on Apex.

@Alberto_It Using latest 0031 bios.


----------



## morph.

Nizzen said:


> Try 0.95SA. I'm using that on 6000c30 tweaked on Apex.
> 
> Using latest 0031 bios.


it's weird this time round huh lower the SA the better the potential with stability and stress tests?

Or is this for better training/posting as well?


----------



## Alberto_It

Nizzen said:


> Try 0.95SA. I'm using that on 6000c30 tweaked on Apex.
> 
> @Alberto_It Using latest 0031 bios.


Thank you, I will use version 0031, in the Bios for the simple XMP at 6000 Cl36 what should I set? @Nizzen


----------



## morph.

Nizzen said:


> Try 0.95SA. I'm using that on 6000c30 tweaked on Apex.
> 
> @Alberto_It Using latest 0031 bios.


tried 1.05 sa and it errored out within minutes...gonna creep back up the sa to like 1.18 and see how it goes.


----------



## Silent Scone

morph. said:


> it's weird this time round huh lower the SA the better the potential with stability and stress tests?
> 
> Or is this for better training/posting as well?


 Pretty normal as this is a signal rail so too much voltage can be the difference between a pass and a fail


----------



## Alberto_It

Silent Scone said:


> Pretty normal as this is a signal rail so too much voltage can be the difference between a pass and a fail


Sorry @Silent Scone for the disturb , on my Apex I will use Bios version 0031, but for the simple XMP profile @ 6000 Cl36 what should I set or change?


----------



## Silent Scone

Alberto_It said:


> Sorry @Silent Scone for the disturb , on my Apex I will use Bios version 0031, but for the simple XMP profile @ 6000 Cl36 what should I set or change?


That depends on what happens when you set XMP and save UEFI changes


----------



## Alberto_It

Silent Scone said:


> That depends on what happens when you set XMP and save UEFI changes


Several users with my same Cpu, motherboard and ram kit BSOD or instability trying the simple XMP profile 😅. Anyway thanks @Silent Scone


----------



## Silent Scone

Alberto_It said:


> Several users with my same Cpu, motherboard and ram kit BSOD or instability trying the simple XMP profile 😅. Anyway thanks @Silent Scone


I know a few users have had luck lowering the CPU System Agent with XMP and the CL40 kits, maybe try there first.

The Apex memory profiles are there for a reason though, don’t be afraid to use them especially if they help stability.


----------



## Alberto_It

Silent Scone said:


> I know a few users have had luck lowering the CPU System Agent with XMP and the CL40 kits, maybe try there first.
> 
> The Apex memory profiles are there for a reason though, don’t be afraid to use them especially if they help stability.


Me and others users we have not purchased one expensive kit for increase cas latency. The system stability is correct, but with the Dram kit that we have purchased


----------



## Silent Scone

Alberto_It said:


> Me and others users we have not purchased one expensive kit for increase cas latency. The system stability is correct, but with the Dram kit that we have purchased


I said other users have found success with the CPU SA and those kits, not raise CAS to 40.
I don’t understand the rest of your post


----------



## Alberto_It

Silent Scone said:


> I said other users have found success with the CPU SA and those kits, not raise CAS to 40.
> I don’t understand the rest of your post


@Silent Scone sorry There was a misunderstanding


----------



## Alberto_It

It's been a few days that when I turn on the PC, under Windows 11 the QCode led give me the number 40 and not A0. I must restart the Pc for A0.

My power plan on Windows 11 is under performance both pc and monitor without sleeping mode/time

What's wrong?


----------



## TheOnlyGummy

Alberto_It said:


> It's been a few days that when I turn on the PC, under Windows 11 the QCode led give me the number 40 and not A0. I must restart the Pc for A0.
> 
> My power plan on Windows 11 is under performance both pc and monitor without sleeping mode/time
> 
> What's wrong?
> 
> View attachment 2539155


Hi! I think it's a fast startup of windows, try to disable this option in windows --> power mode and retry


----------



## nickolp1974

Silent Scone said:


> Hello,
> 
> Sticks in, quick and dirty tinker using Elmor's 6000 profile.
> 
> Maximum achievable coverage increases with reduced DIMM temps. Ergo, use active airflow where possible if pushing.
> 
> F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5K (6000-C36)
> Apex 0811
> Per Core 54/53/52
> E-Core 41
> Cache 40
> VDD 1.44
> VDDQ 1.44v
> VDDQTX 1.44v
> VCCSA 1.23 [Auto]
> MC VDD 1.3v
> 
> View attachment 2538704
> 
> 
> 
> Tweaks to CPU voltages.
> 
> MC VVD 1.2v
> VCCSA 1.1v
> 
> View attachment 2538709


Hello Mr Scone hows tricks???  
Just managed to grab some of the gskill 6000 cl36 today and an apex, how are they???? i see your running a KF cpu, are there any gains to be had from one of those or is there nothing in it between the regular K?? Also see that your needing a fan on the memory, so there getting warm then???


----------



## MacTavishPapa6

Has anyone else noticed a version 0901 BIOS is now available for the ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4 with today’s date? No fixes listed but will give it a go later. Wondering if it fixes the WHEA 17/PCI-E link state power management issue and improves memory stability.


----------



## bscool

MacTavishPapa6 said:


> Has anyone else noticed a version 0901 BIOS is now available for the ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4 with today’s date? No fixes listed but will give it a go later. Wondering if it fixes the WHEA 17/PCI-E link state power management issue and improves memory stability.


Yeah I see it. Try it and let us know.  Actually i will try it also and see how it is for sr b die and dr b die.


----------



## GtiJason

cstkl1 said:


>


 So fast !!! Just shows how much mem OC matters to this bench. Under 56s at 5.2g vs

Best time for 12900k (8P) is only 2s faster but at 6.4g / LN2









Xtreme Addict`s y-cruncher - Pi-2.5b score: 53sec 877ms with a Core i9 12900KF (8P)


The Core i9 12900KF (8P) @ 6400MHzscores getScoreFormatted in the y-cruncher - Pi-2.5b benchmark. Xtreme Addictranks #12 worldwide and #3 in the hardware class. Find out more at HWBOT.




hwbot.org





And Best time for 12900k (16c) is just over 4s faster again on LN2 LN2









Splave`s y-cruncher - Pi-2.5b score: 51sec 767ms with a Core i9 12900K


The Core i9 12900K @ 6400MHzscores getScoreFormatted in the y-cruncher - Pi-2.5b benchmark. Splaveranks #14 worldwide and #2 in the hardware class. Find out more at HWBOT.




hwbot.org


----------



## cstkl1

GtiJason said:


> So fast !!! Just shows how much mem OC matters to this bench. Under 56s at 5.2g vs
> 
> Best time for 12900k (8P) is only 2s faster but at 6.4g / LN2
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Xtreme Addict`s y-cruncher - Pi-2.5b score: 53sec 877ms with a Core i9 12900KF (8P)
> 
> 
> The Core i9 12900KF (8P) @ 6400MHzscores getScoreFormatted in the y-cruncher - Pi-2.5b benchmark. Xtreme Addictranks #12 worldwide and #3 in the hardware class. Find out more at HWBOT.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hwbot.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And Best time for 12900k (16c) is just over 4s faster again on LN2 LN2
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Splave`s y-cruncher - Pi-2.5b score: 51sec 767ms with a Core i9 12900K
> 
> 
> The Core i9 12900K @ 6400MHzscores getScoreFormatted in the y-cruncher - Pi-2.5b benchmark. Splaveranks #14 worldwide and #2 in the hardware class. Find out more at HWBOT.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hwbot.org


i suspect they benched it before the ucode for avx 512


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> Yeah I see it. Try it and let us know.  Actually i will try it also and see how it is for sr b die and dr b die.


I just got everything stable lol grrr.


----------



## bscool

truehighroller1 said:


> I just got everything stable lol grrr.


I am on 901 strix d4 now and so far it is ok with sr in the short time running it. Same microcode 12. I think they are having issues with 15 since they went back to mc 12. I will take better performance/stability over newer mc.


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> I am on 901 strix d4 now and so far it is ok with sr in the short time running it. Same microcode 12. I think they are having issues with 15 since they went back to mc 12. I will take better performance/stability over newer mc.



Where is the download having issues finding it for some reason?


----------



## bscool

truehighroller1 said:


> Where is the download having issues finding it for some reason?


Here if you want it ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0901.CAP

I dont know why it doesnt show for some people. z690 Strix d4 901


Added sr b die cmo(if new people want to test) for sr b die should work for dr also but havent test. Mem oc 4000c14-15-15 with fairly tight timings and ai oc enabled, 4000c14 AiOC bios901.CMO

Quick aida64 no memest just y crucher and cpuz ti test quickly

Sorry thought this was ddr4 z690 thread. Oh well Ill leave it here.

Microcode 12


----------



## X909

Does anybody have a new TUF WiFi D4 BIOS maybe? >0808


----------



## Cam1

X909 said:


> Does anybody have a new TUF WiFi D4 BIOS maybe? >0808


Atm no bios allows me to set Ram stable @4000MHz Gear 1 with this board.
Soon a new Bios will solve this i believe.


----------



## bscool

Cam1 said:


> Atm no bios allows me to set Ram stable @4000MHz Gear 1 with this board.
> Soon a new Bios will solve this i believe.


Did you try 707? I know a couple people with the tuf ran 4000+ on sr and dr b die used that bios.

I had issues on strix d4 with later bioses and sr b die had to go back to 707. 901 is good though.


----------



## manjooie

I am using Z690 Hero and was having issues running my DDR5 at even the stock 4800 CL40. Thankfully literally yesterday ASUS posted a new BIOS (8011) and now everything has been working great. I am able to run my GSkill Trident Z 6000 CL36 at the rated speeds using XMP 1 with no crashes.


----------



## MacTavishPapa6

bscool said:


> Here if you want it ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0901.CAP
> 
> I dont know why it doesnt show for some people. z690 Strix d4 901
> 
> 
> Added sr b die cmo(if new people want to test) for sr b die should work for dr also but havent test. Mem oc 4000c14-15-15 with fairly tight timings and ai oc enabled, 4000c14 AiOC bios901.CMO
> 
> Quick aida64 no memest just y crucher and cpuz ti test quickly
> 
> Sorry thought this was ddr4 z690 thread. Oh well Ill leave it here.


Thanks! Those AIDA values are looking sweet. Will see how I get on.


----------



## bscool

MacTavishPapa6 said:


> Thanks! Those AIDA values are looking sweet. Will see how I get on.


Takes a decent IMC to run that. I can do 4266-4300 gear 1 but another person I am helping is done at 4000c14 gear 1. No boot at 4133c15 or 4133c16 for his IMC on sr b die.


----------



## Cam1

bscool said:


> Did you try 707? I know a couple people with the tuf ran 4000+ on sr and dr b die used that bios.
> 
> I had issues on strix d4 with later bioses and sr b die had to go back to 707. 901 is good though.


Ah this is the official Asus tuf Bios, i didn't try this one ! 

Did you get 4000 Gear 1 working with this Bios but not with the last one ( 0807 ) ?


----------



## MacTavishPapa6

bscool said:


> Takes a decent IMC to run that. I can do 4266-4300 gear 1 but another person I am helping is done at 4000c14 gear 1. No boot at 4133c15 or 4133c16 for his IMC on sr b die.


Just booted in with AIOC 12700K with XMP II 4000 C16, Gear 1, CR2, 1.4 DRAM and 1.25 SA. Going to do a memory test now. What voltages are you running? Also, separate to his have you had any WHEA issues, WHEA 17 or 20 where people have had to change PCI-E slot to Gen 3.0?


----------



## bscool

MacTavishPapa6 said:


> Just booted in with AIOC 12700K with XMP II 4000 C16, Gear 1, CR2, 1.4 DRAM and 1.25 SA. Going to do a memory test now. What voltages are you running? Also, separate to his have you had any WHEA issues, WHEA 17 or 20 where people have had to change PCI-E slot to Gen 3.0?


I have been running dram 1.55v sa/vq on auto which is 1.35v for me. haven't paid attention to whea or seen anything. Do you get crashes or just see them in event viewer?

I havent touched pcie left it on auto and it was running 4.0 last time I checked. Not at the pc right now.


----------



## bscool

Cam1 said:


> Ah this is the official Asus tuf Bios, i didn't try this one !
> 
> Did you get 4000 Gear 1 working with this Bios but not with the last one ( 0807 ) ?


707 was an official release and you tried it. i looked at your old posts


----------



## MacTavishPapa6

bscool said:


> I have been running dram 1.55v sa/vq on auto which is 1.35v for me. haven't paid attention to whea or seen anything. Do you get crashes or just see them in event viewer?
> 
> I havent touched pcie left it on auto and it was running 4.0 last time I checked. Not at the pc right now.


Ah ok, thanks. Will see how stable this is before I try anything else, no blue screens yet and even the CPU and temps seem more stable too! I got a WHEA 17 crash yesterday and apparently it's an issue to do with PCI-E link state power management and the BIOS. Apparently ASUS is working with Intel on a fix, maybe it's already in the new BIOS.


----------



## ObscureEmpyre

MacTavishPapa6 said:


> Has anyone else noticed a version 0901 BIOS is now available for the ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4 with today’s date? No fixes listed but will give it a go later. Wondering if it fixes the WHEA 17/PCI-E link state power management issue and improves memory stability.


Not sure about the Strix Z690-A, but the Strix Z690-F 0811 BIOS didn’t fix the WHEA issue for me. What’s odd is every forum I’ve come across about the issue discusses WHEA 17 errors, but I was getting WHEA 20 errors by the thousands. I disabled ASPM settings in the BIOS as well as the PCIE link in Windows, and hadn’t gotten any errors until last night. There was a single new WHEA 20 error with a different detail code than all the rest. What’s odd is that it happened when the system should have been in sleep mode, so I disabled all wake on event settings. Sure hoping they figure this out soon. I’ve spent a lot of time and money diagnosing and troubleshooting the issue. And no, I didn’t pay anyone to diagnose it. I bought a 2nd 12700K thinking it may have been the CPU. At least I have another build the 2nd one can go in.


----------



## dyanikoglu

Does GSkill 6000 Mhz CL36 currently works on z690-E with XMP profiles on latest bios? Anyone?


----------



## Cam1

bscool said:


> 707 was an official release and you tried it. i looked at your old posts


No since i changed my Ram, just tried it, can boot windows with xmp 1 Gear 1 4000MHz but it's not stable.
That's such a wast of time lol...
i'm using xmp and 3800 maybe 3900 is stable but waiting for a new bios to try again 4000 xmp gear 1...


----------



## bscool

Cam1 said:


> No since i change my Ram, just tried it and it's boot windows aith xmp 1 Gear 1 4000MHz but it's not stable.
> That's such a wast of time lol...
> i'm using xmp and 3800 maybe 3900 is stable but waiting for a new bios to try again 4000 xmp gear 1...


I know it can be frustrating. When this guy told me single rank doesnt work(z690 strix d4) on newer bios(812) I thought he doesnt know what he is doing. So i tried it. yep he was right lol. DR works great though. makes no sense to me.


----------



## Sarzinski

Cam1 said:


> Atm no bios allows me to set Ram stable @4000MHz Gear 1 with this board.
> Soon a new Bios will solve this i believe.


That's not the BIOS' fault, that's most likely your IMC.

I can boot 4266 and run 4133 stable on 0707, 0807, 0808 and boot at least 4133 with stable 4000 on every other BIOS I've tried. Also TUF, but with 12900k.


----------



## bscool

Sarzinski said:


> That's not the BIOS' fault, that's most likely your IMC.
> 
> I can boot 4266 and run 4133 stable on 0707, 0807, 0808 and boot at least 4133 with stable 4000 on every other BIOS I've tried. Also TUF, but with 12900k.


I can run 4266c16 dr on 808, 4133c15 bios 812 

but sr b die mess on 812. So it can be a bios issue.

bench 4266c15 dr

the screens are dr.


----------



## Cam1

Sarzinski said:


> That's not the BIOS' fault, that's most likely your IMC.
> 
> I can boot 4266 and run 4133 stable on 0707, 0807, 0808 and boot at least 4133 with stable 4000 on every other BIOS I've tried. Also TUF, but with 12900k.


Bios makes the system components working together, how can you be so sure it's because of the "IMC" ?


----------



## MacTavishPapa6

ObscureEmpyre said:


> Not sure about the Strix Z690-A, but the Strix Z690-F 0811 BIOS didn’t fix the WHEA issue for me. What’s odd is every forum I’ve come across about the issue discusses WHEA 17 errors, but I was getting WHEA 20 errors by the thousands. I disabled ASPM settings in the BIOS as well as the PCIE link in Windows, and hadn’t gotten any errors until last night. There was a single new WHEA 20 error with a different detail code than all the rest. What’s odd is that it happened when the system should have been in sleep mode, so I disabled all wake on event settings. Sure hoping they figure this out soon. I’ve spent a lot of time and money diagnosing and troubleshooting the issue. And no, I didn’t pay anyone to diagnose it. I bought a 2nd 12700K thinking it may have been the CPU. At least I have another build the 2nd one can go in.


Yes, I read your post about the WHEA 20 error when I was searching for the issue with the WHEA 17 error. Apparently changing the PCI-E slot to Gen 3.0 stops WHEA 17 happening but not sure about WHEA 20. I think new BIOS versions will solve the issues.


----------



## ObscureEmpyre

MacTavishPapa6 said:


> Yes, I read your post about the WHEA 20 error when I was searching for the issue with the WHEA 17 error. Apparently changing the PCI-E slot to Gen 3.0 stops WHEA 17 happening but not sure about WHEA 20. I think new BIOS versions will solve the issues.


I’ve currently got the PCIE slots set to auto. Tried setting them to gen 3 before messing with ASPM, and that had no effect on the WHEA errors. Still never saw 17 though. 20 usually springs up when I’m testing CPU OC stability, but my CPU is set to stock. The only OC is my RAM’s XMP profile. I would say that’s probably what caused the 20 errors, but I was getting them even with RAM set to stock. Still a possibility I suppose since DDR5 is new.


----------



## MacTavishPapa6

ObscureEmpyre said:


> I’ve currently got the PCIE slots set to auto. Tried setting them to gen 3 before messing with ASPM, and that had no effect on the WHEA errors. Still never saw 17 though. 20 usually springs up when I’m testing CPU OC stability, but my CPU is set to stock. The only OC is my RAM’s XMP profile. I would say that’s probably what caused the 20 errors, but I was getting them even with RAM set to stock. Still a possibility I suppose since DDR5 is new.


Yeah, could be a DDR5 specific thing.


----------



## Tradition

Can we have 0811 for z690m plus d4?


bscool said:


> I can run 4266c16 dr on 808, 4133c15 bios 812
> 
> but sr b die mess on 812. So it can be a bios issue.
> 
> bench 4266c15 dr
> 
> the screens are dr.



where did u get 0812 for d4?


----------



## morph.

@shamino1978 have a merry Christmas and a well-deserved break. Just letting you know that the Samsung 2x16 6000 memory profile worked really other than not being to post with the 1t setting for z690 formula on my gskill 6000c36 kit. Hoping maybe this can be reviewed but also once you bed in the ram performance and stability a bit further, and you have time I would love to see some extra Samsung sr 2x16 ddr5 profiles such as 6200 and 6400 in future bios version please.


----------



## GtiJason

Tradition said:


> Can we have 0811 for z690m plus d4?
> where did u get 0812 for d4?











[OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread


Okay so it ended up being the motherboard! Both ram sticks now work and i can also use XMP. Now do i keep the RMA Ram set that i payed for in advance and go 64GB lol i mean i just use it for gaming. If it's Samsung or Hynx RAM, you can make a killing scalping it on ebay and just keep 32 GB...




www.overclock.net


----------



## DaTraS

https://rog.asus.com/motherboards/rog-strix/rog-strix-z690-a-gaming-wifi-d4-model/helpdesk_bios
BIOS 0901 from 23.12.21 out.
Sadly no changelog.

Strix Z690-A D4.


----------



## truehighroller1

DaTraS said:


> https://rog.asus.com/motherboards/rog-strix/rog-strix-z690-a-gaming-wifi-d4-model/helpdesk_bios
> BIOS 0901 from 23.12.21 out.
> Sadly no changelog.
> 
> Strix Z690-A D4.


It sucked for my kit which is b die A2 revision 4 x 4gb. I'm back on 0812 stable at 4000 Gear 1.


----------



## Malinkadink

Bladed said:


> My D4 Strix sets SA to 1.329v when using auto settings with XMP 1, I'd imagine that should be relatively safe, so 1.25v should be safe enough.
> 
> That said, I can't get XMP to be stable on any bios version. 605 has been the closest to stable so far, but TM5 gives 2 errors and I get random app crashes and BSODs.


Interesting, mine doesn't give it nearly enough SA on auto even with XMP on, I have to give it 1.25v and force 4ghz on ring with e cores off just to not fail stability testing using large data set in p95 for example. Oddly though I get 0 errors in TM5 if i give it less SA than it needed to pass P95 or even RealBench which is a lot less intense. I guess TM5 really tests memory stability more and doesn't hit the ring as hard as P95, but getting TM5 to pass simply wasn't enough for me, actually had games hard crash unless i gave it enough SA to pass P95 memory testing.


----------



## ahmedmo1

Finally got round to getting the Z690-I, a 12700K, and some DDR5 ram.


----------



## Silent Scone

nickolp1974 said:


> Hello Mr Scone hows tricks???
> Just managed to grab some of the gskill 6000 cl36 today and an apex, how are they???? i see your running a KF cpu, are there any gains to be had from one of those or is there nothing in it between the regular K?? Also see that your needing a fan on the memory, so there getting warm then???


Long time, nick!

Working well at 6200 C32 1T on daily but have soak tested this over the last few days and not pushed further yet. 6400 shouldn't be too much trouble.

Yes, anything over 60c can be pretty damning for stability not too far indifferent from bdie.

I'm not sure of any binning or benefits to running either the KF over a regular K or how those SKU would have been binned by Intel.


----------



## nickolp1974

Silent Scone said:


> Long time, nick!
> 
> Working well at 6200 C32 1T on daily but have soak tested this over the last few days and not pushed further yet. 6400 shouldn't be too much trouble.
> 
> Yes, anything over 60c can be pretty damning for stability not too far indifferent from bdie.
> 
> I'm not sure of any binning or benefits to running either the KF over a regular K or how those SKU would have been binned by Intel.


Aye its been a while!! Just fancied jumping on this new platform and having a play, nearly gave up on the idea due to all the shortages. Hopefully will have system up and running near new year. Family to see 1st. Looking forward to see what it can do.


----------



## bscool

Tradition said:


> Can we have 0811 for z690m plus d4?
> 
> 
> 
> where did u get 0812 for d4?











ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0812.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com


----------



## Silent Scone

Hello,

Some more testing with F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5K (6000-C36)

Merry Christmas eve!


6600 CAS 38-39-39-58-2T

F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5K (6000-C36)
Apex 0811
Per Core 54/53/52
E-Core 41
Cache 40
VDD 1.45
VDDQ 1.45v
VDDQTX 1.45v
VCCSA 1.1
MC VDD 1.25v


----------



## Srider

@Shimano could you check if there is an code error in the 0811 Bios for the Strix Z690 I Gaming regarding the second NVME Slot?

After the update to this version I can't use any of my NVME's in this slot. It is not even shown in the Bios.

Thanks and merry Christmas


----------



## shrimpyuk

Hey Guys!
Z690 Hero here with Trident Z5 [email protected]
Been running the XMP I profile on bios ver 0811 which has been incredibly stable and got to 1500% with no errors on Khufu. I'm hearing talks of a [email protected] 'profile' and seen some people jumping to 6400 based off one of the guides here, can someone help point me in the right direction to squeeze a little more out my ram?


----------



## MISIKEX

Hellog Guys! Sorry for my bad English, but i have a troubble with my new PC...

i just finished the build, and i noticed my multi GPU setup not working in SLI...

I saw there is a beta BIOS for APEX, but i have HERO motherboard.

So do you have any idea, or trick how can i get my SLI back?

Thank you!

ROG MAXIMUS Z690 HERO (811 BIOS)
CPU: I7-12700K


----------



## Eaton

@shamino1978 2 bug reports for the Hero BIOS for you.

I am currently on 0811. There is a typo here:










And "PCI Express Native Power Management" changes do not persist after reboot. If you disable, save and exit, then go back into the BIOS, it will still be enabled.


----------



## D-EJ915

MISIKEX said:


> Hellog Guys! Sorry for my bad English, but i have a troubble with my new PC...
> 
> i just finished the build, and i noticed my multi GPU setup not working in SLI...
> 
> I saw there is a beta BIOS for APEX, but i have HERO motherboard.
> 
> So do you have any idea, or trick how can i get my SLI back?
> 
> Thank you!
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 HERO (811 BIOS)
> CPU: I7-12700K


You can ask Shamino for a custom bios but that would be the only option. EVGA Dark will probably have an SLI license key too so you could wait for that and resell the hero as well.


----------



## Agent-A01

@Falkentyne 

I get this random application crashes(games)
0xc0000005

Seems like it may be ram related. Any experience with that?


----------



## WaXmAn

Any z690 Hero mobo owners having these issues?









Asus ROG Maximus Z690 Hero Motherboards Are Burning up | Digital Trends


Various reports of the Asus ROG Maximus Z690 Hero, one of the most powerful motherboards on the market, burning up have emerged in recent days.




www.digitaltrends.com


----------



## Alberto_It

shamino1978 said:


> you can try this bios
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0031.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


@shamino1978 Thanks for the bios, I have not yet tried it due to Christmas time. If you have further improvements and stability please let me know. 

This year I have worked hard to purchase the new Alder Lake configuration and I would like to be safe to have a system stable as possible. 

Have a nice Marry Christmas and holiday season 

Alberto


----------



## Tech Geek Mike

Nizzen said:


> You need the apex bios with sli key...
> 
> I think it's this one:
> 
> 0072
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0072.rar
> 
> Report back


Do you know which bios for the z690 extreme would work for NVLink? Having the same issue. Thanks!


----------



## Martin778

Tried Anta777 Extreme with 6000 C32 ASUS profile for 2x16 Sammys, 1 error at 58*C. Tough call, could be temperature related.
I have a 120mm blowing on the RAM sticks but apparently that's not enough


----------



## Tech Geek Mike

Hi everyone, I am trying to get NVlink up with a z690 extreme but appears the current bios options don't have the license. @shamino1978 could you assist? I'd greatly appreciate it!


----------



## Nizzen

Tech Geek Mike said:


> Do you know which bios for the z690 extreme would work for NVLink? Having the same issue. Thanks!


There isn't any I know of. Shamino need to make a special with temporary sli key 
Ask after christmas holidays


----------



## EconomyFishFinger

Hey just wanted to give everyone with Team Group DDR5 6400Mhz Delta RGB kits a heads up: If you cannot get the RGB to work, OpenRGB software works perfectly and I can now actually sync everything just fine


----------



## Spiriva

WaXmAn said:


> Any z690 Hero mobo owners having these issues?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asus ROG Maximus Z690 Hero Motherboards Are Burning up | Digital Trends
> 
> 
> Various reports of the Asus ROG Maximus Z690 Hero, one of the most powerful motherboards on the market, burning up have emerged in recent days.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.digitaltrends.com


Mine works fine. Had it since launch.


----------



## pat-Geek

Hello everyone,
it was recently discovered by a few people around here that all ROG Maximus motherboards did not include an SLI multi-GPU licence. I have no idea why Asus decided to not include one even on their highest tier Z690 motherboards. So far I tried 0236, 0802 and 0811 Bios configurations and I still can't enable SLI on my Z690 HERO motherboard. No public Bios currently works with SLI. Somebody was able to get SLI working with the 0072 Bios on an Z690 APEX motherboard. I searched the HERO version of that Bios but couldn't find it. Are there a few people around here who have a working SLI on the Z690 HERO and if so, what Bios version are you using?
Best regards.


----------



## Nizzen

pat-Geek said:


> Hello everyone,
> it was recently discovered by a few people around here that all ROG Maximus motherboards did not include an SLI multi-GPU licence. I have no idea why Asus decided to not include one even on their highest tier Z690 motherboards. So far I tried 0236, 0802 and 0811 Bios configurations and I still can't enable SLI on my Z690 HERO motherboard. No public Bios currently works with SLI. Somebody was able to get SLI working with the 0072 Bios on an Z690 APEX motherboard. I searched the HERO version of that Bios but couldn't find it. Are there a few people around here who have a working SLI on the Z690 HERO and if so, what Bios version are you using?
> Best regards.


No sli license for Asus boards yet. Don't ask why, because I don't know.


----------



## Benni231990

because sli is dead 

no further game support it only benchmark support it 

and no one need or use 2 cards because 1 card is so powerfull like 3090


----------



## MISIKEX

Benni231990 said:


> because sli is dead
> 
> no further game support it only benchmark support it
> 
> and no one need or use 2 cards because 1 card is so powerfull like 3090


Hm... You Wrong!

SLI is sexy, and perform pretty well!

I have 2 GTX 1080 TI, and its the same performance wiht the 3090.

I am sad about the SLI licence problem, but i hoping for they include in the next BIOS update.

I have 690 Hero too.


----------



## Benni231990

you got damn right sli is absolut sexy 

but with my 3090 i have 400-450 watt for full power and i believe you have 500+watt for the same performance and no games right now use sli?

show me for example far cry 6 or warzone or BF2042 they all not support sli  and thats the reason why sli is dead and now wonder why shoud asus pay for a licens for a dead technologie


----------



## dante`afk

apex owners, should this light up?


----------



## jomama22

dante`afk said:


> apex owners, should this light up?
> 
> View attachment 2539447


Mine doesn't and I don't think it's supposed to. Looks like the intent was for the rbg to be bright enough to illuminate through it but it doesn't? I dunno, I don't mess with RGB to know if there is some setting in aura sync that makes it so.


----------



## D-EJ915

dante`afk said:


> apex owners, should this light up?
> 
> View attachment 2539447


nope it's just shiny. Apex z490 z590 are much better looking boards imo, this one looks cheap especially because of that ugly io plate lol.


----------



## Nizzen

D-EJ915 said:


> nope it's just shiny. Apex z490 z590 are much better looking boards imo, this one looks cheap especially because of that ugly io plate lol.


Looks < performance


----------



## pat-Geek

Nizzen said:


> There isn't any I know of. Shamino need to make a special with temporary sli key
> Ask after christmas holidays


Who is Shamino? Please can he make a SLI key Bios for my Z690 HERO as well?


----------



## sniperpowa

Well that’s why I couldn’t get sli to work I threw another 3090 in to bench on and couldn’t get it to work crazy.


----------



## Martin778

pat-Geek said:


> Who is Shamino? Please can he make a SLI key Bios for my Z690 HERO as well?


Shamino? I think they make bicycle parts, not sure about computers.

/jk

By the way has anyone got the new Ryujin II 360? I wonder if it fits on all Z690 ROG boards?
I know it's stupidly expensive but it looks so swanky compared to the Liquid Freezer. Wonder if slapping triple T30's on it would outperform the LF II with A12x25's.


----------



## Nizzen

pat-Geek said:


> Who is Shamino? Please can he make a SLI key Bios for my Z690 HERO as well?


If you don't know who Shamino is, you don't need SLI key 


Ps: He is Apex, hes is OC legend, and he is working for Asus. Bios guru 😎


----------



## WaXmAn

Spiriva said:


> Mine works fine. Had it since launch.


What BIOS version you on?


----------



## pat-Geek

Nizzen said:


> If you don't know who Shamino is, you don't need SLI key
> 
> 
> Ps: He is Apex, hes is OC legend, and he is working for Asus. Bios guru 😎


Please tell him to make a SLI key Bios for us Z690 HERO users. I'm fairly new here.


----------



## sugi0lover

pat-Geek said:


> Please tell him to make a SLI key Bios for us Z690 HERO users. I'm fairly new here.


Check this site out.
He is using 12900K + 3090 Sli
and you can see some sli peoformance.


https://youtube.com/c/GVMAX


----------



## pat-Geek

sugi0lover said:


> Check this site out.
> He is using 12900K + 3090 Sli
> and you can see some sli peoformance.
> 
> 
> https://youtube.com/c/GVMAX


He's using a Z690 APEX motherboard. He managed to find the 0072 Bios for the APEX which allows SLI to work on that specific board. No other Bios version currently works at with SLI on the Maximus Z690 series. I need the Z690 HERO version of that Bios for my Hero motherboard.


----------



## shamino1978

For hero it was decided that ot does not support sli due to nvlink length by the product manager , though I will feedback this. For apex, only test sli key available and still waiting for official key


----------



## Grendel602

MacTavishPapa6 said:


> Yes, I read your post about the WHEA 20 error when I was searching for the issue with the WHEA 17 error. Apparently changing the PCI-E slot to Gen 3.0 stops WHEA 17 happening but not sure about WHEA 20. I think new BIOS versions will solve the issues.


I was getting thousands of WHEA 17 errors on Z690 Gaming WIFI D4, did a bunch of bios updates, chipset update, adn WIN 11 updates and it suddenly started working. Don't ask why or how....got lucky.


----------



## yahfz

dante`afk said:


> apex owners, should this light up?
> 
> View attachment 2539447


If you mean the metal plate, no it doesn't. But there's rgb leds under the plate that passes light through the "dots".


----------



## OCHIANG-CHENG-TAO

有人用 rog z690i 用 ln2 超頻 ddr5 Samsung/Hynix ic 嗎？不知道為什麼我的bios每個版本用ln2都不能驅動7600mhz以上的內存~我的imc是風冷的這種情況下可以驅動ASUS ddr4800 16g*2到7400mhz 16g*2 Hynix 7000mhz 16g *2 ok，不過ln2的情況~7600單腳後跟都開不了。我手上的ddr5是華碩4800 16g*2。g.skill 6000c36/c40 16g*2 (3組) teamgroup 6200/6400 16g*2 kingston kf560c40BB-16*2 kf560c40BB2/32 ˋ幾乎這些條子都可以風冷 7000 7000 720都不能開76在ln2下。頻率~有人有類似情況嗎？


----------



## xl_digit

OCHIANG-CHENG-TAO said:


> 有人用 rog z690i 用 ln2 超頻 ddr5 Samsung/Hynix ic 嗎？不知道為什麼我的bios每個版本用ln2都不能驅動7600mhz以上的內存~我的imc是風冷的這種情況下可以驅動ASUS ddr4800 16g*2到7400mhz 16g*2 Hynix 7000mhz 16g *2 ok，不過ln2的情況~7600單腳後跟都開不了。我手上的ddr5是華碩4800 16g*2。g.skill 6000c36/c40 16g*2 (3組) teamgroup 6200/6400 16g*2 kingston kf560c40BB-16*2 kf560c40BB2/32 ˋ幾乎這些條子都可以風冷 7000 7000 720都不能開76在ln2下。頻率~有沒有人有同樣的情況？


----------



## xl_digit

*what the f*** *


----------



## pat-Geek

shamino1978 said:


> For hero it was decided that ot does not support sli due to nvlink length by the product manager , though I will feedback this. For apex, only test sli key available and still waiting for official key


Thank you for your feedback. I'm using two RTX 20 series GPUs with the small NVLink bridge on my Z690 HERO. I'm not using RTX 30 series cards. Please let us know if any official SLI key Bios becomes available for all Maximus Z690 HERO, FORMULA, APEX and EXTREME motherboards. Best regards.


----------



## Carlyle2020

Today my brain is offline and his phrasing is harsh to translate with software. So basically A is behaving like B so C must be behaving like D, ...cause same idea?


----------



## edkieferlp

xl_digit said:


> *what the f*** *


This is what Google translation comes out with.
OCHIANG-CHENG-TAO said:
"Does anyone use rog z690i to overclock ddr5 Samsung/Hynix ic with ln2? I don’t know why each version of my bios can’t drive memory above 7600mhz with ln2~ My imc can drive ASUS ddr4800 16g*2 to 7400mhz 16g*2 Hynix 7000mhz 16g *2 ok, but it is air-cooled. In the case of ln2~7600 single heel can not be opened. The ddr5 in my hand is ASUS 4800 16g*2. g.skill 6000c36/c40 16g*2 (3 groups) teamgroup 6200/6400 16g*2 kingston kf560c40BB-16*2 kf560c40BB2/32 ˋAlmost these slivers can be air-cooled 7000 7000 720 can not be opened 76 under ln2. Frequency~ Does anyone have the same situation?"


----------



## OCHIANG-CHENG-TAO

cstkl1 said:


> 我懷疑他們在 avx 512 的 ucode 之前將其放置
> [/引用]
> 有人用 rog z690i 用 ln2 超頻 ddr5 Samsung/Hynix ic 嗎？不知道為什麼我的bios每個版本用ln2都不能驅動7600mhz以上的內存~我的imc是風冷的這種情況下可以驅動ASUS ddr4800 16g*2到7400mhz 16g*2 Hynix 7000mhz 16g *2 ok，不過ln2的情況~7600單腳後跟都開不了。我手上的ddr5是華碩4800 16g*2。g.skill 6000c36/c40 16g*2 (3組) teamgroup 6200/6400 16g*2 kingston kf560c40BB-16*2 kf560c40BB2/32 ˋ幾乎這些條子都可以風冷 7000 7000 720都不能開76在ln2下。頻率~有沒有人有同樣的情況？


----------



## Carillo

子都可以風冷


----------



## Spiriva

pat-Geek said:


> Please tell him to make a SLI key Bios for us Z690 HERO users. I'm fairly new here.


I use 0811.


----------



## pat-Geek

Spiriva said:


> I use 0811.


I also use 0811 and SLI can't be enabled on that Bios version as well.


----------



## OCHIANG-CHENG-TAO

xl_digit said:


> *什麼他媽的 ：哈哈：*
> [/引用]
> 谷歌翻譯....


----------



## OCHIANG-CHENG-TAO

xl_digit said:


> *what the f*** *


Does anyone use rog z690i to overclock ddr5 Samsung/Hynix ic with ln2? I don’t know why every version of my bios can’t drive the memory above 7600mhz when I use ln2~ my imc is air-cooled In this case, I can drive ASUS ddr4800 16g*2 to 7400mhz 16g*2 Hynix 7000mhz 16g*2 ok, but in the case of ln2~ I can't even turn on a single heel at 7600. The ddr5 on my hand has ASUS 4800 16g*2. g.skill 6000c36/c40 16g*2 (3 groups) teamgroup 6200/6400 16g*2 kingston kf560c40BB-16*2 kf560c40BB2/32 ˋAlmost these slivers can be air-cooled 7000/7200, but none of them can be turned on 7600 under ln2. Frequency~ Does anyone have a similar situation?


----------



## dyanikoglu

7600 mhz? what the f*.


----------



## Sarzinski

.


----------



## LionAlonso

Sarzinski said:


> I've posted this in reply to the original WCCF tech article, but again:
> 
> 2 out of those 3 have clearly installed the board without standoffs.
> https://cdn.wccftech.com/wp-content...imus-Z690-HERO-Motherboard-Burn-Damage-_1.jpg
> https://uploads.disquscdn.com/image...67687e0de894fe77905efaf9eb11635374c2ec2d4.jpg
> 
> Now the third also looks a bit too close, but it's not as clear cut as the previous 2. Could be missing the standoffs, not 100% sure there.
> https://cdn.wccftech.com/wp-content...imus-Z690-HERO-Motherboard-Burn-Damage-_3.png
> 
> From what I've seen here, I would call it user error unless someone shows an example of a well done install showing the same issue.


What does the standoff prevents?


----------



## skullbringer

BTW I've found a solution to the intermittent resets by raising the SA voltage considerably. Samsung 6200c36 2T needs 1.45 V SA for my 12900K to not spontaneously reset. Apex, BIOS 0811

So it seems like auto SA is low with 0.9, auto IMC VDD is high with 1.3. But for tight overclocking you want the inverse, so lower IMC VDD otherwise you'll get errors im stability test, I'm at 1.15 atm and you want to raise SA _a lot_, at least for S16B, to not have the system reset on you. I've also tried raising VCCIN instead of SA, but didn't do anything. Also it seems like Fsw of the FIVR for SA could help, but don't think that's accessible (yet?)


----------



## X909

LionAlonso said:


> What does the standoff prevents?


A deadly short


----------



## illidan2000

anyone tried the bios 901 on Asus Strix D4 wifi? I have the crucial ballistix rgb 3600mhz cl16-18-18 (2x16)


----------



## Martin778

@skullbringer 
Interesting, I've found out I can pass TM5 Anta777 Extreme with ease at 1.15VCCSA and 6000 C32 T1(ASUS built in OC profile for Sammy) and probably even lower but the sticks must remain cool at all times.
I now use a single Noctua 12x25 but have bought a Corsair Dominator PRO (old one for DDR3 GT's) to swap with Noctuas.
Protip - disable RAM RGB when benching!).


----------



## skullbringer

Martin778 said:


> @skullbringer
> Interesting, I've found out I can pass TM5 Anta777 Extreme with ease at 1.15VCCSA and 6000 C32 T1(ASUS built in OC profile for Sammy) and probably even lower but the sticks must remain cool at all times.
> I now use a single Noctua 12x25 but have bought a Corsair Dominator PRO (old one for DDR3 GT's) to swap with Noctuas.
> Protip - disable RAM RGB when benching!).


1T somehow seems to be lighter on the SA too, dont know how that makes sense.
when I launch tm5 per default it spawns 22 threads, meaning some threads are running with low priority over others, and I can usually pass this with lower SA.
don't think it matters if e cores are on or not. on they just slow down the whole ring, off there aren't enough threads for tm5 default allocation size 1536 MB to fill up 32 GB of RAM.

when I run hci memtestpro7 up to 400 % with 16 non-low priority threads on p-cores only, the resets happen very quickly. with 1.45 Vsa it now reset again, but only after 4 hours of hci and tm5 consecutively. testing 1.475 Vsa now...


----------



## beardlessduck

removed


----------



## Nizzen

beardlessduck said:


> FFS, this platform has been out for almost 2 months and RAM compatibility is still ****ed! I have never regretted a new PC purchase before this. I appreciate that work is being done but I am so frustrated.
> 
> I see more work being done to support extreme overclockers than regular people just trying to get work done on their PC.
> 
> If I have 4 sticks of compatible RAM, I should be able to set it to auto and it should work.


Did you buy a "quad" pack with paired sticks? If not, good night 😆



https://www.corsair.com/eu/en/Categories/Products/Memory/VENGEANCE-DDR5-Memory---Black/p/CMK64GX5M4A4400C36



4x16GB 4400 and 2x 32GB


----------



## SuperMumrik

Nizzen said:


> Did you buy a "quad" pack with paired sticks? If not, good night 😆


This, and the fact that you are a special kind of stupid if you are an early adopter when you need to do work on your computer


----------



## beardlessduck

removed


----------



## beardlessduck

removed


----------



## bscool

z690 Strix A d4 bios 901

4133c15-15-15 2x16 DR b die

1.55v dram

sa/dq 1.35(auto)


----------



## Martin778

No LEDs and even better memory temps. Now passing anta777 extreme with ease.


----------



## jomama22

skullbringer said:


> BTW I've found a solution to the intermittent resets by raising the SA voltage considerably. Samsung 6200c36 2T needs 1.45 V SA for my 12900K to not spontaneously reset. Apex, BIOS 0811
> 
> So it seems like auto SA is low with 0.9, auto IMC VDD is high with 1.3. But for tight overclocking you want the inverse, so lower IMC VDD otherwise you'll get errors im stability test, I'm at 1.15 atm and you want to raise SA _a lot_, at least for S16B, to not have the system reset on you. I've also tried raising VCCIN instead of SA, but didn't do anything. Also it seems like Fsw of the FIVR for SA could help, but don't think that's accessible (yet?)


You should try raising cpu termination and pci standby (both normal and boot voltages in tweakers paradise and Digi+ respectfully) to 1.2v before pumping a ton of SA.


----------



## jomama22

X909 said:


> A deadly short


Standoff are completely unnecessary unless the bottom of the motherboard is going to hit/lay on somthing conductive. Have benched plenty of mobo on their own cardboard box or my desk mat without issue. 

The pictures clearly show they have other standoffs attached and the board isn't hitting the chassis so a short isn't happening.


----------



## jomama22

skullbringer said:


> 1T somehow seems to be lighter on the SA too, dont know how that makes sense.
> when I launch tm5 per default it spawns 22 threads, meaning some threads are running with low priority over others, and I can usually pass this with lower SA.
> don't think it matters if e cores are on or not. on they just slow down the whole ring, off there aren't enough threads for tm5 default allocation size 1536 MB to fill up 32 GB of RAM.
> 
> when I run hci memtestpro7 up to 400 % with 16 non-low priority threads on p-cores only, the resets happen very quickly. with 1.45 Vsa it now reset again, but only after 4 hours of hci and tm5 consecutively. testing 1.475 Vsa now...


You can change the allocation per thread in the config file...


----------



## Martin778

@skullbringer 
Take a step back and re-evaluatie, if you need that kind of VCCSA something else is wrong, not VCCSA (which may cause instability if it's too high...).
Even the 6000 C32 ASUS profile doesn't apply more than 1.25V, for me 1.15V works just as well.


----------



## arrow0309

How do you guys keep the Memory Integrity under Device Security, Core Isolation, on or off?
Cause I've had a lot of issues today.


----------



## Cam1

Asus ! Where is my Christmas present ? You know that bios that can allow me to set my XMP ram profile "on" with Gear 1 ?
☺


----------



## clackersx

Might have missed it, any info on CPU microcode?
Latest is version 16 dated 2021-11-11 by the looks of it, 0901 and most of the 08XX on the strix D4 use microcode 12 which is dated 2021-09-26. (i think there was a single 08XX bios that used 15)
Bugs in the latest or something? DDR4 issue?


----------



## Alberto_It

I have put the new kit G.Skill 6000 Cl36 on my Z690 Apex with @shamino1978 *Bios 0031. *They works fine with XMP I profile, but no significant performance increase!
Same results as when I had the Kingston Fury Beast 5200Mhz CL40 kit on Cinebench 23.

The strange thing is that looking at HWinfo64 the voltages Cores has decreased a little bit. From 1.49 of average to 1.47


----------



## neurokirurgi

Alberto_It said:


> I have put the new kit G.Skill 6000 Cl36 on my Z690 Apex with @shamino1978 *Bios 0031. *They works fine with XMP I profile, but no significant performance increase!
> Same results as when I had the Kingston Fury Beast 5200Mhz CL40 kit on Cinebench 23.
> 
> The strange thing is that looking at HWinfo64 the voltages Cores has decreased a little bit. From 1.49 of average to 1.47


Well, no ****. Cinebench resides in cache. Memory speeds have zero impact on CB scores.


----------



## Alberto_It

neurokirurgi said:


> Well, no ****. Cinebench resides in cache. Memory speeds have zero impact on CB scores.


Sorry but I'm a newbie, anyway also on Time Spy and Firestrike no gains from previous ram kit


----------



## skullbringer

jomama22 said:


> You should try raising cpu termination and pci standby (both normal and boot voltages in tweakers paradise and Digi+ respectfully) to 1.2v before pumping a ton of SA.





Martin778 said:


> @skullbringer
> Take a step back and re-evaluatie, if you need that kind of VCCSA something else is wrong, not VCCSA (which may cause instability if it's too high...).
> Even the 6000 C32 ASUS profile doesn't apply more than 1.25V, for me 1.15V works just as well.


boards from other vendors use up to 1.4 on auto, so eh?

but after some more hours of testing 1.45 Vsa does not seem to work anymore either, or it never worked in the first place and ADL was just inconsistent, as it always is. Man, how do you test for something that happens 4 hours after boot when it's not guaranteed to happen every boot.

no errors im memory tests, no bsod, just a hard reset, what could it be? hasn't done it the first 2 weeks I had the board...


----------



## Nizzen

Alberto_It said:


> Sorry but I'm a newbie, anyway also on Time Spy and Firestrike no gains from previous ram kit


Look at the cpu score in timespy. Compare them here


----------



## Nizzen

skullbringer said:


> boards from other vendors use up to 1.4 on auto, so eh?
> 
> but after some more hours of testing 1.45 Vsa does not seem to work anymore either, or it never worked in the first place and ADL was just inconsistent, as it always is. Man, how do you test for something that happens 4 hours after boot when it's not guaranteed to happen every boot.
> 
> no errors im memory tests, no bsod, just a hard reset, what could it be? hasn't done it the first 2 weeks I had the board...


Gear 2 is running memorycontroller 1/2 speed. Then it makes no sense to run high vccsa. For gear 1:1 yes high vccsa is required.
I' still running 6000c32 with ~0.95v vccsa on Apex. I think even 0.9v is enough, atleast on 6000c36 xmp

Hard reset may be some other values that drops too low, like powersave state is bugging when high load suddenly appair.

Hard to know, but high vccsa isn't the cure 
Maybe try a small offset on v-core?


----------



## skullbringer

Nizzen said:


> Gear 2 is running memorycontroller 1/2 speed. Then it makes no sense to run high vccsa. For gear 1:1 yes high vccsa is required.
> I' still running 6000c32 with ~0.95v vccsa on Apex. I think even 0.9v is enough, atleast on 6000c36 xmp
> 
> Hard reset may be some other values that drops too low, like powersave state is bugging when high load suddenly appair.
> 
> Hard to know, but high vccsa isn't the cure
> Maybe try a small offset on v-core?


you running sammy b or hyny m?

cpu and cache have comfortably enough voltage. also the shutdowns don't happen during transients, not even during tm5 cycle starts, but sometime later.


----------



## Nizzen

skullbringer said:


> you running sammy b or hyny m?
> 
> cpu and cache have comfortably enough voltage. also the shutdowns don't happen during transients, not even during tm5 cycle starts, but sometime later.


Sammy g.skill 😟


----------



## EconomyFishFinger

Think something terrible has happened to my TeamGroup 6400Mhz kit :-(

only 16Gb is now recognised, however both sticks are detected when looking at slot population. however, the non-working ram module is reporting the completely incorrectly memory size and is totally unusable. I have tried different bios's and slot configurations.

The 16Gb module is reporting as 131,072Mb in size!

HWinfo still recognises it, reads voltages and temperatures just the memory is unavailable.

Any ideas?


----------



## skullbringer

Nizzen said:


> Sammy g.skill 😟


weird, I can't even train with less than 1.1 SA on Sammy B. Looks like you have a strong IMC!


----------



## neurokirurgi

EconomyFishFinger said:


> Think something terrible has happened to my TeamGroup 6400Mhz kit :-(
> 
> only 16Gb is now recognised, however both sticks are detected when looking at slot population. however, the non-working ram module is reporting the completely incorrectly memory size and is totally unusable. I have tried different bios's and slot configurations.
> 
> The 16Gb module is reporting as 131,072Mb in size!
> 
> HWinfo still recognises it, reads voltages and temperatures just the memory is unavailable.
> 
> Any ideas?
> View attachment 2539662


You haven't used Thaiphoon Burner recently, have you?

There was an other user here who had his SPD data become corrupted after simply reading SPD data using Thaiphoon.


----------



## EconomyFishFinger

neurokirurgi said:


> You haven't used Thaiphoon Burner recently, have you?
> 
> There was an other user here who had his SPD data become corrupted after simply reading SPD data using Thaiphoon.


No not used that software since I had my DDR4 board. Hmm, could there be a way to repair the SPD data if it has become corrupted somehow?


----------



## neurokirurgi

EconomyFishFinger said:


> No not used that software since I had my DDR4 board. Hmm, could there be a way to repair the SPD data if it has become corrupted somehow?


That would be Thaiphoon Burner, but I honestly would steer clear of it as it's wonky software at best. I'd wait for other responses. Maybe the guy who had the issue that I'm referring to shows up here.

It could be something else, like a BIOS bug, or issues with the SMBus which is used to access SPD.


----------



## Jubeishock

illidan2000 said:


> anyone tried the bios 901 on Asus Strix D4 wifi? I have the crucial ballistix rgb 3600mhz cl16-18-18 (2x16)


Me, Unstable, games crash, xmp profiles isn't working. I've tried using G.skill and Corsair (qvl) and both doesn't work.
Which bios are you using now?


----------



## EconomyFishFinger

neurokirurgi said:


> That would be Thaiphoon Burner, but I honestly would steer clear of it as it's wonky software at best. I'd wait for other responses. Maybe the guy who had the issue that I'm referring to shows up here.
> 
> It could be something else, like a BIOS bug, or issues with the SMBus which is used to access SPD.


I have tried all motherboard DDR5 slots, and combinations of different stick arrangements. Also flashed different bios versions just in case. I dont understand whats actually happened to the RAM module.


----------



## Grendel602

Was able to snag some DDR5 6000 Trident Z C36 from Microcenter. Booted right up using XMP and AI Overclock for CPU (71% OC). Tested with TimeSpy and saw a 22% increase in in CPU score over my previous Corsair Vengeance RAM 16-20-20-38 -- granted, not near the fastest DDR4 you can get.

Question for the group. I've not dabbled in Memory OC so what programs would I need to try to get the timings tighter on my DDR5 kit? Wouldn't mind running T1 at 6000.

Z690-F and 12900K.


----------



## ahmadexp

shamino1978 said:


> For hero it was decided that ot does not support sli due to nvlink length by the product manager , though I will feedback this. For apex, only test sli key available and still waiting for official key


Any chance we can get a BIOS with SLI support for the Z690 Extreme? Thank you in Advance.


----------



## kmellz

With 901 for my board I had to go to 2T instead of 1T, it wouldn't even boot otherwise. No other settings changed


----------



## Tech Geek Mike

ahmadexp said:


> Any chance we can get a BIOS with SLI support for the Z690 Extreme? Thank you in Advance.


Seconded, @shamino1978 can you help us please?


----------



## Nizzen

Tech Geek Mike said:


> Seconded, @shamino1978 can you help us please?


Ps: many people have christmas holiday to after new year 
Wait and play a game without SLI 😅


----------



## CoUsT

Jubeishock said:


> Me, Unstable, games crash, xmp profiles isn't working. I've tried using G.skill and Corsair (qvl) and both doesn't work.
> Which bios are you using now?


I started using my Alder Lake PC few days ago and the first BIOS I ever installed was 901... boy, if I knew things are like this I wouldn't bother.

My Samsung B-Die RAM ran just fine for the whole night of mem-testing. XMP profile, nothing else changed. Here is the pic of HWiNFO and MemTest % coverage.









All it took the PC to become unstable is a simple reboot. Yes, a reboot.










As shown on the screenshot (that was corrupted on the lower side), all sensors seems to be the same. CPU and RAM speeds, all voltages. The reboot heavily destabilized the PC. I assume some settings are not applied correctly. Maybe some subtimings or the real RAM voltage is 1.2V instead of 1.35V and shown incorrectly or something else because it is crazy that a simple reboot can destabilize PC. To make it stable again all I had to do was raise/lower SA and DRAM voltage by 1 level. I guess the voltage got re-applied and it was working fine... until the next reboot after which it started crashing again and again.

I couldn't make XMP with raised DRAM clocks from 3200 to 3600 MHz stable at all. Tried SA voltage ranging from 1.0V to 1.35V and RAM voltage from 1.35V to 1.49V. Not sure if my RAM is that bad or the BIOS is that broken...

Is there something I'm doing wrong or is this BIOS version broken?

Not to mention my audio is delayed slightly by about 100 ms, annoying and very noticeable during loud and sudden noises like gunshots in games etc. Is this something that was observed by anyone before? EDIT: Seems like everything is alright after uninstalling Realtek drivers or I was imagining this all the time.


----------



## bscool

CoUsT said:


> I started using my Alder Lake PC few days ago and the first BIOS I ever installed was 901... boy, if I knew things are like this I wouldn't bother.
> 
> My Samsung B-Die RAM ran just fine for the whole night of mem-testing. XMP profile, nothing else changed. Here is the pic of HWiNFO and MemTest % coverage.
> View attachment 2539709
> 
> 
> All it took the PC to become unstable is a simple reboot. Yes, a reboot.
> 
> View attachment 2539713
> 
> 
> As shown on the screenshot (that was corrupted on the lower side), all sensors seems to be the same. CPU and RAM speeds, all voltages. The reboot heavily destabilized the PC. I assume some settings are not applied correctly. Maybe some subtimings or the real RAM voltage is 1.2V instead of 1.35V and shown incorrectly or something else because it is crazy that a simple reboot can destabilize PC. To make it stable again all I had to do was raise/lower SA and DRAM voltage by 1 level. I guess the voltage got re-applied and it was working fine... until the next reboot after which it started crashing again and again.
> 
> I couldn't make XMP with raised DRAM clocks from 3200 to 3600 MHz stable at all. Tried SA voltage ranging from 1.0V to 1.35V and RAM voltage from 1.35V to 1.49V. Not sure if my RAM is that bad or the BIOS is that broken...
> 
> Is there something I'm doing wrong or is this BIOS version broken?
> 
> Not to mention my audio is delayed slightly by about 100 ms, annoying and very noticeable during loud and sudden noises like gunshots in games etc. Is this something that was observed by anyone before?


DR or SR b die? I had no issues with 901 and SR or DR but some on sr do better on bios 707.


----------



## Tech Geek Mike

Nizzen said:


> Ps: many people have christmas holiday to after new year
> Wait and play a game without SLI 😅


That's understood, just leaving a message on the board for when the guru gets free time to login; posts get buried fast on this thread. Thanks for the suggestion on playing games an alternate way but that's not my issue😊


----------



## skullbringer

CoUsT said:


> I started using my Alder Lake PC few days ago and the first BIOS I ever installed was 901... boy, if I knew things are like this I wouldn't bother.
> 
> My Samsung B-Die RAM ran just fine for the whole night of mem-testing. XMP profile, nothing else changed. Here is the pic of HWiNFO and MemTest % coverage.
> View attachment 2539709
> 
> 
> All it took the PC to become unstable is a simple reboot. Yes, a reboot.
> 
> View attachment 2539713
> 
> 
> As shown on the screenshot (that was corrupted on the lower side), all sensors seems to be the same. CPU and RAM speeds, all voltages. The reboot heavily destabilized the PC. I assume some settings are not applied correctly. Maybe some subtimings or the real RAM voltage is 1.2V instead of 1.35V and shown incorrectly or something else because it is crazy that a simple reboot can destabilize PC. To make it stable again all I had to do was raise/lower SA and DRAM voltage by 1 level. I guess the voltage got re-applied and it was working fine... until the next reboot after which it started crashing again and again.
> 
> I couldn't make XMP with raised DRAM clocks from 3200 to 3600 MHz stable at all. Tried SA voltage ranging from 1.0V to 1.35V and RAM voltage from 1.35V to 1.49V. Not sure if my RAM is that bad or the BIOS is that broken...
> 
> Is there something I'm doing wrong or is this BIOS version broken?
> 
> Not to mention my audio is delayed slightly by about 100 ms, annoying and very noticeable during loud and sudden noises like gunshots in games etc. Is this something that was observed by anyone before?


sounds like the boot-to-boot inconsistency we've been seeing at high clocks in gear 2 since rkl. but you are in gear 1, very strange...


----------



## CoUsT

bscool said:


> DR or SR b die? I had no issues with 901 and SR or DR but some on sr do better on bios 707.


2x8 GB 3200CL14 Samsung B-Dies, G.Skill FlareX that were compatible with early Ryzens back in the day. Weird because imo they should be great for stability and heavy overclocking. I will be trying 707 I guess.


----------



## bscool

CoUsT said:


> 2x8 GB 3200CL14 Samsung B-Dies, G.Skill FlareX that were compatible with early Ryzens back in the day. Weird because imo they should be great for stability and heavy overclocking. I will be trying 707 I guess.


Yeah I know it makes no sense. But I had great results using bios 812 on DR and put in SR to help someone and I couldnt get it working. Would blue screen half the time on reboots. SR b die is harder to run than DR from my testing on z690 Srtix. Maybe not harder but picky about bios version.


----------



## X909

I have also different training results every boot and some weired behavior of voltages. 3466 to 3800 is possible to boot but impossible to make completely error-free. 4x 16 GB B-DIE. 
Funny thing is, with 4 Modules it scales negatively above 1.445V. But with 2 it scales up to 1.55+. Also, impossible to boot 3800 with 1.4VDDGTX but below 1.385 and above 1.415 works. This platform is a sissy or the BIOSes are alpha.


----------



## CoUsT

TL;DR: Random crashes on BIOS version 0901? Try 0707.

I have rebooted multiple times with XMP 2 loaded on BIOS 0707 and it never destabilized itself. No bsods, short MemTests without errors and everything is alright after 10 reboots. I assume they ****ed up something during 08xx releases because patch notes state "better memory support" so there were changes and some of them **** everything up on some specific systems or something. That or I had corrupted BIOS (very unlikely). Not gonna try 0901 anymore, not worth my time. Will check back 1xxx version.

EDIT: 4000 MHz with 16-16-16-36-52 and auto subtimings working fine. 4100 MHz booting but freezes/crashes before/in BIOS. 4133 MHz boot-looping. 0901 was definitely at fault


----------



## phillyman36

was posted earlier nm


----------



## destylock

Anybody here has their z690 hero brick itself or catch fire. Saw the recent news about the top right circuitry of the board is faulty.


----------



## j o e

I'm having an issue with adaptive voltage for my vcore, I have my overclock pretty dialed in with a static vcore, I want to switch to adaptive voltage but whenever I do it my vcore sits at 1.65v at idle, i almost pooped myself. I didnt set an offset with the adaptive voltage or anything. I can pu a giant offset on it but it never bins down the voltage at idle. I cant figure it out. My LLC is 4 I think and my svid is best case scenario. Am I ******ed?


----------



## truehighroller1

destylock said:


> Anybody here has their z690 hero brick itself or catch fire. Saw the recent news about the top right circuitry of the board is faulty.


From what I read the people who did had standoff issues like as in not using them and or to short of ones being used.


----------



## matique

Also had boot to boot instability with my Samsung 6200c32 + z690i strix. Totally stable for days and then a random crash and complete instability suddenly. You need to load optimised defaults, boot up, restart, and manually enter your ram OC again. Restoring a saved user profile simply does not work as it will remain unstable. Upon successful application of your memory settings + checking for stability in tm5 and karhu, I rebooted back to bios and disabled MCH. I have since used my PC for the past few days without stability issues thus far, would see how it goes in the coming weeks.


----------



## HvacGuru

j o e said:


> I'm having an issue with adaptive voltage for my vcore, I have my overclock pretty dialed in with a static vcore, I want to switch to adaptive voltage but whenever I do it my vcore sits at 1.65v at idle, i almost pooped myself. I didnt set an offset with the adaptive voltage or anything. I can pu a giant offset on it but it never bins down the voltage at idle. I cant figure it out. My LLC is 4 I think and my svid is best case scenario. Am I ******ed?


Set Windows power plan to Balanced


----------



## Martin778

Anybody here has their z690 hero brick itself or catch fire. Saw the recent news about the top right circuitry of the board is faulty.
[/QUOTE]
We will never know, they will never admit.
No standoffs is a gibberish argument, these come standard in all cases and no way the board would short there as it has another MOSFet on the back which has a non conductive body that would act as a standoff considering where it's placed.

__
https://www.reddit.com/r/ASUS/comments/rjp8tt


----------



## marti69

Martin778 said:


> Anybody here has their z690 hero brick itself or catch fire. Saw the recent news about the top right circuitry of the board is faulty.


We will never know, they will never admit.
No standoffs is a gibberish argument, these come standard in all cases and no way the board would short there as it has another MOSFet on the back which has a non conductive body that would act as a standoff considering where it's placed.

__
https://www.reddit.com/r/ASUS/comments/rjp8tt
[/QUOTE]
i have been using the hero since day1 no issue did a lot of oc 3 cpu and 3 kits of rams gskill kingston and corsair no issue so far i play a lot of games and did a lot of stress testing board is rock solid.


----------



## Benni231990

is only the hero board with the problem or also the STRIX boards?


----------



## Nizzen

Benni231990 said:


> is only the hero board with the problem or also the STRIX boards?


There is no problem. 2 or 3 dead boards out of thousands, with maybe 50% chance of userfailure isn't a problem


----------



## skullbringer

it's the simple things...


----------



## neurokirurgi

Dunno why people would rush in to defend a multibillion dollar corp for free on OCN. I think the evidence that we've seen so far supports only one conclusion, and that's that ASUS screwed up a batch of these Hero boards.

I checked my board, and it has a G157 cap mounted correctly, so I guess I'm in the clear. As for how something like this would pass through QA.. now that casts a shadow over ASUS's QA practices.


----------



## dyanikoglu

What's the most stable bios for apex + GSkill 6000 CL36 Sammy at the moment?


----------



## skullbringer

dyanikoglu said:


> What's the most stable bios for apex + GSkill 6000 CL36 Sammy at the moment?


0811


----------



## j o e

God damnit I have a hero with the flipped capacitor


----------



## Martin778

There obviously is a problem and this is most probably the cause. One might hope there will be a recall as it's a given that the board WILL blow up at some point if that cap is reversed.


----------



## neurokirurgi

j o e said:


> God damnit I have a hero with the flipped capacitor


I wouldn't use that computer at all. Or at least leave it on unattended.

Maybe hit up GN-Steve and offer to ship it over to him if he pays you for a new board  He's bound to be covering this story sooner or later, he likes stuff that blows up.


----------



## j o e

neurokirurgi said:


> I wouldn't use that computer at all. Or at least leave it on unattended.
> 
> Maybe hit up GN-Steve and offer to ship it over to him if he pays you for a new board  He's bound to be covering this story sooner or later, he likes stuff that blows up.



thats not a bad idea, I've been running it 24/7 for 2-3 weeks so far. Im def not leaving it on unattended for now.


----------



## criznit

My board also has the flipped capacitor  . I will send it back to newegg and hopefully receive one that isn't defective lol.


----------



## j o e

I have til 1-31-2022 to return my board through amazon, I might just get the apex to avoid the chance of getting another hero with a flipped capacitor. I also contacted GN and buildzoid to see if they want my board


----------



## marti69

thnak god i have have capacitor on the right direction lol


----------



## Spiriva

j o e said:


> God damnit I have a hero with the flipped capacitor
> View attachment 2539843


On my hero z690 it looks like this:


----------



## marti69

Spiriva said:


> On my hero z690 it looks like this:


its the right direction


----------



## j o e

if someone is in the uk with the flipped cap, send it to bz


----------



## sblantipodi

can't understand why my Z690 Extreme is still at 0803 BIOS while the cheaper motherboards got the 0811 BIOS.


----------



## Nizzen

sblantipodi said:


> can't understand why my Z690 Extreme is still at 0803 BIOS while the cheaper motherboards got the 0811 BIOS.


Because there is one board to rule them all: APEX 
🤠🤟

So what is wrong with the 0803? Can't overclock memory far enough? 
(sorry I just had to comment) 😘


----------



## skullbringer

sblantipodi said:


> can't understand why my Z690 Extreme is still at 0803 BIOS while the cheaper motherboards got the 0811 BIOS.











ROG MAXIMUS/STRIX/TUF Z690 Series Beta Bios 0811 UPDATE


Attempts to improve xmp , fixed a core ranking / core vid reading bug. vmaxstress option name changed for future function DC LL tracked to vrm LL at auto htt...




www.sweclockers.com


----------



## orbitech

Guys quick one. I use manual 1.32V for all core o/c with TVB +2 with LLC6 for 5.1/4GHz/auto ring on my 12900k/Apex. Everything works fine and under heavy loads I'm between 1.2-1.22V. Temps are kept under 90C for the vast majority of cases. In benchmate though when CB23,CB21 for example are validated I see vcore being reported up to 1.47V. I suspect Asus overcompensates by a lot for 5.3GHz boost. Should I use offset or adaptive for better results or something else? Are those spikes dangerous in the long run?


----------



## Spiriva

marti69 said:


> its the right direction


Changed camera and could take a better pic


----------



## RobertoSampaio

sblantipodi said:


> can't understand why my Z690 Extreme is still at 0803 BIOS while the cheaper motherboards got the 0811 BIOS.


I have an extreme with 0811.









ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0811.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com


----------



## j o e

orbitech said:


> Guys quick one. I use manual 1.32V for all core o/c with TVB +2 with LLC6 for 5.1/4GHz/auto ring on my 12900k/Apex. Everything works fine and under heavy loads I'm between 1.2-1.22V. Temps are kept under 90C for the vast majority of cases. In benchmate though when CB23,CB21 for example are validated I see vcore being reported up to 1.47V. I suspect Asus overcompensates by a lot for 5.3GHz boost. Should I use offset or adaptive for better results or something else? Are those spikes dangerous in the long run?


where are you checking that vcore? is it the VID? check it in cpuz


----------



## sblantipodi

RobertoSampaio said:


> I have an extreme with 0811.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0811.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


Hoped to get it from the official site but thank you.


----------



## skullbringer

sblantipodi said:


> Hoped to get it from the official site but thank you.


there is nothing official about this forum either.

if you want official, wait for asus.com, 6 months or longer xD


----------



## sblantipodi

skullbringer said:


> there is nothing official about this forum either.
> 
> if you want official, wait for asus.com, 6 months or longer xD


pretty disappointed that every Z690 boards got the new bios while the more expensive ones not.
it has no sense.


----------



## satinghostrider

sblantipodi said:


> pretty disappointed that every Z690 boards got the new bios while the more expensive ones not.
> it has no sense.


You're missing the point.

Most of these bios that makes its way to Asus site gets uploaded here first. 0811 at least in my knowledge has been confirmed by @safedisk that the ones here posted before making its way official is the 1 and same BIOS.

But hey if you wanna wait 6 months for the word official to feel safe, by all means.


----------



## sblantipodi

satinghostrider said:


> You're missing the point.
> 
> Most of these bios that makes its way to Asus site gets uploaded here first. 0811 at least in my knowledge has been confirmed by @safedisk that the ones here posted before making its way official is the 1 and same BIOS.
> 
> But hey if you wanna wait 6 months for the word official to feel safe, by all means.


If it's the same I'll use it. Thanks!!!


----------



## geriatricpollywog

My Strix D4 is looking more and more appealing.


----------



## Lyzzsha

sblantipodi said:


> Hoped to get it from the official site but thank you.


You can download it from the official site o.o ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME | ROG Maximus | Gaming Motherboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG Global

Version 0811

2021/12/03 11.54 MBytes

ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME BIOS 0811
"- Improve DRAM performance

improve system stability
improve thunderbolt device compatibility
Improve system performance

Before running the USB BIOS Flashback tool, please rename the BIOS file (MZ690E.CAP) using BIOSRenamer."


----------



## sblantipodi

Lyzzsha said:


> You can download it from the official site o.o ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME | ROG Maximus | Gaming Motherboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG Global
> 
> Version 0811
> 
> 2021/12/03 11.54 MBytes
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME BIOS 0811
> "- Improve DRAM performance
> 
> improve system stability
> improve thunderbolt device compatibility
> Improve system performance
> 
> Before running the USB BIOS Flashback tool, please rename the BIOS file (MZ690E.CAP) using BIOSRenamer."


If I click your link I see 0803 bios not 0811


----------



## Silent Scone

sblantipodi said:


> If I click your link I see 0803 bios not 0811


Expand it. https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/BIOS/ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0811.ZIP

[Yoda] Spoonfed, you need.


----------



## jomama22

It's a region thing. Happens all the time.


----------



## darth_meh

Silent Scone said:


> Expand it. https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/BIOS/ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0811.ZIP
> 
> [Yoda] Spoonfed, you need.


To be fair, it's dumb that the latest release isn't at the top.


----------



## sblantipodi

darth_meh said:


> To be fair, it's dumb that the latest release isn't at the top.


oops I think that they where wrong in the release date, so the new bios doesn't appeared on the top.


----------



## Eaton

From ASUS employee in the ASUS PC DIY Facebook group regarding the Z690 Hero burns:


----------



## ParadoxicalPurpose

Eaton said:


> From ASUS employee in the ASUS PC DIY Facebook group regarding the Z690 Hero burns:
> 
> View attachment 2539910


Ya... they need to copy paste that response in a couple hundred different places all over redit, facebook, here, various other forums. In fact if they can't program program an AI reslove the comment spread over all the places people are posting up their z690 asus problems they will need to hire more people to do so in order to actually have manpower to address the issue. It's going viral that fast...


----------



## dyanikoglu

I've an issue with my new Apex motherboard and any help is appreciated.

I'm currently running i9-12900KF, MSI 3080 TI Suprim X & 2x16gb GSkill Trident Z5 RAM configuration with a 850w psu.

I was previously using an asus z690-a gaming Wifi D4, and switched to my new z690 Apex moba today. I'm sure GPU doesn't have any problems, but currently getting d6 qcode without any picture on the monitor (which means no gpu detected)

What I've tried so far:


Removed each cable other than fans from moba
Tried other pcie slot
Tried a gtx 780 card on both pcie slots, still no luck
Tried a riser cable with both pcie slots, still not luck
Tried hdmi and display port monitors, still d6 issue with vga light lighting white.

Is the moba dead, or is there any solution for this problem? I've updated to latest bios with flashback, but that also didn't fix the issue.


----------



## jomama22

dyanikoglu said:


> I've an issue with my new Apex motherboard and any help is appreciated.
> 
> I'm currently running i9-12900KF, MSI 3080 TI Suprim X & 2x16gb GSkill Trident Z5 RAM configuration with a 850w psu.
> 
> I was previously using an asus z690-a gaming Wifi D4, and switched to my new z690 Apex moba today. I'm sure GPU doesn't have any problems, but currently getting d6 qcode without any picture on the monitor (which means no gpu detected)
> 
> What I've tried so far:
> 
> 
> Removed each cable other than fans from moba
> Tried other pcie slot
> Tried a gtx 780 card on both pcie slots, still no luck
> Tried a riser cable with both pcie slots, still not luck
> Tried hdmi and display port monitors, still d6 issue with vga light lighting white.
> 
> Is the moba dead, or is there any solution for this problem? I've updated to latest bios with flashback, but that also didn't fix the issue.


It's a displayport issue, usually monitor specific. Boot to windows using HDMI, remove the HDMI cable, put the dp cable on, restart. Should fix the issue though it may pop up from time to time.

Edit: sorry, didn't see you had tried HDMI already. Make sure the card is fully in the slot. That new release mechanism can be slightly too tight and not allow the card to full insert, though should still have enough to get a detection.


----------



## IronAge

Eaton said:


> From ASUS employee in the ASUS PC DIY Facebook group regarding the Z690 Hero burns:


Direct them to youtube Video.


----------



## ahmedmo1

For anyone that has undervolted a 12700K on any of these boards at stock, how low were you able to go? I set LLC to the lowest option, SVID behaviour to typical (as it crashed at the lowest setting) and the adaptive offset to -0.025V. This gets me to ~130W under full load on realbench and ~145W in Cinebench. Is this about as low as I can go?


----------



## WaXmAn

Rather annoying ASUS has known about this issue for at least a week and still crickets....


----------



## Tradition

ahmedmo1 said:


> For anyone that has undervolted a 12700K on any of these boards at stock, how low were you able to go? I set LLC to the lowest option, SVID behaviour to typical (as it crashed at the lowest setting) and the adaptive offset to -0.025V. This gets me to ~130W under full load on realbench and ~145W in Cinebench. Is this about as low as I can go?


use v/f offset to lower your voltage on the higher stages 
you can provably go like -0.2mv on the top end but 0.01 on the low clocks


----------



## Martin778

I'm starting to think - what the hell is wrong with memory training on these boards. Yesterday passed Anta777 with ease, today 21 errors with even better memory cooling using a modified corsair dominator airflow pro with 2 noctua 60mm PWM fans. What the?


----------



## truehighroller1

Martin778 said:


> I'm starting to think - what the hell is wrong with memory training on these boards. Yesterday passed Anta777 with ease, today 21 errors with even better memory cooling using a modified corsair dominator airflow pro with 2 noctua 60mm PWM fans. What the?


I've experienced this behavior about fifteen years ago with an Asus mother board. They'll track it down and fix it. My guess is that it's odt / rtl related issues.


----------



## Martin778

It's so weird, maybe this is why some folks are rising VCCSA trying to fix a problem laying somewhere else, my 6000 C32 OC profile ran perfectly before, today it doesn't want to. I've also noticed that it takes a long time to retrain at reboot after being in the BIOS and adjusting VCCSA.
950mV VCCSA only lasted 4 minutes into TM5.


----------



## j o e

Nice, I’m sending my board to gn so they can f it up


----------



## Martin778

Looks like a nice offer from them, saves you time doing RMA.


----------



## darth_meh

Martin778 said:


> Looks like a nice offer from them, saves you time doing RMA.


Think of all the Youtube views they'll get from that video... smart business move on Steve's part.


----------



## j o e

i want to see if he actually manages to blow it up somehow


----------



## raider307




----------



## joneffingvo

whew... stripe is on the right! 🕺


----------



## jhlee0133

hmmm, curious to know if other ROG motherboards aside the Hero and Formula are affected by this as well?


----------



## criznit

So I finally started the RMA process for my board, but it will take about a week before I get my replacement. I'm half tempted to just buy a new board and sell my replacement (will be new in the box) when I get it.


----------



## Muad_Dib69

no new beta bios for Asus Formula? it still verry unstable with gskill 6000cas36, i tried other kit and it's the same.


----------



## Alberto_It

Muad_Dib69 said:


> no new beta bios for Asus Formula? it still verry unstable with gskill 6000cas36, i tried other kit and it's the same.


With @shamino1978 beta Bios 0031 for the Apex my G. Skill 6000 cl 36 the XMP profile works fine. 

It would be nice if it was done for all Asus Z690 boards


----------



## Muad_Dib69

The apex looks much more stable


----------



## Maksonzi

Hello everyone! Can you tell me if it is worth updating to bios 0811 for the z690 apex or not updating at all? How stable is the last BIOS ??


----------



## Tech Geek Mike

sblantipodi said:


> can't understand why my Z690 Extreme is still at 0803 BIOS while the cheaper motherboards got the 0811 BIOS.


I noticed it is on Asus' server but the support page doesn't have it linked yet: link is here

edit: deleted cache and it is there now


----------



## ssgwright

I have the hero with the upside down cap... don't know what to do, it's running fine (3+ weeks now 24/7)


----------



## LionAlonso

ssgwright said:


> I have the hero with the upside down cap... don't know what to do, it's running fine (3+ weeks now 24/7)


RMA.
U will have problems sooner or later.


----------



## IronAge

j o e said:


> i want to see if he actually manages to blow it up somehow


he could as well just change te orientation of the part and show its not blowing up ?

makes much more sense for me, i hate it when things get wasted.

but i guess that gets him less views than blowing up the board with high voltages on the PDN.


----------



## asdkj1740

asus pc diy group facebook

*ASUS Announcement Regarding Maximus Z690 Hero Issue*

To our valued ASUS Customers,

ASUS is committed to producing the highest quality products and we take every incident report from our valued customers very seriously. We have recently received incident reports regarding the ROG Maximus Z690 Hero motherboard. In our ongoing investigation, we have preliminarily identified a potential reversed memory capacitor issue in the production process from one of the production lines that may cause debug error code 53, no post, or motherboard components damage. The issue potentially affects units manufactured in 2021 with the part number 90MB18E0-MVAAY0 and serial number starting with MA, MB, or MC.

You can identify your part number by referring to the product packaging: Please reference the attached image


As of December 28, 2021, there have been a few incidents reported in North America. Going forward, we are continuing our thorough inspection with our suppliers and customers to identify all possible affected ROG Maximus Z690 Hero motherboards in the market and will be working with relevant government agencies on a replacement program.

Thank you so much to everyone for your patience and support while we are working through the replacement program.

If you have any questions or concerns please feel free to contact ASUS customer service.


-------------------------------------------


As noted - Based on our ongoing review no other ASUS Z690 motherboards are affected including FORMULA.


----------



## iamjanco

^lol, they should send buildzoid a check for doing the troubleshooting for them.


----------



## darth_meh

asdkj1740 said:


> asus pc diy group facebook
> 
> *ASUS Announcement Regarding Maximus Z690 Hero Issue*
> 
> To our valued ASUS Customers,
> 
> ASUS is committed to producing the highest quality products and we take every incident report from our valued customers very seriously. We have recently received incident reports regarding the ROG Maximus Z690 Hero motherboard. In our ongoing investigation, we have preliminarily identified a potential reversed memory capacitor issue in the production process from one of the production lines that may cause debug error code 53, no post, or motherboard components damage. The issue potentially affects units manufactured in 2021 with the part number 90MB18E0-MVAAY0 and serial number starting with MA, MB, or MC.


It's unfortunate this got through Asus QC, but I give them credit for acknowledging the issue fairly quickly, confirming Buzzoid's reversed capacitor theory, and starting the recall process.


----------



## skullbringer

iamjanco said:


> ^lol, they should send buildzoid a check for doing the troubleshooting for them.


or at least reply to his emails, even if it's just a polite "sorry no, we are too afraid to sample you"


----------



## Silent Scone

iamjanco said:


> ^lol, they should send buildzoid a check for doing the troubleshooting for them.





skullbringer said:


> or at least reply to his emails, even if it's just a polite "sorry no, we are too afraid to sample you"


His source was an end-user, I believe. Says as much in the video.


----------



## asdkj1740

skullbringer said:


> or at least reply to his emails, even if it's just a polite "sorry no, we are too afraid to sample you"


probably not because of that reason.
pr/marketing guys care about views only.
connection also plays a big role. there are few super low subs youtube channels got the media box edition of z690.
i guess pr/marketing guys probably would not understand his content. they just don't give a **** about him as a small channel.

unless samples are sent by r&d department, just like falkentyne.


----------



## sblantipodi

guys why when I try to "Load Raw Mhz" in the bios it sets crazy timings?
it sets something like
CAS 50/120/120/120/2T


----------



## blautemple

sblantipodi said:


> guys why when I try to "Load Raw Mhz" in the bios it sets crazy timings?
> it sets something like
> CAS 50/120/120/120/2T


That‘s why it‘s called „Load Raw Mhz“


----------



## sblantipodi

blautemple said:


> That‘s why it‘s called „Load Raw Mhz“


I haven't understood, isn't supposed to set some latencies that is good for that MHz?
I have 4.4GHz only, why such bad latencies?
CAS50 for 4.4GHz?


----------



## Martin778

Because it does what it says - RAW MHz means "I give you very loose timings so you can pump raw MHz" like 7000MHz+. Why? I guess for testing/validation purposes.


----------



## sblantipodi

Martin778 said:


> Because it does what it says - RAW MHz means "I give you very loose timings so you can pump raw MHz" like 7000MHz+. Why? I guess for testing/validation purposes.


Ah ok, thanks for the explanation


----------



## owikh84

6200 CL34 is finally stable after I put another 120mm fan on the latch side of the DIMM slots.

12900K SP88 - Stock
Maximus Z690 Hero | BIOS 0811
G.Skill F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK
2x16GB DDR5-6200 34-36-36-56-2T
VDD/VDDQ/TX VDDQ 1.45v | SA 1.25v | MC 1.3v










Credits to @neurokirurgi for the idea on the timings etc.
I will revisit CL32 again when I am free later.

BTW, just tested one round of CB R23. EK Velocity2 block beats the Velocity1 (with LGA1700 backplate) by 3.8C in terms of average temps of P-core + E-core.


----------



## fortecosi

Well, if a Gigabyte fanboy - small tech streamer/youtuber (does not mean bad in any case!) had to teach Asus what´s wrong with the Asus board, it´s not what I would expect from my favourite company. 
On the other way, if Asus recall and replace all the affected boards no questions, this is what I would expect and it´s all right then. Everyone can do an error. I only judge a company HOW they resolve the error, problem, anything clearly wrong etc. That said, Asus is still my N°1 board company.


----------



## Vld

Quick question - i have EK Monarch RAM wb, will it fit G.Skill Trident5 non rgb DDR5 ?
Thank you !


----------



## Nizzen

Vld said:


> Quick question - i have EK Monarch RAM wb, will it fit G.Skill Trident5 non rgb DDR5 ?
> Thank you !


Yes 😁


----------



## Vld

Nizzen said:


> Yes 😁


Thank you Nizzen !


----------



## owikh84

Vld said:


> Quick question - i have EK Monarch RAM wb, will it fit G.Skill Trident5 non rgb DDR5 ?
> Thank you !


The upcoming Bitspower DDR5 RAM heatsink will fully cover the whole RAM ICs. ETA Jan 2022.










EK Monarch vs Bitspower:









Source: Facebook


----------



## ahmadexp

shamino1978 said:


> For hero it was decided that ot does not support sli due to nvlink length by the product manager , though I will feedback this. For apex, only test sli key available and still waiting for official key


Any chance we can get nvlink working on the ROG Z690 Extreme? Is there any work around ATM?


----------



## ssgwright

welp found a new z690 hero locally... up and running just waiting on asus to figure our how to get the other one replaced so I can resell it


----------



## xl_digit

no need to buy a new RAM Cooler if you allready have Monarch Modules, this minimal missing coverage won´t be a Problem.
Just take care to cover the ICs down there with Thermalpads, they will transfer the waste heat to the Heatsink.


----------



## cstkl1




----------



## Alberto_It

cstkl1 said:


>


Unfortunately I don't understand the language, but it seems that on the Apex you can also mount the DDR 4 on m.2 expansion


----------



## j o e

owikh84 said:


> 6200 CL34 is finally stable after I put another 120mm fan on the latch side of the DIMM slots.
> 
> 12900K SP88 - Stock
> Maximus Z690 Hero | BIOS 0811
> G.Skill F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK
> 2x16GB DDR5-6200 34-36-36-56-2T
> VDD/VDDQ/TX VDDQ 1.45v | SA 1.25v | MC 1.3v
> 
> View attachment 2540107
> 
> 
> Credits to @neurokirurgi for the idea on the timings etc.
> I will revisit CL32 again when I am free later.
> 
> BTW, just tested one round of CB R23. EK Velocity2 block beats the Velocity1 (with LGA1700 backplate) by 3.8C in terms of average temps of P-core + E-core.



I really like my velocity2 it does a great job. Only thing that’s annoying is having the mount screws on the backplate but other than that it’s a monster


----------



## Carillo

Alberto_It said:


> Unfortunately I don't understand the language, but it seems that on the Apex you can also mount the DDR 4 on m.2 expansion


Me neither, but there is something called subtitles on youtube


----------



## Vld

xl_digit said:


> no need to buy a new RAM Cooler if you allready have Monarch Modules, this minimal missing coverage won´t be a Problem.
> Just take care to cover the ICs down there with Thermalpads, they will transfer the waste heat to the Heatsink.


Thank you for information !


----------



## Alberto_It

Carillo said:


> Me neither, but there is something called subtitles on youtube


Yes in Chinese


----------



## Carillo

Alberto_It said:


> Yes in Chinese


and english 🤣


----------



## Alberto_It

Carillo said:


> and english 🤣


From my mobile phone only Chinese, anyway what is it? One adapter DDR5 to DDR4? It's possible to purchase?


----------



## cstkl1

Alberto_It said:


> Unfortunately I don't understand the language, but it seems that on the Apex you can also mount the DDR 4 on m.2 expansion


its a converter add on to dimm slot for ddr4


----------



## X909

I can not believe this... the DDR4 codes must be in the Bios to make this work?!?


----------



## Alberto_It

cstkl1 said:


> its a converter add on to dimm slot for ddr4


It's possible to purchase?


----------



## shamino1978

latest test bios for Apex:








ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0046.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com


----------



## yahfz

shamino1978 said:


> latest test bios for Apex:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0046.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


TEAMGROUP 6400c40 XMP still bsods for anyone wondering.


----------



## Alberto_It

shamino1978 said:


> latest test bios for Apex:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0046.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


@shamino1978 works fine with XMP profile and G. Skill 6000 Cl36 kit with Samsung chips as 0031 release?


----------



## sblantipodi

shamino1978 said:


> latest test bios for Apex:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0046.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


I see no love for Extreme and Glacial users. xD


----------



## Alberto_It

sblantipodi said:


> I see no love for Extreme and Glacial users. xD


Compra una Apex


----------



## sblantipodi

Alberto_It said:


> Compra una Apex


a sto punto compro una MSI


----------



## Carillo

shamino1978 said:


> latest test bios for Apex:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0046.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


Does this bios add PMIC support ?


----------



## Alberto_It

Alberto_It said:


> @shamino1978 works fine with XMP profile and G. Skill 6000 Cl36 kit with Samsung chips as 0031 release?





Carillo said:


> Does this bios add PMIC support ?


@Carillo i have quoted your question with mine hoping on @shamino1978 answers 😝


----------



## ThinbinJim

shamino1978 said:


> latest test bios for Apex:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0046.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


MCU 18 does not support avx512? It is enabled in bios with e-cores disabled but avx512 is not supported according to hwinfo64 and cpu-z.


----------



## xl_digit

shamino1978 said:


> latest test bios for Apex:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0046.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


after Flashing 0046 -> Post ends in 4F, tried several Times (CMOS clear also doesn´t help). @shamino1978


----------



## morph.

shamino1978 said:


> latest test bios for Apex:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0046.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


<3 whats new anything for formula?


----------



## shamino1978

ThinbinJim said:


> MCU 18 does not support avx512? It is enabled in bios with e-cores disabled but avx512 is not supported according to hwinfo64 and cpu-z.


yes
support is removed. not our call.


----------



## xl_digit

xl_digit said:


> after Flashing 0046 -> Post ends in 4F, tried several Times (CMOS clear also doesn´t help). @shamino1978


BIOS Flashback did fix the fault.


----------



## dante`afk

shamino1978 said:


> latest test bios for Apex:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0046.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


what are the changes? ram retraining issue? pmic support?


----------



## sblantipodi

at the end I was able to run 6000MHz no problem on my 2x16GB Samsung Corsair Dominator 5600MHz C36 using XMP and no other settings changed apart the ram frequency.

if I add two sticks more I goes down from 6GHz to 4.4GHz since I can't get 4.8GHz stable with 4 sticks.

How this can be possible?
From 6GHz stable with 1.25V RAM and 1.25SA to 4.4GHz?

@shamino1978 I'm sorry if I quote you, but is this problem supposed to be solved on the Asus motherbords?
I bought an Extreme mobo to have the possibility to add more RAM by adding more banks. I use VMs and I need a lot of RAM.

I don't want to achieve crazy frequency, 4.8GHz/C36 on 4 sticks would be enough for me but I can't achieve it with fast sticks that can achieve 6GHz when using 2 sticks only.

If I can't use 4 sticks I don't need an Extreme mobo at this point.


----------



## LionAlonso

sblantipodi said:


> at the end I was able to run 6000MHz no problem on my 2x16GB Samsung Corsair Dominator 5600MHz C36 using XMP and no other settings changed apart the ram frequency.
> 
> if I add two sticks more I goes down from 6GHz to 4.4GHz since I can't get 4.8GHz stable with 4 sticks.
> 
> How this can be possible?
> From 6GHz stable with 1.25V RAM and 1.25SA to 4.4GHz?
> 
> @shamino1978 I'm sorry if I quote you, but is this problem supposed to be solved on the Asus motherbords?
> I bought an Extreme mobo to have the possibility to add more RAM by adding more banks. I use VMs and I need a lot of RAM.
> 
> I don't want to achieve crazy frequency, 4.8GHz/C36 on 4 sticks would be enough for me but I can't achieve it with fast sticks that can achieve 6GHz when using 2 sticks only.
> 
> If I can't use 4 sticks I don't need an Extreme mobo at this point.


Man, u are so tiring.
Did u buy the 4 sticks in a kit with 4800Mhz? 
no right? Thats why they dont sell them, they cannot guarantee them to work at 4 sticks.
Buy a cheap ddr4 motherboard and u can get ur ram stable at 1500€ less and when ddr5 is better upgrade like many others are doing.
Spending all ur days crying about the same wont solve ur problems neither shamino, because he can be good coder, but he is not a mage.


----------



## sblantipodi

LionAlonso said:


> Man, u are so tiring.
> Did u buy the 4 sticks in a kit with 4800Mhz?
> no right? Thats why they dont sell them, they cannot guarantee them to work at 4 sticks.
> Buy a cheap ddr4 motherboard and u can get ur ram stable at 1500€ less and when ddr5 is better upgrade like many others are doing.
> Spending all ur days crying about the same wont solve ur problems neither shamino, because he can be good coder, but he is not a mage.


I want to know if I need to sell my mobo or not or I need to wait for a new bios that can solve the problem.


----------



## LionAlonso

sblantipodi said:


> I want to know if I need to sell my mobo or not or I need to wait for a new bios that can solve the problem.


NO ONE can guarantee that ur kit will work fine at 4 sticks BECAUSE ur kits ARE NOT guaranteed to work at 4800 4 sticks
Man, its simple to understand


----------



## ddarko

ASUS Announcement Regarding ROG Maximus Z690 Hero Manufacturing Defect



> ASUS is committed to producing the highest quality products and we take every incident report from our valued customers very seriously. We have recently received incident reports regarding the ROG Maximus Z690 Hero motherboard. In our ongoing investigation, we have preliminarily identified a potential reversed memory capacitor issue in the production process from one of the production lines that may cause debug error code 53, no post, or motherboard components damage. The issue potentially affects units manufactured in 2021 with the part number 90MB18E0-MVAAY0 and serial number starting with MA, MB, or MC.
> 
> You can identify your part number by referring to the product packaging: Please reference the attached image. As of December 28, 2021, there have been a few incidents reported in North America. Going forward, we are continuing our thorough inspection with our suppliers and customers to identify all possible affected ROG Maximus Z690 Hero motherboards in the market and will be working with relevant government agencies on a replacement program.
> 
> Thank you so much to everyone for your patience and support while we are working through the replacement program. If you have any questions or concerns please feel free to contact ASUS customer service.


----------



## sblantipodi

If someone is interested in an Asus Extreme mobo and two kits of Dominator Platinum 5600MHz C36 I sell them.


----------



## Maksonzi

[QUOTE = "sblantipodi, post: 28920013, member: 427422"]
Если кого-то интересует мобо Asus Extreme и два комплекта Dominator Platinum 5600MHz C36, я их продаю.
[/ЦИТИРОВАТЬ]
Почему вам не нравится иметь две доски? В asus apex вообще 2 слота для ddr!🤨🤔


----------



## criznit

Newegg decided to make things right and refund my Hero board. I went ahead and just bought a MSI Unify X board instead since MSI is the only company I know of with the least amount of serious issues. My X570 Crosshair VIII hero board was the BEST board for my 5950x, but these intel asus boards ain't it right now.


----------



## skullbringer

shamino1978 said:


> yes
> support is removed. not our call.


so intel pulled avx512?


----------



## Jetlain

shamino1978 said:


> latest test bios for Apex:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0046.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


Will 0046 bios support SLI?


----------



## ssgwright

a lot of beta bios for apex, seen any for the hero?


----------



## beardlessduck

LionAlonso said:


> Man, u are so tiring.
> Did u buy the 4 sticks in a kit with 4800Mhz?
> no right? Thats why they dont sell them, they cannot guarantee them to work at 4 sticks.
> Buy a cheap ddr4 motherboard and u can get ur ram stable at 1500€ less and when ddr5 is better upgrade like many others are doing.
> Spending all ur days crying about the same wont solve ur problems neither shamino, because he can be good coder, but he is not a mage.


I deleted my post about this because I don't want to argue with a bunch of RAM snobs on here. But holy ****, of course users should be able to upgrade their RAM on their PC. If someone buys a PC, most expect that they can upgrade their RAM. This is nonsense.

Of course people can accept that maybe the XMP speeds are not attainable (especially at first), but 4 sticks should work from multiple matching kits.

Are you seriously saying that PC users cannot upgrade their RAM without replacing their already existing sticks?

This is completely unacceptable and aside from a few RAM snobs on here, the entire population of PC enthusiasts will agree that RAM should be able to be added to a PC.

Where does it say on the Asus website or the RAM manufacturer website that you cannot add RAM?

Let me summarize the reasons people have given arguing why the RAM shouldn't work:
1."You guys are idiots"
2. "You shouldn't expect new PCs to work! LOL"
3. "Everyone knows you can't upgrade your RAM, LOL"

STOP accepting bad behavior from corporations. The engineers can create profiles or otherwise get this stuff working. I cannot understand why some of you get pleasure out of RAM compatibility issues.


----------



## LionAlonso

beardlessduck said:


> I deleted my post about this because I don't want to argue with a bunch of RAM snobs on here. But holy ****, of course users should be able to upgrade their RAM on their PC. If someone buys a PC, most expect that they can upgrade their RAM. This is nonsense.
> 
> Of course people can accept that maybe the XMP speeds are not attainable (especially at first), but 4 sticks should work from multiple matching kits.
> 
> Are you seriously saying that PC users cannot upgrade their RAM without replacing their already existing sticks?
> 
> This is completely unacceptable and aside from a few RAM snobs on here, the entire population of PC enthusiasts will agree that RAM should be able to be added to a PC.
> 
> Where does it say on the Asus website or the RAM manufacturer website that you cannot add RAM?


If it were for me i would like that the world was full of peace.
But thats an utopia.
You can say that is unnaceptable, so dont buy DDR5, but matching 2 kits, even if they are the same, doesnt guarantee that the XMP would work for 4 kits, because theye werent tested as that…


----------



## acoustic

beardlessduck said:


> I deleted my post about this because I don't want to argue with a bunch of RAM snobs on here. But holy ****, of course users should be able to upgrade their RAM on their PC. If someone buys a PC, most expect that they can upgrade their RAM. This is nonsense.
> 
> Of course people can accept that maybe the XMP speeds are not attainable (especially at first), but 4 sticks should work from multiple matching kits.
> 
> Are you seriously saying that PC users cannot upgrade their RAM without replacing their already existing sticks?
> 
> This is completely unacceptable and aside from a few RAM snobs on here, the entire population of PC enthusiasts will agree that RAM should be able to be added to a PC.
> 
> Where does it say on the Asus website or the RAM manufacturer website that you cannot add RAM?


Who said you can't add RAM? He added it .. but 4x16 @ 6000 is not on the QVL for the board iirc, nor is running sticks not made for 4x16.

The RAM isn't really what's causing the issue here anyway. The board or the CPU IMC probably want to die trying to push 6000 across 4 sticks.


----------



## beardlessduck

acoustic said:


> Who said you can't add RAM? He added it .. but 4x16 @ 6000 is not on the QVL for the board iirc, nor is running sticks not made for 4x16.
> 
> The RAM isn't really what's causing the issue here anyway. The board or the CPU IMC probably want to die trying to push 6000 across 4 sticks.


Tons of people on here are saying it, including the guy I replied to.

The original poster was said that even 4800 didn't work with 4 sticks and the guy I replied to insulted them.

I was insulted for suggesting that RAM should be able to be added as well. And other users before that.



LionAlonso said:


> If it were for me i would like that the world was full of peace.
> But thats an utopia.
> You can say that is unnaceptable, so dont buy DDR5, but matching 2 kits, even if they are the same, doesnt guarantee that the XMP would work for 4 kits, because theye werent tested as that…


They don't even work at stock speeds without a ton of trial and error. The person you replied to didn't say it should work at 6000, they tried at 4800. Comparing 4 RAM sticks working at all to a utopia is a level of snobbery that I wouldn't have believed existed until this thread.

Can we stop with the insults about differences of opinion on RAM compatibility?


----------



## LionAlonso

beardlessduck said:


> Tons of people on here are saying it, including the guy I replied to.
> 
> The original poster was said that even 4800 didn't work with 4 sticks and the guy I replied to insulted them.
> 
> I was insulted for suggesting that RAM should be able to be added as well. And other users before that.
> 
> 
> 
> They don't even work at stock speeds without a ton of trial and error. The person you replied to didn't say it should work at 6000, they tried at 4800. Comparing 4 RAM sticks working at all to a utopia is a level of snobbery that I wouldn't have believed existed until this thread.
> 
> Can we stop with the insults about differences of opinion on RAM compatibility?


I have not insulted anyone.
I agree that ddr5 is not mature.
Thats why i bought a cheap ddr4 board, to upgrade to a ddr5 board when it matures.
It happens…


----------



## beardlessduck

LionAlonso said:


> I have not insulted anyone.
> I agree that ddr5 is not mature.
> Thats why i bought a cheap ddr4 board, to upgrade to a ddr5 board when it matures.
> It happens…


Your posts to that person were extremely condescending. That's the last thing I'll say about it.

We have a lot in common. Let's be somewhat tolerant of our differences of opinion.


----------



## LionAlonso

beardlessduck said:


> Your posts to that person were extremely condescending. That's the last thing I'll say about it.
> 
> We have a lot in common. Let's be somewhat tolerant of our differences of opinion.


Man.
I agree with you but that person has been spamming all threads and creating new ones.
All the answers were the same but he kept on asking.
If u want that kind of “respect” first u have to offer it somehow…


----------



## sblantipodi

beardlessduck said:


> I deleted my post about this because I don't want to argue with a bunch of RAM snobs on here. But holy ****, of course users should be able to upgrade their RAM on their PC. If someone buys a PC, most expect that they can upgrade their RAM. This is nonsense.
> 
> Of course people can accept that maybe the XMP speeds are not attainable (especially at first), but 4 sticks should work from multiple matching kits.
> 
> Are you seriously saying that PC users cannot upgrade their RAM without replacing their already existing sticks?
> 
> This is completely unacceptable and aside from a few RAM snobs on here, the entire population of PC enthusiasts will agree that RAM should be able to be added to a PC.
> 
> Where does it say on the Asus website or the RAM manufacturer website that you cannot add RAM?
> 
> Let me summarize the reasons people have given arguing why the RAM shouldn't work:
> 1."You guys are idiots"
> 2. "You shouldn't expect new PCs to work! LOL"
> 3. "Everyone knows you can't upgrade your RAM, LOL"
> 
> STOP accepting bad behavior from corporations. The engineers can create profiles or otherwise get this stuff working. I cannot understand why some of you get pleasure out of RAM compatibility issues.


The incredible things is that I can use 2 sticks at 6Ghz, and I'm locked at 4.4Ghz with 4 sticks.
This doesn't sounds normal to me, this is why I continue asking.

I continue asking because no one gived me a useful answer.

no one have idea on this matter and I'm searching some infos to understand what to do.

The good Shamino is the only one who helped me here, he said that it's known that Samsung chip don't work well with 4 sticks while Micron ones plays better with 4 sticks.
Infact my brother have 4 micron 5.2GHz sticks and they works 5.2GHz no problem.

now my question is.

From 6GHz 2 sticks to 4.4GHz 4 sticks doesn't sound normal, so, 
is it a known problem of the Asus mobo or even other mobos have this problem?

This is a known problem since Shamino said me that Samsung chip doesn't work well with 4 sticks, 
but will we see a bios fix for the problem or not?
is it a bios problem or not?

This is the answer I am searching for and why I continue asking.


----------



## truehighroller1

sblantipodi said:


> The incredible things is that I can use 2 sticks at 6Ghz, and I'm locked at 4.4Ghz with 4 sticks.
> This doesn't sounds normal to me, this is why I continue asking.
> 
> I continue asking because no one gived me a useful answer.
> 
> no one have idea on this matter and I'm searching some infos to understand what to do.
> 
> The good Shamino is the only one who helped me here, he said that it's known that Samsung chip don't work well with 4 sticks while Micron ones plays better with 4 sticks.
> Infact my brother have 4 micron 5.2GHz sticks and they works 5.2GHz no problem.
> 
> now my question is.
> 
> From 6GHz 2 sticks to 4.4GHz 4 sticks doesn't sound normal, so,
> is it a known problem of the Asus mobo or even other mobos have this problem?
> 
> This is a known problem since Shamino said me that Samsung chip doesn't work well with 4 sticks,
> but will we see a bios fix for the problem or not?
> is it a bios problem or not?
> 
> This is the answer I am searching for and why I continue asking.


It's not going to get fixed with a bios update. Shamino told me so.


----------



## j o e

So, how’s everyone’s day going


----------



## sblantipodi

truehighroller1 said:


> It's not going to get fixed with a bios update. Shamino told me so.


but is it a problem that happens on Asus motherboards or even other motherboards are afflicted?


----------



## Grendel602

sblantipodi said:


> but is it a problem that happens on Asus motherboards or even other motherboards are afflicted?


I'll just say it. Should this be happening? No, but it is. The people telling you to stop complaining are fan boys of ASUS and believe that you should just take whatever **** a company gives you and accept it. There is no reason why you shouldn't be able to use the memory at the advertised speed. And you are absolutely right that you should be able to use them in a 4 DIMM configuration. The only reason you clearly can't in this case is because of limitations of the motherboard -- likely power limits.

Welcome to being an early adopter.


----------



## owikh84

Z690 Hero 0811.
I could post up to 5600 CL36 with 4x16GB 6000C36 Samsung kits, but totally unstable.
5400 CL32-35-35 and CL36-36-36 look stable though, but I still need to confirm it later when I have the time.

Or maybe I will move straight to the Extreme. 

Edit: Take note that I binned my 12900K for stable DDR4 4133 Gear 1, if that matters.


----------



## TomCom205

I have tested with 7 different CPUs i9 12900k on the Z690 Apex.
I found out depending of the CPU I get more or less errors.
Maybe it is just a coincidence, but it looks like better CPUs have less problems with higher memory clocks
Almost every CPU with SP86 and higher had less errors with the XMP of the Teamgroup 6400 Kit.
Also the Samsung Kits had less problems with the presets if the CPU was "better".
Nevertheless it is hard to understand why XMP not working but doing OC or tighten the timings on those Sticks the get more Stable.
Also playing around with the Voltage if the timings aren't stable doesn't help sometimes.
For example CL40 isn't working while CL38 works.

Also testet at the ROG Z690 Extreme.
But there everything was worse because sometimes it wasn't even Posting and you had to clear Settings or wait until you can try next time.

Hopefully there will be a fix. not sure if it is only a Asus problem maybe also Intel needs to assist or the RAM Manufacturers.

Beside Teamgroup Support was telling its all a Bios Problem and consider to set 6200 or 6000 and load XMP until the problem is fixed.

For now it is still a kind of mystery and right now it seem not possible to have really consistent tests when doing RAM OC.


----------



## owikh84

j o e said:


> I really like my velocity2 it does a great job. Only thing that’s annoying is having the mount screws on the backplate but other than that it’s a monster


Exactly, having to mount and unmount Velocity2 from the backside of the mobo is annoying as hell.
Just imagine the hassle when swapping the CPUs on the test bench like mine. 
I had unplug everything out of the mobo including the GPU etc and flip the board just to change that little CPU.


----------



## asdkj1740

bscool said:


> SELL [email protected]!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> PLEASE SELL IT. BUY MSI


gigabyte with currently 3 versions of bios enters the chat!



sblantipodi said:


> The incredible things is that I can use 2 sticks at 6Ghz, and I'm locked at 4.4Ghz with 4 sticks.
> This doesn't sounds normal to me, this is why I continue asking.
> 
> I continue asking because no one gived me a useful answer.
> 
> no one have idea on this matter and I'm searching some infos to understand what to do.
> 
> The good Shamino is the only one who helped me here, he said that it's known that Samsung chip don't work well with 4 sticks while Micron ones plays better with 4 sticks.
> Infact my brother have 4 micron 5.2GHz sticks and they works 5.2GHz no problem.
> 
> now my question is.
> 
> From 6GHz 2 sticks to 4.4GHz 4 sticks doesn't sound normal, so,
> is it a known problem of the Asus mobo or even other mobos have this problem?
> 
> This is a known problem since Shamino said me that Samsung chip doesn't work well with 4 sticks,
> but will we see a bios fix for the problem or not?
> is it a bios problem or not?
> 
> This is the answer I am searching for and why I continue asking.


as far as i know, 4000mhz for 4 sticks is intel spec.
2 sticks=6000 but 4 sticks=4400 to me is fine, because of the layout - daisy chain.




Alberto_It said:


> It's possible to purchase?


no plan to be mass-produced. that's for experiments currently.


----------



## Maksonzi

[QUOTE = "sblantipodi, post: 28920206, member: 427422"]
Невероятно то, что я могу использовать 2 стика на 6 ГГц, а я заблокирован на 4,4 ГГц с 4 стиками.
Для меня это звучит не нормально, поэтому я продолжаю спрашивать.

Я продолжаю спрашивать, потому что никто не дал мне полезного ответа.

никто не знает по этому поводу, и я ищу информацию, чтобы понять, что делать.

Хороший Шамино - единственный, кто мне здесь помог, он сказал, что известно, что чип Samsung плохо работает с 4-мя стиками, а Micron лучше работает с 4-мя стиками.
Фактически, у моего брата есть 4-микронные палочки с частотой 5,2 ГГц, и они без проблем работают с частотой 5,2 ГГц.

теперь мой вопрос.

С 6 ГГц 2 палки до 4,4 ГГц 4 палочки звучат ненормально, поэтому,
это известная проблема мобо Asus или даже у других мобо есть эта проблема?

Это известная проблема, поскольку Шамино сказал мне, что чип Samsung плохо работает с 4-мя стиками,
но увидим ли мы в BIOS исправление проблемы или нет?
это проблема с биосом или нет?

Это ответ, который я ищу, и почему я продолжаю спрашивать.
[/ЦИТИРОВАТЬ]
В мануале к материнской плате MSI было написано, что чем больше планок и чем выше ранг, тем ниже частота ОЗУ


----------



## beardlessduck

sblantipodi said:


> but is it a problem that happens on Asus motherboards or even other motherboards are afflicted?


It's happening across all Z690 motherboards, so swapping over to MSI isn't going to help. In fact, it's probably going to be worse.

As bad as it is for us on Asus, this is as good as it gets. I don't think there are owners threads like this from anyone else. At least Asus is giving us some beta BIOSes to test out, and Shamino is in here and can see our feedback.


----------



## Nch

Guys, i just finished Z690 Hero build and have these problems:

1. front USB-C connection not working. I have Phanteks case (Enthoo 719), connector is correctly connected, all other USBs front/rear seems fine. I also plugged additional 6 pin psu power for phone quick charging. Does anybody have Phanteks (or any other) case with front USB-C 3.2? Is it working fine for you?

2. Is there a way to dissable lights effect on rear IO cover (ROG/Hero effects) when PC is turned off? I set up stealth mode when PC is in turned off/sleep/hibernate state in UEFI/BIOS. All leds d-rgb(case, fans plugged to MB), G skill rams turns off, except that rear IO cover.


----------



## Eaton

Nch said:


> Guys, i just finished Z690 Hero build and have these problems:
> 
> 1. front USB-C connection not working. I have Phanteks case (Enthoo 719), connector is correctly connected, all other USBs front/rear seems fine. I also plugged additional 6 pin psu power for phone quick charging. Does anybody have Phanteks (or any other) case with front USB-C 3.2? Is it working fine for you?
> 
> 2. Is there a way to dissable lights effect on rear IO cover (ROG/Hero effects) when PC is turned off? I set up stealth mode when PC is in turned off/sleep/hibernate state in UEFI/BIOS. All leds d-rgb(case, fans plugged to MB), G skill rams turns off, except that rear IO cover.


2. You can set it in the Armoury Crate software. This setting sticks/is persistent, and once set you don't need to have Armoury Crate running to have it keep working. Also persists after power is lost.


----------



## Grendel602

Well, I was running fine with my TridentZ DDR5 6000 C36 memory and now, as of a few hours ago, one of the modules has stopped working. 

I was not overclocking at all other than running the XMP profile in BIOS.

Swapped DIMM slots and it is a single stick that won't work (RGB lights up). CPUZ and system information don't recognize that module anymore.









TridentZ DDR5 6000 Module Suddenly Not Working...


Anyone else have this issue or know how I might fix it? I installed the 32 GB Trident Z5 6000 CL36-36-36-76 kit and it worked for about 1 week. Today one of the sticks stopped working and is no longer recognized by my computer (neither CPUZ or System Information). I changed the DIMM slot it...




www.overclock.net





Thoughts?


----------



## truehighroller1

I think there something wrong with my motherboard. I just watched it deteriorate. It was memory related to I watched it get worse and worse and worse and worse.


----------



## LionAlonso

truehighroller1 said:


> I think there something wrong with my motherboard. I just watched it deteriorate. It was memory related to I watched it get worse and worse and worse and worse.


Can u elaborate that more? In what terms u see it degrade or deteriorate?


----------



## Jamied281

Alberto_It said:


> Compra una Apex





Alberto_It said:


> @shamino1978 works fine with XMP profile and G. Skill 6000 Cl36 kit with Samsung chips as 0031 release?


Alberto, did you get your G-Skill kit in your forum title stable at 6000/36 on the Apex? 

Thanks James


----------



## Jamied281

Happy Holidays all! I hope you had a good one. I’m new to the forum having just acquired ADL and the Apex. 

Some fantastically knowledgeable people in here!

James.


----------



## satinghostrider

0046 solved my issues with the Asus Preset 6000C32 which was constantly unstable on 0811 for me for some reason. I'm able to consistently run TM5 with no errors particularly on Test 6. This is relative to my 6000C36 kit on Apex.

I believe there are quite a few fixes for stability this 0046 bios. @owikh84

I think for other models wait for the new bios based on 0046. Should be a pleasant one.


----------



## truehighroller1

LionAlonso said:


> Can u elaborate that more? In what terms u see it degrade or deteriorate?


My system became more and more and more unstable and all the errors that I was getting were memory related. I was playing Warzone with my brothers. I checked my voltages and temperatures, and everything was fine and dandy in that regard.

Got a picture and I swear this thing is not orientated correctly either like other motherboards being reported by asus.

My voltages I turned them up to compensate and they went down instead of up as well I noticed.











Are both of these backwards??


----------



## Alberto_It

Jamied281 said:


> Alberto, did you get your G-Skill kit in your forum title stable at 6000/36 on the Apex?
> 
> Thanks James


Yes they are stable on my Z690 Apex thanks to @shamino1978 bios 0031 with XMP I profile.

Now I would like to know if the new beta is working as well with Samsung chips with XMP I profile. But @shamino1978 not answer me 😅


----------



## Alberto_It

satinghostrider said:


> 0046 solved my issues with the Asus Preset 6000C32 which was constantly unstable on 0811 for me for some reason. I'm able to consistently run TM5 with no errors particularly on Test 6. This is relative to my 6000C36 kit on Apex.
> 
> I believe there are quite a few fixes for stability this 0046 bios. @owikh84
> 
> I think for other models wait for the new bios based on 0046. Should be a pleasant one.


Have you tried if XMP profile works fine as well with 0046 bios?


----------



## satinghostrider

Alberto_It said:


> Have you tried if XMP profile works fine as well with 0046 bios?


I don't use XMP usually but 0811 worked fine with XMP. 0046 should work as well though I haven't tried as I don't usually use XMP.


----------



## ThinbinJim

satinghostrider said:


> I don't use XMP usually but 0811 worked fine with XMP. 0046 should work as well though I haven't tried as I don't usually use XMP.


I use XMP on my APEX/6000C36
0811 - unstable most of the times, even with raised vdd/vddq and tweaked vccsa/imc
0031 - i encountered bad boots about 2 times in the 2 days I used it with full auto xmp i settings. a huge improvement over 0811 but was still unstable
0046 - on full auto xmp i settings (1.30 vdd/vddq, 1.25 vccsa, 1.30 imc), I haven't encountered any errors in TM5 so far


----------



## Alberto_It

satinghostrider said:


> I don't use XMP usually but 0811 worked fine with XMP. 0046 should work as well though I haven't tried as I don't usually use XMP.


Thank you, I use XMP profile because I'm not able to manage timings and voltages on my sticks and the Apex presets they crash the games after 20 seconds


----------



## satinghostrider

ThinbinJim said:


> I use XMP on my APEX/6000C36
> 0811 - unstable most of the times, even with raised vdd/vddq and tweaked vccsa/imc
> 0031 - i encountered bad boots about 2 times in the 2 days I used it with full auto xmp i settings. a huge improvement over 0811 but was still unstable
> 0046 - on full auto xmp i settings (1.30 vdd/vddq, 1.25 vccsa, 1.30 imc), I haven't encountered any errors in TM5 so far


Even the Asus Preset works very well so far.
Just remember to cool the memory somehow when using this preset. I get spitting TM5 errors once it crosses high 50s and once in 60s, it's an error fest. With a ram fan, I see around 52 max. Wonder which idiot at Gskill decided it was a great idea to leave the PMIC without thermal pads. These DDR5's are extremely sensitive to temps for long term stability more than any rams I've used.

TLDR; 0046 is a good way forward. But I don't think it's well tuned for 6000C40 sticks. Looks like most of the work was done for 6000C36 sticks. I have both and this was my experience.


----------



## neurokirurgi

sblantipodi said:


> If I can't use 4 sticks I don't need an Extreme mobo at this point.





beardlessduck said:


> Can we stop with the insults about differences of opinion on RAM compatibility?


If you can't run 4 DIMMs at higher speeds, guess what? Nobody's been lying to you.

Asus has QVL lists for their mobos. The Z690 Formula has a grand total of.... one 4x16GB kit on that QVL list, with a supported speed of 4400. That's what Asus is promising you when you buy a Z690 Formula. They are saying that you can buy that kit and it will work at 4400. That's the end of their promise. And the Extreme's QVL looks just the same. Want 4 DIMMs? 4400 is all we can promise you in that case, says Asus.

Intel has been extremely open about their officially supported RAM speeds as well:










This is like buying a Ferrari, then complaining that it sucks at off-roading and then demanding that Ferrari fix that for you .


----------



## Alberto_It

satinghostrider said:


> Even the Asus Preset works very well so far.
> Just remember to cool the memory somehow when using this preset. I get spitting TM5 errors once it crosses high 50s and once in 60s, it's an error fest. With a ram fan, I see around 52 max. Wonder which idiot at Gskill decided it was a great idea to leave the PMIC without thermal pads. These DDR5's are extremely sensitive to temps for long term stability more than any rams I've used.
> 
> TLDR; 0046 is a good way forward. But I don't think it's well tuned for 6000C40 sticks. Looks like most of the work was done for 6000C36 sticks. I have both and this was my experience.


Where I can download TM5?


----------



## asdkj1740

neurokirurgi said:


> If you can't run 4 DIMMs at higher speeds, guess what? Nobody's been lying to you.
> 
> Asus has QVL lists for their mobos. The Z690 Formula has a grand total of.... one 4x16GB kit on that QVL list, with a supported speed of 4400. That's what Asus is promising you when you buy a Z690 Formula. They are saying that you can buy that kit and it will work at 4400. That's the end of their promise. And the Extreme's QVL looks just the same. Want 4 DIMMs? 4400 is all we can promise you in that case.
> 
> Intel has been extremely open about their officially supported RAM speeds as well:
> 
> View attachment 2540298
> 
> 
> This is like buying a Ferrari, then complaining that it sucks at off-roading and then demanding that Ferrari fix that for you .


i think he got a point. ppl here are looking for help. 
qvl is kind of a mess in this gen.


----------



## satinghostrider

Alberto_It said:


> Where I can download TM5?


Look at Roberto's thread on 12900k. His first post has all the tools listed there.


----------



## sblantipodi

neurokirurgi said:


> If you can't run 4 DIMMs at higher speeds, guess what? Nobody's been lying to you.
> 
> Asus has QVL lists for their mobos. The Z690 Formula has a grand total of.... one 4x16GB kit on that QVL list, with a supported speed of 4400. That's what Asus is promising you when you buy a Z690 Formula. They are saying that you can buy that kit and it will work at 4400. That's the end of their promise. And the Extreme's QVL looks just the same. Want 4 DIMMs? 4400 is all we can promise you in that case, says Asus.
> 
> Intel has been extremely open about their officially supported RAM speeds as well:
> 
> View attachment 2540298
> 
> 
> This is like buying a Ferrari, then complaining that it sucks at off-roading and then demanding that Ferrari fix that for you .


I'm experiencing memory crashes even at 4.4GHz.
no problem with 2 sticks at 5.6GHz.


----------



## Silent Scone

ThinbinJim said:


> I use XMP on my APEX/6000C36
> 0811 - unstable most of the times, even with raised vdd/vddq and tweaked vccsa/imc
> 0031 - i encountered bad boots about 2 times in the 2 days I used it with full auto xmp i settings. a huge improvement over 0811 but was still unstable
> 0046 - on full auto xmp i settings (1.30 vdd/vddq, 1.25 vccsa, 1.30 imc), I haven't encountered any errors in TM5 so far


Hello,

I think the individual CPU plays a big role also. 0046 with a base memory setting CMO from 0811 is much more unstable for me. Same board and same memory kit. I've had no problems tweaking 6000C36 kit for the Apex on 0811, even when dialing down. The bottom line, use what works for you.


----------



## satinghostrider

Silent Scone said:


> Hello,
> 
> I think the individual CPU plays a big role also. 0046 with a base memory setting CMO from 0811 is much more unstable for me. Same board and same memory kit. I've had no problems tweaking 6000C36 kit for the Apex on 0811, even when dialing down.


It seems there is a problem even loading saved profiles from time to time stability wise. I wouldn't count on using a CMO profile from an older bios to a newer one. I know it's annoying to punch in all the values again but to rule out any instability due to this, I'd just do it over again for this platform at least untill things mature. Still alot of work to be done to get this platform fully stable across various setups.

All I know is Load Optimize everytime before you want to change profiles.


----------



## TomCom205

TomCom205 said:


> I have tested with 7 different CPUs i9 12900k on the Z690 Apex.
> I found out depending of the CPU I get more or less errors.
> Maybe it is just a coincidence, but it looks like better CPUs have less problems with higher memory clocks
> Almost every CPU with SP86 and higher had less errors with the XMP of the Teamgroup 6400 Kit.
> Also the Samsung Kits had less problems with the presets if the CPU was "better".
> Nevertheless it is hard to understand why XMP not working but doing OC or tighten the timings on those Sticks the get more Stable.
> Also playing around with the Voltage if the timings aren't stable doesn't help sometimes.
> For example CL40 isn't working while CL38 works.
> 
> Also testet at the ROG Z690 Extreme.
> But there everything was worse because sometimes it wasn't even Posting and you had to clear Settings or wait until you can try next time.
> 
> Hopefully there will be a fix. not sure if it is only a Asus problem maybe also Intel needs to assist or the RAM Manufacturers.
> 
> Beside Teamgroup Support was telling its all a Bios Problem and consider to set 6200 or 6000 and load XMP until the problem is fixed.
> 
> For now it is still a kind of mystery and right now it seem not possible to have really consistent tests when doing RAM OC.





Silent Scone said:


> Hello,
> 
> I think the individual CPU plays a big role also. 0046 with a base memory setting CMO from 0811 is much more unstable for me. Same board and same memory kit. I've had no problems tweaking 6000C36 kit for the Apex on 0811, even when dialing down. The bottom line, use what works for you.


Yeah that's it what I was trying to tell.
Some CPUs just do a better job right now.


----------



## ThinbinJim

Silent Scone said:


> Hello,
> 
> I think the individual CPU plays a big role also. 0046 with a base memory setting CMO from 0811 is much more unstable for me. Same board and same memory kit. I've had no problems tweaking 6000C36 kit for the Apex on 0811, even when dialing down. The bottom line, use what works for you.


Maybe I got lucky and 0031/0046 might not be all that different from 0811.
Ram stability varied greatly across reboots on 0811 for me, and it's also the bios I spent the longest amount of time with among the three so that would make it more likely for instability to happen. 
I'm skeptical that 0046 has fully fixed the problem - instability might crop up over the next few days/weeks when using this bios so that's what I'm looking out for currently.


----------



## satinghostrider

ThinbinJim said:


> Maybe I got lucky and 0031/0046 might not be all that different from 0811.
> Ram stability varied greatly across reboots on 0811 for me, and it's also the bios I spent the longest amount of time with among the three so that would make it more likely for instability to happen.
> I'm skeptical that 0046 has fully fixed the problem - instability might crop up over the next few days/weeks when using this bios so that's what I'm looking out for currently.


It's the same thing for me. That phobia of instabilities always is at the back of my head. But so far it's been far more stable than 0811. TM5 passes properly and gaming no crashes. I'll see if this can be sustained over the next few days as well. I've never spent more time in bios in my life before. Even before I close my eyes to sleep, I feel like I keep forgetting to keep hitting the delete button. Yup, it's bad.


----------



## Silent Scone

[]


satinghostrider said:


> It seems there is a problem even loading saved profiles from time to time stability wise. I wouldn't count on using a CMO profile from an older bios to a newer one. I know it's annoying to punch in all the values again but to rule out any instability due to this, I'd just do it over again for this platform at least untill things mature. Still alot of work to be done to get this platform fully stable across various setups.
> 
> All I know is Load Optimize everytime before you want to change profiles.


This is sometimes the case, yes and sound advice for those still looking for any revision that helps stability in their case.

I haven’t experienced any problems porting over CMO this gen (so far). The aforementioned profile was only known good timings for sake of direct comparison.


----------



## cstkl1

beardlessduck said:


> I deleted my post about this because I don't want to argue with a bunch of RAM snobs on here. But holy ****, of course users should be able to upgrade their RAM on their PC. If someone buys a PC, most expect that they can upgrade their RAM. This is nonsense.
> 
> Of course people can accept that maybe the XMP speeds are not attainable (especially at first), but 4 sticks should work from multiple matching kits.
> 
> Are you seriously saying that PC users cannot upgrade their RAM without replacing their already existing sticks?
> 
> This is completely unacceptable and aside from a few RAM snobs on here, the entire population of PC enthusiasts will agree that RAM should be able to be added to a PC.
> 
> Where does it say on the Asus website or the RAM manufacturer website that you cannot add RAM?
> 
> Let me summarize the reasons people have given arguing why the RAM shouldn't work:
> 1."You guys are idiots"
> 2. "You shouldn't expect new PCs to work! LOL"
> 3. "Everyone knows you can't upgrade your RAM, LOL"
> 
> STOP accepting bad behavior from corporations. The engineers can create profiles or otherwise get this stuff working. I cannot understand why some of you get pleasure out of RAM compatibility issues.


the problem aint da board. its between cpu and ram.

understand the problem before thinking the issue is on aib based on past assumptions of ddr4 and previous gen architecture

rkl itself had issues with 4dimm on gear 2


----------



## ThinbinJim

shamino1978 said:


> yes
> support is removed. not our call.












After a couple of hours reading up about modding the bios to downgrade the MCU using UEFI Bios Updater (UBU) tool on win-raid, I got avx512f working on 0046 

Here's the link for those that want avx512 working on the latest beta bios for the Apex








MZ690A.CAP


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com





Use bios flashback to flash the above file.

Note that this is a modded bios that can potentially brick your system. Use at your own risk


----------



## LionAlonso

truehighroller1 said:


> My system became more and more and more unstable and all the errors that I was getting were memory related. I was playing Warzone with my brothers. I checked my voltages and temperatures, and everything was fine and dandy in that regard.
> 
> Got a picture and I swear this thing is not orientated correctly either like other motherboards being reported by asus.
> 
> My voltages I turned them up to compensate and they went down instead of up as well I noticed.
> 
> View attachment 2540283
> 
> 
> 
> Are both of these backwards??
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2540286


Mmm interesting, u have a TUF right? I dont know if they are backwards maybe anyone who understand a bit more of electronic can answer you.


----------



## Alberto_It

ThinbinJim said:


> View attachment 2540312
> 
> 
> After a couple of hours reading up about modding the bios to downgrade the MCU using UEFI Bios Updater (UBU) tool on win-raid, I got avx512f working on 0046
> 
> Here's the link for those that want avx512 working on the latest beta bios for the Apex
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MZ690A.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Use bios flashback to flash the above file.
> 
> Note that this is a modded bios that can potentially brick your system. Use at your own risk


Works also with E-Cores enabled?


----------



## ThinbinJim

Alberto_It said:


> Works also with E-Cores enabled?


No. Same rules as before. Only works if e-cores are disabled.


----------



## Alberto_It

ThinbinJim said:


> No. Same rules as before. Only works if e-cores are disabled.


Thanks, but at this point useless to choose Alder Lake. 8 Cores and 16 Threads i purchase a 9900ks


----------



## acoustic

Alberto_It said:


> Thanks, but at this point useless to choose Alder Lake. 8 Cores and 16 Threads i purchase a 9900ks


With much lower IPC? Have fun with that.


----------



## skullbringer

ThinbinJim said:


> View attachment 2540312
> 
> 
> After a couple of hours reading up about modding the bios to downgrade the MCU using UEFI Bios Updater (UBU) tool on win-raid, I got avx512f working on 0046
> 
> Here's the link for those that want avx512 working on the latest beta bios for the Apex
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MZ690A.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Use bios flashback to flash the above file.
> 
> Note that this is a modded bios that can potentially brick your system. Use at your own risk


holy **** that was fast, thank you!


----------



## satinghostrider

ThinbinJim said:


> Maybe I got lucky and 0031/0046 might not be all that different from 0811.
> Ram stability varied greatly across reboots on 0811 for me, and it's also the bios I spent the longest amount of time with among the three so that would make it more likely for instability to happen.
> I'm skeptical that 0046 has fully fixed the problem - instability might crop up over the next few days/weeks when using this bios so that's what I'm looking out for currently.


No dice. Started having error 6 in TM5 today. Only error 6. Realised it was unstable when Vanguard crashed to desktop. So frustrating.


----------



## Jamied281

ThinbinJim said:


> I use XMP on my APEX/6000C36
> 0811 - unstable most of the times, even with raised vdd/vddq and tweaked vccsa/imc
> 0031 - i encountered bad boots about 2 times in the 2 days I used it with full auto xmp i settings. a huge improvement over 0811 but was still unstable
> 0046 - on full auto xmp i settings (1.30 vdd/vddq, 1.25 vccsa, 1.30 imc), I haven't encountered any errors in TM5 so far


Jim, are you applying any other adjustments? I can’t get my C16 6000 stable on 0046. Starting to panic a little.


----------



## ThinbinJim

satinghostrider said:


> No dice. Started having error 6 in TM5 today. Only error 6. Realised it was unstable when Vanguard crashed to desktop. So frustrating.


I errored on TM5 too a while ago, specifically, on test 6, test 1 three times and test 12. Errors were gone with a reboot without any change to bios settings. Seems like 0046 is still plagued with the inconsistent stability problem.


Jamied281 said:


> Jim, are you applying any other adjustments? I can’t get my C16 6000 stable on 0046. Starting to panic a little.


Nope, the bios is unchanged apart from the microcode downgrade. As far as I can tell, stability is still a lottery on each boot. Misread
As far as ram settings go, I'm running full auto XMP I
The only manual settings are on the CPU side -
E-cores at 39x,
P-cores at 52, 52, 52, 51, 51, 51, 51, 50, and
AC Loadline at 0.40mOhm
As @Silent Scone and @TomCom205 have said, it varies across cpus quite a bit, so our results shouldn't be the same.


----------



## Alberto_It

acoustic said:


> With much lower IPC? Have fun with that.


I have fun with my 12900k SP 99 @5.6 and over 22000 points on Cpu score with Time Spy


----------



## sblantipodi

neurokirurgi said:


> If you can't run 4 DIMMs at higher speeds, guess what? Nobody's been lying to you.
> 
> Asus has QVL lists for their mobos. The Z690 Formula has a grand total of.... one 4x16GB kit on that QVL list, with a supported speed of 4400. That's what Asus is promising you when you buy a Z690 Formula. They are saying that you can buy that kit and it will work at 4400. That's the end of their promise. And the Extreme's QVL looks just the same. Want 4 DIMMs? 4400 is all we can promise you in that case, says Asus.
> 
> Intel has been extremely open about their officially supported RAM speeds as well:
> 
> View attachment 2540298
> 
> 
> This is like buying a Ferrari, then complaining that it sucks at off-roading and then demanding that Ferrari fix that for you .


yesterday my Asus Extreme crashed at 4.4GHz.
4 sticks of ram is completely unstable no matter the frequency, the more the frequency, the more the unstability, but I can't even handle 4.4GHz fully stable.

2 sticks is rock solid at 6GHz.

there is some flaws in my Asus extreme.

I have tried other kits, I have 4x16GB Corsair Dominator 5600MHz C36 with Samsung chips,
my brother have 4x16GB Corsair Dominator 5200MHz C40 with micron chips,
@shamino1978 said that Micron chips works better when using 4 sticks but same results.
that sticks works at 5.2GHz on my brother's Asus Hero motherboard with a CPU SP79, 
my CPU is SP85.

So will we see another flaws on the Asus side?

I have a 4 sticks that can run 5200MHz on a SP79 CPU on Asus Hero,
same sticks can't run stable 4.4GHz on my SP85 Asus Maximus Extreme.

My Maximus Extreme can run stable two sticks at 6Ghz no problem.

I don't trust that there is no problem in the Extreme since all the extreme users are the ones complaining about memory issues.
There are much more Extreme users complaining about memory issues than the others.

On the ROG forums there was a lot of users complaining about memory issues on the Extreme mobos but the admin deleted posts, renamed them, and banned users complaining about the problem.

Take your conclusion.


----------



## shamino1978

sblantipodi said:


> This is a known problem since Shamino said me that Samsung chip doesn't work well with 4 sticks,
> but will we see a bios fix for the problem or not?
> is it a bios problem or not?
> 
> This is the answer I am searching for and why I continue asking.


first off, i would like some clarification of people's definition of "bios problem".
i see this word being thrown about so often.
is it a "bios problem" if the bios does not apply "1001 tweaks outside of reference code" to get non-por standards to work?
if so, then almost everything can be defined as a "bios problem".
i would just like people to think about this when categorizing a problem as a bios problem.

secondly, i dont have a setup to test, you can try some things from my old notes if you wish:

skew control/odts/
rtt WR 48
rtt Nom rd 34
rtt nom wr 34
rtt park 34
rtt parkdqs 34

rtt ca group A 240
rtt cs group A 0
rtt ck group A 0

rtt ca group B 40
rtt cs group B 40
rtt ck group B 40

Ron odt up/down: 34/34

skew control/comp control:

DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL0_dqvrefup 159
DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL0_dqvrefdn 94
DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL0_dqodtvrefup 128
DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL0_dqodtvrefdn 99

DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL1_cmdvrefup 145
DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL1_ctlvrefup 118
DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL1_clkvrefup 128
DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL1_ckecsvrefup 0
DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL2_cmdvrefdn 92
DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL2_ctlvrefdn 103
DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL2_clkvrefdn 92

VCCSA 1.15v, mc voltage 1.25v, vdd/vddq 1.35v


----------



## sblantipodi

shamino1978 said:


> first off, i would like some clarification of people's definition of "bios problem".
> i see this word being thrown about so often.
> is it a "bios problem" if the bios does not apply "1001 tweaks outside of reference code" to get non-por standards to work?
> if so, then almost everything can be defined as a "bios problem".
> i would just like people to think about this when categorizing a problem as a bios problem.
> 
> secondly, i dont have a setup to test, you can try some things from my old notes if you wish:
> 
> skew control/odts/
> rtt WR 48
> rtt Nom rd 34
> rtt nom wr 34
> rtt park 34
> rtt parkdqs 34
> 
> rtt ca group A 240
> rtt cs group A 0
> rtt ck group A 0
> 
> rtt ca group B 40
> rtt cs group B 40
> rtt ck group B 40
> 
> Ron odt up/down: 34/34
> 
> skew control/comp control:
> 
> DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL0_dqvrefup 159
> DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL0_dqvrefdn 94
> DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL0_dqodtvrefup 128
> DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL0_dqodtvrefdn 99
> 
> DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL1_cmdvrefup 145
> DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL1_ctlvrefup 118
> DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL1_clkvrefup 128
> DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL1_ckecsvrefup 0
> DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL2_cmdvrefdn 92
> DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL2_ctlvrefdn 103
> DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL2_clkvrefdn 92
> 
> VCCSA 1.15v, mc voltage 1.25v, vdd/vddq 1.35v


I really appreciate your help here Shamino, you are my last hope to solve the problem.

I'm in a situation that I don't know what to do, I have spent a lot of money and my PC does not work.

I bought the extreme with 4 slots since I need a lot of memory for the VMs.
I'll try these settings and I'll quote you once finished.

Thank you Shamino, thank you so much and happy new year


----------



## Alberto_It

shamino1978 said:


> first off, i would like some clarification of people's definition of "bios problem".
> i see this word being thrown about so often.
> is it a "bios problem" if the bios does not apply "1001 tweaks outside of reference code" to get non-por standards to work?
> if so, then almost everything can be defined as a "bios problem".
> i would just like people to think about this when categorizing a problem as a bios problem.
> 
> secondly, i dont have a setup to test, you can try some things from my old notes if you wish:
> 
> skew control/odts/
> rtt WR 48
> rtt Nom rd 34
> rtt nom wr 34
> rtt park 34
> rtt parkdqs 34
> 
> rtt ca group A 240
> rtt cs group A 0
> rtt ck group A 0
> 
> rtt ca group B 40
> rtt cs group B 40
> rtt ck group B 40
> 
> Ron odt up/down: 34/34
> 
> skew control/comp control:
> 
> DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL0_dqvrefup 159
> DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL0_dqvrefdn 94
> DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL0_dqodtvrefup 128
> DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL0_dqodtvrefdn 99
> 
> DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL1_cmdvrefup 145
> DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL1_ctlvrefup 118
> DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL1_clkvrefup 128
> DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL1_ckecsvrefup 0
> DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL2_cmdvrefdn 92
> DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL2_ctlvrefdn 103
> DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL2_clkvrefdn 92
> 
> VCCSA 1.15v, mc voltage 1.25v, vdd/vddq 1.35v


Sorry for the disturb but Mr. @shamino1978 could you please tell me if bios version 0046 support the basic XMP 1 profile for my G. Skill F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK as 0031 bios?
And the 0046 version for the Z690 Apex is near to be on stable release? Thanks in advance


----------



## shamino1978

Alberto_It said:


> Sorry for the disturb but Mr. @shamino1978 could you please tell me if bios version 0046 support the basic XMP 1 profile for my G. Skill F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK as 0031 bios?
> And the 0046 version for the Z690 is near to be on stable release? Thanks in advance


its trying to of course.
"Z690 is near to be on stable release?" -> the philosophy is to always try to improve things without breaking other working items. so unless bugs are found, then this is always true.


----------



## shamino1978

sblantipodi said:


> I really appreciate your help here Shamino, you are my last hope to solve the problem.
> 
> I'm in a situation that I don't know what to do, I have spent a lot of money and my PC does not work.
> 
> I bought the extreme with 4 slots since I need a lot of memory for the VMs.
> I'll try these settings and I'll quote you once finished.
> 
> Thank you Shamino, thank you so much and happy new year


i will ask my co worker to help me regarding this next week.


----------



## Alberto_It

shamino1978 said:


> its trying to of course.
> "Z690 is near to be on stable release?" -> the philosophy is to always try to improve things without breaking other working items. so unless bugs are found, then this is always true.


You're right, thanks for the answer. If there aren't nda are you already working for the next improvement of latest 0046 version for Apex board? Thanks and have a great happy new year @shamino1978


----------



## beardlessduck

Alberto_It said:


> Thanks, but at this point useless to choose Alder Lake. 8 Cores and 16 Threads i purchase a 9900ks


I "upgraded" from a 9900k and wish I didn't. I think you made the right move. The 12900k is faster but I will never make back the time I lost from the compatibility issues. In the end, the 12900k is actually slower for me because of the wasted time.


----------



## Alberto_It

Alberto_It said:


> You're right, thanks for the answer. If there aren't nda are you already working for the next improvement of latest 0046 version for Apex board? Thanks and have a great happy new year @shamino1978


In my case with my Apex and 12900k I have some issues stability with ram profiles presets on my G. Skill 6000 Cl36 dear @shamino1978


----------



## skullbringer

ThinbinJim said:


> View attachment 2540312
> 
> 
> After a couple of hours reading up about modding the bios to downgrade the MCU using UEFI Bios Updater (UBU) tool on win-raid, I got avx512f working on 0046
> 
> Here's the link for those that want avx512 working on the latest beta bios for the Apex
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MZ690A.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Use bios flashback to flash the above file.
> 
> Note that this is a modded bios that can potentially brick your system. Use at your own risk


I just found out that this version of microcode does not have shamino's patch for AVX2 clocks. could you maybe mod the bios with an earlier u code, like from bios 0801?


----------



## TomCom205

I do appreciate everything what Shamino does very much!

About the saying "It's a Bios Problem" this came also from Gskill and and Teamgroup.

I can share email where Teamgroup Support is telling it is a "Bios Problem not a RAM problem".

So if I understood correctly it's not a Software Development Bios Problem.

As soon as they find out how MB, CPU, RAM need to work together for full functionality and high performance the Bios development will know how to programm everything.

Hopefully next year 😉


----------



## sblantipodi

shamino1978 said:


> first off, i would like some clarification of people's definition of "bios problem".
> i see this word being thrown about so often.
> is it a "bios problem" if the bios does not apply "1001 tweaks outside of reference code" to get non-por standards to work?
> if so, then almost everything can be defined as a "bios problem".
> i would just like people to think about this when categorizing a problem as a bios problem.
> 
> secondly, i dont have a setup to test, you can try some things from my old notes if you wish:
> 
> skew control/odts/
> rtt WR 48
> rtt Nom rd 34
> rtt nom wr 34
> rtt park 34
> rtt parkdqs 34
> 
> rtt ca group A 240
> rtt cs group A 0
> rtt ck group A 0
> 
> rtt ca group B 40
> rtt cs group B 40
> rtt ck group B 40
> 
> Ron odt up/down: 34/34
> 
> skew control/comp control:
> 
> DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL0_dqvrefup 159
> DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL0_dqvrefdn 94
> DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL0_dqodtvrefup 128
> DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL0_dqodtvrefdn 99
> 
> DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL1_cmdvrefup 145
> DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL1_ctlvrefup 118
> DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL1_clkvrefup 128
> DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL1_ckecsvrefup 0
> DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL2_cmdvrefdn 92
> DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL2_ctlvrefdn 103
> DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL2_clkvrefdn 92
> 
> VCCSA 1.15v, mc voltage 1.25v, vdd/vddq 1.35v


Shamino tell me what to do and I will do it 
You are here to help, and I have great respect of people who helps other people.

I have set all the params as per your suggestion and it works better than before.
I can't boot at 5.2GHz but I am testing 4.8GHz C36/36/36/76 (default latency for my kit)
4.8GHz for me would be enough considering the fact that I'm using 4 sticks. hope to make it stable.

the only param that I have skipped from the ones you suggested is this:

Ron odt up/down: 34/34

I can't find it in my maximus extreme bios, I have pressed F9 to try to search for it but I haven't found it.

I'll keel you posted after some tests to see if the ram is now stable.


----------



## IronAge

neurokirurgi said:


> This is like buying a Ferrari, then complaining that it sucks at off-roading and then demanding that Ferrari fix that for you .


Well, that's only half of the truth.

If sb just checks tech specs before buying an early buyer could come to the wrong conclusion it runs with up to 4x32GB 6400.just fine.






 ROG MAXIMUS Z690 FORMULA | ROG MAXIMUS Z690 FORMULA | Gaming Motherboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG Global


ROG MAXIMUS Z690 FORMULA



rog.asus.com





So the presentation on the website has lead many to the misunderstanding, that higher bandwidth should be possible with 4 DIMM slots equipped.

Many 4 DIMM slot boards including the Z690 Extreme did not even post with four DDR5 Modules @ DDR5-4800 / JEDEC Settings with initial Bioses.


----------



## sblantipodi

sblantipodi said:


> Shamino tell me what to do and I will do it
> You are here to help, and I have great respect of people who helps other people.
> 
> I have set all the params as per your suggestion and it works better than before.
> I can't boot at 5.2GHz but I am testing 4.8GHz C36/36/36/76 (default latency for my kit)
> 4.8GHz for me would be enough considering the fact that I'm using 4 sticks. hope to make it stable.
> 
> the only param that I have skipped from the ones you suggested is this:
> 
> Ron odt up/down: 34/34
> 
> I can't find it in my maximus extreme bios, I have pressed F9 to try to search for it but I haven't found it.
> 
> I'll keel you posted after some tests to see if the ram is now stable.


not stable, it fail after few minutes I start memory test, using Ram Test from Karhu Software


----------



## LionAlonso

sblantipodi said:


> not stable, it fail after few minutes I start memory test, using Ram Test from Karhu Software


If this gets soon enough and u havent sold ur mb maybe u can try 2x32gb ddr4 pair and wait till ddr5 matures.








ASUS Demonstrates DDR5 to DDR4 Converter Card







www.anandtech.com


----------



## nickolp1974

After seeing numerous posts regarding the instability of DDR5 i have just checked the Asus site and my Gskill 6000c36 are not on the list for the Apex, the shop does have the gskill 6000c40 hynix in stock, should i exchange???? mine have not been used yet as waiting for the CPU


----------



## Silent Scone

IronAge said:


> Well, that's only half of the truth.
> 
> If sb just checks tech specs before buying an early buyer could come to the wrong conclusion it runs with up to 4x32GB 6400.just fine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 FORMULA | ROG MAXIMUS Z690 FORMULA | Gaming Motherboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG Global
> 
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 FORMULA
> 
> 
> 
> rog.asus.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So the presentation on the website has lead many to the misunderstanding, that higher bandwidth should be possible with 4 DIMM slots equipped.
> 
> Many 4 DIMM slot boards including the Z690 Extreme did not even post with four DDR5 Modules @ DDR5-4800 / JEDEC Settings with initial Bioses.


4800 is only designated to work in 1DPC configuration according to Intel. That's not to say you can't get them to work beyond this, but evidently, it's tricky and not guaranteed (even more so if you're combining memory kits). The lack of 4 DIMM binned kits is also a testament to this. It will get better as things mature


----------



## LionAlonso

Silent Scone said:


> 4800 is only designated to work in 1DPC configuration according to Intel. 4400 for 2DPC. That's not to say you can't get them to work beyond this, but evidently, it's tricky and not guaranteed. The lack of 4 DIMM binned kits is also a testament to this. It will get better as things mature


It has been said several times to him.
He even have a post saying he sell his goods.
I guess its a dead end trying to explain it.


----------



## IronAge

IMHO 4 DIMM DDR5 slot mobos just have two obsolete DIMM Slots as of now.

i am not sure if this will get much better too soon.

or maybe Intel brings up a new Stepping with better IMC or it works better with next Gen for S1700, only Intel knows.


----------



## Nizzen

nickolp1974 said:


> After seeing numerous posts regarding the instability of DDR5 i have just checked the Asus site and my Gskill 6000c36 are not on the list for the Apex, the shop does have the gskill 6000c40 hynix in stock, should i exchange???? mine have not been used yet as waiting for the CPU


It isn't hynix.... same samsung in 6000c40. I have them both


----------



## Silent Scone

IronAge said:


> IMHO 4 DIMM DDR5 slot mobos just have two obsolete DIMM Slots as of now.
> 
> i am not sure if this will get much better too soon.
> 
> or maybe Intel brings up a new Stepping with better IMC or it works better with next Gen for S1700, only Intel knows.


Given the lack of users who've even tried running a kit binned to run any reasonable speed in 2DPC (and yes, that will make a difference) that's speculation more than anything else. I'd give it time.


P.S Happy NY all
🍾


----------



## Nizzen

IronAge said:


> IMHO 4 DIMM DDR5 slot mobos just have two obsolete DIMM Slots as of now.
> 
> i am not sure if this will get much better too soon.
> 
> or maybe Intel brings up a new Stepping with better IMC or it works better with next Gen for S1700, only Intel knows.


Corsair is selling 4x16 4400mhz ddr5..... Not higher for a reason


----------



## nickolp1974

Nizzen said:


> It isn't hynix.... same samsung in 6000c40. I have them both


Is it wrong on the Asus site then and is it outdated???


----------



## Silent Scone

nickolp1974 said:


> Is it wrong on the Asus site then and is it outdated???


Yes Nick I think the QVL is wrong. All the C40 kits appear to be Samsung as do the C36 kits (If there are any Hynx ones I've not seen them).


----------



## nickolp1974

Silent Scone said:


> Yes Nick I think the QVL is wrong. All the C40 kits appear to be Samsung as do the C36 kits (If there are any Hynx ones I've not seen them).


Thanks and to @Nizzen for the clarification


----------



## IronAge

Nizzen said:


> Corsair is selling 4x16 4400mhz ddr5..... Not higher for a reason


whats that called then ? sub-overclocking memory ? 

there has been a little secrecy about this at the beginning when ADL been released.

nb left a word about 4 DIMM DDR5 usage, no 4 DIMM Kits being offered.

if i had bought a 4 DIMM Slot board as an early adopter i would be kinda pissed too. (Z690 Extreme for over 1000 bucks for instance)


----------



## sblantipodi

sblantipodi said:


> not stable, it fail after few minutes I start memory test, using Ram Test from Karhu Software


It's the last day of the year so I'll pass some time with the family.
@shamino1978 your settings helped a bit but I'm still unstable. Do you have some other suggestion that it's worth to try? 
Maybe highering the SA to 1.2V?

Happy new years to everyone. In 7 hours we will enter new year here  
It's time for a good dinner. It's sad that I have a PC that doesn't work but there are bigger problems in the world.


----------



## Gadfly

Having Samsung IC's should be a good thing as soon as the bios gets sorted out, thus far only the Samsung IC's will run 6800-7000, looks like 7000 40-40-40-80 @ 1.5v on the XMP profiles, and I have even seen 7000 C36 @ 1.55v on some spec sheets. 

That said... I am starting my new build; 12900K with the Apex and G.skill 6000 C36 16GB sticks. What bios should I start with; any tips for getting up and running at at least XMP profile to start?


----------



## Merkor

@Shamino: We always talk about motherboard and RAM manufacturers, when it comes to the inconsistent memory stability, or better: instability.

BUT what does Intel say about this problem? Do they just point to the fact of running off spec or do they acknowledge and are helping you guys figuring out a solution?


----------



## skullbringer

nickolp1974 said:


> Is it wrong on the Asus site then and is it outdated???
> View attachment 2540364


notice the A in the part number, that means hynix. E is samsung. There are just different SKUs at same XMP speed and timings floating around, though A = hynix isn't yet being sold in big quantities


----------



## Gadfly

Merkor said:


> @Shamino: We always talk about motherboard and RAM manufacturers, when it comes to the inconsistent memory stability, or better: instability.
> 
> BUT what does Intel say about this problem? Do they just point to the fact of running off spec or do they acknowledge and are helping you guys figuring out a solution?


Obviously I am not Shamino, but generally Intel will help with bios issues, in addition the memory module manufactures work directly with MB partners for the overclocked profiles. Their is a lot going on in the bios, and how it interacts with the firmware. If you are expecting a quick fix you are going to be disappointed. Based on what we have seen with the AMD bios issues since Ryzen launched in 2017 it will take about a 6 months to a year to get a fully functional and stable bios/firmware/microcode combination; and that is assuming the platform is not abandoned. As soon as Asus starts making a Z790 boards, they will get all the attention (or whatever the next platform is called).

At launch the only thing that is guaranteed to work is ootb stock everything. No overclocking, just stock spec's (that means no XMP profiles beyond official intel supported specs); everything else takes time, a whole lot of tinkering, and frustration.


----------



## Grendel602

One of the sticks on my TridentZ 6000 CL36 died so I replaced it with some Ripjaws S5 5600 CL36.

Actually got my best performance yet in TimeSpy and Cinebench R23 with the Ripjaws. Something must have been up with my TridentZ sticks or the 6000 CL36 just isn't stable enough on the XMP profiles.

Thank goodness I am driving distance to a MicroCenter and I ended up with a cheaper stick of DDR5 that performed better.

I just missed out on grabbing some Corsair Dominator DDR5 5600 CL36. They had two in stock and someone grabbed it right before me. Oddly, the QVL for ASUS doesn't list those sticks. Shows how immature the tech and bio support is right now.


----------



## Gadfly

Grendel602 said:


> One of the sticks on my TridentZ 6000 CL36 died so I replaced it with some Ripjaws S5 5600 CL36.
> 
> Actually got my best performance yet in TimeSpy and Cinebench R23 with the Ripjaws. Something must have been up with my TridentZ sticks or the 6000 CL36 just isn't stable enough on the XMP profiles.
> 
> Thank goodness I am driving distance to a MicroCenter and I ended up with a cheaper stick of DDR5 that performed better.
> 
> I just missed out on grabbing some Corsair Dominator DDR5 5600 CL36. They had two in stock and someone grabbed it right before me. Oddly, the QVL for ASUS doesn't list those sticks. Shows how immature the tech and bio support is right now.


It isn't the memory. This issue is unique to the Asus boards. The Samsung IC's work great on the Gigabyte/ASRock boards. My best guess is that some of the default timings and memory settings that are not set by XMP are causing issues with the samsung IC's. You have to remember that only a few of the memory timings are set by XMP, the rest are all set by the MB manufacture.


----------



## darth_meh

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1477037030001553413
It's happening...


----------



## j o e

darth_meh said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1477037030001553413
> It's happening...



Guys that’s my hero board gn is testing, I put a red paint dot on the 4th dimm slot latch before I shipped it to him. I feel like a famous person


----------



## Feklar

Warp speed Mr. Scott! Push her until it blows!


----------



## Carillo

nickolp1974 said:


> Is it wrong on the Asus site then and is it outdated???
> View attachment 2540364


It's not wrong. it's different part-numbers. 6000U4040E and U3636C is Samsung, 6000U4040A is Hynix..... So part-numbers with A is Hynix except Ripjaws 5200 witch is Micron.....Ripjaws han Tridentz 5600 A is Hynix


----------



## Falkentyne

sblantipodi said:


> at the end I was able to run 6000MHz no problem on my 2x16GB Samsung Corsair Dominator 5600MHz C36 using XMP and no other settings changed apart the ram frequency.
> 
> if I add two sticks more I goes down from 6GHz to 4.4GHz since I can't get 4.8GHz stable with 4 sticks.
> 
> How this can be possible?
> From 6GHz stable with 1.25V RAM and 1.25SA to 4.4GHz?
> 
> @shamino1978 I'm sorry if I quote you, but is this problem supposed to be solved on the Asus motherbords?
> I bought an Extreme mobo to have the possibility to add more RAM by adding more banks. I use VMs and I need a lot of RAM.
> 
> I don't want to achieve crazy frequency, 4.8GHz/C36 on 4 sticks would be enough for me but I can't achieve it with fast sticks that can achieve 6GHz when using 2 sticks only.
> 
> If I can't use 4 sticks I don't need an Extreme mobo at this point.


_edit_ never mind. Seems like shamino himself helped you.


----------



## asdkj1740

Gadfly said:


> It isn't the memory. This issue is unique to the Asus boards. The Samsung IC's work great on the Gigabyte/ASRock boards. My best guess is that some of the default timings and memory settings that are not set by XMP are causing issues with the samsung IC's. You have to remember that only a few of the memory timings are set by XMP, the rest are all set by the MB manufacture.


"The Samsung IC's work great on the Gigabyte/ASRock boards"
bs.



IronAge said:


> whats that called then ? sub-overclocking memory ?
> 
> there has been a little secrecy about this at the beginning when ADL been released.
> 
> nb left a word about 4 DIMM DDR5 usage, no 4 DIMM Kits being offered.
> 
> if i had bought a 4 DIMM Slot board as an early adopter i would be kinda pissed too. (Z690 Extreme für over 1000 bucks for instance)


in fact the first gen (non rgb) trident z 3200c14 16g*2 samsung b die dual rank has become golden sticks after intel updated the mc (comet lake and rocket lake).


----------



## jomama22

Gadfly said:


> Having Samsung IC's should be a good thing as soon as the bios gets sorted out, thus far only the Samsung IC's will run 6800-7000, looks like 7000 40-40-40-80 @ 1.5v on the XMP profiles, and I have even seen 7000 C36 @ 1.55v on some spec sheets.
> 
> That said... I am starting my new build; 12900K with the Apex and G.skill 6000 C36 16GB sticks. What bios should I start with; any tips for getting up and running at at least XMP profile to start?


This is just incorrect. Currently, Hynix ICs have the highest clocks and tightest timings no matter the mobo manufacturer. Samsung's on a good day can get up there, but not nearly at the timings, nor command rate, that they hynix' can.


----------



## MarkDeMark

I wonder if anyone can help me here?
I received my board a couple of weeks ago (APEX Z690). I worked with one BIOS (default switch as it came. Didn’t touch it) . Updated that BIOS a few times - up to version 0811 – always without any issue. Then a few days ago I switched to the other BIOS and updated that BIOS to version 0046. Worked on 0046 for a few days. Then today decided to switch back to the existing 0811. When I booted it displayed a message saying "don't touch anything BIOS is updating, etc. etc." which I found really strange. There was nothing to update. I was just switching back to 0811. What was that about… Why? But it finally booted in the correct BIOS 0811, so I didn’t make a case of it. Just really odd. I work for a few hours in it. Then I wanted to return to the most recent one 0046. That's when all hell broke loose. It displayed the same message "Updating BIOS - don't touch anything, etc. etc." and never booted. And it still isn't. And the BIOS lights alternately flash from one BIOS to the other and Q-code is stuck at 00 – turning on and off – synched with the BIOS lights switching from one BIOS light to the other. I am afraid both BIOS got corrupted for a reason that escapes me.
Both configurations were working fine. It seems it’s the switching between BIOS that caused an issue.
Any suggestion – anyone has encountered this issue before? A solution? I tried the obvious: Clear CMOS, Flashback – which doesn’t work by the way. The blue light becomes steady after 5 seconds, and no BIOS gets flashed. I remove the battery, remount RAM and CPU, etc. All without any success – or even a slight change in the behavior as described above
So here is the situation, how do you revive the board when the 2 BIOS seem corrupted?
As you can imagine, I am also looking for the fastest line of support from ASUS. What’s the best way to get support from ASUS?
What a new year's eve....
Thanks
Here are 2 small videos of the broken behavior happening at the same time
Post code stuck 00
BIOS switch light alternating from one to the other


----------



## pR1maL

MarkDeMark said:


> I wonder if anyone can help me here?
> I received my board a couple of weeks ago (APEX Z690). I worked with one BIOS (default switch as it came. Didn’t touch it) . Updated that BIOS a few times - up to version 0811 – always without any issue. Then a few days ago I switched to the other BIOS and updated that BIOS to version 0046. Worked on 0046 for a few days. Then today decided to switch back to the existing 0811. When I booted it displayed a message saying "don't touch anything BIOS is updating, etc. etc." which I found really strange. There was nothing to update. I was just switching back to 0811. What was that about… Why? But it finally booted in the correct BIOS 0811, so I didn’t make a case of it. Just really odd. I work for a few hours in it. Then I wanted to return to the most recent one 0046. That's when all hell broke loose. It displayed the same message "Updating BIOS - don't touch anything, etc. etc." and never booted. And it still isn't. And the BIOS lights alternately flash from one BIOS to the other and Q-code is stuck at 00 – turning on and off – synched with the BIOS lights switching from one BIOS light to the other. I am afraid both BIOS got corrupted for a reason that escapes me.
> Both configurations were working fine. It seems it’s the switching between BIOS that caused an issue.
> Any suggestion – anyone has encountered this issue before? A solution? I tried the obvious: Clear CMOS, Flashback – which doesn’t work by the way. The blue light becomes steady after 5 seconds, and no BIOS gets flashed. I remove the battery, remount RAM and CPU, etc. All without any success – or even a slight change in the behavior as described above
> So here is the situation, how do you revive the board when the 2 BIOS seem corrupted?
> As you can imagine, I am also looking for the fastest line of support from ASUS. What’s the best way to get support from ASUS?
> What a new year's eve....
> Thanks
> (I tried to link 2 small videos of the behavior - the post doesn't accept the .MOV extension or mp4. How do you link a small video inside a post?)


Maybe try bios flashback with all components removed from the motherboard, including the cpu and dram?


----------



## darth_meh

MarkDeMark said:


> Any suggestion – anyone has encountered this issue before? A solution? I tried the obvious: Clear CMOS, Flashback – which doesn’t work by the way. The blue light becomes steady after 5 seconds, and no BIOS gets flashed. I remove the battery, remount RAM and CPU, etc. All without any success – or even a slight change in the behavior as described above
> So here is the situation, how do you revive the board when the 2 BIOS seem corrupted?
> As you can imagine, I am also looking for the fastest line of support from ASUS. What’s the best way to get support from ASUS?
> What a new year's eve....
> Thanks
> (I tried to link 2 small videos of the behavior - the post doesn't accept the .MOV extension or mp4. How do you link a small video inside a post?)


Did you hold the BIOS Flashback button down for 3 seconds? After that it's supposed to blink 3 times, then it starts flashing until the light goes off.


> (I tried to link 2 small videos of the behavior - the post doesn't accept the .MOV extension or mp4. How do you link a small video inside a post?)


Maybe upload to Youtube and post links here?


----------



## MarkDeMark

darth_meh said:


> Did you hold the BIOS Flashback button down for 3 seconds? After that it's supposed to blink 3 times, then it starts flashing until the light goes off.
> 
> Maybe upload to Youtube and post links here?


Yes - I held 3 secs - it flashes for about 5 secs - and then became steady. Which, as written in the documentation, isn't working: Flashback failed. Yes the USB drive is formatted correctly - it's the one I used to update the APEX BIOS about 5 times since I have it
Youtube - thanks - but why does everything need to be so convoluted? Now I need a youtube account
Don't get me wrong - I appreciate - just in a bad place now


----------



## MarkDeMark

pR1maL said:


> Maybe try bios flashback with all components removed from the motherboard, including the cpu and dram?


Something to try I guess. How would the CPU and RAM interfere in a flashback? The board has power but nothing's powered on during flashback...Thanks


----------



## darth_meh

MarkDeMark said:


> Yes - I held 3 secs - it flashes for about 5 secs - and then became steady. Which, as written in the documentation, isn't working: Flashback failed. Yes the USB drive is formatted correctly - it's the one I used to update the APEX BIOS about 5 times since I have it
> Youtube - thanks - but why does everything need to be so convoluted? Now I need a youtube account


The way I read the BIOS Flashback documentation is after it stops flashing, the LED should stay on while it's flashing, then turn off after the flash completes.


> Don't get me wrong - I appreciate - just in a bad place now


I'd be frustrated too. Just trying to help.


----------



## MarkDeMark

darth_meh said:


> The way I read the BIOS Flashback documentation is after it stops flashing, the LED should stay on while it's flashing, then turn off after the flash completes.
> 
> I'd be frustrated too. Just trying to help.


Yes it should be flashing until it finishes. But mine turns steady on a couple of seconds after I remove my fingers. Which indicate a flash fail


----------



## jomama22

MarkDeMark said:


> Yes it should be flashing until it finishes. But mine turns steady on a couple of seconds after I remove my fingers. Which indicate a flash fail


You didn't try switching bios while in the bios did you? Just asking as if you did, that could absolutely have cause issues.


----------



## MarkDeMark

jomama22 said:


> You didn't try switching bios while in the bios did you? Just asking as if you did, that could absolutely have cause issues.


No. While the system was off, all I did was press the BIOS switch - look at the BIOS light switch - make my choice the right (0041) or the left (0811) - and only then - after making my choice - press the board START button.


----------



## MarkDeMark

While I am looking for a solution and support, my question to ASUS would be: Why when I switch to a different BIOS already installed, one I've been working with for weeks before, why would it want to update itself? Why? I come from ASRock Z590 OC Formula with two (2) BIOS as well, and never had such an issue. This is so unfortunate


----------



## shamino1978

MarkDeMark said:


> No. While the system was off, all I did was press the BIOS switch - look at the BIOS light switch - make my choice the right (0041) or the left (0811) - and only then - after making my choice - press the board START button.


The reason for the updating bios messafe is due to differing firmware packed in the 2 different bioses. Usually the embedded controller fw. Resetting during this time may cause a corrupted ec unable to boot. Were you overclocked setting at the target bios?
The fw is updated at boottime, so usbflashback process wont help


----------



## shamino1978

sblantipodi said:


> It's the last day of the year so I'll pass some time with the family.
> @shamino1978 your settings helped a bit but I'm still unstable. Do you have some other suggestion that it's worth to try?
> Maybe highering the SA to 1.2V?
> 
> Happy new years to everyone. In 7 hours we will enter new year here
> It's time for a good dinner. It's sad that I have a PC that doesn't work but there are bigger problems in the world.


The ron thing I meant driver impedance at the same page as odt. Easiest is to try mc and sa voltage. Try some timings like loosen trfc, set tccdl to 8


----------



## IronAge

j o e said:


> Guys that’s my hero board gn is testing, I put a red paint dot on the 4th dimm slot latch before I shipped it to him. I feel like a famous person


Welcome to GamersJackass formerly know as GamersNecksus.


----------



## MarkDeMark

@shamino1978
Yes both configurations were overclocked
I didn't reset - like I wrote, first time I switched I let it go but found it odd and it finally booted in the correct config and BIOS (was going back from 0041 to 0811) but later went I went back to 0041, after the update screen again, the screen remained black and the behavior became what you see in the 2 videos in my first post. From there no matter what I did or tried it didn't change anything. I can't log in any of them. It's still the same. What are my options here?

For the record - when it's updating it's written in black and white on the screen "Do not turn off or reset the system during the update as this may corrupt and cause problem to boot etc. etc." Or something like that. So I hope this put this question at rest. And all my systems are powered by UPS - so there wasn't any power outage either that shut down the system. It just happened.
.


----------



## ThinbinJim

skullbringer said:


> I just found out that this version of microcode does not have shamino's patch for AVX2 clocks. could you maybe mod the bios with an earlier u code, like from bios 0801?


Is it working on stock 0046? I would but don't know how to. 0801 uses the same ucode version 15 as in my modded 0046.


----------



## shamino1978

MarkDeMark said:


> @shamino1978
> Yes both configurations were overclocked
> I didn't reset - like I wrote, first time I switched I let it go but found it odd and it finally booted in the correct config and BIOS (was going back from 0041 to 0811) but later went I went back to 0041, after the update screen again, the screen remained black and the behavior became what you see in the 2 videos in my first post. From there no matter what I did or tried it didn't change anything. I can't log in any of them. It's still the same. What are my options here?
> .


I think you have to rma


----------



## ThinbinJim

MarkDeMark said:


> Yes - I held 3 secs - it flashes for about 5 secs - and then became steady. Which, as written in the documentation, isn't working: Flashback failed. Yes the USB drive is formatted correctly - it's the one I used to update the APEX BIOS about 5 times since I have it
> Youtube - thanks - but why does everything need to be so convoluted? Now I need a youtube account
> Don't get me wrong - I appreciate - just in a bad place now


Did you rename the bios file to MZ690A.CAP? Try using flashback with other usb drives you have on hand to rule out the asus usb drive being the issue.


----------



## MarkDeMark

shamino1978 said:


> I think you have to rma


That's sad. What happened with the CrashFree BIOS 3 utility - From the User Guide:

3.4 ASUS CrashFree BIOS 3
The ASUS CrashFree BIOS 3 utility is an auto recovery tool that allows you to restore the
BIOS file when it fails or gets corrupted during the updating process. 
You can restore a corrupted BIOS file using a USB flash drive that contains the BIOS file. Etc.

From trying, I can tell you that doesn't work either...
Thanks


----------



## shamino1978

MarkDeMark said:


> That's sad. What happened with the CrashFree BIOS 3 utility - From the User Guide:
> 
> 3.4 ASUS CrashFree BIOS 3
> The ASUS CrashFree BIOS 3 utility is an auto recovery tool that allows you to restore the
> BIOS file when it fails or gets corrupted during the updating process.
> You can restore a corrupted BIOS file using a USB flash drive that contains the BIOS file. Etc.
> 
> From trying, I can tell you that doesn't work either...
> Thanks


Like I explained, if the ec fw is corrupt, then the bios being sound doesnt matter if the board cannot get to start running tge first line of bios code. If its just the bios being broken or not booting, then the flashback will work.


----------



## Alberto_It

Dear @shamino1978, I am very sorry for disturbing you and for same my stupid questions.

I know that you are not blind 

Anyway, in the next days I must to perform a clean install of Windows 11 and I have to participate in a small oc competition between friends.

I just wanted to know if you were refining the Bios 0046 for the Apex or designing a new version of the Bios. So that I can take the best from my Alder Lake setup.

Thank you for your understanding and I wish you a good start of 2022.

Kind regards

Alberto


----------



## owikh84

4x16GB 5400 CL32 is possible, I'm now testing 5600. 
Forgive me for the whacked timings LOL.










12900K SP88 - Stock (binned for DDR4-4133 Gear 1 DR)
Maximus Z690 Hero | BIOS 0811
G.Skill F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK
4x16GB DDR5-5400 32-35-35-52-2T
VDD/VDDQ/TX VDDQ 1.30v | SA 1.25v | MC 1.25v


----------



## Jamied281

ThinbinJim said:


> I errored on TM5 too a while ago, specifically, on test 6, test 1 three times and test 12. Errors were gone with a reboot without any change to bios settings. Seems like 0046 is still plagued with the inconsistent stability problem.
> 
> Nope, the bios is unchanged apart from the microcode downgrade. As far as I can tell, stability is still a lottery on each boot. Misread
> As far as ram settings go, I'm running full auto XMP I
> The only manual settings are on the CPU side -
> E-cores at 39x,
> P-cores at 52, 52, 52, 51, 51, 51, 51, 50, and
> AC Loadline at 0.40mOhm
> As @Silent Scone and @TomCom205 have said, it varies across cpus quite a bit, so our results shouldn't be the same.


Thanks Jim, I’m coming back from a stint on AMD, and the learning curve is quite steep this gen. 

James


----------



## Falkentyne

MarkDeMark said:


> I wonder if anyone can help me here?
> I received my board a couple of weeks ago (APEX Z690). I worked with one BIOS (default switch as it came. Didn’t touch it) . Updated that BIOS a few times - up to version 0811 – always without any issue. Then a few days ago I switched to the other BIOS and updated that BIOS to version 0046. Worked on 0046 for a few days. Then today decided to switch back to the existing 0811. When I booted it displayed a message saying "don't touch anything BIOS is updating, etc. etc." which I found really strange. There was nothing to update. I was just switching back to 0811. What was that about… Why? But it finally booted in the correct BIOS 0811, so I didn’t make a case of it. Just really odd. I work for a few hours in it. Then I wanted to return to the most recent one 0046. That's when all hell broke loose. It displayed the same message "Updating BIOS - don't touch anything, etc. etc." and never booted. And it still isn't. And the BIOS lights alternately flash from one BIOS to the other and Q-code is stuck at 00 – turning on and off – synched with the BIOS lights switching from one BIOS light to the other. I am afraid both BIOS got corrupted for a reason that escapes me.
> Both configurations were working fine. It seems it’s the switching between BIOS that caused an issue.
> Any suggestion – anyone has encountered this issue before? A solution? I tried the obvious: Clear CMOS, Flashback – which doesn’t work by the way. The blue light becomes steady after 5 seconds, and no BIOS gets flashed. I remove the battery, remount RAM and CPU, etc. All without any success – or even a slight change in the behavior as described above
> So here is the situation, how do you revive the board when the 2 BIOS seem corrupted?
> As you can imagine, I am also looking for the fastest line of support from ASUS. What’s the best way to get support from ASUS?
> What a new year's eve....
> Thanks
> Here are 2 small videos of the broken behavior happening at the same time
> Post code stuck 00
> BIOS switch light alternating from one to the other


I've seen this behavior when updating from a pre-release BIOS on Z590 to a production BIOS. The board didn't switch bios lights though, it just kept power cycling to 00 every 1 second. Fixed by using USB flashback, booting then immediately using Qflash to reflash the exact same production BIOS (If i didn't do this, the board would soft brick itself again if I tried saving any BIOS setting).

Bios is updating, means some sort of firmware is updating because the major BIOS revision changed, which updates something else on the board, but I have no idea what it is.
The other message is "board is updating LED firmware/Aura LED firmware", which also happens when one BIOS uses a different firmware than another BIOS and you switch between them.

What exactly did you do when it said "Updating BIOS, don't touch anything"? Did you interrupt the process?
One time, it took 5 minutes to complete but it actually did complete.
To avoid things like this, once I know I'm on a BIOS version I like, I update the older BIOS chip to the current one with USB flashback, and I only switch between Bioses if the firmware versions are identical so it doesn't reflash firmwares.


----------



## skullbringer

ThinbinJim said:


> Is it working on stock 0046? I would but don't know how to. 0801 uses the same ucode version 15 as in my modded 0046.


yeah on stock 0046 it's working. don't think the version number alone is indicative. so like the 15 from 0801 might have the workaroudn while the 15 from 0046 does not.


----------



## sblantipodi

shamino1978 said:


> i will ask my co worker to help me regarding this next week.


@shamino1978 I have used all your suggested settings and the system was unstable at 4.8GHz.
Highering the SA from 1.150V to 1.200V seems to have helped a lot.
System is much more stable now, I have just passed 2 hours of memtest without errors.

If you need a tester, tell me what to do and I will do it.

Thank you very much Shamino, I think that everone here love you! 
Happy new year to you and your team!!!


----------



## ThinbinJim

skullbringer said:


> yeah on stock 0046 it's working. don't think the version number alone is indicative. so like the 15 from 0801 might have the workaroudn while the 15 from 0046 does not.


In the unmodded Apex official/unmodded bioses, there are multiple "partial" (not sure what to call these) microcode beginning with an FF (i.e. FF0672) for the family of retail alderlake cpus alongside the official 90672 microcode supplied by intel in the Apex bios. The 90672 microcode matches in checksum with the microcode shipped in MSI's bioses while the partial ones I suspect, are Asus proprietary code that might play a role in patching the avx downclocking issue.

Now the problem with these partial microcodes is that they are considered as corrupted by the UBU tool that used to create the modded bios. While I can extract them from the Apex bios, I can't inject them into the modded ones as the tool doesn't recognise the files.


----------



## owikh84

12900K SP88 - Stock (binned for DDR4-4133 Gear 1 DR)
Maximus Z690 Hero | BIOS 0811
G.Skill F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK
*4x16GB DDR5-5600 34-36-36-56-2T
VDD/VDDQ/TX VDDQ 1.35v | SA 0.95v | MC 1.35v*









*4x16GB DDR5-5800 34-36-36-56-2T :*


----------



## IronAge

*@owikh84

Asus should hire you for four DIMM Memory Profile creation. Probably want to share your Bios Profile ? May be helpfull for some.*


----------



## owikh84

IronAge said:


> *@owikh84
> 
> Asus should hire you for four DIMM Memory Profile creation. Probably want to share your Bios Profile ? May be helpfull for some.*


Nothing special actually, no algo etc basically all the settings (whacked) are showed in the ss above LOL.
BTW 4x16GB 5800 looks stable as well, I will share the profiles when it is done.


----------



## Silent Scone

owikh84 said:


> 12900K SP88 - Stock (binned for DDR4-4133 Gear 1 DR)
> Maximus Z690 Hero | BIOS 0811
> G.Skill F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK
> *4x16GB DDR5-5600 34-36-36-56-2T
> VDD/VDDQ/TX VDDQ 1.35v | SA 0.95v | MC 1.35v*
> View attachment 2540490
> 
> 
> *4x16GB DDR5-5800 34-36-36-56-2T :*
> View attachment 2540491


Hello,

The timings aren’t bad considering the frequency. Nice work, under 50 degrees on the sticks also.


----------



## MarkDeMark

shamino1978 said:


> Like I explained, if the ec fw is corrupt, then the bios being sound doesnt matter if the board cannot get to start running tge first line of bios code. If its just the bios being broken or not booting, then the flashback will work.


In this case it does look like ec firmware is corrupt. Nothing else prevails. Flashback definitely doesn't work. Holding down the START button won't even shut down the board. Well it shuts down for one second, but it turns itself back on with the same behavior routine of flashing POST code 00. I need to turn off the power supply so that the board gets turned off. I guess I only have one option left. Thanks @shamino1978 - as usual your input is invaluable


----------



## MarkDeMark

Falkentyne said:


> I've seen this behavior when updating from a pre-release BIOS on Z590 to a production BIOS. The board didn't switch bios lights though, it just kept power cycling to 00 every 1 second. Fixed by using USB flashback, booting then immediately using Qflash to reflash the exact same production BIOS (If i didn't do this, the board would soft brick itself again if I tried saving any BIOS setting).
> 
> Bios is updating, means some sort of firmware is updating because the major BIOS revision changed, which updates something else on the board, but I have no idea what it is.
> The other message is "board is updating LED firmware/Aura LED firmware", which also happens when one BIOS uses a different firmware than another BIOS and you switch between them.
> 
> What exactly did you do when it said "Updating BIOS, don't touch anything"? Did you interrupt the process?
> One time, it took 5 minutes to complete but it actually did complete.
> To avoid things like this, once I know I'm on a BIOS version I like, I update the older BIOS chip to the current one with USB flashback, and I only switch between Bioses if the firmware versions are identical so it doesn't reflash firmwares.


Sadly I can't flashback. It simply fails every time I try. And yes I get the alternating flashing BIOS lights on the board.
What I did when it said "Updating BIOS, don't touch anything" was wait. Like I did before during the first switch back to 0811. But this time the update warning lines disappeared after a while and for 10 minutes just a black screen - nothing else happening. I knew something was wrong, just didn't know how wrong.
"... I only switch between Bioses if the firmware versions that are identical so it doesn't reflash firmwares..." Yes I am sure that's good advice. Also @shamino1978 hinted at saving OC profiles and only switching between configurations with loaded defaults. But I am only assuming here. The only sure thing here is that now I have to go through the painful process of RMA.
Thanks to you @Falkentyne - you're another giant here.


----------



## Alberto_It

Tried the Bios 0046 for my Apex Z690 published by @shamino1978 a few days ago.

I entered the OCTVB settings that I had with the previous version of the bios 0031, but I encountered higher p cores voltages and several Q Codes errors on startup. Also the scores on benchmarks were lower than before.

I have lost a lot of time for adjustment on vf curve and additional voltage.

Come Back to previous Bios 0031 versions and everything works perfectly 

How it's possible?

Edit : Before to try 0046 bios version with USB Flashback i have performed a cmos and F5.


----------



## Gadfly

jomama22 said:


> This is just incorrect. Currently, Hynix ICs have the highest clocks and tightest timings no matter the mobo manufacturer. Samsung's on a good day can get up there, but not nearly at the timings, nor command rate, that they hynix' can.


No, it isn't. Thus far only the Samsung IC's have been validated at 7000 MT/s (7000 40-40-40-80 @ 1.5v)


----------



## X909

Did some of you play aroung with adaptive voltage settings of the e cores? Or do you have a clue how throtteling of the e cores work?
Because, my turbo VCore would be sufficient for 4.2 e core clock (around 1.4V). But under heavy load, the p cores throttle to 5 Ghz or below, less than 1.2V - to low to run the e cores at 4.2 and also to low to run them safely at 4 Ghz under every scenario. Sometimes the e cores clock down to 3900 Mhz when the p cores clock below 5 Ghz but not allways. Would be good to throttle the e cores dependend on VCore or per offset to the p cores...


----------



## Nizzen

Gadfly said:


> No, it isn't. Thus far only the Samsung IC's have been validated at 7000 MT/s (7000 40-40-40-80 @ 1.5v)


Show us


----------



## Garlicky

truehighroller1 said:


> It sucked for my kit which is b die A2 revision 4 x 4gb. I'm back on 0812 stable at 4000 Gear 1.


What are your settings? I've been trying to get over 3733 but no luck what so ever...


----------



## Gadfly

Nizzen said:


> Show us


G.SKILL Showcases DDR5-7000 CL40 Extreme Speed Memory-G.SKILL International Enterprise Co., Ltd. (gskill.com)
Z690 AORUS TACHYON (rev. 1.0) Support | Motherboard - GIGABYTE Global

etc. etc.

back to my point... Right now the settings and defaults for Samsung IC's on Asus boards just isn't working well, but when setup correctly (whatever those settings may be), the Samsung IC's appear to have greater potential with a potentially higher breakdown voltage limit; 1.5v is right at the Hynix IC's absolute max voltage.


----------



## Jamied281

Evening all, I’m having a head scratcher - I’m running a 12900KF at stock with G-Skill 6000 cl36 RAM on the Apex, and I’m having incredibly bad Aida64 L1 Cache scores (350GB/s). Everything is running at stock, even the RAM is back to JADEC timings. I’ve tried a fresh windows install, swapping the RAM and CPU (both like for like), but still no luck.

I’m currently running the latest beta bios.

Is there anything I’m missing that could be causing this?

Thanks in advance.

James


----------



## Nizzen

Gadfly said:


> G.SKILL Showcases DDR5-7000 CL40 Extreme Speed Memory-G.SKILL International Enterprise Co., Ltd. (gskill.com)
> Z690 AORUS TACHYON (rev. 1.0) Support | Motherboard - GIGABYTE Global
> 
> etc. etc.
> 
> back to my point... Right now the settings and defaults for Samsung IC's on Asus boards just isn't working well, but when setup correctly (whatever those settings may be), the Samsung IC's appear to have greater potential with a potentially higher breakdown voltage limit; 1.5v is right at the Hynix IC's absolute max voltage.


This doesn't show anything. It shows imaginary IC that noone can buy... Pleace try again


----------



## shamino1978

X909 said:


> Did some of you play aroung with adaptive voltage settings of the e cores? Or do you have a clue how throtteling of the e cores work?
> Because, my turbo VCore would be sufficient for 4.2 e core clock (around 1.4V). But under heavy load, the p cores throttle to 5 Ghz or below, less than 1.2V - to low to run the e cores at 4.2 and also to low to run them safely at 4 Ghz under every scenario. Sometimes the e cores clock down to 3900 Mhz when the p cores clock below 5 Ghz but not allways. Would be good to throttle the e cores dependend on VCore or per offset to the p cores...


Why not set ecore usage 8 active cores to 39 - 40x? By the time all ecores are active, the pcores would already be all active.


----------



## drpeppir

Will SLI nvlink will work on the z690 formula or is there a beta bios for that as well?


----------



## Alberto_It

Hi to everyone, here is my self adjusted bios profile, but I think that there is something wrong with VF Curve, Offset and additional voltage. And perhaps on my p cores and e cores frequency.

I have take a look at the latest excel table of @RobertoSampaio , but I'm not sure that I have understood right. 

Using latest version of HWINFO and launching CB20, 23 i just noticed that Core Vid, Core Vid 0, 1 and 2 on full load touch 1.51V

Suggestions? Someone can help me?


----------



## Nizzen

drpeppir said:


> Will SLI nvlink will work on the z690 formula or is there a beta bios for that as well?


No sli for formula. Only one testbios for Apex with sli.


----------



## X909

shamino1978 said:


> Why not set ecore usage 8 active cores to 39 - 40x? By the time all ecores are active, the pcores would already be all active.


Because under normal full load (even CB23) I can run the e Cores with 40. Even 42 would be OK in WinRAR because the voltage is much higher. Only under heaviest load, when the p Cores throttle below 50, I need to reduce the e Cores clock also. If I just set 39-40, than I have only 39 even under light load on all Cores.


----------



## skullbringer

ThinbinJim said:


> In the unmodded Apex official/unmodded bioses, there are multiple "partial" (not sure what to call these) microcode beginning with an FF (i.e. FF0672) for the family of retail alderlake cpus alongside the official 90672 microcode supplied by intel in the Apex bios. The 90672 microcode matches in checksum with the microcode shipped in MSI's bioses while the partial ones I suspect, are Asus proprietary code that might play a role in patching the avx downclocking issue.
> 
> Now the problem with these partial microcodes is that they are considered as corrupted by the UBU tool that used to create the modded bios. While I can extract them from the Apex bios, I can't inject them into the modded ones as the tool doesn't recognise the files.


huh interesting, thank you for the info. now I am curious to try modifying microcode myself 

are you using this one or different one? [Tool Guide+News] "UEFI BIOS Updater" (UBU)


----------



## shrimpmaster

Is there an option to disable Intel Serial IO with Asus Z690 TUF? I tried disabling serial port in the bios but I still get those Intel Serial IO controllers.


----------



## Arni90

shamino1978 said:


> first off, i would like some clarification of people's definition of "bios problem".
> i see this word being thrown about so often.
> is it a "bios problem" if the bios does not apply "1001 tweaks outside of reference code" to get non-por standards to work?
> if so, then almost everything can be defined as a "bios problem".
> i would just like people to think about this when categorizing a problem as a bios problem.
> 
> secondly, i dont have a setup to test, you can try some things from my old notes if you wish:
> 
> skew control/odts/
> rtt WR 48
> rtt Nom rd 34
> rtt nom wr 34
> rtt park 34
> rtt parkdqs 34
> 
> rtt ca group A 240
> rtt cs group A 0
> rtt ck group A 0
> 
> rtt ca group B 40
> rtt cs group B 40
> rtt ck group B 40
> 
> Ron odt up/down: 34/34
> 
> skew control/comp control:
> 
> DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL0_dqvrefup 159
> DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL0_dqvrefdn 94
> DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL0_dqodtvrefup 128
> DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL0_dqodtvrefdn 99
> 
> DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL1_cmdvrefup 145
> DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL1_ctlvrefup 118
> DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL1_clkvrefup 128
> DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL1_ckecsvrefup 0
> DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL2_cmdvrefdn 92
> DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL2_ctlvrefdn 103
> DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL2_clkvrefdn 92
> 
> VCCSA 1.15v, mc voltage 1.25v, vdd/vddq 1.35v


This is highly interesting information, is there some kind of methodology to find out what values work when changing voltages up or down?


----------



## sblantipodi

owikh84 said:


> 4x16GB 5400 CL32 is possible, I'm now testing 5600.
> Forgive me for the whacked timings LOL.
> 
> View attachment 2540468
> 
> 
> 12900K SP88 - Stock (binned for DDR4-4133 Gear 1 DR)
> Maximus Z690 Hero | BIOS 0811
> G.Skill F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK
> 4x16GB DDR5-5400 32-35-35-52-2T
> VDD/VDDQ/TX VDDQ 1.30v | SA 1.25v | MC 1.25v
> 
> View attachment 2540467


I'm starting thinking that my Extreme mobo has some design flaws.
Extreme users can't run 4 slots reliably, frequency does not matter, 4 stick are unreliable.
on ROG forum there are a lot of users complaining about my same problem but the admin there delete the posts about this problem


----------



## Nizzen

sblantipodi said:


> I'm starting thinking that my Extreme mobo has some design flaws.
> Extreme users can't run 4 slots reliably, frequency does not matter, 4 stick are unreliable.
> on ROG forum there are a lot of users complaining about my same problem but the admin there delete the posts about this problem


You still haven't tested a quad DDR5 kit....
Lack of knwoledge of 4xDDr5 is real for everyone here. 
Remember Just over 4000mhz 4x dimms, fully stable was a pain with DDR4 for a LONG! time.


----------



## sblantipodi

Nizzen said:


> You still haven't tested a quad DDR5 kit....
> Lack of knwoledge of 4xDDr5 is real for everyone here.
> Remember Just over 4000mhz 4x dimms, fully stable was a pain with DDR4 for a LONG! time.


With 4 sticks I'm not even stable at JDEC specs (4.4GHz).
This is a shame.
errors are so random, you can test for 2 hours without errors, 
then shutdown the PC and crash the day after on the first 10 minutes of memtest.


----------



## sblantipodi

I don't even understood why my Extreme defaults to 4.0GHz while defaults should be 4.4GHz.
Probably Asus knows that this mobo can't handle JDEC specs because they are rushed ones?


----------



## nickolp1974

sblantipodi said:


> With 4 sticks I'm not even stable at JDEC specs (4.4GHz).
> This is a shame.
> errors are so random, you can test for 2 hours without errors,
> then shutdown the PC and crash the day after on the first 10 minutes of memtest.


so once you have it stable/2 hours without errors can you not lock in all values manually or maybe break it down into timing groups to possibly isolate the problem??? the board maybe retraining at different values to what you had without errors .


----------



## sblantipodi

nickolp1974 said:


> so once you have it stable/2 hours without errors can you not lock in all values manually or maybe break it down into timing groups to possibly isolate the problem??? the board maybe retraining at different values to what you had without errors .


I tried loosing the timing from 36/36/36/76 to 40/40/40/80 but random errors remained.


----------



## nickolp1974

sblantipodi said:


> I tried loosing the timing from 36/36/36/76 to 40/40/40/80 but random errors remained.


i meant all 2nds and 3rds etc as well as primarys. From what i'm also reading voltages are also highly sensitive maybe manually set all those also. Use memtweakit to get timings and HWinfo for voltages. My system wont be up and runinng till the end of the week so can't comment fully and its been a while!!!


----------



## drpeppir

Nizzen said:


> No sli for formula. Only one testbios for Apex with sli.


Doesn't seem like an enthusiast board then.


----------



## Nizzen

drpeppir said:


> Doesn't seem like an enthusiast board then.


SLi is dead. That's why. 

We buy Apex for special OC bios love 
All the good stuff bios vice is coming to Apex.


----------



## Arni90

sblantipodi said:


> I don't even understood why my Extreme defaults to 4.0GHz while defaults should be 4.4GHz.
> Probably Asus knows that this mobo can't handle JDEC specs because they are rushed ones?


Because 2.0 GHz is Intel spec for 4 SR DIMMs?
2.2 GHz is Intel spec for 2 SR DIMMs on a 4DPC board, and 2.4 GHz is Intel spec on a 2DPC board.


----------



## LionAlonso

Arni90 said:


> Because 2.0 GHz is Intel spec for 4 SR DIMMs?
> 2.2 GHz is Intel spec for 2 SR DIMMs on a 4DPC board, and 2.4 GHz is Intel spec on a 2DPC board.


He wont answer you.
He doesnt like to hear the truth.


----------



## drpeppir

Nizzen said:


> SLi is dead. That's why.
> 
> We buy Apex for special OC bios love
> All the good stuff bios vice is coming to Apex.


no matter the purpose, it reduces our options for board usage. Not everyone is into special OC bios alone. That’s the point of the enthusiast hobby, if it’s allowable it should be available at the least on the Maximus line.


----------



## xRuBiCoNx

Hey RGB/light experts  I own the Z690 Formula (on lastest BIOS 0811) and have issues with RGB on the Board itself (not on other RGB stuff like GPU or fans) that is not turning off when powering down the System. I have put all RGB settings in BIOS to "Stealth" when Power Off and also put in the Armory as Setting to go Stealth after shutdown. As a fix I tried a Power socket and completely remove it from Power so all RGB is off but then i get randomly a bright White LED flashing after few h of the System powered down (annoying during the night). Is there a way to stop this white LED flashing?


----------



## jomama22

drpeppir said:


> no matter the purpose, it reduces our options for board usage. Not everyone is into special OC bios alone. That’s the point of the enthusiast hobby, if it’s allowable it should be available at the least on the Maximus line.


It's not entirely up to Asus. Nvidia has to give them an sli key for it to work. So if you want to yell at someone, yell at Nvidia.


----------



## sblantipodi

Arni90 said:


> Because 2.0 GHz is Intel spec for 4 SR DIMMs?
> 2.2 GHz is Intel spec for 2 SR DIMMs on a 4DPC board, and 2.4 GHz is Intel spec on a 2DPC board.


Thanks for the answer. 
4DPC stands for?


----------



## drpeppir

jomama22 said:


> It's not entirely up to Asus. Nvidia has to give them an sli key for it to work. So if you want to yell at someone, yell at Nvidia.


No yelling intended, just disappointment.


----------



## owikh84

sblantipodi said:


> I'm starting thinking that my Extreme mobo has some design flaws.
> Extreme users can't run 4 slots reliably, frequency does not matter, 4 stick are unreliable.
> on ROG forum there are a lot of users complaining about my same problem but the admin there delete the posts about this problem


Attached below are my Z690 Hero BIOS 0811 profiles for stable 5400 CL32 and 5600 CL36, in case you're interested to try. However, I humbly have to admit that most if not all of the settings are rubbish. But they are consistently stable on every boot.

It must be mentioned that my SP88 was binned for DDR4 4133+ Gear1 with DR, out of 6 pcs of 12900K. So I can confirm that my IMC is stronger than average chips. Also, voltage pairing (VDD/VDDQ/TX/SA/MC) does play an important role as well. My profiles will not work with auto voltages, so you must figure it out yourself depending on the strengths of your IMC and RAM IC etc.

Back to my 5800 CL34, I didn't manage to fully stabilize it and errors started to appear in the middle of the TM5. I think I'm already reaching the wall for 4x16GB. But I do understand that I cannot expect much for 4 sticks OC from a daisy-chain board. In the past we had T-topology board which favors populated DIMM OC but it is no longer offered for current gens.

==============================================

12900K SP88 - Stock
Maximus Z690 Hero | BIOS 0811
G.Skill F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK
*4x16GB DDR5-5800 34-36-36-56-2T 
VDD/VDDQ/TX VDDQ 1.425v | SA 0.95v | MC 1.375v*
_Not 100% stable_










Let's see if I have the time, I will swap this Hero for Extreme within today or so and see if I could apply the same 4x16GB settings on the Extreme.


----------



## OCHIANG-CHENG-TAO

Does someone give me the OC BIOS of ROG Z690I or test the BIOS? I am using 0811 now. Can anyone give me an updated BIOS? thanks


----------



## Garlicky

OCHIANG-CHENG-TAO said:


> 有人給我ROG Z690I的OC BIOS或測試BIOS嗎？我目前使用的是 0811。誰能給我一個更新的 BIOS？謝謝


兄弟好歹用个翻译器啊，谁看的懂中文啊


----------



## GtiJason

sblantipodi said:


> at the end I was able to run 6000MHz no problem on my 2x16GB Samsung Corsair Dominator 5600MHz C36 using XMP and no other settings changed apart the ram frequency.
> 
> if I add two sticks more I goes down from 6GHz to 4.4GHz since I can't get 4.8GHz stable with 4 sticks.
> 
> How this can be possible?
> From 6GHz stable with 1.25V RAM and 1.25SA to 4.4GHz?
> 
> @shamino1978 I'm sorry if I quote you, but is this problem supposed to be solved on the Asus motherbords?
> I bought an Extreme mobo to have the possibility to add more RAM by adding more banks. I use VMs and I need a lot of RAM.
> 
> I don't want to achieve crazy frequency, 4.8GHz/C36 on 4 sticks would be enough for me but I can't achieve it with fast sticks that can achieve 6GHz when using 2 sticks only.
> 
> If I can't use 4 sticks I don't need an Extreme mobo at this point.


That's pretty good, according to Intel it's supposed to be 4000MHz so +400MHz OC ftw !


----------



## GtiJason

skullbringer said:


> notice the A in the part number, that means hynix. E is samsung. There are just different SKUs at same XMP speed and timings floating around, though A = hynix isn't yet being sold in big quantities


So is "C" Micron ?
EDIT: I figured it out, the mems are 5600c36 (5600U3636C16GA2) and in this case the C stands for Samsung. They sure like making us jump through hoops to find our favorite IC's. Nothing new though, been doing this since DDR1
Also noticed on 6000c40 kits 4040D can be Hynix or Samsung and so far 4040F appears to be Hynix


----------



## Jubeishock

Anyone used 0901 bios on strix gaming a d4? Xmp are working or still crashing?


----------



## OCHIANG-CHENG-TAO

Garlicky said:


> 兄弟好歹用個翻譯器啊，誰看的懂中文啊
> [/引用]
> 我用GOOGLE翻譯的...！!!!!!! 我在打中文嗎？


----------



## owikh84

Z690 Hero > Extreme 

Extreme 0811
4x16GB Sammy
5600 CL34 bootable but totally unstable
5800 CL34 no boot

🙅‍♂️🙅‍♂️🙅‍♂️

Update:
2x16GB 6000 CL32 2T ASUS profile is stable
2x16GB 6200 CL34 - still testing


----------



## sippo

There is something strange about VPP switching Frequency (Asus Z690 Formula).

Memory: Gskill Samsung 6000C36-36-36-76
First Stable at: C32-34-32-34 - VDD/VDDQ - 1.4V (switching frequency for VDD/VDDQ set to 1.5MHz, VPP Set to auto),
System Agent, Memory controller to 1.25V

Then I've tried to C28, then C30 at 6000 - it fail, so I've switched back to previous stable setting, but it was also unstable (nothing more changed only CAS).

I've figure out, after setting VPP Switching frequency to 1.5MHz system is stable now again.
So I switched back to C30 and it's still stable, 28 not.

Conclusion: I've do not understood what is happening there.

To fast test stability I've used TestMem5 with setting Extreme1 @anta777 for 1 hour.

Bellow TM5 for 20 min, and I will left this for few hours:


----------



## MarkDeMark

Asus Memory support for APEX lists most, if not all F5-*6000U4040*A16GX2-XXXX as Hynix chip. Is that correct? Anyone can confirm this?
Ref: ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX | ROG Maximus | Gaming Motherboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG Canada
Tx

*Just noticed, Asus listing of gskill memory are all with an "A", as in F5-6000U4040*A*16GX2-RS5K, and that doesn't even exist on gskill site. They're all "E" . Must be a typo...


----------



## Nizzen

MarkDeMark said:


> Asus Memory support for APEX lists most, if not all F5-*6000U4040*A16GX2-XXXX as Hynix chip. Is that correct? Anyone can confirm this?
> Ref: ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX | ROG Maximus | Gaming Motherboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG Canada
> Tx
> 
> *Just noticed, Asus listing of gskill memory are all with an "A", as in F5-6000U4040*A*16GX2-RS5K, and that doesn't even exist on gskill site. They're all "E" . Must be a typo...


There is no G.skill with Hynix in stores now. Sad but true.
My F5-6000U4040E16gx2-TZ5RK is samsung.


----------



## sblantipodi

sippo said:


> There is something strange about VPP switching Frequency (Asus Z690 Formula).
> 
> Memory: Gskill Samsung 6000C36-36-36-76
> First Stable at: C32-34-32-34 - VDD/VDDQ - 1.4V (switching frequency for VDD/VDDQ set to 1.5MHz, VPP Set to auto),
> System Agent, Memory controller to 1.25V
> 
> Then I've tried to C28, then C30 at 6000 - it fail, so I've switched back to previous stable setting, but it was also unstable (nothing more changed only CAS).
> 
> I've figure out, after setting VPP Switching frequency to 1.5MHz system is stable now again.
> So I switched back to C30 and it's still stable, 28 not.
> 
> Conclusion: I've do not understood what is happening there.
> 
> To fast test stability I've used TestMem5 with setting Extreme1 @anta777 for 1 hour.
> 
> Bellow TM5 for 20 min, and I will left this for few hours:
> 
> View attachment 2540871


that program doesn't guarantee you stability with just an hour.
I can run it for 2 hours without errors and get errors next day on the first ten minutes without touching settings.

testing ram is pretty difficult unfortunantly


----------



## Andarian

Hello everyone, maybe some1 have info about 1t on extreme? 
Im trying to stabile 6200/30/1t and i have stab profile, but i have issues with boot. Sometimes system dont want to boot and i need to restart.


----------



## MarkDeMark

Nizzen said:


> There is no G.skill with Hynix in stores now. Sad but true.
> My F5-6000U4040E16gx2-TZ5RK is samsung.


Anyone know the difference between all G.Skill models with an "X" versus and "A" in the name, as in F5-6000U3636E16G*X*2-TZ5K and F5-6000U3636E16G*A*2-TZ5K? The FAQ page claims there are no difference in specifications. OK, but they do bother with listing the different name for each product, so what is the difference? G.Skill isn't answering email about this


----------



## jomama22

MarkDeMark said:


> Anyone know the difference between all G.Skill models with an "X" versus and "A" in the name, as in F5-6000U3636E16G*X*2-TZ5K and F5-6000U3636E16G*A*2-TZ5K? The FAQ page claims there are no difference in specifications. OK, but they do bother with listing the different name for each product, so what is the difference? G.Skill isn't answering email about this


Could be anything that ever so slightly changed on their end and nothing to do with anything a user needs to be concerned with. Literally could be a different heatsink, pcb color, w.e.

They list both so that when someone wants to look up their model number, they can find it.


----------



## MarkDeMark

jomama22 said:


> Could be anything that ever so slightly changed on their end and nothing to do with anything a user needs to be concerned with. Literally could be a different heatsink, pcb color, w.e.
> 
> They list both so that when someone wants to look up their model number, they can find it.


Just got the answer from GSKILL: ", it references the original source of the product - etc."


----------



## drpeppir

Anyone notice the Z690 Formula support tab is missing (for downloading drivers and BIOS) and ASUS has removed some references to the board on marketing?

I think it may have something to do with this post:

“ROG Maximus Z690 Extreme
ROG Maximus Z690 Extreme Glacial 
ROG Maximus Z690 Apex 

Will also officially support SLI/NVLINK, initial SLI listing was not noted as they were still undergoing official certification which has been delayed/extended due to pandemic-related factors.

The latest UEFI release will be required for this functionality. Please be patient in this respect.”


----------



## managerman

drpeppir said:


> no matter the purpose, it reduces our options for board usage. Not everyone is into special OC bios alone. That’s the point of the enthusiast hobby, if it’s allowable it should be available at the least on the Maximus line.


Agreed...For the price of the Maximus Extreme and the Glacial Board (which I have) you would think the SLI license fee would be taken care of....I have asked (in various places) for a SLI capable Beta bios for the Extreme and Extreme Glacial boards...My two 3090's are ready to go...

SLI may be dead for many games, but is still valid when 3D benchmarking....just my .02....

EDIT....just saw your post above my reply....we must be on an "SLI" wavelength....Let's hope "they" can "certify" quickly!

-M


----------



## managerman

drpeppir said:


> Anyone notice the Z690 Formula support tab is missing (for downloading drivers and BIOS) and ASUS has removed some references to the board on marketing?
> 
> I think it may have something to do with this post:
> 
> “ROG Maximus Z690 Extreme
> ROG Maximus Z690 Extreme Glacial
> ROG Maximus Z690 Apex
> 
> Will also officially support SLI/NVLINK, initial SLI listing was not noted as they were still undergoing official certification which has been delayed/extended due to pandemic-related factors.
> 
> The latest UEFI release will be required for this functionality. Please be patient in this respect.”


Where did you see this new post? Edit....nvm...found it on the ASUS DIY facebook page...

-M


----------



## GAN77

*What is G.SKILL memory's naming convention/nomenclature? [DDR5]*

For example: F5-5200U4040A16GX2-RS5K
Break down to F5 / 5200 / U / 4040 / A / 16G / 2 / RS5 / K

Memory Type:
F5 = DDR5

Frequency:
4800 = DDR5-4800
5200 = DDR5-5200
5600 = DDR5-5600

DIMM Type:
U/J = UDIMM (unbuffered DIMM)
S = SO-DIMM

Latency Timing (tCL / tRCD-tRP):
xxyy = xx-yy-yy
The first two digits correspond to tCL; the last two digits correspond to tRCD and tRP. For example, "4040" = 40-40-40 timing, and "4039" = 40-39-39 timing.

Rated Voltage:
A = 1.10V
B = 1.15V
C = 1.20V
D = 1.25V
E = 1.30V
F = 1.35V
G = 1.40V
H = 1.45V
J = 1.50V

Single Module Capacity:
16G = 16GB per module
32G = 32GB per module
64G = 64GB per module
128G = 128GB per module

Total Modules in Kit:
1 = 1 module in kit
2 = 2 modules in kit
4 = 4 modules in kit
8 = 8 modules in kit

* To get the total memory kit capacity, multiply the single module capacity with total modules in kit.

Series:
TZ5 = Trident Z5
TZ5R = Trident Z5 RGB
RS5 = Ripjaws S5

Color:
K = Black
W = White
G = Gold
S = Silver



*G.SKILL Serial Number Check*​







SN Check-G.SKILL International Enterprise Co., Ltd.


G.SKILL




www.gskill.com





Example 
F5-5600U3636C16GX2-TZ5RS 
Serial Number 21495548933 
Code Number 0R48AXS8*10B - 10B possibly indicates samsung*
Date of Manufacture 2021/12/07 
Series D5 Trident Z5 RGB 

Memory Type DDR5-5600
Tested Latency 36-36-36-76
Tested Voltage 1.20v
Capacity 16Gx2 
Features Intel XMP 3.0 Ready


----------



## drpeppir

managerman said:


> Agreed...For the price of the Maximus Extreme and the Glacial Board (which I have) you would think the SLI license fee would be taken care of....I have asked (in various places) for a SLI capable Beta bios for the Extreme and Extreme Glacial boards...My two 3090's are ready to go...
> 
> SLI may be dead for many games, but is still valid when 3D benchmarking....just my .02....
> 
> EDIT....just saw your post above my reply....we must be on an "SLI" wavelength....Let's hope "they" can "certify" quickly!
> 
> -M


I need the SLI before I consider purchase. The release of the Maximus Z690 seems to have been rushed by ASUS.


----------



## Garlicky

是的，你是不是忘了拷贝英文了


----------



## sippo

drpeppir said:


> Anyone notice the Z690 Formula support tab is missing (for downloading drivers and BIOS) and ASUS has removed some references to the board on marketing?
> 
> I think it may have something to do with this post:
> 
> “ROG Maximus Z690 Extreme
> ROG Maximus Z690 Extreme Glacial
> ROG Maximus Z690 Apex
> 
> Will also officially support SLI/NVLINK, initial SLI listing was not noted as they were still undergoing official certification which has been delayed/extended due to pandemic-related factors.
> 
> The latest UEFI release will be required for this functionality. Please be patient in this respect.”








ROG MAXIMUS Z690 FORMULA | ROG Maximus | Gaming Motherboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG Australia


ROG MAXIMUS Z690 FORMULA



rog.asus.com


----------



## drpeppir

sippo said:


> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 FORMULA | ROG Maximus | Gaming Motherboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG Australia
> 
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 FORMULA
> 
> 
> 
> rog.asus.com


I was referring to this page- they removed the support tab unlike the other Z690 : ROG MAXIMUS Z690 FORMULA | ROG Maximus | Gaming Motherboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG Global


----------



## fortecosi

drpeppir said:


> I need the SLI before I consider purchase. The release of the Maximus Z690 seems to have been rushed by ASUS.


afaik, noone Z690 board of any vendor has sli license, this has nothing to do with asus.


----------



## shamino1978

sblantipodi said:


> I'm starting thinking that my Extreme mobo has some design flaws.
> Extreme users can't run 4 slots reliably, frequency does not matter, 4 stick are unreliable.
> on ROG forum there are a lot of users complaining about my same problem but the admin there delete the posts about this problem


try this bios








ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0050.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com


----------



## Tigra456

Because you are still testing….
Strix F….

The 2x 16 GB 6000 c36 are running Testmem5 Anta777 stable but only with

1.35 VDDQ DRAM
1.35 VDD

IRV Transm Voltage 1.35
CPU SA (Auto - 1.25)

why i must lift the RAM voltages to get it stable ?
Other users don’t have to lift this voltages and it works ?

And additional question: at first boot the ram led is still light up, after a reboot the led is off …?


----------



## satinghostrider

I quoted my own post in the DDR5 thread which I mentioned that the 6000 kits I tested are out of whack. I even had 1 kit 6000C36 that did not work with XMP1 or XMP2. If you are stable with XMP1 or XMP2 with higher voltage, I can only deduce that most of these 6000 kits XMP are not actually verified by G.Skill before sale. I had to RMA mine because it simply will not run XMP1 or XMP2 or even setting the timings manually and tweaking voltages. You are paying for a kit that states 1.3V for 6000C36. If you need more voltage to run that, technically you can RMA it. G.Skill has to start testing these kits properly as it is creating alot of unnecessary frustration with users owing to the fact that they are not testing these frequencies and voltages tagged to XMP properly or they are binning these Samsung so tightly that it does not run well on many systems.

Hope this helps. I switched mine to 5600C36 kit and I can run the XMP properly (Tried yesterday just for fun since I started with the 6000C321T preset). If the XMP does not work properly, I would blame the kit not the BIOS. I tried 4 BIOS with 3 different kits of G.Skill memory to realise the 6000 kits are a big hit and miss with most users.



Tigra456 said:


> Because you are still testing….
> Strix F….
> 
> The 2x 16 GB 6000 c36 are running Testmem5 Anta777 stable but only with
> 
> 1.35 VDDQ DRAM
> 1.35 VDD
> 
> IRV Transm Voltage 1.35
> CPU SA (Auto - 1.25)
> 
> why i must lift the RAM voltages to get it stable ?
> Other users don’t have to lift this voltages and it works ?
> 
> And additional question: at first boot the ram led is still light up, after a reboot the led is off …?





satinghostrider said:


> I've had extremely bad luck on *2 kits* of DDR5 memory.
> 
> *6000c36 kit* - Failed even XMP1 and XMP2. 6000C32 preset extremely unstable but bootable to windows. Vanguard is instant crash even at lobby. Adjusted combination of voltages no dice. Appears to be faulty as none of it ran on all 4 bios I tried including XMP1 and XMP2. Going to RMA this on Monday.
> 
> *6000c40 kit* - Only XMP2 is stable. 60000C32 preset doesn't even boot to Windows. BSOD while loading windows. Bad lottery. Did not bother to test further. XMP1 totally not stable. Even tried relaxing some main timings still not stable.
> 
> 5600C36 kit - Did not try XMP at all. 6000C32 kit works very well but still crashes in Vanguard. Adjusted VDD down to 1.415V, MC to 1.3V and SA to 0.95V. VDDTXQ is as per Asus Preset at 1.4375V. Stable so far. Played Vanguard 2 hours no issues. Rebooted 3 times including 1 shutdown and tried gaming. So far so good.
> 
> I'm getting a feel that some of these higher end kits are extremely tightly binned or just plain defective (Not able to run advertised XMP profiles with stability; JEDEC is fine.) . I tried 4 Bios on the first 2 kits with 0010,0015,0811 and 0046. More than the bios, I think these RAMs you guys gotta check if it's stable on XMP1 or XMP2 first and maybe try 0046 and 0811 before concluding if it's a bios issue. Start with 0811 first. They will either run XMP1 or XMP2 and if you're lucky you can use the 6000C32 preset but you gotta do some adjustments based on your kit.
> 
> @Nizzen is right. These Gskills, the lottery is real as much as the combination of voltages to get them working correctly. You can't brute force these sticks with higher voltages at a certain frequency. I found adjusting the voltages downwards did much more for me but YMMV based on your silicon. And TestMem5 is extremely accurate based on my gameplay with Vanguard. You can do a quick test by trying to game on Vanguard and cross-check with TM5 from time to time. I found this the best way as sometimes the runs from TM5 may pass but you might crash after an hour in Vanguard. You definitely need to micro-adjust these voltages initially. But after that it appears to be stable. I'm still testing but I'm pretty happy as this is the furthest I've got so far and I'm glad to be running the 6000C32 preset at 1T well so far. Well, it's an Apex board that's the point isn't it?
> 
> If you guys are having issues with the 6000C32 preset, it is worth dialing down your vdd voltages (trial and error; I started with 1.4 and worked my way up to 1.415V for stability) and setting the rest to the above as listed with my 5600c36 kit. Keep VDDTXQ stock as per Asus Preset at 1.4375V.
> 
> Thanks @cstkl1 for isolating each factor one by one tirelessly with me. It was extremely frustrating to the point I wanted to go back to my 11900k. 😂


----------



## truehighroller1

@shamino1978 


I've recently noticed that in order to push over 1.584v to my memory I need to push vddq over 1.35v and that when I do that it becomes unstable. Is there a glitch in my bios causing this? I have the d4 strix. My memory is rated for 1.5 already. I just want to push 1.64-1.65v to lower my timings some more. I have gskill ripsaw ddr4 4400mhz 2 x 16gb 17-18-18-38 1.5v if that helps. Also I'm on 0901 bios.

Thank you sir.


----------



## drpeppir

fortecosi said:


> afaik, noone Z690 board of any vendor has sli license, this has nothing to do with asus.


 MSI


----------



## sblantipodi

edited


----------



## Nizzen

sblantipodi said:


> 0050 seems a lot "old", we have the 0811 now,
> Is 0050 a very old beta bios? Can I use it safely?


If you are question like this, you are on the wrong forums 

00 means testbios, and Shamino is working for Asus. If he is posting a 00xx bios it's allways "fresh out of the oven"

Hope this helps


----------



## safedisk

7200 2T 32-42-42-28

SA 1.35
VDD 1.56
VDDQ 1.48
Memory Controller 1.4

In my experience the imc of Alder lake a big difference
So 6600+++ need a good imc cpu to boot
For a daily setting, I prefer the tight timing of 1t 6400-6600
Because the 1T runs the TM5 so fast


----------



## sblantipodi

Nizzen said:


> If you are question like this, you are on the wrong forums
> 
> 00 means testbios, and Shamino is working for Asus. If he is posting a 00xx bios it's allways "fresh out of the oven"
> 
> Hope this helps


Cool where shamino posts this new beta bios?
I haven't seen this bios on this forum before.
Thanks


----------



## fortecosi

drpeppir said:


> MSI


MSI what? noone of their z690 boards has sli man.


----------



## bscool

edit


----------



## Silent Scone

safedisk said:


> View attachment 2540965
> 
> 
> View attachment 2540966
> 
> 
> View attachment 2540967
> 
> 
> 
> 7200 2T 32-42-42-28
> 
> SA 1.35
> VDD 1.56
> VDDQ 1.48
> Memory Controller 1.4
> 
> In my experience the imc of Alder lake a big difference
> So 6600+++ need a good imc cpu to boot
> For a daily setting, I prefer the tight timing of 1t 6400-6600
> Because the 1T runs the TM5 so fast


Most stable frequency at 1T is the way forward but 7200 2T is mighty impressive



Andarian said:


> Hello everyone, maybe some1 have info about 1t on extreme?
> Im trying to stabile 6200/30/1t and i have stab profile, but i have issues with boot. Sometimes system dont want to boot and i need to restart.
> View attachment 2540886
> 
> View attachment 2540885


What Q-Code? Try more SA


----------



## drpeppir

fortecosi said:


> MSI what? noone of their z690 boards has sli man.








MSI MEG Z690 UNIFY Gaming Motherboard ATX - Intel 12th Gen Processors - 19+2 Phase, DDR5, PCIe 5.0







us.msi.com


----------



## crossbone

1


fortecosi said:


> MSI what? noone of their z690 boards has sli man.


Currently 3 of MSIs Z690 Boards have official SLI support. The Godlike will most likely have it as well.
MSI MEG Z690 UNIFY Gaming Motherboard ATX - Intel 12th Gen Processors - 19+2 Phase, DDR5, PCIe 5.0
MSI MEG Z690 UNIFY-X Gaming Motherboard ATX - Intel 12th Gen Processors - 19+2 Phase, DDR5, PCIe 5.0
MSI MEG Z690 ACE Gaming Motherboard ATX - Intel 12th Gen Processors - 19+1+2 Phase, DDR5, PCIe 5.0


----------



## Andarian

Silent Scone said:


> Most stable frequency at 1T is the way forward but 7200 2T is mighty impressive
> 
> 
> 
> What Q-Code? Try more SA


54 the most popular q-code


----------



## Tigra456

satinghostrider said:


> I quoted my own post in the DDR5 thread which I mentioned that the 6000 kits I tested are out of whack. I even had 1 kit 6000C36 that did not work with XMP1 or XMP2. If you are stable with XMP1 or XMP2 with higher voltage, I can only deduce that most of these 6000 kits XMP are not actually verified by G.Skill before sale. I had to RMA mine because it simply will not run XMP1 or XMP2 or even setting the timings manually and tweaking voltages. You are paying for a kit that states 1.3V for 6000C36. If you need more voltage to run that, technically you can RMA it. G.Skill has to start testing these kits properly as it is creating alot of unnecessary frustration with users owing to the fact that they are not testing these frequencies and voltages tagged to XMP properly or they are binning these Samsung so tightly that it does not run well on many systems.
> 
> Hope this helps. I switched mine to 5600C36 kit and I can run the XMP properly (Tried yesterday just for fun since I started with the 6000C321T preset). If the XMP does not work properly, I would blame the kit not the BIOS. I tried 4 BIOS with 3 different kits of G.Skill memory to realise the 6000 kits are a big hit and miss with most users.


Is that a fact that Gskill not correct selected the dimms or a these ?

Not in the mood to wait long for a RMA or order new same dimms…


----------



## sblantipodi

shamino1978 said:


> try this bios
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0050.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


Oops I haven't noticed that you are the genuine Shamino from Asus sorry.
I'll try it asap and report you if something inroved here. Thanks!!!


----------



## Technodox

Tigra456 said:


> Is that a fact that Gskill not correct selected the dimms or a these ?
> 
> Not in the mood to wait long for a RMA or order new same dimms…



Could just need a new BIOS update from Asus. I'm sure GSkill tested and binned the RAM.


----------



## owikh84

Z690 Extreme BIOS 0811.
0050 is even worse.

4x16GB G.Skill 6000C36
5600 CL34 bootable but totally unstable
5800 CL34 no boot

2x16GB G.Skill 6000C36
6000 CL32 2T ASUS profile is stable
6200 CL34 bootable but totally unstable

I could do all these easier on the Z690 Hero.


----------



## sblantipodi

shamino1978 said:


> try this bios
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0050.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


I'm sorry @shamino1978 but this BIOS is a total regression over an already painful situation.

I try to recap.
Asus Maximus Extreme Z690 with 12900K here,
4x16GB Corsair Dominator 5600MHz C36 (Samsung chip)

With 0811 BIOS I can do 4.8GHz on RAM using
1.25V SA, 1.35V VDD/VDDQ, 1.25V MC
but I have some random errors during test, for this reason I'm using

4.4GHz with
1.10V SA, 1.25V VDD/VDDQ, 1.20V MC
for maximum stability

with default settings I have errors during testing even at 4.4GHz.

With the latest BETA 0050 BIOS it's a complete regression.
I tried all the above settings but I can't boot over 4.0GHz.

Even when "load optimize defaults" sometimes it hangs with the "Detect Memory" screen...










With 0050 BIOS there is no way to boot above 4.0GHz and even 4.0GHz gives me problems hanging at boot.

I reverted back to 0811 BIOS.
Hope that you'll find a solution to this situation.
On ROG forums and other forums there are a lot of users with Extreme motherboards having problems with 4 sticks.

Thank you for your work and for your support Shamino, we all appreciate your efforts here.


----------



## sblantipodi

owikh84 said:


> Z690 Extreme BIOS 0811.
> 0050 is even worse.
> 
> 4x16GB G.Skill 6000C36
> 5600 CL34 bootable but totally unstable
> 5800 CL34 no boot
> 
> 2x16GB G.Skill 6000C36
> 6000 CL32 2T ASUS profile is stable
> 6200 CL34 bootable but totally unstable
> 
> I could do all these easier on the Z690 Hero.


I agree that 0050 is much worse, can you post your 100% stable settings?
Are you stable at 5.4GHz or 5.2GHz? If yes at what settings? And what do you consider stable? Do you run a memtest or TM5 or something else for 2 hours at least?
Does your RAM kit uses Samsung memory?

Thank you!


----------



## owikh84

sblantipodi said:


> I agree that 0050 is much worse, can you post your 100% stable settings?
> Are you stable at 5.4GHz or 5.2GHz? If yes at what settings? And what do you consider stable? Do you run a memtest or TM5 or something else for 2 hours at least?
> Does your RAM kit uses Samsung memory?
> 
> Thank you!


*2x16GB* G.Skill 6000C36 Samsung.
TM5 stable with the 6000 CL32 ASUS profile (modified to 2T and reduced the MC to 1.25v).
As for *4x16GB*, I haven't tried anything lower than 5600 yet so no idea for time being.


----------



## pR1maL

12900K / APEX / 2x16gb F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RS / EKWB Velocity2

Built system and installed 0811. Moved my windows 11 installation directly over from my Z690 Strix D4.
Set XMP1 and 1T. Stable over multiple days/runs of Memtest, Cinebench r23, 3d Mark, Flight Sim 2020, and 4 hours of COD Vanguard.
P-cores "Sync by Core Usage" ranging from all cores @ 50, to 53 single core. 
38 Ring bus.
Default E-Cores.
Haven't tried tweaking anything else yet, but I'm very optimistic that I can squeeze a lot more out of the memory and a little more out of the cpu. 
The 12900k's SP is 77, but it doesn't seem to mind.

The only annoyance is that Armory Crate has trouble detecting my dram rgb, even with optimized bios defaults. Asus software is SO bad.

When I switched from the z690 Strix D4 to the Apex, I switched from an NZXT Z73 AIO to the EKWB block, D5 Pump, and 360mm PE radiator. 
This custom loop destroys the Z73. Temps are around 10c cooler at load, the cpu never even thinks about thermal throttling.


----------



## Silent Scone

Hello,

Some 6800 testing.

Per C 54/53/52
Adaptive 1.37v
Cache 40
E Core 41 Sync

IMCVVD 1.33
SA 0.98
VDD 1.48
VDDQ 1.48
TX VDDQ 1.52

6800 C38-39-39-58 2T


----------



## Tigra456

Technodox said:


> Could just need a new BIOS update from Asus. I'm sure GSkill tested and binned the RAM.


After I had contact with the Gskill Support…the more VDD / VDDQ I need with my Strix 690-F and 6000 C36..it must be something with the bios / board….


The worst case would be to delete the 6000 c36 from the QVL List…

So maybe @shamino1978 and his team will find a solution to fix….?


----------



## asdkj1740

Tigra456 said:


> After I had contact with the Gskill Support…the more VDD / VDDQ I need with my Strix 690-F and 6000 C36..it must be something with the bios / board….
> 
> 
> The worst case would be to delete the 6000 c36 from the QVL List…
> 
> So maybe @shamino1978 and his team will find a solution to fix….?


i wonder when would gskill release spd flash to update the current sticks.


----------



## WaXmAn

morph. said:


> did u really buy an apex board for xmp ram?


Thanks....I had a Hero. But that was recalled, and I got a choice to get an Apex and got it. Starting from the QVL settings is what I have always done and moved the settings from there. Thanks for the wasted response.


----------



## Tigra456

asdkj1740 said:


> i wonder when would gskill release spd flash to update the current sticks.


SPD Flash ?
What’s that ?


----------



## criznit

The XMP issue is 100% the Asus bios. The same ram that I had issues with in my Hero works perfectly in my Unify-x


----------



## darth_meh

morph. said:


> did u really buy an apex board for xmp ram?


Can an Apex really not run memory at XMP speeds? Seems like it should be able to run XMP at a minimum.


----------



## sblantipodi

criznit said:


> The XMP issue is 100% the Asus bios. The same ram that I had issues with in my Hero works perfectly in my Unify-x


I feel that my mobo have nearly no quality assurance.
they tested 2 sticks of ram and hoped that 4 works xD

I only hope that these problems will be fixed, I'm waiting because I love Asus boards, my first Asus boards was an Asus CUSL2 on a Pentium III CPU.

I hope that nothing is changed in Asus and that I can still trust them as a company.
I have full trust of Shamino that is a very good guy, I'm absolutely not complaining about him,
but I feel that Asus lacks some quality assurance. You can't sell a mobo in this state IMHO, it's simply not "finished".


----------



## Martin778

I don't understand something, with the latest beta BIOS my AI OC is crashing like crazy and I "think" that's because of the E-Cores OC (4.1 is a bit much, me thinks).
I thought Windows was supposed to leave E-Cores alone when we're gaming? Yet in Forza Horizon 5 I see load on (mostly) 4-Pcores and consistent (not max but still) load on all E-cores.








Something must be borked in the latest beta bios for the Apex, I can't use AI OC for P-Cores only anymore...otherwise it disables AI OC all together.


----------



## newls1

is 901 still the latest bios for the Strix Gaming D4 board? thanks


----------



## bscool

newls1 said:


> is 901 still the latest bios for the Strix Gaming D4 board? thanks


As far as I know. It the best of them all for me on DR b die.


----------



## j o e

pR1maL said:


> 12900K / APEX / 2x16gb F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RS / EKWB Velocity2
> 
> Built system and installed 0811. Moved my windows 11 installation directly over from my Z690 Strix D4.
> Set XMP1 and 1T. Stable over multiple days/runs of Memtest, Cinebench r23, 3d Mark, Flight Sim 2020, and 4 hours of COD Vanguard.
> P-cores "Sync by Core Usage" ranging from all cores @ 50, to 53 single core.
> 38 Ring bus.
> Default E-Cores.
> Haven't tried tweaking anything else yet, but I'm very optimistic that I can squeeze a lot more out of the memory and a little more out of the cpu.
> The 12900k's SP is 77, but it doesn't seem to mind.
> 
> The only annoyance is that Armory Crate has trouble detecting my dram rgb, even with optimized bios defaults. Asus software is SO bad.
> 
> When I switched from the z690 Strix D4 to the Apex, I switched from an NZXT Z73 AIO to the EKWB block, D5 Pump, and 360mm PE radiator.
> This custom loop destroys the Z73. Temps are around 10c cooler at load, the cpu never even thinks about thermal throttling.


For the ram not being detected In the BIOS, check to see if SPD WRITE is enabled. It needs to be so the software can access it.


----------



## Bladed

bscool said:


> As far as I know. It the best of them all for me on DR b die.


Are you running 2 or 4 sticks? 901 is the only bios I haven't tried yet, but I can't even get 4x16GB 3200Mhz stable (ram is 3600Mhz CL 14-14-14-34)


----------



## bscool

Bladed said:


> Are you running 2 or 4 sticks? 901 is the only bios I haven't tried yet, but I can't even get 4x16GB 3200Mhz stable (ram is 3600Mhz CL 14-14-14-34)


Currently running 2x16. I tested 4x16 on bios 812, didnt test on 901 but should be good also. 812 and 901 are similar for me on 2x16

link to 4x16 test I did









[Official] Intel Z690 / Z790 DDR4 Daily Memory Overclock


do you guys expect MSI to fix their DR wall?




www.overclock.net


----------



## morph.

WaXmAn said:


> Thanks....I had a Hero. But that was recalled, and I got a choice to get an Apex and got it. Starting from the QVL settings is what I have always done and moved the settings from there. Thanks for the wasted response.





darth_meh said:


> Can an Apex really not run memory at XMP speeds? Seems like it should be able to run XMP at a minimum.


Nah wasn't my point, Apex is the XOC board for Asus most people get it to do manual ram overclocking and ln2 overclocking... Yes, there would be a few that do get apex not to do that but I guess it's a rare combo especially with the participants in this forum. Manually plugging in the primary, secondary and tertiaries isn't too difficult to do if it's not in QVL and just play with voltages first to see what gets stable.

DDR5 has only been out for like 2 months people need to not expect it to be as proficient as ddr4 support and compatibility right out the gates especially if they are getting 6000+ speed dimms as those things are unicorns. There are a huge amount of memory manufacturers trying to get into the QVL list of DDR5 at the moment. IMHO the 6-month mark is when there may be more maturity for bios's support and qvl especially since we are going over the christmas/ny/chinese ny and easter holiday periods.


----------



## pR1maL

j o e said:


> For the ram not being detected In the BIOS, check to see if SPD WRITE is enabled. It needs to be so the software can access it.


Just to clarify, the memory itself doesn't have any problems being detected. Armory Crate just has issues with detecting the ram's RGB. To get Armory Crate to detect the RGB, I had to install "G.Skill Trident Z Lighting Control". Then I rescan RGB headers in Armory Crate, and it detects them. Google search reveals issues with " ENE-RGB-HAL drivers". Other's report the issue occurring when Call of Duty Vanguard is installed. I do have Vanguard installed. That might indicate a drm conflict. 

Then again, I did port my windows 11 install over from the Strix Z690 D4 to the 690 Apex. I usually reinstall the OS, but didn't have a lot of spare time over the holidays.

Thanks for your reply!


----------



## safedisk

newls1 said:


> is 901 still the latest bios for the Strix Gaming D4 board? thanks


ASUS Z690 Series D4 motherboard Last Bios Update

1. Update microcode C-0 Stepping 0x018 ver
2. Improve system performance

ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4 BETA BIOS 1001

ASUS PRIME Z690-P D4 BETA BIOS 1004

ASUS PRIME Z690-P WIFI D4 BETA BIOS 1004

ASUS PRIME Z690M-PLUS D4 BETA BIOS 1004

TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS D4 BETA BIOS 1001

TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS WIFI D4 BETA BIOS 1001


----------



## newls1

any info on what changed? And whats this microcode 12 i read about? Im on 0812bios, is this using an older microcode compared to 0901 and this one listed above? What does a newer microcode bring to the table....?


----------



## riximFPS

newls1 said:


> any info on what changed? And whats this microcode 12 i read about? Im on 0812bios, is this using an older microcode compared to 0901 and this one listed above? What does a newer microcode bring to the table....?


The microcode has something to do with AVX 512. Intel wants to disable AVX 512 support with newer microcode.... so it would be better to stick with a BIOS version that contains the old microcode


----------



## safedisk

newls1 said:


> any info on what changed? And whats this microcode 12 i read about? Im on 0812bios, is this using an older microcode compared to 0901 and this one listed above? What does a newer microcode bring to the table....?


Update microcode C-0 Stepping 0x018 ver


----------



## newls1

riximFPS said:


> The microcode has something to do with AVX 512. Intel wants to disable AVX 512 support with newer microcode.... so it would be better to stick with a BIOS version that contains the old microcode


i dont think i have a use for avx512 as i dont disable my e-cores..


----------



## ggwwp3090

shamino1978 said:


> attempts to improve xmp , fixed a core ranking / core vid reading bug.
> vmaxstress option name changed for future function
> DC LL tracked to vrm LL at auto
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-FORMULA-ASUS-0811.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-GLACIAL-ASUS-0811.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0811.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0811.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-ASUS-0811.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-E-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0811.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-I-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0811.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0811.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0812.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-G-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0811.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-F-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0811.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-WIFI-ASUS-0811.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-ASUS-0811.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ProArt-Z690-CREATOR-WIFI-ASUS-0811.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PRIME-Z690-A-ASUS-0811.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> special test bios for apex:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0021.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


Hi,can you please add sly support for test my nex z690 rog maximus extreme and x2 3090 ?i ready to pay for you.


----------



## satinghostrider

I believe Microcode 15 still has AVX-512 support.
0046 for Apex has Microcode 18 which dumped AVX-512 support. So I think based on the above, Microcode 18 onwards disables AVX-512 indefinitely like a nail through a coffin.


----------



## bscool

newls1 said:


> i dont think i have a use for avx512 as i dont disable my e-cores..


I got it installed, I am curious to see if there is any difference in mem oc or cpu oc or voltages. Can rollback to older bios if it is worse. I dont use avx512 either.


----------



## Falkentyne

riximFPS said:


> The microcode has something to do with AVX 512. Intel wants to disable AVX 512 support with newer microcode.... so it would be better to stick with a BIOS version that contains the old microcode


I'll have a guide posted on how to patch AVX512 back in with the older microcode (this will also work for 12900 Keep Spending Edition) but atm I'm still not feeling well enough atm, but I'll have it soon.


----------



## newls1

bscool said:


> I got it installed, I am curious to see if there is any difference in mem oc or cpu oc or voltages. Can rollback to older bios if it is worse. I dont use avx512 either.


waiting for your update


----------



## owikh84

sblantipodi said:


> I agree that 0050 is much worse, can you post your 100% stable settings?
> Are you stable at 5.4GHz or 5.2GHz? If yes at what settings? And what do you consider stable? Do you run a memtest or TM5 or something else for 2 hours at least?
> Does your RAM kit uses Samsung memory?
> 
> Thank you!


Just to update you that 4x16GB 5400 CL32 is bootable but unstable on the Z690 Extreme BIOS 0811. It was easy on the Hero though, in fact the below settings were all stable on the Hero (except for 4x16GB 5800 CL34):

*4x16GB G.Skill 6000C36*
5400 CL32 bootable but totally unstable
5600 CL34 bootable but totally unstable
5800 CL34 no boot

*2x16GB G.Skill 6000C36*
6000 CL32 2T ASUS profile is stable
6200 CL34 bootable but totally unstable


----------



## bscool

newls1 said:


> waiting for your update


z690 Strix A d4 bios 1001

Did a quick mem oc and aida64 and y cruncher.

One change I notice is cache use to go up to 47 for me if I left it on auto when manually setting P and E cores.

Now cache will stay down at 3600 all the time if left on auto.

For screenshots CPU OC is AI OC for CPU all voltages on auto

1.35 io(looks like io need to be set manually now as default is lower and will not boot on auto like 812 and 901)

1.35sa

1.58v dram

From what I can tell not much difference from bios 901 other than microcode(but I did minimal performance testing). I doubt this 4133c14 is memtest stable.

In the past I ended up at 4133c15-15-15

I would say stay on 901 unless you like to play with new bioses or have some compatibility issues on your current Strix d4 setup.

Edit added Karhu 4133c15

4133c14 errored.


----------



## sblantipodi

owikh84 said:


> Just to update you that 4x16GB 5400 CL32 is bootable but unstable on the Z690 Extreme BIOS 0811. It was easy on the Hero though, in fact the below settings were all stable on the Hero (except for 4x16GB 5800 CL34):
> 
> *4x16GB G.Skill 6000C36*
> 5400 CL32 bootable but totally unstable
> 5600 CL34 bootable but totally unstable
> 5800 CL34 no boot
> 
> *2x16GB G.Skill 6000C36*
> 6000 CL32 2T ASUS profile is stable
> 6200 CL34 bootable but totally unstable


Same here, my brother's Hero motherboard is much more stable than my Extreme with the same memory sticks with a CPU with much lower SP points...


----------



## Alberto_It

sblantipodi said:


> Same here, my brother's Hero motherboard is much more stable than my Extreme with the same memory sticks with a CPU with much lower SP points...


Anche se non ti conosco, accetti un consiglio di chi in passato ha attraversato la tua stessa situazione? Il PC deve essere un piacere, non una frustrazione. Quindi io al tempo dopo settimane di frustrazioni e porchi ho venduto il vendibile e mi sono preso mb, ram e CPU le più collaudate e stabili . Poi ovviamente non sono affari miei 😊


----------



## sblantipodi

Alberto_It said:


> Anche se non ti conosco, accetti un consiglio di chi in passato ha attraversato la tua stessa situazione? Il PC deve essere un piacere, non una frustrazione. Quindi io al tempo dopo settimane di frustrazioni e porchi ho venduto il vendibile e mi sono preso mb, ram e CPU le più collaudate e stabili . Poi ovviamente non sono affari miei 😊


I'm just waiting a bit before doing what you said 
I'm still hoping that Asus can do something to improve one of the most expensive motherboard in his lineup. I'll wait a bit more before giving up.


----------



## Silent Scone

sblantipodi said:


> Same here, my brother's Hero motherboard is much more stable than my Extreme with the same memory sticks with a CPU with much lower SP points...


Hello,

Not that you usually heed the advice given but for clarification for anyone else reading, the SP rating is stacked by the (predefined) V/F curve in order to both inform the user and create a prediction of potential core clocks. It has no direct bearing on the strength of the CPU's IMC.


----------



## grifers

Someone with 12700k, Z690 TUF gaming and the new 0811 bios can confirm the around 810 points in cpu-z with the stock CPU? and how about the overclock on the memories? I'm still with BIOS 0003 which is the best.


----------



## LionAlonso

bscool said:


> z690 Strix A d4 bios 1001
> 
> Did a quick mem oc and aida64 and y cruncher.
> 
> One change I notice is cache use to go up to 47 for me if I left it on auto when manually setting P and E cores.
> 
> Now cache will stay down at 3600 all the time if left on auto.
> 
> For screenshots CPU OC is AI OC for CPU all voltages on auto
> 
> 1.35 io(looks like io need to be set manually now as default is lower and will not boot on auto like 812 and 901)
> 
> 1.35sa
> 
> 1.58v dram
> 
> From what I can tell not much difference from bios 901 other than microcode(but I did minimal performance testing). I doubt this 4133c14 is memtest stable.
> 
> In the past I ended up at 4133c15-15-15
> 
> I would say stay on 901 unless you like to play with new bioses or have some compatibility issues on your current Strix d4 setup.
> 
> Edit added Karhu 4133c15
> 
> 4133c14 errored.


Anyone can confirm also that the cache is always at 3600 with that new Bios?


----------



## edkieferlp

LionAlonso said:


> Anyone can confirm also that the cache is always at 3600 with that new Bios?


I thought the ring should not go above the E core frequency.


----------



## LionAlonso

edkieferlp said:


> I thought the ring should not go above the lowest E core frequency.


For me even at stock with e cores on hw info has a max of 4,7 Ghz.


----------



## Wolferin

safedisk said:


> ASUS Z690 Series D4 motherboard Last Bios Update
> 
> 1. Update microcode C-0 Stepping 0x018 ver
> 2. Improve system performance
> 
> ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4 BETA BIOS 1001
> 
> ASUS PRIME Z690-P D4 BETA BIOS 1004
> 
> ASUS PRIME Z690-P WIFI D4 BETA BIOS 1004
> 
> ASUS PRIME Z690M-PLUS D4 BETA BIOS 1004
> 
> TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS D4 BETA BIOS 1001
> 
> TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS WIFI D4 BETA BIOS 1001


1001 for Strix Z690-A have the Primary Display selection bug, in Offizial Version 0901 everything is fine, i am talking about that:




__





We'll be back.






rog.asus.com


----------



## edkieferlp

LionAlonso said:


> For me even at stock with e cores on hw info has a max of 4,7 Ghz.


That is odd, for me its 3600 same as E cores on my 12600k, I have only OC mem to [email protected] all CPU clocks are auto, no per core OC yet.
Edit: I am still on 0707 bios.


----------



## j o e

I have a question, in the ai menu in bios it lists your preferred cores in order, but when you go to change per core values some codes have asterisks next to them, they’re not the same cores listed in the ai menu


----------



## Arni90

sblantipodi said:


> I'm just waiting a bit before doing what you said
> I'm still hoping that Asus can do something to improve one of the most expensive motherboard in his lineup. I'll wait a bit more before giving up.


Here's a suggestion that fixed some random errors I was having with Samsung DDR4 DDR5 on my Z690 Apex:
tREFIx9 to 20

As far as I can understand, tREFIx9 controls refresh interval extensions, postponing tREFI. I believe there's some kind of bug with per-bank refresh (tRFCpb) skipping refresh too many times on one or more banks, as locking down tREFIx9 seems to alleviate the issue.
My issue was that the PC would boot just fine, but Karhu would show errors after 2-15 minutes, regardless of timings I set.
Lowering tREFIx9 this low is essentially underclocking, but it seems to have improved stability for me at least.


----------



## LionAlonso

Arni90 said:


> Here's a suggestion that fixed some random errors I was having with Samsung DDR4 on my Z690 Apex:
> tREFIx9 to 20
> 
> As far as I can understand, tREFIx9 controls refresh interval extensions, postponing tREFI. I believe there's some kind of bug with per-bank refresh (tRFCpb) skipping refresh too many times on one or more banks, as locking down tREFIx9 seems to alleviate the issue.
> My issue was that the PC would boot just fine, but Karhu would show errors after 2-15 minutes, regardless of timings I set.
> Lowering tREFIx9 this low is essentially underclocking, but it seems to have improved stability for me at least.


I guess u mean Samsung DDR5


----------



## Tradition

edkieferlp said:


> That is odd, for me its 3600 same as E cores on my 12600k, I have only OC mem to [email protected] all CPU clocks are auto, no per core OC yet.





LionAlonso said:


> For me even at stock with e cores on hw info has a max of 4,7 Ghz.


 it show 4.7 max but it wont do that because of the e-cores it will only go to 3600 you can force to 4200 4300 maybe with ecores enabled and with them disabled from 4.8 to 5.0 usualy


----------



## LionAlonso

Tradition said:


> it show 4.7 max but it wont do that because of the e-cores it will only go to 3600 you can force to 4200 4300 maybe with ecores enabled and with them disabled from 4.8 to 5.0 usualy


You can force that with adaptative voltage? Or only static one? How do you test cache stability?


----------



## X909

Uncore boosts to 4700 also with 1001 BIOS on TUF. Naturally very rare because all e cores need to be parked. To basically 3600 at 95% of the time.


----------



## LionAlonso

X909 said:


> Uncore boosts to 4700 also with 1001 BIOS on TUF. Naturally very rare because all e cores need to be parked. To basically 3600 at 95% of the time.


For me new bios with same settings as before errors in tm5.
DR Bdie 4100 cl16.
Hope they solve it before release.
Im gonna revert to 0807.


----------



## Alberto_It

Hi, someone know when will be available the new bios for the Z690 Apex with Intel Enhanced Thermal Velocity Boost option for 12900KS processor? I don't tag Shamino otherwise you tell me that I do spamming


----------



## edkieferlp

Tradition said:


> it show 4.7 max but it wont do that because of the e-cores it will only go to 3600 you can force to 4200 4300 maybe with ecores enabled and with them disabled from 4.8 to 5.0 usualy


You are correct it does show 4.5 max but in the current column of HWinfo64, I never see that value.


----------



## newls1

@bscool does bios 0812 and 0901 use the same micro code?


----------



## arrow0309

Falkentyne said:


> I'll have a guide posted on how to patch AVX512 back in with the older microcode (this will also work for 12900 Keep Spending Edition) but atm I'm still not feeling well enough atm, but I'll have it soon.


Hi, sorry for quoting you from another forum:

_"Below are some loadlines suggestions for the 12900K”

LLC#1
DC_LL = 1.7
AC_LL = 0.60

LLC#2
DC_LL = 1.46
AC_LL = 0.50

LLC#3
DC_LL 1.1
AC_LL 0.35

*LLC#4*_
*DC_LL 0.98*
_*AC_LL 0.30*

These are the values that we will be recommending for end users when using the “Adaptive Voltage” or specific core adaptive voltage settings."_

Can I use the LLC4 settings for my 12700KF as well (adaptive, zero offset, 53 - 51)?
In fact I'm starting using them since today


----------



## Tradition

didnt see any improvement on the new bios provably just a micro code update 
still getting 3900 cl15 on micron e-die


----------



## MaghX

I cannot boot strix-a CR1 regardless of the frequency so reverting to 0812


----------



## LionAlonso

MaghX said:


> I cannot boot strix-a CR1 regardless of the frequency so reverting to 0812


Yeah.
Ram seem to have taken a hit with this new bios


----------



## Nizzen

Alberto_It said:


> Hi, someone know when will be available the new bios for the Z690 Apex with Intel Enhanced Thermal Velocity Boost option for 12900KS processor? I don't tag Shamino otherwise you tell me that I do spamming


You will know when it's here 

"The _release date_ of the i9-_12900KS_ is currently unknown"


----------



## bscool

newls1 said:


> @bscool does bios 0812 and 0901 use the same micro code?


Yeah from what I remember both at mc 12.


----------



## newls1

flashed from 0812 to 0901 and loaded my saved profile, rebooted.... went back into bios to confirm OC settings applied, saved/exited booted into windows and reran some benchies like cpuz and aida64 M/R/C/L tests and all pretty much the same except on AIDA64 my copy is about 1000 points lower (give or take) but my Latency is down 2ns to 43! So thats nice. everything else is status quo for me... im not doing anything to crazy with my ram speeds, and my OC certainly isnt benchmark stable, but rather game stable for what I play, so all seems ok over here. Thanks bscool for your input


----------



## wkamil

arrow0309 said:


> Hi, sorry for quoting you from another forum:
> 
> _"Below are some loadlines suggestions for the 12900K”
> 
> LLC#1
> DC_LL = 1.7
> AC_LL = 0.60
> 
> LLC#2
> DC_LL = 1.46
> AC_LL = 0.50
> 
> LLC#3
> DC_LL 1.1
> AC_LL 0.35
> 
> *LLC#4*_
> *DC_LL 0.98*
> _*AC_LL 0.30*
> 
> These are the values that we will be recommending for end users when using the “Adaptive Voltage” or specific core adaptive voltage settings."_
> 
> Can I use the LLC4 settings for my 12700KF as well (adaptive, zero offset, 53 - 51)?
> In fact I'm starting using them since today


0.30? Here ASUS MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME & i9-12900K GUIDE - Load... is 0.20


----------



## sippo

What do you think about changing maximus board to msi unify-x ? (mainly ram overclock)
Memory - teamgroup 6400


----------



## sblantipodi

sippo said:


> What do you think about changing maximus board to msi unify-x ? (mainly ram overclock)
> Memory - teamgroup 6400


Asus is certainly having hard time with RAM...


----------



## Nizzen

sippo said:


> What do you think about changing maximus board to msi unify-x ? (mainly ram overclock)
> Memory - teamgroup 6400


Can't be worse with Team 6400 😇


----------



## arrow0309

wkamil said:


> 0.30? Here ASUS MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME & i9-12900K GUIDE - Load... is 0.20


Hmmmmm, I wonder which one would work better for our 12700K, 0.20 or 0.30


----------



## wkamil

arrow0309 said:


> Hmmmmm, I wonder which one would work better for our 12700K, 0.20 or 0.30


What's yours CPU ratio and CPU voltage settings right now?


----------



## arrow0309

wkamil said:


> What's yours CPU ratio and CPU voltage settings right now?


Starting from this morning 53-53-52-52-51-51-51-51, ring 42 e cores 39 (after tried the AI Optimised 54-51 and bsoded a couple of times in low load) adaptive no offset, LLC4, DC_LL 0.98 AC_LL 0.30, 1.41 vcore max and 1.32 full load Realbench.
Previous I was using 5.1 all cores LLC5 adaptive negative offset 10mv auto LL.
Noticing that no games is scaling higher than 5.1 like never anyway.


----------



## pat-Geek

Hello everyone and Happy New Year to you and your beloved ones.

When can we expect a public SLI key Bios for Z690 HERO users?

Best regards.


----------



## Nizzen

pat-Geek said:


> Hello everyone and Happy New Year to you and your beloved ones.
> 
> When can we expect a public SLI key Bios for Z690 HERO users?
> 
> Best regards.


Only Apex and Extreme, when they are given by nVidia. Until then, only Apex has one testbios with sli support.


----------



## uplink

Hey there guys,

was testing multiple DDR5 kits on Z690 Extreme.

Now I'm on F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK and when I was running *0803,* I've had to pump up the *VDD* and *VDDQ* [info acquired on *ROG forums* from *Shamino* and *Hopper64*] to *1.35* and *1.375* respectively. *Vanilla XMP* runs on *1.3 both*.

































And it worked!

Now I updated to *0811*, and now XMP I. [and maybe even II.] work with vanilla settings! Well, I must not jinx it, but I've got one full pass successfull. *No increase* in *VDD* and *VDDQ* *required*.

Thanks for the great job guys! I'm gonna get another kit today ["tomorrow"] so I'm gonna test them both running side by side how deep does the rabbit hole go.


----------



## pat-Geek

Nizzen said:


> Only Apex and Extreme, when they are given by nVidia. Until then, only Apex has one testbios with sli support.


Hopefully this doesn't last forever. I'm pretty tired of NVidia proprietary stuff. SLI should natively work on any motherboard with dual x8 PCIe slots without the need of a license key. Also there were no issues for Asus to get SLI working on Z490/Z590 and now suddenly they4re taking ages to get the same feature enabled on even more expensive Z690 motherboards.


----------



## Nizzen

pat-Geek said:


> Hopefully this doesn't last forever. I'm pretty tired of NVidia proprietary stuff. SLI should natively work on any motherboard with dual x8 PCIe slots without the need of a license key. Also there were no issues for Asus to get SLI working on Z490/Z590 and now suddenly they talking ages to get the same feature enabled on even more expensive Z690 motherboards.


Blame nVidia.... No other brand has SLI for z690 either...

Buy Apex, problem solved for now


----------



## pat-Geek

Nizzen said:


> Blame nVidia.... No other brand has SLI for z690 either...
> 
> Buy Apex, problem solved for now


I prefer the Hero over the Apex. I use a discrete sound card in the third PCIe slot. I will simply stop buying NVidia hardware from now on and get out of their closed ecosystem. I'll be moving over to Intel ARC.


----------



## Nizzen

pat-Geek said:


> I prefer the Hero over the Apex. I use a discrete sound card in the third PCIe slot. I will simply stop buying NVidia hardware from now on and get out of their closed ecosystem. I'll be moving over to Intel ARC.


Usb dac/amp is the way.... Problem solved 
Using Shiit Jotunheim here and Focal Elear...


----------



## pat-Geek

Nizzen said:


> Usb dac/amp is the way.... Problem solved
> Using Shiit Jotunheim here and Focal Elear...


I use both the headphones mode and 5.1 speakers mode of my Sound Blaster ZxR, so I still need a sound card.


----------



## owikh84

First complete TM5 with the Z690 Extreme.😆
Easy 6000 CL32 with that bottommost ASUS profile, adjusted to 2T and MC reduced to 1.275v. Exactly same settings I used on the Hero previously.

12900K SP88 - Stock
Maximus Z690 Extreme | BIOS 0811
G.Skill F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK
2x16GB DDR5-6000 32-35-35-52-2T @ VDD/VDDQ/TX VDDQ 1.435v | SA 0.9v | MC 1.275v










12900K SP88 (Big SP100/ Small SP65) - P/E/Ring: 5.2/4.1/4.3GHz
Maximus Z690 Extreme | BIOS 0811
G.Skill F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK
2x16GB DDR5-6000 32-35-35-52-2T @ VDD/VDDQ/TX VDDQ 1.435v | SA 0.9v | MC 1.275v
EK-Velocity2 + RX360 push pull fans (3.8C better than Velocity1 + LGA1700)
Ambient: 28C


----------



## satinghostrider

owikh84 said:


> First complete TM5 with the Z690 Extreme.😆
> Easy 6000 CL32 with that bottommost ASUS profile, adjusted to 2T and MC reduced to 1.275v. Exactly same settings I used on the Hero previously.
> 
> 12900K SP88 - Stock
> Maximus Z690 Extreme | BIOS 0811
> G.Skill F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK
> 2x16GB DDR5-6000 32-35-35-52-2T @ VDD/VDDQ/TX VDDQ 1.435v | SA 0.9v | MC 1.275v
> View attachment 2541511
> 
> 
> 
> 12900K SP88 (Big SP100/ Small SP65) - P 5/E/Ring: 5.2/4.1/4.3GHz
> Maximus Z690 Extreme | BIOS 0811
> G.Skill F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK
> 2x16GB DDR5-6000 32-35-35-52-2T @ VDD/VDDQ/TX VDDQ 1.435v | SA 0.9v | MC 1.275v
> EK-Velocity2 + RX360 push pull fans (3.8C better than Velocity1 + LGA1700)
> Ambient: 28C
> View attachment 2541513


Great job! You should try dropping MC to 1.25V, VDD/VDDQ/TX to 1.4V. Given I'm running 6000C32 1T, you should be able to drop the voltages lower. I'm stable on TestMem 5 1usmus so far and gamed 4 hours last night with 0 crashes. And I'm only on the 5600C36 kit.


----------



## owikh84

satinghostrider said:


> Great job! You should try dropping MC to 1.25V, VDD/VDDQ/TX to 1.4V. Given I'm running 6000C32 1T, you should be able to drop the voltages lower. I'm stable on TestMem 5 1usmus so far and gamed 4 hours last night with 0 crashes. And I'm only on the 5600C36 kit.


Good suggestion. Previous I actually did try VDD/VDDQ/TX 1.40V and MC 1.25V on the Hero but unfortunately did not manage to stabilize it (TM5 error). Will definitely give it a try on this Extreme.

Update: 
VDD/VDDQ/TX 1.40V: not stable
MC 1.25V: not stable
ODT 40/240/240/48/48: not stable


----------



## satinghostrider

owikh84 said:


> Good suggestion. Previous I actually did try VDD/VDDQ/TX 1.40V and MC 1.25V on the Hero but it unfortunately did not manage to stabilize it (TM5 error). Will definitely give it a try on this Extreme.


Also used ODT 40/240/240/48/48. For both channels. See if it helps you stabilise.


----------



## rissler84

12900k and Asus rog strix a gaming d4

I updated from 0901 to 1001 and it completely recalculated my CPU and which cores is best for OC.
Best to worst, it also says that the cores needs much more voltage.
Bios 0901 SP84 - PC 91 - EC 71 - 7,5,2,3,0,1,6,4
Bios 1001 SP83 - PC 90 - EC 70 - 6,7,4,5,2,3,0,1

Then I went back to 0901 and now my CPU is again SP84 but now PC94 and EC66.
Best cores is back to the original order 7,5,2,3,0,1,6,4.

I then went back to 1001 it same result, really strange.


----------



## newls1

rissler84 said:


> 12900k and Asus rog strix a gaming d4
> 
> I updated from 0901 to 1001 and it completely recalculated my CPU and which cores is best for OC.
> Best to worst, it also says that the cores needs much more voltage.
> Bios 0901 SP84 - PC 91 - EC 71 - 7,5,2,3,0,1,6,4
> Bios 1001 SP83 - PC 90 - EC 70 - 6,7,4,5,2,3,0,1
> 
> Then I went back to 0901 and now my CPU is again SP84 but now PC94 and EC66.
> Best cores is back to the original order 7,5,2,3,0,1,6,4.
> 
> I then went back to 1001 it same result, really strange.


that is very strange..... Im pretty much speechless!


----------



## wkamil

arrow0309 said:


> Starting from this morning 53-53-52-52-51-51-51-51, ring 42 e cores 39 (after tried the AI Optimised 54-51 and bsoded a couple of times in low load) adaptive no offset, LLC4, DC_LL 0.98 AC_LL 0.30, 1.41 vcore max and 1.32 full load Realbench.
> Previous I was using 5.1 all cores LLC5 adaptive negative offset 10mv auto LL.
> Noticing that no games is scaling higher than 5.1 like never anyway.


You are on alder lake now? Change your sig 
Could you check in HWiNFO what is yours CPU Power readings on full load? Im curious, 'cos with my settings (all P cores 4.9, E cores 4.0, Ring 4.0, adaptive voltage with -0.065 offset, LLC 4, DC_LL 0.98, AC_LL 0.2) CPU Power in HWiNFO is definitely off and readings is higher then it should be (e.g. max VRM Vcore power is 180W and max IA Cores power is 196W).


----------



## RobertoSampaio

rissler84 said:


> 12900k and Asus rog strix a gaming d4
> 
> I updated from 0901 to 1001 and it completely recalculated my CPU and which cores is best for OC.
> Best to worst, it also says that the cores needs much more voltage.
> Bios 0901 SP84 - PC 91 - EC 71 - 7,5,2,3,0,1,6,4
> Bios 1001 SP83 - PC 90 - EC 70 - 6,7,4,5,2,3,0,1
> 
> Then I went back to 0901 and now my CPU is again SP84 but now PC94 and EC66.
> Best cores is back to the original order 7,5,2,3,0,1,6,4.
> 
> I then went back to 1001 it same result, really strange.


The SP algo changed and now by core adaptive voltage it's working better.
I recommend you to use the new bios. 
As you can see, Intel preferred cores are not necessary the low voltage cores no matter the bios, but the Asus AI and prediction is more precisely now.


----------



## RobertoSampaio

wkamil said:


> You are on alder lake now? Change your sig
> Could you check in HWiNFO what is yours CPU Power readings on full load? Im curious, 'cos with my settings (all P cores 4.9, E cores 4.0, Ring 4.0, adaptive voltage with -0.065 offset, LLC 4, DC_LL 0.98, AC_LL 0.2) CPU Power in HWiNFO is definitely off and readings is higher then it should be (e.g. max VRM Vcore power is 180W and max IA Cores power is 196W).


Vcore match VID at full load?
The DC_LL for the LLC#4 can differ for one MB to another. Try to rise a bit the DC_LL, let's say 1.0 or 1.02 and test.
But keep in mind you will never have a perfect match value.


----------



## LionAlonso

rissler84 said:


> 12900k and Asus rog strix a gaming d4
> 
> I updated from 0901 to 1001 and it completely recalculated my CPU and which cores is best for OC.
> Best to worst, it also says that the cores needs much more voltage.
> Bios 0901 SP84 - PC 91 - EC 71 - 7,5,2,3,0,1,6,4
> Bios 1001 SP83 - PC 90 - EC 70 - 6,7,4,5,2,3,0,1
> 
> Then I went back to 0901 and now my CPU is again SP84 but now PC94 and EC66.
> Best cores is back to the original order 7,5,2,3,0,1,6,4.
> 
> I then went back to 1001 it same result, really strange.


For me on tuf my settings werent stable as before, tm5 gave errors at exact same settings.
I reverted.


----------



## wkamil

RobertoSampaio said:


> Vcore match VID at full load?
> The DC_LL for the LLC#4 can differ for one MB to another. Try to rise a bit the DC_LL, let's say 1.0 or 1.02 and test.
> But keep in mind you will never have a perfect match value.


Hi... my mistake. Readings was off, when i set LLC 4 but not with DC_LL 0.98, AC_LL 0.2. With DC_LL 0.98, AC_LL 0.2 VRM Vcore power match IA Cores power almost perfectly, 








but as You can see, VID and Vcore do not match at full load (at Blender benchmark). What should I change (should I? ) to match them?


----------



## sblantipodi

uplink said:


> Hey there guys,
> 
> was testing multiple DDR5 kits on Z690 Extreme.
> 
> Now I'm on F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK and when I was running *0803,* I've had to pump up the *VDD* and *VDDQ* [info acquired on *ROG forums* from *Shamino* and *Hopper64*] to *1.35* and *1.375* respectively. *Vanilla XMP* runs on *1.3 both*.
> 
> View attachment 2541500
> View attachment 2541499
> 
> 
> View attachment 2541497
> View attachment 2541498
> 
> 
> And it worked!
> 
> Now I updated to *0811*, and now XMP I. [and maybe even II.] work with vanilla settings! Well, I must not jinx it, but I've got one full pass successfull. *No increase* in *VDD* and *VDDQ* *required*.
> 
> Thanks for the great job guys! I'm gonna get another kit today ["tomorrow"] so I'm gonna test them both running side by side how deep does the rabbit hole go.


Yes, Asus tested 2 sticks but not 4 
I would not call it a great job


----------



## RobertoSampaio

wkamil said:


> Hi... my mistake. Readings was off, when i set LLC 4 but not with DC_LL 0.98, AC_LL 0.2. With DC_LL 0.98, AC_LL 0.2 VRM Vcore power match IA Cores power almost perfectly,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> but as You can see, VID and Vcore do not match at full load (at Blender benchmark). What should I change (should I? ) to match them?


You Will never have a perfect match...
I prefer to match VID=Vcore...
Try DC_LL 0.95 or 0.93 and test if VID and vcore become closer.... A difference of 0.01 to 0.02v is ok... For power a difference of 5 to 10W at full load is ok too. 
The problem is , let's say, you have vcore 1.17v and a VID of 1.25 at full load...
All CPU power calcs will be very wrong this way...


----------



## newls1

RobertoSampaio said:


> The SP algo changed and now by core adaptive voltage it's working better.
> I recommend you to use the new bios.
> As you can see, Intel preferred cores are not necessary the low voltage cores no matter the bios, but the Asus AI and prediction is more precisely now.


So you are recommending to in fact use the new 1001 bios?


----------



## LionAlonso

newls1 said:


> So you are recommending to in fact use the new 1001 bios?


If you use by core adptative maybe.
My recommendation is to avoid it.
I had tested A LOT my voltages and put them on edge 
With 807 no errors Tm5 at 1.29 Sa 1.3VDDQ and 4100Dram

With 1001 errors almost instant.


----------



## Jedi Mind Trick

Sorry for not going through the ~116 pages to see if anyone else asked about this, did a super quick search to see what it meant but couldn't find anything.

What does the Z690 Strix F's manual mean when it states "1 x PCIe 3.0 x16 slot (supports x4 mode or x4/x4 mode)"? It looks like it is electrically an x8 slot, but it only works at x4 (or x4/x4)?

I see that the Strix E's manual says something similar for the PCIe 4 slot ("1 x PCIe 4.0 x16 slot (supports x4 mode or x4/x4 mode for ROG HYPER M.2 CARD)"), but that slot looks like it is only an x4 slot electrically (same with the bottom PCIe 3.0 slot).

Just wondering if anyone has the Strix *F* and can see if the bottom slot will work as a PCIe 3.0 x8 slot (which would be cool as I could add in a 10gb NIC + nvme card down the road).

Weighing my options between the Strix F and a Prime A (which has 2 x4 slots and seems like it would let me use a 10gb NIC in one and put an nvme drive in the second)


----------



## wkamil

RobertoSampaio said:


> You Will never have a perfect match...
> I prefer to match VID=Vcore...
> Try DC_LL 0.95 or 0.93 and test if VID and vcore become closer.... A difference of 0.01 to 0.02v is ok... For power a difference of 5 to 10W at full load is ok too.
> The problem is , let's say, you have vcore 1.17v and a VID of 1.25 at full load...
> All CPU power calcs will be very wrong this way...


Hmmm, for me VID almost match Vcore under full load whet I set DC_LL 0.75. VID ~ 1.2v and Vcore ~ 1.208-1.217. Is it ok or smth is wrong with my settings?


----------



## LionAlonso

wkamil said:


> Hmmm, for me VID almost match Vcore under full load whet I set DC_LL 0.75. VID ~ 1.2v and Vcore ~ 1.208-1.217. Is it ok or smth is wrong with my settings?


Keep in mind tuf and strix doesnt have die sense voltage so no reason to match perfectly vcore and vid.
Vcore should be a bit higher than VID


----------



## rissler84

RobertoSampaio said:


> The SP algo changed and now by core adaptive voltage it's working better.
> I recommend you to use the new bios.
> As you can see, Intel preferred cores are not necessary the low voltage cores no matter the bios, but the Asus AI and prediction is more precisely now.


I also rolled back to 0901, the voltages where just all over the place, and it asking for way to much voltage, had to use a lot of undervolting at VF curve point 6, for it to hit what was actually required to be stable.
This was not needed with 0901.
I can see that all the cores needed more voltage than before, actually all is increased with +0.4 voltage in the bios.


----------



## bscool

rissler84 said:


> I also rolled back to 0901, the voltages where just all over the place, and it asking for way to much voltage, had to use a lot of undervolting at VF curve point 6, for it to hit what was actually required to be stable.
> This was not needed with 0901.
> I can see that all the cores needed more voltage than before, actually all is increased with +0.4 voltage in the bios.


I went back to bios 901 too. Maybe 1001 if better if someone want to spend the time retuning everything. But the little I tested it I still prefer 901.

I dont use adaptive votlage just static v core and static clocks. 

z690 Strix d4 DR b die


----------



## arrow0309

wkamil said:


> You are on alder lake now? Change your sig
> Could you check in HWiNFO what is yours CPU Power readings on full load? Im curious, 'cos with my settings (all P cores 4.9, E cores 4.0, Ring 4.0, adaptive voltage with -0.065 offset, LLC 4, DC_LL 0.98, AC_LL 0.2) CPU Power in HWiNFO is definitely off and readings is higher then it should be (e.g. max VRM Vcore power is 180W and max IA Cores power is 196W).


I've just updated my sig xD



wkamil said:


> Hi... my mistake. Readings was off, when i set LLC 4 but not with DC_LL 0.98, AC_LL 0.2. With DC_LL 0.98, AC_LL 0.2 VRM Vcore power match IA Cores power almost perfectly,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> but as You can see, VID and Vcore do not match at full load (at Blender benchmark). What should I change (should I? ) to match them?


OK so you managed to get through it.
About the creepy difference between the vcore and vid you're not alone mate
BTW:
Turned back to sync all cores / avx 5.1 since the "by core usage" was giving me zero gaming gain, the bloody boost freq didn't go up higher than 5.1 not for 0.5 sec (maybe once to 5.2) in hours of gaming (3 games tested) so imho it really sucks



RobertoSampaio said:


> You Will never have a perfect match...
> I prefer to match VID=Vcore...
> Try DC_LL 0.95 or 0.93 and test if VID and vcore become closer.... A difference of 0.01 to 0.02v is ok... For power a difference of 5 to 10W at full load is ok too.
> The problem is , let's say, you have vcore 1.17v and a VID of 1.25 at full load...
> All CPU power calcs will be very wrong this way...


What do you think in my case (LLC#4, adaptive + offset -0.010, XMP) with DC_LL 0.98 / AC_LL 0.30 I have in full load Realbench like VID 1.26-1.27v and vcore 1.33 and with DC_LL 0.95 / AC_LL 0.20 like VID 1.25 and vcore 1.30-1.31v



LionAlonso said:


> Keep in mind tuf and strix doesnt have die sense voltage so no reason to match perfectly vcore and vid.
> Vcore should be a bit higher than VID


Right, a bit higher like always, even in light load.
But not that much innit?


----------



## Stockman

WaXmAn said:


> Just got some Corsair CMT32GX5M2X6200C36, will these eventaully work on the Z690 APEX? The QVL list seems way out of date?


FWIW it's not on MSI QVL either, however XMP was plug-and-play on Z690 Unify-x.


----------



## Nizzen

Stockman said:


> FWIW it's not on MSI QVL either, however XMP was plug-and-play on Z690 Unify-x.


Show us some results on z690 Unify-x, so we can compare.


----------



## bastian

If anyone is in need of DDR5, give me a PM. I have a 2x16 Corsair Dominator RGB kit 5200 40-40-40-77.


----------



## Nizzen

bastian said:


> If anyone is in need of DDR5, give me a PM. I have a 2x16 Corsair Dominator RGB kit 5200 40-40-40-77.


Micron ♿


----------



## bastian

Nizzen said:


> Micron ♿


Yes, it is Micron. So I should have said desperate need


----------



## truehighroller1

@shamino1978 

The 1001 bios is a no go for me. I've been running 0901 just fine at 15-16-16-32 -2 gear 1 with my gskill ripjaw ddr4 4400mhz 17-18-18-38-1 2x 16gb 1.5v kit just fine on 0901. The only issue I notice on 0901 is that in order to go above 1.58v dram voltage I need to crank up the vddq past 1.35v then everything becomes unstable. On the 1001 bios I can't even get 4133 to boot gear 1. No matter the vddq or vscca voltage I pump into it up or down voltage wise. I tried everything for the last four hours and no go. 

I flashed the bios with defaults loaded etc. No go.


----------



## asdkj1740

Jedi Mind Trick said:


> Sorry for not going through the ~116 pages to see if anyone else asked about this, did a super quick search to see what it meant but couldn't find anything.
> 
> What does the Z690 Strix F's manual mean when it states "1 x PCIe 3.0 x16 slot (supports x4 mode or x4/x4 mode)"? It looks like it is electrically an x8 slot, but it only works at x4 (or x4/x4)?
> 
> I see that the Strix E's manual says something similar for the PCIe 4 slot ("1 x PCIe 4.0 x16 slot (supports x4 mode or x4/x4 mode for ROG HYPER M.2 CARD)"), but that slot looks like it is only an x4 slot electrically (same with the bottom PCIe 3.0 slot).
> 
> Just wondering if anyone has the Strix *F* and can see if the bottom slot will work as a PCIe 3.0 x8 slot (which would be cool as I could add in a 10gb NIC + nvme card down the road).
> 
> Weighing my options between the Strix F and a Prime A (which has 2 x4 slots and seems like it would let me use a 10gb NIC in one and put an nvme drive in the second)











Обзор материнской платы ASUS ROG STRIX Z690-E Gaming WiFi GreenTech_Reviews


Обзор и тестирование материнской платы ASUS ROG STRIX Z690-E Gaming WiFi




greentechreviews.ru




strix e has x8 wired in that slot too.
since intel chipset's pcie controllers are x4 each. it seems asus has put two pcie controllers (x4+x4) into that slot.
if you have the hyper m.2 card (strix e has it bundled but strix f has not) then two m.2 would be able to use on that slot.
i think that slot cant be used as x8 by one device like GPU (only x4 would be recognized), that's why asus states x4 or x4+x4(hyper m.2 card) only.


----------



## Agent-A01

truehighroller1 said:


> @shamino1978
> 
> The 1001 bios is a no go for me. I've been running 0901 just fine at 15-16-16-32 -2 gear 1 with my gskill ripjaw ddr4 4400mhz 17-18-18-38-1 2x 16gb 1.5v kit just fine on 0901. The only issue I notice on 0901 is that in order to go above 1.58v dram voltage I need to crank up the vddq past 1.35v then everything becomes unstable. On the 1001 bios I can't even get 4133 to boot gear 1. No matter the vddq or vscca voltage I pump into it up or down voltage wise. I tried everything for the last four hours and no go.
> 
> I flashed the bios with defaults loaded etc. No go.


Works fine for me. 4133 15-15-15-28 Gear 1


----------



## sblantipodi

@shamino1978 I noticed that after I installed the 0050 beta bios you gived me my VTx extension stopped working.
I tried reverting back to 0811 but the VTx extension does not work anymore. Always worked before.
I even formatted windows but VTx seems dead.

Have I broked my motherboard with thatB ios?
Can you fix it please?

That bios destroyed my PC since I can't use hyperv without VTx extension.


----------



## truehighroller1

Agent-A01 said:


> Works fine for me. 4133 15-15-15-28 Gear 1


What memory kit and post pictures of timings and voltages etc. please thanks.


----------



## LionAlonso

sblantipodi said:


> @shamino1978 I noticed that after I installed the 0050 beta bios you gived me my VTx extension stopped working.
> I tried reverting back to 0811 but the VTx extension does not work anymore. Always worked before.
> I even formatted windows but VTx seems dead.
> 
> Have I broked my motherboard with thatB ios?
> Can you fix it please?
> 
> That bios destroyed my PC since I can't use hyperv without VTx extension.


Its a beta bios.
You shouldnt have flashed it in an important pc


----------



## wkamil

arrow0309 said:


> I've just updated my sig xD
> 
> 
> OK so you managed to get through it.
> About the creepy difference between the vcore and vid you're not alone mate
> BTW:
> Turned back to sync all cores / avx 5.1 since the "by core usage" was giving me zero gaming gain, the bloody boost freq didn't go up higher than 5.1 not for 0.5 sec (maybe once to 5.2) in hours of gaming (3 games tested) so imho it really sucks
> 
> 
> 
> What do you think in my case (LLC#4, adaptive + offset -0.010, XMP) with DC_LL 0.98 / AC_LL 0.30 I have in full load Realbench like VID 1.26-1.27v and vcore 1.33 and with DC_LL 0.95 / AC_LL 0.20 like VID 1.25 and vcore 1.30-1.31v
> 
> 
> 
> Right, a bit higher like always, even in light load.
> But not that much innit?


So you need at last 1.3v for 5.1 all cores full load? Bit high... 🙂 What's yours CPU SP?


----------



## sblantipodi

sblantipodi said:


> @shamino1978 I noticed that after I installed the 0050 beta bios you gived me my VTx extension stopped working.
> I tried reverting back to 0811 but the VTx extension does not work anymore. Always worked before.
> I even formatted windows but VTx seems dead.
> 
> Have I broked my motherboard with thatB ios?
> Can you fix it please?
> 
> That bios destroyed my PC since I can't use hyperv without VTx extension.


Flashed back to 0803 and then 0811 and it fixed the problem. I think it's a Windows problem not a bios one. Sorry that I have disturbed you with this.


----------



## criznit

I did some quick testing with my Unify-X board and got 6400 CL32 with SA 1.25, VDD/VDDQ 1.4


----------



## Falkentyne

sblantipodi said:


> Flashed back to 0803 and then 0811 and it fixed the problem. I think it's a Windows problem not a bios one. Sorry that I have disturbed you with this.


I have no words....


----------



## Nizzen

criznit said:


> I did some quick testing with my Unify-X board and got 6400 CL32 with SA 1.25, VDD/VDDQ 1.4
> 
> View attachment 2541677


57.8ns?

It's like 5600mhz c32...


----------



## criznit

Nizzen said:


> 57.8ns?
> 
> It's like 5600mhz c32...


I have a lot of background apps running i.e. discord, epic, steam, etc lol


edit: Here, I disabled a few and re-ran. I will do a proper run later tonight tho for some sub 50 sexiness lol


----------



## EconomyFishFinger

@shamino1978 just asking if there are any new bios performance improvements for the z690 formula beyond the current 811 bios?

regards


----------



## truehighroller1

truehighroller1 said:


> What memory kit and post pictures of timings and voltages etc. please thanks.





Agent-A01 said:


> Works fine for me. 4133 15-15-15-28 Gear 1



I'm guessing you're a troll, or you responded with a troll comment before looking at my memory details and thinking about what you're saying first?


----------



## Lyzzsha

criznit said:


> I did some quick testing with my Unify-X board and got 6400 CL32 with SA 1.25, VDD/VDDQ 1.4
> 
> View attachment 2541677


I have the same setup (same memory, mainboard and cpu)
Can you share your bios config to me pleaseeeee? :3


----------



## uplink

sblantipodi said:


> Yes, Asus tested 2 sticks but not 4
> I would not call it a great job


 With Corsairs [5200 MHz/CL38] I managed to get 4400 MHz/CL48 with 2 kits [4 sticks], it pretty much works like DDR4, so no harm done there.

So...I hope that I'm gonna get something like 5600 MHz and CL64 with two kits of G.Skills.


----------



## Eaton

Eaton said:


> @shamino1978 2 bug reports for the Hero BIOS for you.
> 
> I am currently on 0811. There is a typo here:
> 
> View attachment 2539366
> 
> 
> And "PCI Express Native Power Management" changes do not persist after reboot. If you disable, save and exit, then go back into the BIOS, it will still be enabled.
> 
> View attachment 2539367


Update - I discovered if you have Advanced / PCI Subsystem Settings / SR-IOV Support *Enabled*, then it forces PCI Express Native Power Management enabled, and cannot be disabled.

Apparently by design.


----------



## LionAlonso

uplink said:


> With Corsairs [5200 MHz/CL38] I managed to get 4400 MHz/CL48 with 2 kits [4 sticks], it pretty much works like DDR4, so no harm done there.
> 
> So...I hope that I'm gonna get something like 5600 MHz and CL64 with two kits of G.Skills.


Like ddr4 with double latency XD


----------



## uplink

LionAlonso said:


> Like ddr4 with double latency XD


 DDR4 can't do 8400 MT/s, afaik, nor 6000 MT/s in my case.

Well, if You noticed the revolution of DDR memory, this is it, this is the trend. The fastest will be CL22 and they'll be either slow, or we'll have to wait a long time for them.


----------



## LionAlonso

uplink said:


> DDR4 can't do 8400 MT/s, afaik, nor 6000 MT/s in my case.
> 
> Well, if You noticed the revolution of DDR memory, this is it, this is the trend. The fastest will be CL22 and they'll be either slow, or we'll have to wait a long time for them.


I mean for 4 slots 4400 cl 48.


----------



## uplink

LionAlonso said:


> I mean for 4 slots 4400 cl 48.


 Nope, I have Corsair Dominator running 4 slots at 4400 MHz at CL38.


----------



## LionAlonso

uplink said:


> Nope, I have Corsair Dominator running 4 slots at 4400 MHz at CL38.


With ddr4 u can 4000 or even more at cl16 with 4 slots.
Rn imo only hynix chips are worth for 6400cl32 or so in ddr5.


----------



## Larkonian

I have a question: Can I redo the initial AI OC BIOS testing like when you install a new cpu?


----------



## Jedi Mind Trick

asdkj1740 said:


> Обзор материнской платы ASUS ROG STRIX Z690-E Gaming WiFi GreenTech_Reviews
> 
> 
> Обзор и тестирование материнской платы ASUS ROG STRIX Z690-E Gaming WiFi
> 
> 
> 
> 
> greentechreviews.ru
> 
> 
> 
> 
> strix e has x8 wired in that slot too.
> since intel chipset's pcie controllers are x4 each. it seems asus has put two pcie controllers (x4+x4) into that slot.
> if you have the hyper m.2 card (strix e has it bundled but strix f has not) then two m.2 would be able to use on that slot.
> i think that slot cant be used as x8 by one device like GPU (only x4 would be recognized), that's why asus states x4 or x4+x4(hyper m.2 card) only.


Thanks! That’s what I was hoping NOT to hear .
I wonder how a plx switched card would work there. If I get the chance to get some ddr5, I might play around with it.


----------



## Codehook

Hey, I have a question, recently I noticed that a capacitor on my motherboard seemed to be emitting a lot of heat or something that left a trace on the motherboard, is it normal or should I be concerned?
I have a Strix Z690-E


----------



## darth_meh

Codehook said:


> Hey, I have a question, recently I noticed that a capacitor on my motherboard seemed to be emitting a lot of heat or something that left a trace on the motherboard, is it normal or should I be concerned?
> I have a Strix Z690-E
> View attachment 2541703


Looks like a leaking capacitor. Not good.


----------



## Codehook

darth_meh said:


> Looks like a leaking capacitor. Not good.


Lord, not again, I have previously RMA a Z690-A D4 because the PCIE stopped working after 1 week of use.


----------



## asdkj1740

Jedi Mind Trick said:


> Thanks! That’s what I was hoping NOT to hear .
> I wonder how a plx switched card would work there. If I get the chance to get some ddr5, I might play around with it.


if strix e is within your budget then i think strix e is way better than strix f simply because of that bundled hyper m.2 card.
but it is still fine to choose strix f unless you really need all 28 pcie lanes used at the same time.


----------



## Agent-A01

truehighroller1 said:


> I'm guessing you're a troll, or you responded with a troll comment before looking at my memory details and thinking about what you're saying first?


I guess you're an idiot because neither of what you said is correct.

Again, I have no issues with 1001 bios running 4133 CL-15-15-15-28.
I guess you can choose not to believe me since I'm a troll.


----------



## truehighroller1

Agent-A01 said:


> I guess you're an idiot because neither of what you said is correct.
> 
> Again, I have no issues with 1001 bios running 4133 CL-15-15-15-28.
> I guess you can choose not to believe me since I'm a troll.



You have yet to post any proof about what you're talking about. I want to see bios 1001. I want to see your settings and your voltages otherwise you're full of crap. Why do you even care that I have a problem? Why are you even commenting on anything I'm saying dude? You're trolling that's why.


----------



## Nizzen

Relax please.This aint Guru3d forums...


----------



## truehighroller1

Agent-A01 said:


> Jeeze man you are deluded. Exactly what benefit do I gain by lying?
> 
> 1001 runs the exact same as the previous bios for me.
> 
> View attachment 2541745
> 
> 
> If you respond back with another stupid comment you'll be on the ignore list.


Again, are you single rank or dual rank memory? Dude, this isn't complicated. What are your voltages etc as well? There's a pretty big difference there man. Never mind I looked through your post history myself.



Agent-A01 said:


> What VDIMM and SA did you need to go 4133 > 4266?


Like how you get to ask questions but no one else does..



Agent-A01 said:


> No need to point out the obvious. I've seen many people post the same things and I had no problems flashing the same bios.
> Typically user error and just as I said, no DDR5 TUF variant exists in ASUS product sku list.
> 
> Only DDR4 WIFI and non wifi. So the no D4 in the title is a moot point.
> 
> .... and yes, maybe there's a tuf D5 variant in the chinese market but they wouldn't be on this website trying to download it.


No one else can have an opinion I see again..



Two Months ago you said this.



Agent-A01 said:


> Rolled back to 0707 and 4133 posts no problem as others have stated


One month after you say this.



Agent-A01 said:


> I agree 0803 is argue-ably worse than previous revisions but I never did try 0707.. I should try it at this point
> 
> I used to have these set as following on the last 0801(IIRC) vs current 0803
> 
> Voltages = same for both
> DDR = 1.48
> SA = 1.22
> VDDQ = 1.35
> 
> tRDWR_SG = 10 > 13
> tRDWR_SG = 10 > 13
> tRDWR_DR = 10 > 13
> tRDWR_DD = 10 > 13
> tWRWR_DR = 6 > 7
> 
> Board was 100% stable before but will not post these old values on 0803 bios.
> I did find out that tWRWR = 6 will boot with approx 1.47~ VDDQ when before it was fine at stock 1.35v
> 
> Mentioned before, used to could boot 4000 reliably. With the past couple bios that's been impossible.
> 0803 worked fine once at XMP 4000 CL17 @ Gear 1 but after a reboot it would never post again at that speed.
> 
> Can do CL13-13-13-22 at 3800 but impossible to boot at 3866... No way that's a cpu limitation as i could still boot 4133(with lots of memory errors)
> 
> Another thing, a user mentioned skew settings of 80-60-60.. Does not work for my DR kit.
> Makes training take forever. 80-40-40 works great.
> 
> One last thing.
> This board/bios has just killed another Noctua A12 fan. Repeated testing of various things has somehow killed the PWM controllers on the fans. Those two fans are now stuck at 100% because the board detects them as PWM but it's dead.
> Setting them as DC will allow them to idle normally.
> 
> I'm pretty positive they are dead because swapping another a12 in the same header is fine. Moving the bad fan to another header results in 100% fan speed.
> 
> Not fun losing $60 from a bios update. Unless it's just another bios bug introduced with this 0803 version.
> Anyways be careful with repeated tests. Hopefully it's not a widespread issue.


I think you're starting to lose your memory sir.



Agent-A01 said:


> Are you deliberately trying to be an ass hat?
> You haven't told me anything I don't already know. That's why I explicitly asked for a D4 variant because the posted one doesn't work.
> 
> I'll repeat what I just said.
> 
> There have been many people with the same board that said they couldn't flash BIOS posted by Shamino, with D4 in the name. I had no issues flashing those BIOS, multiple times.
> That can be attributed to people flashing a wifi vs non wifi.
> 
> So of course I'll try it out myself.
> 
> I'll also point out that many BIOS posted here sometimes have typos that but have flashed with no problems.
> I've exclusively used ASUS boards since P55 so I can say with experience on these 'beta' bios that typos happen.
> 
> Lastly, since no TUF DDR5 variant exists(try finding one) in the current market you can see why I would assume that with that and the previous information I laid out why no D4 in the name could just be a typo.
> 
> So yes, I can now safely deduce that there _may_ possibly be D5 TUF variants floating around or there was a mistake in creating the bios..
> 
> But yeah feel free to post 100 more times with stupid comments like that. /s


Again, you're just a troll. Look at how you talk to people. I'm giving feed back on how my system is acting with the new BIOS. I don't care how yours works. Leave it at that and move away from trying to troll me next like you do other people, thanks.


----------



## newls1

truehighroller1 said:


> Again, are you single rank or dual rank memory? Dude, this isn't complicated. What are your voltages etc as well? There's a pretty big difference there man. Never mind I looked through your post history myself.
> 
> 
> 
> Like how you get to ask questions but no one else does..
> 
> 
> 
> No one else can have an opinion I see again..
> 
> 
> 
> Two Months ago you said this.
> 
> 
> 
> One month after you say this.
> 
> 
> 
> I think you're starting to lose your memory sir.
> 
> 
> 
> Again, you're just a troll. Look at how you talk to people. I'm giving feed back on how my system is acting with the new BIOS. I don't care how yours works. Leave it at that and move away from trying to troll me next like you do other people, thanks.


well, if anything... good research sir


----------



## cstkl1

Apex Bios 0021 seems fine


----------



## skullbringer

is Fsw 800 kHz on Apex fixed with bios 9901?


----------



## Martin778

Can anyone check if they can use AI OC separately for P and E-cores on BIOS 0021 on APEX? It's completely broken (unstable) on mine and I can't turn off AI OC for the E-Cores....


----------



## IronAge

cstkl1 said:


> Apex Bios 0021 seems fine


CPU-Z reads Version 0022 ... so who has got the typo ?


----------



## cstkl1

IronAge said:


> CPU-Z reads Version 0022 ... so who has got the typo ?


its 021 modded for my es stick for high dram mode. after this these es stick not supported anymore.

hence its just 021


----------



## webwilli

Martin778 said:


> Can anyone check if they can use AI OC separately for P and E-cores on BIOS 0021 on APEX? It's completely broken (unstable) on mine and I can't turn off AI OC for the E-Cores....


Same here, but BIOS 9901


----------



## Cucobr

I gave up on run 4 sticks of Kingston Fury DDR5 5200 with XMP on (64GB total)

I sent 2 sticks back to the retailer and now I'm very happy with only two sticks. With 2 sticks I can turn on XMP with no problems.

PC is running smoothly. No crashs or BSODs.

I'm gonna wait some time and then buy 4 sticks of Corsair Dominator Platinum to see if the stabilities got better.


----------



## arrow0309

wkamil said:


> So you need at last 1.3v for 5.1 all cores full load? Bit high... 🙂 What's yours CPU SP?


Yeah, 72, average (as I can see around)
Did you find the correct LL (dc & ac) ratio in the end?


----------



## Stockman

Nizzen said:


> Show us some results on z690 Unify-x, so we can compare.


Sure. The AIDA64 test?


----------



## Martin778

webwilli said:


> Same here, but BIOS 9901


Nice, feels like we're starting with the 'one step forward, two steps back' route. Why was this changed??


----------



## DOOOLY

I am having an issue with the Z690 Hero USB ports. If I use all the 4 lower ports and run a game it shuts off those ports. If I restart they come back and work. Is this supposed to happen?


----------



## wkamil

arrow0309 said:


> Yeah, 72, average (as I can see around)
> Did you find the correct LL (dc & ac) ratio in the end?


Indeed. DC_LL 0.75 AC_LL 0.25, adaptive voltage offset -0.065, P cores 5.0, E cores 4.0, Ring 4.0. At full load vcore is 1,243v
Mine ADL is pretty average too. SP 70, P cores 82, E cores 47


----------



## Jedi Mind Trick

asdkj1740 said:


> if strix e is within your budget then i think strix e is way better than strix f simply because of that bundled hyper m.2 card.
> but it is still fine to choose strix f unless you really need all 28 pcie lanes used at the same time.


I wish I could justify the extra $$ for the E, but I don’t think I can at the moment.

Got the Prime A for $105 and the F for $170 (not including taxes). I was hoping a better board would have been available (open box microcenter), but for a side project, I can’t complain about the prices!

Honestly though, a D4 board probably would have been a better fit now that I think about it.


----------



## Nizzen

Stockman said:


> Sure. The AIDA64 test?


Game benchmarks too? <3


----------



## Stockman

Nizzen said:


> Game benchmarks too? <3


Yeah, but not sure how meaningful it'll be - especially comparing motherboards, which tend to have little impact on gaming, all else equal.


----------



## arrow0309

wkamil said:


> Indeed. DC_LL 0.75 AC_LL 0.25, adaptive voltage offset -0.065, P cores 5.0, E cores 4.0, Ring 4.0. At full load vcore is 1,243v
> Mine ADL is pretty average too. SP 70, P cores 82, E cores 47


Wait on what LLC?


----------



## darth_meh

DOOOLY said:


> I am having an issue with the Z690 Hero USB ports. If I use all the 4 lower ports and run a game it shuts off those ports. If I restart they come back and work. Is this supposed to happen?


I'm gonna go with no. Perhaps it's a particular device plugged in?


----------



## newls1

I just had a huge fight with my motherboard (Strix z690 A D4) and bios 1001. I just spent 5-6hours getting my ram to boot 4000Mhz like every past bios did with no issues what so ever, but instead of flashing back to 901 or 0812 bios's i decided to win this battle. I came to the conclusion that this bios and VDDQ has to be pin point set to the "T" or no post... at least for me that seemed to be the issue. After I found 1.40vddq, everything else was pretty much the same. However im having a very strange issue and dont know if it has anything to do with the new microcode 18 this bios has, but i found out running through my normal games to check stability (FC6/FC5/ SOTR and 3DMark) that SOTR insta bluescreens with a "watchdog timer error" Ive never had this ever before, and it happens with or WITHOUT any OC on the system.. Could the new microcode cause this? I even "verified game iles" and everything was fine, loaded game, and WATCH DOG ERROR instantly. Everything else plays fine and benches fine.... Help?!


----------



## cstkl1

ddr4. 
new bioses sometimes experimental skews were change to mode 2 from beta

so try mode 2 on release bios


----------



## affxct

Hey guys. Just need a quick sanity check. I had a run-in with a borked kit of S16B Z5’s and my retailer let me have a different kit that’s been behaving far more normally. 

I have two reboot-stable configs:
6000 32-34-34-56-2T (tightened subs) @ 1.375V TX/VDD/Q and 1.15V SA/1.25V VDD2

6200 36-36-36-54-2T (tightened subs) @
1.3V TX/VDD/Q and 1.35V SA/1.25V VDD2

_Before anyone asks; I went back and scaled my SA again on the 6200 config because I was checked on my SA and it seemed that my XMP and my 6000C32 tune only required 1.1 and 1.15 respectively. 6200 does indeed require 1.35 to be reboot stable for whatever reason (probably cause I’m on 6 layers)._

*Now onto my actual question*; I’m currently using 6000C32 because of SA, but I’m a bit skeptical about S16B’s voltage tolerance. Being that my initial kit hit a brick wall short of its XMP and didn’t scale with voltage at all, and after running into someone who had a stick die on them at 1.4V, I’m beginning to wonder how specific G.Skill were with regards to binning their kits to certain voltages and frequencies. I just wanted to gauge how many of you guys have been running 1.4V+ on S16B without issue over the last few weeks.


----------



## Technodox

Quick question.

On the Strix Z690-E *How many M.2 NVME drives* can I run connected to the board, and still have the GPU at x16?


----------



## bscool

newls1 said:


> I just had a huge fight with my motherboard (Strix z690 A D4) and bios 1001. I just spent 5-6hours getting my ram to boot 4000Mhz like every past bios did with no issues what so ever, but instead of flashing back to 901 or 0812 bios's i decided to win this battle. I came to the conclusion that this bios and VDDQ has to be pin point set to the "T" or no post... at least for me that seemed to be the issue. After I found 1.40vddq, everything else was pretty much the same. However im having a very strange issue and dont know if it has anything to do with the new microcode 18 this bios has, but i found out running through my normal games to check stability (FC6/FC5/ SOTR and 3DMark) that SOTR insta bluescreens with a "watchdog timer error" Ive never had this ever before, and it happens with or WITHOUT any OC on the system.. Could the new microcode cause this? I even "verified game iles" and everything was fine, loaded game, and WATCH DOG ERROR instantly. Everything else plays fine and benches fine.... Help?!


Dude I already posted, warning you about 1001. Why did you do this to yourself. Avoid 1001 on Strix d4 

Even better news after flashing back to older bios versions, it will never be the same. Have fun 

Editing for clarity. Not like the board is bricked just cache use to clock up to 4700 when on auto if I manually set P and E cores. So not the end of the world but annoying none the less.


----------



## Cam1

Tried it (Bios 1001) on my Tuf to see if i can get 4000 gear 1 ram working, it's a disaster lol ! Can't even boot at 3600MHz


----------



## acoustic

bscool said:


> Dude I already posted, warning you about 1001. Why did you do this to yourself. Avoid 1001 on Strix d4
> 
> Even better news after flashing back to older bios versions, it will never be the same. Have fun


Doesn't make much sense that flashing this BIOS would permanently change the board even if you flash back to something older like 0707.


----------



## bscool

acoustic said:


> Doesn't make much sense that flashing this BIOS would permanently change the board even if you flash back to something older like 0707.


You have the MB dont you? If you flash it let me know


----------



## acoustic

bscool said:


> You have the MB dont you? If you flash it let me know


I have a TUF D4. I won't be able to test anything for another couple months - away for work right now.

Last I tested before I left was 0707, and then whatever the first 08xx was.

Logically, though, flashing this newer BIOS and then going back should not be permanently changing the way the board behaves, especially if you're flashing the right way (clear CMOS, optimized Defaults, flash, clear CMOS, optimized Defaults).. that just sounds weird.


----------



## bscool

acoustic said:


> I have a TUF D4. I won't be able to test anything for another couple months - away for work right now.
> 
> Last I tested before I left was 0707, and then whatever the first 08xx was.
> 
> Logically, though, flashing this newer BIOS and then going back should not be permanently changing the way the board behaves, especially if you're flashing the right way (clear CMOS, optimized Defaults, flash, clear CMOS, optimized Defaults).. that just sounds weird.


I agree. Just been on this earth long enough to know not everything is logical and doesnt work like it "should" work. I agree it shouldnt change anything. 

Z590 Apex "should" flash the microcode with Flashback but it doesnt work for me, need to use EZ flash. Not only for me but other have also found this to happen on z590 Apex. 

Maybe there is something else going on just sharing info.

Flash to your own content. I know I am skeptical about most things and always test for myself to verify.


----------



## beardlessduck

bscool said:


> Dude I already posted, warning you about 1001. Why did you do this to yourself. Avoid 1001 on Strix d4
> 
> Even better news after flashing back to older bios versions, it will never be the same. Have fun



OOF... I'm so desperate to get my PC working that I really want to try every new BIOS ASAP. Glad to hear there is also the possibility of a BIOS that can permanently cause problems on top of everything else...


----------



## bscool

beardlessduck said:


> OOF... I'm so desperate to get my PC working that I really want to try every new BIOS ASAP. Glad to hear there is also the possibility of a BIOS that can permanently cause problems on top of everything else...


Dont put to much into that. I am one person. It could just be me or some other issue. Just putting it out there. 

If I start seeing multiple peolpe with Strix d4 having same issues I know it is not just me. SO far @newls1 is having similar issue to what i had on bios 1001 so sounds the same. Now the question is if he goes back to older bios does he still have weird issues.


----------



## beardlessduck

bscool said:


> Dont put to much into that. I am one person. It could just be me or some other issue. Just putting it out there.
> 
> If I start seeing multiple peolpe with Strix d4 having same issues I know it is not just me. SO far @newls1 is having similar issue to what i had on bios 1001 so sounds the same. Now the question is if he goes back to older bios does he still have weird issues.


Thanks, I will probably risk it then. I can return mine in town worst case scenario.


----------



## bscool

To clarify about my issue with bios 1001 on z690 Strix d4.

Not like the board is bricked just cache use to clock up to 4700 when on auto if I manually set P and E cores while leaving cache clocks on auto.

So not the end of the world but annoying none the less.

Now I have to set cache clocks manually and cache voltage(L2) or it will crash.

It only works correcyly(auto clockc cache to 4700) when CPU is set to Auto/MCE enabled or AI OC.

This is even after using Flashback and EZ flash to bios 0223 the first release bios then doing the same for bios 707.

Also tried turning off psu and holding clear CMOS for 30 seconds. Tried different OS to rule that out. Not sure what else to try.

But I can use the board just have to set cache setting manually now if I want higher than 3600 cache and not use MCE only.

Edit added pic to show how cache is locked at 3600 in bios 1001 if left on auto with manual P and E core OC.

I will probably end up flashing back to 1001 to see if I can get it working even if it means manually cache clocks and L2 votlages as I have to do that on older bios version now with manual CPU OC.


----------



## wkamil

arrow0309 said:


> Wait on what LLC?


LLC 4


----------



## Falkentyne

bscool said:


> I agree. Just been on this earth long enough to know not everything is logical and doesnt work like it "should" work. I agree it shouldnt change anything.
> 
> Z590 Apex "should" flash the microcode with Flashback but it doesnt work for me, need to use EZ flash. Not only for me but other have also found this to happen on z590 Apex.
> 
> Maybe there is something else going on just sharing info.
> 
> Flash to your own content. I know I am skeptical about most things and always test for myself to verify.


I'm 99.9% sure the BIOS always flashes the microcode as it's embedded in the BIOS. The BIOS does not keep a newer microcode as its not capable of it.
I think your problem is that windows itself updated the microcode when the BIOS updated it, and when you went back to the older bios, you have the windows version and the BIOS version, and higher version always wins.

Try deleting the dlll or whatever it's called (google it).
I think its mcupdate_genuineintel.dll 


__
https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocking/comments/9g8lqi


----------



## bscool

Falkentyne said:


> I'm 99.9% sure the BIOS always flashes the microcode as it's embedded in the BIOS. The BIOS does not keep a newer microcode as its not capable of it.
> I think your problem is that windows itself updated the microcode when the BIOS updated it, and when you went back to the older bios, you have the windows version and the BIOS version, and higher version always wins.
> 
> Try deleting the dlll or whatever it's called (google it).
> I think its mcupdate_genuineintel.dll
> 
> 
> __
> https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocking/comments/9g8lqi


Ok if thats the case I tried another OS and it still had the same issue. So that would rule that out, not?

But I will still try what you suggested. Nothing to lose. Thanks for the idea.

Edit tried and no change. Cache still doesnt clock up when manual OC E and P core.


----------



## acoustic

I t


bscool said:


> Ok if thats the case I tried another OS and it still had the same issue. So that would rule that out, not?
> 
> But I will still try what you suggested. Nothing to lose. Thanks for the idea.
> 
> Edit tried and no change. Cache still doesnt clock up when manual OC E and P core.


Pretty sure he was referring to the Z590 APEX issue, but I'm sure he will clarify.


----------



## bscool

acoustic said:


> I t
> Pretty sure he was referring to the Z590 APEX issue, but I'm sure he will clarify.


Well then that makes no sense to me as I was flashing a newer bios and newer MC and it would not update the microcode via Flashback only EZ flash on z590 Apex.

I posted screen shots on this forum in the 11th gen thread at the time, on Asus support forum, Hwbot. Other users had the same issue so it wasnt just me.

Pretty sure I even saw @safedisk mention some user had issues with it on z590 Apex


----------



## GtiJason

bscool said:


> Well then that makes no sense to me as I was flashing a newer bios and newer MC and it would not update the microcode via Flashback only EZ flash on z590 Apex.
> 
> I posted screen shots on this forum in the 11th gen thread at the time, on Asus support forum, Hwbot. Other users had the same issue so it wasnt just me.
> 
> Pretty sure I even saw @safedisk mention some user had issues with it on z590 Apex


Happened to me and at least 5 HWBot users on Z490 just as the Rocket Lake bios' started coming out. Some guys still can't use that bios at all, I used Rasp Pi flashrom and bios file I removed the UEFI header/container? to make it .ROM instead of .CAP. I also know guys at HWBot who had similar problem on the Z590 APEX ( teammate Noizemaker, supported by ASUS and in charge of making the HWBot APEX XIII XOC thread for 1) but I think it was the opposite problem. Flashing via USB stick / bios flashback for me did not update everything properly and rendered bios B/2 useless until I flashed via SPI header.












Here is an example of using RPi 3 B+ to flash via SPI header



http://imgur.com/a/DI5LYIL


----------



## newls1

bscool said:


> Dont put to much into that. I am one person. It could just be me or some other issue. Just putting it out there.
> 
> If I start seeing multiple peolpe with Strix d4 having same issues I know it is not just me. SO far @newls1 is having similar issue to what i had on bios 1001 so sounds the same. Now the question is if he goes back to older bios does he still have weird issues.


I just had to fine tune vddq to get 1001 bios to play nice.... everything else seems par for the course


----------



## LionAlonso

newls1 said:


> I just had to fine tune vddq to get 1001 bios to play nice.... everything else seems par for the course


But yo gave it more or less value?


----------



## newls1

LionAlonso said:


> But yo gave it more or less value?


less... other bios' needed 1.40vddq. 1001 wont post with 1.40 (for me) with it @ 1.4... Just on a whim I thought id waste 34hours of my life and try .010mv less until hopefully it posted and it started to post @ 1.365-1.355, anything less or more NO POST


----------



## sblantipodi

uplink said:


> Nope, I have Corsair Dominator running 4 slots at 4400 MHz at CL38.


4.4GHz CL38 with DDR4 or DDR5?


----------



## truehighroller1

newls1 said:


> less... other bios' needed 1.40vddq. 1001 wont post with 1.40 (for me) with it @ 1.4... Just on a whim I thought id waste 34hours of my life and try .010mv less until hopefully it posted and it started to post @ 1.365-1.355, anything less or more NO POST



Now I'm going to have to check and make sure mines not doing this... I'm back in 0901..


----------



## newls1

truehighroller1 said:


> Now I'm going to have to check and make sure mines not doing this... I'm back in 0901..


also make sure you step up the ram speed 1 divider at a time... 3600 save exit, 3733 save exit, 4000 save exit


----------



## newls1

truehighroller1 said:


> Now I'm going to have to check and make sure mines not doing this... I'm back in 0901..


also, see here .... ASUS ROG Strix Z690-A Gaming WiFi D4 Thread


----------



## truehighroller1

newls1 said:


> also make sure you step up the ram speed 1 divider at a time... 3600 save exit, 3733 save exit, 4000 save exit



I had so many issues with 1001.


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> To clarify about my issue with bios 1001 on z690 Strix d4.
> 
> Not like the board is bricked just cache use to clock up to 4700 when on auto if I manually set P and E cores while leaving cache clocks on auto.
> 
> So not the end of the world but annoying none the less.
> 
> Now I have to set cache clocks manually and cache voltage(L2) or it will crash.
> 
> It only works correcyly(auto clockc cache to 4700) when CPU is set to Auto/MCE enabled or AI OC.
> 
> This is even after using Flashback and EZ flash to bios 0223 the first release bios then doing the same for bios 707.
> 
> Also tried turning off psu and holding clear CMOS for 30 seconds. Tried different OS to rule that out. Not sure what else to try.
> 
> But I can use the board just have to set cache setting manually now if I want higher than 3600 cache and not use MCE only.
> 
> Edit added pic to show how cache is locked at 3600 in bios 1001 if left on auto with manual P and E core OC.
> 
> I will probably end up flashing back to 1001 to see if I can get it working even if it means manually cache clocks and L2 votlages as I have to do that on older bios version now with manual CPU OC.



Not saying yours wasn't acting up here mind you but, mine is working with the auto setting so I might just stay here for a short minute until they fix whatever is wrong with 1001. I did notice that my BIOS did the updating BIOS will reboot message when I flashed back to 0901 did yours do that?


----------



## newls1

truehighroller1 said:


> Not saying yours wasn't acting up here mind you but, mine is working with the auto setting so I might just stay here for a short minute until they fix whatever is wrong with 1001. I did notice that my BIOS did the updating BIOS will reboot message when I flashed back to 0901 did yours do that?


how are you stable with cache @ 4.7 and have e-cores enabled? I havent tried anytihng faster then 4.4 for cache, so now im wondering if 4.7 would be stable with my current OC? I now you arent asking me the above question but going from 901 to 1001 after a successful flash, and then reboot, the bios went into another "Update" and then 2nd reboot like you stated above, but i havent down graded bios yet to 901 from 1001 so i cant answer that


----------



## newls1

truehighroller1 said:


> Not saying yours wasn't acting up here mind you but, mine is working with the auto setting so I might just stay here for a short minute until they fix whatever is wrong with 1001. I did notice that my BIOS did the updating BIOS will reboot message when I flashed back to 0901 did yours do that?


can i see your bios settings to get your 5.6ghz OC stable?? Can you run CBr23 with that OC by chance?


----------



## truehighroller1

newls1 said:


> can i see your bios settings to get your 5.6ghz OC stable?? Can you run CBr23 with that OC by chance?



Just ran y cruncher one time right after booting. I get low 72.000s after everything settles down in windows 11. I'll post my cbr for you too one sec. I can get over 30000 with a little, more voltage pumped into her.


----------



## newls1

can i see how you setup your bios settings? i must be doing something wrong as i cant run hardly any benchmarks with my OC (55x6 54x8) but can game jsut fine and if it matters, my cpu is a SP100 P-Core cpu


----------



## Arni90

truehighroller1 said:


> Just ran y cruncher one time right after booting. I get low 72.000s after everything settles down in windows 11. I'll post my cbr for you too one sec. I can get over 30000 with a little, more voltage pumped into her.


If you have some single rank A2 B-die sticks, you could probably get a significant uplift in y-cruncher with gear 2.


----------



## truehighroller1

newls1 said:


> can i see how you setup your bios settings? i must be doing something wrong as i cant run hardly any benchmarks with my OC (55x6 54x8) but can game jsut fine and if it matters, my cpu is a SP100 P-Core cpu



Here's the text with my settings.

Also, I'm toying with tighter memory timings now so I had to bump up my vddq to 1.365 compared to those settings I just posted so you know. My new voltages netted me little more points and tiny bit faster ycruncher.


----------



## EconomyFishFinger

I currently have some teamgroup (hynix)6400mhz ram sent off for replacement due to SPD corruption; was able to get about cl34 stable at 6400, or keep cl 40 and hit 6600. 
In the mean time I have a kit of g.skill 6000 (samsung) cl36 which i can run stable at 6000mhz cl30. 

Anyone have any thoughs on which kit may work oput best long run?


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

sblantipodi said:


> 4.4GHz CL38 with DDR4 or DDR5?


It's ddr5, the cl38 gave it away.


----------



## bscool

truehighroller1 said:


> Not saying yours wasn't acting up here mind you but, mine is working with the auto setting so I might just stay here for a short minute until they fix whatever is wrong with 1001. I did notice that my BIOS did the updating BIOS will reboot message when I flashed back to 0901 did yours do that?


[email protected] My cache definitely will not clock up anymore when left on auto when manually setting P and E core clocks.. I am back on bios 1001. Need to set manual cache clocks and l2 voltages. Lol I give up. It must be just me. 🙃

It doesnt matter in the end everything works. But if others with less experience have this issue oh boy they will be lost and complaining to Asus how they are junk and tell @shamino1978 how to fix the bios


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> [email protected] My cache definitely will not clock up anymore when left on auto when manually setting P and E core clocks.. I am back on bios 1001. Need to set manual cache clocks and l2 voltages. Lol I give up. It must be just me. 🙃
> 
> It doesnt matter in the end everything works. But if others with less experience have this issue oh boy they will be lost and complaining to Asus how they are junk and tell @shamino1978 how to fix the bios



I said he'll with it and flashed back to 1001 because I'm stubborn and man I can't get 4133 back. I booted too 4000 though. Now I'm going to try to tighten up 4600 on it since it loads on this bios gear 2 cr1 to see what I can manage to get out of it.


----------



## Akadaka

Thinking of Jumping on Z690 platform, The first board I was considering was the Hero but that was before the thing started catching fire.. How has the Formula been for some of you owners?


----------



## Bladed

Halo Infinite is proving to be the hardest benchmark when testing for stability lol. I can get my settings to pass 6+ cycles of TM5 +anta777 config, memtest, and aida64 stress / benchmark, but crash within the first game of Halo Infinite.

With stock ram settings, I can play Halo Infinite for hours. Anything more than 3200Mhz and I crash within the first game.


----------



## arrow0309

wkamil said:


> LLC 4


OK, tomorrow I'm gonna try them.
Because the settings I'm using right now are giving me way higher vcore than the vid all the times.


----------



## tiggerlator

Still on 0901 bios for my z690-a wifi, The 1001 is not officially available yet but i found it, is it worth flashing or shall i wait till it's official(in case of changes)

My ram is this btw
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/team...00c16-3600mhz-dual-channel-kit-my-002-8p.html


----------



## Zyther

j o e said:


> Guys that’s my hero board gn is testing, I put a red paint dot on the 4th dimm slot latch before I shipped it to him. I feel like a famous person


Did he ever end up blowing it up


----------



## Arni90

DarthMuse said:


> Thinking of Jumping on Z690 platform, The first board I was considering was the Hero but that was before the thing started catching fire.. How has the Formula been for some of you owners?


Consider your needs carefully, almost all Z690 boards are perfectly fine when it comes to VRM. The added functionality of switching PCIe 5.0 lanes is mostly useless unless you're one of the unicorns who need PCIe 5.0 SSDs. Sure, thunderbolt-support is nice, but are you going to use it?

In my eyes, the only Z690 Maximus-board worth considering is the Apex. The whole lineup is ridiculously expensive, and I really don't need Thunderbolt 4 or a VRM capable of powering 3x 12900K


----------



## bastian

Happy to be back at Intel.

P-cores 100 SP / E-cores 70 SP


----------



## bscool

cstkl1 said:


> ddr4.
> new bioses sometimes experimental skews were change to mode 2 from beta
> 
> so try mode 2 on release bios


No "Mode" that I can see on z690 ddr4 though. 

Should be at the top? 

I also searched the bios in other areas and saw no "mode" setting like on past models i have used.


----------



## cstkl1

[


bscool said:


> No "Mode" that I can see on z690 ddr4 though.
> 
> Should be at the top?
> 
> I also searched the bios in other areas and saw no "mode" setting like on past models i have used.


oh so maximus only. my bad


----------



## acoustic

Bladed said:


> Halo Infinite is proving to be the hardest benchmark when testing for stability lol. I can get my settings to pass 6+ cycles of TM5 +anta777 config, memtest, and aida64 stress / benchmark, but crash within the first game of Halo Infinite.
> 
> With stock ram settings, I can play Halo Infinite for hours. Anything more than 3200Mhz and I crash within the first game.


That's IMC instability. I found Halo Infinite to be an IMC crusher when the chips came out. No clue what Halo is doing that's catching it so early, but within the first 10-15minutes of a match I would get a CTD.


----------



## nickolp1974

EconomyFishFinger said:


> I currently have some teamgroup (hynix)6400mhz ram sent off for replacement due to SPD corruption; was able to get about cl34 stable at 6400, or keep cl 40 and hit 6600.
> In the mean time I have a kit of g.skill 6000 (samsung) cl36 which i can run stable at 6000mhz cl30.
> 
> Anyone have any thoughs on which kit may work oput best long run?


kinda have the same dilema although my mind has been made up due to the dell green sticks being nearly £200 cheaper. Shame though as i had no bother with the 6kc36 gskills. i would of liked to see how much further they would go. But the £600 will go towards a VGA


----------



## shamino1978

sblantipodi said:


> Yes, Asus tested 2 sticks but not 4
> I would not call it a great job


try this ver:









ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0061.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com


----------



## shamino1978

owikh84 said:


> First complete TM5 with the Z690 Extreme.😆
> Easy 6000 CL32 with that bottommost ASUS profile, adjusted to 2T and MC reduced to 1.275v. Exactly same settings I used on the Hero previously.


try this ver








ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0061.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com


----------



## acoustic

shamino1978 said:


> try this ver:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0061.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


You're a true legend for being so polite. Is there any idea why, based off the results I've seen, the Extreme _seem_ to be struggling more than the Hero with 4 DIMMs? 

Thanks for all the support!


----------



## Alberto_It

shamino1978 said:


> try this ver
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0061.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


Question about Apex Z690 with G. Skill F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK : i have noticed that there are 2 only ready profiles for Samsung chips with the same name. 

How i can understand the difference? Will more be added? 

Thank you in advance and sorry if maybe are stupid questions. 

I'm using 0031 version


----------



## CanM4

Hi guys, 

i read you and I was reassured to not be alone with Samsung memory problem on Z690 Apex.


i have Z690 apex with Gskill z5 6000c36, I can’t use the xmp profile or make any overclock on the memory. I tried bios 0811 and 9011 (thanks for the share) and always going crash during stability test

Does anyone find a solution for Samsung memory on apex ?


----------



## Alberto_It

CanM4 said:


> Hi guys,
> 
> i read you and I was reassured to not be alone with Samsung memory problem on Z690 Apex.
> 
> 
> i have Z690 apex with Gskill z5 6000c36, I can’t use the xmp profile or make any overclock on the memory. I tried bios 0811 and 9011 (thanks for the share) and always going crash during stability test
> 
> Does anyone find a solution for Samsung memory on apex ?


 I'm using this and XMP profile 1 works 









[OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread


Well...at the moment neither XMP works on these. Have the same board and memory, XMP1 extemeely unstable, XMP2 would also randomly crash. Load the 6000MHz C32 ASUS OC profile and make sure you have active cooling on your RAM. I can't even get into windows with the profile or XMP with...




www.overclock.net


----------



## CanM4

Alberto_It said:


> I'm using this and XMP profile 1 works
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread
> 
> 
> Well...at the moment neither XMP works on these. Have the same board and memory, XMP1 extemeely unstable, XMP2 would also randomly crash. Load the 6000MHz C32 ASUS OC profile and make sure you have active cooling on your RAM. I can't even get into windows with the profile or XMP with...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net


thanks I’m gonna try it.

the second xmp profile doesn’t work ?


----------



## Alberto_It

CanM4 said:


> thanks I’m gonna try it.
> 
> the second xmp profile doesn’t work ?


Yes but I have no tested if it is stable


----------



## satinghostrider

CanM4 said:


> Hi guys,
> 
> i read you and I was reassured to not be alone with Samsung memory problem on Z690 Apex.
> 
> 
> i have Z690 apex with Gskill z5 6000c36, I can’t use the xmp profile or make any overclock on the memory. I tried bios 0811 and 9011 (thanks for the share) and always going crash during stability test
> 
> Does anyone find a solution for Samsung memory on apex ?


Try SA 0.95V first. If still fails stability test, try VDD/VDDQ 1.325V. You can also try ODT 40/240/240/48/48. Do for both channels under Skews. Make sure you monitor the temps of the DIMMs to ensure they don't cross 60 degrees or your errors might be thermally related.

Make sure you try both XMP1 and XMP2 before trying the above. And stick to 0811 it's still relatively alright for Samsung. I got mine stable but like you, I had alot of issues with the 6000C36 kit and sold it away. The 5600C36 works much better for me to run even the 6000C32 1T preset on my Apex with some minor voltage tweaks.


----------



## Alberto_It

satinghostrider said:


> Try SA 0.95V first. If still fails stability test, try VDD/VDDQ 1.325V. You can also try ODT 40/240/240/48/48. Do for both channels under Skews. Make sure you monitor the temps of the DIMMs to ensure they don't cross 60 degrees or your errors might be thermally related.
> 
> Make sure you try both XMP1 and XMP2 before trying the above. And stick to 0811 it's still relatively alright for Samsung. I got mine stable but like you, I had alot of issues with the 6000C36 kit and sold it away. The 5600C36 works much better for me to run even the 6000C32 1T preset on my Apex with some minor voltage tweaks.


Bios 0031 and the XMP 1 profile works great without further settings


----------



## satinghostrider

Alberto_It said:


> Bios 0031 and the XMP 1 profile works great without further settings


Not everyone's 6000c36 kit will be perfect. I found this by flashing 3 different bios and none of them worked including running manual timings and voltages on my 6000c36 kit. You need to isolate the problem first by playing with voltages and 0811 is a good start which many have no issues with. If you're still not able to run XMP1 or XMP2 or even manually setting the timings and voltages, bios is not part of the solution. It's the sticks. DDR5 silicon lottery is real. No kidding.


----------



## Alberto_It

satinghostrider said:


> Not everyone's 6000c36 kit will be perfect. I found this by flashing 3 different bios and none of them worked including running manual timings and voltages on my 6000c36 kit. You need to isolate the problem first by playing with voltages and 0811 is a good start which many have no issues with. If you're still not able to run XMP1 or XMP2 or even manually settings the timings and voltages, bios is not part of the solution. It's the sticks. DDR5 silicon lottery is real. No kidding.


Thank you for the clarification, so I can consider myself a lucky guy with 12900k with sp99 and XMP 1 stable. 

I didn't try to Oc them or touch the timing because I'm not able to do it


----------



## satinghostrider

Alberto_It said:


> Thank you for the clarification, so I can consider myself a lucky guy with 12900k with sp99 and XMP 1 stable.
> 
> I didn't try to Oc them or touch the timing because I'm not able to do it


You can probably try the last preset under Memory Tweaks to see if you can run 6000C32 1T preset. But be prepared to do some work with voltages. It's not load + save and exit. It's only a baseline.


----------



## pat-Geek

shamino1978 said:


> try this ver:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0061.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


Hi,

Do you have any update regarding SLI support on Z690 HERO motherbaords?


----------



## acoustic

pat-Geek said:


> Hi,
> 
> Do you have any update regarding SLI support on Z690 HERO motherbaords?


He's already said it will be exclusive to APEX and Extreme - I don't know why the Formula is excluded considering it's an $800 board, but that's ASUS decision.


----------



## pat-Geek

acoustic said:


> He's already said it will be exclusive to APEX and Extreme - I don't know why the Formula is excluded considering it's an $800 board, but that's ASUS decision.


Well that's unfair and very disappointing. I'm a long time ROG Maximus customer and this negligence is enough to make me consider another brand moving forward. Every board that has the name "MAXIMUS" in it and PCIe bifurcation should have an SLI key.


----------



## acoustic

pat-Geek said:


> Well that's unfair and very disappointing. I'm a long time ROG Maximus customer and this negligence is enough to make me consider another brand moving forward. Every board that has the name "MAXIMUS" in it and PCIe bifurcation should have an SLI key.


As far as I understand, the SLI keys are not as easy to acquire this round. With that being said, considering the price of the boards, I completely agree with owners being frustrated. The HERO is $599 - there is no reason it shouldn't have full fledged features. The APEX, Formula, and Extreme, at $799 to $1099, should all have it as well.

It's strange to me that they picked the APEX and Extreme but left out the Formula, despite the Formula being the same price as the APEX.

But hey, a lot of people have no issue with the insane price hikes that ASUS has done over the past two generations .. it is what it is.


----------



## sblantipodi

any news on getting 4 sticks of ram working on my 1200€ boards?
Today my system BSODed at 4.4GHz with 1.150V SA, 1.25V MC, and 1.25V on VDD/VDDQ.

Man, I can't even get 4.4GHz stable on a 1200€ boards.


----------



## Nizzen

sblantipodi said:


> any news on getting 4 sticks of ram working on my 1200€ boards?
> Today my system BSODed at 4.4GHz with 1.150V SA, 1.25V MC, and 1.25V on VDD/VDDQ.
> 
> Man, I can't even get 4.4GHz stable on a 1200€ boards.


Buy 4x16GB ddr5 kit. Like corsair 4400 4x16 kit.


----------



## asdkj1740

Nizzen said:


> Buy 4x16GB ddr5 kit. Like corsair 4400 4x16 kit.


2*32g should be better...


----------



## CanM4

satinghostrider said:


> Try SA 0.95V first. If still fails stability test, try VDD/VDDQ 1.325V. You can also try ODT 40/240/240/48/48. Do for both channels under Skews. Make sure you monitor the temps of the DIMMs to ensure they don't cross 60 degrees or your errors might be thermally related.
> 
> Make sure you try both XMP1 and XMP2 before trying the above. And stick to 0811 it's still relatively alright for Samsung. I got mine stable but like you, I had alot of issues with the 6000C36 kit and sold it away. The 5600C36 works much better for me to run even the 6000C32 1T preset on my Apex with some minor voltage tweaks.


Thanks for the soluce 😀 i can run it stable 6000c32 32-35-35-60 (manually tweak not the preset) on bios 9011 SA 1V VDD/VDDQ 1.35

XMP1 is stable at 1.35v, XMP2 not stable

Wait and pray for Asus stable Bios


----------



## j o e

Zyther said:


> Did he ever end up blowing it up


He said he’s endurance testing it, maybe in a week or two he’ll do something with it


----------



## Nizzen

asdkj1740 said:


> 2*32g should be better...


Atleast with hynix 😎
He said 4x dimms, so I didn't mention 2x32. I think 2x32 will do 6000+ in soon future


----------



## pR1maL

Alberto_It said:


> Question about Apex Z690 with G. Skill F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK :* i have noticed that there are 2 only ready profiles for Samsung chips with the same name.
> 
> How i can understand the difference? Will more be added?*
> 
> Thank you in advance and sorry if maybe are stupid questions.
> 
> I'm using 0031 version


What I do, is select one of the profiles, apply it, and then hit "Save changes and Reset" as if you were going to exit and reboot. The bios will then show you a list of all the settings that have changed, and ask if you to apply them before exiting. I take a quick screenshot or pic of the info I need, and then I can compare. Then I just back out, and exit the bios with discard changes. 

If I remember correctly, the second profile is C32 and the 1st profile is C40. I'm running the second profile with some tweaks.


----------



## akgis

Hey guys, trying to improve my DDR5

Z690 Hero BIOS 0015
12900k stock atm
DDR5 GSKILL 6000 36CL 2x16GB

Having some issues booting and even normal stability probleams(Crashes in Games and BSODs in Windows) at XMP II, XMP I is more stable atlest when not running games, I know its not my graphics card cause it came from my old 6700k and there it was running 100% stable. 

So its either the RAM or the Mobo

I uped the SA to 1.25 MC to 1.25, VDD and VQD to 1.35 and I cant run 1T no mater what I do even loaded the Samsung profile in the BIOS wich has 1T 1.45 VDD

*







*


----------



## akgis

duplicate please delete.


----------



## shamino1978

sblantipodi said:


> any news on getting 4 sticks of ram working on my 1200€ boards?
> Today my system BSODed at 4.4GHz with 1.150V SA, 1.25V MC, and 1.25V on VDD/VDDQ.
> 
> Man, I can't even get 4.4GHz stable on a 1200€ boards.


did u not see what i posted?


----------



## yd01

akgis said:


> Hey guys, trying to improve my DDR5
> 
> Z690 Hero BIOS 0015
> 12900k stock atm
> DDR5 GSKILL 6000 36CL 2x16GB
> 
> Having some issues booting and even normal stability probleams(Crashes in Games and BSODs in Windows) at XMP II, XMP I is more stable atlest when not running games, I know its not my graphics card cause it came from my old 6700k and there it was running 100% stable.
> 
> So its either the RAM or the Mobo
> 
> I uped the SA to 1.25 MC to 1.25, VDD and VQD to 1.35 and I cant run 1T no mater what I do even loaded the Samsung profile in the BIOS wich has 1T 1.45 VDD
> 
> *
> View attachment 2542110
> *


same here , with Bios Version 0811

looks stable but in Games .... only issues games crashed everytime (e.g. Division2, Fary Cry6 ...) switch to 5600 MHZ and still issues but longer stable sometimes one 1hour, but at all 
insufficient situation:

changed back to fallback Corsair 5200MHZ CL38 stable ....


----------



## TheOnlyGummy

Hi! I need help...and i know im not the only one 
I have a Z690 Extreme Glacial with 12900k and Gskill RAM F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RS, i cant use XMP profile without Blue screen or TM5 error...
Im on a 0811 Bios, the last one on Asus website for the Extreme Glacial. I try some tuning like SA 1V and VDD VDDQ at 1.35V but after 8 min of TM5 i have some errors....
I hope @shamino1978 can help me in some way, this RAM kit it's very expensive and it is very frustrating not to be able to use the xmp profile which is just what I want ... nothing more, i dont need 6000+mhz or CL under 36...im simply happy with XMP. 
Thank you Guys


----------



## beardlessduck

Removing post because there is no progress on my RAM issue and I can't spent time arguing on here.


----------



## Nizzen

beardlessduck said:


> Any chance of the newest BIOS version that supposedly works with 4 sticks of RAM for the Formula? I know people are going to flame me again for expecting a reliable PC, but there are millions of dollars on the line based on my ability to get work done this month. My PC is working to some degree but the RAM issues are really ****ing up my life.
> 
> Thanks in advance to all who will reply with snarky comments.


Link to that 4x16GB memorykit you bought?


----------



## beardlessduck

Removing post because there is no progress on my RAM issue and I can't spent time arguing on here.


----------



## Nizzen

beardlessduck said:


> It's 2 32GB kits. Yes, I already know that XMP might not be possible but I'm running them at 4000mhz instead of 5200mhz.
> 
> This argument has already happened earlier in the thread. Some people believe that you cannot upgrade your RAM if you buy 2 sticks and want to add 2 more in the future. I do not agree with these people. There should be a way for 4 matching sticks to work together to some degree.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> VENGEANCE® 32GB (2x16GB) DDR5 DRAM 5200MHz C38 Memory Kit — Black
> 
> 
> CORSAIR VENGEANCE DDR5, optimized for Intel® motherboards, delivers higher frequencies and greater capacities of DDR5 technology in a high-quality, compact module that suits your system.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.corsair.com


It was the same with ddr4 too. No guaranty that xmp would work with 2x (2x ddr4) kits. Much harder for the imc. That's why there are 4x kits that are matched.
Many getting 4x dimms to work with ddr4. Ekstra cooling and tweaking is required. DDR5 is new tech, so that's a reason there isn't many 4x ddr5 kits on Qvl list for motherboard vendors. If any at all.
Don't blame bios makers, for not fixing mixed memorykits.

.........

Old but may still be valid:
Read here






Dont combine memory kits! The meat and potatoes overview


Don’t combine memory kits! The meat and potatoes overview Spurred by the abundance of combined memory kit related issue threads in the forums, we've put together a quick discourse for you today. Have fun - and don't mind my "humor"! Pricing of memory kits can make it attractive for...



rog.asus.com


----------



## sblantipodi

shamino1978 said:


> did u not see what i posted?


I have a wife and I like girls, but big hug man, I appreciate your effort of making Asus a better brand.
You are making Asus a better brand.

sorry, I lost your last post, I'll try the new beta tomorrow and report back extensive tests.


----------



## sblantipodi

beardlessduck said:


> Removing post because there is no progress on my RAM issue and I can't spent time arguing on here.


What is your problem? I think we are on a similar boat.


----------



## akgis

yd01 said:


> same here , with Bios Version 0811
> 
> looks stable but in Games .... only issues games crashed everytime (e.g. Division2, Fary Cry6 ...) switch to 5600 MHZ and still issues but longer stable sometimes one 1hour, but at all
> insufficient situation:
> 
> changed back to fallback Corsair 5200MHZ CL38 stable ....


Try the beta BIOS 0015 it improved my stability atlest working and web browsing on XMP I, I dont have fallback memory.

What is at fault here? Mobo / Bios / Ram / Samsung ICs. This is getting frustrating and I need PC for gaming. for work I can fallback to laptop.

The RAM is both QVL on Asus Site and on Gskill Site. Who should give support?


----------



## fpas1992

acoustic said:


> That's IMC instability. I found Halo Infinite to be an IMC crusher when the chips came out. No clue what Halo is doing that's catching it so early, but within the first 10-15minutes of a match I would get a CTD.


What have you done to fix this issue? All my games have been crashing within either 1 hour or 10 hours.. Can't seem to find what is happening but it all goes CTD.


----------



## fpas1992

Hey everyone, i recently upgraded my build and noticed playing some games randomly will crash back to the my desktop. Sometimes it happens after 10 hours and sometimes it happens in 30 minutes. It's happened on multiple games, insurgency sandstorm, COD Warzone, BF2042, Halo, New World. When looking into Event Viewer i see these errors : "Nvlddmkm stopped responding but recovered" or something along those lines. I've done a number of things so far and wanting to know what to do or where to go next? My computer has not been overclocked and everything is at stock settings.
My specs are :
Asus z690 Maximus Extreme
Asus rog strix 3090 OC (White Edition)
GSkill Trident 5600 36cl 16gbx2
1000 EVGA P2 PSU
i9-12900k
nzxt aio z73
idle temps: 26c-30c CPU 32-38 GPU
On Load Temps: 40-50c CPU 60-74c GPU
First time using Windows 11

I originally thought it was my RAM as i read online that XMP was causing crashing issues with DDR5 on z690 boards. I disabled XMP and ran at stock settings and it still happens. Other things i have tried:


Used DDU and used old Nvidia Driver (currently trying 497.09, still having issues)
Completely wiped Armory Crate using revo uninstaller ( read online it causes a mess sometimes )
Updated ASUS Bios 2 times ( Most recent one was on 1/5/2021 )
-Made sure everything was updated ( looking at intel website, making sure windows update has everything downloaded)
Anyone have any ideas?


----------



## edkieferlp

fpas1992 said:


> Hey everyone, i recently upgraded my build and noticed playing some games randomly will crash back to the my desktop. Sometimes it happens after 10 hours and sometimes it happens in 30 minutes. It's happened on multiple games, insurgency sandstorm, COD Warzone, BF2042, Halo, New World. When looking into Event Viewer i see these errors : "Nvlddmkm stopped responding but recovered" or something along those lines. I've done a number of things so far and wanting to know what to do or where to go next? My computer has not been overclocked and everything is at stock settings.
> My specs are :
> Asus z690 Maximus Extreme
> Asus rog strix 3090 OC (White Edition)
> GSkill Trident 5600 36cl 16gbx2
> 1000 EVGA P2 PSU
> i9-12900k
> nzxt aio z73
> idle temps: 26c-30c CPU 32-38 GPU
> On Load Temps: 40-50c CPU 60-74c GPU
> First time using Windows 11
> 
> I originally thought it was my RAM as i read online that XMP was causing crashing issues with DDR5 on z690 boards. I disabled XMP and ran at stock settings and it still happens. Other things i have tried:
> 
> 
> Used DDU and used old Nvidia Driver (currently trying 497.09, still having issues)
> Completely wiped Armory Crate using revo uninstaller ( read online it causes a mess sometimes )
> Updated ASUS Bios 2 times ( Most recent one was on 1/5/2021 )
> -Made sure everything was updated ( looking at intel website, making sure windows update has everything downloaded)
> Anyone have any ideas?


"Nvlddmkm stopped responding but recovered" Has to do with vid driver crashing.
I don't have that MB or vid card but here are some things you can try.

1) run games again in debug mode (NVCP option in Help menu). Debug mode removes vendor factory OC's.
2) disable resizable bar
3) disable HAGs
4) run PCIE slot in Gen3 mode.


----------



## fpas1992

edkieferlp said:


> "Nvlddmkm stopped responding but recovered" Has to do with vid driver crashing.
> I don't have that MB or vid card but here are some things you can try.
> 
> 1) run games again in debug mode (NVCP option in Help menu). Debug mode removes vendor factory OC's.
> 2) disable resizable bar
> 3) disable HAGs
> 4) run PCIE slot in Gen3 mode.


Thank you ! I shall try this once I am home.


----------



## Martin778

FYI mine did the same thing, it was spitting out the driver randomly, finally BSODing. Disabling AI OC fixed it. No idea why AI OC broke, it worked fine before.


----------



## fpas1992

Martin778 said:


> FYI mine did the same thing, it was spitting out the driver randomly, finally BSODing. Disabling AI OC fixed it. No idea why AI OC broke, it worked fine before.


Good to know.. i haven't tried to enable AI OC yet.


----------



## satinghostrider

TheOnlyGummy said:


> Hi! I need help...and i know im not the only one
> I have a Z690 Extreme Glacial with 12900k and Gskill RAM F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RS, i cant use XMP profile without Blue screen or TM5 error...
> Im on a 0811 Bios, the last one on Asus website for the Extreme Glacial. I try some tuning like SA 1V and VDD VDDQ at 1.35V but after 8 min of TM5 i have some errors....
> I hope @shamino1978 can help me in some way, this RAM kit it's very expensive and it is very frustrating not to be able to use the xmp profile which is just what I want ... nothing more, i dont need 6000+mhz or CL under 36...im simply happy with XMP.
> Thank you Guys


Try ODT 40/240/240/48/48.
Before you do that, load optimized defaults and save an exit. Go back into bios and run XMP 1 or XMP2 then go to dram timing control and look for skews and odt control. Key in that for both dimm channels.

Run tm5 again and see if it works.
If still fails, increase vdd/vddq to 1.35v, MC to 1.275V and SA to 0.95V.


----------



## satinghostrider

akgis said:


> Hey guys, trying to improve my DDR5
> 
> Z690 Hero BIOS 0015
> 12900k stock atm
> DDR5 GSKILL 6000 36CL 2x16GB
> 
> Having some issues booting and even normal stability probleams(Crashes in Games and BSODs in Windows) at XMP II, XMP I is more stable atlest when not running games, I know its not my graphics card cause it came from my old 6700k and there it was running 100% stable.
> 
> So its either the RAM or the Mobo
> 
> I uped the SA to 1.25 MC to 1.25, VDD and VQD to 1.35 and I cant run 1T no mater what I do even loaded the Samsung profile in the BIOS wich has 1T 1.45 VDD
> 
> *
> View attachment 2542110
> *


You can't run 1T on the Hero or 4 DIMM boards. That preset is mainly for Apex. Change it to 2T and test again. Drop SA to 0.95V VDD/VDDQ/VDDTXQ to 1.40V and MC to 1.275V.

If anything, you may need to adjust vdd/vddq slightly upwards if you have errors in TM5.


----------



## Falkentyne

satinghostrider said:


> Try ODT 40/240/240/48/48.
> Before you do that, load optimized defaults and save an exit. Go back into bios and run XMP 1 or XMP2 then go to dram timing control and look for skews and odt control. Key in that for both dimm channels.
> 
> Run tm5 again and see if it works.
> If still fails, increase vdd/vddq to 1.35v, MC to 1.275V and SA to 0.95V.


Aren't you missing an ODT? There should be 3 sets of 2, not an odd number.


----------



## TheOnlyGummy

satinghostrider said:


> Try ODT 40/240/240/48/48.
> Before you do that, load optimized defaults and save an exit. Go back into bios and run XMP 1 or XMP2 then go to dram timing control and look for skews and odt control. Key in that for both dimm channels.
> 
> Run tm5 again and see if it works.
> If still fails, increase vdd/vddq to 1.35v, MC to 1.275V and SA to 0.95V.


I'm sorry but what exactly would be the odt to be set? I see a mess of options and I don't understand ....
In the meantime i tried xmp with the recommended voltage but immediately errors in tm5 ... in this case i didn't touch the odt because i don't know what option it is exactly


----------



## satinghostrider

Falkentyne said:


> Aren't you missing an ODT? There should be 3 sets of 2, not an odd number.












Not that I know of. I just did for both channels but used my earlier posted ODT.


----------



## Falkentyne

satinghostrider said:


> View attachment 2542145
> 
> 
> Not that I know of. I just did for both channels but used my earlier posted ODT.


Guess it's different for DDR5.
On DDR4 there was a WR, Nom and Park for each channel.
Your SS is blurry but looks like WR and Nom are partially combined.


----------



## beardlessduck

sblantipodi said:


> What is your problem? I think we are on a similar boat.


We do have the same issue, I'm eagerly awaiting a BIOS update that helps with 4 matching sticks from two separate DDR5 kits.


----------



## Nizzen

beardlessduck said:


> We do have the same issue, I'm eagerly awaiting a BIOS update that helps with 4 matching sticks from two separate DDR5 kits.


Send sticks to Corsair and tell them to match them and make a new xmp profile for 4x sticks.....

Yes it aint gonna happend 

You made the problem with mixing kits, now you need to fix it yourself with tweaking subtimings and vdd/q mc and sa. Good luck 

Friendly advice


----------



## bscool

@shamino1978

Strix d4 bios 1001

DR b die 12900kf

Weird issues with cache not working like it should. Would not clock up to 4700 if left on Auto when setting P core manually cache stayed locked at 3600.

Then I set manually cache min 36 and max 46 and that worked for a while. Then suddenly it was staying stuck at 46 all the time.

Now I did a clear cmos and now PPT is disable and Trusted Device tab missing.

I know I can get it back by enabling PPT but doing clear cmos has never done this before.

Normally PPT is enabled and cannot be set to disabled. So not sure if this info is useful to you just thought I would let you know.

Including a few screenshots showing PPT disabled and Trusted Device Missing.

Edit added showing Trusted Device after enable PPT.

Maybe this is new and the intended function?

If so good I know many complained about PPT not being abled to be set to disabled. Me i dont care either way.

Edit 2 added screen shot of

P core 51

E core 39

cache min Auto,

max Cache set to 44

and cache not clocking down.

Also setting cache min to 36 still stays at 44 in Windows.


----------



## shamino1978

fpas1992 said:


> Hey everyone, i recently upgraded my build and noticed playing some games randomly will crash back to the my desktop. Sometimes it happens after 10 hours and sometimes it happens in 30 minutes. It's happened on multiple games, insurgency sandstorm, COD Warzone, BF2042, Halo, New World. When looking into Event Viewer i see these errors : "Nvlddmkm stopped responding but recovered" or something along those lines. I've done a number of things so far and wanting to know what to do or where to go next? My computer has not been overclocked and everything is at stock settings.
> My specs are :
> Asus z690 Maximus Extreme
> Asus rog strix 3090 OC (White Edition)
> GSkill Trident 5600 36cl 16gbx2
> 1000 EVGA P2 PSU
> i9-12900k
> nzxt aio z73
> idle temps: 26c-30c CPU 32-38 GPU
> On Load Temps: 40-50c CPU 60-74c GPU
> First time using Windows 11
> 
> I originally thought it was my RAM as i read online that XMP was causing crashing issues with DDR5 on z690 boards. I disabled XMP and ran at stock settings and it still happens. Other things i have tried:
> 
> 
> Used DDU and used old Nvidia Driver (currently trying 497.09, still having issues)
> Completely wiped Armory Crate using revo uninstaller ( read online it causes a mess sometimes )
> Updated ASUS Bios 2 times ( Most recent one was on 1/5/2021 )
> -Made sure everything was updated ( looking at intel website, making sure windows update has everything downloaded)
> Anyone have any ideas?


Try turning off the pcie power saving stuff


----------



## bscool

Flashing back to older bios from Strix d4 1001 still has stuck cache issue. Either bios 1001 borked something or it is my MB or CPU that is messed up/defective. 

Never had this issue before trying bios 1001. But it could just be a coincidence and would have happened anyway?


----------



## Silent Scone

Hello,

6000 C30 profile.

Per C 54/53/53

6000 C30-34-34-54-1T 

VDD 1.44
VDDQ 1.44
VDDQTX 1.44
SA 0.98
MCVDD 1.2

Apex 0046


----------



## CanM4

Silent Scone said:


> Hello,
> 
> 6000 C30 profile.
> 
> Per C 54/53/53
> 
> 6000 C30-34-34-54-1T
> 
> VDD 1.44
> VDDQ 1.44
> VDDQTX 1.44
> SA 0.98
> MCVDD 1.2
> 
> Apex 0046
> 
> 
> View attachment 2542190


nice timing ! 

what is your max temp on memory stress test ?


----------



## newls1

@bscool DO i want to have PPT disabled in bios?


----------



## bscool

newls1 said:


> @bscool DO i want to have PPT disabled in bios?


Edit i misread what you asked. It is up to you. people usually want to disable it so Win11 cant be installed or updated to by Windows.


----------



## Silent Scone

CanM4 said:


> nice timing !
> 
> what is your max temp on memory stress test ?


Can see it in the screenshot, around 45c if you are referring to the memory


----------



## LionAlonso

bscool said:


> @shamino1978
> 
> Strix d4 bios 1001
> 
> DR b die 12900kf
> 
> Weird issues with cache not working like it should. Would not clock up to 4700 if left on Auto when setting P core manually cache stayed locked at 3600.
> 
> Then I set manually cache min 36 and max 46 and that worked for a while. Then suddenly it was staying stuck at 46 all the time.
> 
> Now I did a clear cmos and now PPT is disable and Trusted Device tab missing.
> 
> I know I can get it back by enabling PPT but doing clear cmos has never done this before.
> 
> Normally PPT is enabled and cannot be set to disabled. So not sure if this info is useful to you just thought I would let you know.
> 
> Including a few screenshots showing PPT disabled and Trusted Device Missing.
> 
> Edit added showing Trusted Device after enable PPT.
> 
> Maybe this is new and the intended function?
> 
> If so good I know many complained about PPT not being abled to be set to disabled. Me i dont care either way.
> 
> Edit 2 added screen shot of
> 
> P core 51
> 
> E core 39
> 
> cache min Auto,
> 
> max Cache set to 44
> 
> and cache not clocking down.
> 
> Also setting cache min to 36 still stays at 44 in Windows.


With min cache auto even at idle it doesnt downclock?


----------



## bscool

LionAlonso said:


> With min cache auto even at idle it doesnt downclock?


Nope. Not if I set max cache.

Starting to wonder if I dont have a defective mb or cpu.

But the thing is when CPU is all set to auto or Ai OC then cache functions like it should. So that leads me to thinking it is MB issues. Temped to return MB as still can return it to Amazon.

Wish there was a bios that could fix it but since I seem to be the only one with the issue i dont think it is a bios issue.


----------



## LionAlonso

bscool said:


> Nope. Starting to wonder if I dont have a defective mb or cpu.
> 
> But the thing is when CPU is all set to auto or Ai OC then cach functions like it should. So that leads me to thnking it is MB issues. Temped to return MB as still can return it to Amazon.
> 
> Wish there was a bios that could fix it but since I seem to be the only one with the issue i dont think it is a bios issue.


But for you whats the correct way of cache functioning? 
i mean, for me in auto, it stays mostly at 3,6
Only goes up (very rarely) to 4,7 if e cores are parked.
And i notice it because HWINFO…
Then if i set a fixed one (min and max value the same) it stays there but dont let the cpu vcore downclock at idle


----------



## bscool

LionAlonso said:


> But for you whats the correct way of cache functioning?
> i mean, for me in auto, it stays mostly at 3,6
> Only goes up (very rarely) to 4,7 if e cores are parked.
> And i notice it because HWINFO…
> Then if i set a fixed one (min and max value the same) it stays there but dont let the cpu vcore downclock at idle


If set min 36 and max 46 it should drop down to 36 at times or when under all core load I thought.

Does yours drop down under all core load like CB23?

If I leave cache on auto and set P core to fix that makes cache stay at 3600 all the time.

Setting P core manually breaks cache for me.


----------



## LionAlonso

bscool said:


> If set min 36 and max 46 it should drop down to 36 at times or when under all core load I thought.
> 
> Does yours drop down under all core load like CB23?


I haven't tried it as said, only tried to put min and max the same (42 for example)
But i guess it should downclock to 36 when e cores are working (most of the time)
But as min is 36, probably wont downclock more at idle and will let the vcore not idle also.
Edit:As shamino said i have cstates always enabled at C8 max state


----------



## shamino1978

bscool said:


> If set min 36 and max 46 it should drop down to 36 at times or when under all core load I thought.
> 
> Does yours drop down under all core load like CB23?
> 
> If I leave cache on auto and set P core to fix that makes cache stay at 3600 all the time.
> 
> Setting P core manually breaks cache for me.


setting synch all cores from bios auto disables csates, you can enabled cstates manually
csates needs to be enabled for ecores to sleep opportuinistically thus for ring to boost up


----------



## bscool

shamino1978 said:


> setting synch all cores from bios auto disables csates, you can enabled cstates manually
> csates needs to be enabled for ecores to sleep opportuinistically thus for ring to boost up


OK thank you I will try that. Thing is I never changed how i have been setting things. But I will try it.


----------



## shamino1978

cstates are disabled if you set "synch allcores" but not if u set by core usage and so on
so it could have just been parked in a different "mode"


----------



## bscool

shamino1978 said:


> cstates are disabled if you set "synch allcores" but not if u set by core usage and so on
> so it could have just been parked in a different "mode"


I think that is what it is. At times I was using per core and now I am using sycn all. THANK YOU

lol I thought I was losing my mind.


----------



## bscool

@shamino1978 

You are the man! That was it 

Dont I feel dumb 💩


----------



## lolhaxz

Different platform, same old issue that has plagued ASUS for years now... crappy bioses relating to memory training.

Boot XMP-II (F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK on Extreme board - 811 bios), run memtest - pass, shutdown machine, start - run memtest - pass, shutdown machine, start - run memtest - pass, shutdown machine...... start - run memtest - fail.

Tends to suggest the board is already electrically at the edge at just 6000MHz - RTL's also clearly start to go whack beyond this.

The above is my standard practice with a ASUS board because the problem is almost expected.

Why, after so many generations are ASUS boards still plagued with the same training reliability issues? its ridiculous.

The D4 bioses have been an even bigger crapshow.

Last ASUS board I will own, good riddance you might say  - I just feel sorry for the regular users who would have to put up with this.

Tried all manners of voltage combinations, VCCSA likes to be 1.0-1.05v, IMC VDD 1.175-1.2v - the training inconsistency remains.


----------



## akgis

wth is wrong with Gskill samsung modules mainly the 5600-6000 cl36 ones everyone is posting instability at default stick CPU and DRAM XMP settings

Mainly HERO boards?


----------



## lolhaxz

akgis said:


> wth is wrong with Gskill samsung modules mainly the 5600-6000 cl36 ones everyone is posting instability at default stick CPU and DRAM XMP settings
> 
> Mainly HERO boards?


I will bet you money its not the modules [at least for the most part] - it will be the bios.

I've been through the exact same thing generation after generation with Asus, takes them 6+ months to get their crap together. Meanwhile, said sticks will be on QVL and everything.


----------



## akgis

fpas1992 said:


> Hey everyone, i recently upgraded my build and noticed playing some games randomly will crash back to the my desktop. Sometimes it happens after 10 hours and sometimes it happens in 30 minutes. It's happened on multiple games, insurgency sandstorm, COD Warzone, BF2042, Halo, New World. When looking into Event Viewer i see these errors : "Nvlddmkm stopped responding but recovered" or something along those lines. I've done a number of things so far and wanting to know what to do or where to go next? My computer has not been overclocked and everything is at stock settings.
> My specs are :
> Asus z690 Maximus Extreme
> Asus rog strix 3090 OC (White Edition)
> GSkill Trident 5600 36cl 16gbx2
> 1000 EVGA P2 PSU
> i9-12900k
> nzxt aio z73
> idle temps: 26c-30c CPU 32-38 GPU
> On Load Temps: 40-50c CPU 60-74c GPU
> First time using Windows 11
> 
> I originally thought it was my RAM as i read online that XMP was causing crashing issues with DDR5 on z690 boards. I disabled XMP and ran at stock settings and it still happens. Other things i have tried:
> 
> 
> Used DDU and used old Nvidia Driver (currently trying 497.09, still having issues)
> Completely wiped Armory Crate using revo uninstaller ( read online it causes a mess sometimes )
> Updated ASUS Bios 2 times ( Most recent one was on 1/5/2021 )
> -Made sure everything was updated ( looking at intel website, making sure windows update has everything downloaded)
> Anyone have any ideas?


Look arround this thread Asus Z690 boards with Gskill Samsung DDR5, the CL36 boards have instability issues at XMP settings and sometimes even with all defaults no XMP, ppl cant even run 4 sticks.

I have same graphics cards as you have that was working fine on older system, but you should test it on other system if possible, its not windows11 aswell last days I went back to windows 10 and had same issues.


----------



## asdkj1740

akgis said:


> wth is wrong with Gskill samsung modules mainly the 5600-6000 cl36 ones everyone is posting instability at default stick CPU and DRAM XMP settings
> 
> Mainly HERO boards?


no, everyone suffers.


----------



## pR1maL

LionAlonso said:


> But for you whats the correct way of cache functioning?
> i mean, for me in auto, it stays mostly at 3,6
> Only goes up (very rarely) to 4,7 if e cores are parked.
> And i notice it because HWINFO…
> Then if i set a fixed one (min and max value the same) it stays there but dont let the cpu vcore downclock at idle





https://skatterbencher.com/2021/11/04/alder-lake-overclocking-whats-new/#Alder_Lake_Overclocking_DDR4DDR5_Memory_Memory_Controller




> The default ring frequency is significantly affected by E-cores. When only P-cores are enabled, the ring frequency is 4.7GHz. However, when E-cores are enabled (and active) the ring frequency drops to 3.6 GHz.


----------



## owikh84

shamino1978 said:


> try this ver
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0061.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com





sblantipodi said:


> any news on getting 4 sticks of ram working on my 1200€ boards?
> Today my system BSODed at 4.4GHz with 1.150V SA, 1.25V MC, and 1.25V on VDD/VDDQ.
> Man, I can't even get 4.4GHz stable on a 1200€ boards.





beardlessduck said:


> Removing post because there is no progress on my RAM issue and I can't spent time arguing on here.


Sorry for my late feedback, been busy relocating the Z690 Extreme to my main rig in the Lian Li V3000 case.
BIOS 0061 is superb, so far my 4x16GB 6000C36 seem to be stable at 5200 CL32 @ 1.30v and 5600 CL34 @ 1.35v, which is similar to my Hero. I will finalize the testing as soon as my loops are completely free of bubbles and post it here.
Thank you shamino for the effort!


----------



## Tradition

bscool said:


> I think that is what it is. At times I was using per core and now I am using sycn all. THANK YOU
> 
> lol I thought I was losing my mind.


you can go in the c states config and set it as cpu default then it will work


----------



## Silent Scone

lolhaxz said:


> Different platform, same old issue that has plagued ASUS for years now... crappy bioses relating to memory training.
> 
> Boot XMP-II (F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK on Extreme board - 811 bios), run memtest - pass, shutdown machine, start - run memtest - pass, shutdown machine, start - run memtest - pass, shutdown machine...... start - run memtest - fail.
> 
> Tends to suggest the board is already electrically at the edge at just 6000MHz - RTL's also clearly start to go whack beyond this.


Hello,

That's an interesting theory. Can you then explain how 6600-7000 is possible?


----------



## lolhaxz

Silent Scone said:


> Hello,
> 
> That's an interesting theory. Can you then explain how 6600-7000 is possible?


Hello,

That's an interesting question.

Not sure how it's relevant - however, 6600-7000 is possible, probably, due to using a 2 dimm board - the Apex typically always has the usual 400-600mhz higher headroom... for obvious reasons.

You sure are not doing 7000MHz on a 4-Dimm ASUS board.

Infact other than taking some thought provoking screenshots, I doubt you are doing 7000MHz with any stability on a Apex either .

I can happily boot into windows at 6600MHz on the Extreme and take some screenshots, no problemo... my use case extends a little further than that tho.

The problem here is reliable, repeatable, _stability_


----------



## Spiriva

I picked up a pair of "F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5K" "G skill Trident Z5 DDR5-6000MHz CL36-36-36-76 1.30V"

Is bios version 0811 the latest one for the z690 Hero still? Or is there a beta bios out too for the Z690 Hero?


----------



## Silent Scone

lolhaxz said:


> Hello,
> 
> That's an interesting question.
> 
> Not sure how it's relevant - however, 6600-7000 is possible, probably, due to using a 2 dimm board - the Apex typically always has the usual 400-600mhz higher headroom... for obvious reasons.
> 
> You sure are not doing 7000MHz on a 4-Dimm ASUS board.
> 
> Infact other than taking some thought provoking screenshots, I doubt you are doing 7000MHz with any stability on a Apex either .
> 
> I can happily boot into windows at 6600MHz on the Extreme and take some screenshots, no problemo... my use case extends a little further than that tho.
> 
> The problem here is reliable, repeatable, _stability_


Interesting, so you feel the board is electrically at its limit at 6K when you're able to boot at over 600MHz beyond this. Fascinating. Any reason why you're using XMP II and not XMP I?

Perhaps disable MRC full check and enable MRC Fastboot to see if that helps, although it sounds like you've already made up your mind.

The Extreme is validated up to 6400


7K+ Does in fact work, but will require a strong IMC and the right modules (APEX).

Here's 6800 in case you're interested. That's 200MHz above the maximum quoted validation on the website, just for reference.


----------



## Rpro

Hello friend @shamino1978! there was such a problem for me and a couple of other friends with the apex: the highics with one bar in the second slot starts 7000, in the first one does not. Information came that revision 1.02 is a marriage of the first slot and revision 2.01 has been released that fixes this. processor sp94. can you answer is it true?


----------



## joneffingvo

what’s the latest bios for the z690 hero, anything newer than 811?


----------



## TheOnlyGummy

Someone can help me with my extreme glacial and gskill 6000 C36 that cant run stable with xmp profile? No new beta bios for my MB? Another question....i have a full custom loop with 3 360mm rads in a Lian Li O11D XL....6 fans intake and 4 exhaust....i try to set my ram at 1.35V and when i run a stress test my ram temp raise to 60 degree....in this forum i see picture of a 1.45V at 47 degree max....is this possible without a fan over the ram?


----------



## MarkDeMark

Here are the available DDR5 modules in my area. If you own any of those, could you please point out if they are Hynix chips? Thanks
1. Corsair Dominator Platinum *CMT32GX5M2X5600C36 *
2. XPG Lancer *AX5U6000C4016G-DCLARBK*
3. Most of the *5600-6000 TZ5 G.SKILL* line-up, but I am quite certain all of those are Samsung


----------



## asdkj1740

MarkDeMark said:


> Here are the available DDR5 modules in my area. If you own any of those, could you please point out if they are Hynix chips? Thanks
> 1. Corsair Dominator Platinum *CMT32GX5M2X5600C36 *
> 2. XPG Lancer *AX5U6000C4016G-DCLARBK*
> 3. Most of the *5600-6000 TZ5 G.SKILL* line-up, but I am quite certain all of those are Samsung


xpg lancer


----------



## beardlessduck

owikh84 said:


> Sorry for my late feedback, been busy relocating the Z690 Extreme to my main rig in the Lian Li V3000 case.
> BIOS 0061 is superb, so far my 4x16GB 6000C36 seem to be stable at 5200 CL32 @ 1.30v and 5600 CL34 @ 1.35v, which is similar to my Hero. I will finalize the testing as soon as my loops are completely free of bubbles and post it here.
> Thank you shamino for the effort!


Awesome to hear. I hope it's available for the Formula soon!


----------



## sblantipodi

owikh84 said:


> Sorry for my late feedback, been busy relocating the Z690 Extreme to my main rig in the Lian Li V3000 case.
> BIOS 0061 is superb, so far my 4x16GB 6000C36 seem to be stable at 5200 CL32 @ 1.30v and 5600 CL34 @ 1.35v, which is similar to my Hero. I will finalize the testing as soon as my loops are completely free of bubbles and post it here.
> Thank you shamino for the effort!


I confirm that the new beta is superb.

With 0811 my 4x16GB 5600MHz C36 Samsung memory insta bsodded @5.2GHz/C40 as soon as windows is loaded with
1.150SA
1.25MC
1.35VDD/VDDQ
With 0811 I had problems stabilizing 4.4GHz during stress test with Karhu and memtest. Sometimes Cinebench crashes.

With the new 0061 BIOS with the same settings I can easily run Cinebench R23 @5.2GHz/C40 that for my system is a big achievement but it fails after some minutes of Karhu ram test.

Memory training is much much faster than before.

I'm currently testing 4.8GHz, if I can be stable at 4.8GHz I would consider my self pretty happy 😁
Continue testing 4.8GHz to see if I can be 100% stable.

In any case you are a Wizard @shamino1978, Asus must be proud of people like you!!!


----------



## shamino1978

my co worker worked on it , i just passed it along


----------



## MarkDeMark

asdkj1740 said:


> xpg lancer


@* asdkj1740 *100% sure for this particular model (*AX5U6000C4016G-DCLARBK)?*
The info is nowhere to be found. Isn't it about time that all companies advertise this info? It's not even part of the module P/N code for ADATA XPG....


----------



## Carillo

Is it true what they say about Apex REV 1.02 ? Bad memory traces for Slot #1 ? So Asus released a REV 2.01 in silence ?


----------



## X909

@shamino1978

Is there any chance we see Cache OffSet-Frequency instead of fixing a max? Currently we have the choice between around 4200 Mhz max allways or 3600 to 4700 depending on eCores active or not. How nice would it be to have the Automatism of higher clocks when e cores are parked but change the clock range to 4200 (ecores active) to 5000 (ecores sleep) in example  Best of the two worlds...


----------



## LionAlonso

X909 said:


> @shamino1978
> 
> Is there any chance we see Cache OffSet-Frequency instead of fixing a max? Currently we have the choice between around 4200 Mhz max allways or 3600 to 4700 depending on eCores active or not. How nice would it be to have the Automatism of higher clocks when e cores are parked but change the clock range to 4200 (ecores active) to 5000 (ecores sleep) in example  Best of the two worlds...


Probably CPU limitation


----------



## SuperMumrik

Carillo said:


> So Asus released a REV 2.01 in silence ?


Oh joy! 😵
If that's the case, mine is one of the affected


----------



## Nizzen

Carillo said:


> Is it true what they say about Apex REV 1.02 ? Bad memory traces for Slot #1 ? So Asus released a REV 2.01 in silence ?
> View attachment 2542221


***? 🤯😵😱


----------



## edkieferlp

I have a quick question, if you save bios settings to CMO file, what app can be used to view them in windows?


----------



## asdkj1740

MarkDeMark said:


> @* asdkj1740 *100% sure for this particular model (*AX5U6000C4016G-DCLARBK)?*
> The info is nowhere to be found. Isn't it about time that all companies advertise this info? It's not even part of the module P/N code for ADATA XPG....


i cant sorry.
at least that's what gigabyte's qvl stated.

xpg lancer rgb has both hynix and micron at 5200xmp models.


----------



## MarkDeMark

asdkj1740 said:


> i cant sorry.
> at least that's what gigabyte's qvl stated.
> 
> xpg lancer rgb has both hynix and micron at 5200xmp models.


No problem - thanks - it does indeed seem to be Hynix


----------



## Carillo

Rpro said:


> Hello friend @shamino1978! there was such a problem for me and a couple of other friends with the apex: the highics with one bar in the second slot starts 7000, in the first one does not. Information came that revision 1.02 is a marriage of the first slot and revision 2.01 has been released that fixes this. processor sp94. can you answer is it true?
> View attachment 2542210


You have link to this forum and picture of 2.01 board ?


----------



## Agent-A01

edkieferlp said:


> I have a quick question, if you save bios settings to CMO file, what app can be used to view them in windows?


Any text editor will do


----------



## MarkDeMark

Carillo said:


> You have link to this forum and picture of 2.01 board ?


Exactly. Picture of a 2.01? If they haven't done it yet., ASUS isn't gonna come forward with this info now... In your dreams.


----------



## edkieferlp

Agent-A01 said:


> Any text editor will do


Then something went wrong, its all unreadable in notepad and notepad++


----------



## bscool

edkieferlp said:


> Then something went wrong, its all unreadable in notepad and notepad++


You cant read that? Me either  hehe

I know if you save as txt file and not cmo you can read it in Windows.


----------



## Rpro

Карилло said:


> У вас есть ссылка на этот форум и изображение платы 2.01?
> [/ЦИТИРОВАТЬ]
> 
> 
> DDR-5 на платформе Intel. Статистика разгона, советы, обсуждение результатов. • Конференция Overclockers.ru
> 
> 
> Информация от Китайских оверлокеров
> Вставьте планку в первый слот и во второй, во втором слоте у всех моих знакомых и у меня лично 7000 сразу, в первом это невозможно (


----------



## Rpro

Сначало герой, теперь проблемы с апексом. Возможно, дело не в ревизии а в партии


----------



## edkieferlp

bscool said:


> You cant read that? Me either  hehe
> 
> I know if you save as txt file and not cmo you can read it in Windows.


hehe, I saved using F2, not Ctrl+F2 so I got CMO file, I now did it in text format (Ctrl+F2) and all is good


----------



## bscool

About the difference in frequency in slots. The same thing was happening on z590 MB Apex and Unify x. More to do with IMC or MB layout or combo from what i could tell. Uness this is different with the z690 Apex

Edit reading the linked thread there is no issue. People like to cause drama. One of the posters there has the old and new revison and he can run 7000+ on both.



DDR-5 на платформе Intel. Статистика разгона, советы, обсуждение результатов. • Конференция Overclockers.ru


----------



## Rpro

bscool said:


> Насчет разницы частот в слотах. То же самое происходило на z590 MB Apex и Unify x. Насколько я могу судить, больше связано с макетом IMC или MB или комбо. Uness, это отличается от z690 Apex.
> [/ЦИТИРОВАТЬ]
> Первый слот ближе к процессору, он должен легче запускать, одной палкой 7000 он может только во втором, проверили уже 3 апекса. Хотелось бы чтоб я ошибался


----------



## bscool

@Rpro 

Do you own a z590 MB? Same thing farther slot clocks higher.


----------



## Carillo

bscool said:


> About the difference in frequency in slots. The same thing was happening on z590 MB Apex and Unify x. More to do with IMC or MB layout or combo from what i could tell. Uness this is different with the z690 Apex


Why would the 2.01 exist( if it exist) if there wasn't something fundamental wrong with 1.02 ?


----------



## bscool

Carillo said:


> Why would the 2.01 exist( if it exist) if there wasn't something fundamental wrong with 1.02 ?


I dont know. But do you own z590. It was the same thing, farther slot clocked higher.

You could be right just putting that out there.


----------



## Carillo

bscool said:


> I dont know. But do you own z590. It was the same thing, farther slot clocked higher.


The problem here is far more complicated than a small frequency difference between slot 1 and 2 ... In one case they run 7000 in one slot and a maximum of 6200 in the other slot with the same stick.


----------



## bscool

@Carillo Did you read the posts in the link? A user has both revisions and they clock the same for him. Both 7000+


----------



## bscool

Carillo said:


> The problem here is far more complicated than a small frequency difference between slot 1 and 2 ... In one case they run 7000 in one slot and a maximum of 6200 in the other slot with the same stick.


So just some of the first revisiouns are bad? there is a poster in that linked thread that has both and can clock 7000+ on old revison also.


----------



## Rpro

bscool said:


> @Carillo Вы читали сообщения по ссылке? У пользователя обе ревизии и часы у него одинаковые. Оба 7000+
> [/ЦИТИРОВАТЬ]
> У меня лично и моих друзей первый слот 6400, второй 7000


----------



## bscool

So get a Unify X and post back with both slots running 7000. Proof. Right?


----------



## Rpro

Все три платы 2021 октября. Партия одна. Сегодня получил новый апекс но он к сожалению из того же числа


----------



## bscool

I dont know but instead of getting upset you need to verify it is true. I always want to test and verify things for myself. Hence why the last few gens i by both Apex and Unify. This gen i went cheap and Strix d4.


----------



## Rpro

На днях приедет ещё 2 платы. Будем смотреть


----------



## bscool

Rpro said:


> На днях приедет ещё 2 платы. Будем смотреть


More Apex?

Why not Unify X if this is an Apex issue?

I get it you are hoping for new version but if you get uify X and it runs 7000 both stick that tells you it is Apex.


----------



## Rpro

bscool said:


> Больше Апекса?
> 
> Почему бы не использовать Unify X, если это проблема Apex?
> [/ЦИТИРОВАТЬ]
> Да апекса) хочется убедится. Надеюсь на другую ревизию или партию и что это исправит это. Всегда в начале покупал msi и тд, и всегда возвращался к asus


----------



## bscool

I hope your right. What waste of time it would be and you get a new revision and still same issues. sending 20 MB back


----------



## Carillo

bscool said:


> So get a Unify X and post back with both slots running 7000. Proof. Right?



What should that prove? LOL. Point is, does 2.01 exist, and why.... If you read my initial post, you can see that the what I wrote, is a question, not a statement.


----------



## bscool

[QUOTE = "Carillo, post: 28927326, member: 557830"]
What should that prove? Lol. Point is, does 2.01 exist, and why .... If you read my initial post, you can see that the what I wrote, is a question, not a statement.
[/ QUOTE]
If the unify x runs 7000 both sticks and Apex version 1 doesn then it proves version 1 Apex is defective like is the theory now. Not?

And i said I dont know to your question.


----------



## bscool

And really, who do you guys care? you will buy 20 kits or ram 10 cpus to bin. Whats buying another MB? 😁


----------



## jomama22

Looks like one person quoting some Chinese forum who had an issue with their Apex. Plenty of people without large differences between slots.

Guy who is saying it only has ddr4 anyway....


----------



## Rpro

bscool said:


> И действительно, кого вы, ребята, волнуете? выкупите 20 комплектов или выбросите 10 процессоров в мусорное ведро. Что покупать еще один МБ? 😁
> [/ЦИТИРОВАТЬ]
> Отбирал 20 процессоров, максимум что получил sp94. Друг перебрал 50шт, сегодня у него максимальное из 50шт 94сп


----------



## bscool

Exactly what is buying 20 more MB to run 7000. Drop in the bucket


----------



## jomama22

Carillo said:


> What should that prove? LOL. Point is, does 2.01 exist, and why.... If you read my initial post, you can see that the what I wrote, is a question, not a statement.


Revisions can be any number of things, and not necessarily good. Could literally be finding cheaper, yet slightly differently shaped components and hence, a slight pad placement change is needed.


----------



## Silent Scone

bscool said:


> Exactly what is buying 20 more MB to run 7000. Drop in the bucket


Some people have a hard enough time coming to terms with CPU variance, start talking about board variance and they'll lose their minds


----------



## Rpro

Silent Scone said:


> Некоторым людям достаточно трудно смириться с дисперсией ЦП, начать говорить о дисперсии платы, и они сойдут с ума.
> [/ЦИТИРОВАТЬ]
> Видел хиру, была формула, есть апекс, у друга экстрим и все 690 в этом поколении загнутые платы. Это нормально? То что хиры горели это мало доказывает что косяки только там могут быть


----------



## TheOne1894

sblantipodi said:


> I confirm that the new beta is superb.
> 
> With 0811 my 4x16GB 5600MHz C36 Samsung memory insta bsodded @5.2GHz/C40 as soon as windows is loaded with
> 1.150SA
> 1.25MC
> 1.35VDD/VDDQ
> With 0811 I had problems stabilizing 4.4GHz during stress test with Karhu and memtest. Sometimes Cinebench crashes.
> 
> With the new 0061 BIOS with the same settings I can easily run Cinebench R23 @5.2GHz/C40 that for my system is a big achievement but it fails after some minutes of Karhu ram test.
> 
> Memory training is much much faster than before.
> 
> I'm currently testing 4.8GHz, if I can be stable at 4.8GHz I would consider my self pretty happy 😁
> Continue testing 4.8GHz to see if I can be 100% stable.
> 
> In any case you are a Wizard @shamino1978, Asus must be proud of people like you!!!





sblantipodi said:


> I confirm that the new beta is superb.
> 
> With 0811 my 4x16GB 5600MHz C36 Samsung memory insta bsodded @5.2GHz/C40 as soon as windows is loaded with
> 1.150SA
> 1.25MC
> 1.35VDD/VDDQ
> With 0811 I had problems stabilizing 4.4GHz during stress test with Karhu and memtest. Sometimes Cinebench crashes.
> 
> With the new 0061 BIOS with the same settings I can easily run Cinebench R23 @5.2GHz/C40 that for my system is a big achievement but it fails after some minutes of Karhu ram test.
> 
> Memory training is much much faster than before.
> 
> I'm currently testing 4.8GHz, if I can be stable at 4.8GHz I would consider my self pretty happy 😁
> Continue testing 4.8GHz to see if I can be 100% stable.
> 
> In any case you are a Wizard @shamino1978, Asus must be proud of people like you!!!


@shamino1978 

I got the same problem with the Board ProArt Z690-Creator WIFO too. I have the same 4x16GB 5600MHz C36 Samsung memory install!

Please give the board a beta bios too! Thanks


----------



## sblantipodi

TheOne1894 said:


> @shamino1978
> 
> I got the same problem with the Board ProArt Z690-Creator WIFO too. I have the same 4x16GB 5600MHz C36 Samsung memory install!
> 
> Please give the board a beta bios too! Thanks


What are the setting you are trying and what are the frequencyes and timings you are using to be stable?


----------



## marti69

any feedbacks on apex 9901 bios and gskill oc compare to to 0811?


----------



## Lord Alzov

У меня старая плата 1 ревизии 7200+винду грузит биос хз мб еще выше не проверял.
Зависит еще от КП процессора сильно у меня был 6600 с ошибками, щас 6800CL30 стабильно.
I have an old board of 1 revision 7200+Windows loads bios xs mb even higher did not check. It also depends on the CPU IMC very much, I had 6600 with errors on old 12900k, right now 6800CL30 is stable.


----------



## Lord Alzov

bscool said:


> [QUOTE = "Carillo, post: 28927326, member: 557830"]
> What should that prove? Lol. Point is, does 2.01 exist, and why .... If you read my initial post, you can see that the what I wrote, is a question, not a statement.
> [/ QUOTE]
> If the unify x runs 7000 both sticks and Apex version 1 doesn then it proves version 1 Apex is defective like is the theory now. Not?
> 
> And i said I dont know to your question.


I run 7200 on apex 1


----------



## Rpro

Лорд Альзов said:


> У меня старая плата 1 ревизии 7200+винду грузит биос хз мб еще выше не проверял.
> Зависит еще от КП процессор сильно у меня был 6600 с ошибками, щас 6800CL30 стабильно.
> У меня старая плата 1 ревизии 7200+винда грузит биос хз мб даже выше не проверял. Так же очень сильно зависит от процессора IMC, у меня на старом 12900к был 6600 с ошибками, щас 6800CL30 стабильно.
> [/ЦИТИРОВАТЬ]
> Возможно вообще дело не в ревизии. А партия какая то


----------



## Rpro

Лорд Алзов said:


> Я запускаю 7200 на вершине 1
> [/ЦИТИРОВАТЬ]
> Можешь поделиться настройками? Проверим


----------



## sblantipodi

shamino1978 said:


> my co worker worked on it , i just passed it along


Ok, can't get stable 4.8GHz.
Reverting to a crappy 4.4GHz and hope that it's stable at 4.4 at least.


----------



## owikh84

Carillo said:


> The problem here is far more complicated than a small frequency difference between slot 1 and 2 ... In one case they run 7000 in one slot and a maximum of 6200 in the other slot with the same stick.


Remember I posted here before about my SP91 CPU on Strix Z690-A D4?
Only slot 4 is able to boot DR at 4133+ Gear 1. 
I thought my mobo was defective, but turns out that it was my IMC being weak.
Bought this SP88 CPU and all slots can boot DR at 4133+ Gear 1 on the same board.


----------



## IronAge

MarkDeMark said:


> @* asdkj1740 *100% sure for this particular model (*AX5U6000C4016G-DCLARBK)?*
> The info is nowhere to be found. Isn't it about time that all companies advertise this info? It's not even part of the module P/N code for ADATA XPG....


I own a Kit of XPG Lancer 6000C40 and some others in germany as well, they have Hynix IC.


----------



## MarkDeMark

IronAge said:


> I own a Kit of XPG Lancer 6000C40 and some others in germany as well, they have Hynix IC.


@IronAge Thanks! Decent and fun overclocking with these Hynix - lots of headroom? A little more fun than Samsung at this point in time with DDR5?


----------



## bscool

;


rissler84 said:


> 12900k and Asus rog strix a gaming d4
> 
> I updated from 0901 to 1001 and it completely recalculated my CPU and which cores is best for OC.
> Best to worst, it also says that the cores needs much more voltage.
> Bios 0901 SP84 - PC 91 - EC 71 - 7,5,2,3,0,1,6,4
> Bios 1001 SP83 - PC 90 - EC 70 - 6,7,4,5,2,3,0,1
> 
> Then I went back to 0901 and now my CPU is again SP84 but now PC94 and EC66.
> Best cores is back to the original order 7,5,2,3,0,1,6,4.
> 
> I then went back to 1001 it same result, really strange.


Did you every get your SP # back to what they originally were on bios 901?

I had the same issue Ill post about it at the z690 Strix d4 thread so not clutter up this thread if there more discussion about it. ASUS ROG Strix Z690-A Gaming WiFi D4 Thread


----------



## hey_aj

Bladed said:


> Halo Infinite is proving to be the hardest benchmark when testing for stability lol. I can get my settings to pass 6+ cycles of TM5 +anta777 config, memtest, and aida64 stress / benchmark, but crash within the first game of Halo Infinite.
> 
> With stock ram settings, I can play Halo Infinite for hours. Anything more than 3200Mhz and I crash within the first game.


I hear you, I am running my G.Skill 2x16 DDR5 6000mhz CL36 kit at stock on the Apex as enabling XMP I or II causes crashes on Halo Infinite consistently.


----------



## asdkj1740

IronAge said:


> I own a Kit of XPG Lancer 6000C40 and some others in germany as well, they have Hynix IC.


can you check whether there is thermal pad for pmic on this kit? 
a flashlight can do the trick. thanks


----------



## satinghostrider

Did any of you guys watercool your RGB kits?


----------



## shamino1978

sblantipodi said:


> Ok, can't get stable 4.8GHz.
> Reverting to a crappy 4.4GHz and hope that it's stable at 4.4 at least.


try this version:








ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0067.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com


----------



## shamino1978

beardlessduck said:


> Awesome to hear. I hope it's available for the Formula soon!


after finalized on extreme will synch up on others.


----------



## shamino1978

Carillo said:


> Why would the 2.01 exist( if it exist) if there wasn't something fundamental wrong with 1.02 ?


there is no 2.01.
this is a rumor started by some china power users when they saw some hi clock results.
we have dispatched a latest batch of apexes to evaluate the variations in pcb impedances affecting oc. 
there maybe some boards with variations resulting on worse oc (but not unusual from what impedance variation can occur)


----------



## Rpro

[ЦИТАТА="shamino1978, сообщение: 28927594, участник: 622726"]
2.01 нет.
это слух, запущенный некоторыми опытными пользователями Китая, когда они увидели некоторые высокие результаты.
мы отправили последнюю партию апексов для оценки изменений импеданса печатных плат, влияющих на oc.
могут быть некоторые платы с вариациями, приводящими к ухудшению ОС (но не редкость из-за того, что может произойти изменение импеданса)
[/ЦИТИРОВАТЬ]
Большое спасибо) Рад слышать что это слух. 👍👍👍Всегда доверяю тебе друг


----------



## Carillo

shamino1978 said:


> there is no 2.01.
> this is a rumor started by some china power users when they saw some hi clock results.
> we have dispatched a latest batch of apexes to evaluate the variations in pcb impedances affecting oc.
> there maybe some boards with variations resulting on worse oc (but not unusual from what impedance variation can occur)


thanks for the clarification


----------



## sblantipodi

shamino1978 said:


> try this version:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0067.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


You tell me what I need to do and I do it. 😁
Testing it.


----------



## Spiriva

@shamino1978 Do we have a newer bios for the z690 Hero then 0811 ?


----------



## sblantipodi

shamino1978 said:


> try this version:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0067.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


Differently from 0061, with 0067 I got an instant BSOD as soon as windows started at 5.2GHz.
Trying at 4.8GHz if I can be stable during mem tests.

Just one question.
Can I consider 1.35V for TX VDDQ and VDD/VDDQ a safe voltage for long term use and for testing or am I damaging my RAM/CPU?


----------



## asdkj1740

Carillo said:


> thanks for the clarification


some power users even came up with the idea that apex had poor memory traces on channel a, causing poor oc or even memory and cpu burnt, since oct 21.


----------



## Rpro

[ЦИТАТА="asdkj1740, сообщение: 28927611, участник: 483688"]
некоторые опытные пользователи даже пришли к выводу, что с 21 октября у apex были плохие следы памяти на канале a, что приводило к плохой работе ОС или даже к сгоранию памяти и процессора.
[/ЦИТИРОВАТЬ]
У меня погорела одна палка как раз) сдам обратно её


----------



## asdkj1740

Rpro said:


> [ЦИТАТА="asdkj1740, сообщение: 28927611, участник: 483688"]
> некоторые опытные пользователи даже пришли к выводу, что с 21 октября у apex были плохие следы памяти на канале a, что приводило к плохой работе ОС или даже к сгоранию памяти и процессора.
> [/ЦИТИРОВАТЬ]
> У меня погорела одна палка как раз) сдам обратно её


the first pack of 6000u3636e i got, cant even finish aida64 benchmark at default 4800mhz.
and i didnt blame gigabyte.

the most insane idea is to blame the traces on pcb.
in general reviewers or power users may criticize on components, layouts, performance, bios optimization etc.
but blaming/commenting on traces requires super high level of professional knowledge in the practical field. you cant even visually check all the memory traces.


----------



## cstkl1

asdkj1740 said:


> some power users even came up with the idea that apex had poor memory traces on channel a, causing poor oc or even memory and cpu burnt, since oct 21.


one basket started. rest followed. 
atm if there was a blame or fault its either this

1. ram timing formulation - i have seen enough cpu imc to noticed on hynix not all can run the same subs. the disparity is huge
2. i think ppl should start checking their rams and see whether its faulty or not

everybody overengineered their boards because nobody knew what to expect and what new rams etc will be coming.. bios can only be tuned for whats now. 

if ddr4 z690 we are seeing disparity between cpu imc.. y ppl think ddr5 is exempted?


----------



## shamino1978

Spiriva said:


> @shamino1978 Do we have a newer bios for the z690 Hero then 0811 ?


later


----------



## Alberto_It

shamino1978 said:


> later


Hoping also on Apex with further improvements


----------



## Silent Scone

asdkj1740 said:


> some power users even came up with the idea that apex had poor memory traces on channel a, causing poor oc or even memory and cpu burnt, since oct 21.


A lot of the time when looking at this stuff vicariously, saying it works on my system if you do X and Y is all one can really say.

This does not imply it will work for everyone. Any PCB carrying a signal will have some kind of variance (although most of which is the CPU). This is where some users fall over because they want to believe it's something else when it is not. Especially when you're talking about running something like 7GHz on this platform where every condition has to be aligned tightly for stability. If these things were that easy, I'm sure the memory vendors would be putting out kits rated higher instead of 800MHz to 1GHz below.


----------



## skullbringer

it seems like Apex is in decent place atm and 4 dimmers need some love first, but are there further optimizations planned for memory OC on Apex?

I'm asking because I can't run Teamgroup 6400c40 at XMP (tested XMP I and XMP II) with bios 0046 or 9901 TM5 stable. If that is just down to impedance variations on my board and it just needs manual tuning in all cases, so be it, just would like to know. For reference, same CPU and same memory kit on Tachyon and Unify-X run XMP TM5 stable.

Also atm v/f point offsets for adaptive vcore don't apply at every reboot on Apex, it seems random even on warm restarts. Is this issue known and tracked for future fix?


----------



## cstkl1

skullbringer said:


> it seems like Apex is in decent place atm and 4 dimmers need some love first, but are there further optimizations planned for memory OC on Apex?
> 
> I'm asking because I can't run Teamgroup 6400c40 at XMP (tested XMP I and XMP II) with bios 0046 or 9901 TM5 stable. If that is just down to impedance variations on my board and it just needs manual tuning in all cases, so be it, just would like to know. For reference, same CPU and same memory kit on Tachyon and Unify-X run XMP TM5 stable.
> 
> Also atm v/f point offsets for adaptive vcore don't apply at every reboot on Apex, it seems random even on warm restarts. Is this issue known and tracked for future fix?


1T try 0072/0806
2T xmp try 0811
2T go 0021 go straight 6800

load optimize, save, reboot, ezflash

6400
ignore xmp just key it 30-37-37-28 - 6400
1T rtl 61|56
2T rtl 62|57


----------



## IronAge

asdkj1740 said:


> can you check whether there is thermal pad for pmic on this kit?
> a flashlight can do the trick. thanks


looks like they have no thermal pad on the PMIC at all, since that stylish RGB reflector sits above the position of the PMIC. 🤦‍♂️

i also asked sb who actually removed the HS from his XPG Lancer and he stated that there has been no TIM on PMIC.

picture of naked modules inside spoiler



Spoiler


----------



## Tradition

something weird happened yesterday

my cpu wont do 4000 gear 1 with micron e-die 
but for some reason i was able to boot once at 4000 cl18 with 1.42v SA 
and it was rock solid stable restarted with exactly same timings and stuff started erroring out
i think its something to do with memmory tranning but i cant quite figure it out


----------



## asdkj1740

IronAge said:


> looks like they have no thermal pad on the PMIC at all, since that stylish RGB reflector sits above the position of the PMIC. 🤦‍♂️
> 
> i also asked sb who actually removed the HS from his XPG Lancer and he stated that there has been no TIM on PMIC.
> 
> picture of naked modules inside spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler


i was thinking adata would have put thermal pad for pmic at higher frequency rated kits.
thank you and your friend.


----------



## IronAge

asdkj1740 said:


> i was thinking adata would have put thermal pad for pmic at higher frequency rated kits.
> thank you and your friend.


welcome. he had to use a heat gun in order to remove the hs since adata uses a strong glue, "catastrophy" in his words.


----------



## shamino1978

skullbringer said:


> it seems like Apex is in decent place atm and 4 dimmers need some love first, but are there further optimizations planned for memory OC on Apex?
> 
> I'm asking because I can't run Teamgroup 6400c40 at XMP (tested XMP I and XMP II) with bios 0046 or 9901 TM5 stable. If that is just down to impedance variations on my board and it just needs manual tuning in all cases, so be it, just would like to know. For reference, same CPU and same memory kit on Tachyon and Unify-X run XMP TM5 stable.
> 
> Also atm v/f point offsets for adaptive vcore don't apply at every reboot on Apex, it seems random even on warm restarts. Is this issue known and tracked for future fix?


I dont know of vf pt offset issues. Describe. In bios you set x and in os you readback y or?


----------



## Alberto_It

@shamino1978 Will be added to the next bios? 

Versione 16.0.15.1620
2022/01/12 7.22 MBytes
MEUpdateTool
Intel has identified security issue that could potentially place impacted platform at risk.
Use ME Update tool to update your ME.
*We suggest you update ME Driver to the latest Version 16.0.15.1620 simultaneously.
Please download the file and check the MD5 code first.
MD5: 2f7e66424ecb9273a5886b6cbe0940ed



https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/03CHIPSET/MEUpdateTool_16.0.15.1620_T.zip


----------



## Nch

DOOOLY said:


> I am having an issue with the Z690 Hero USB ports. If I use all the 4 lower ports and run a game it shuts off those ports. If I restart they come back and work. Is this supposed to happen?
> View attachment 2541834


I believe this is windows power saving feature. I had the same problems with front USBs 3.0. Go to control panels (there are still there even in win 11, just search control panel in start), set your power plan, not to suspens usb in advanced settings. After open device manager (right click on start icon) and set not to turn off usb in properties of all usb controllers, hubs etc.


----------



## asdkj1740

IronAge said:


> welcome. he had to use a heat gun in order to remove the hs since adata uses a strong glue, "catastrophy" in his words.


btw i cant see your pictures it seem hardwareluxx account login is required.


----------



## IronAge

asdkj1740 said:


> btw i cant see your pictures it seem hardwareluxx account login is required.


fixed, uploaded them here.


----------



## asdkj1740

IronAge said:


> fixed, uploaded them here.


any heatsink's picture?


----------



## X909

Tradition said:


> something weird happened yesterday
> 
> my cpu wont do 4000 gear 1 with micron e-die
> but for some reason i was able to boot once at 4000 cl18 with 1.42v SA
> and it was rock solid stable restarted with exactly same timings and stuff started erroring out
> i think its something to do with memmory tranning but i cant quite figure it out


This happens when you run it on the edge  I have the same issues with 3800 and 4 DR DIMMs. It ran 2hrs error free stress test some day but one restart later you see a bluescreen allready at boot. And the chance it trains and posts is about 50/50 on every start. I hope they optimize the code further. Because the span between "start to become problematic" and "problematic but sometimes able to be solid" is a very large range, in my case from 3466 to 3800 Mhz. TUF D4.


----------



## skullbringer

shamino1978 said:


> I dont know of vf pt offset issues. Describe. In bios you set x and in os you readback y or?


say default without offset vid is 1250 for x53 and I set offset -50 via v/f 7,8 , f10 reboot, go to os run stresstest -> vid = 1200, Vcore is ~1200, also in hwinfo and worktool v/f curve offset is shown as applied -50.
then I restart from windows, run stress test again, vid is now 1250, but hwinfo and worktool v/f curve still show offset -50 set. but it does not work, also Vcore is ~1250
I restart again, it maybe applies, maybe does not. also tried cold booting, also does not always apply.

went back to bios 0702, same offsets, always applies at every reboot.


----------



## shamino1978

If the registers readback correct I dont know what else we can do , sounds like a pcode bug. Have you setting the same value for all the repetitive pts? Is the voltage get under same condition?


----------



## skullbringer

shamino1978 said:


> If the registers readback correct I dont know what else we can do , sounds like a pcode bug. Have you setting the same value for all the repetitive pts? Is the voltage get under same condition?


yes, other v/f points are also affected from my testing, like I will set by usage 1 x55 and v/f 11 +200, sometimes it applies, sometimes default vid is used for v/f 11 which of course is not enough for x55 even to get to windows. also tested v/f6 -40 with by usage 8 x52 and interpolation, sometimes applies, sometimes does not apply, uses default vid, runs hotter

not sure what you mean with "Is the voltage get under same condition?"

if you think its microcode related, then modding old microcode to new bios might work 🤔

EDIT: indeed after modding microcode 12 into bios 0046, v/f offset settings apply at every boot


----------



## TheOne1894

sblantipodi said:


> What are the setting you are trying and what are the frequencyes and timings you are using to be stable?


Asus ProArt z690 with 0811 my 4x G.Skill 16GB 5600MHz C36 Samsung memory (F5-5600U3636C16G) instabil!
XMP-I / XMP-2 / Manually
1.25 SA
1.25 MC
1.35 VDD/VDDQ/TXVDDQ








exactly like this! RAM have active airflow cooling!

I can just leave all "Auto" and got 4800c40 to stabil!

CPU is not OC!


----------



## sblantipodi

I noticed that sometimes the LEDs animation on my Corsair Dominator RAM stops working but the PC continue to work well.
when it happen if I reboot the PC hangs on detect memory.
what does it means?


----------



## pat-Geek

shamino1978 said:


> later


With SLI key ?


----------



## Nizzen

pat-Geek said:


> With SLI key ?


Only for Extreme and Apex he said several times. Want SLI on Hero, you will need to hack nVidia and fix sli support yourself LOL

🤟


----------



## pat-Geek

Nizzen said:


> Only for Extreme and Apex he said several times. Want SLI on Hero, you will need to hack nVidia and fix sli support yourself LOL
> 
> 🤟


NVidia dropped the ball on Z690. I can't wait for their market share to shrink to irrelevancy once Intel ARC enters the market. They need to be taught a lesson. They have no CPU, so they need to stop that proprietary bullsh!t if they hope to still be around in a few years. They need to learn to be more open. And Asus needs to price its MAXIMUS branded motherboards accordingly if they are to get less features than their predecessors.


----------



## Simkin

morph. said:


> @shamino1978 and all the ram guru's, I'm on the latest bios v0811 on the z690 formula and I've been running GEIL (Micron) 2x16 SR 5200 C34-38-38-78 on XMP 1 without any issues (3 weeks with daily reboots) till yesterday...
> 
> Yesterday I decided to see if I can increase the running speed up to 5400 but wasn't unable to train/boot it even when adding VDDD, VDDQ, MC to around 1.3-1.35v or running the pre-set 5400 memory profile manually.
> 
> Now here is the frustrating part... I haven't been able to since go back down to my default XMP1 or XMP2 profile of 5200 without BSODing after logging in.
> 
> I've tried reseating the ram multiple times.
> I've switched the ram to each other's respective slots.
> I've re-loaded bios to optimised defaults.
> I've tried increasing VDDD, VDDQ, MC, SA voltages for the 5200 profile.
> 
> At the moment I'm settling for 5000mhz any idea why it is suddenly behaving like this? I know it's early days but 5200 is a pretty moderate speed it's not like we are talking about 6000+ so I was very surprised this happened even with XMP.
> 
> I've run mem test at 300% and passed it perfectly fine a few times previosuly... I suspect it might be something to do with the memory training however I've run the xmp1 5200 profile for nearly 3 weeks without issue with v0803 & v0811 until I decided to try and increase the ram speed yesterday. I've basically burnt a day trying to get it back to 5200 but every time it loads into windows post-login it BSOD's  Any help, pointers or tips would be greatly appreciated.
> 
> Got a set of g.skill z5 2x16 6000 c36 coming before Christmas hopefully... But now scared it might become a very expensive paperweight.


Im running G.skill 6000CL36 XMP 2 on my Apex, (0811, i have not tried 0046 yet) and whenever i try to change the volts, going a little up or down, i get bsod-bonanza. First it always bsod when login screen appears, then it bsod as soon as i have entered my pin and i enter windows, this happens 3-4 times in total and then i can use my pc as normal.

it's not testmem5 stable now at 1.34v - but seems fairly stable overall in my "everyday use". But yesterday i got bsod my simply opening my mail.


----------



## centvalny

Workin on 7200 ambient with 0046


----------



## newls1

HOLY SMOKES thats fast!!!


----------



## akgis

Everyday someone posts instability with Asus Z690 + Samsung Memory this needs a investigation asap Iam affected aswell, but seems only Apex gets beta bios this days not even the frigging 1200euros/dollars Extreme, isnt Asus testing all Z690 range?

Its clear as day that Asus Z690 and XMP Samsung CL36 ratted kits are not stable, I archived better stability with increased voltages in SA/MC/VDD/VQD but everyday I fear of losing work or droping out of a game.

I dont mind to beta test if it leads of stability cause the 6000mhz/CL36 samsung DDR5 kit is very very popular would be even more if it was in stock


----------



## pat-Geek

akgis said:


> Everyday someone posts instability with Asus Z690 + Samsung Memory this needs a investigation asap Iam affected aswell, but seems only Apex gets beta bios this days not even the frigging 1200euros/dollars Extreme, isnt Asus testing all Z690 range?
> 
> Its clear as day that Asus Z690 and XMP Samsung CL36 ratted kits are not stable, I archived better stability with increased voltages in SA/MC/VDD/VQD but everyday I fear of losing work or droping out of a game.
> 
> I dont mind to beta test if it leads of stability cause the 6000mhz/CL36 samsung DDR5 kit is very very popular would be even more if it was in stock


The large majority of the data produced on this entire thread is only about the Z690 APEX. The rest is getting neglicted. That's unfortunate but it is what it is. As a long time ROG Maximus customer I'm not happy with Asus this generation. After waiting all this time, this is not how I envisioned the Intel 10nm experience on desktop.


----------



## sblantipodi

akgis said:


> Everyday someone posts instability with Asus Z690 + Samsung Memory this needs a investigation asap Iam affected aswell, but seems only Apex gets beta bios this days not even the frigging 1200euros/dollars Extreme, isnt Asus testing all Z690 range?
> 
> Its clear as day that Asus Z690 and XMP Samsung CL36 ratted kits are not stable, I archived better stability with increased voltages in SA/MC/VDD/VQD but everyday I fear of losing work or droping out of a game.
> 
> I dont mind to beta test if it leads of stability cause the 6000mhz/CL36 samsung DDR5 kit is very very popular would be even more if it was in stock


Shamino posted a beta bios some posts ago for the Extreme.
It improves things but it isn't good... I still have instability at only 4.8GHz.


----------



## rissler84

Guys I just did the washer trick igorslab found out, shaved 9 °C of my temps, and my cooler is also rated higher in the bios now, really happy with the results!
I also changed thermal paste to Noctua NT-H2, so it might be a combination of the two.
Went from hitting around 82 °C now max hitting 73 °C after several runs in CB23.

I have Arctic freezer 2 420, and my overclock is 5 ghz all core at around 1.217 volt under load.
12900k SP84 (P91) and Asus rog strix z690-a d4








Alder Lake’s cooling problem straightened out by 5 degrees! - Simple ILM-Mod for Intel’s LGA-1700 socket | Practice | igor'sLAB


Intel's Alder Lake CPUs run hot, very hot. A few weeks ago, Igor had already identified the bending of the CPU and motherboard due to the LGA1700 socket as a potential cause for this. Today I'




www.igorslab.de


----------



## newls1

rissler84 said:


> Guys I just did the washer trick igorslab found out, shaved 9 °C of my temps, and my cooler is also rated higher in the bios now, really happy with the results!
> I also changed thermal paste to Noctua NT-H2, so it might be a combination of the two.
> Went from hitting around 82 °C now max hitting 73 °C after several runs in CB23.
> 
> I have Arctic freezer 2 420, and my overclock is 5 ghz all core at around 1.217 volt under load.
> 12900k SP84 (P91) and Asus rog strix z690-a d4
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Alder Lake’s cooling problem straightened out by 5 degrees! - Simple ILM-Mod for Intel’s LGA-1700 socket | Practice | igor'sLAB
> 
> 
> Intel's Alder Lake CPUs run hot, very hot. A few weeks ago, Igor had already identified the bending of the CPU and motherboard due to the LGA1700 socket as a potential cause for this. Today I'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.igorslab.de


WOW! never knew about this and im sub'd to his channel. he's not made a video about this yet or even talked about it. Thanks for this read. Next time i take system apart for "whatever might break next" ill be sure to add this mod to the list


----------



## bscool

rissler84 said:


> Guys I just did the washer trick igorslab found out, shaved 9 °C of my temps, and my cooler is also rated higher in the bios now, really happy with the results!
> I also changed thermal paste to Noctua NT-H2, so it might be a combination of the two.
> Went from hitting around 82 °C now max hitting 73 °C after several runs in CB23.
> 
> I have Arctic freezer 2 420, and my overclock is 5 ghz all core at around 1.217 volt under load.
> 12900k SP84 (P91) and Asus rog strix z690-a d4
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Alder Lake’s cooling problem straightened out by 5 degrees! - Simple ILM-Mod for Intel’s LGA-1700 socket | Practice | igor'sLAB
> 
> 
> Intel's Alder Lake CPUs run hot, very hot. A few weeks ago, Igor had already identified the bending of the CPU and motherboard due to the LGA1700 socket as a potential cause for this. Today I'
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.igorslab.de


Interesting.

What wattage are you hitting. I think I can do that now or better without doing any mod. Probably case by case dependent is my guess.

Probably also depends on IHS concave or convex as they will vary some like always.

Here is my screen 52/40 258wat 75c peak Strix d4 Arctic 420 AIO

I am not taking mine apart to test because I doubt these temps could get better(with AIO). Not tempting fate anyway


----------



## RobertoSampaio

bscool said:


> Interesting.
> 
> What wattage are you hitting. I think I can do that now or better without doing any mod. Probably case by case dependent is my guess.
> 
> Probably also depends on IHS concave or convex as they will vary some like always.
> 
> Here is my screen 52/40 258wat 75c peak Strix d4 Arctic 420 AIO
> 
> I am not taking mine apart to test because I doubt these temps could get better(with AIO). Not tempting fate anyway


I'm trying to understand how you are running full Load P52x/E40x with Vcore=1.288v and your CPU is so cold...
Mine P51xE40 Vcore=1.17v ~210W, and I hit 86C in some cores.


----------



## HvacGuru

bscool said:


> Interesting.
> 
> What wattage are you hitting. I think I can do that now or better without doing any mod. Probably case by case dependent is my guess.
> 
> Probably also depends on IHS concave or convex as they will vary some like always.
> 
> Here is my screen 52/40 258wat 75c peak Strix d4 Arctic 420 AIO
> 
> I am not taking mine apart to test because I doubt these temps could get better(with AIO). Not tempting fate anyway


That's one hell of a chip you got your hands on! Last time I had a golden cpu was the 920


----------



## newls1

RobertoSampaio said:


> I'm trying to understand how you are running full Load P52x/E40x with Vcore=1.288v and your CPU is so cold...
> Mine P51xE40 Vcore=1.17v ~210W, and I hit 86C in some cores.
> 
> 
> View attachment 2542466


he might have a super cool room ambient temp. bscool is a damn good dude on these forums, one of the most helpful guys.


----------



## bscool

RobertoSampaio said:


> I'm trying to understand how you are running full Load P52x/E40x with Vcore=1.288v and your CPU is so cold...
> Mine P51xE40 Vcore=1.17v ~210W, and I hit 86C in some cores.
> 
> 
> View attachment 2542466


Maybe dumb luck? I honestly do not know.

I have the AIO tubes down as tubes up(Fractal Torrent) I get air circulation and that caused higher temps. Also I use liquid metal instead of thermal paste and my theory is that helps a few c or more also.

Maybe just unicorn chip though? I had a custom loop Raystorm block before with 1151 mount and temps where 15c higher. Never tried adding washers to increase pressure.

Maybe the block on my Arctic just "mates" better than normal with my CPU concave or convex?

I know I seem to have better temps than most.

My ambient room temp is 22.5c on average.


----------



## bscool

newls1 said:


> he might have a super cool room ambient temp. bscool is a damn good dude on these forums, one of the most helpful guys.


I just have no other life


----------



## RobertoSampaio

bscool said:


> Maybe dumb luck? I honestly do not know.
> 
> I have the AIO tubes down as tubes up(Fractal Torrent) I get air circulation and that caused higher temps. Also I use liquid metal instead of thermal paste and my theory is that helps a few c or more also.
> 
> Maybe just unicorn chip though? I had a custom loop Raystorm block before with 1151 mount and temps where 15c higher. Never tried adding washers to increase pressure.
> 
> Maybe the block on my Arctic just "mates" better than normal with my CPU concave or convex?
> 
> I know I seem to have better temps than most.
> 
> My ambient room temp is 22.5c on average.


I think the problem is the pressure from the ILM... I remember when I installed the CPU... I had to do a lot of force to close the socket... More than usual...
I'm thinking to try that washers to decrease the pressure.

EDITED:
But you have the same core5 hottest and core2 coldest, like me.
It could be the temperature of the water (mine is 29C) and the liquid metal ...

I'm too lazy to remove the water cooler to test the ILM pressure.... LOL


----------



## bscool

RobertoSampaio said:


> I think the problem is the pressure from the ILM... I remember when I installed the CPU... I had to do a lot of force to close the socket... More than usual...
> I'm thinking to try that washers to decrease the pressure.
> 
> EDITED:
> But you have the same core5 hottest and core2 coldest, like me.
> It could be the temperature of the water (mine is 29C) and the liquid metal ...
> 
> I'm too lazy to remove the water cooler to test the ILM pressure.... LOL


Yeah I dont know. I installed my CPU "the wrong way" I didnt a backplate installed when I put in the CPU, just bare MB so supposedly i should be getting bad temps from my understanding. (going by my understanding of another article by igor)

I do find this stuff interesting though. The "nuances" how they can at times make a big difference.

You know that I think about it that may be why when I did install the backplate it was so hard and I had to "crank" the standoffs much more than usual. I was worried about messing up the MB, there was a lot of resistance. But I kept going tightening them until they stopped.


----------



## Crow77

Where is the strix A 1001 bios download?


----------



## bscool

Crow77 said:


> Where is the strix A 1001 bios download?


Your better off not knowing 

If looking for the ddr5 version I dont know.



ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4


----------



## Agent-A01

bscool said:


> *I am not taking mine apart to test because I doubt these temps could get better(with AIO). Not tempting fate anyway *












But on a serious note, AIO is easy peasy to reinstall versus these full waterblock setups.
Do it for the cause


----------



## bscool

Agent-A01 said:


> But on a serious note, AIO is easy peasy to reinstall versus these full waterblock setups.
> Do it for the cause


No, not after 1001 bios. Scarred for life 

Dont mess with something thats working.........

it will last until tomorrow and ill mess something and wonder why


----------



## Agent-A01

bscool said:


> No, not after 1001 bios. Scarred for life
> 
> Dont mess with something thats working.........
> 
> it will last until tomorrow and ill mess something and wonder why


I'll be swapping out tuf for strix-a so I'm contemplating the washer mod.

I tried comparing my temps but since you have E cores it's not relevant.
For 5.2 /4.8 cache 1.23v load in CB LLC 4 my max core temp was 70c with avg of 66c.

If it doesn't help it's a PITA to go back as the WB is so bulky and tubes are tightly ran.


----------



## bscool

Agent-A01 said:


> I'll be swapping out tuf for strix-a so I'm contemplating the washer mod.
> 
> I tried comparing my temps but since you have E cores it's not relevant.
> For 5.2 /4.8 cache 1.23v load in CB LLC 4 my max core temp was 70c with avg of 66c.
> 
> If it doesn't help it's a PITA to go back as the WB is so bulky and tubes are tightly ran.


I have custom loop too and I dont see how one is harder than the other. Dont try that crap with me. You do the test and report back 

Plus that means I might have to leave my house to buy the washers/spacers. We cant have that.


----------



## bscool

"Someone" should start a separate thread and users can post their z690 washer temp results, it would be easier to find and interesting to compare.

Me not that someone, but someone should 

@RobertoSampaio

@rissler84

@Agent-A01

@newls1


----------



## Arni90

centvalny said:


> Workin on 7200 ambient with 0046
> View attachment 2542449


I see TX VDDQ is quite a bit higher than VDD and VDDQ on the memory chips themselves, is that necessary to hit this frequency?


----------



## centvalny

Arni90 said:


> I see TX VDDQ is quite a bit higher than VDD and VDDQ on the memory chips themselves, is that necessary to hit this frequency?


I set auto setting in bios.


----------



## jedi95

I tried the washer mod with the Apex. (0.8mm washers) It boots just fine at default speeds, but my RAM refused to run my previously stable 6200 C32 config. Reversing the mod fixed the memory speed issues.

I might try it again with some 0.5mm washers later, but it appears that there is a good reason for the original clamping pressure.


----------



## bscool

jedi95 said:


> I tried the washer mod with the Apex. (0.8mm washers) It boots just fine at default speeds, but my RAM refused to run my previously stable 6200 C32 config. Reversing the mod fixed the memory speed issues.
> 
> I might try it again with some 0.5mm washers later, but it appears that there is a good reason for the original clamping pressure.


Good info, I highly doubt this is going to work for everyone. Some it will be worse for is my bet. And issues like you had.


----------



## HvacGuru

Who's brave enough to just loosen the 4- torque screws 1/4 turn. Should be a easy fix if it doesn't work lol


----------



## shamino1978

akgis said:


> Everyday someone posts instability with Asus Z690 + Samsung Memory this needs a investigation asap Iam affected aswell, but seems only Apex gets beta bios this days not even the frigging 1200euros/dollars Extreme, isnt Asus testing all Z690 range?
> 
> Its clear as day that Asus Z690 and XMP Samsung CL36 ratted kits are not stable, I archived better stability with increased voltages in SA/MC/VDD/VQD but everyday I fear of losing work or droping out of a game.
> 
> I dont mind to beta test if it leads of stability cause the 6000mhz/CL36 samsung DDR5 kit is very very popular would be even more if it was in stock


i posted like 4 extreme bioses back to back, so i dont think what u say is fair


----------



## shamino1978

skullbringer said:


> yes, other v/f points are also affected from my testing, like I will set by usage 1 x55 and v/f 11 +200, sometimes it applies, sometimes default vid is used for v/f 11 which of course is not enough for x55 even to get to windows. also tested v/f6 -40 with by usage 8 x52 and interpolation, sometimes applies, sometimes does not apply, uses default vid, runs hotter
> 
> not sure what you mean with "Is the voltage get under same condition?"
> 
> if you think its microcode related, then modding old microcode to new bios might work 🤔
> 
> EDIT: indeed after modding microcode 12 into bios 0046, v/f offset settings apply at every boot


im on ucode x18 rebooted multiple times dont see what u say.
send me your cmo


----------



## truehighroller1

@shamino1978 

Was the 1001 bios for the strix d4 wifi more geared towards Sr memory? Just curious because I'm more stable on 0901 with my Dr.


----------



## shamino1978

truehighroller1 said:


> @shamino1978
> 
> Was the 1001 bios for the strix d4 wifi more geared towards Sr memory? Just curious because I'm more stable on 0901 with my Dr.


there was no particular bias. the main change was updating to the latest memory reference code from intel.


----------



## truehighroller1

shamino1978 said:


> there was no particular bias. the main change was updating to the latest memory reference code from intel.


There must be something wrong in their new code then is my assumption. I started reading into the mrc interesting stuff. Thank you.


----------



## bscool

truehighroller1 said:


> There must be something wrong in their new code then is my assumption. I started reading into the mrc interesting stuff. Thank you.


Where did you find it, googling but incase I cant find i.

Edit I misunderstood. I thought you were talking about you found specific info from Intel on the new 18 ucode.


----------



## shamino1978

synched up dramming bioses for the following:








ROG-STRIX-Z690-F-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0070.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-STRIX-Z690-E-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0070.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-ASUS-0070.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-FORMULA-ASUS-0070.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0070.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com


----------



## bscool

Agent-A01 said:


> I'll be swapping out tuf for strix-a so I'm contemplating the washer mod.
> 
> I tried comparing my temps but since you have E cores it's not relevant.
> For 5.2 /4.8 cache 1.23v load in CB LLC 4 my max core temp was 70c with avg of 66c.
> 
> If it doesn't help it's a PITA to go back as the WB is so bulky and tubes are tightly ran.


I tried e core off and get similar temps(1.24v bios ll6). Ambient was 23c.

What are you using for cooling?


----------



## Alberto_It

shamino1978 said:


> synched up dramming bioses for the following:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-F-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0070.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-E-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0070.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-ASUS-0070.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-FORMULA-ASUS-0070.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0070.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


Ok, maybe you hate me, but no Apex bios update? @RobertoSampaio please investigate why Shamino don't answer to my questions


----------



## morph.

shamino1978 said:


> synched up dramming bioses for the following:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-F-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0070.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-E-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0070.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-ASUS-0070.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-FORMULA-ASUS-0070.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0070.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


Thanks, Shamino! whats does "synched up dramming bioses" mean exactly? Is this a beta/early preview or will be a proper release like the v0811


----------



## andrew149

Guys I’m looking into this board because it’s Ddr3 and my dad is giving me 2 3060s my main intention is to play games on this pc for my girlfriend but would like to use the 2 cards to use on enthium coins will the pcie 3.0 16x slot work on this board fine to get the full hash rate?


----------



## newls1

bscool said:


> Your better off not knowing
> 
> If looking for the ddr5 version I dont know.
> 
> 
> 
> ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4


1001 been the best for me so far.... Completely fixed the random performance loss issue that all other bios' had. That fix alone for me was worth the time in getting this bios to be ram friendly for my needs..


----------



## rissler84

bscool said:


> "Someone" should start a separate thread and users can post their z690 washer temp results, it would be easier to find and interesting to compare.
> 
> Me not that someone, but someone should
> 
> @RobertoSampaio
> 
> @rissler84
> 
> @Agent-A01
> 
> @newls1


Not sure if I should set the AIO to max when testing, right now it is just running and low speeds.
Do you have the pump running at full speed all the time and detached the fans from it?


----------



## bscool

rissler84 said:


> Here is mine after 3 runs of CB23, im resetting the timer each time in HWinfo.
> Not sure if I should set the AIO to max when testing, right now it is just running and low speeds.
> Do you have the pump running at full speed all the time and detached the fans from it?


I just have the AIO set up like it comes out of the box, other than put the fans to pull.. Fan profile to Turbo in bios.

Pump and fans connected like from the factory so they sync together.


----------



## bscool

newls1 said:


> 1001 been the best for me so far.... Completely fixed the random performance loss issue that all other bios' had. That fix alone for me was worth the time in getting this bios to be ram friendly for my needs..


Do you use per core or sync all?

I had been using per core and it is when using Sync all i had the issues with ring.

I think part if it also is I run Windows high performance power profile and I see switching to Balance and Power Saving that effects things. 

I am so use to the old static all core and static voltages. Old dog learning new tricks


----------



## newls1

bscool said:


> Do you use per core or sync all?
> 
> I had been using per core and it is when using Sync all i had the issues with ring.
> 
> I think part if it also is I run Windows high performance power profile and I see switching to Balance and Power Saving that effects things.
> 
> I am so use to the old static all core and static voltages. Old dog learning new tricks


I use per core.... windows power plan is set to ultimate. I have no power savings options enabled.


----------



## sblantipodi

shamino1978 said:


> synched up dramming bioses for the following:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-F-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0070.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-E-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0070.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-ASUS-0070.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-FORMULA-ASUS-0070.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0070.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


What does it means synched up drumming bios?
Is 0070 for the extreme only a renamed bios created to match the naming scheme for other boards, or there is something new over the 0067?

Bios seems pretty stable but I still have problem, it hangs from time to time when rebooting at detecting memory. Does it means that I need more voltages somewhere?


----------



## asdkj1740

centvalny said:


> Workin on 7200 ambient with 0046
> View attachment 2542449


1.77v tx vddq omg


----------



## Falkentyne

Alberto_It said:


> Ok, maybe you hate me, but no Apex bios update? @RobertoSampaio please investigate why Shamino don't answer to my questions


This is going to be long.

Because, IMO, you're sometimes getting extremely annoying and you talk/post WAY too much, and you are contributing NOTHING to help anyone else, and just always begging. You constantly ask NONSTOP questions over and over, about every little tiny thing. You legitly act like a young immature teenager or something. Take it to a chatroom or something. You can't have someone who has to work for a living as your personal tech support, do you realize how selfish and greedy that is? There _MAY_ be some people here who may have time to add you to a chat on discord or something and help you personally, but that's RARE, but i don't think you quite get it--if someone does that, that turns into a JOB for them. It turns into a multi-hour long tech support fixing every little CPU or memory problem on your computer and are you paying them for their time? Of course not. Especially with tuning RAM. But maybe if you offered to PAY someone money for personal tech support, they might be more willing to put in some time---you forget SOME People have jobs and are very busy. And they don't come here on forums to be MORE busy. People's leisure time is very valuable and you can't expect to monopolize everything. You need to remember that you are NOT the only person who is using a certain motherboard or memory. There are other people using most settings too (Unless you are one of those rare people using 4x16 GB and expecting XMP to work). So you can often just STOP ASKING SO MANY QUESTIONS, sit back, wait for other people with similar RAM as you to post their feedback on a thread, copy their settings, voltages, skews, algorithms, etc, and maybe post ONE or TWO questions each BIOS release.

You want Shamino to tune the perfect BIOS for YOU and only YOU. The world doesn't work that way. And you bought bleeding edge hardware, hot off the presses...what did you think was going to happen?


----------



## shamino1978

sblantipodi said:


> What does it means synched up drumming bios?
> Is 0070 for the extreme only a renamed bios created to match the naming scheme for other boards, or there is something new over the 0067?
> 
> Bios seems pretty stable but I still have problem, it hangs from time to time when rebooting at detecting memory. Does it means that I need more voltages somewhere?


just my way of calling these "for dram obsessed people"  dont take it seriously.


----------



## skullbringer

shamino1978 said:


> im on ucode x18 rebooted multiple times dont see what u say.
> send me your cmo


here is cmo from bios 9901 with ucode 18, simple -50 v/f6 offset for by usage 8 x51









adaptive_vf.CMO


1 file sent via WeTransfer, the simplest way to send your files around the world




we.tl


----------



## satinghostrider

2022 gonna be a long ass year for sure.


----------



## Arni90

shamino1978 said:


> just my way of calling these "for dram obsessed people"  dont take it seriously.


I noticed there was no Apex in the last batch of BIOSes. Are Samsung optimizations on the Z690 Apex are as good as they're going to get on 0046?


----------



## Silent Scone

Arni90 said:


> I noticed there was no Apex in the last batch of BIOSes. Are Samsung optimizations on the Z690 Apex are as good as they're going to get on 0046?


Where are you currently at?


----------



## Tradition

RobertoSampaio said:


> I'm trying to understand how you are running full Load P52x/E40x with Vcore=1.288v and your CPU is so cold...
> Mine P51xE40 Vcore=1.17v ~210W, and I hit 86C in some cores.
> 
> 
> View attachment 2542466


my 12700k is pretty much the same 220w and it hits like 91C im using a 280mm deep cooler castle AIO 
this is with the socket mod


----------



## acoustic

Alberto_It said:


> This is my original question after that I have received a lot of ****storming
> 
> If it is because I'm Italian tell me right now or my English is so bad that you don't understand


I told you a while ago (probably 2 weeks or so at this point) that you were tagging Shamino way too much ..

Just ease up posting questions constantly. APEX has seen more BIOS releases than any other board in the lineup, so if Shamino releases new ones for all the other boards, it's likely just getting them up to speed with the APEX.

Sometimes it's better to not post, and just read.


----------



## Alberto_It

acoustic said:


> I told you a while ago (probably 2 weeks or so at this point) that you were tagging Shamino way too much ..
> 
> Just ease up posting questions constantly. APEX has seen more BIOS releases than any other board in the lineup, so if Shamino releases new ones for all the other boards, it's likely just getting them up to speed with the APEX.
> 
> Sometimes it's better to not post, and just read.


Okay, thanks very much for your kindness


----------



## karoc

IronAge said:


> I own a Kit of XPG Lancer 6000C40 and some others in germany as well, they have Hynix IC.


Just to let others know. I bought a kit of these AX5U6000C4016G-CLARBK and mine have Samsung IC's, not Hynix. As a result, I'm returning them as already have a kit of G.Skill 6000 CL36 DIMMs.


----------



## Nizzen

karoc said:


> Just to let others know. I bought a kit of these AX5U6000C4016G-CLARBK and mine have Samsung IC's, not Hynix. As a result, I'm returning them as already have a kit of G.Skill 6000 CL36 DIMMs.


Like we thought. Every 4800-6000 mhz kit will be Micron or Samsung from now on. Even a 6200 kit (v-color) is samsung now.


----------



## Carillo

karoc said:


> Just to let others know. I bought a kit of these AX5U6000C4016G-CLARBK and mine have Samsung IC's, not Hynix. As a result, I'm returning them as already have a kit of G.Skill 6000 CL36 DIMMs.


Thanks for sharing this info. Almost ordered this kit... puhhh


----------



## Nizzen

Carillo said:


> Thanks for sharing this info. Almost ordered this kit... puhhh


same LOL


----------



## karoc

Carillo said:


> Thanks for sharing this info. Almost ordered this kit... puhhh


No problem! I must admit, I took a gamble based on earlier comments in here and when I saw I had Samsung, I thought I'd create an account on here and let people know otherwise there would be a few disappointed people!


----------



## bastian

sblantipodi said:


> Bios seems pretty stable but I still have problem, it hangs from time to time when rebooting at detecting memory. Does it means that I need more voltages somewhere?


If it is hanging, you have some instability somewhere. Check voltages/timings.


----------



## sblantipodi

so much people complaining about no new bios for their boards and no one posted feedbacks about the new betas...
it's weird.


----------



## akgis

sblantipodi said:


> so much people complaining about no new bios for their boards and no one posted feedbacks about the new betas...
> it's weird.


Currently flashed on my Hero 1hour ago, so far stock XMP I is stable but I only been doing office work(nothing critital), I will do some gaming after business hours. Sorry iam not the typical Overlocker jsut want at lest stock stability with official XMP

What I tested in lunch was Bios MEMTEST86 ,Testmem5(15min) ,3DMark Timespy 1loop and CPU test didnt gave me any bsod or crash but in the 0811 it could had a session where it didnt aswell so its too soon to talk


----------



## shamino1978

skullbringer said:


> here is cmo from bios 9901 with ucode 18, simple -50 v/f6 offset for by usage 8 x51
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> adaptive_vf.CMO
> 
> 
> 1 file sent via WeTransfer, the simplest way to send your files around the world
> 
> 
> 
> 
> we.tl


i tried your profile but since its not easy to see 48x voltage at 51x basically all the time i set all to 54x and see what i get first
then i set last vf pt to +100mv.
and in the os i see no change so i used oc tool to runtime set it to 200mv and still no change.
then i noticed you park your vcore at adaptive and auto. for some reason, there were no auto rules applied and so it remained default valueless. so i set adaptive to any value, 1.2, 1.3 or 1.4 and the last vf pt takes effect immediately.
have u tried setting "some" value to the adaptive voltage option?


----------



## beardlessduck

shamino1978 said:


> just my way of calling these "for dram obsessed people"  dont take it seriously.


My DRAM obsessed brothers and sisters thank you!

I haven't tried this yet but I will ASAP.


----------



## IronAge

karoc said:


> No problem! I must admit, I took a gamble based on earlier comments in here and when I saw I had Samsung, I thought I'd create an account on here and let people know otherwise there would be a few disappointed people!


nice letting us know that are shipped with Samsung now as well, but it does not mean that all of them got Samsung.

i have another new Kit coming in, i will let you know what IC it has.


----------



## sblantipodi

in any case the weakness on the Extreme is not related to Samsung only.
I have tried micron chips,it works a little bit better but nothing special too when using 4 sticks.


----------



## skullbringer

shamino1978 said:


> i tried your profile but since its not easy to see 48x voltage at 51x basically all the time i set all to 54x and see what i get first
> then i set last vf pt to +100mv.
> and in the os i see no change so i used oc tool to runtime set it to 200mv and still no change.
> then i noticed you park your vcore at adaptive and auto. for some reason, there were no auto rules applied and so it remained default valueless. so i set adaptive to any value, 1.2, 1.3 or 1.4 and the last vf pt takes effect immediately.
> have u tried setting "some" value to the adaptive voltage option?


you mean like this?









setting "additional turbo mode cpu core voltage" to 1.2 indeed unlocks v/f 11. so if I set like by core 1 x54, start cb r23 single core, I can control vid with "vf points" tool at v/f point 11. I set +50 mV voltage goes up by 50 mV, I set +100 mV voltage goes up by 100mV, cool. but all other v/f points still do not work. 

please correct me if I am wrong. when I set by core 8 x51 and I have v/f 6 x48 at +0 and v/f 7 x51 at +0 and get vid 1200 mV. then I set v/f6 to -50 and v/f7 to -50, I should get vid 1150 mV, because voltage is interpolated between v/f points and x51 is between x48 and x52. that is also how it works in bios 0702. 

I also tried by core 8 x48, so it exactly matches frequency for v/f 6, but I still cannot change vid with "vf points" tool or bios setting for v/f6.


----------



## karoc

IronAge said:


> nice letting us know that are shipped with Samsung now as well, but it does not mean that all of them got Samsung.
> 
> i have another new Kit coming in, i will let you know what IC it has.


Very true. Looks like someone over in the DDR5 OC Thread managed to get an Adata Kit with Hynix: *Official* Intel DDR5 OC and 24/7 daily Memory Stability...


----------



## LionAlonso

shamino1978 said:


> i tried your profile but since its not easy to see 48x voltage at 51x basically all the time i set all to 54x and see what i get first
> then i set last vf pt to +100mv.
> and in the os i see no change so i used oc tool to runtime set it to 200mv and still no change.
> then i noticed you park your vcore at adaptive and auto. for some reason, there were no auto rules applied and so it remained default valueless. so i set adaptive to any value, 1.2, 1.3 or 1.4 and the last vf pt takes effect immediately.
> have u tried setting "some" value to the adaptive voltage option?





skullbringer said:


> you mean like this?
> View attachment 2542570
> 
> 
> setting "additional turbo mode cpu core voltage" to 1.2 indeed unlocks v/f 11. so if I set like by core 1 x54, start cb r23 single core, I can control vid with "vf points" tool at v/f point 11. I set +50 mV voltage goes up by 50 mV, I set +100 mV voltage goes up by 100mV, cool. but all other v/f points still do not work.
> 
> please correct me if I am wrong. when I set by core 8 x51 and I have v/f 6 x48 at +0 and v/f 7 x51 at +0 and get vid 1200 mV. then I set v/f6 to -50 and v/f7 to -50, I should get vid 1150 mV, because voltage is interpolated between v/f points and x51 is between x48 and x52. that is also how it works in bios 0702.
> 
> I also tried by core 8 x48, so it exactly matches frequency for v/f 6, but I still cannot change vid with "vf points" tool or bios setting for v/f6.


Yeah true, i think i also had the same problem in 1001 version of tuf d4.
And it dismantled all my previous stable oc.
Because i had ac-ll and vf6 and vf7 finetuned.
Hope the problem is acknowledge by intel in this case.
Maybe shamino could report it.


----------



## shamino1978

skullbringer said:


> you mean like this?
> View attachment 2542570
> 
> 
> setting "additional turbo mode cpu core voltage" to 1.2 indeed unlocks v/f 11. so if I set like by core 1 x54, start cb r23 single core, I can control vid with "vf points" tool at v/f point 11. I set +50 mV voltage goes up by 50 mV, I set +100 mV voltage goes up by 100mV, cool. but all other v/f points still do not work.
> 
> please correct me if I am wrong. when I set by core 8 x51 and I have v/f 6 x48 at +0 and v/f 7 x51 at +0 and get vid 1200 mV. then I set v/f6 to -50 and v/f7 to -50, I should get vid 1150 mV, because voltage is interpolated between v/f points and x51 is between x48 and x52. that is also how it works in bios 0702.
> 
> I also tried by core 8 x48, so it exactly matches frequency for v/f 6, but I still cannot change vid with "vf points" tool or bios setting for v/f6.


The 1.2 is arbritary number, adaptive cannot go below vid with ac ll taken into account. You also cannot go lower than the previous pt. Then at some pt, if cpu is still stable youll hit the cache vid
So just check in os keep trimming the previous pts. Until no lower than use oc tool intel ctl , set offset negative xxx and select ring/ cache domain and apply. If it then goes diwn you know ehat that means.[/QUOTE]


----------



## Nizzen

karoc said:


> Very true. Looks like someone over in the DDR5 OC Thread managed to get an Adata Kit with Hynix: _Official_ Intel DDR5 OC and 24/7 daily Memory Stability...


Old batch


----------



## Tigra456

Strix F and the 0070 with 6000 c36 Trident Z5 RGB…

My „old“ 0811 profile with XMP Timings was Testmem5 Anta777 stable with
1.35 VDD
1.35 VDDQ
TRX 1.35
SA 1.25

but with the 0080 Bios Testmem is not able zu run with optimized defaults and XMP1…
Again with the self fixed Voltages Testmem/PC crashed too…
Maybe i must try a correct reset before Bios flash but it looks like more unstable like the 0811 ?


----------



## sblantipodi

After hours of testing and different RAM kits tryed I'm pretty convinced that DDR5 is a mess and that Extreme is a more problematic motherboards than the others.

My brother's Hero is much better in RAM stability.

With 0070 BIOS I can't complete 30 minutes of Cinebench at only 4.8GHz with pretty significant voltages

1.150V SA
1.25V MC
1.35 VDD
1.35 VDDQ
TRX 1.35 

come one, this Extreme is an Extreme trash. 
I would have bought it on Amazon just to ask for a refund.


----------



## TheOne1894

shamino1978 said:


> synched up dramming bioses for the following:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-F-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0070.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-E-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0070.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-ASUS-0070.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-FORMULA-ASUS-0070.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0070.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


Where is for ProArt Z690?


----------



## jomama22

sblantipodi said:


> After hours of testing and different RAM kits tryed I'm pretty convinced that DDR5 is a mess and that Extreme is a more problematic motherboards than the others.
> 
> My brother's Hero is much better in RAM stability.
> 
> With 0070 BIOS I can't complete 30 minutes of Cinebench at only 4.8GHz with pretty significant voltages
> 
> 1.150V SA
> 1.25V MC
> 1.35 VDD
> 1.35 VDDQ
> TRX 1.35
> 
> come one, this Extreme is an Extreme trash.
> I would have bought it on Amazon just to ask for a refund.


I am genuinely curious as to why you post the same thing over and over. If you have a problem with the board, return it or sell it.

Just because you spend more money, doesn't mean you will magically have better capabilities. DDR5 was always going to be a struggle from the get go, especially combining two separate 2 dimm kits. If you needed that much ram capacity, you absolutely should have just gotten a ddr4 board. 

Also, those are not significant voltages.


----------



## schuldig

thanks for the laugh!



sblantipodi said:


> I'm a computer scientist


... meanwhile 8 years later


----------



## asdkj1740

karoc said:


> Just to let others know. I bought a kit of these AX5U6000C4016G-CLARBK and mine have Samsung IC's, not Hynix. As a result, I'm returning them as already have a kit of G.Skill 6000 CL36 DIMMs.


you should not return it before trying it. 
some said gskill samsung kits are poop here (definitely not me). 
maybe adata has better samsung dies considering there are lots of adata samsung's 6600 6800 7000 kits listed on mobo vendors qvl.


----------



## LionAlonso

schuldig said:


> thanks for the laugh!
> 
> 
> 
> ... meanwhile 8 years later


----------



## MarkDeMark

karoc said:


> Just to let others know. I bought a kit of these AX5U6000C4016G-CLARBK and mine have Samsung IC's, not Hynix. As a result, I'm returning them as already have a kit of G.Skill 6000 CL36 DIMMs.


Yes they come in 2 flavors: Samsung and Hynix with the same specs and same Module P/N. You never going to know which you'll get until you have them in hands








Z690 AORUS TACHYON (rev. 1.0) Support | Motherboard - GIGABYTE Global


Lasting Quality from GIGABYTE.GIGABYTE Ultra Durable™ motherboards bring together a unique blend of features and technologies that offer users the absolute ...




www.gigabyte.com


----------



## TheSkaz

Does anyone have dual 3090s (EVGA FTW3) in their Extreme board and have it running 8x/8x? mine is 8x/2x (i know SLI isnt licensed yet)


----------



## newls1

TheSkaz said:


> Does anyone have dual 3090s (EVGA FTW3) in their Extreme board and have it running 8x/8x? mine is 8x/2x (i know SLI isnt licensed yet)


im sure you can find a spot in bios for port bifurcation and set it appropriately


----------



## skullbringer

shamino1978 said:


> The 1.2 is arbritary number, adaptive cannot go below vid with ac ll taken into account. You also cannot go lower than the previous pt. Then at some pt, if cpu is still stable youll hit the cache vid
> So just check in os keep trimming the previous pts. Until no lower than use oc tool intel ctl , set offset negative xxx and select ring/ cache domain and apply. If it then goes diwn you know ehat that means.


[/QUOTE]

ohhh, good point, limited cache to x40 and now I can lower v/f6 from 1170 to 1020.

did not need to limit cache on 0702, so microcode >12 must have changed cache vid somehow or how cache and vcore vid are compared.

I knew that highest vid "wins", but did not consider microcode update might change vid values. thank you so much for helping me with this! big rep!


----------



## TheSkaz

Here are my settings:


----------



## Silent Scone

Some 6400 1T testing this evening, timings need work. Most of the time was spent finding favorable voltage points for this CPU. 

C40-40-40-72-1T
Per Core 54/53/52
Cache 40
Ecore 41
MCVDD 1.33v
VCCSA 1.18v
VDD 1.48
VDDQ 1.48
VDDQTX 1.63v


----------



## beardlessduck

sblantipodi said:


> After hours of testing and different RAM kits tryed I'm pretty convinced that DDR5 is a mess and that Extreme is a more problematic motherboards than the others.
> 
> My brother's Hero is much better in RAM stability.
> 
> With 0070 BIOS I can't complete 30 minutes of Cinebench at only 4.8GHz with pretty significant voltages
> 
> 1.150V SA
> 1.25V MC
> 1.35 VDD
> 1.35 VDDQ
> TRX 1.35
> 
> come one, this Extreme is an Extreme trash.
> I would have bought it on Amazon just to ask for a refund.


I think we have the same issue but I don't think it's fair to blame the specific motherboard. Asus is doing more than anyone else to help, so we should be appreciative. This is why I'll continue to buy Asus in the future even if I have to dump my Z690 setup for something else down the road.

This platform was released without proper testing, that is insanely obvious. Here's a small list of issues I've experienced:

Photoshop crashed constantly. Users had to work with the Abobe engineers for weeks to get this resolved. It is resolved now though.
Windows 11, which is needed for the new task scheduler, is a buggy mess.
CPU doesn't fully make contact with heatsink and can cause thermal throttling even when liquid cooled (I solved this by putting on extra thermal paste)
RAM issues

My opinion is that this platform was not ready for release. I do expect my RAM (yes, from two separate kits) to work, but Asus is at least helping us.


----------



## Agent-A01

bscool said:


> I tried e core off and get similar temps(1.24v bios ll6). Ambient was 23c.
> 
> What are you using for cooling?


That's with EK velocity2 WB and 3x 360 rads in LIAN Li Dynamic XL.

IIRC 75f ambient? Something like that.


----------



## Silent Scone

beardlessduck said:


> I think we have the same issue but I don't think it's fair to blame the specific motherboard. Asus is doing more than anyone else to help, so we should be appreciative. This is why I'll continue to buy Asus in the future even if I have to dump my Z690 setup for something else down the road.
> 
> This platform was released without proper testing, that is insanely obvious. Here's a small list of issues I've experienced:
> 
> Photoshop crashed constantly. Users had to work with the Abobe engineers for weeks to get this resolved. It is resolved now though.
> Windows 11, which is needed for the new task scheduler, is a buggy mess.
> CPU doesn't fully make contact with heatsink and can cause thermal throttling even when liquid cooled (I solved this by putting on extra thermal paste)
> RAM issues
> 
> My opinion is that this platform was not ready for release. I do expect my RAM (yes, from two separate kits) to work, but Asus is at least helping us.


If you’re waiting for the “magic bullet” you may well start having to test methodically yourself.

There’s only so much that can be done to dial these things out without user intervention. Any teething issues that might arise from DDR5 as a whole are second to something like combining kits.

It's difficult not to sound like a broken record, but *Please don't combine memory kits and expect an off the shelf solution*

This is a historical issue enthusiast face that will probably continue. However, the introduction of DDR5 has brought in far more unsuspecting users seeking answers.

The main culprit is the lack of 4 DIMM kits currently on the market for DDR5. Most users where possible do tend to buy kits at the rated density, timings, and frequency. However, if you remove those kits from the market you leave a gaping void to be filled with users looking for 64GB and/or simply to populate all available memory slots.


The reason you should avoid combining kits is actually painfully simple, however, the whys and buts are best left to actual DRAM and electrical engineers. 



*The memory kit is binned by the vendor to operate at XMP in the exact density it is sold in*. If you combine them, you will need to consider the following things, and there will be only so much guidance others can give you including the vendors themselves.

1). Evaluate if the kit is able to run at or even close to the rated frequency anymore. This depends on the amount of guardband the memory vendor has put in, the motherboard, platform and CPU. 

2). Evaluate if the kit is able to run at or close to the primary timings the memory vendor has put in. This also depends on the amount of guardband the memory vendor has put in.

3). Evaluate how much voltage the memory needs for the above two points.

4). Evaluate the motherboard sub timings to see if the kits are able to run at or close to the auto ruling assigned by the board vendor. 

5). As with any memory kit, evaluate what voltages are needed on the CPU side. (MCVDD / CPU SA).

I know you’re humble about it which is always a good place to start, but mixing kits is still a misadventure for many and it is not something that is recommended by anyone in the industry.


----------



## Herald

Which is the best apex bios for sammy 6000c36? Tested the 0811 and 0046, the 0811 seems to work better. Stability is impossible with the 0046.


----------



## dante`afk

Alberto_It said:


> Ok, maybe you hate me, but no Apex bios update? @RobertoSampaio please investigate why Shamino don't answer to my questions


some other have already said it, but it's sticking to my tongue since a few weeks.

shamino is not your personal tech support, you treat him like he is, like a little toddler that keeps pulling on mom's skirt while she's cooking and you won't let go.

take a break, and take a few steps back.


----------



## Arni90

Silent Scone said:


> Where are you currently at?


Currently at 6000 32-35-35-50-1T

CL30 won't post even at 1.60V VDD/VDDQ.
6200 will quickly get errors, even at 40-40-40-80-2T


----------



## beardlessduck

Silent Scone said:


> The main culprit is the lack of 4 DIMM kits currently on the market for DDR5. Most users where possible do tend to buy kits at the rated density, timings, and frequency. However, if you remove those kits from the market you leave a gaping void to be filled with users looking for 64GB and/or simply to populate all available memory slots.


Good post. I think this is an especially good point. Most of us that are combining kits knew it wasn't ideal but our options are limited. We wouldn't have many people complaining if 64GB kits were easy to find.

@shamino1978 I just flashed the latest BIOS, thank you for that. What's the intended way of testing this for us DRAM obsessed people 

There are profiles for a variety of RAM configurations, XMP II, all settings set to auto/setting RAM speed manually. I can try a few different things if you have suggestions.

Thanks!


----------



## cstkl1

Herald said:


> Which is the best apex bios for sammy 6000c36? Tested the 0811 and 0046, the 0811 seems to work better. Stability is impossible with the 0046.


i would use 0811 to make sure xmp and the ram is stable. then test beta bios on tuning/ oc


----------



## Alberto_It

Herald said:


> Which is the best apex bios for sammy 6000c36? Tested the 0811 and 0046, the 0811 seems to work better. Stability is impossible with the 0046.


I'm using 0031 release on my Z690 Apex and XMP profile works fine without any additional adjustments as on 0811 where it needs to increase VDD and VDDQ to 1.35V


----------



## Silent Scone

Arni90 said:


> Currently at 6000 32-35-35-50-1T
> 
> CL30 won't post even at 1.60V VDD/VDDQ.
> 6200 will quickly get errors, even at 40-40-40-80-2T


1T can be tough beyond 6k even on the Apex

Try some of the settings in my posts. If the test is falling over quickly look at VCCSA and MCVDD. Disable MRC full check.

VDDQTX scales and can be needed to stabilise higher frequencies 

CAS 32 6K 1T is nothing to be sniffed at, though.


----------



## Herald

cstkl1 said:


> i would use 0811 to make sure xmp and the ram is stable. then test beta bios on tuning/ oc


Ty, xmp is definitely not stable. I can easily boot with 6400 mhz, but stability..nope.


----------



## satinghostrider

Silent Scone said:


> 1T can be tough beyond 6k even on the Apex
> 
> Try some of the settings in my posts. If the test is falling over quickly look at VCCSA and MCVDD. Disable MRC full check.
> 
> VDDQTX scales and can be needed to stabilise higher frequencies
> 
> CAS 32 6K 1T is nothing to be sniffed at, though.


I can feel a noticeable difference 6000C40 2T XMP And running 6000C32 1T in games. Everything just feels alot sharper and snappier with the 6000C32 1T preset.


----------



## Herald

Alberto_It said:


> I'm using 0031 release on my Z690 Apex and XMP profile works fine without any additional adjustments as on 0811 where it needs to increase VDD and VDDQ to 1.35V


So you are running the xmp2 with no adjustments? IMC at 1.1 volts and auto SA?


----------



## Alberto_It

Herald said:


> So you are running the xmp2 with no adjustments? IMC at 1.1 volts and auto SA?


I'm using XMP 1 with 0031 bios for my Apex and I haven't touched nothing. 

Tested with Aida, Mem5 for the stability


----------



## Silent Scone

satinghostrider said:


> I can feel a noticeable difference 6000C40 2T XMP And running 6000C32 1T in games. Everything just feels alot sharper and snappier with the 6000C32 1T preset.


1T is always the way forward (if your system can do it). 6600-7200 2T is nice but there are normally too many concessions needed


----------



## Herald

Alberto_It said:


> I'm using XMP 1 with 0031 bios for my Apex and I haven't touched nothing.
> 
> Tested with Aida, Mem5 for the stability


Nice, I can't stabilize with xmp no matter the voltages :/ TM5 throws error


----------



## Alberto_It

Herald said:


> Nice, I can't stabilize with xmp no matter the voltages :/ TM5 throws error


On my board are 1.30V by XMP 1 default and as G. Skill F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK specific


----------



## Herald

Alberto_It said:


> On my board are 1.30V by XMP 1 default and as G. Skill F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK specific


Yeah, mine is the same. XMP 1 or XMP 2 don't boot at all, needs more memory voltages (around 1.35 to boot). The APEX profiles for samsung boot but throw errors. Right now I'm running the c32 1t Apex profile but at 5600 mhz, seems to be going okay. Throws 1 error at TM5, can;t get rid of that, but other than that seems to be stable.


----------



## Alberto_It

Herald said:


> Yeah, mine is the same. XMP 1 or XMP 2 don't boot at all, needs more memory voltages (around 1.35 to boot). The APEX profiles for samsung boot but throw errors. Right now I'm running the c32 1t Apex profile but at 5600 mhz, seems to be going okay. Throws 1 error at TM5, can;t get rid of that, but other than that seems to be stable.


I don't want to write a heresy, but maybe it can depend on the silicon lottery of the CPU and same model memory could be different. 

But I'm not sure, you can ask to cstkl1

I can't tag because......


----------



## Herald

Alberto_It said:


> I don't want to write a heresy, but maybe it can depend on the silicon lottery of the CPU and same model memory could be different.
> 
> But I'm not sure, you can ask to cstkl1
> 
> I can't tag because......


Yeah could be, though i got a 95 sp and usually, if the dimms require voltage Imc is not the problem


----------



## malkov

Arni90 said:


> Сейчас на 6000 32-35-35-50-1T
> 
> CL30 не работает даже при 1,60 В VDD/VDDQ.
> 6200 быстро выдаст ошибки, даже на 40-40-40-80-2Т
> [/ЦИТИРОВАТЬ]


Сan you write here voltages for 6000 32-35-35-50-1T and what board do you use?


----------



## satinghostrider

malkov said:


> Сan you write here voltages for 6000 32-35-35-50-1T and what board do you use?


Try this :

1.41v VDD/VDDQ
1.405v VDDTXQ
1.275v MC Voltage
System Agent (SA) Voltage : Start 1.1/1.05V then if you're stable you can try 0.95V.

ODT 40/240/240/48/48 - Do for both channels under Dram Timing Frequency>Skews

The above are my settings for the 6000C32 1T preset on Apex Z690. YMMV might vary depending on your rams.


----------



## Herald

satinghostrider said:


> Try this :
> 
> 1.41v VDD/VDDQ
> 1.405v VDDTXQ
> 1.275v MC Voltage
> System Agent (SA) Voltage : Start 1.1/1.05V then if you're stable you can try 0.95V.
> 
> ODT 40/240/240/48/48 - Do for both channels under Dram Timing Frequency>Skews
> 
> The above are my settings for the 6000C32 1T preset on Apex Z690. YMMV might vary depending on your rams.


With what bios is that?


----------



## satinghostrider

Herald said:


> With what bios is that?


0811.


----------



## Muad_Dib69

any feedback on 070 for Formula?


----------



## wesley8

Muad_Dib69 said:


> any feedback on 070 for Formula?


stable so far


----------



## sblantipodi

beardlessduck said:


> I think we have the same issue but I don't think it's fair to blame the specific motherboard. Asus is doing more than anyone else to help, so we should be appreciative. This is why I'll continue to buy Asus in the future even if I have to dump my Z690 setup for something else down the road.
> 
> This platform was released without proper testing, that is insanely obvious. Here's a small list of issues I've experienced:
> 
> Photoshop crashed constantly. Users had to work with the Abobe engineers for weeks to get this resolved. It is resolved now though.
> Windows 11, which is needed for the new task scheduler, is a buggy mess.
> CPU doesn't fully make contact with heatsink and can cause thermal throttling even when liquid cooled (I solved this by putting on extra thermal paste)
> RAM issues
> 
> My opinion is that this platform was not ready for release. I do expect my RAM (yes, from two separate kits) to work, but Asus is at least helping us.


I love Asus, I'm just mad that I can't even stabilize 4.8GHz that in my mind is the minimum possible to give a microscopic meaning to DDR5 over ddr4.

In the end with 0070 it seems that I can be 100% stable at 4.8GHz by highering the MC to 1.26V from 1.25V.
Hope that next bioses will not bring regression in this field.


----------



## nikpoth

Guys the arctic liquid freezer ii, does not fit in maximus z690 apex? Will it find in vrm / m2, heatsink?


----------



## Frenzi3d

I heard someone got a problem like me, APEX can not boot dram frequency above 6200 - 6400Mhz on DIMM_1 but DIMM_2 is normal, yeah I got this problem and after I have changed to the new mobo (APEX) it's fixed my problem.
Now I can boot 7000Mhz on both DIMM_1 & 2 with a new APEX.
So I think the problem is not from the IMC on the CPU, but it's from ASUS.









Screenshot


Captured with Lightshot




prnt.sc


----------



## SuperMumrik

Frenzi3d said:


> I heard someone got a problem like me, APEX can not boot dram frequency above 6200 - 6400Mhz on DIMM_1 but DIMM_2 is normal, yeah I got this problem and after I have changed to the new mobo (APEX) it's fixed my problem.
> Now I can boot 7000Mhz on both DIMM_1 & 2 with a new APEX.
> So I think the problem is not from the IMC on the CPU, but it's from ASUS.


Yeah, I got this problem as well. 
Dimm B can bench 7400 vs 6800 on Dimm A


----------



## snakeeyes111

Mhh i think asus should swap Boards, if there is a issue like this.... now I have to buy a New or need a rma... we all know how long rma can be.


----------



## CanM4

Frenzi3d said:


> I heard someone got a problem like me, APEX can not boot dram frequency above 6200 - 6400Mhz on DIMM_1 but DIMM_2 is normal, yeah I got this problem and after I have changed to the new mobo (APEX) it's fixed my problem.
> Now I can boot 7000Mhz on both DIMM_1 & 2 with a new APEX.
> So I think the problem is not from the IMC on the CPU, but it's from ASUS.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Screenshot
> 
> 
> Captured with Lightshot
> 
> 
> 
> 
> prnt.sc
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2542714


what is the manufacturing date of your new apex ?


----------



## Carillo

Frenzi3d said:


> I heard someone got a problem like me, APEX can not boot dram frequency above 6200 - 6400Mhz on DIMM_1 but DIMM_2 is normal, yeah I got this problem and after I have changed to the new mobo (APEX) it's fixed my problem.
> Now I can boot 7000Mhz on both DIMM_1 & 2 with a new APEX.
> So I think the problem is not from the IMC on the CPU, but it's from ASUS.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Screenshot
> 
> 
> Captured with Lightshot
> 
> 
> 
> 
> prnt.sc
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2542714


Same problem here. Have tested 3 different boards, 4 cpu's and 6 memory kit. Results are persistent , and one board only does 6400 in SLOT A, while 7400 slot B. second board 6800 A and 7400 B. Last board boots 7000 in A, but blue screen under AIDA with only one slot populated. CPU IMC can benchmark 6600 CL28 1T without problems. Also tested with ICE COLD water


----------



## Frenzi3d

CanM4 said:


> what is the manufacturing date of your new apex ?





CanM4 said:


> what is the manufacturing date of your new apex ?


How to check?


----------



## truehighroller1

Frenzi3d said:


> How to check?


Box sticker?


----------



## SoldierRBT

My apex board also has this problem. It posts 6800 Dimm A and 7200 Dimm B. Purchased November 2021.


----------



## Alberto_It

What do you think about my CB23 score? 

Edit : I have got an Aio as cooling system


----------



## CanM4

Frenzi3d said:


> How to check?


On the box stiker you can see « manufacturing date… »


----------



## snakeeyes111

Dont need to search any more for issues on Ram. I ****ing soled my dimms, cause this garbage Board ****s me every second boot!

My Samsung do 64001t stable one time, sold cause next boot Bsod etc.
My Dell boot 7200 best stick, 7000 shown in Screen worst dimm..... sold cause i cant do stable every boot.

Test mch fullcheck enable. 98% timings auto.
Voltage gap from Board! Same dimm in both slots, after i raise Voltage for same value on both slots. Dont make a sense, 6400 is the end of Dimm A!!!!!

Paid a lot of money for dimms... and at the end u reconized the Apex is the worst Board for daily OC. GG Asus !


----------



## Carillo

SoldierRBT said:


> My apex board also has this problem. It posts 6800 Dimm A and 7200 Dimm B. Purchased November 2021.


My 6800 in slot A board is also november 2021


----------



## pat-Geek

Quite funny to hear that the APEX and EXTREME have stability issues with OC DDR5 DIMMs more than the HERO and FORMULA, but for some reason these are the two motherboards Asus chose to give an BIOS with SLI key over the HERO and FORMULA, lol.


----------



## snakeeyes111

My second dimm boot 7200 with Same Voltage...sold for 450€ and i bet get never dimms like this again 🤣.

Still mch fullcheck enable.


----------



## snakeeyes111

The better one. So i was wondering why i cant get 64002t stable lol....


----------



## snakeeyes111

Mhh cant find Date on Box. Purchased 6.11... so i think its a Problem on first board.


----------



## CanM4

pat-Geek said:


> Quite funny to hear that the APEX and EXTREME have stability issues with OC DDR5 DIMMs more than the HERO and FORMULA, but for some reason these are the two motherboards Asus chose to give an BIOS with SLI key over the HERO and FORMULA, lol.


**** launch. Bad gen for ASUS


----------



## snakeeyes111

600mhz between Slot A and B. This is a huge gap.... lol. But RMA = 2 or 4 weeks no board for asus fault ! No way.... Lost enough money, but i think the Customer are happy with their new dimms .


----------



## Rpro

Карилло said:


> Моя плата 6800 в слоте A тоже ноябрь 2021 г.
> [/ЦИТИРОВАТЬ]
> Сегодня забрал плату протестировав ее. По серийному номеру октябрь, а внизу мануфактура 2021.11. все слоты 7000. На остальных платах отсутствует надпись мануфактура и дата


----------



## snakeeyes111

Sorry my Alphapex wont work well, lol


----------



## sblantipodi

pat-Geek said:


> Quite funny to hear that the APEX and EXTREME have stability issues with OC DDR5 DIMMs more than the HERO and FORMULA, but for some reason these are the two motherboards Asus chose to give an BIOS with SLI key over the HERO and FORMULA, lol.


Extreme costs two times more than the Hero and it clocks worse than the Hero. 😁
Probably Asus is trying to create one reason to justify this thing 😁


----------



## pat-Geek

sblantipodi said:


> Extreme costs two times more than the Hero and it clocks worse than the Hero. 😁
> Probably Asus is trying to create one reason to justify this thing 😁


LOL. I can't stop laughing over this 😂. I'm a long time Maximus HERO customer and this is the very first time I'm kind of disappointed by Asus. I don't know what happened with ROG this generation. I planned to replace my 12900K by a 13900K later this year, and something tells me I will have to replace my Z690 Hero by a Z790 board as well just to have a better DDR5 experience, lol.


----------



## acoustic

Hoping this stuff will be sorted out by Sapphire Rapids at the end of this year.


----------



## sblantipodi

in the mean time my 1200€ mobo isn't able to run 4 sticks at 4.8GHz C40... crashed right now...
4.8GHz C40 is slower than DDR4 3.6GHz C16.

Nice to see that in 2022, you can spend two times more for a motherboard that clocks worse than the cheaper motherboard and two times more for some RAM sticks that are slower than standard DDR4 3.6GHz C16 ones...

this market is ill


----------



## LionAlonso

sblantipodi said:


> in the mean time my 1200€ mobo isn't able to run 4 sticks at 4.8GHz C40... crashed right now...
> 4.8GHz C40 is slower than DDR4 3.6GHz C16.
> 
> Nice to see that in 2022, you can spend two times more for a motherboard that clocks worse than the cheaper motherboard and two times more for some RAM sticks that are slower than standard DDR4 3.6GHz C16 ones...
> 
> this market is ill


You are a "computer scientist".
You should have known that buying 2 different Ram kits with the new DDR5 standard and group them up was a bad idea.
Imo the market isnt ill, you know, as Jesus said: *"First remove the plank from your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brothers eye "*


----------



## jomama22

sblantipodi said:


> in the mean time my 1200€ mobo isn't able to run 4 sticks at 4.8GHz C40... crashed right now...
> 4.8GHz C40 is slower than DDR4 3.6GHz C16.
> 
> Nice to see that in 2022, you can spend two times more for a motherboard that clocks worse than the cheaper motherboard and two times more for some RAM sticks that are slower than standard DDR4 3.6GHz C16 ones...
> 
> this market is ill


So it took you less than 24hrs to post the same thing again?

Sell the board already! Makes no sense to me that you haven't.


----------



## acoustic

sblantipodi said:


> in the mean time my 1200€ mobo isn't able to run 4 sticks at 4.8GHz C40... crashed right now...
> 4.8GHz C40 is slower than DDR4 3.6GHz C16.
> 
> Nice to see that in 2022, you can spend two times more for a motherboard that clocks worse than the cheaper motherboard and two times more for some RAM sticks that are slower than standard DDR4 3.6GHz C16 ones...
> 
> this market is ill


I think you need to understand that it's not just the board you're fighting in this case.

I suspect, even when you eventually swap the board out for another, that you're going to run into issues with the replacement as well. You need to do your own manual tweaking when trying to run mismatched sticks, and from what I've seen, you've only tried what Shamino has recommended but not done your own due diligence.

Sell the board, go with MSI, and see if it's any better - I have a feeling it won't be, at least for your 4x16 setup.


----------



## sblantipodi

acoustic said:


> I think you need to understand that it's not just the board you're fighting in this case.
> 
> I suspect, even when you eventually swap the board out for another, that you're going to run into issues with the replacement as well. You need to do your own manual tweaking when trying to run mismatched sticks, and from what I've seen, you've only tried what Shamino has recommended but not done your own due diligence.
> 
> Sell the board, go with MSI, and see if it's any better - I have a feeling it won't be, at least for your 4x16 setup.


I don't need an overclock to show a result on a forum, I would like to run a daily OC that lasts... I don't have time to buy new hardware every year and have the same problems over and over again.

I feel that my VDD/VDDQ/VDDQ TX is pretty high for a daily system.
I'm running it at 1.35V and the MC is now at 1.26V.

how much further can I push it to try to find stability without burninig all the things out?


----------



## acoustic

You have a long way to go before you're in danger territory with those voltages, from what I've seen others running.

You're going to need more voltage than you see other people using directly because of the 4x16. Add in that they aren't a matching kit, and that's a cause for even more voltage needed on top of that.


----------



## Muad_Dib69

formula with bios 0070 I loaded samsung preset cas32. Not booting off course but i change 2t for 1t. and it's stable until 64°c as usual. Let's see for how long. i put maxximus tweak to mode 1 also. Just to try but it works. 

Any suggestion to go back to 1T?


----------



## bern43

I've got an Apex Board that was purchased back in November (took forever to find RAM) that I was planning on building with this weekend with G-Skill 6000 CL36. Nothing is opened yet. Wondering if I should exchange the motherboard for a newer one. I've got a few weeks left on the exchange period for the board with New Egg.


----------



## vlad.enthusiast

Hey guys! I hope you can help me. I bought an Asus rog z690 extreme motherboard and a fractal design (torrent) case. I am trying to secure the motherboard, and I have a problem. It looks like there are no compatible screws (I have 6-32 that I got with the torrent case), and it looks like a screw length is not enough to secure the motherboard. Am I doing something wrong, or should I get different screws?
edit:
I applied pressure and was able to do the work 🤦‍♂️


----------



## bscool

vlad.enthusiast said:


> Hey guys! I hope you can help me. I bought an Asus rog z690 extreme motherboard and a fractal design (torrent) case. I am trying to secure the motherboard, and I have a problem. It looks like there are no compatible screws (I have 6-32 that I got with the torrent case), and it looks like a screw length is not enough to secure the motherboard. Am I doing something wrong, or should I get different screws?


I have that case but not the Extreme MB but it shouldnt need a special screw. Sounds like you are using the wrong screws or the MB is not seated all the way down.

Never heard of needing a special longer screw for any MB.


----------



## vlad.enthusiast

bscool said:


> I have that case but not the Extreme MB but it shouldnt need a special screw. Sounds like you are using the wrong screws or the MB is not seated all the way down.
> 
> Never heard of needing a special longer screw for any MB.


Yes, you are right. I fixed the issue. I did not know that I have to apply pressure to screw it in.


----------



## snakeeyes111

I swear my apex isnt broken....


----------



## RobertoSampaio

snakeeyes111 said:


> I swear my apex isnt broken....
> View attachment 2542766


Did you enable VMD ?


----------



## jomama22

snakeeyes111 said:


> I swear my apex isnt broken....
> View attachment 2542766


That's a security setting in the bios or you have corrupted the os through enough memory fails. Has nothing to do the board itself.


----------



## snakeeyes111

RobertoSampaio said:


> Did you enable VMD ?


Default = enable. So it is enable


----------



## RobertoSampaio

snakeeyes111 said:


> Default = enable. So it is enable


There is a sub setting in VMD I cant remember... 
If you enable this sub item, you will have this problem if you go back.


----------



## Silent Scone

pat-Geek said:


> Quite funny to hear that the APEX and EXTREME have stability issues with OC DDR5 DIMMs more than the HERO and FORMULA, but for some reason these are the two motherboards Asus chose to give an BIOS with SLI key over the HERO and FORMULA, lol.



No issues here. Up to 6933 stable on Apex.


----------



## criznit

Silent Scone said:


> No issues here. Up to 6933 stable on Apex.


What voltages are you running for 6933? I can get my kit up to 6666 on the unify-x, but I stopped for now.


----------



## skullbringer

Frenzi3d said:


> I heard someone got a problem like me, APEX can not boot dram frequency above 6200 - 6400Mhz on DIMM_1 but DIMM_2 is normal, yeah I got this problem and after I have changed to the new mobo (APEX) it's fixed my problem.
> Now I can boot 7000Mhz on both DIMM_1 & 2 with a new APEX.
> So I think the problem is not from the IMC on the CPU, but it's from ASUS.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Screenshot
> 
> 
> Captured with Lightshot
> 
> 
> 
> 
> prnt.sc
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2542714


would really like to know if it is the rumored 2.0 pcb revision, can you check? printing under the first pcie slot latch, between slot and heatsink, might need to shine in with flash light, should say rev 1.02 or rev 2.01


----------



## sblantipodi

Muad_Dib69 said:


> formula with bios 0070 I loaded samsung preset cas32. Not booting off course but i change 2t for 1t. and it's stable until 64°c as usual. Let's see for how long. i put maxximus tweak to mode 1 also. Just to try but it works.
> 
> Any suggestion to go back to 1T?


what do you mean for "it's stable until 64°c as usual"?
does Samsung chip became unstable once reached 64°C?


----------



## sblantipodi

acoustic said:


> You have a long way to go before you're in danger territory with those voltages, from what I've seen others running.
> 
> You're going to need more voltage than you see other people using directly because of the 4x16. Add in that they aren't a matching kit, and that's a cause for even more voltage needed on top of that.


thank you for the reply. most people here doesn't care if the CPU will die in a week or in a month...
considering the fact that they throw as much voltage as the motherboard permit 

I really have no idea on how far can I go with the voltages.


----------



## Agent-A01

acoustic said:


> I think you need to understand that it's not just the board you're fighting in this case.
> 
> I suspect, even when you eventually swap the board out for another, that you're going to run into issues with the replacement as well. You need to do your own manual tweaking when trying to run mismatched sticks, and from what I've seen, you've only tried what Shamino has recommended but not done your own due diligence.
> 
> Sell the board, go with MSI, and see if it's any better - I have a feeling it won't be, at least for your 4x16 setup.


No need to tell that guy anything logical. He will just ignore it and complain some more the next day


----------



## beardlessduck

sblantipodi said:


> in the mean time my 1200€ mobo isn't able to run 4 sticks at 4.8GHz C40... crashed right now...
> 4.8GHz C40 is slower than DDR4 3.6GHz C16.
> 
> Nice to see that in 2022, you can spend two times more for a motherboard that clocks worse than the cheaper motherboard and two times more for some RAM sticks that are slower than standard DDR4 3.6GHz C16 ones...
> 
> this market is ill


I agree that it sucks but just run it at 4000mhz before you let it crash over and over. I got some weird behavior on the last BIOS but my uptime was 19 days at 4000mhz with a little extra voltage. Photoshop, Blender, Chrome, Visual Studio Code, games, and more all running at once. 

I'm running the latest BIOS with the same settings (4000mhz / everything on auto / a little extra voltage) and I have not experienced any weird behavior since updating. 

The RAM is probably slower than my previous DDR4 setup, but that's not something I notice in my day to day life.

Asus is putting in some effort here where nobody else is -- these types of posts are not going to make them feel like they should keep helping us.


----------



## sblantipodi

beardlessduck said:


> I agree that it sucks but just run it at 4000mhz before you let it crash over and over. I got some weird behavior on the last BIOS but my uptime was 19 days at 4000mhz with a little extra voltage. Photoshop, Blender, Chrome, Visual Studio Code, games, and more all running at once.
> 
> I'm running the latest BIOS with the same settings (4000mhz / everything on auto / a little extra voltage) and I have not experienced any weird behavior since updating.
> 
> The RAM is probably slower than my previous DDR4 setup, but that's not something I notice in my day to day life.
> 
> Asus is putting in some effort here where nobody else is -- these types of posts are not going to make them feel like they should keep helping us.


I appreciate the post, probably, one day, I will admit that 1000€ sticks must run way worse than 500€ equivalent DDR4 sticks and I'll leave them at 4GHz.


----------



## owikh84

sblantipodi said:


> in the mean time my 1200€ mobo isn't able to run 4 sticks at 4.8GHz C40... crashed right now...
> 4.8GHz C40 is slower than DDR4 3.6GHz C16.
> 
> Nice to see that in 2022, you can spend two times more for a motherboard that clocks worse than the cheaper motherboard and two times more for some RAM sticks that are slower than standard DDR4 3.6GHz C16 ones...
> 
> this market is ill


12900K SP88 - Stock
Maximus Z690 EXTREME | BIOS 0070
G.Skill F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK (Samsung)
*4x16GB DDR5-5600 34-36-36-56-2T
VDD/VDDQ/TX VDDQ 1.35v | SA 1.25v (Auto) | MC 1.25v*









Attached below is the RAM profile in case you would like to give it a try on your Extreme + 4x16GB Samsung. Kindly rename the CMO file to remove the .txt extension.
SA is at auto = 1.25v, currently trying to reduce this.
SA 0.9-1.1v: TM5 error within 60 mins
SA 1.15v: TM5 error at 2 hours

Currently still waiting for the bubbles to disappear from both loops, this gonna take some time I guess.




























My hardware setup:
CPU: 12900K SP88
M/B: ASUS ROG Maximus Z690 Extreme BIOS 0070
RAM: 4x16GB G.Skill Trident Z5 RGB DDR5-6000C36 @ 5600 CL34 1.35v
SSD: WD SN850 1TB + SN750 4TB
HDD: Seagate Barracuda 4TB
GPU: ASUS ROG Strix 3090 vBIOS V4 Rebar ON
PSU: Corsair AX1500i + CableMod ModFlex Carbon/Black full cable set
Case: Lian Li V3000
Others: Lancool Vertical GPU Mount Bracket (modded) + ADT PCIe4 15cm Riser Cable + Jonsbo VC-20 Mini GPU Stand

Custom loop setup:
CPU: EK-Velocity2 Nickel+Plexi D-RGB + TG Kryonaut
GPU: EK-Vector Strix + Active Backplate Nickel+Plexi D-RGB + TG Kryonaut paste + TR Extreme Odyssey pads
Rad: 2x EK PE 480mm
Pump: 2x Laing D5 Vario
Distro plate: WV Mech D5 Dual Loop
Fans: 12x EK Vardar-S 120mm D-RGB
Fittings: Bitspower+Barrow+Bykski
Tubing: Barrow PETG 14mm


----------



## ahmadexp

shamino1978 said:


> just my way of calling these "for dram obsessed people"  dont take it seriously.


Any chance you can provide us with the SLI/NVLINK enabled bios for z690 extreme?


----------



## sblantipodi

owikh84 said:


> 12900K SP88 - Stock
> Maximus Z690 EXTREME | BIOS 0070
> G.Skill F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK (Samsung)
> *4x16GB DDR5-5600 34-36-36-56-2T
> VDD/VDDQ/TX VDDQ 1.35v | SA 1.25v (Auto) | MC 1.25v*
> View attachment 2542798
> 
> 
> Attached below is the RAM profile in case you would like to give it a try on your Extreme + 4x16GB Samsung. Kindly rename the CMO file to remove the .txt extension.
> SA is at auto = 1.25v, currently trying to reduce this.
> SA 0.9-1.1v: TM5 error within 60 mins
> SA 1.15v: TM5 error at 2 hours


Thank you very much man I'll give it a try 
Really appreciated.


----------



## EviLBoy

Hey, 
I can't flash my motherboard with the latest bios ROG-STRIX-Z690-F-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0070.rar, I tried ezflash and flashback but still the green led, but I have 6 USB keys I do not understand, if anyone has an idea.
Thank you


----------



## bscool

EviLBoy said:


> Hey,
> I can't flash my motherboard with the latest bios ROG-STRIX-Z690-F-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0070.rar, I tried ezflash and flashback but still the green led, but I have 6 USB keys I do not understand, if anyone has an idea.
> Thank you


Gotta unzip it. And for Flashback you need to rename it look at MB manual for name or use renamer if bios came with one.


----------



## EviLBoy

bscool said:


> Gotta unzip it. And for Flashback you need to rename it look at MB manual for name or use renamer if bios came with one.


Sorry I forgot to specify, but I renamed the bios by hand


----------



## bscool

EviLBoy said:


> Sorry I forgot to specify, but I renamed the bios by hand


You unzipped it first?

You need something like 7 zip. 7-Zip


----------



## EviLBoy

bscool said:


> You unzipped it first?
> 
> You need something like 7 zip. 7-Zip


Yes winrar


----------



## bscool

EviLBoy said:


> Yes winrar


No idea then.

I guess I would try another bios version if they dont work sounds like MB issue.

If other bioses work then bad bios file download for 0070?

I think I have seen other people say they couldnt flash certain version. Dont remember the MB or bios though.


----------



## Falkentyne

owikh84 said:


> 12900K SP88 - Stock
> Maximus Z690 EXTREME | BIOS 0070
> G.Skill F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK (Samsung)
> *4x16GB DDR5-5600 34-36-36-56-2T
> VDD/VDDQ/TX VDDQ 1.35v | SA 1.25v (Auto) | MC 1.25v*
> View attachment 2542798
> 
> 
> Attached below is the RAM profile in case you would like to give it a try on your Extreme + 4x16GB Samsung. Kindly rename the CMO file to remove the .txt extension.
> SA is at auto = 1.25v, currently trying to reduce this.
> SA 0.9-1.1v: TM5 error within 60 mins
> SA 1.15v: TM5 error at 2 hours
> 
> Currently still waiting for the bubbles to disappear from both loops, this gonna take some time I guess.
> 
> View attachment 2542807
> 
> 
> View attachment 2542809
> 
> 
> View attachment 2542808
> 
> 
> My hardware setup:
> CPU: 12900K SP88
> M/B: ASUS ROG Maximus Z690 Extreme BIOS 0070
> RAM: 4x16GB G.Skill Trident Z5 RGB DDR4-6000C36 @ 5600 CL34 1.35v
> SSD: WD SN850 1TB + SN750 4TB
> HDD: Seagate Barracuda 4TB
> GPU: ASUS ROG Strix 3090 vBIOS V4 Rebar ON
> PSU: Corsair AX1500i + CableMod ModFlex Carbon/Black full cable set
> Case: Lian Li V3000
> Others: Lancool Vertical GPU Mount Bracket (modded) + ADT PCIe4 15cm Riser Cable + Jonsbo VC-20 Mini GPU Stand
> 
> Custom loop setup:
> CPU: EK-Velocity2 Nickel+Plexi D-RGB + TG Kryonaut
> GPU: EK-Vector Strix + Active Backplate Nickel+Plexi D-RGB + TG Kryonaut paste + TR Extreme Odyssey pads
> Rad: 2x EK PE 480mm
> Pump: 2x Laing D5 Vario
> Distro plate: WV Mech D5 Dual Loop
> Fans: 12x EK Vardar-S 120mm D-RGB
> Fittings: Bitspower+Barrow+Bykski
> Tubing: Barrow PETG 14mm


That's gotta be the cleanest build I've seen posted on this entire forum.


----------



## acoustic

Falkentyne said:


> That's gotta be the cleanest build I've seen posted on this entire forum.


In an older case too, no less! Very clean.


----------



## asdkj1740

wesley8 said:


> stable so far
> View attachment 2542706


hynix or Samsung?


----------



## Nizzen

ahmadexp said:


> Any chance you can provide us with the SLI/NVLINK enabled bios for z690 extreme?


He said they are waiting for nVidia... They need to get the sli key.


----------



## wesley8

asdkj1740 said:


> hynix or Samsung?


hynix，with 0070 bios can stable 6600c32 CR2


----------



## shamino1978

skullbringer said:


> ohhh, good point, limited cache to x40 and now I can lower v/f6 from 1170 to 1020.
> 
> did not need to limit cache on 0702, so microcode >12 must have changed cache vid somehow or how cache and vcore vid are compared.
> 
> I knew that highest vid "wins", but did not consider microcode update might change vid values. thank you so much for helping me with this! big rep!


ive added ring vf pt offset to octool:








OCTool_ADL0115.zip


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com


----------



## asdkj1740

wesley8 said:


> hynix，with 0070 bios can stable 6600c32 CR2


sick. 
6600 on 4dimm mobo tm5 absolute stable as well??


----------



## wesley8

asdkj1740 said:


> sick.
> 6600 on 4dimm mobo tm5 absolute stable as well??


yes，even with gaming test。。。


----------



## sblantipodi

owikh84 said:


> 12900K SP88 - Stock
> Maximus Z690 EXTREME | BIOS 0070
> G.Skill F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK (Samsung)
> *4x16GB DDR5-5600 34-36-36-56-2T
> VDD/VDDQ/TX VDDQ 1.35v | SA 1.25v (Auto) | MC 1.25v*
> View attachment 2542798
> 
> 
> Attached below is the RAM profile in case you would like to give it a try on your Extreme + 4x16GB Samsung. Kindly rename the CMO file to remove the .txt extension.
> SA is at auto = 1.25v, currently trying to reduce this.
> SA 0.9-1.1v: TM5 error within 60 mins
> SA 1.15v: TM5 error at 2 hours
> 
> Currently still waiting for the bubbles to disappear from both loops, this gonna take some time I guess.
> 
> View attachment 2542807
> 
> 
> View attachment 2542809
> 
> 
> View attachment 2542808
> 
> 
> My hardware setup:
> CPU: 12900K SP88
> M/B: ASUS ROG Maximus Z690 Extreme BIOS 0070
> RAM: 4x16GB G.Skill Trident Z5 RGB DDR4-6000C36 @ 5600 CL34 1.35v
> SSD: WD SN850 1TB + SN750 4TB
> HDD: Seagate Barracuda 4TB
> GPU: ASUS ROG Strix 3090 vBIOS V4 Rebar ON
> PSU: Corsair AX1500i + CableMod ModFlex Carbon/Black full cable set
> Case: Lian Li V3000
> Others: Lancool Vertical GPU Mount Bracket (modded) + ADT PCIe4 15cm Riser Cable + Jonsbo VC-20 Mini GPU Stand
> 
> Custom loop setup:
> CPU: EK-Velocity2 Nickel+Plexi D-RGB + TG Kryonaut
> GPU: EK-Vector Strix + Active Backplate Nickel+Plexi D-RGB + TG Kryonaut paste + TR Extreme Odyssey pads
> Rad: 2x EK PE 480mm
> Pump: 2x Laing D5 Vario
> Distro plate: WV Mech D5 Dual Loop
> Fans: 12x EK Vardar-S 120mm D-RGB
> Fittings: Bitspower+Barrow+Bykski
> Tubing: Barrow PETG 14mm


In any case if this is your result with the extreme and Samsung chip I ask sorry to Asus.
My bad results must be a problem of my IMC or of my Poor overclocking skills.

Love Asus. Always bought their products. Sometimes I feel like cursing. Please forgive me, I'm not a bad guy 😁😁😁

Just one question if possible...
I have seen that you changed these settings:



> DRAM CAS# Latency [34]
> DRAM RAS# to CAS# Delay [36]
> DRAM RAS# PRE Time [36]
> DRAM RAS# ACT Time [56]
> DRAM Command Rate [2N]
> DRAM RAS# to RAS# Delay L [6]
> DRAM RAS# to RAS# Delay S [4]
> DRAM REF Cycle Time [450]
> DRAM REF Cycle Time 2 [Auto]
> DRAM REF Cycle Time Same Bank [Auto]
> DRAM Refresh Interval [65535]
> DRAM WRITE Recovery Time [16]
> DRAM READ to PRE Time [12]
> DRAM FOUR ACT WIN Time [16]
> DRAM WRITE to READ Delay [Auto]
> DRAM WRITE to READ Delay L [Auto]
> DRAM WRITE to READ Delay S [Auto]
> DRAM CKE Minimum Pulse Width [6]
> DRAM Write Latency [32]
> 
> tRDRD_sg_Training [Auto]
> tRDRD_sg_Runtime [11]
> tRDRD_dg_Training [Auto]
> tRDRD_dg_Runtime [8]
> tRDWR_sg [18]
> tRDWR_dg [18]
> tWRWR_sg [20]
> tWRWR_dg [8]
> tWRRD_sg [60]
> tWRRD_dg [50]
> tRDRD_dr [14]
> tRDRD_dd [16]
> tRDWR_dr [18]
> tRDWR_dd [18]
> tWRWR_dr [14]
> tWRWR_dd [14]
> tWRRD_dr [12]
> tWRRD_dd [12]
> tRPRE [Auto]
> tWPRE [Auto]
> tWRPRE [Auto]
> tPRPDEN [Auto]
> tRDPDEN [Auto]
> tWRPDEN [Auto]
> tCPDED [Auto]
> tREFIX9 [Auto]


does this settings improves stability or simply reduce latency for improved performance?
Now I'm not searching for improved performance but improved stability only 


thanks


----------



## edkieferlp

wesley8 said:


> yes，even with gaming test。。。
> View attachment 2542825


Hi wesley8, May I ask what memory test app is in the pic?


----------



## schuldig

edkieferlp said:


> Hi wesley8, May I ask what memory test app is in the pic?


that would be karhu:


RAM Test - Karhu Software


----------



## Gadfly

So, I am having no luck finding Hynix kits.
can someone who is running the Galilee 6000c36 Sammy kit post there full timings, settings, voltages?

is anyone running Samsung memory 6800+ stable On an apex?


----------



## IronAge

SB posted d/l link for Bios 0072 for Apex on hwbot, not sure if it has been posted yet.









ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0072.CAP


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com







ASUS ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX | APEX 14


----------



## CanM4

hi guys,

I just tested my motherboard (z690 apex  ) and.... slot 1 max 6400mhz slot 2 max 7000mhz. My board manufacturing date is 11 / 2021, so maybe December 2021 manufactured motherboard got the V2 ?

try your board, check if you have the same issue... i dont know if RMA can work for this issue.

RAM slot 1 issue, BIOS instability for samsung memory.... its too much for 700€ board.


----------



## J1mB091

IronAge said:


> SB posted d/l link for Bios 0072 for Apex on hwbot, not sure if it has been posted yet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0072.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ASUS ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX | APEX 14





shamino1978 said:


> Adds specific p e core disable: also adds temparay sli key
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0072.rar


Has been posted but the one from hwbot isn't the same as the one from shamino. MD5 mismatch.


----------



## Gadfly

CanM4 said:


> hi guys,
> 
> I just tested my motherboard (z690 apex  ) and.... slot 1 max 6400mhz slot 2 max 7000mhz. My board manufacturing date is 11 / 2021, so maybe December 2021 manufactured motherboard got the V2 ?
> 
> try your board, check if you have the same issue... i dont know if RMA can work for this issue.
> 
> RAM slot 1 issue, BIOS instability for samsung memory.... its too much for 700€ board.


It is possible that this is just a PHY training issue that can be corrected in software, or default (auto) RTT/ODT/Termination settings that need to be modified for slot 1; it does not necessarily mean there is a physical problem with the board.


----------



## CanM4

Gadfly said:


> It is possible that this is just a PHY training issue that can be corrected in software, or default (auto) RTT/ODT/Termination settings that need to be modified for slot 1; it does not necessarily mean there is a physical problem with the board.


you think it can be solved by bios update ?


----------



## truehighroller1

CanM4 said:


> you think it can be solved by bios update ?


Probably.


----------



## Gadfly

CanM4 said:


> you think it can be solved by bios update ?


Most likely. Each channel will require different PHY settings, and in the bios you can set ODT settings per channel

I suspect what we are seeing is just the defaults are set the same on both channels. 

*shamino1978 Posted these few pages back:*

skew control/odts/
rtt WR 48
rtt Nom rd 34
rtt nom wr 34
rtt park 34
rtt parkdqs 34

rtt ca group A 240
rtt cs group A 0
rtt ck group A 0

rtt ca group B 40
rtt cs group B 40
rtt ck group B 40

Ron odt up/down: 34/34

skew control/comp control:

DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL0_dqvrefup 159
DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL0_dqvrefdn 94
DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL0_dqodtvrefup 128
DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL0_dqodtvrefdn 99

DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL1_cmdvrefup 145
DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL1_ctlvrefup 118
DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL1_clkvrefup 128
DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL1_ckecsvrefup 0
DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL2_cmdvrefdn 92
DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL2_ctlvrefdn 103
DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL2_clkvrefdn 92

VCCSA 1.15v, mc voltage 1.25v, vdd/vddq 1.35v


----------



## D-EJ915

Falkentyne said:


> Can you disable those USB ports in your BIOS, save, then re-enable them and see if they start working?
> This shouldn't have to even be done but it's a last ditch attempt before you RMA.
> An entire bank of red USB ports not working is a defect I've never seen before (then again I don't exactly read forums or reddit just looking for hardware defects specifically!)


well in a weird case it happened on my 2nd one but I've discovered a way to fix it ? Not sure why it would even happen but I've just let the board sit around so no idea. Anyway I switched to the old bios and disabled and enabled and made no difference then switched back to the new one and they are working so yeah I have no clue lol. Glad it works again though.


----------



## uplink

@shamino1978 You're on a good path with Apex regarding memory stability. 9901 made my G.Skill 6000 MHz CL36 work on vanilla XMP II. so far, I've passed one pass in MemTest.


----------



## bscool

Agent-A01 said:


> But on a serious note, AIO is easy peasy to reinstall versus these full waterblock setups.
> Do it for the cause


Short version, tried it by just loosening torx screws and no difference.

Long version....

Loosened my IML bracket torx screws 1.5 turn(half a turn more and they come out of the threads so not much room left) and saw no difference in temps.

I did notice a slight convex to my CPU though even out of the socket. With Torx IML screws normal/factory there was a LARGE concave "hole" as the lever is pushed down. Could observe by holding razor blade on IHS and lower securing lever. Concave "hole" was reduce by loosening Torx screws.

I use liquid metal and apply it "heavy" so i am thinking it "pools" in the hole so to speak and has better conductiivty than normal thermal paste and this may be part of why I seem to get better temps than many on AIO. Sorry not going to clean off LM to verify against regular TIM, that would be the "correct" way to test but I dont care enough. LM is pain to clean off.

Also put razor in my Arctic 420 block and it is flat. Could not see a convex.


----------



## bscool

Edit
Dumb user error lol was still at 4133 not 4266. Nothing to see here.........


----------



## Merkor

Just to show what the bending stuff, torx/washers mod is all about: Here are some shots of my Asus Z690 Hero, 12900K and Noctua NH-D15.

Originally, I inserted the CPU with the Noctua backplate attached to strengthen the motherboard's backplate, but had to remove it again to mount the mounting parts of the cooler. I applied the thermal paste by spreading it on the heatspreader, as I do since 25 years.

However, clamping the CPU on the long side led to significant bending on the CPU in the middle axis with apparently NO contact of the cooler to the hottest part of the CPU. This is why @bscool is describing the "pooling" of the thermal paste in the clamping axis of the CPU. So you need A LOT thermal paste to fill the room to the cooler. Don't spare with it. This being said, there will never be sufficient direct contact to the cooler in the middle. Loosening the torx or doing the washers mod AFTER the CPU has been bent, will IMHO not lead to better temperatures. You will rather lose the Intel specification for the contact pressure from CPU to socket pins with possible stability flaws like even worse RAM compatibility (some are reporting). But this is speculation and there might be serial/mechanical tolerances, so users will have different experiences with the whole thing. Who knows, if also the RAM stability issues are due to a bad seating of the CPU. Support staff already recommends reseating the CPU when having RAM stability issues.

For me, it is a horrible Intel design flaw of the new generation: CPU/clamping points, flakey motherboard backplate and the too strong socket mechanism.


----------



## wesley8

edkieferlp said:


> Hi wesley8, May I ask what memory test app is in the pic?





RAM Test - Karhu Software


----------



## Zyther

Any reason why my cpu speed constantly dips from 4900 back to 4898.8 MHz then back to 4900


----------



## IronAge

@J1mB091 

yeah this 0072 is newer, see the screen on hwbot, this 0072 is dated 01/13/2022, probaly just a renewed SLI key ?


----------



## IronAge




----------



## skullbringer

IronAge said:


>


shamino, was that you?


----------



## CoUsT

I have 12700KF and Strix A D4. I'm trying to undervolt/overclock CPU and I'm really confused. Things didn't really make sense to me at first but then I got to know the CPU better. My Ring clock was going to 4600 MHz when E-cores were not in use and it caused the voltage to go up to 1.43V. I managed to overcome that obstacle and I think I have fairly good understanding how things are working now BUT there is one thing that is making me confused...

I'm trying to find my optimal E-core frequency so I set down P-cores to 4200 MHz (so E-cores frequency/voltage curve takes priority) and was trying E-cores - 4000 MHz, no luck, errors in Prime. 3900 seems fine so I tried undervolting. I wanted to take P-cores frequency down even further to reduce power usage a little bit and this is where things got interesting.



http://imgur.com/a/Q7GiY7G


P-cores set to 4700 MHz, the CPU wants around 1.242V. 4500 MHz and the CPU wants 1.245V... 4300 MHz 1.255V. 4100 MHz and it's 1.275V now. 4000 MHz 1.305V. P-cores same frequency as E-cores, so 3900 for both and the CPU wants 1.388V. Nothing else changed other than P-cores frequency.

I'm seriously confused and this is something totally abstract. Lowering frequency results in higher voltage. Like, *** is going on? Any clues?


----------



## RobertoSampaio

I think I figured out how Asus calculates OCTVB temperature profiles...

If you use ASUS "By Core" and "OCTVB profile", could you please help me and test if the spreadsheet is doing the correct temperature calculations?










ASUS MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME & i9-12900K GUIDE - Load...


This doesn't necessarily mean that is safe or that won't cause damage to the processor. Read the note below that (which was first added in the 8th/9th gen specification sheet for 8 core SKU). "The controller requires IMVP9 (whatever version) controller needs to have offset voltage capability (on...




www.overclock.net


----------



## schuldig

nice SP
🤔

could this whole scenario be related to the bug that @sugi0lover mentioned in this post? like BIOS microcode getting stuck when changing CPU from 12900K to 12400 so it accidentally unlocks the function?








*Official* Intel DDR5 OC and 24/7 daily Memory Stability...


Would be fun. Maby HIcoockie could learn me a thing or two about cpu-z :D Tachyon seems like a really good MB. Would be nice to try it out :) It’s ok talk to yourself but answering is schizophrenia. Maybe you should seek help.:ROFLMAO: If you where in states.I’d be up for board swap for a...




www.overclock.net





it was discovered quite a while ago that changing BCLK would lead to some "interesting" results.








*Official* Intel DDR5 OC and 24/7 daily Memory Stability...


I've been running at an all PCore 5GHz and all ECore 4GHz. The Uncore @ 4GHz and the memory at 6000 36-36-36-76. I decided to try out a 125MHz base clock since all of these frequencies are evenly divisible by 125. I set the PCore multiplier to 40, ECore to 32, Ring to 32, and memory to 48...




www.overclock.net





now... can someone make the bug work in a way that we get those 25ns, please? 😄


----------



## sugi0lover

schuldig said:


> View attachment 2543069
> 
> 
> nice SP
> 🤔
> 
> could this whole scenario be related to the bug that @sugi0lover mentioned in this post? like BIOS microcode getting stuck when changing CPU from 12900K to 12400 so it accidentally unlocks the function?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Overclocking ADL - 12900k etc results, bins and discussion
> 
> 
> For SP108 12900K, the price was around USD 1,250, but the deal got broken because 108 was SP bug. It was actually SP84 ^^ I did hear about the SP bug before. How would someone know what is the true value or not? Specific BIOS version? I paid $1,050 USD for P-core SP98 (I don't care about...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and especially this post
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Official* Intel DDR5 OC and 24/7 daily Memory Stability...
> 
> 
> Would be fun. Maby HIcoockie could learn me a thing or two about cpu-z :D Tachyon seems like a really good MB. Would be nice to try it out :) It’s ok talk to yourself but answering is schizophrenia. Maybe you should seek help.:ROFLMAO: If you where in states.I’d be up for board swap for a...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> it was discovered quite a while ago that changing BCLK would lead to some "interesting" results.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Official* Intel DDR5 OC and 24/7 daily Memory Stability...
> 
> 
> I've been running at an all PCore 5GHz and all ECore 4GHz. The Uncore @ 4GHz and the memory at 6000 36-36-36-76. I decided to try out a 125MHz base clock since all of these frequencies are evenly divisible by 125. I set the PCore multiplier to 40, ECore to 32, Ring to 32, and memory to 48...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> now... can someone make the bug work in a way that we get those 25ns, please? 😄


You can see voltages N/A... That's a definitely bug.
The SP bug I mentioned is that it is hard to tell it's a bug unless you know your real SP.


----------



## robertr1

Does the Strix-A D4 support BCLK OC for locked sku's @shamino1978 ?


----------



## LionAlonso

robertr1 said:


> Does the Strix-A D4 support BCLK OC for locked sku's @shamino1978 ?


It still makes no sense, better go for prime or tuf and 12600k .
It will be patched also


----------



## uplink

Hey there @shamino1978,

a little report from me, if it helps. *Z690* *Extreme* running BiOS/UEFi *0811 *eats *F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK* [*G.Skill DDR5 6000 MHz CL36*] both *one* and *two* kits running *XMP I*. and *XMP II *[solo kit runs at *6000 MHz* and *CL36* and two kits run at *4400 MHz* and *CL36*]. *Z690 Apex* running BiOS/UEFi *0811 *works only in _"automatic"_ mode [4800 MHz and CL40], *XMP I*. and *XMP II*. either *vanilla*, or *tweaked* spit out *errors* all over the place in *MemTest*.

*9901* on *Z690 Apex* run *F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK* [*G.Skill DDR5 6000 MHz CL36*] using *XMP I. *is spitting *errors* while *hammering* in *MemTest*. No tweaks helped me [e.g. increase of VDD and/or VDDQ like it helped in older versions while using *Z690 Extreme*].

*9901* on *Z690 Apex* runs *F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK* [*G.Skill DDR5 6000 MHz CL36*] just fine using *XMP II.*

You're definitely on a good path there mate, see my files attached as a proof of passes using Your BiOS/UEFi *9901* and *XMP II*. settings preset [*vanilla*].

















Keep up the good work! Maybe even XMP I. from Asus can work laters?

Any ETA on newer BiOS/UEFi addressing RAM compatibility and stability?


----------



## Tradition

CoUsT said:


> I have 12700KF and Strix A D4. I'm trying to undervolt/overclock CPU and I'm really confused. Things didn't really make sense to me at first but then I got to know the CPU better. My Ring clock was going to 4600 MHz when E-cores were not in use and it caused the voltage to go up to 1.43V. I managed to overcome that obstacle and I think I have fairly good understanding how things are working now BUT there is one thing that is making me confused...
> 
> I'm trying to find my optimal E-core frequency so I set down P-cores to 4200 MHz (so E-cores frequency/voltage curve takes priority) and was trying E-cores - 4000 MHz, no luck, errors in Prime. 3900 seems fine so I tried undervolting. I wanted to take P-cores frequency down even further to reduce power usage a little bit and this is where things got interesting.
> 
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/a/Q7GiY7G
> 
> 
> P-cores set to 4700 MHz, the CPU wants around 1.242V. 4500 MHz and the CPU wants 1.245V... 4300 MHz 1.255V. 4100 MHz and it's 1.275V now. 4000 MHz 1.305V. P-cores same frequency as E-cores, so 3900 for both and the CPU wants 1.388V. Nothing else changed other than P-cores frequency.
> 
> I'm seriously confused and this is something totally abstract. Lowering frequency results in higher voltage. Like, *** is going on? Any clues?


try as i do it
5.0 p cores 1.3v locked llc 4 
e cores 4.0 
uncore 4.2


----------



## sblantipodi

Testing this ram is impossible. I can test for two days without an error and get an error on the first five minutes of testing on the third day.


----------



## Paragram

I have a C36 Trident Z5 6000 coming in a few days paired with a Z690 Apex board, but hearing issues with Samsung ram with the apex board... What bios do you recommend? I did have some C38 5200 XPG lancer but was unstable and PC was constantly bootlooping with the odd time getting into bios/windows but PC was super unstable with that kit!


----------



## dyanikoglu

Paragram said:


> I have a C36 Trident Z5 6000 coming in a few days paired with a Z690 Apex board, but hearing issues with Samsung ram with the apex board... What bios do you recommend? I did have some C38 5200 XPG lancer but was unstable and PC was constantly bootlooping with the odd time getting into bios/windows but PC was super unstable with that kit!


Latest 0046 beta bios provided by shamino are all stable with XMP I from what I've tested. Also latest stable bios should be working too.


----------



## J_Lab4645

Silent Scone, you're the one who gave it away. You have a Z690 Apex mobo, bios versions xxx-xxxx10, and not only can you get your G.skill 6000mhz 36cl to run at XMP defaults but are able to OC the pants off of them. What does that tell the community? Is it the mobo? Is he a magician? Is it the bios? What it finally told me with the same exact setup......>? It was the fu**ing ram. I returned my original G.skill 6000mhz36cl ram that I was having problems with and ordered the EXACT same ram from Newegg and Wahalla-! The sky's parted. Memtests passed, games not crashing....the world opened up to blue skies! G.skill & Samsung have some QC issues they need to figure out. Full STOP


----------



## Paragram

dyanikoglu said:


> Latest 0046 beta bios provided by shamino are all stable with XMP I from what I've tested. Also latest stable bios should be working too.


Will give it a try! Thanks man. I thought my board was dead but just got it back from the RMA team and confirmed that it was fully working, PC was fine for a few days and completely started boot looping tried every bios under the sun and NOTHING worked, after much googling it seemed that XPG Lancer is super hit and miss on most motherboards atm


----------



## Gadfly

Merkor said:


> Just to show what the bending stuff, torx/washers mod is all about: Here are some shots of my Asus Z690 Hero, 12900K and Noctua NH-D15.
> 
> Originally, I inserted the CPU with the Noctua backplate attached to strengthen the motherboard's backplate, but had to remove it again to mount the mounting parts of the cooler. I applied the thermal paste by spreading it on the heatspreader, as I do since 25 years.
> 
> However, clamping the CPU on the long side led to significant bending on the CPU in the middle axis with apparently NO contact of the cooler to the hottest part of the CPU. This is why @bscool is describing the "pooling" of the thermal paste in the clamping axis of the CPU. So you need A LOT thermal paste to fill the room to the cooler. Don't spare with it. This being said, there will never be sufficient direct contact to the cooler in the middle. Loosening the torx or doing the washers mod AFTER the CPU has been bent, will IMHO not lead to better temperatures. You will rather lose the Intel specification for the contact pressure from CPU to socket pins with possible stability flaws like even worse RAM compatibility (some are reporting). But this is speculation and there might be serial/mechanical tolerances, so users will have different experiences with the whole thing. Who knows, if also the RAM stability issues are due to a bad seating of the CPU. Support staff already recommends reseating the CPU when having RAM stability issues.
> 
> For me, it is a horrible Intel design flaw of the new generation: CPU/clamping points, flakey motherboard backplate and the too strong socket mechanism.


I don't think that is due to the clamping pressure on the CPU's PCB, in your case the motherboard itself is flexing. That would suggest back plate rigidity is more an issue than clamping force. 

You can test this pretty easily. Completely remove the CPU clamping frame, and mount the cooler, using the cooler to push the CPU into the socket, then check the contact. If it remains unchanged, then it isn't Intel's clamping bracket that is the issue, but rather the back plate isn't holding the board flat.


----------



## Gadfly

Paragram said:


> Will give it a try! Thanks man. I thought my board was dead but just got it back from the RMA team and confirmed that it was fully working, PC was fine for a few days and completely started boot looping tried every bios under the sun and NOTHING worked, after much googling it seemed that XPG Lancer is super hit and miss on most motherboards atm


That sucks, I just bought an XPG Lancer 6000C40 kit (AX5U6000C4016G-DCLARBK)
because it is supposed to be Hynix....


----------



## Paragram

Gadfly said:


> That sucks, I just bought an XPG Lancer 6000C40 kit (AX5U6000C4016G-DCLARBK)
> because it is supposed to be Hynix....


Yeah I had a 5200 kit cause that was all I could find at the time, but it was Micron. Seen it be fine for a few people but more problems than it being fine, so I send them straight back when I saw Tridents in stock


----------



## Xeq54

Gadfly said:


> That sucks, I just bought an XPG Lancer 6000C40 kit (AX5U6000C4016G-DCLARBK)
> because it is supposed to be Hynix....


I have this kit for a couple of days. Hynix chips, XMP works flawlessly on HERO with 0811, you should be fine.


----------



## Silent Scone

J_Lab4645 said:


> Silent Scone, you're the one who gave it away. You have a Z690 Apex mobo, bios versions xxx-xxxx10, and not only can you get your G.skill 6000mhz 36cl to run at XMP defaults but are able to OC the pants off of them. What does that tell the community? Is it the mobo? Is he a magician? Is it the bios? What it finally told me with the same exact setup......>? It was the fu**ing ram. I returned my original G.skill 6000mhz36cl ram that I was having problems with and ordered the EXACT same ram from Newegg and Wahalla-! The sky's parted. Memtests passed, games not crashing....the world opened up to blue skies! G.skill & Samsung have some QC issues they need to figure out. Full STOP


Hello,

I’ve not shown any XMP results. 

6400 1T / 6800 2T required a fair bit of work on my system, whereas for another kit or CPU it may work with mostly auto values. It comes down to a signal alignment issue, buying multiple kits till you find one that works better with your CPU is one remedy.

It is what it is, some users would blame their cat before giving up with certain hardware combinations


----------



## satinghostrider

J_Lab4645 said:


> Silent Scone, you're the one who gave it away. You have a Z690 Apex mobo, bios versions xxx-xxxx10, and not only can you get your G.skill 6000mhz 36cl to run at XMP defaults but are able to OC the pants off of them. What does that tell the community? Is it the mobo? Is he a magician? Is it the bios? What it finally told me with the same exact setup......>? It was the fu**ing ram. I returned my original G.skill 6000mhz36cl ram that I was having problems with and ordered the EXACT same ram from Newegg and Wahalla-! The sky's parted. Memtests passed, games not crashing....the world opened up to blue skies! G.skill & Samsung have some QC issues they need to figure out. Full STOP


This was exactly what I was posting about much earlier. I had 3 sticks. 5600C36 worked in the end running 6000C321T at 1.405VDD/VDDQ only. 6000C40 only can run XMP default and 6000C36 was a colossal mess. XMP to even loosening timings didn't work together with mildly increasing voltages. G.skill obviously didn't test or bin the rams properly for these 6000C36 sticks at least from the kit I had. Some get lucky some go through nightmares like you and I did. That's why when I tried 3 kits I realised it was nothing to do with the BIOS. It was down to just the ****ty sticks.

It is time you guys look at your sticks if you can't even get XMP stable because 0811 which I am on now works well with both XMP and Asus presets (minor voltage tweaks required) ASSUMING your kit is working fine. This rabbit hole that some including myself been in trying everything and anything to stabilise eventually came to an end when I swapped my kit to the 5600C36. This should not be happening at all. If you can't run the Asus preset, you can't really blame G.skill. But if you can't run XMP1 or XMP2 by now on the latest bios, it really points to the sticks. Yes blue skies and topless titties for me too after this ordeal. The sentiment is the same.


----------



## Gadfly

satinghostrider said:


> This was exactly what I was posting about much earlier. I had 3 sticks. 5600C36 worked in the end running 6000C321T at 1.405VDD/VDDQ only. 6000C40 only can run XMP default and 6000C36 was a colossal mess. XMP to even loosening timings didn't work together with mildly increasing voltages. G.skill obviously didn't test or bin the rams properly for these 6000C36 sticks at least from the kit I had. Some get lucky some go through nightmares like you and I did. That's why when I tried 3 kits I realised it was nothing to do with the BIOS. It was down to just the ****ty sticks.
> 
> It is time you guys look at your sticks if you can't even get XMP stable because 0811 which I am on now works well with both XMP and Asus presets (minor voltage tweaks required) ASSUMING your kit is working fine. This rabbit hole that some including myself been in trying everything and anything to stabilise eventually came to an end when I swapped my kit to the 5600C36. This should not be happening at all. If you can't run the Asus preset, you can't really blame G.skill. But if you can't run XMP1 or XMP2 by now on the latest bios, it really points to the sticks. Yes blue skies and topless titties for me too after this ordeal. The sentiment is the same.


Did you contact Gskill and RMA the kit?


----------



## satinghostrider

Gadfly said:


> Did you contact Gskill and RMA the kit?


I RMAed the kit locally through my distributor.
They are still checking as they said it was fine.
But their fine was testing the rams at 4800 which obviously would work.
So I am still talking to them to get it tested at XMP.


----------



## Gadfly

Xeq54 said:


> I have this kit for a couple of days. Hynix chips, XMP works flawlessly on HERO with 0811, you should be fine.


Any luck with overclocking this kit?


----------



## fortecosi

satinghostrider said:


> This was exactly what I was posting about much earlier. I had 3 sticks. 5600C36 worked in the end running 6000C321T at 1.405VDD/VDDQ only. 6000C40 only can run XMP default and 6000C36 was a colossal mess. XMP to even loosening timings didn't work together with mildly increasing voltages. G.skill obviously didn't test or bin the rams properly for these 6000C36 sticks at least from the kit I had. Some get lucky some go through nightmares like you and I did. That's why when I tried 3 kits I realised it was nothing to do with the BIOS. It was down to just the ****ty sticks.
> 
> It is time you guys look at your sticks if you can't even get XMP stable because 0811 which I am on now works well with both XMP and Asus presets (minor voltage tweaks required) ASSUMING your kit is working fine. This rabbit hole that some including myself been in trying everything and anything to stabilise eventually came to an end when I swapped my kit to the 5600C36. This should not be happening at all. If you can't run the Asus preset, you can't really blame G.skill. But if you can't run XMP1 or XMP2 by now on the latest bios, it really points to the sticks. Yes blue skies and topless titties for me too after this ordeal. The sentiment is the same.


There is a new G.skill 6000C36 kit with XMP increased Vdimm to 1.35 a tRAS to 96. Maybe they are aware of an issue and trying to fix it that way?
F5-6000J3636F16GX2-TZ5RKF5-6000J3636F16GA2-TZ5RK-G.SKILL International Enterprise Co., Ltd. (gskill.com)


----------



## geriatricpollywog

Microcenter in Overland Park has all the Samsung kits in case anyone is nearby.


----------



## satinghostrider

fortecosi said:


> There is a new G.skill 6000C36 kit with XMP increased Vdimm to 1.35 a tRAS to 96. Maybe they are aware of an issue and trying to fix it that way?
> F5-6000J3636F16GX2-TZ5RKF5-6000J3636F16GA2-TZ5RK-G.SKILL International Enterprise Co., Ltd. (gskill.com)


Could be be given that 5600 kits didn't have this new F variant. Only the 6000C36. At least from the G.skill website. Even the 6000C40 doesn't have the F variant. So yeah suggestive something could have been fixed. My suggestion is if your rams works fine, leave it. So much variance between these kits that the new kit may not necessarily clock better or even at all. But XMP is definitely gonna work I feel.


----------



## Xeq54

Gadfly said:


> Any luck with overclocking this kit?


Did not really have much free time since I got it last week.

But I have tried basic stuff, boots up to 7000mhz/cl40, maybe even higher, did not try more. Have worked on 6600 CL30/32 stability, though still errors after about 20-30 mins in TM5, will work on that more. So nothing stable yet, will definitely post here once I have something stable.


----------



## asdkj1740

fortecosi said:


> There is a new G.skill 6000C36 kit with XMP increased Vdimm to 1.35 a tRAS to 96. Maybe they are aware of an issue and trying to fix it that way?
> F5-6000J3636F16GX2-TZ5RKF5-6000J3636F16GA2-TZ5RK-G.SKILL International Enterprise Co., Ltd. (gskill.com)


this is f , we were talking about the e.
voltages are not that "vital" as we have already messed around with different voltages combinations.



satinghostrider said:


> This was exactly what I was posting about much earlier. I had 3 sticks. 5600C36 worked in the end running 6000C321T at 1.405VDD/VDDQ only. 6000C40 only can run XMP default and 6000C36 was a colossal mess. XMP to even loosening timings didn't work together with mildly increasing voltages. G.skill obviously didn't test or bin the rams properly for these 6000C36 sticks at least from the kit I had. Some get lucky some go through nightmares like you and I did. That's why when I tried 3 kits I realised it was nothing to do with the BIOS. It was down to just the ****ty sticks.
> 
> It is time you guys look at your sticks if you can't even get XMP stable because 0811 which I am on now works well with both XMP and Asus presets (minor voltage tweaks required) ASSUMING your kit is working fine. This rabbit hole that some including myself been in trying everything and anything to stabilise eventually came to an end when I swapped my kit to the 5600C36. This should not be happening at all. If you can't run the Asus preset, you can't really blame G.skill. But if you can't run XMP1 or XMP2 by now on the latest bios, it really points to the sticks. Yes blue skies and topless titties for me too after this ordeal. The sentiment is the same.


not only asus, msi and gigabyte mobos had the instability problem as well.
there are already reports by gigabyte users even with the latest bios (f7) specific for gskill ram, it is still not stable when the xmp profile is enabled.


----------



## X909

Hey guys, I know thats maybe not the right thread but I noticed something strange on my TUF D4 with 4 DIMMs I want to share. Maybe someone with DDR5 Board can verify...
I'm struggeling to run anything higher than 3600 Mhz with 4 DIMMs. Currently I'm about to swap slots to see if the RTLs change. Now I noticed, that with 2 DIMMs in A2/B2 installed it sets RTL for MC0 CHA R0, R2 and R3 while R1 is set to 25 (empty). Same on MC1. Shouldn't be only 2 RTLs on each chennel be set? R0 and R1 or R0 and R2?

Maybe there is something wrong in the training code that sets this RTL on the empty Rank and also kills good OC when 4 DIMMs are installed?


----------



## bscool

X909 said:


> Hey guys, I know thats maybe not the right thread but I noticed something strange on my TUF D4 with 4 DIMMs I want to share. Maybe someone with DDR5 Board can verify...
> I'm struggeling to run anything higher than 3600 Mhz with 4 DIMMs. Currently I'm about to swap slots to see if the RTLs change. Now I noticed, that with 2 DIMMs in A2/B2 installed it sets RTL for MC0 CHA R0, R2 and R3 while R1 is set to 25 (empty). Same on MC1. Shouldn't be only 2 RTLs on each chennel be set? R0 and R1 or R0 and R2?
> 
> Maybe there is something wrong in the training code that sets this RTL on the empty Rank and also kills good OC when 4 DIMMs are installed?


I have a strix d4 n 4x8 is much harder to run for me 3733c14 verse 2x16 4133c15 is easy.


----------



## satinghostrider

asdkj1740 said:


> this is f , we were talking about the e.
> voltages are not that "vital" as we have already messed around with different voltages combinations.
> 
> 
> not only asus, msi and gigabyte mobos had the instability problem as well.
> there are already reports by gigabyte users even with the latest bios (f7) specific for gskill ram, it is still not stable when the xmp profile is enabled.


I've swapped my 6000c36 kits between both slots including trying 1.35V voltage. Unstable no matter what. But what's surprising is the new variant is only for 6000c36. Unless G.skill will slowly phase out the 6000c36 E variant and only sell the F variant. I'm not too sure just a hunch.


----------



## Muad_Dib69

After a few days on Formula gskill 6000cas 36, used with asus profile cas32 but in 2t. Crashing after a while (clock watchdog), back to xmp1 + volatge, crashing sometine also. I tried to put ddr5600 instead, still crasking when gaming. I will go back to 811, it was also not stable but a bit less. It's hard to have a pc not really working properly....


----------



## bscool

@X909 Screen showing some of the RTLs. I think yours sounds like it is working right. Need to use memtweak it to view all in Windows and I dont have 4x8 installed anymore. This is old screenshot.


----------



## X909

I looked up alle the RTLs in the BIOS. You can't see the full granularity in timing configurater.
Could you maybe reboot and look up in the BIOS how many RTLs and an which channels/ranks are set with your 2 DIMMs?


----------



## bscool

X909 said:


> I looked up alle the RTLs in the BIOS. You can't see the full granularity in timing configurater.
> Could you maybe reboot and look up in the BIOS how many RTLs and an which channels/ranks are set with your 2 DIMMs?


It was the same on z590. I have 2x16 installed now MEMTWEAKIT is the same timings as displayed in bios.


----------



## X909

Ok, same here. Seems to be normal than but also not logical for me


----------



## olegdjus

Hi! ADATA 6000c40 - nice DRAM.







I haven't checked its stability yet, but it will definitely be better than my OEM Hynix. And he turned out to be pretty good


----------



## Simkin

satinghostrider said:


> Could be be given that 5600 kits didn't have this new F variant. Only the 6000C36. At least from the G.skill website. Even the 6000C40 doesn't have the F variant. So yeah suggestive something could have been fixed. My suggestion is if your rams works fine, leave it. So much variance between these kits that the new kit may not necessarily clock better or even at all. But XMP is definitely gonna work I feel.


So XMP should work without raising the volts? My 6000 CL36 seems to be "kind of" stable with VDD/VDDQ 1.34v, and leaving all other settings at auto. But for me like many others, works fine in gaming etc and then bsod by just opening a simple program like my email.


----------



## asdkj1740

olegdjus said:


> Hi! ADATA 6000c40 - nice DRAM.
> View attachment 2543246
> 
> I haven't checked its stability yet, but it will definitely be better than my OEM Hynix. And he turned out to be pretty good
> 
> View attachment 2543248
> View attachment 2543249


how are the spd temps?


----------



## Muad_Dib69

Simkin said:


> So XMP should work without raising the volts? My 6000 CL36 seems to be "kind of" stable with VDD/VDDQ 1.34v, and leaving all other settings at auto. But for me like many others, works fine in gaming etc and then bsod by just opening a simple program like my email.


 Same for me it's working until max temp in all test bun then after it crashes randomly in game or just on the desk.


----------



## satinghostrider

Simkin said:


> So XMP should work without raising the volts? My 6000 CL36 seems to be "kind of" stable with VDD/VDDQ 1.34v, and leaving all other settings at auto. But for me like many others, works fine in gaming etc and then bsod by just opening a simple program like my email.


What is your SA and which board are you using?


----------



## Muad_Dib69

satinghostrider said:


> What is your SA and which board are you using?


Mine is same a simkin, Formula bios 811 and 0070, 1.36 v vdd/q and 1.25 SA


----------



## Simkin

satinghostrider said:


> What is your SA and which board are you using?


It's on default on the XMP 2 setting. Z690 Apex 0811.


----------



## olegdjus

АSUS HERO, XMP с G.SKILL 6000c36 works fine. Raise the voltage a little and the 6200 will work. Hot, of course, but what can you do.
On the APEX, just any manipulation causes instability. You just turn on the MCE and goodbye. Although it may be related in some obscure way.


----------



## satinghostrider

@Simkin @Muad_Dib69 Try dropping SA to 0.95V under manual.

@Muad_Dib69 If it works stably, you can try dropping your VDD/VDDQ back to 1.3V to see if you are still stable. If you're not, then set it back to 1.36V.


----------



## bastian

Simkin said:


> So XMP should work without raising the volts? My 6000 CL36 seems to be "kind of" stable with VDD/VDDQ 1.34v, and leaving all other settings at auto. But for me like many others, works fine in gaming etc and then bsod by just opening a simple program like my email.


XMP should work with default volts. I would not keep the ram if it needed more than expected. Chances are high it won't be a good OC.

Crashing at idle is typical of some DDR5 and passing during stressing. That is why you must stress and see how it runs normally as well to find stability.


----------



## sblantipodi

What is the MC voltage written in the SPD of the 6GHz+ kits?


----------



## asdkj1740

sblantipodi said:


> What is the MC voltage written in the SPD of the 6GHz+ kits?


gskill sets 1.3v but msi ignores it and set 1.2v.


----------



## Silent Scone

More 64001T "magician" tuning

All sub timings are currently board-controlled.

C34-38-38-52-1T
Per C 54/53/52
Cache 40
E Core 41 Sync
MCVVD 1.4
SA 1.18
VDD 1.48
VDDQ 1.48
VDDQTX1.66


----------



## sblantipodi

asdkj1740 said:


> gskill sets 1.3v but msi ignores it and set 1.2v.


Thanks for the answer. Are there other boards that ignore higher MC voltage than 1.2?
What about Asus boards when using gskill 6GHz kits? Do they use 1.3V from the XMP?


----------



## jeiselramos

sblantipodi said:


> Thanks for the answer. Are there other boards that ignore higher MC voltage than 1.2?
> What about Asus boards when using gskill 6GHz kits? Do they use 1.3V from the XMP?


XMP 1 Auto
XMP 2 1.3 

Inviato dal mio IN2023 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## asdkj1740

jeiselramos said:


> XMP 1 Auto
> XMP 2 1.3
> 
> Inviato dal mio IN2023 utilizzando Tapatalk


auto-->
gigabyte 1.3v
msi 1.2v

it seems only asus has two xmp profiles available.


----------



## sblantipodi

It would be interesting to know why MSI engineers reduced that value to 1.2V


----------



## asdkj1740

sblantipodi said:


> It would be interesting to know why MSI engineers reduced that value to 1.2V


what they said is vdd2/mc should not be set by dram vendors, because ddr5 would last for generations of cpu and different generations may require different vdd2/mc.


----------



## Muad_Dib69

satinghostrider said:


> @Simkin @Muad_Dib69 Try dropping SA to 0.95V under manual.
> 
> @Muad_Dib69 If it works stably, you can try dropping your VDD/VDDQ back to 1.3V to see if you are still stable. If you're not, then set it back to 1.36V.


at 1.3v it's worst. but at1.36 it's not stable for long time however it pass tm5 test without problem.


----------



## jomama22

Muad_Dib69 said:


> at 1.3v it's worst. but at1.36 it's not stable for long time however it pass tm5 test without problem.


If tm5 and other men tests are stable, you then need to adjust SA voltage. Best to find the ring you want to run at first, get that stable then apply your mem timings, check mem stability, then fine tune SA. 

Bad SA will cause game crashing, app ctd, graphics driver crashes, etc. If possible, would adjust SA while in windows when ctd's in apps occur and keep using the PC.


----------



## Muad_Dib69

jomama22 said:


> If tm5 and other men tests are stable, you then need to adjust SA voltage. Best to find the ring you want to run at first, get that stable then apply your mem timings, check mem stability, then fine tune SA.
> 
> Bad SA will cause game crashing, app ctd, graphics driver crashes, etc. If possible, would adjust SA while in windows when ctd's in apps occur and keep using the PC.


my ring is 4700, should i go down or up with the SA? Some says it looks better to go down.


----------



## jomama22

Muad_Dib69 said:


> my ring is 4700, should i go down or up with the SA? Some says it looks better to go down.


Gotta try both and find what works. Lower is better for me and seems like most people as well.


----------



## Muad_Dib69

Ok I putted 1.20, let's see. Thanks for your help


----------



## sblantipodi

4x16GB Samsung 5600MHz C36 Corsair Dominator,
Maximus Extreme with 0070 BETA BIOS,
running RAM @ 4.8GHz C36
1.36V VDD/VDDQ/TX VDDQ
1.05V SA
1.275V MC

I have done hours and hours of TM5, Karhu, MemTest86 and it seems stable, highering MC from 1.25V to 1.275V improved the situation by a huge margin.
I noticed that coding Java with IntelliJ is a better test than the others since I find instabilities with less time and it seems that all is stable now.

Yesterday happened a very very weird things though...

I was coding an Audio VU Meter and I enabled the audio loopback device, Asus uses Sonic Studio Virtual Mixer for the purpose.





Once enabled the audio loopback device I started hearing a white noise from my headphones and the system became completely unstable with app crashing as soon as I started them.
I restarted the PC, instability was there.
I restarted into bios and reset all at default settings, booted in Windows and the instability was there. :O

I tought I broked my PC, I shut down the PC, cycled my power supply, entered windows again, disabled audio loopback and all fine since then.
I now re-enabled my OC and done hours of testing and no error whatsoever.

I have a brand new Corsair HX1200i power supply...

don't know what happened. so weird.


----------



## Gadfly

fortecosi said:


> There is a new G.skill 6000C36 kit with XMP increased Vdimm to 1.35 a tRAS to 96. Maybe they are aware of an issue and trying to fix it that way?
> F5-6000J3636F16GX2-TZ5RKF5-6000J3636F16GA2-TZ5RK-G.SKILL International Enterprise Co., Ltd. (gskill.com)


My understanding is the the F5-6000*U* kits are Samsung, and the F5-6000*J* kits are Hynix.


----------



## skullbringer

Gadfly said:


> My understanding is the the F5-6000*U* kits are Samsung, and the F5-6000*J* kits are Hynix.


kinda too good to be true, do you have a source?


----------



## marco.is.not.80

Silent Scone said:


> More 64001T "magician" tuning
> 
> All sub timings are currently board-controlled.
> 
> C34-38-38-52-1T
> Per C 54/53/52
> Cache 40
> E Core 41 Sync
> MCVVD 1.4
> SA 1.18
> VDD 1.48
> VDDQ 1.48
> VDDQTX1.66


Wow man, I just got my Apex/12900k/DDR5 Samsung kit and have been researching for the last 24 hours or so and came across your post. There is so much bullshit and whining all over the place forget about the idea of running 1T "it'll never happen" and then here you are. I was able to replicate your settings above and passed memtest and I'm writing this right now as I run some more stability tests but just had to write this and say thanks for a great baseline to work from and now I'll put in the time to dial it in for my specific gear... Really thankful for your findings. Man... still can't believe what I'm seeing... DDR5 6000+ at 1T - W T F.


----------



## sblantipodi

another question if possible. is there someone with a Maximus board and a Corsair Dominator kit?

as far as I can see here:










https://help.corsair.com/hc/en-us/articles/4416228610957-How-to-Set-up-CORSAIR-DDR5-memory-in-iCUE#h_01FPKJA9PEHP7ZA71PJSQAK2DB



it should be possible to create a custom XMP profile from iCue...
in my iCue (latest version) there is no XMP option and I can't write a custom XMP profile.

any idea? is there someone who succeded in creating his own XMP profile?










thanks


----------



## karoc

sblantipodi said:


> another question if possible. is there someone with a Maximus board and a Corsair Dominator kit?
> 
> as far as I can see here:
> View attachment 2543324
> 
> 
> 
> https://help.corsair.com/hc/en-us/articles/4416228610957-How-to-Set-up-CORSAIR-DDR5-memory-in-iCUE#h_01FPKJA9PEHP7ZA71PJSQAK2DB
> 
> 
> 
> it should be possible to create a custom XMP profile from iCue...
> in my iCue (latest version) there is no XMP option and I can't write a custom XMP profile.
> 
> any idea? is there someone who succeded in creating his own XMP profile?
> View attachment 2543325
> 
> 
> 
> thanks


You probably need to enable SPD write in your motherboard BIOS. Not sure what motherboard you have but if you search for something along those lines, I suspect it'll fix it. Good luck!


----------



## sblantipodi

karoc said:


> You probably need to enable SPD write in your motherboard BIOS. Not sure what motherboard you have but if you search for something along those lines, I suspect it'll fix it. Good luck!


Thank you for the answer I appreciate it.
I tried both settings for the SPD write, disable and enabled, it doesn't work.
Ok, no problem, it seems that no one buys Corsair here 😁
In any case It's not a problem, just a minor thing.


----------



## Tideman

Any Apex owners managed to mount the Arctic Liquid Freezer II coolers on their board?

The two horizontal mounting brackets (that press the block down) don't fit as the VRM and m.2 heatsink are in the way.. 

I tell you.. Corsair AIOs have the simpler installation but are a nightmare for the cabling
Arctic are the complete opposite..


----------



## satinghostrider

Gadfly said:


> My understanding is the the F5-6000*U* kits are Samsung, and the F5-6000*J* kits are Hynix.


I think you got it mixed up. 6000E are Samsung, 6000U (Or maybe 6000A can't recall) was supposedly Hynix but never released to public for sale. 6000J apparently are revised 6000E's. 6000E timings are 36-36-36-76 (1.3V) while 6000J timings are 36-36-36-96 (1.35V). Honestly, I don't see how 6000J will be Hynix.


----------



## Falkentyne

Tideman said:


> Any Apex owners managed to mount the Arctic Liquid Freezer II coolers on their board?
> 
> The two horizontal mounting brackets (that press the block down) don't fit as the VRM and m.2 heatsink are in the way..
> 
> I tell you.. Corsair AIOs have the simpler installation but are a nightmare for the cabling
> Arctic are the complete opposite..


Either remove the outer shroud around the fan housing (two screws) or mount the block so the VRM Fan is facing towards the top of the case (or power connectors if you're on a horizontal flat bench).


----------



## bscool

Some AIOs on Apex is too tight. Even on z590 Apex I could not mount EK AIOs. The NVME block interfers too. Never tried Arctic on z690 Apex but even on z690 strix d4 is is super tight it is almost touching or within 2 peices of paper from vrms.









ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II 360 - User Manual


Get your ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II 360 user manual. Detailed explanation with coloured schematics, photos, animations and videos.




support.arctic.de





*Motherboard Compatibility*
A selection of motherboards interferes with the cooler. Below is a list of motherboards which have been confirmed to have this problem.


ASUS ROG Maximus Z690 Apex
ASUS ROG Maximus Z690 Extreme
GIGABYTE Z590I Vision D
GIGABYTE Z690I AORUS Ultra
GIGABYTE Z690I AORUS Ultra DDR4
GIGABYTE Z690M AORUS Elite AX DDR4
GIGABYTE Z690M AORUS Elite DDR4
Also for another compatibility issue but for these just remove cover like @Falkentyne mentioned above I think he uses Arctic on Extreme so he should know if it works.









ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II LGA1700 - User Manual


Get your ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II LGA1700 user manual. Detailed explanation with coloured schematics, photos, animations and videos.




support.arctic.de





Below is a list of motherboard which have been confirmed to have this problem.


ASRock Z690 Taichi
ASUS Prime Z690-A
ASUS ProArt Z690-Creator WIFI
ASUS ROG Maximus Z690 Extreme Glacial
ASUS ROG Maximus Z690 Formula
ASUS ROG Maximus Z690 Hero
ASUS ROG Strix Z690-A Gaming WIFI D4
ASUS ROG Strix Z690-E Gaming WIFI
ASUS ROG Strix Z690-F Gaming WIFI
ASUS ROG Strix Z690-G Gaming WIFI
ASUS ROG Strix Z690-I Gaming WIFI
Biostar Z690GTA
MSI MPG Z690 carbon EK X


----------



## Falkentyne

bscool said:


> Some AIOs on Apex is too tight. Even on z590 Apex I could not mount EK AIOs. The NVME block interfers too. Never tried Arctic on z690 Apex but even on z690 strix d4 is is super tight it is almost touching or within 2 peices of paper from vrms.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II 360 - User Manual
> 
> 
> Get your ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II 360 user manual. Detailed explanation with coloured schematics, photos, animations and videos.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> support.arctic.de
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Motherboard Compatibility*
> A selection of motherboards interferes with the cooler. Below is a list of motherboards which have been confirmed to have this problem.
> 
> 
> ASUS ROG Maximus Z690 Apex
> ASUS ROG Maximus Z690 Extreme
> GIGABYTE Z590I Vision D
> GIGABYTE Z690I AORUS Ultra
> GIGABYTE Z690I AORUS Ultra DDR4
> GIGABYTE Z690M AORUS Elite AX DDR4
> GIGABYTE Z690M AORUS Elite DDR4
> Also for another compatibility issue but for these just remove cover like @Falkentyne mentioned above I think he uses Arctic on Extreme so he should know if it works.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II LGA1700 - User Manual
> 
> 
> Get your ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II LGA1700 user manual. Detailed explanation with coloured schematics, photos, animations and videos.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> support.arctic.de
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Below is a list of motherboard which have been confirmed to have this problem.
> 
> 
> ASRock Z690 Taichi
> ASUS Prime Z690-A
> ASUS ProArt Z690-Creator WIFI
> ASUS ROG Maximus Z690 Extreme Glacial
> ASUS ROG Maximus Z690 Formula
> ASUS ROG Maximus Z690 Hero
> ASUS ROG Strix Z690-A Gaming WIFI D4
> ASUS ROG Strix Z690-E Gaming WIFI
> ASUS ROG Strix Z690-F Gaming WIFI
> ASUS ROG Strix Z690-G Gaming WIFI
> ASUS ROG Strix Z690-I Gaming WIFI
> Biostar Z690GTA
> MSI MPG Z690 carbon EK X


They removed the Apex and Extreme from that list. The Hero and Formula and "Extreme Glacial" are still there, though.
It's already confirmed that mounting the block with the VRM fan facing up will clear both the Extreme and Apex. For the VRM Fan facing down, you probably have to remove the PCB Cover from the block.


----------



## Self Tapper

sblantipodi said:


> another question if possible. is there someone with a Maximus board and a Corsair Dominator kit?
> 
> it should be possible to create a custom XMP profile from iCue...
> in my iCue (latest version) there is no XMP option and I can't write a custom XMP profile.
> 
> any idea? is there someone who succeded in creating his own XMP profile?


@sblantipodi are you using the release version of iCue4, or the one with XMP Manager Preview from here: https://downloads.corsair.com/Files/CUE/iCUESetup_4.18.218_release.msi ?


----------



## Nizzen

bscool said:


> Some AIOs on Apex is too tight. Even on z590 Apex I could not mount EK AIOs. The NVME block interfers too. Never tried Arctic on z690 Apex but even on z690 strix d4 is is super tight it is almost touching or within 2 peices of paper from vrms.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II 360 - User Manual
> 
> 
> Get your ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II 360 user manual. Detailed explanation with coloured schematics, photos, animations and videos.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> support.arctic.de
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Motherboard Compatibility*
> A selection of motherboards interferes with the cooler. Below is a list of motherboards which have been confirmed to have this problem.
> 
> 
> ASUS ROG Maximus Z690 Apex
> ASUS ROG Maximus Z690 Extreme
> GIGABYTE Z590I Vision D
> GIGABYTE Z690I AORUS Ultra
> GIGABYTE Z690I AORUS Ultra DDR4
> GIGABYTE Z690M AORUS Elite AX DDR4
> GIGABYTE Z690M AORUS Elite DDR4
> Also for another compatibility issue but for these just remove cover like @Falkentyne mentioned above I think he uses Arctic on Extreme so he should know if it works.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II LGA1700 - User Manual
> 
> 
> Get your ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II LGA1700 user manual. Detailed explanation with coloured schematics, photos, animations and videos.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> support.arctic.de
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Below is a list of motherboard which have been confirmed to have this problem.
> 
> 
> ASRock Z690 Taichi
> ASUS Prime Z690-A
> ASUS ProArt Z690-Creator WIFI
> ASUS ROG Maximus Z690 Extreme Glacial
> ASUS ROG Maximus Z690 Formula
> ASUS ROG Maximus Z690 Hero
> ASUS ROG Strix Z690-A Gaming WIFI D4
> ASUS ROG Strix Z690-E Gaming WIFI
> ASUS ROG Strix Z690-F Gaming WIFI
> ASUS ROG Strix Z690-G Gaming WIFI
> ASUS ROG Strix Z690-I Gaming WIFI
> Biostar Z690GTA
> MSI MPG Z690 carbon EK X


I used Arctic II 420 on apex z690 the first weeks. Very! tight, but it worked great


----------



## vlad.enthusiast

Falkentyne said:


> They removed the Apex and Extreme from that list. The Hero and Formula and "Extreme Glacial" are still there, though.
> It's already confirmed that mounting the block with the VRM fan facing up will clear both the Extreme and Apex. For the VRM Fan facing down, you probably have to remove the PCB Cover from the block.


So, are you using asus z690 extreme with Liquid Freezer II 360 LGA1700 right now? I have the same set, did not install the AIO yet. Should I get any additional parts? Thanks!


----------



## Simkin

satinghostrider said:


> I think you got it mixed up. 6000E are Samsung, 6000U (Or maybe 6000A can't recall) was supposedly Hynix but never released to public for sale. 6000J apparently are revised 6000E's. 6000E timings are 36-36-36-76 (1.3V) while 6000J timings are 36-36-36-96 (1.35V). Honestly, I don't see how 6000J will be Hynix.


Could this simply mean, that they figured 1.3v was not stable? Don't else see why they would release this one.


----------



## satinghostrider

Simkin said:


> Could this simply mean, that they figured 1.3v was not stable? Don't else see why they would release this one.


No idea. Funny thing is that it's slightly more expensive than the older one with higher voltage and a looser tras. We will only know once people start testing them.


----------



## Silent Scone

Simkin said:


> Could this simply mean, that they figured 1.3v was not stable? Don't else see why they would release this one.


Or it may simply be that these new kits all need additional voltage.

Most if not all GSKILL is binned by hand. If the kits weren't stable in their test environment they wouldn't have been put to market.

Only GSKILL will have the answer, but hypothetically, there could be a large enough variance between the CPU samples and IMC between different kits that they've felt the need to increase the voltage guard-band.

Ultimately, it's really not that important as it's not that uncommon to pump some kits with additional voltage in order to meet stability.


----------



## Simkin

Silent Scone said:


> Or it may simply be that these new kits all need additional voltage.
> 
> Most if not all GSKILL is binned by hand. If the kits weren't stable in their test environment they wouldn't have been put to market.
> 
> Only GSKILL will have the answer, but hypothetically, there could be a large enough variance between the CPU samples and IMC between different kits that they've felt the need to increase the voltage guard-band.
> 
> Ultimately, it's really not that important as it's not that uncommon to pump some kits with additional voltage in order to meet stability.


You might be right. However, the E kits are still in the stores, they are cheaper, and require less voltage and have slight tighter timing. If the J kit had been cheaper it would make sense.


----------



## Silent Scone

Simkin said:


> You might be right. However, the E kits are still in the stores, they are cheaper, and require less voltage and have slight tighter timing. If the J kit had been cheaper it would make sense.


Different IC, price of IC, RGB, non-RGB. 

Doesn't really matter, you have to pay to play . Contact GSKILL, their customer service is actually pretty good.


----------



## Tideman

Falkentyne said:


> Either remove the outer shroud around the fan housing (two screws) or mount the block so the VRM Fan is facing towards the top of the case (or power connectors if you're on a horizontal flat bench).


No, that's not the same issue I'm talking about. What I mean is, I can't even get those two brackets down onto the standoffs because it would require me to brute force them down between the VRM and M.2 heatsinks (above and below the socket), probably damaging the board in the process. So it's the bracket length that is the problem..


Nizzen said:


> I used Arctic II 420 on apex z690 the first weeks. Very! tight, but it worked great


How did you manage to get those brackets down on to the standoffs without jamming them between the heatsinks mentioned above?

Anyway I've had to switch back to my H170i for now until I sort this out. I notice someone on reddit ran into this problem too.


----------



## bscool

Tideman said:


> No, that's not the same issue I'm talking about. What I mean is, I can't even get those two brackets down onto the standoffs because it would require me to brute force them down between the VRM and M.2 heatsinks (above and below the socket), probably damaging the board in the process. So it's the bracket length that is the problem..
> 
> How did you manage to get those brackets down on to the standoffs without jamming them between the heatsinks mentioned above?
> 
> Anyway I've had to switch back to my H170i for now until I sort this out. I notice someone on reddit ran into this problem too.


Owning a AC 420 I think it is worth modding the brackets sllightly if you have to. Agree the mount is not the best but the performance makes up for that and overall simplicity and low noise.

Here is what i would do. Remove you other AIO so you can do a "mock up" Take the 2 side brackets that screw to the Arctic block that you say are too long(remove them) and put them down into place where they will go and make a note/mark and then take and file or gind off the little bit that needs it to fit down in there.

I recently switched back to my Raystorm block on custom loop to compare temps and the AC420 give me the same temps up to y crucnher 312w load on 12900kf.

I also tested r23 and temps also identical.

Screenshot is with AC 420

Edit also would be helpful if you take pics when you do this to show proof to us and Arctic that it does indeed hit so other are aware of it incase there is some component variance or whatever is going on. Visual proof always helps.


----------



## asdkj1740

bear in mind arctic liquid freezer ii aio has a completely flat base, unlike asetek ones.


----------



## sblantipodi

sblantipodi said:


> another question if possible. is there someone with a Maximus board and a Corsair Dominator kit?
> 
> as far as I can see here:
> View attachment 2543324
> 
> 
> 
> https://help.corsair.com/hc/en-us/articles/4416228610957-How-to-Set-up-CORSAIR-DDR5-memory-in-iCUE#h_01FPKJA9PEHP7ZA71PJSQAK2DB
> 
> 
> 
> it should be possible to create a custom XMP profile from iCue...
> in my iCue (latest version) there is no XMP option and I can't write a custom XMP profile.
> 
> any idea? is there someone who succeded in creating his own XMP profile?
> View attachment 2543325
> 
> 
> 
> thanks


I wrote to corsair support and this is their reply:

_Hi 
I have just been informed that XMP integration is not supported with ASUS motherboards yet. 
We are working with ASUS on getting this implemented, but unfortunately we do not have an estimated date for release. We apologize for the inconvenience._

ok, we must wait for this


----------



## sblantipodi

Self Tapper said:


> @sblantipodi are you using the release version of iCue4, or the one with XMP Manager Preview from here: https://downloads.corsair.com/Files/CUE/iCUESetup_4.18.218_release.msi ?


yes, using latest version, please see my post above


----------



## satinghostrider

sblantipodi said:


> I wrote to corsair support and this is their reply:
> 
> _Hi
> I have just been informed that XMP integration is not supported with ASUS motherboards yet.
> We are working with ASUS on getting this implemented, but unfortunately we do not have an estimated date for release. We apologize for the inconvenience._
> 
> ok, we must wait for this


I was referring to the G.skill kits not the Corsair ones.


----------



## sblantipodi

satinghostrider said:


> I was referring to the G.skill kits not the Corsair ones.


I don't know why you post finished in my quote, I'm sorry


----------



## adna

first time. when i update to 0070 finish. then i press f5 and f10+enter but can't boot.
with my ram 3 pairs. adata4800c40[micron], s5-5600c36[samsung] and fury-5200c38[hynix].
but, xmp is boot fine.

strix z690-f with bios 0070 and hynix
fury-hynix-6400-30-37-37-28-2t
sa | vdd | vddq | txvddq | mc = 0.9 | 1.43 |1.4 | 1.25 | 1.25
ps. when tm5 finish. i open asrock timing config. but it show single ch.


----------



## owikh84

Day 2 with Hynix... Surprisingly CR1 works well on this 4 DIMM board.
Not sure why the first stick has sudden spike in temp ~ 64c though, bad heat spreaders maybe?

12900K SP88 - Stock
Maximus Z690 EXTREME | BIOS 0070
Kingston Fury Beast KF556C40BBK2-32 (Hynix)

*2x16GB DDR5-6000 34-36-36-52-1T
VDD/VDDQ/TX VDDQ 1.435v | SA 1.25v (Auto) | MC 1.25v*









Update: 6000 32-35-35-52-1T looks stable as well with MC 1.275v, to be updated tomorrow.


----------



## Gadfly

satinghostrider said:


> I think you got it mixed up. 6000E are Samsung, 6000U (Or maybe 6000A can't recall) was supposedly Hynix but never released to public for sale. 6000J apparently are revised 6000E's. 6000E timings are 36-36-36-76 (1.3V) while 6000J timings are 36-36-36-96 (1.35V). Honestly, I don't see how 6000J will be Hynix.


I think I had it right, as I am holding an F5-6000U3636E16GX2 kit in my hand, 36-36-36-76, 1.3v. If you look on G.skill's website they have F5-6000U and F5-6000J memory; "U" kits are 100% for sure Samsung IC's, and I am pretty sure the "J" kits are hynix. 

There are no 6000E kits on the website.


----------



## Gadfly

skullbringer said:


> kinda too good to be true, do you have a source?


I have read in this thread, and the DDR5 stability thread multiple times. I can tell you100% for sure the F5-6000U3636 kit are Samsung, as I have one in my hand.


----------



## jomama22

There aren't any gskill kits that have hynix release to the public, at least none that anyone has reported.

I wouldn't bank on any of them having it regardless until someone can actually verify it in hand.


----------



## Gadfly

jomama22 said:


> There aren't any gskill kits that have hynix release to the public, at least none that anyone has reported.
> 
> I wouldn't bank on any of them having it regardless until someone can actually verify it in hand.


Agreed, I am pretty sure the J kits are not shipping yet.


----------



## Tideman

bscool said:


> Owning a AC 420 I think it is worth modding the brackets sllightly if you have to. Agree the mount is not the best but the performance makes up for that and overall simplicity and low noise.
> 
> Here is what i would do. Remove you other AIO so you can do a "mock up" Take the 2 side brackets that screw to the Arctic block that you say are too long(remove them) and put them down into place where they will go and make a note/mark and then take and file or gind off the little bit that needs it to fit down in there.
> 
> I recently switched back to my Raystorm block on custom loop to compare temps and the AC420 give me the same temps up to y crucnher 312w load on 12900kf.
> 
> I also tested r23 and temps also identical.
> 
> Screenshot is with AC 420
> 
> Edit also would be helpful if you take pics when you do this to show proof to us and Arctic that it does indeed hit so other are aware of it incase there is some component variance or whatever is going on. Visual proof always helps.


Thanks for the encouragement. I had another try during the daylight and actually managed to mount it! Very snug fit due to the heatsinks, but everything seems to be working fine. This thing is dead silent. Haven't had a chance to really put it to work yet!

So for those with Apex. The LF II 420 does fit but only just.


----------



## Tigra456

I don’t understand why the 0070 bios doesn’t run stable @stock and with the same higher voltages like in my 0811 … I don’t understand what is changed and has this effect of getting unstable.

Z690-F 
Gskill 6000 c36
12700k…

@shamino1978 maybe I can help with data or screens to get a more stable bios ?


----------



## Shreve

Do I need to worry about bio updates? I'm on the original bios 0503

While waiting on my case to come in, I went ahead and put my parts together on a cardboard box. I have been gaming with a 6700k and 2080 TI for years now so this is a big upgrade and didnt feel like waiting

*Parts*
12900k
Asus z690 strix e
Gsill 6000 Ram (36) XMP
3080 TI
etc.

Anyway with XMP turned on, games and benchmarks seem to be running fine. Only thing that suprises me is that the CPU seems to max out at 4.9 perpetually even though temps max out in the 60's or 70's. I assumed that it would be over 5ghz. Maybe there is a bios setting that I need to switch?

Anway, was curious if things are working is there any reason that I need to update to the latest bios on the website or the beta that @shamino1978 posted? (since I'm on the original launch bios)


----------



## Herald

satinghostrider said:


> Try dropping SA to 0.95V under manual.


Yeah, that did the trick for me. Still doesn't work on XMP 1 (sometimes not even booting), XMP 2 is a mess (lots of ctds), but the Asus 6000c32 1t profile works like a charm with 0.95SA. Can't explain how and why, it's one of those things.

What's the difference between xmp1 and 2 though?


----------



## edkieferlp

Shreve said:


> Do I need to worry about bio updates? I'm on the original bios 0503
> 
> While waiting on my case to come in, I went ahead and put my parts together on a cardboard box. I have been gaming with a 6700k and 2080 TI for years now so this is a big upgrade and didnt feel like waiting
> 
> *Parts*
> 12900k
> Asus z690 strix e
> Gsill 6000 Ram (36) XMP
> 3080 TI
> etc.
> 
> Anyway with XMP turned on, games and benchmarks seem to be running fine. Only thing that suprises me is that the CPU seems to run at 4.9 perpetually even though temps max out in the 60's or 70's. I assumed that it would be over 5ghz. Maybe there is a bios setting that I need to switch?
> 
> Anway, was curious if things are working is there any reason that I need to update to the latest bios on the website or the beta that @shamino1978 posted? (since I'm on the original launch bios)


See if a balanced power plan helps.


----------



## edkieferlp

Herald said:


> Yeah, that did the trick for me. Still doesn't work on XMP 1 (sometimes not even booting), XMP 2 is a mess (lots of ctds), but the Asus 6000c32 1t profile works like a charm with 0.95SA. Can't explain how and why, it's one of those things.
> 
> What's the difference between xmp1 and 2 though?


If memory is right XMP1 is MB using primary timings with Asus sub timings and XMP2 is MB using more of the DDR manufacturer timings on the RAM.

Edit: voltages could also be in there too.
With my Ballistix [email protected] I didn't notice any difference in bios settings between the two but I didn't look down in the advanced values.
But that is DDR4 your on DDR5.


----------



## pR1maL

Red led of death on my strix 3090, no fun for me. Now I get to wait on an Asus RMA. Wanted to play with my Apex.


----------



## satinghostrider

Herald said:


> Yeah, that did the trick for me. Still doesn't work on XMP 1 (sometimes not even booting), XMP 2 is a mess (lots of ctds), but the Asus 6000c32 1t profile works like a charm with 0.95SA. Can't explain how and why, it's one of those things.
> 
> What's the difference between xmp1 and 2 though?


If you're running 6000C32 1T, forget about XMP altogether. This 6000C32 1T runs way better in games. XMP1 or XMP2 is a hit or miss with some 6000C36 kits. The 6000C40 kit I had worked perfectly fine with XMP but close to 0 overclockable. Oddly, my 5600C36 worked like a charm including running 6000C32 1T. I had tons of issues with 6000C36 from running anything at all with stability. RMAed those sticks.


----------



## jomama22

pR1maL said:


> Red led of death on my strix 3090, no fun for me. Now I get to wait on an Asus RMA. Wanted to play with my Apex.


Did it happen when you put it on the apex for the first time? I'd so, would double check that it does it with your old setup as well. A bad mobo can cause it.


----------



## bscool

Tideman said:


> Thanks for the encouragement. I had another try during the daylight and actually managed to mount it! Very snug fit due to the heatsinks, but everything seems to be working fine. This thing is dead silent. Haven't had a chance to really put it to work yet!
> 
> So for those with Apex. The LF II 420 does fit but only just.


Yeah it is kinda tricky if I was newer to pc building or didnt do it a lot i would think it did fit. You gotta "fanagle" it


----------



## dante`afk

Tideman said:


> Any Apex owners managed to mount the Arctic Liquid Freezer II coolers on their board?
> 
> The two horizontal mounting brackets (that press the block down) don't fit as the VRM and m.2 heatsink are in the way..
> 
> I tell you.. Corsair AIOs have the simpler installation but are a nightmare for the cabling
> Arctic are the complete opposite..


when I was using it before I got my heatkiller kit, it worked with the arctic LGA 1700 bracket.

it was very tight towards the ram but I could press it down and mount it. share pictures?


----------



## bscool

dante`afk said:


> when I was using it before I got my heatkiller kit, it worked with the arctic LGA 1700 bracket.
> 
> it was very tight towards the ram but I could press it down and mount it. share pictures?


Did compare temps between AC and HK? Which size did you have of Arctic?

I get same temps on AC 420 and Raystorm makes me wonder is Raystorm that bad or AC 420 that good. Or the limitation in getting the heat off the IHS.


----------



## dyanikoglu

pR1maL said:


> Red led of death on my strix 3090, no fun for me. Now I get to wait on an Asus RMA. Wanted to play with my Apex.


Same happened to me also with a Suprim X 3080 TI. I was told the pcie slot was forced & broken by the user (which is me lol), but they got it repaired and sent back to me in a working state. I have no idea how I managed to break it, but I feel like apex mobas have more sensitive pcie slots compared to others, I've never faced something like this before.


----------



## Tideman

bscool said:


> Yeah it is kinda tricky if I was newer to pc building or didnt do it a lot i would think it did fit. You gotta "fanagle" it


Yep I only upgrade my cpu/motherboard every 4-5 years or so but I'm also used to Corsair AIOs which are more compact.


dante`afk said:


> when I was using it before I got my heatkiller kit, it worked with the arctic LGA 1700 bracket.
> 
> it was very tight towards the ram but I could press it down and mount it. share pictures?


Sure, see below! I had to re-mount as my load temps were not good. After the second mount, they dropped 10c. I think one corner was not down all the way. Make sure you force each corner down as far as it goes so they all reach the end of the standoffs. It can be hard to tell. They will keep tight contact with the heatsinks (unavoidable).

Note the water block chassis itself (latest LF II), does not need to be altered at all to fit the Apex.

CB23 load temps are equal to my H170i. Although this is in a higher room temp and, despite a custom fan curve, the LF II fans did not fully max. I'll have to play around with that some more.

Also, build quality/condition of this LF II 420 is top class compared to the two H170i units I tried. Kudos to them for that.


----------



## Silent Scone

satinghostrider said:


> If you're running 6000C32 1T, forget about XMP altogether. This 6000C32 1T runs way better in games. XMP1 or XMP2 is a hit or miss with some 6000C36 kits. The 6000C40 kit I had worked perfectly fine with XMP but close to 0 overclockable. Oddly, my 5600C36 worked like a charm including running 6000C32 1T. I had tons of issues with 6000C36 from running anything at all with stability. RMAed those sticks.


I've noticed a lot of users seemingly hell-bent on XMP stability on the Apex. Although XMP 1 is optimised and validated by ASUS these global profiles are quite relaxed, not to mention also all validated at Command Rate 2.

I'm not sure if this is a misconception or something else, but for a board like the Apex XMP is really a baseline. Using the Apex-specific memory profiles if working on your system is a no-brainer. Always use 1T where possible.


----------



## RobertoSampaio

Tideman said:


> Yep I only upgrade my cpu/motherboard every 4-5 years or so but I'm also used to Corsair AIOs which are more compact.
> 
> Sure, see below! I had to re-mount as my load temps were not good. After the second mount, they dropped 10c. I think one corner was not down all the way. Make sure you force each corner down as far as it goes so they all reach the end of the standoffs. It can be hard to tell. They will keep tight contact with the heatsinks (unavoidable).
> 
> Note the water block chassis itself (latest LF II), does not need to be altered at all to fit the Apex.
> 
> CB23 load temps are equal to my H170i. Although this is in a higher room temp and, despite a custom fan curve, the LF II fans did not fully max. I'll have to play around with that some more.
> 
> Also, build quality/condition of this LF II 420 is top class compared to the two H170i units I tried. Kudos to them for that.
> View attachment 2543611
> View attachment 2543613



I'd rotate the water block 90º left

If you take a look at the coldplate, it is rectangular, and if you rotate the block, it will fit the rectangular size of the CPU.


----------



## owikh84

That one stick is still giving 63.8c max temp.

12900K SP88 - Stock
Maximus Z690 EXTREME | BIOS 0070
Kingston Fury Beast KF556C40BBK2-32 (Hynix)

*2x16GB DDR5-6000 32-35-35-52-1T
VDD/VDDQ/TX VDDQ 1.435v | SA 0.95v | MC 1.275v*


----------



## bscool

RobertoSampaio said:


> I'd rotate the water block 90º left
> 
> If you take a look at the coldplate, it is rectangular, and if you rotate the block, it will fit the rectangular size of the CPU.
> 
> 
> View attachment 2543624
> 
> 
> View attachment 2543625
> 
> 
> View attachment 2543628


Interesting mine is like his. Next time I mount it il try it and I'll test for temp differences.

Also even mounted like his is mine makes full contact as the block is bigger. Also direction of fins in the block are optimized for that position from what I know.

Or do you know something different from Arctic or testing?


----------



## Tideman

Yes that's an unusual way of mounting it but worth experimenting with!

The guides/online manual only show one method of mounting and that's the one I followed.


----------



## bscool

Tideman said:


> Yes that's an unusual way of mounting it but worth experimenting with!
> 
> The guides/online manual only show one method of mounting and that's the one I followed.


So r u gonna test it? If so I won't bother.


----------



## Tideman

bscool said:


> So r u gonna test it? If so I won't bother.


No I think I've had my fill of re-mounting water blocks and fighting with that thing for now anyway lol. Next time I re-paste maybe!


----------



## bscool

Tideman said:


> No I think I've had my fill of re-mounting water blocks and fighting with that thing for now anyway lol. Next time I re-paste maybe!


Ok I'll do who am I kidding I would have tested it for myself anyway. I'm so skeptical n have to test everything myself 😁


----------



## Tideman

bscool said:


> Ok I'll do who am I kidding I would have tested it for myself anyway. I'm so skeptical n have to test everything myself 😁


Cool let us know if you see any difference in temps!


----------



## RobertoSampaio

bscool said:


> Interesting mine is like his. Next time I mount it il try it and I'll test for temp differences.
> 
> Also even mounted like his is mine makes full contact as the block is bigger. Also direction of fins in the block are optimized for that position from what I know.
> 
> Or do you know something different from Arctic or testing?


I don't think it will be better... But....
When I tested the 12900k there is no brackets for lga1700 and the af-II manual only had the old CPU type.
So I mounted this way...
I removed the block some times to see the paste and this way I mounted was the better. About the VRM fan, looks like it will do a better job when rotated too... But to be honest I don't think it do some extraordinary thing to the VRM temp.


----------



## yahfz

Any idea how to get past the code 11 on the apex when trying for higher frequencies?


----------



## bscool

@Tideman

@RobertoSampaio

2-3c better with vrm fan up. Could be considered margin of error but with all the testing I have done from loosening torx screwns, to washer mod, to comparing to custom loop to AC 420 I never saw even 1 c so this is the first measureable change.

Ambient* VRM fan Up 72f*

Ambient *Sideways 71f

Update* temps *3c higher with sideways mount* after a day of switching to sideways mount.

So consistently higher results with sideways mount. *I switched back to VRM fan up and temps down 3c*.


----------



## yahfz

hmm, apparently there’s a bug when trying 100:133 and picking an odd frequency like 6267. 6400 posted fine but 6267 gets code 11 instantly, so does 6533. Any idea what could be wrong here @shamino1978 ? To reproduce basically just set 100:133 and pick frequency 6267.


----------



## shamino1978

read the guide, gear2 requires divisible by 2 multipliers while gear 4 requires divisible by 4 
6267/133 requires an odd number ratio and odd numbers are neither multiples of 2 nor 4


----------



## yahfz

Ah, so that's why i get code 11. Thanks


----------



## satinghostrider

Silent Scone said:


> I've noticed a lot of users seemingly hell-bent on XMP stability on the Apex. Although XMP 1 is optimised and validated by ASUS these global profiles are quite relaxed, not to mention also all validated at Command Rate 2.
> 
> I'm not sure if this is a misconception or something else, but for a board like the Apex XMP is really a baseline. Using the Apex-specific memory profiles if working on your system is a no-brainer. Always use 1T where possible.


Completely agree but some of these Gskill ram kits neither work properly for XMP1 or XMP2 much less the Asus preset. I'm completely stable right now at 6000C321T and I am very happy with the gaming performance. XMP versus this current setting is a very noticeable difference in games interms of response. Am not chasing anything higher as of now as I can run everything well at 1T which the Asus preset is a pretty good baseline to start with. Most would have to tweak the voltages to find what works for you as every kit is different. I will stick to 1T that's what the board is designed for unless I'm able to get better sticks that can go past 6600+. Then probably hitting 2T might just be easier to achieve with stability.


----------



## pR1maL

jomama22 said:


> Did it happen when you put it on the apex for the first time? I'd so, would double check that it does it with your old setup as well. A bad mobo can cause it.





dyanikoglu said:


> Same happened to me also with a Suprim X 3080 TI. I was told the pcie slot was forced & broken by the user (which is me lol), but they got it repaired and sent back to me in a working state. I have no idea how I managed to break it, but I feel like apex mobas have more sensitive pcie slots compared to others, I've never faced something like this before.


My 3090 is around two years old. It's been running fine the entire time, and running in the Apex for around 3 weeks. I was benching 3d Mark, one of the old tests. The card was running at like 750+ fps. I'm starting to think it's similar to the "new world" card failures. 

Center red led blinks, no post, d6 post code. If I unplug the blinking connector, I get a solid red but still no post. 

I hope it's not my Apex, don't think I abused it even remotely. Oh well, Asus should have the card by the end of the day and then I just play the waiting game.


----------



## bscool

Tideman said:


> Any Apex owners managed to mount the Arctic Liquid Freezer II coolers on their board?
> 
> The two horizontal mounting brackets (that press the block down) don't fit as the VRM and m.2 heatsink are in the way..
> 
> I tell you.. Corsair AIOs have the simpler installation but are a nightmare for the cabling
> Arctic are the complete opposite..


Did you use the lga 1700 mounting kit?


----------



## centvalny

Apex Bios 0080 with Green Hynix strips





ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0080.7z







drive.google.com













Boot with samsung up to 6600 with xmp 1 ram settings


----------



## Alberto_It

centvalny said:


> Apex Bios 0080 with Green Hynix strips
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0080.7z
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2543745


Where did you find this version of Apex bios?


----------



## Stahlstich

Alberto_It said:


> Where did you find this version of Apex bios?


In HWBot.


----------



## Alberto_It

Stahlstich said:


> In HWBot.


Thank you, but I think that it is specific for SK Hynix Dram oc frequency. 

And I have Samsung chips


----------



## Silent Scone

Alberto_It said:


> Thank you, but I think that it is specific for SK Hynix Dram oc frequency.
> 
> And I have Samsung chips


Hello,

Did you even bother to read all the post? He does show some Samsung XMP+ results (albeit with vague stability). One would think given all the trouble you claim to have had you would be eager to give updates a try. This requires effort on your part, though


----------



## Alberto_It

Silent Scone said:


> Hello,
> 
> Did you even bother to read all the post? He does show some Samsung XMP+ results (albeit with vague stability). One would think given all the trouble you claim to have had you would be eager to give updates a try. This requires effort on your part, though


Thank you for the answer, I follow 3 different threads, maybe I have missed this one. 

The only that I've seen is this 









[OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread


Yep I only upgrade my cpu/motherboard every 4-5 years or so but I'm also used to Corsair AIOs which are more compact. Sure, see below! I had to re-mount as my load temps were not good. After the second mount, they dropped 10c. I think one corner was not down all the way. Make sure you force...




www.overclock.net





And on a Korean forum, published by @safedisk 

Anyway I give a try


----------



## Alberto_It

@cstkl1 could you please add on the first page of the thread this Apex bios version? 



ASUS ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX | APEX 14


----------



## Tideman

bscool said:


> Did you use the lga 1700 mounting kit?


Yeah that's the one I'm using. It comes included in the box now, if ordered from Arctic's online store. Otherwise has to be ordered separately I believe.

Anyone else getting WHEA-Logger errors in their event log? Fatal hardware error (doesn't specify). I noticed a single error yesterday upon first boot into Windows 11. Fresh Install. I've heard these are common at the moment with Asus drivers and W11 but still slightly concerned.

Tested with Aida64 (cpu+fpu+cache) and it failed at 1hr. So I turned off XMP and ran it again and no errors after 4hrs. Yet today when I booted up into windows, there was that single error in event log again..

This is with CPU at stock btw


----------



## lolhaxz

Tideman said:


> Anyone else getting WHEA-Logger errors in their event log? Fatal hardware error (doesn't specify). I noticed a single error yesterday upon first boot into Windows 11. Fresh Install. I've heard these are common at the moment with Asus drivers and W11 but still slightly concerned.


Got a PCIE riser cable by chance?


----------



## Tideman

lolhaxz said:


> Got a PCIE riser cable by chance?


Nope. Seems to only happen after a cold boot.

Just ran Realbench for an hour and no issues.. I'll probably loop CB23 for couple hours as well. Again everything at stock, on 0811 BIOS.

I can't be certain, but I don't remember getting this error before the new W11 update.. I may just have not noticed it though because it happens only once.

UPDATE: All seems well after setting my ram speed/timings manually.


----------



## sblantipodi

0070 BIOS on Extreme here.
If I set SA on Auto
it runs 1.040V, I can read this value on both BIOS and HWInfo.

If I try to manually set 1.050V the PC does not boot and hangs at detect memory.
If I set it to 1.10V same thing.
If I set it to 1.150V it seems to work?

Why this behaviour?
If Auto uses 1.040, why the system does not boot until 1.150V when using a manual setting?


----------



## sblantipodi

After days of testing without errors I stopped doing tests thinking that I found a stable settings.
Today I launched a simple Cinebench and I get a bsod on the memory.

Can't wait to jump on zen 4.


----------



## adna

try to test ABSOLUT with same setting
fury-hynix-6400-30-37-37-28-2t
sa | vdd | vddq | txvddq | mc = 0.9 | 1.43 | 1.4 | 1.25 | 1.25


----------



## RobertoSampaio

adna said:


> try to test ABSOLUT with same setting
> fury-hynix-6400-30-37-37-28-2t
> sa | vdd | vddq | txvddq | mc = 0.9 | 1.43 | 1.4 | 1.25 | 1.25
> View attachment 2543803
> 
> View attachment 2543804



I bought this sticks... Waiting to arrive....



https://gzhls.at/blob/ldb/7/9/2/b/8624ba4a9eabed920b690c3e6ee7046c99ab.pdf



Do you think I can use your settings?


----------



## Silent Scone

sblantipodi said:


> 0070 BIOS on Extreme here.
> If I set SA on Auto
> it runs 1.040V, I can read this value on both BIOS and HWInfo.
> 
> If I try to manually set 1.050V the PC does not boot and hangs at detect memory.
> If I set it to 1.10V same thing.
> If I set it to 1.150V it seems to work?
> 
> Why this behaviour?
> If Auto uses 1.040, why the system does not boot until 1.050V when using a manual setting?


Because the CPU System Agent is sensitive to small voltage changes both in the OS and during POST stress tests that deskew the signal lines in order for the system to pass successfully and be stable. This comes down to CPU and memory variance.

The auto values are not a one-size fit all solution and can require adjustment. In other words, your CPU likes around 1.04v or 1.15V VCCSA. The voltage window for stability also gets narrower the closer to the edge you are.

In other words stop mixing kits so we can all stop reading your posts lol


----------



## adna

RobertoSampaio said:


> I bought this sticks... Waiting to arrive....
> 
> 
> 
> https://gzhls.at/blob/ldb/7/9/2/b/8624ba4a9eabed920b690c3e6ee7046c99ab.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> Do you think I can use your settings?


I think fury6000c40 can do. wait to see
my setting is simple. i think bit difference timings. another pairs.


----------



## fortecosi

Corsair 5600C36 Samsung @ 5866C36 1T, APEX, BIOS 0080.


----------



## sblantipodi

But is there a 0080 for the extreme too?
If yes, what's new over 0070?


----------



## dyanikoglu

Why new Apex bioses are being shared in hwbot? No more love for overclock.net?


----------



## fortecosi

dyanikoglu said:


> Why new Apex bioses are being shared in hwbot? No more love for overclock.net?


Because some people think this is their personal support forum and are very annoying.


----------



## jeiselramos

dyanikoglu said:


> Why new Apex bioses are being shared in hwbot? No more love for overclock.net?


Safedisk usually post on both 

Inviato dal mio IN2023 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## dyanikoglu

fortecosi said:


> Because some people think this is their personal support forum and are very annoying.


Looking at the efforts of thread owner to gather all of shared bioses in one post, I think it makes more sense to have them here. Most of bioses in hwbot (and possibly other forums) are just being lost in a few days.


----------



## d0minat0r

Hi, 

have problem wih z690-a strix D4

Can't boot any UEFI OS, only W7 and XP. This is MEI problem. Tryed to flash bios many times to triger update MEI but without any luck. All day trying to start tools in W7 but no go got 0xc00007b eror


----------



## Falkentyne

RobertoSampaio said:


> I'd rotate the water block 90º left
> 
> If you take a look at the coldplate, it is rectangular, and if you rotate the block, it will fit the rectangular size of the CPU.
> 
> 
> View attachment 2543624
> 
> 
> View attachment 2543625
> 
> 
> View attachment 2543628


Sorry but I tested this.
0C difference. Just a waste of thermal paste :/ So no need to waste your time or your expensive thermal paste trying this. Plus this rotation made the case very hard to close since now the tubes were pushing against the side panel.

The main heat is centered directly in the middle of the IHS and diffused. Rotating definitely won't do anything with a heat spreader.

It's "possible" that there may be a difference if you are completely delidded, when using direct die due to the direct heat transfer, but someone else will have to test that.


----------



## Steven K.

Hi, everyone.
I use a Z690 Maximus Formula. I also have two ram kits. 32GB Kingston Beast 6000CL40 (Hynix) and 32GB G.Skill Trident Z5 6000CL40(Samsung). Of course I tested both kits separately. In principle, both kits run on the board, but with the following anomalies.

The Kingston kit runs in single channel as well as in dual channel, even with an activated XMP profile, but I get the Q-Qode 55 Memory Detect in a period of between 1-3 days when booting and the system no longer boots in dual channel mode. Only when you remove a stick does the system boot again. If you then insert the second stick again, you get the Q-Qode 55 again. The same behavior is also evident with the G-Skill, except that the XMP profile does not run stably here.

After days of research I found the following. When I got the Q-Qode 55, I removed a stick (it doesn't matter which ram kit I use, the behavior is the same), loaded the XMP 1 profile and fixed all timings manually and set MRC to fastboot. Fixed the command rate to "Auto" since it was set to 1T... . When I saved the bios, I turned off the PC and reinserted the second ram stick.


What can I say, both kits run without problems with the XMP profile in dual channel mode. No more Q-Qode 55 Memory Detect.

I'm currently testing the clock rates, 6000MHz are not stable because TestMem5 spits out errors, but I haven't made any adjustments to the voltages here yet. 5200MHz seems to be running without problems so far, I'll keep testing.


----------



## sblantipodi

@Steven K. three minutes of testing tells you nothing about stability 
those memory can run no problem for days and spit errors the day after.


----------



## Carillo

While waiting for a new 12900K, I got my self a i5 12400F. Amazing performance with this little guy. B660+12400F will demolish 9900K in every scenario 

These settings are stable so far

5250mhz core
6100 C28 1T ( maximum 1T settings for my IMC)

No point in running Aida since results is far of because the BCLK OC 

Thanks Asus 

Edit: 
CB23 

16315 Multi 
2031 Single


----------



## Steven K.

sblantipodi said:


> @Steven K. three minutes of testing tells you nothing about stability
> those memory can run no problem for days and spit errors the day after.


It is absolutely clear to me that we cannot speak of stable here. It was all about the system working at all with the settings. I only test briefly with TestMem5 whether errors are thrown and if not I go up until errors come, then back one level. I then test this setting with Memtest86 and everyday applications.

Thanks.


----------



## cstkl1

Alberto_It said:


> @cstkl1 could you please add on the first page of the thread this Apex bios version?
> 
> 
> 
> ASUS ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX | APEX 14


ppl here already complaining about beta bios to test fix some issues.
posting experimental tunings bios here.. will end up ppl bothering faes on it if something goes wrong


----------



## Paragram

Hi guys I've got the weirdest problems with my build: 12900K, Z690 Apex and Trident Z5 C36 6000. Before today I had XPG Lancer 5200 speeds and the PC had major problems after the first 24 hours, it kept bootlooping 24/7, updated to latest bios and was fine for another couple days until it began boot looping 24/7 I tried all bios etc... to have still constant boot loops! I sent the motherboard back thinking that was my issue until they said they ran all tests and it was fine, I sent the ram and manged to get a refund. Today I got my new Trident kit and it booted into windows but began bootlooping shortly after getting into windows, updated bios to 9901 and so far it seems to stay in windows a lot longer but it will just randomly shut down after about 10 mins maybe even 1 hour and just restart? any suggestions?


----------



## Alberto_It

cstkl1 said:


> ppl here already complaining about beta bios to test fix some issues.
> posting experimental tunings bios here.. will end up ppl bothering faes on it if something goes wrong


Dude, several bios here are experimental. No problem for me, I'm using it and works better than others. 

Goodbye


----------



## Merkor

Sounds like your PSU could be faulty. Already tried another one?


----------



## Paragram

Merkor said:


> Sounds like your PSU could be faulty. Already tried another one?


Yeah I've tried others, plus I just switch it from my 10th gen intel which was perfectly fine with that. And that was before I got the trident it was boot looping so PSU is 100% fine


----------



## Paragram

Paragram said:


> Hi guys I've got the weirdest problems with my build: 12900K, Z690 Apex and Trident Z5 C36 6000. Before today I had XPG Lancer 5200 speeds and the PC had major problems after the first 24 hours, it kept bootlooping 24/7, updated to latest bios and was fine for another couple days until it began boot looping 24/7 I tried all bios etc... to have still constant boot loops! I sent the motherboard back thinking that was my issue until they said they ran all tests and it was fine, I sent the ram and manged to get a refund. Today I got my new Trident kit and it booted into windows but began bootlooping shortly after getting into windows, updated bios to 9901 and so far it seems to stay in windows a lot longer but it will just randomly shut down after about 10 mins maybe even 1 hour and just restart? any suggestions?











this is what it said on OCCT... This was only on XMP 1 on 9901


----------



## PoMpIs

Hello ..

I wanted to ask you something related to the OC-No-K

Since the launch day of alder lake I have an Asus Hero, it was working with a 12900k... but now I have a 12100F for a few days to try, which is great...



Spoiler















But if I restart the computer, instead of restarting, it turns off and on again... is this the case or do I have something wrong... It only happens when I activate the bios option for overclocking BCLK...

happens to you?

Many thanks


----------



## cstkl1

Alberto_It said:


> Dude, several bios here are experimental. No problem for me, I'm using it and works better than others.
> 
> Goodbye


its a different target audience. 

if it works for u .. thats good.


----------



## Alberto_It

cstkl1 said:


> its a different target audience.
> 
> if it works for u .. thats good.


Never touched the ram timings, under Aio Cooling system and experimental bios (done by Safedisk). Anyway I have understood 

My results :








ASUS MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME & i9-12900K GUIDE - Load...


No. I tried them with sync acdc in bios (it auto select dc ll) and llc3 is 1.1 and llc4 is 0.98 I didn't check how many levels but your core VID matches Vcore under load (no offset) with DC_LL= 1.1? Also I saw that sync AC/DC option should that be enabled?. I am not using any offset or...




www.overclock.net


----------



## skullbringer

So on my Apex channel B can post 7466, but channel A can only post 6800. Would you call that normal variation or concerning?


----------



## owikh84

12900K SP88 - Stock
Maximus Z690 EXTREME | BIOS 0811
Kingston Fury Beast KF556C40BBK2-32 (Hynix)

*2x16GB DDR5-6200 30-37-37-28-1T
VDD/VDDQ/TX VDDQ 1.435v | SA 0.95v | MC 1.325v*


----------



## affxct

Okay so, I attempted the washer mod for my ILM and failed MRC. Before attempting the mod I checked to see if my CPU had a bow, and it did. This was also quite apparent to me because of checking paste spread on the occasions I had to remove my AIO. I also swapped DIMM slots around as I was going to do more testing and see if it would make a difference. Swapping back didn't fix MRC so I concluded that it had to logically be the extra washers leading to decreasing loading pressure on the CPU pins. The MRC failures were similar to what I was seeing with the previous 5600C36 kit I owned that failed XMP MRC on three ADL chips and two boards. After removing the (0.7mm ish) M4s, the MRC passed without issue again. So, just something to think about and might provide some valuable data as to why some kits are failing MRC so hard and others are not. Not entirely sure what that decrease in pressure did but it could've prevented optimal data transfer between the RAM and CPU that was borking training. Idk.


----------



## truehighroller1

@shamino1978 

Y'all got anymore of those beta test bios for the strix d4 wifi?? 

😂


----------



## Carillo

skullbringer said:


> So on my Apex channel B can post 7466, but channel A can only post 6800. Would you call that normal variation or concerning?


Probably IMC related from my findings..Same as my 4 Apex boards with same cpu and different Hynix kits.. I’m receiving a cpu with very strong IMC on Monday , that has done 7200 with both dimms on another apex board. So I know for sure then


----------



## sblantipodi

RobertoSampaio said:


> I'd rotate the water block 90º left
> 
> If you take a look at the coldplate, it is rectangular, and if you rotate the block, it will fit the rectangular size of the CPU.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2543628


Is there various revisions of the Extreme mobo?

As you can see from this photo I don't have the "LGA-17XX/LGA-18XX" engraved on my socket.










what's the revision of your board?


----------



## RobertoSampaio

sblantipodi said:


> Is there various revisions of the Extreme mobo?
> 
> As you can see from this photo I don't have the "LGA-17XX/LGA-18XX" engraved on my socket.
> 
> View attachment 2544212
> 
> 
> what's the revision of your board?


My board is not a retail...
It's an engineering sample...
The CPU is an ES too...
Asus sent me for test before the launch.


----------



## Falkentyne

RobertoSampaio said:


> My board is not a retail...
> It's an engineering sample...
> The CPU is an ES too...
> Asus sent me for test before the launch.


Same for me (Not a retail board). Says Lotes on the socket.
Did you get a second board? I remember your OLED died. Or did you just keep the dead OLED?


----------



## truehighroller1

RobertoSampaio said:


> My board is not a retail...
> It's an engineering sample...
> The CPU is an ES too...
> Asus sent me for test before the launch.





Falkentyne said:


> Same for me (Not a retail board). Says Lotes on the socket.
> Did you get a second board? I remember your OLED died. Or did you just keep the dead OLED?


Very helpful for us plebes. I don't see a benefit here considering your board acts completely different from mine and the write up you provide is not realistic compared to my plebe board what so ever even though by all means I appreciate your contributions by all means. Can we get realistic please? Your board is completely different acting from mine.

Straight to point:

Quality is important and especially when it comes to an electronics point of view and as someone with an electronics degree from 20 years ago it is showing my then education curriculum was correct.

This is more directed towards the manufacturers of these products. Not either one of you because I really do appreciate both of yours contributions to this community by all means.


----------



## Paragram

Paragram said:


> View attachment 2544124
> 
> this is what it said on OCCT... This was only on XMP 1 on 9901


To add to this guys I've tried 4 different power supplies, 2 different kits of DDR5, different coolers etc... about 2 weeks ago when I only had my XPG lancer kit it worked pretty much perfectly fine for about 12 hours, began looping, updated to latest bios and it worked on and off for 2 days until it just boot looped infinitely no matter what I tried (I tried literally everything!) Yesterday I got my Trident kit and it looped a few times at first but then got into windows but the PC was hard shutting off every 10 mins maybe up to an hour? I sent thee motherboard back but they said its fine after running 2 hours of OCCT and 1 hour on idle (personally I dont think its enough to tell if its "fine") Only thing not been sent back or tested it CPU, maybe the memory controller is faulty? thats why it was more stable with the odd time getting into windows etc...? when I installed a brand new kit of ram? I'm not sure, just wonder if any of you guys suggest what I should do? losing my mind because I bought this platform early Nov just to still be at this point! Because my original 12900K got stolen cause the courier took it to different address lmao!


----------



## cstkl1

truehighroller1 said:


> Very helpful for us plebes. I don't see a benefit here considering your board acts completely different from mine and the write up you provide is not realistic compared to my plebe board what so ever even though by all means I appreciate your contributions by all means. Can we get realistic please? Your board is completely different acting from mine.
> 
> Straight to point:
> 
> Quality is important and especially when it comes to an electronics point of view and as someone with an electronics degree from 20 years ago it is showing my then education curriculum was correct.
> 
> This is more directed towards the manufacturers of these products. Not either one of you because I really do appreciate both of yours contributions to this community by all means.


retail > es. 

so...

@owikh84 having good result on his cpu that can run high ddr4 clock on extreme ddr5 also. 

the board can only do so much as what the cpu can accommodate.


----------



## fortecosi

Paragram said:


> To add to this guys I've tried 4 different power supplies, 2 different kits of DDR5, different coolers etc... about 2 weeks ago when I only had my XPG lancer kit it worked pretty much perfectly fine for about 12 hours, began looping, updated to latest bios and it worked on and off for 2 days until it just boot looped infinitely no matter what I tried (I tried literally everything!) Yesterday I got my Trident kit and it looped a few times at first but then got into windows but the PC was hard shutting off every 10 mins maybe up to an hour? I sent thee motherboard back but they said its fine after running 2 hours of OCCT and 1 hour on idle (personally I dont think its enough to tell if its "fine") Only thing not been sent back or tested it CPU, maybe the memory controller is faulty? thats why it was more stable with the odd time getting into windows etc...? when I installed a brand new kit of ram? I'm not sure, just wonder if any of you guys suggest what I should do? losing my mind because I bought this platform early Nov just to still be at this point! Because my original 12900K got stolen cause the courier took it to different address lmao!


So you bought Apex, yet you are unable to even adjust the XMP profile little bit to run it stable? Note XMP is not guaranteed 100% plug and play. Sometimes you have to adjust a setting(s) a bit... esp. while start of the new ddr era. Try to play with VDD/VDDQ/SA/MC/TX voltages a bit. Or get rid of the XMP and try to OC the ram manually, you get better results that way anyway.


----------



## fortecosi

truehighroller1 said:


> Very helpful for us plebes. I don't see a benefit here considering your board acts completely different from mine and the write up you provide is not realistic compared to my plebe board what so ever even though by all means I appreciate your contributions by all means. Can we get realistic please? Your board is completely different acting from mine.
> 
> Straight to point:
> 
> Quality is important and especially when it comes to an electronics point of view and as someone with an electronics degree from 20 years ago it is showing my then education curriculum was correct.
> 
> This is more directed towards the manufacturers of these products. Not either one of you because I really do appreciate both of yours contributions to this community by all means.


By your logic, it would be impossible to write up a guide, because, you know, every CPU acts completely different too, right? The guide does not mean you have to apply exactly the same values as it´s impossible... it shows you the way.


----------



## truehighroller1

fortecosi said:


> By your logic, it would be impossible to write up a guide, because, you know, every CPU acts completely different too, right? The guide does not mean you have to apply exactly the same values as it´s impossible... it shows you the way.



Said it, meant it.


----------



## Silent Scone

truehighroller1 said:


> Very helpful for us plebes. I don't see a benefit here considering your board acts completely different from mine and the write up you provide is not realistic compared to my plebe board what so ever even though by all means I appreciate your contributions by all means. Can we get realistic please? Your board is completely different acting from mine.
> 
> Straight to point:
> 
> Quality is important and especially when it comes to an electronics point of view and as someone with an electronics degree from 20 years ago it is showing my then education curriculum was correct.
> 
> This is more directed towards the manufacturers of these products. Not either one of you because I really do appreciate both of yours contributions to this community by all means.


Hello,

Dozens of guides will have been written on some form of ES samples. Personally, I've had dozens of ES CPUs from ASUS/Intel and none of the behavior has been different. This is because Intel ES are nearly identical if not often completely. None of the ES samples I've had are particularly good overclockers on ambient, either.

Moreover, any changes (quite obviously) are improvements once on the market. Unless you can provide an actual example of the shortfalls of having a retail board over a pre-release one then probably best to leave these discussions for actual engineers.


----------



## RobertoSampaio

truehighroller1 said:


> Very helpful for us plebes. I don't see a benefit here considering your board acts completely different from mine and the write up you provide is not realistic compared to my plebe board what so ever even though by all means I appreciate your contributions by all means. Can we get realistic please? Your board is completely different acting from mine.
> 
> Straight to point:
> 
> Quality is important and especially when it comes to an electronics point of view and as someone with an electronics degree from 20 years ago it is showing my then education curriculum was correct.
> 
> This is more directed towards the manufacturers of these products. Not either one of you because I really do appreciate both of yours contributions to this community by all means.


I'm sorry for that...
I think all this is a misunderstood...

In fact, my ES MB have problems that was solved in the retail version...

I think if I can run my settings in a preliminary board, probably a retail will be better.

I have a pair of ES ddr5 that can't run higher than 4800... They don't have xpm profiles and it's impossible to know the brand of them... But it runs 4800 without errors..

I just bough a hynix and I'm waiting to arrive... I hope my CPU can run the sticks at 6000... But I'm not sure if it will be possible, because I have all ES stuffs...

My af-ii was mounted without the appropriate mount kit...
I tested a lot of bios and had a lot of problems... So I think I'm in the plede too... Lolol...
My glory is the same of that guy who taste the wine before the king, testing if there is some poison on it... LOL

What I'm trying to say is... If you have a retail, probably you can do better than me...
And if I can help anyone here it will be a pleasure...
I remember years ago, when I arrived in this community... I had a 3770k and just bought a 10900k... I had a lot of questions and I had a lot of help here...
Now, if I can help, I'd like to...
IIf you need some help with loadlines, adaptive voltage, by core, octvb... that's my fun..
Now I will try to learn about memory OC... And I'll need a lot of help...


----------



## affxct

sblantipodi said:


> 0070 BIOS on Extreme here.
> If I set SA on Auto
> it runs 1.040V, I can read this value on both BIOS and HWInfo.
> 
> If I try to manually set 1.050V the PC does not boot and hangs at detect memory.
> If I set it to 1.10V same thing.
> If I set it to 1.150V it seems to work?
> 
> Why this behaviour?
> If Auto uses 1.040, why the system does not boot until 1.150V when using a manual setting?


Alder Lake has this weird thing where some SA settings will allow for memory training and some will not. Some SA settings will cause IMC instability and some will not. You need enough SA to stabilise the ring unless you Jack up the the Core/Cache rail, and I found that increasing L2 cause immediate instability in stress tests.

If you drop SA quite low like a lot of OC’ers are doing, you can sometimes achieve better scaling else you’ll end up at like 1.5V for 6933, But if you’re using like 1.05-1.15 for a high speed bin OC, I don’t think you can realistically maintain IMC stability. The auto value is weird. My CPU auto’s at 0.9 for JEDEC, and 1.25 for literally anything above JEDEC. For XMP 6000C36 (with tightened subs and 56 tRAS), I can run my all-core OC stable with 1.15V SA and 1.1V VDD2/IMC VDD (set by XMP II and I figured I’d give it a spin). With stock CPU settings I only require 1.1V SA. I can go all the way up to 1.25 and beyond and not cause IMC instability, but only because the speed bin is conservative enough.

I’ve done many reboot and cold boot IBT V2 and HCI stable profiles and all went bad after enough cold boots. All except XMP. I’m beginning to think the binning done by vendors is not related to the voltage scalability of the ICs or even how good they are, but rather their ability to maintain daily usability. I think a few kits are behaving weirdly because of the contact between the CPU and socket pins on individual boards, and is also linked to how bowed your CPU is and how much pressure your cooler can exert on your CPU.

It’s all so relative but my first 5600C36 couldn’t do XMP or scale voltage on three different chips and that all went away when I was graced with this amazing 6000C36 kit that I bought with my store credit after my retailer refunded me. I can’t say anything more than I was blessed in this particular instance because I know they didn’t technically have to take my kit back because it didn’t do XMP. They spoke to G.SKILL no doubt as they definitely sent that kit back, so maybe just maybe my RMA will get G.SKILL to think a little bit about what happened. That’s a stretch and maybe it sounds a bit self-centred, but hopefully my 5600C36 will set a precedent.

In terms of why this is happening to you, if you mix kits you’re basically asking to get screwed, and if you run out of QVL the same applies. The only way to be reliably reboot stable is to use a kit that your board can comfortably facilitate, paired with a CPU that can train your kit and run it at a conservative - usually XMP or just a bit better - configuration. Thus far the only config that hasn’t come back to bite me after a few days has been XMP and it didn’t freak out whether SA was 1.1 or 1.25. The only caveat being it needed more SA for higher ring clock but that’s it.



sblantipodi said:


> 0070 BIOS on Extreme here.
> If I set SA on Auto
> it runs 1.040V, I can read this value on both BIOS and HWInfo.
> 
> If I try to manually set 1.050V the PC does not boot and hangs at detect memory.
> If I set it to 1.10V same thing.
> If I set it to 1.150V it seems to work?
> 
> Why this behaviour?
> If Auto uses 1.040, why the system does not boot until 1.150V when using a manual setting?





sblantipodi said:


> 0070 BIOS on Extreme here.
> If I set SA on Auto
> it runs 1.040V, I can read this value on both BIOS and HWInfo.
> 
> If I try to manually set 1.050V the PC does not boot and hangs at detect memory.
> If I set it to 1.10V same thing.
> If I set it to 1.150V it seems to work?
> 
> Why this behaviour?
> If Auto uses 1.040, why the system does not boot until 1.150V when using a manual setting?





Silent Scone said:


> Because the CPU System Agent is sensitive to small voltage changes both in the OS and during POST stress tests that deskew the signal lines in order for the system to pass successfully and be stable. This comes down to CPU and memory variance.
> 
> The auto values are not a one-size fit all solution and can require adjustment. In other words, your CPU likes around 1.04v or 1.15V VCCSA. The voltage window for stability also gets narrower the closer to the edge you are.
> 
> In other words stop mixing kits so we can all stop reading your posts lol


You’re literally spot on. I find that when your kit is running at a speed it’s very comfortable at, you begin to see that you can run a scaled range of SA’s and neither your RAM or IMC will freak out. It seems only the aggressive memory tunes are the ones that are becoming unstable after a few reboots.


----------



## affxct

fortecosi said:


> Because some people think this is their personal support forum and are very annoying.


You have an SP79? I have an 81. I thought I was alone.


----------



## Silent Scone

affxct said:


> You’re literally spot on. I find that when your kit is running at a speed it’s very comfortable at, you begin to see that you can run a scaled range of SA’s and neither your RAM or IMC will freak out. It seems only the aggressive memory tunes are the ones that are becoming unstable after a few reboots.




This behavior is not new and comes down to voltage alignment that is needed for signal equilibrium for a combination of components in a particular system. What some users fall prey to is not understanding that each CPU is different in more ways than one, and not in a linear fashion. These things are impacted heavier by any drift on the underlying mechanisms when pushing platform limits, some of which can be dialed out with the right settings. You will find different settings work on almost any platform on this rail for the last few generations.

Below is an example I made on Z390 when running the Formula board at its limit. You will see that the System Agent is higher on the red outline, and yet the memory is now almost instantly unstable when running Google Stress App test.

TLDR; More voltage is not always better


----------



## sblantipodi

affxct said:


> You’re literally spot on. I find that when your kit is running at a speed it’s very comfortable at, you begin to see that you can run a scaled range of SA’s and neither your RAM or IMC will freak out. It seems only the aggressive memory tunes are the ones that are becoming unstable after a few reboots.


Please don't forget that I have 4 sticks. I spent days finding these settings


----------



## affxct

Silent Scone said:


> This behavior is not new and comes down to voltage alignment that is needed for signal equilibrium for a combination of components in a particular system. What some users fall prey to is not understanding that each CPU is different in more ways than one, and not in a linear fashion. These things are impacted heavier by any drift on the underlying mechanisms when pushing platform limits, some of which can be dialed out with the right settings. You will find different settings work on almost any platform on this rail for the last few generations.
> 
> Below is an example I made on Z390 when running the Formula board at its limit. You will see that the System Agent is higher on the red outline, and yet the memory is now almost instantly unstable when running Google Stress App test.
> 
> TLDR; More voltage is not always better
> 
> 
> View attachment 2544334


Oh 100%. Funnily enough I never really saw this on other platforms. On Comet Lake I did notice that using too much SA or IO would roll-over, but over the years once something seemed locked in for daily use it would kinda just run.

Last week I tried to push my card’s gaming clock a bit too far and crashed Adrenalin (not the first time I’ve done that), and had to do a reboot. I’ve had it happen before where you’d need to DDU Adrenalin because it’s borked, so when I started having ‘Page File’ BSODs on every single of my previously stable BIOS profile, I immediately wiped it and went back to reinstall it.

Once it was reinstalled my Windows update wouldn’t immediately crash the system (I noticed clicking Windows update would trigger Page File), and I thought I was in the clear. I decided to go through each BIOS profile on Burn Test V2 and each and everyone one through up math errors after being cold boot stable prior.

The 6200 34-35-35-55-2T (1.35VDD/W, 1.15 SA, 1.25 VDD2) I made following that was also seemingly rock solid and I daily’d for like a week. It never crashed or gave any indication of instability whatsoever. On a day when I had send my GPU in for RMA last week, I decided to mess with my BIOS on iGPU as I was bored and wanted to try to break my CPU freq wall and stabilise a 6600 profile by manipulating BCLK.

After an afternoon of BSODs and instant heat crashes in my stress tests, I gave up and figured my setup wasn’t being cooled well enough for higher core/cache clocks, but upon loading my old daily it too was unstable until I either jacked up the core/cache rail or messed with VCCSA, whereafter I couldn’t get it reboot and cold boot stable (close but no cigar).

Currently on 6000C36 XMP with tRAS 54 and manual subs, and it seems perfect on both 0811 and 0070. Almost at 500% HCI on 0070 and I’ll probably do Burn Test just to check up on my IMC. XMP seems to work at a range of SA voltages so I assume this is something that can be daily’d, whereas my other tunes were simply requiring an environment too strict for reliability.


----------



## affxct

sblantipodi said:


> Please don't forget that I have 4 sticks. I spent days finding these settings


I spent days as well, just for my settings to become unstable as well. As I said, you’re literally asking for something that can’t be done on Alder Lake. This die is just too specific with its requirements and each rail affects other rails and subsystems on the die. It even ties into ILM pressure and cooler mounting pressure.

I really do empathise with you, but genuinely, if you need 64GB for work then run at a slow speed. Something like 5200-5400 maybe. If you absolutely need lighting speeds then ditch 64GB dual rank, but 5200-5400 dual rank likely beats 6000 single rank anyway.

If you only care about speed and performance then you bought the wrong RAM XD. You need no-RGB RAM cooled by a fan or a water block, and you need two sticks in a single rank config. Literally no one on earth is blazing through D5 tunes with memory above 60c, and with 4 DIMMs. Literally just not a thing. Your one saving grace might be the Aqua. 12 layers of ASRock daisy-chain sorcery might be what you require; not to speak heresy in an Asus forum - I like Asus boards.


----------



## sblantipodi

affxct said:


> I spent days as well, just for my settings to become unstable as well. As I said, you’re literally asking for something that can’t be done on Alder Lake. This die is just too specific with its requirements and each rail affects other rails and subsystems on the die. It even ties into ILM pressure and cooler mounting pressure. I really do empathise with you, but genuinely, if you need 64GB for work then run at a slow speed. Something like 5200-5400 maybe. If you absolutely need lighting speeds then ditch 64GB dual rank. 5200-5400 dual rank likely beats 6000 single rank anyway.


I'm not asking anything now.
Just wanted to figure out why my mobo can't boot with an SA lower than 1.150V in manual mode, while it can in auto mode at 1.040V, but it's only a curiosity.

I can't run 5.2GHz stable, I fought to get a crappy 4.8GHz stable but now I'm stable and I'm not asking anything else. Don't want to bother in trying reaching 5.2GHz since internet is full of reviews that shows that AL performance doesn't scale well on memory  Basically there is nearly no difference between 4.8GHz and 5.6GHz so I don't care.

There is bigger difference between 4.0GHz and 4.8GHz, this is why I tried to run 4.8GHz but now it seems stable and I can rest xD


----------



## affxct

sblantipodi said:


> I'm not asking anything now. I can't run 5.2GHz stable, I fought to get a crappy 4.8GHz stable but now I'm stable and I'm not asking anything else. Don't want to bother in trying reaching 5.2GHz since internet is full of reviews that shows that AL performance doesn't scale well on memory  Basically there is nearly no difference between 4.8GHz and 5.6GHz so I don't care.
> 
> There is bigger difference between 4.0GHz and 4.8GHz, this is why I tried to run 4.8GHz but now it seems stable and I can rest xD


In that case all is well then? I mean you could maybe tighten up timings a bit to help, but I am sorry if you’re disappointed. I would be too. Micron is much less harsh on the IMC than Samsung and Hynix so perhaps sell the S16B ICs and get a 4X16 kit of Micron at 5200? Corsair has a very good 4X16-validated 5200 Micron XMP.


----------



## Paragram

fortecosi said:


> So you bought Apex, yet you are unable to even adjust the XMP profile little bit to run it stable? Note XMP is not guaranteed 100% plug and play. Sometimes you have to adjust a setting(s) a bit... esp. while start of the new ddr era. Try to play with VDD/VDDQ/SA/MC/TX voltages a bit. Or get rid of the XMP and try to OC the ram manually, you get better results that way anyway.


its got the same issue stock, on both my XPG Lancer kit and Trident kit, RMA on motherboard said it was fine and they sent it back to me... Only last thing is the CPU hasn't been replaced


----------



## sblantipodi

affxct said:


> In that case all is well then? I mean you could maybe tighten up timings a bit to help, but I am sorry if you’re disappointed. I would be too. Micron is much less harsh on the IMC than Samsung and Hynix so perhaps sell the S16B ICs and get a 4X16 kit of Micron at 5200? Corsair has a very good 4X16-validated 5200 Micron XMP.


Thank you for the kind words and for the suggestions, all it's much appreciated.
If I can remain stable at 4.8GHz, I'm ok in this way. 
I'm really tired of testing and crashing, I use my PC for open source programming and gaming, 
I want to rest when I'm on the home PC, I don't want to get stressed by it 

if Shamino and his team will not break my stability with the next bios update hihihi, I'm ok in this way


----------



## affxct

sblantipodi said:


> Thank you for the kind words and for the suggestions, all it's much appreciated.
> If I can remain stable at 4.8GHz, I'm ok in this way.
> I'm really tired of testing and crashing, I use my PC for open source programming and gaming,
> I want to rest when I'm on the home PC, I don't want to get stressed by it
> 
> if Shamino and his team will not break my stability with the next bios update hihihi, I'm ok in this way


I can understand that, I’ve been stress testing more than I ever have in my entire life. D5 testing with higher spec kits came out on both HUB and I2Hard and it’s a clear W for fast D5, not even as fast as what some of us on the forums have achieved. The performance is there but it feels out of reach. Like you’re so close and then stability just slips through your fingers. I can’t imagine what it would be like to game on 6933C32 1T or something like that.


----------



## sblantipodi

affxct said:


> I can’t imagine what it would be like to game on 6933C32 1T or something like that.


with AL, you can imagine that nothing changes, at least not that much. differences in gaming are so small and in a real world scenario when you are GPU limited, differences are simply not there 









DDR5 Memory Performance Scaling with Alder Lake Core i9-12900K


In this article, we take a closer look at the performance scaling you can expect for various DDR5 configurations. We test from DDR5-6000 all the way down to DDR5-2400 and compare CL30 vs. CL36 vs. CL40. Last but not least, we also consider these numbers in relation to what DDR4-3600 offers.




www.techpowerup.com


----------



## affxct

sblantipodi said:


> with AL, you can imagine that nothing changes, at least not that much. differences in gaming are so small and in a real world scenario when you are GPU limited, differences are simply not there
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DDR5 Memory Performance Scaling with Alder Lake Core i9-12900K
> 
> 
> In this article, we take a closer look at the performance scaling you can expect for various DDR5 configurations. We test from DDR5-6000 all the way down to DDR5-2400 and compare CL30 vs. CL36 vs. CL40. Last but not least, we also consider these numbers in relation to what DDR4-3600 offers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.techpowerup.com


Mmmmm I’m not so sure about that XD. Alder Lake made Witcher 2 playable (by my unrealistic standards). I also finally cracked 400 FPS in COD Vanguard 1440p.


----------



## Nizzen

sblantipodi said:


> with AL, you can imagine that nothing changes, at least not that much. differences in gaming are so small and in a real world scenario when you are GPU limited, differences are simply not there
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DDR5 Memory Performance Scaling with Alder Lake Core i9-12900K
> 
> 
> In this article, we take a closer look at the performance scaling you can expect for various DDR5 configurations. We test from DDR5-6000 all the way down to DDR5-2400 and compare CL30 vs. CL36 vs. CL40. Last but not least, we also consider these numbers in relation to what DDR4-3600 offers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.techpowerup.com


Small difference in gaming vs xmp?


----------



## affxct

Nizzen said:


> Small difference in gaming vs xmp?


Yeah this video was pretty eye-opening. Fast D5 absolutely burns through games.


----------



## asdkj1740

affxct said:


> Yeah this video was pretty eye-opening. Fast D5 absolutely burns through games.








不是贵的才是对的 DDR5 VS DDR4内存超频游戏测试 20款游戏3种分辨率告诉你搭配12代酷睿内存超频能为游戏带来多少提升？_哔哩哔哩_bilibili


从DDR4 3600MHz到DDR5 6400MHz，我们搭配3款处理器，3种分辨率，测试了20款各类型游戏。帮助你快速了解内存超频究竟可以获得多少收益!数据量较大，内容可能较为枯燥，友情提醒可以通过播放栏打开字母功能，或使用分段进度条找到自己想看的部分！本期测试内容量较大,视频中如有任何错误或遗漏请各位大佬在评论区或弹幕中留言指出。, 视频播放量 350912、弹幕量 1125、点赞数 25540、投硬币枚数 28688、收藏人数 6525、转发人数 2018, 视频作者 51972, 作者简介...




www.bilibili.com





all manually tuned


----------



## SuperMumrik

affxct said:


> Yeah this video was pretty eye-opening. Fast D5 absolutely burns through games.


Would have liked to see 1T for both d4 and d5 though


----------



## Lord Alzov

affxct said:


> Yeah this video was pretty eye-opening. Fast D5 absolutely burns through games.


Its just LOW 6400 memory. 6933cl30 best game now.


----------



## affxct

Lord Alzov said:


> Its just LOW 6400 memory. 6933cl30 best game now.


I wish haha, such a hard speed bin to do. You need S-tier 12900, S-tier Hynix and S-tier 2 DIMM board. That would be amazing to daily though.


----------



## asdkj1740

Lord Alzov said:


> Its just LOW 6400 memory. 6933cl30 best game now.


only crazy gamers would get 2 dimm mobo for best ram performance...
on 4 dimm mobo with 8 layers pcb, it seems 6400 max for Samsung kits and 6600 max for hynix kit.


----------



## affxct

asdkj1740 said:


> only crazy gamers would get 2 dimm mobo for best ram performance...
> on 4 dimm mobo with 8 layers pcb, it seems 6400 max for Samsung kits and 6600 max for hynix kit.


On my 6 layer I top out at 6200. I can boot 6600 but it won’t hold and training fails sometimes.


----------



## asdkj1740

affxct said:


> On my 6 layer I top out at 6200. I can boot 6600 but it won’t hold and training fails sometimes.


i saw a bios screenshot of msi torpedo (6 layers) d5 at 7000mhz.


----------



## affxct

asdkj1740 said:


> i saw a bios screenshot of msi torpedo (6 layers) d5 at 7000mhz.


I doubt you could be daily stable at 7000 on a 6 layer board. It would not make a lot of sense but it's at least promising to hear.


----------



## fortecosi

affxct said:


> You have an SP79? I have an 81. I thought I was alone.


Sadly yes.


----------



## fortecosi

Paragram said:


> its got the same issue stock, on both my XPG Lancer kit and Trident kit, RMA on motherboard said it was fine and they sent it back to me... Only last thing is the CPU hasn't been replaced


Yeah, but did you try to play with voltages a bit? Or adjust skews? Afaik sometimes XMP profiles just does not work or are unstable, but usually it requires only a small adjusting to make it work! And when you find your stable baseline, you may try to OC the ram even more.


----------



## Lord Alzov

affxct said:


> I wish haha, such a hard speed bin to do. You need S-tier 12900, S-tier Hynix and S-tier 2 DIMM board. That would be amazing to daily though.


Its my daily man with sp85 mediocre CPU.....


----------



## Lord Alzov

asdkj1740 said:


> only crazy gamers would get 2 dimm mobo for best ram performance...
> on 4 dimm mobo with 8 layers pcb, it seems 6400 max for Samsung kits and 6600 max for hynix kit.


Only 2 dimm mobo u can buy. 4 dimm noobs choice, me gamer and i use 2dimm mobo. 32gb ddr5 its OVERKILL for game. Why u need 4 slot? 64gb? FOr game?


----------



## Nizzen

Lord Alzov said:


> Only 2 dimm mobo u can buy. 4 dimm noobs choice, me gamer and i use 2dimm mobo. 32gb ddr5 its OVERKILL for game. Why u need 4 slot? 64gb? FOr game?


Overkill is the best kill 😎
The best is just perfect for gaming


----------



## gecko991

I got a two dimm board also and fine with it.


----------



## affxct

Lord Alzov said:


> Its my daily man with sp85 mediocre CPU.....
> View attachment 2544396


5.3, 4.2, 4.4 @ 1.36V on a SP85? What Vcore does your CPU run at in stress tests and what cooling do you have?


----------



## Lord Alzov

affxct said:


> 5.3, 4.2, 4.4 @ 1.36V on a SP85? What Vcore does your CPU run at in stress tests and what cooling do you have?


Custom water cooling. Mo-ra +1 360mm radiator. Its For all stress test stable. Like PRIME/LINX CRUNCHER etc. 1.38 bios LLC7 on LOAD like 1.32-1.34v.


----------



## affxct

Lord Alzov said:


> Custom water cooling. Mo-ra +1 360mm radiator. Its For all stress test stable. Like PRIME/LINX CRUNCHER etc. 1.38 bios LLC7 on LOAD like 1.32-1.34v.


Mmm I'll guess I'll do some more experimenting. I think I lose stability because I'm on an AIO.


----------



## Paragram

What does SP score mean on the CPU in the bios? everyone else im seeing has 79+ mine was 75 I think... maybe that's why my PC keeps boot looping, pulling that out my A$$ cant lie


----------



## sblantipodi

I can see my SP85 as soon as I open the bios, I think that that SP is referred to the Pcores, where can I see the SP referred to the Ecores?


----------



## LordEinZ

Hey i just got quite recently into mem overclocking i just wanted to ask a few things 
My goal was to get a nice sturdy overclock for gaming 
Got a z690 strix f and z5 6000 c36
Currently running on 32 35 35 52 completely stable. Passed every important memtest ^^
So i was wondering if some timings lead to performance loss even if stable
And also why everyone keeps tRAS 20 above CL nor trp below trcd
For me tras 42 was also working and trp below 35 also stable

I am also running txp on 4 and tcke too. Ontop the trdwr_dg was on 34 for some reason, running on 20 now
If anyone could give me a small list with timings important for fps improvements and timings which i should better leave on auto would be real nice
I pretty much changed tcl ; trcd ; trp ; tras ; twr ; trfc/pb ; rrd's ; tfaw ; tcke ; rdwr_dg ; txp








Thanks for all answers^^


----------



## RobertoSampaio

New MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME bios fixing the "resume from sleep" issue...









ASUS MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME & i9-12900K GUIDE - Load...


Updated: https://www.overclock.net/threads/asus-maximus-z690-extreme-i9-12900k-guide-load-lines-vf-curves-adaptive-voltage-by-core-octvb.1794957/post-28892755 Roberto in your first post on the hwinfo image I see a max package power of 140W. How can you do such a good OC with 140W only? Isn't...




www.overclock.net


----------



## sblantipodi

RobertoSampaio said:


> New MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME bios fixing the "resume from sleep" issue...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ASUS MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME & i9-12900K GUIDE - Load...
> 
> 
> Updated: https://www.overclock.net/threads/asus-maximus-z690-extreme-i9-12900k-guide-load-lines-vf-curves-adaptive-voltage-by-core-octvb.1794957/post-28892755 Roberto in your first post on the hwinfo image I see a max package power of 140W. How can you do such a good OC with 140W only? Isn't...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net


Is this a new bios from shamino?
Does it includes all the improvements from 0070 beta bios?


----------



## RobertoSampaio

sblantipodi said:


> Is this a new bios from shamino?
> Does it includes all the improvements from 0070 beta bios?


I'll check it out and give you feedback....


----------



## sblantipodi

RobertoSampaio said:


> I'll check it out and give you feedback....


We need more people like Roberto, the world would be a better place.


----------



## Antsu

Lord Alzov said:


> Only 2 dimm mobo u can buy. 4 dimm noobs choice, me gamer and i use 2dimm mobo. 32gb ddr5 its OVERKILL for game. Why u need 4 slot? 64gb? FOr game?


People are getting crazy with this. I am running 2x8 and I never run out of RAM... Sure 16GB is starting to get a little tight, but 32 is indeed overkill. 64 for gaming is just a joke.


----------



## jeiselramos

sblantipodi said:


> I can see my SP85 as soon as I open the bios, I think that that SP is referred to the Pcores, where can I see the SP referred to the Ecores?


Extreme Tweaker>Ai Features

Inviato dal mio IN2023 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## asdkj1740

Lord Alzov said:


> Only 2 dimm mobo u can buy. 4 dimm noobs choice, me gamer and i use 2dimm mobo. 32gb ddr5 its OVERKILL for game. Why u need 4 slot? 64gb? FOr game?


price of apex is >$100usd more than the price of hero and you ask me why ppl tend not to buy these two dimm mobos?


----------



## Lord Alzov

asdkj1740 said:


> price of apex is >$100usd more than the price of hero and you ask me why ppl tend not to buy these two dimm mobos?


On my country Apex was Cheaper than hero


----------



## sblantipodi

RobertoSampaio said:


> I'll check it out and give you feedback....


another question if possible. is this bios a "stable version" and we will see it in the official Asus site?
I mean, BIOS that starts with two 0 example 00XX is BETA version,
BIOS that starts with 2 numbers different than 0 is stable version, am I right?

can you suggest people that shares these bioses to always bundle a changelog with the BIOSes? 
I think that everyone will appreciate.


----------



## lowmotion

Antsu said:


> People are getting crazy with this. I am running 2x8 and I never run out of RAM... Sure 16GB is starting to get a little tight, but 32 is indeed overkill. 64 for gaming is just a joke.


If some programm uses more than 12gb ram, windows will swap. If windows finds more than xxgb memory, windows will use that free memory for caching. New games are developed by the hardware specs of xbox and ps. They use 16gb in sharing mode. So 16gb are enough for almost everything and 32gb are just nice to have for some special games like star citizen alpha.


----------



## Spiriva

I got this today: 










Gonna flash it with beta bios 0080 and install it in the loop asap


----------



## satinghostrider

Spiriva said:


> I got this today:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gonna flash it with beta bios 0080 and install it in the loop asap


Rev 2.01! Joking. Well no harm checking.


----------



## Martin778

See, I have such mixed feelings about this, 'if' there is a Rev 2 of the APEX I know I will ditch my old rev APEX the same day and buy a Tachyon or Unify-X. Absolutely not because the Apex is a bad board as such but because for me, if a new rev gets released within 2-3 months after launch, me thinks it has a critical flaw somewhere. I've had my fun twith the X99 ASUS boards that killed CPU's.


----------



## Silent Scone

It's normal for the furthest slot to behave differently as there's less snaking (traces). This behaviour will be more apparent when pushing memory frequency. This has been the case for a very long time. You just need the right union of parts and some patience, as the strength of the memory controller is aided or impeded by such things as the above.

Basically you need a good CPU, good sticks and a systematic approach to overclocking. Even then there’s no guarantees.


----------



## fortecosi

Martin778 said:


> See, I have such mixed feelings about this, 'if' there is a Rev 2 of the APEX I know I will ditch my old rev APEX the same dat and buy a Tachyon or Unify-X. Absolutely not because the Apex is a bad board as such but because for me, if a new rev gets released within 2-3 months after launch, me thinks it has a critical flaw somewhere. I've had my fun twith the X99 ASUS boards that killed CPU's.


1st: Shamino said there is no a new revision of the APEX, so there is not. Because Shamino is not lying. You should trust him and not convinced yourself into conspiracy theories. 
2nd: GL with Gigabyte if you hate new revisions.


----------



## Nizzen

Martin778 said:


> See, I have such mixed feelings about this, 'if' there is a Rev 2 of the APEX I know I will ditch my old rev APEX the same dat and buy a Tachyon or Unify-X. Absolutely not because the Apex is a bad board as such but because for me, if a new rev gets released within 2-3 months after launch, me thinks it has a critical flaw somewhere. I've had my fun twith the X99 ASUS boards that killed CPU's.


Ask @Carillo about what happened with a new good cpu on Apex and memory overclocking


----------



## RobertoSampaio

sblantipodi said:


> another question if possible. is this bios a "stable version" and we will see it in the official Asus site?
> I mean, BIOS that starts with two 0 example 00XX is BETA version,
> BIOS that starts with 2 numbers different than 0 is stable version, am I right?
> 
> can you suggest people that shares these bioses to always bundle a changelog with the BIOSes?
> I think that everyone will appreciate.


Usually this 9901 Bios number is an internal test BIOS... All 9901 I tested was stable... 
So it's not the same of 0070. Probably it's an evolution of the 0070, but Im not 100% sure.
I tested it and the "resume from sleep" issue was fixed.
You have a dual bios board...
If you have any time, please help me testing it... I'm sure the resume from sleep is ok now, but I didn't test the 0070...
If you could help testing it and give a feedback I'll appreciate.

EDITED
Now I have a decent pair of stick ddr5 (hynix 6000)... And I'll be able to start to test ram stability... My old ddr5 was a ES sample that only ran 4800....


----------



## ChaosAD

Had some free time and thought to try a newer bios, so i flashed from 0053 to 0080. It dropped my P core score from 95 to 91, but i didn't care too much because i read that its possible for the score to change after a flash. But now im not stable with the same vcore i was with 0053. So i guess i'm back to 0053 for now.


----------



## sblantipodi

RobertoSampaio said:


> Usually this 9901 Bios number is an internal test BIOS... All 9901 I tested was stable...
> So it's not the same of 0070. Probably it's an evolution of the 0070, but Im not 100% sure.
> I tested it and the "resume from sleep" issue was fixed.
> You have a dual bios board...
> If you have any time, please help me testing it... I'm sure the resume from sleep is ok now, but I didn't test the 0070...
> If you could help testing it and give a feedback I'll appreciate.
> 
> EDITED
> Now I have a decent pair of stick ddr5 (hynix 6000)... And I'll be able to start to test ram stability... My old ddr5 was a ES sample that only ran 4800....


I never had problem when resuming my PC from sleep so I can't help unfortunantly.
Never had this problem with any of the previous BIOS, I know it because I often put my PC on sleep to wake it up from remote.

Roberto, you always helped me, if you need some help in testing something, simply ask and I'll do it 

I now swtiched from 0070 to 9901 but it doesn't seem to help a lot with the RAM, I have some problems in the training process but in the end it booted and now I don't have errors.


----------



## dante`afk

Carillo said:


> View attachment 2544197
> 
> 
> 
> Probably IMC related from my findings..Same as my 4 Apex boards with same cpu and different Hynix kits.. I’m receiving a cpu with very strong IMC on Monday , that has done 7200 with both dimms on another apex board. So I know for sure then


watcha doin? domino?


----------



## RobertoSampaio

sblantipodi said:


> I never had problem when resuming my PC from sleep so I can't help unfortunantly.
> Never had this problem with any of the previous BIOS, I know it because I often put my PC on sleep to wake it up from remote.
> 
> Roberto, you always helped me, if you need some help in testing something, simply ask and I'll do it
> 
> I now swtiched from 0070 to 9901 but it doesn't seem to help a lot with the RAM, I have some problems in the training process but in the end it booted and now I don't have errors.


A lot of people not noted the "resume from sleep" issue.... 
It happened when you set specific by core adaptive voltage... But now it's solved...

I'll need help with my new ddr5...
I'll have some time after Wednesday for testing the ram... I know you are working hard with yours... So maybe you could help me...


----------



## yahfz

RobertoSampaio said:


> A lot of people not noted the "resume from sleep" issue....
> It happened when you set specific by core adaptive voltage... But now it's solved...
> 
> I'll need help with my new ddr5...
> I'll have some time after Wednesday for testing the ram... I know you are working hard with yours... So maybe you could help me...


Do you have an Apex? I can give you my CMO and if you don't i can jsut give you my bios settings that should be pretty much stable for you. 6200c28 49.9ns - 100gb/s read/write/copy Stable which is my current daily ram oc.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

What are some games with built-in benchmarks besides SoTR? In that game, tuned Samsung DDR5 matches B-die and tuned Hynix can beat it by 1-2%. And anything less than a 3090 is GPU limited.


----------



## newls1

hoping to get a few of these memory settings off auto, can one of you smart people tell me if these settings are worth anything to adjust, and if so, possibly assist with some performance settings? here is a screen shot of the settings im hoping to adjust:


----------



## Alberto_It

RobertoSampaio said:


> Usually this 9901 Bios number is an internal test BIOS... All 9901 I tested was stable...
> So it's not the same of 0070. Probably it's an evolution of the 0070, but Im not 100% sure.
> I tested it and the "resume from sleep" issue was fixed.
> You have a dual bios board...
> If you have any time, please help me testing it... I'm sure the resume from sleep is ok now, but I didn't test the 0070...
> If you could help testing it and give a feedback I'll appreciate.
> 
> EDITED
> Now I have a decent pair of stick ddr5 (hynix 6000)... And I'll be able to start to test ram stability... My old ddr5 was a ES sample that only ran 4800....


So I can flash my Z690 Apex with 9901 or I wait a new release? I ask to obtain the best vf curve/voltage for the P-Cores and gain a little bit stability on full load. 

After testing 0080 release I'm not very sure despite the decent results


----------



## RobertoSampaio

Alberto_It said:


> So I can flash my Z690 Apex with 9901 or I wait a new release? I ask to obtain the best vf curve/voltage for the P-Cores and gain a little bit stability on full load.
> 
> After testing 0080 release I'm not very sure despite the decent results


Wait for the new apex bios.


----------



## cstkl1

Alberto_It said:


> So I can flash my Z690 Apex with 9901 or I wait a new release? I ask to obtain the best vf curve/voltage for the P-Cores and gain a little bit stability on full load.
> 
> After testing 0080 release I'm not very sure despite the decent results


i am back to 0806
new bioses the ram oc effects my octvb + 2 profile.


----------



## Alberto_It

RobertoSampaio said:


> Wait for the new apex bios.


Thanks @RobertoSampaio, kind and helpful always at the right time


----------



## newls1

how do you add more voltage in adaptive mode? EX: when I enable adaptive vcore, i go as low as .175v! Sometimes that low the pc auto reboots! how do i properly adjust vcore in this mode to (Lets say) minimum vcore of .500 and up to 1.450? trying at my last attempt to pass cb r23 @ 5.4ghz


----------



## LordEinZ

Why is noone going below tRCD with theire tRP?
Im currently on 30 35 33 40 and it seems to be stable so far
tm5 passed and karhu got a 10000% without any errors 🤔

Edit: Got samsung ic's


----------



## ComansoRowlett

LordEinZ said:


> Why is noone going below tRCD with theire tRP?
> Im currently on 30 35 33 40 and it seems to be stable so far
> tm5 passed and karhu got a 10000% without any errors 🤔
> 
> Edit: Got samsung ic's


Probably still used to old gen where tRCD/tRP was still tied. I'm also on G.Skill Samsung/Apex and currently am doing 6200 30-35-34-1T


----------



## sblantipodi

I have found some settings that are pretty stable on my rig.
Days of testing (memtest, ram test, cinebench, aida), gaming, programming with IDEs, code compiling.

Stable settings:
Z690 Extreme
4x16GB Samsung
4.8GHz C36,36,36,76
1.360V VDD/VDDQ/TX VDDQ
1.275V MC
1.150V SA

I can't crush my PC with that settings...

But I don't understand why these settings are so difficult to boot.
Once the PC is able to boot with these settings is super stable, I can reboot it without problems and live with these settings.
But as soon as I change something in BIOS, even to simply loose a timing from C36 to C40, the PC hangs on "DETECT MEMORY" error code 28.
After various try and retry, like setting C38, then C40, then C36, after a lot of try I can boot with the stable settings.

this does not happen if with the same settings, I select 5.0GHz and 5.2GHz.

5.0 and 5.2GHz are less stable than 4.8GHz during testing but much easyer to boot with.

How this is possible?
I'm not an expert but this seems something that should be fixed by Asus.

PS: Using 0070 and 9901 BIOS


----------



## Alberto_It

cstkl1 said:


> i am back to 0806
> new bioses the ram oc effects my octvb + 2 profile.


In recent months I have tried different versions of Bios for my Apex Z690. Now the ram compatibility seems to be fine.

I think that it's the time to release beta\stable version of the bios for both Maximus and Strix boards series. For extreme overclockers can continue to test hardware with experimental bios. 

Because Asus's warranty does not cover any damage or problems caused by Bios not present on the support web page.


----------



## Silent Scone

G.Skill Pushes DDR5 Memory To The Extreme: Hits DDR5-8888 CL88 Overclock With ASUS ROG Maximus Z690 APEX Motherboard


G.Skill has been posting some extreme records ever since DDR5 memory launched and their latest one is simply insane, hitting up to DDR5-8888.




wccftech.com


----------



## Martin778

CL88 LOL Are we in DDR3 1600 CL9 performance region yet?  Feels more like a meme with 88 MPH.


----------



## shamino1978

sblantipodi said:


> I have found some settings that are pretty stable on my rig.
> Days of testing (memtest, ram test, cinebench, aida), gaming, programming with IDEs, code compiling.
> 
> Stable settings:
> Z690 Extreme
> 4x16GB Samsung
> 4.8GHz C36,36,36,76
> 1.360V VDD/VDDQ/TX VDDQ
> 1.275V MC
> 1.150V SA
> 
> I can't crush my PC with that settings...
> 
> But I don't understand why these settings are so difficult to boot.
> Once the PC is able to boot with these settings is super stable, I can reboot it without problems and live with these settings.
> But as soon as I change something in BIOS, even to simply loose a timing from C36 to C40, the PC hangs on "DETECT MEMORY" error code 28.
> After various try and retry, like setting C38, then C40, then C36, after a lot of try I can boot with the stable settings.
> 
> this does not happen if with the same settings, I select 5.0GHz and 5.2GHz.
> 
> 5.0 and 5.2GHz are less stable than 4.8GHz during testing but much easyer to boot with.
> 
> How this is possible?
> I'm not an expert but this seems something that should be fixed by Asus.
> 
> PS: Using 0070 and 9901 BIOS


Difference is whether memory is retrained or not. For dran related items it is retrained. For other it is not.


----------



## Alberto_It

shamino1978 said:


> Difference is whether memory is retrained or not. For dran related items it is retrained. For other it is not.


Hi Mr. @shamino1978, I know that you work hard for us, and I have the maximum respect for you. 

In the last month I have tested several bios for my Apex, and now the Samsung memory chips compatibility issue is solved. 

Could you please tell me if on the official website of my board will be available a stable beta with all improvements of previous bios? 

Thank you in advance 

Your answer and opinion is important for me.


----------



## asdkj1740

how to avoid "IA limit Reasons" "YES" in hwinfo64? even when tvb voltages/clip are both disabled?


----------



## shamino1978

latest , latest, s3 resume sometimes bug fixed, etc








ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0090.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0090.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com


----------



## Alberto_It

shamino1978 said:


> latest , latest, s3 resume sometimes bug fixed, etc
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0090.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0090.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


Thank you very much!!!!!!!!


----------



## newls1

anything new in line for the strix d4 board?


----------



## geriatricpollywog

Thanks @cstkl1 @bscool @shamino1978 @safedisk


----------



## sblantipodi

testing the new Beta from the star of the community, Shamino, thanks again for the help and the answers.

I noticed that there is an interesting "new features" in the 
TVB section -> Overclocking TVB
it's called. Boost Until Target.

I think that it's worth a try


----------



## Sinivalkoinen

Last weekend I got the chance to try out both the z690 Hero and the z690 Apex, along with a 12900k and g skill ddr 5 6000mhz (F5-6000U3636E16GA2-TZ5RS)

Both worked fine when XMP loaded, with no other setting changed. So i moved on to overclocking the ddr5.

I started of with the Hero, i flashed the latest beta bios i could find, version 0070. The cpu ran at stock, and the g skill ddr5 at 6200mhz with the following settings:

Xmp1 
ddr frequency 6200mhz
maximus tweak mode 2
34-36-36-55-2N
ref cyle time 700
dram refresh time 65535
sa 0.950000v
mc 1.31250v
vdd 1.42000v
vddq 1.42000v

With these settings the g skill F5-6000U3636E16GA2-TZ5RS ran fine. I did the bios memory test "memtest86", it passed. And i did the "karhusoftware" to 2000% without any errors, i also ran TM5-anta777 which it passed. 

Then it was time for the Apex z690, everything els stayed the same execpt the motherboard it self, Cpu, ddr5, 3080ti, psu, mouse, keyboard, monitor.

I flashed the latest beta bios i could find, version 0080, then i again set the same settings as i found to be stable on the Hero.

This time however memtest86 failed in the first pass, karhusoftware gave errors under 100% and TM5-anta777 failed after somewhat 30sec.

I tried to bump up the vdd/vvdq up to 1.54000v, change sa between 0.85000v to 1.3000v, change ref cycle to 800 or / auto, change dram refresh time to 15000 or / auto.
Nothing helped, as soon as i changed it from 6000mhz to 6200mhz or let it run on 6000mhz and changed only the timings (34-36-36-55-2N) (with the same volt changes as worked on the hero) it would fail all the memory tests.

I tried bios 0811, 0911, 0046, 0072, 0080 but nothing worked. If the memory did not just run at xmp it would fail the tests.

After that i changed motherboard back to the Hero (bios 0070) and again there was no problems with the settings above. 

Now i dont know if it happen to be a very good Hero, or if it happen to be a not very good version of the Apex, but for me, with these specific ddr5 the Hero was better then the Apex.


----------



## Deceased

shamino1978 said:


> latest , latest, s3 resume sometimes bug fixed, etc
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-0090.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0090.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


Hi Shamino, was wondering if there’s any love for z690-i?

So far only 0010 is stable for me


----------



## cstkl1

geriatricpollywog said:


> Thanks @cstkl1 @bscool @shamino1978 @safedisk
> View attachment 2544828


mora + winter hard at work eh bro.


----------



## cstkl1

Sinivalkoinen said:


> Last weekend I got the chance to try out both the z690 Hero and the z690 Apex, along with a 12900k and g skill ddr 5 6000mhz (F5-6000U3636E16GA2-TZ5RS)
> 
> Both worked fine when XMP loaded, with no other setting changed. So i moved on to overclocking the ddr5.
> 
> I started of with the Hero, i flashed the latest beta bios i could find, version 0070. The cpu ran at stock, and the g skill ddr5 at 6200mhz with the following settings:
> 
> Xmp1
> ddr frequency 6200mhz
> maximus tweak mode 2
> 34-36-36-55-2N
> ref cyle time 700
> dram refresh time 65535
> sa 0.950000v
> mc 1.31250v
> vdd 1.42000v
> vddq 1.42000v
> 
> With these settings the g skill F5-6000U3636E16GA2-TZ5RS ran fine. I did the bios memory test "memtest86", it passed. And i did the "karhusoftware" to 2000% without any errors, i also ran TM5-anta777 which it passed.
> 
> Then it was time for the Apex z690, everything els stayed the same execpt the motherboard it self, Cpu, ddr5, 3080ti, psu, mouse, keyboard, monitor.
> 
> I flashed the latest beta bios i could find, version 0080, then i again set the same settings as i found to be stable on the Hero.
> 
> This time however memtest86 failed in the first pass, karhusoftware gave errors under 100% and TM5-anta777 failed after somewhat 30sec.
> 
> I tried to bump up the vdd/vvdq up to 1.54000v, change sa between 0.85000v to 1.3000v, change ref cycle to 800 or / auto, change dram refresh time to 15000 or / auto.
> Nothing helped, as soon as i changed it from 6000mhz to 6200mhz or let it run on 6000mhz and changed only the timings (34-36-36-55-2N) (with the same volt changes as worked on the hero) it would fail all the memory tests.
> 
> I tried bios 0811, 0911, 0046, 0072, 0080 but nothing worked. If the memory did not just run at xmp it would fail the tests.
> 
> After that i changed motherboard back to the Hero (bios 0070) and again there was no problems with the settings above.
> 
> Now i dont know if it happen to be a very good Hero, or if it happen to be a not very good version of the Apex, but for me, with these specific ddr5 the Hero was better then the Apex.


set rtl 65|60|65|60


----------



## sblantipodi

Sinivalkoinen said:


> Last weekend I got the chance to try out both the z690 Hero and the z690 Apex, along with a 12900k and g skill ddr 5 6000mhz (F5-6000U3636E16GA2-TZ5RS)
> 
> Both worked fine when XMP loaded, with no other setting changed. So i moved on to overclocking the ddr5.
> 
> I started of with the Hero, i flashed the latest beta bios i could find, version 0070. The cpu ran at stock, and the g skill ddr5 at 6200mhz with the following settings:
> 
> Xmp1
> ddr frequency 6200mhz
> maximus tweak mode 2
> 34-36-36-55-2N
> ref cyle time 700
> dram refresh time 65535
> sa 0.950000v
> mc 1.31250v
> vdd 1.42000v
> vddq 1.42000v
> 
> With these settings the g skill F5-6000U3636E16GA2-TZ5RS ran fine. I did the bios memory test "memtest86", it passed. And i did the "karhusoftware" to 2000% without any errors, i also ran TM5-anta777 which it passed.
> 
> Then it was time for the Apex z690, everything els stayed the same execpt the motherboard it self, Cpu, ddr5, 3080ti, psu, mouse, keyboard, monitor.
> 
> I flashed the latest beta bios i could find, version 0080, then i again set the same settings as i found to be stable on the Hero.
> 
> This time however memtest86 failed in the first pass, karhusoftware gave errors under 100% and TM5-anta777 failed after somewhat 30sec.
> 
> I tried to bump up the vdd/vvdq up to 1.54000v, change sa between 0.85000v to 1.3000v, change ref cycle to 800 or / auto, change dram refresh time to 15000 or / auto.
> Nothing helped, as soon as i changed it from 6000mhz to 6200mhz or let it run on 6000mhz and changed only the timings (34-36-36-55-2N) (with the same volt changes as worked on the hero) it would fail all the memory tests.
> 
> I tried bios 0811, 0911, 0046, 0072, 0080 but nothing worked. If the memory did not just run at xmp it would fail the tests.
> 
> After that i changed motherboard back to the Hero (bios 0070) and again there was no problems with the settings above.
> 
> Now i dont know if it happen to be a very good Hero, or if it happen to be a not very good version of the Apex, but for me, with these specific ddr5 the Hero was better then the Apex.


It's very difficult to know if it's the bios or not.
I experienced very weird behaviour on this ddr5.

I can be stable for two entire days of testing, and crash the third day with the same bios and same settings.

I consider stable settings and bios that doesn't give me errors in an entire week of testing/using the PC. 😁


----------



## X909

Believe me, its the same with 4 DDR4 DIMMs. Everything runs fine on one day, karhu is stable for 2hrs+ and one restart later you can produce errors after 5 minutes. The training procedures seem to be unreliable.


----------



## shamino1978

sblantipodi said:


> It's very difficult to know if it's the bios or not.


not gonna waste time debating this philosophical question
typical superstition is "bios" for anything that is not easily understood.


----------



## dante`afk

What’s it then since everyone has the issue?


----------



## Tradition

geriatricpollywog said:


> Thanks @cstkl1 @bscool @shamino1978 @safedisk
> View attachment 2544828


What are your memory timings?


----------



## shamino1978

the boards that support sli finally with official sli key








ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-1101.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-1101.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-GLACIAL-ASUS-1101.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com




(should be similar to what i posted just now)


These ones that dont support sli:








PRIME-Z690M-PLUS-D4-ASUS-1011.CAP


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












PRIME-Z690-P-WIFI-D4-ASUS-1011.CAP


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












PRIME-Z690-P-D4-ASUS-1011.CAP


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-D4-ASUS-1003.CAP


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-ASUS-1003.CAP


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-WIFI-D4-ASUS-1003.CAP


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-WIFI-ASUS-1003.CAP


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-STRIX-Z690-I-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-1003.CAP


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-STRIX-Z690-G-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-1003.CAP


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-STRIX-Z690-F-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-1003.CAP


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-STRIX-Z690-E-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-1003.CAP


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-1003.CAP


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-1003.CAP


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-ASUS-1003.CAP


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-FORMULA-ASUS-1003.CAP


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ProArt-Z690-CREATOR-WIFI-ASUS-1003.CAP


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












PRIME-Z690-A-ASUS-1003.CAP


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com


----------



## Muad_Dib69

Thanks so much Shamino. do you have the complete changelog? Just to know.


----------



## Alberto_It

shamino1978 said:


> the boards that support sli finally with official sli key
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-1101.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-1101.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-GLACIAL-ASUS-1101.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (should be similar to what i posted just now)
> 
> 
> These ones that dont support sli:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-WIFI-D4-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-WIFI-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-I-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-G-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-F-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-E-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-FORMULA-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ProArt-Z690-CREATOR-WIFI-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PRIME-Z690-A-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


Sorry @shamino1978 and 0090 bios of this morning? I was setting the settings now and I find a new version after a few hours


----------



## sneida

@shamino1978
hi, question - is the 1003 bios also available for "TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-D4"?

can only see the WIFI D4 version in the list...

thanks, br


----------



## fortecosi

shamino1978 said:


> the boards that support sli finally with official sli key
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-1101.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-1101.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-GLACIAL-ASUS-1101.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (should be similar to what i posted just now)
> 
> 
> These ones that dont support sli:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-WIFI-D4-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-WIFI-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-I-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-G-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-F-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-E-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-FORMULA-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ProArt-Z690-CREATOR-WIFI-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PRIME-Z690-A-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


Many thanks! For the APEX, besides the SLI key, is this version the same as 0090 with fixed S3 bug?


----------



## jeiselramos

Alberto_It said:


> Sorry @shamino1978 and 0090 bios of this morning? I was setting the settings now and I find a new version after a few hours


Flash the new one [emoji12]

Inviato dal mio IN2023 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## LionAlonso

sneida said:


> @shamino1978
> hi, question - is the 1003 bios also available for "TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-D4"?
> 
> can only see the WIFI D4 version in the list...
> 
> thanks, br


Maybe its the first one?
Edit: Well seems to be the ddr5 one.
Hope shamingo can share it, because its missing on that list


----------



## shamino1978

sneida said:


> @shamino1978
> hi, question - is the 1003 bios also available for "TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-D4"?
> 
> can only see the WIFI D4 version in the list...
> 
> thanks, br











TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-D4-ASUS-1003.CAP


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com


----------



## Deceased

Sadly even after flashing the new z690-I bios shamino shared, still getting bsod when using xmp 1&2..so far only 0010 works for me.

wonder if it’s my ram issue (gskill 6000 cl40).

sigh.


----------



## fortecosi

Deceased said:


> Sadly even after flashing the new z690-I bios shamino shared, still getting bsod when using xmp 1&2..so far only 0010 works for me.
> 
> wonder if it’s my ram issue (gskill 6000 cl40).
> 
> sigh.


Adjust voltages/timings.


----------



## truehighroller1

@shamino1978

What is this setting?

DII_bwsel

Seems to be a new setting introduced since the 1001 bios revision. I can't get any hits on the web for it's definition.

Also I lost being able to boot my stable settings of 4133mhz again with this bios.

Thank you Shamino.


----------



## Tideman

Official SLI support finally! Much appreciated shamino. The Apex support page on the Asus site seems to be down so I'm guessing it's being updated.


----------



## lowmotion

Deceased said:


> Sadly even after flashing the new z690-I bios shamino shared, still getting bsod when using xmp 1&2..so far only 0010 works for me.
> 
> wonder if it’s my ram issue (gskill 6000 cl40).
> 
> sigh.



SA Voltage is set to 1.250v by XMP and this is not working with every cpu. Most of them need 0.9v-1.0v for 6000mhz.


----------



## newls1

@bscool ... Waiting for your findings on 1003 LOL


----------



## truehighroller1

newls1 said:


> @bscool ... Waiting for your findings on 1003 LOL


I'm running at 4000mhz the same settings I was on 0901 at 4133mhz. Running testmem5 ant777 config and stable so far. Just can't boot 4133 anymore.


----------



## newls1

i havent been able to boot 4133 ever! was hoping for this. For ****s and giggles, have you tried LOW SA voltage like 1.25?


----------



## truehighroller1

newls1 said:


> i havent been able to boot 4133 ever! was hoping for this. For ****s and giggles, have you tried LOW SA voltage like 1.25?



No I haven't. I'll try though, thank you. I'm trying lower main timings right now to see how low I can go.


----------



## newls1

i found this out night before last when I thought my memory was 100% stable and after 10mins into memtest i got 20+ errors. rebooted and started playing with SA Voltage and noticed pc started to post faster with lower SA.... retested memtest with 1.35v SA and errors happened after 20mins... rebooted and set SA to 1.25 (last setting before it turns yellow) and reran memtest with shown mem settings, and after 40ish mins or so i still havent had any errors... Unless this is a fluke and just weird z690 mem compatablity like we all seem to be having... I never would have guessed LOWER SA Voltage would = better stability.... HEre are my mem settings


----------



## bscool

newls1 said:


> @bscool ... Waiting for your findings on 1003 LOL


(Edit probably)Not trying it. 901 is where Im staying.


----------



## bscool

truehighroller1 said:


> @shamino1978
> 
> What is this setting?
> 
> DII_bwsel
> 
> Seems to be a new setting introduced since the 1001 bios revision. I can't get any hits on the web for it's definition.
> 
> Also I lost being able to boot my stable settings of 4133mhz again with this bios.
> 
> Thank you Shamino.


Is the MC on 1003 still 18?


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> Is the MC on 1003 still 18?


Yep.


----------



## LionAlonso

truehighroller1 said:


> No I haven't. I'll try though, thank you. I'm trying lower main timings right now to see how low I can go.


Not even boot for the same previous stable settings?


----------



## truehighroller1

LionAlonso said:


> Not even boot for the same previous stable settings?


Nope. Won't even boot previous stable for that matter settings, at all.


----------



## stahlhart

.


----------



## joneffingvo

1003 completely bricked my z690 hero… once stable settings won’t even post

*edit: i'm a ****ing dumb ass... for VF points i did -0.600 instead of -0.0600 no wonder it didn't want to post... everything is working just fine!*


----------



## truehighroller1

joneffingvo said:


> 1003 completely bricked my z690 hero… once stable settings won’t even post


I'm guessing it has intels new memory code. Their newest memory code broke my previously stable settings in bios 1001 as well. I would love to see this part of the bios code and compare it to their previous code to see if I could spot any glaring issues caused.


----------



## bscool

Thats the thing about trying new bios, you cannot always just plug in your old settings.

Voltages or other setting may need to be adjusted. Obviously the case with 1001 and it sounds the same with 1003 if you are coming from something like bios 901 Strix d4 as an example you may need to set sa or vddq static(or raise or lower it) which I do not need to do on 901. The newer bios versions set it lower by default. This is just an example.


----------



## sblantipodi

shamino1978 said:


> not gonna waste time debating this philosophical question
> typical superstition is "bios" for anything that is not easily understood.


Ahaha, ok, I understood that I'm too noob to understand these things and I'm pretty sure that I can trust my mobo.
Please, don't think that I'm finding some culprits.

If something does not work as I want, it's really probable that the problem sits down between the desk and the monitor 😁

Never had so much problems with memory on my older systems, neither with 8 sticks on Hedt platform with x99 when ddr4 was very new.

You said that the ddr5 specification is a mess (or this is what I understood at least) and who are we to not trust you 

Thank you for all the help!


----------



## Toy47

TUF Z690 Wifi D4 here 12600kf. 
Tried the new 1003 and it can't do 4000 1t like I can on BIOS 0003 only 2t with all other timings the same and I had a play with the voltages but no dice, so I flashed back to 0003. 0003 has been the best BIOS for me, I hope its stability doesn't get lost in future updates.

GSkill 2x8 SR 16GB Trident Z 3200 C14 @ 4000 16-17-17-30 1t with some tweaks
Vdimm 1.45v SA 1.325v VDDQ 1.35v


----------



## joneffingvo

i'm a ****ing dumb ass... for VF points i did -0.600 instead of -0.0600 no wonder it didn't want to post...


----------



## pR1maL

Side note: In case anyone is curious about the current state of Asus RMA's, my 3090 died with the red led of death. They received my card on 1/20, and today (1/26) I just received a tracking number. Looks like a replacement card, since the serial number is different. Not too bad, I expected much longer. Looking over at my cold and dark system, I feel like an android with a part of me missing. Never realized how much I like prodding around and tweaking settings. What a geek.  Can't wait to put that card back in, and get back to tweaking the apex. This week and a half has been weird, doing other things and "stuff"....

Anyway, new serial number means new card, which means new limits to discover. Come on Silicon Lottery!


----------



## pR1maL

Toy47 said:


> TUF Z690 Wifi D4 here 12600kf.
> Tried the new 1003 and it can't do 4000 1t like I can on BIOS 0003 only 2t with all other timings the same and I had a play with the voltages but no dice, so I flashed back to 0003. 0003 has been the best BIOS for me, I hope its stability doesn't get lost in future updates.
> 
> GSkill 2x8 SR 16GB Trident Z 3200 C14 @ 4000 16-17-17-30 1t with some tweaks
> Vdimm 1.45v SA 1.325v VDDQ 1.35v


Would have been interesting to insert a usb drive, hit CTRL+F2 to save text files for each bios, and then compare the settings. Then again, the differences probably aren't observable in the settings. Still, curiosity.


----------



## truehighroller1

pR1maL said:


> Would have been interesting to insert a usb drive, hit CTRL+F2 to save text files for each bios, and then compare the settings. Then again, the differences probably aren't observable in the settings. Still, curiosity.



@shamino1978

What is this setting?

DII_bwsel

This is one of the new settings I noticed and played with it earlier trying to get 4133mhz back. If I go from 20 - 36 it does nothing to help booting. If I go over 36 the systems hangs at the yellow light.


----------



## sblantipodi

pR1maL said:


> Side note: In case anyone is curious about the current state of Asus RMA's, my 3090 died with the red led of death. They received my card on 1/20, and today (1/26) I just received a tracking number. Looks like a replacement card, since the serial number is different. Not too bad, I expected much longer. Looking over at my cold and dark system, I feel like an android with a part of me missing. Never realized how much I like prodding around and tweaking settings. What a geek.  Can't wait to put that card back in, and get back to tweaking the apex. This week and a half has been weird, doing other things and "stuff"....
> 
> Anyway, new serial number means new card, which means new limits to discover. Come on Silicon Lottery!


Nice to know that Asus customer service is not that bad in managing RMAs as most people says.


----------



## bastian

sblantipodi said:


> Nice to know that Asus customer service is not that bad in managing RMAs as most people says.


So long as they don't think you have done anything to modify or caused the damage yourself. Always take lots of photos before sending anything into RMA


----------



## akgis

Yey new bios  , iam even afraid to upgrade as I been stable on 0070 on hero at 6000 36 now


----------



## Anonimoussex

shamino1978 said:


> the boards that support sli finally with official sli key
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-1101.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-1101.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-GLACIAL-ASUS-1101.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (should be similar to what i posted just now)
> 
> 
> These ones that dont support sli:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-D4-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-WIFI-D4-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-WIFI-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-I-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-G-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-F-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-E-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-FORMULA-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ProArt-Z690-CREATOR-WIFI-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PRIME-Z690-A-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


Is the asus Prime Z690-P D4 being worked on still? it's been 2 months now since last update =/


----------



## geriatricpollywog

cstkl1 said:


> mora + winter hard at work eh bro.


And I forgot to turn up the ring clock again. I think 370+ is possible on DDR4.


----------



## affxct

Just for interest’s sake, is there a particular reason that the two recent batch of BIOSs haven’t made their way onto the global pages yet?


----------



## Tigra456

New bios flashed for my Strix F 
Everything on Auto + XMP1 Testmem5 Anta777 errors after minutes…

Old Bios 0811 Profile.


VDD 1.35
VDDQ 1.35
SA 1.25
TRX 1.35
MC VDD 1.25

the 6000 c36 gskills didn’t finish Testmem5 Anta777 for 1,45 hours.
Until the first hour no errors but after that 11 ones…

think I will go back to 0811…


----------



## affxct

Tigra456 said:


> New bios flashed for my Strix F
> Everything on Auto + XMP1 Testmem5 Anta777 errors after minutes…
> 
> Old Bios 0811 Profile.
> 
> 
> VDD 1.35
> VDDQ 1.35
> SA 1.25
> TRX 1.35
> MC VDD 1.25
> 
> the 6000 c36 gskills didn’t finish Testmem5 Anta777 for 1,45 hours.
> Until the first hour no errors but after that 11 ones…
> 
> think I will go back to 0811…


I’ll test 1003 tomorrow, but 0070 seemed to not change much from 0811. I think it’s a part-relevant thing but who knows. I might get a bunch of errors.


----------



## sblantipodi

Tigra456 said:


> New bios flashed for my Strix F
> Everything on Auto + XMP1 Testmem5 Anta777 errors after minutes…
> 
> Old Bios 0811 Profile.
> 
> 
> VDD 1.35
> VDDQ 1.35
> SA 1.25
> TRX 1.35
> MC VDD 1.25
> 
> the 6000 c36 gskills didn’t finish Testmem5 Anta777 for 1,45 hours.
> Until the first hour no errors but after that 11 ones…
> 
> think I will go back to 0811…


The problem is not in the bios.


----------



## affxct

I will say, I had some crashes in the Witcher 2 on 0070 and found that I had to increase SA by 25mV to restabilize the IMC. The memory achieved the same level of coverage it did on 0811. I think TM5 does a better job of stressing the IMC than HCI Pro. I find combining HCI Pro with Linpack to be an effective way of getting a daily'able D5 config going. SA seems to change after training different settings and booting into WIndows, as well as after changing BIOS revisions or even re-flashing the same BIOS. That and doing frequent CMOS clears. Once you have a stable OC change nothing. When you change something go back to the drawing board and restabilize. Had nearly no crashes in anything after properly affirming system stability.


----------



## sblantipodi

My thermal camera shows similar temp than what I can read from hwinfo.
Using 4 sticks, central sticks is 5°C hotter than the external. 

Lots of tests passed @ 5GHz C36 on four sticks. 

If I will remain stable for other days, I will do a "summer test" by turning all the fan off to get higher temp on ram😁

If I will remain stable I can rest.

My 4.8GHz target is achieved and surpassed.

I like the fact that my Extreme doesn't care about my CPU load and OC, his VRM are always cold without active cooling.


----------



## Shreve

I'm on the original launch bios for my Asus z690 strix e. 12900k and XMP 6000 36 seems perfectly stable. Only lingering issue are crashes in BFV and BF 2042 with my 3080 TI. All other apps, benchmarks work perfectly.

Considering updating to this new bios. Not sure if a bios upgrade would have any chance of helping stablity with that one set of games or if I'm asking for trouble with everything else working. Played a few hours of Doom Eternal, Far Cry 5, and SOTR after hours of 3DMark and OCCT stress testing. No problems except Battlefield


----------



## Tigra456

sblantipodi said:


> The problem is not in the bios.


Means ?


----------



## LionAlonso

Someone has flashed 1003 bios on tuf d4 or rog strix and its happy with it?
Edit: with tight oc


----------



## truehighroller1

Tigra456 said:


> Means ?



Trolls just ignore them as they'll get you banned for speaking up against their trolling. They're having issues this time of month apparently. I never did understand them getting off on trolling people but, the admins are doing it too so just ignore trust me.


----------



## Deceased

lowmotion said:


> SA Voltage is set to 1.250v by XMP and this is not working with every cpu. Most of them need 0.9v-1.0v for 6000mhz.


Hey, it seems that you are right for my case. On the newer bios I need to set my dram voltage to 1.36 to be stable but that causes mem errors due to high temp. I also noticed the SA voltage is set at 1.25v.

The older bios which I don’t have much issues with, I am able to run my xmp1 just fine with dram voltage 1.30. The SA voltage was around 0.8v for 0010 bios.

Can I seek advice for stability on newer bios pls?


----------



## sblantipodi

Tigra456 said:


> Means ?


Switch back to older bios that you consider stable, enter the same settings you entered on the new bios, test for 3 days and you'll see that you are not stable even with the old bios. 😁

There is a shamino post on that explains that most problems we have are not bios dependant and I can confirm.
Many times I thought that one bios is more stable than another is just because I was more lucky with a bios than the other during testing.


----------



## Tigra456

Hm interesting thing. With 0811 and the voltages from the Asus OC Guide for 4x Samsung 6000 that Bios was the only one that allowed me to pass memetest5 anta777… so the question is what is different in the newer bios versions that the same voltages not work ?
Im not a pro so testing the voltages from the guide was all I know…and that worked …with 0811…


----------



## sblantipodi

Tigra456 said:


> Hm interesting thing. With 0811 and the voltages from the Asus OC Guide for 4x Samsung 6000 that Bios was the only one that allowed me to pass memetest5 anta777… so the question is what is different in the newer bios versions that the same voltages not work ?
> Im not a pro so testing the voltages from the guide was all I know…and that worked …with 0811…


4 sticks 6GHz?


----------



## Tigra456

I have 2 sticks but the voltages for 4 samsung SR worked for me…but only with 0811…


----------



## cstkl1

btw to set rtl
set the max value u want offset 0


----------



## bscool

cstkl1 said:


> btw to set rtl
> set the max value u want offset 0


Is ddr5 only or ddr4 also? I thought setting rtl was a thing of the past. I haven't kept up with ddr5 so if this has always been an option I wasn't aware of it.


----------



## cstkl1

bscool said:


> Is ddr5 only or ddr4 also? I thought setting rtl was a thing of the past. I haven't kept up with ddr5 so if this has always been an option I wasn't aware of it.


ddr5 it helps on apex to increase stability
by setting both mc equal
example
c28 up to 6600
1T is 59|54|59|54
2T is 60|55|60|55

every tcl + 2 = rtl +2
6800/6933 + 2T c28 .. 61|56 seems better

required algo rtl enabled


----------



## bastian

Shreve said:


> I'm on the original launch bios for my Asus z690 strix e. 12900k and XMP 6000 36 seems perfectly stable. Only lingering issue are crashes in BFV and BF 2042 with my 3080 TI. All other apps, benchmarks work perfectly.


Newer Frostbite engines are a good test for stability. Double check your CPU, memory, GPU. The engine hits AVX loads hard so that's a start.


----------



## Silent Scone

affxct said:


> I will say, I had some crashes in the Witcher 2 on 0070 and found that I had to increase SA by 25mV to restabilize the IMC. The memory achieved the same level of coverage it did on 0811. I think TM5 does a better job of stressing the IMC than HCI Pro. I find combining HCI Pro with Linpack to be an effective way of getting a daily'able D5 config going. SA seems to change after training different settings and booting into WIndows, as well as after changing BIOS revisions or even re-flashing the same BIOS. That and doing frequent CMOS clears. Once you have a stable OC change nothing. When you change something go back to the drawing board and restabilize. Had nearly no crashes in anything after properly affirming system stability.


SA rules likely still scale with frequency as they always have. The voltage window on DDR5 ALD for this rail is far more narrow for majority of CPU, though.

HCI is good for catching errors at cache interaction but not so good at isolating the memory bus specifically, coverage is too slow. Karhu Ramtest has an FPU function that isn’t enabled by default which is a better way of simulating thermal output whilst still isolating the memory bus. Realbench for much else realword simulation works, too.


----------



## shamino1978

Toy47 said:


> TUF Z690 Wifi D4 here 12600kf.
> Tried the new 1003 and it can't do 4000 1t like I can on BIOS 0003 only 2t with all other timings the same and I had a play with the voltages but no dice, so I flashed back to 0003. 0003 has been the best BIOS for me, I hope its stability doesn't get lost in future updates.
> 
> GSkill 2x8 SR 16GB Trident Z 3200 C14 @ 4000 16-17-17-30 1t with some tweaks
> Vdimm 1.45v SA 1.325v VDDQ 1.35v


if u happen to be testing check if setting "training profile" to standard helps


----------



## sblantipodi

Tigra456 said:


> View attachment 2544950
> 
> I have 2 sticks but the voltages for 4 samsung SR worked for me…but only with 0811…


Ah ok I thought you are getting 6GHz on 4 sticks with that voltages. I need more than that voltage to get 5GHz on 4 sticks


----------



## Tigra456

sblantipodi said:


> 6GHz on 4 sticks with that voltage seems pretty unbelievable, but ok, if you say that you can do it it's ok. I need more than that voltage to get 5GHz, not 6 xD


no I wanted to say: this voltages for „4x Samsung“are stable for me with 2 sticks 6000…
How I said but only with 0811…


----------



## Wolferin

shamino1978 said:


> ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


Again, new Bios Version 1003 for Strix Z690-A have the Primary Display selection bug, in older Offizial Version 0901 everything is fine! What is Asus doing, hundres of Biosversions, sometimes it doesn't work.

I am talking about that:




__





We'll be back.






rog.asus.com


----------



## marco.is.not.80

cstkl1 said:


> ddr5 it helps on apex to increase stability
> by setting both mc equal
> example
> c28 up to 6600
> 1T is 59|54|59|54
> 2T is 60|55|60|55
> 
> every tcl + 2 = rtl +2
> 6800/6933 + 2T c28 .. 61|56 seems better
> 
> required algo rtl enabled


Hi cstkl1,

I've been looking for a guide or documentation on manually setting RTL/IO with DDR5 and was wondering if you could point me somewhere that gives a little more detail and/or expands on what you've written above?

Thanks!


----------



## Sayenah

dante`afk said:


> What’s it then since everyone has the issue?


We have an exact same build at this point, right down to the monitor. However I cannot tell which RAM you are using. Do you ind sharing the brand and model? 6400 at CL30 sounds absolutelt insane


----------



## cstkl1

marco.is.not.80 said:


> Hi cstkl1,
> 
> I've been looking for a guide or documentation on manually setting RTL/IO with DDR5 and was wondering if you could point me somewhere that gives a little more detail and/or expands on what you've written above?
> 
> Thanks!


1. it requires rtl algo enabled
2. it trains only when its full training or disable mrc fastboot

set max rtl = rtl u want
offset = 0

thats about it.

apex atleast for my cpu and es.. it was better when both mc are equal

on oc. high rtl can be more problematic to train . for example 6600c28 1T
59|54 is better than 60|55


----------



## Toy47

shamino1978 said:


> if u happen to be testing check if setting "training profile" to standard helps


Changed the setting you suggested and it is now working . I'm using the same voltages and timings as BIOS 0003 and it's stress test stable. I will have a little tweak to see if my OC can be changed for the better.
Thx shamino


----------



## Muad_Dib69

Tigra456 said:


> New bios flashed for my Strix F
> Everything on Auto + XMP1 Testmem5 Anta777 errors after minutes…
> 
> Old Bios 0811 Profile.
> 
> 
> VDD 1.35
> VDDQ 1.35
> SA 1.25
> TRX 1.35
> MC VDD 1.25
> 
> the 6000 c36 gskills didn’t finish Testmem5 Anta777 for 1,45 hours.
> Until the first hour no errors but after that 11 ones…
> 
> think I will go back to 0811…


Put your SA at 0.95V to try.


----------



## robertr1

Anonimoussex said:


> Is the asus Prime Z690-P D4 being worked on still? it's been 2 months now since last update =/


It doesn't seem like this board is going to get attention. I mentioned the areas the board needs improvement in and it wasn't acknowledged either. Long story, even on SR bdie, 1T is non existent, there's a pretty decent frequency wall around 4100 which I was able to break past with bclk to 4175+ What's interesting is the v/f stuff is still in the bios but artificially locked out but that's fine. It's the mem side that could use some help.


----------



## IronAge

And another one bites the dust on the Apex.

mates SP98 12900K goes Postcode 00 on Apex next day after daily usage in the evening hours before, LLC4 and Adaptive VC with 35mV negative offset.

now guess how pissed he is, since SP98 isn't that easy to get any more.


----------



## shamino1978

robertr1 said:


> It doesn't seem like this board is going to get attention. I mentioned the areas the board needs improvement in and it wasn't acknowledged either. Long story, even on SR bdie, 1T is non existent, there's a pretty decent frequency wall around 4100 which I was able to break past with bclk to 4175+ What's interesting is the v/f stuff is still in the bios but artificially locked out but that's fine. It's the mem side that could use some help.











PRIME-Z690-P-D4-ASUS-1011.CAP


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com




its difficult to keep up with the model names...


----------



## lowmotion

Is CR1 still working with bios 1003 from yesterday?


----------



## Falkentyne

IronAge said:


> And another one bites the dust on the Apex.
> 
> mates SP98 12900K goes Postcode 00 on Apex next day after daily usage in the evening hours before, LLC4 and Adaptive VC with 35mV negative offset.
> 
> now guess how pissed he is, since SP98 isn't that easy to get any more.


Was he changing voltage in windows with TurboVcore?


----------



## Sayenah

IronAge said:


> And another one bites the dust on the Apex.
> 
> mates SP98 12900K goes Postcode 00 on Apex next day after daily usage in the evening hours before, LLC4 and Adaptive VC with 35mV negative offset.
> 
> now guess how pissed he is, since SP98 isn't that easy to get any more.


I am curious, how did this happen? Was the board at fault?


----------



## robertr1

shamino1978 said:


> PRIME-Z690-P-D4-ASUS-1011.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> its difficult to keep up with the model names...


Thanks for the reply. It's seriously appreciated given your work load. Can you please provide the wifi version of that board also?

Any change notes or this just the one that removes avx512?


----------



## fortecosi

Sayenah said:


> I am curious, how did this happen? Was the board at fault?


We have no idea what he did with his cpu, 99.99% it is user fault.


----------



## IronAge

Falkentyne said:


> Was he changing voltage in windows with TurboVcore?


Nope, no TurboV Core being used at that time, when it still was operational. that was my first question towards him as well.



Sayenah said:


> I am curious, how did this happen? Was the board at fault?


he played a game in the evening hours and shut down the pc afterwards.

next day he powered up his system and it showed postcode 00, RIP SP98 12900K.


----------



## shamino1978

robertr1 said:


> Thanks for the reply. It's seriously appreciated given your work load. Can you please provide the wifi version of that board also?
> 
> Any change notes or this just the one that removes avx512?











PRIME-Z690-P-WIFI-D4-ASUS-1011.CAP


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com




i see a lot, many of which i'm not familiar with, nvme, dmi information, stuff like fanxpert blah blah, and some memory rules


----------



## sblantipodi

At the end it seems that today asus released an official 1003 BIOS for Extreme/Apex ecc
but yesterday Shamino linked to a 1101 BIOS.

this kind of versioning is incomprehensible to me, is there someone who can explain me it please?

is 1003 newer than 1101? what about 9901, 0070, 0090? who is newer than what?
what a mess.
does 1003 supports SLI as well as 1101?

I found a stable setting and I'm not interested in using betas anymore since testing requires days and I would like to enjoy the PC instead of using it as a test machine.

what's the latest stable?
is the current 1003 that I see on the official site based on 0070, 0090, on 1101? is there someone who can shed some light on this?

not having a real changelog doesn't let us know if there are some differences in params that may affect OC, so should we retest everything on every new releases?

thanks


----------



## X909

LionAlonso said:


> Someone has flashed 1003 bios on tuf d4 or rog strix and its happy with it?
> Edit: with tight oc


I had 0807, 0808, 1001 and now 1003 on TUF D4 WiFi. No difference in OC / memory. 4 DR B-Die still a wall at 3800 Mhz.
Only thing I noticed, since 1001 CPU-Z Bench Multi scores low. Starts at 98xx and moves up to 11500. I think I had >12k with 0808 @ 5200-5300 / 4000 / 4200


----------



## VGeorge

Hey everyone,

I tried BIOS 1003 on the Strix D4 and I had a weird issue and thought that I should share it:
I configured my usual safe settings (fixed 1.36 vcore, fixed 5.2 p-core clock, xmp ii, llc4, removed all limits and disabled all e-cores) and after it posted I entered the BIOS again to save all settings to a profile.
I then noticed that the CPU temp on the top right corner was in the high 80s and the CPU would downclock (even though it was set to a fixed clock) all the way down to 400 MHz.
I got kinda scared and I shut down the PC almost immediately and I pressed the clear CMOS button on the IO shield.
Did anyone else have that kind of issue with fixed core and fixed vcore OC on 1003?


----------



## affxct

Board: Z690 Strix-F
CPU: 5.0P/4.0E/4.0R 1.35V LLC5 (50mV of Vdroop under a 4GB Linpack load cycle and around 35mV of Vdroop in HCI Pro)

Can confirm:
6000 36-36-36-54-2T (tightened up secondaries and some tertiaries)
1.3 VDD/Q
1.1V VDD2 (IMC VDD)

0811: 1.15 VCCSA
0070: 1.175 VCCSA
1003: 1.175 VCCSA
Stable on all three BIOSs. No weird errors or any real difference I can pick up on. The only one thing I will mention is that the stock LLC if loaded from optimized defaults is now 7. You guys might want to take a look at that XD.

Seems like 1003 isn't much different from 0070. For interest's sake, this tune is so conservative that I've only bothered doing HCI Pro up to 500% for each BIOS test, and I regarded 25 runs at 4GB on IBT V2 as sufficient. This has been the only reliable daily stable config I've been able to use. For whatever reason, all my other profiles I had previously made destabilized. Likely linked to above 6000 on 6-layer daisy, but it almost feels like the IMC behavior changed after some or other event. I've tried quite hard to mess with my CPU, and I've tried to (reboot/cold boot) stabilize higher memory frequencies, but I'm pretty much done. There comes a point when the effort just isn't worth it anymore. I'm just thankful I can rely on this 6000 XMP at 1.3V to not try and fight with me like all my 6133-6400 configs; I managed to pick up a Z590 Tachyon review sample for $100 so I'm considering switching back to Rocket Lake or Comet Lake and ditching ADL. The CPU is just too heat-sensitive for the kind of cooling solutions I can afford/have time to assemble, and the OCing is so finicky that if you aren't at least a semi-competitive OC'er who doesn't prioritize daily'ability, it's just not really that fun to deal with. I'm sure many people love ADL, I think I just assumed incorrectly that it wouldn't be this finicky and difficult. I was kinda hoping Intel would launch it as a rock solid platform.

Aida64 results (for fun):

5000 36-36-36-54-2T1.1 VDD/Q82.7GB/s77.5GB/s76.8GB/s66.8ns5400 38-38-38-62-2T1.15 VDD/Q89.5GB/s83.2GB/s82.0GB/s63.1ns5800 42-42-42-48-2T1.1 VDD/Q93.7GB/s87.1GB/s85.3GB/s62.4ns5600 40-40-40-40-2T1.1 VDD/Q91.9GB/s84.7GB/s83.9GB/s62.9ns6200 36-36-36-54-2T1.3 VDD/Q101.8GB/s94.2GB/s93.8GB/s57.0ns6000 32-34-34-56-2T1.375 VDD/Q98.4GB/s90.4GB/s90.3GB/s57.2ns6133 34-34-34-56-2T (90K tREFI)1.35 VDD/Q100.4GB/s92.6GB/s92.1GB/s55.7ns6133 32-34-34-56-2T1.425 VDD/Q99.9 GB/s92.4GB/s92.0GB/s56.3ns6200 34-35-35-55-2T1.35 VDD/Q100.3GB/s93.2GB/s92.0GB/s56.3ns6000 36-36-36-54-2T1.3 VDD/Q98.3GB/s91.4GB/s90.2GB/s58.2ns

Some additions:

6200 32-35-35-55-2T1.45 VDD/Q97.3GB/s93.4GB/s92.7GB/s56.1ns6400 36-36-36-64-2T1.45 VDD/Q102.0GB/s95.8GB/s95.3GB/s55.6ns


----------



## affxct

Also, if it's not too much to ask, would one of you top-ranking ASUS geniuses be able to elaborate on what the two new VDD voltage settings do? I have no idea what they could do but I assume it's something to do with our 1.25 hard limit and I assume it can help stabilize OCs. I'm all ears and willing to learn.

Edit: I believe they're called 'Memory Controller Voltage Calculation Base' or something to that effect. There's another one as well. I'm sure they weren't there before.


----------



## cstkl1

sblantipodi said:


> At the end it seems that today asus released an official 1003 BIOS for Extreme/Apex ecc
> but yesterday Shamino linked to a 1101 BIOS.
> 
> this kind of versioning is incomprehensible to me, is there someone who can explain me it please?
> 
> is 1003 newer than 1101? what about 9901, 0070, 0090? who is newer than what?
> what a mess.
> does 1003 supports SLI as well as 1101?
> 
> I found a stable setting and I'm not interested in using betas anymore since testing requires days and I would like to enjoy the PC instead of using it as a test machine.
> 
> what's the latest stable?
> is the current 1003 that I see on the official site based on 0070, 0090, on 1101? is there someone who can shed some light on this?
> 
> not having a real changelog doesn't let us know if there are some differences in params that may affect OC, so should we retest everything on every new releases?
> 
> thanks


official | ucode updates | beta | test bios | fix bios

most ppl best use official only. update if you are having issues.


----------



## pat-Geek

shamino1978 said:


> the boards that support sli finally with official sli key
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-1101.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-1101.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-GLACIAL-ASUS-1101.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (should be similar to what i posted just now)
> 
> 
> These ones that dont support sli:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PRIME-Z690-P-WIFI-D4-ASUS-1011.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PRIME-Z690-P-D4-ASUS-1011.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-D4-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-WIFI-D4-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-WIFI-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-I-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-G-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-F-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-E-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-FORMULA-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ProArt-Z690-CREATOR-WIFI-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PRIME-Z690-A-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


Thank you Shamino for your effort. I'm disappointed that my Z690 HERO doesn't get the SLI support but I understand this comes from NVidia proprietary stuff, not from Asus. I don't plan to keep using NVidia moving forward. I will sell my RTX GPUs and move over to Intel ARC for my next GPU upgrades. From now on I will avoid any products related to NVidia's proprietary tech such as G-Sync Ultimate and Reflex monitors and of course GeForce cards. My next builds will remain full Intel and I hope you guys will also offer ROG branded Intel cards at some point in the future.


----------



## Nizzen

pat-Geek said:


> Thank you Shamino for your effort. I'm disappointed that my Z690 HERO doesn't get the SLI support but I understand this comes from NVidia proprietary stuff, not from Asus. I don't plan to keep using NVidia moving forward. I will sell my RTX GPUs and move over to Intel ARC for my next GPU upgrades. From now on I will avoid any products related to NVidia's proprietary tech such as G-Sync Ultimate and Reflex monitors and of course GeForce cards. My next builds will remain full Intel and I hope you guys will also offer ROG branded Intel cards at some point in the future.


Cool story bro 😜


----------



## LionAlonso

Nizzen said:


> Cool story bro 😜


He will have a Gpu that probably at his best will only be able to match Nvidia 70 Ti specs.


----------



## affxct

LionAlonso said:


> He will have a Gpu that probably at his best will only be able to match Nvidia 70 Ti specs.


I’ve owned all the high-end current gen cards and the 3070 Ti is more than good enough. It’s a great little care. Just a bit hampered by VRAM and you obviously can’t break any records with it. But otherwise it’s perfect. If they compete at a sensible price point then it’ll be a major W for them.

The only GPU that will truly wow you is a 6900 XT OC’d quite hard, and in certain titles where the frame scaling is just out of this world. Seeing games like The Witcher 2 at 300+, RE3 at 500, RE Village at 400-500, and COD Vanguard at 400 is just something else.


----------



## pat-Geek

LionAlonso said:


> He will have a Gpu that probably at his best will only be able to match Nvidia 70 Ti specs.


I will have every generation of ARC GPUs. Alchemist is just the beginning, just to get started with a new game ready driver ecosystem.


----------



## cstkl1

Nizzen said:


> Cool story bro 😜


so many stories this time around. lol


----------



## grifers

Perfect bios 1003 for tuf gaming D4, same performance than 0003 of the stock 12700k consuming less and putting less voltage. As for the overclock of the B-DIE memories is also perfect as the version of the bios 0003 that was the best, you just have to activate the option "training profile" to standard as shamino says to put the memories in 1T.

Thank you very much @shamino1978


----------



## sblantipodi

sblantipodi said:


> At the end it seems that today asus released an official 1003 BIOS for Extreme/Apex ecc
> but yesterday Shamino linked to a 1101 BIOS.
> 
> this kind of versioning is incomprehensible to me, is there someone who can explain me it please?
> 
> is 1003 newer than 1101? what about 9901, 0070, 0090? who is newer than what?
> what a mess.
> does 1003 supports SLI as well as 1101?
> 
> I found a stable setting and I'm not interested in using betas anymore since testing requires days and I would like to enjoy the PC instead of using it as a test machine.
> 
> what's the latest stable?
> is the current 1003 that I see on the official site based on 0070, 0090, on 1101? is there someone who can shed some light on this?
> 
> not having a real changelog doesn't let us know if there are some differences in params that may affect OC, so should we retest everything on every new releases?
> 
> thanks


I quote my self. now the things became even more strange.
they removed 1003 from the official site 





__





ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME | ROG Maximus | Gaming Motherboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG Global


AX5400 Dual Band WiFi 6 Gaming Router, WiFi 6 802.11ax, Mobile Game Mode, ASUS AURA RGB, Lifetime Free Internet Security, Mesh WiFi support, Gear Accelerator, Gaming Port, Adaptive QoS, Port Forwarding



rog.asus.com





jeez.


----------



## Muad_Dib69

sblantipodi said:


> I quote my self. now the things became even more strange.
> they removed 1003 from the official site
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME | ROG Maximus | Gaming Motherboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG Global
> 
> 
> AX5400 Dual Band WiFi 6 Gaming Router, WiFi 6 802.11ax, Mobile Game Mode, ASUS AURA RGB, Lifetime Free Internet Security, Mesh WiFi support, Gear Accelerator, Gaming Port, Adaptive QoS, Port Forwarding
> 
> 
> 
> rog.asus.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jeez.


It's still here....


----------



## sblantipodi

Muad_Dib69 said:


> It's still here....


I don't see it anymore, they should have load balancers that points to different servers that offer different pages.
I would not call it an incremental rollout if "now it's there" and now "it's not"


----------



## shrimpmaster

grifers said:


> Perfect bios 1003 for tuf gaming D4, same performance of the stock 12700k consuming less and putting less voltage. As for the overclock of the B-DIE memories is also perfect as the version of the bios 0003 that was the best, you just have to activate the option "training profile" to standard as shamino says to put the memories in 1T.
> 
> Thank you very much @shamino1978


I agree from my testing 1003 is the best bios since 0003.
1001 was also very good for me, had some things much better, but also introduced some strange stuff, this 1003 seems to fix that.

For me auto training profile works best. But I'm on single rank b die.
What is standard profile supposed to do? When I tried it I got rtl mismatch straight away.
Running 3900 15-15-15 1t


----------



## truehighroller1

@shamino1978 

I set training profile to standard profile and still no boot at 4133mhz. Did default settings before flash and after. No overclock on anything all sub timings untouched. Won't boot 15-16-16-36-2 or 16-16-16-36-2.


----------



## Cam1

Since 1003 i need to set vddq manualy to boot with ram over 3200Mhz Gear 1
1.35 VDDQ
Currently stable same as previously "3900MHz" 2T Gear1
TestMem5 error with 4000MHz


----------



## sblantipodi

Hi guys,
on the official Asus site, 1003 have this in the changelog:
03. Update Intel ME FW to 16.0.15.1620 V3

I updated to 1003 but my ME FW is 16.0.15.1545

why?


----------



## akgis

1003 Hero, optimized defaults, Rebar enabled and XMP1 Samsung [email protected] No other settings seems rock solid so far. Will start tinkering after work

By this time with same settings i would had probably a crash in 0811


----------



## dante`afk

Sayenah said:


> We have an exact same build at this point, right down to the monitor. However I cannot tell which RAM you are using. Do you ind sharing the brand and model? 6400 at CL30 sounds absolutelt insane


teamgroup 6400 c40


----------



## grifers

shrimpmaster said:


> I agree from my testing 1003 is the best bios since 0003.
> 1001 was also very good for me, had some things much better, but also introduced some strange stuff, this 1003 seems to fix that.
> 
> For me auto training profile works best. But I'm on single rank b die.
> What is standard profile supposed to do? When I tried it I got rtl mismatch straight away.
> Running 3900 15-15-15 1t


Im runing Gear 1 4000 Mhz 16-16-16-36 1T at 1.4v, SA to 1.35 and VDDQ voltaje 1.35 too (auto voltage). I also have the secondary timmings tweak, I have to try to play the tertiary ones.

I don't know what the standard profile will do but activating it makes my memories stable. I remember putting it in the 0003 and the RAM throwing errors 2 seconds after opening the testmem5, with the bios 0003 was better to put the automatic profile, in this 1003 I did not try to put it automatic from the beginning I put it standard and to see that it is stable I do not touch it hahah


----------



## shrimpmaster

grifers said:


> Im runing Gear 1 4000 Mhz 16-16-16-36 1T at 1.4v, SA to 1.35 and VDDQ voltaje 1.35 too (auto voltage). I also have the secondary timmings tweak, I have to try to play the tertiary ones.
> 
> I don't know what the standard profile will do but activating it makes my memories stable. I remember putting it in the 0003 and the RAM throwing errors 2 seconds after opening the testmem5, with the bios 0003 was better to put the automatic profile, in this 1003 I did not try to put it automatic from the beginning I put it standard and to see that it is stable I do not touch it hahah


Everytime I see 12700k/kf + z690 tuf doing 4000mhz+ g1 I get closer and closer to press buy button on another 12700k . Feels bad to be stuck at 3900mhz, also core not that great. I'm trying to hold off, maybe wait for 13700k. Not sure on how easy it would be to sell a 12700k here in Portugal and by how much.









3900 15-15-15 1.45v, 1.2v SA.


----------



## edkieferlp

sblantipodi said:


> View attachment 2545064
> 
> Hi guys,
> on the official Asus site, 1003 have this in the changelog:
> 03. Update Intel ME FW to 16.0.15.1620 V3
> 
> I updated to 1003 but my ME FW is 16.0.15.1545
> 
> why?


there a firmware updater for ME on the same page as bios, run it.
That should bring you up to date.

Also when you update bios, not all parts get updated, did you happen to run beta bios, maybe that is the reason but anyway that version is on the official site.


----------



## sneida

shrimpmaster said:


> Everytime I see 12700k/kf + z690 tuf doing 4000mhz+ g1 I get closer and closer to press buy button on another 12700k . Feels bad to be stuck at 3900mhz, also core not that great. I'm trying to hold off, maybe wait for 13700k. Not sure on how easy it would be to sell a 12700k here in Portugal and by how much.
> View attachment 2545094
> 
> 
> 3900 15-15-15 1.45v, 1.2v SA.


stuck at 3600


----------



## sblantipodi

edkieferlp said:


> there a firmware updater for ME on the same page as bios, run it.
> That should bring you up to date.
> 
> Also when you update bios, not all parts get updated, did you happen to run beta bios, maybe that is the reason but anyway that version is on the official site.


yes I used beta bios before, that should have screwed up things.
when I try to manually run the ME FW updater I get this error:










where can I find these drivers? Armory crate does not have any update neither windows 11.










it seems that I have them installed


----------



## shrimpmaster

sneida said:


> stuck at 3600


With good single/dual rank b-die? Can you go higher on gear2?


----------



## Cam1

I'm not sure if the Bios update actually updated the "Intel ME FW to 16.0.15.1620 V3"
Should i do something about that ?
Anywhere else i can read more accurate information ?


----------



## sblantipodi

Cam1 said:


> I'm not sure if the Bios update actually updated the "Intel ME FW to 16.0.15.1620 V3"
> Should i do something about that ?
> Anywhere else i can read more accurate information ?


it should update it, it's written in the changelog. 
have you ever installed a beta firmware before?


----------



## Tradition

@shamino1978 im still waiting on the latest bios for the ddr4 boards
i have a z690m-plus d4 can you provide me with the latest bios?

thank you


----------



## Cam1

sblantipodi said:


> it should update it, it's written in the changelog.
> have you ever installed a beta firmware before?


Yes i did try some beta bios
Oh well found the ME update tool on Asus website, i'll try that.
Thanks for your help !


----------



## grifers

shrimpmaster said:


> Everytime I see 12700k/kf + z690 tuf doing 4000mhz+ g1 I get closer and closer to press buy button on another 12700k . Feels bad to be stuck at 3900mhz, also core not that great. I'm trying to hold off, maybe wait for 13700k. Not sure on how easy it would be to sell a 12700k here in Portugal and by how much.
> 
> 
> 3900 15-15-15 1.45v, 1.2v SA.


It is probably the CPU's memory controller that is no longer able to cope. My configuration is like this:



I had the VDDQ voltage on AUTO and I had put the 1.2 board hahaha, and the best of all is that with that my configuration was stable. To cure myself in health and it seemed to me very little, I manually put 1.3, I remember that the BIOS 0003 in Auto put it to me to 1.35, this 1003 puts it to 1.2. With this bios 1003 the 4700 mhz in all the cores does it (stock) with 1.24 of voltage, with the bios 0003 with 1.28....... 20 watts less of consumption when passing a cinebench, the truth a brilliant work the bios 1003 on the part of ASUS.

Moving on, my RAM modules are 2 Hyperx Predator which are stock at 3600 CL 17. Finally I was able to tweak the tertiary timmings as you can see in the screenshot.


----------



## superino091

post error sorry


----------



## sneida

shrimpmaster said:


> With good single/dual rank b-die? Can you go higher on gear2?


2x16gb dual rank bdie xmp 4000cl16 flat. higher than 3600 only works with gear 2, even with relaxed timings.


----------



## superino091

sblantipodi said:


> yes I used beta bios before, that should have screwed up things.
> when I try to manually run the ME FW updater I get this error:
> 
> View attachment 2545099
> 
> 
> where can I find these drivers? Armory crate does not have any update neither windows 11.
> 
> View attachment 2545114
> 
> 
> it seems that I have them installed


ciao installa i driver dal sito asus io cosi ho risolto.
ciao per caso usi discord? mi servirebbe un consiglio, sto utilizzando extreme e gskill 6000 cl 36 samsung ma non c'è modo di farla funzionare a 6000, provato di tutto ma nulla, a volte funziona passa tutti i test senza errori ma dopo il riavvio di nuovo errori


----------



## tiboor

hello, i have asus z690 d4 mobo. with 2x8gb 4266mhz gskill rams. it is listed on the compatibily sheet. can i add another 2x8gb? will it have issues? thanks guys.


----------



## Agent-A01

tiboor said:


> hello, i have asus z690 d4 mobo. with 2x8gb 4266mhz gskill rams. it is listed on the compatibily sheet. can i add another 2x8gb? will it have issues? thanks guys.


Will work at stock speeds fine. But you are not running XMP with 4x8GB. You'll have to lower your clocks/increase timings.


----------



## Toy47

For those wondering where to get the latest drivers, even newer than those on the Asus website on many cases. Take a look here at station drivers. To navigate easier go through the bios section and there will be a page for your specific motherboard with all the drivers you need. 





Station-Drivers - News


News




www.station-drivers.com


----------



## sblantipodi

superino091 said:


> ciao installa i driver dal sito asus io cosi ho risolto.
> ciao per caso usi discord? mi servirebbe un consiglio, sto utilizzando extreme e gskill 6000 cl 36 samsung ma non c'è modo di farla funzionare a 6000, provato di tutto ma nulla, a volte funziona passa tutti i test senza errori ma dopo il riavvio di nuovo errori


Hi, I answer in English, just because it's an english forum... 
I have installed the Asus drivers but it seems that Windows continue to use the MEI drivers from Microsoft.

if you want to achieve 6GHz and you are not stable currently you have few options.
work on timings, higher voltages, check temperatures.

You can even loose timings or set 5.8 or 5.6GHz and live calm, there is really no difference between 5.6GHz and 6GHz in real world.


----------



## superino091

sblantipodi said:


> Hi, I answer in English, just because it's an english forum...
> I have installed the Asus drivers but it seems that Windows continue to use the MEI drivers from Microsoft.
> 
> if you want to achieve 6GHz and you are not stable currently you have few options.
> work on timings, higher voltages, check temperatures.
> 
> You can even loose timings or set 5.8 or 5.6GHz and live calm, there is really no difference between 5.6GHz and 6GHz in real world.


screwed up with the translator ... sorry,
I was thinking about changing extreme with the apex what do you think?
I had your same preble, but it was enough for me to download the version of the site and then I was able.


----------



## sblantipodi

Cam1 said:


> Yes i did try some beta bios
> Oh well found the ME update tool on Asus website, i'll try that.
> Thanks for you help !


in the end the update tool worked for me after manually reinstalling the MEI driver from the Asus website.

these things are so rushed. bios not updating things like MEI, Armory Crate that manages only "some drivers" but not all drivers... what a mess.

If the bios update does not updated the Intel ME FW, do you think that it has updated the other firmware like the 

USB PD FW to 1.0F. ,
Thunderbolt FW
Update Intel microcode.
???

hope that Asus will take software more seriously.

crate is a mess, bios upgrade process the same, I expect a bit more in quality assurance from a company like Asus.
hope that they will fix all this issues... I feel that all is rushed without a serious process of QA


----------



## sneida

for me (tuf d4 + 12700k) 1003 unfortunately is by far the worst bios I tested so far.

xmp won't even boot (4000cl16).
3600cl14 wont boot (sa/vdq auto).
previously stable 3600cl14 boots with manual sa/vdq 1.35 but throws errors in tm5 anta777 instantly.

tried all training profile values (auto, standard, asus). back to 0807.


----------



## LionAlonso

sneida said:


> for me (tuf d4 + 12700k) 1003 unfortunately is by far the worst bios I tested so far.
> 
> xmp won't even boot (4000cl16).
> 3600cl14 wont boot (sa/vdq auto).
> previously stable 3600cl14 boots with manual sa/vdq 1.35 but throws errors in tm5 anta777 instantly.
> 
> tried all training profile values (auto, standard, asus). back to 0807.


Same for me.
And for stability i have to crank up voltages too much.
Returned to 0807


----------



## Exilon

Strix-A DDR4 1003 worked fine over here with Micron Rev.E at 4000CL15
Exact same settings as 0807


----------



## truehighroller1

Exilon said:


> Strix-A DDR4 1003 worked fine over here with Micron Rev.E at 4000CL15
> Exact same settings as 0807


They're breaking some memory setups and fixing some others.


----------



## shamino1978

Tradition said:


> @shamino1978 im still waiting on the latest bios for the ddr4 boards
> i have a z690m-plus d4 can you provide me with the latest bios?
> 
> thank you











PRIME-Z690M-PLUS-D4-ASUS-1011.CAP


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com


----------



## bastian

1003 running great on my Extreme board. Highest CPU-Z single core result yet.


----------



## cstkl1

truehighroller1 said:


> They're breaking some memory setups and fixing some others.


thats not it. asus supports intel latest ucodes
this however can break previous ram/chipset tuning. so have to retune. because adl has so many options it takes longer.

intel updates new ucodes for a reason

every board has diff tuning. takes time.

dont update if u are fine. ocers are updating because of greed thinking theres more ram oc tweaks and another batch of auto oc for more preformance. .


----------



## sblantipodi

affxct said:


> Board: Z690 Strix-F
> CPU: 5.0P/4.0E/4.0R 1.35V LLC5 (50mV of Vdroop under a 4GB Linpack load cycle and around 35mV of Vdroop in HCI Pro)
> 
> Can confirm:
> 6000 36-36-36-54-2T (tightened up secondaries and some tertiaries)
> 1.3 VDD/Q
> 1.1V VDD2 (IMC VDD)
> 
> 0811: 1.15 VCCSA
> 0070: 1.175 VCCSA
> 1003: 1.175 VCCSA
> Stable on all three BIOSs. No weird errors or any real difference I can pick up on. The only one thing I will mention is that the stock LLC if loaded from optimized defaults is now 7. You guys might want to take a look at that XD.
> 
> Seems like 1003 isn't much different from 0070. For interest's sake, this tune is so conservative that I've only bothered doing HCI Pro up to 500% for each BIOS test, and I regarded 25 runs at 4GB on IBT V2 as sufficient. This has been the only reliable daily stable config I've been able to use. For whatever reason, all my other profiles I had previously made destabilized. Likely linked to above 6000 on 6-layer daisy, but it almost feels like the IMC behavior changed after some or other event. I've tried quite hard to mess with my CPU, and I've tried to (reboot/cold boot) stabilize higher memory frequencies, but I'm pretty much done. There comes a point when the effort just isn't worth it anymore. I'm just thankful I can rely on this 6000 XMP at 1.3V to not try and fight with me like all my 6133-6400 configs; I managed to pick up a Z590 Tachyon review sample for $100 so I'm considering switching back to Rocket Lake or Comet Lake and ditching ADL. The CPU is just too heat-sensitive for the kind of cooling solutions I can afford/have time to assemble, and the OCing is so finicky that if you aren't at least a semi-competitive OC'er who doesn't prioritize daily'ability, it's just not really that fun to deal with. I'm sure many people love ADL, I think I just assumed incorrectly that it wouldn't be this finicky and difficult. I was kinda hoping Intel would launch it as a rock solid platform.
> 
> Aida64 results (for fun):
> 
> 5000 36-36-36-54-2T1.1 VDD/Q82.7GB/s77.5GB/s76.8GB/s66.8ns5400 38-38-38-62-2T1.15 VDD/Q89.5GB/s83.2GB/s82.0GB/s63.1ns5800 42-42-42-48-2T1.1 VDD/Q93.7GB/s87.1GB/s85.3GB/s62.4ns5600 40-40-40-40-2T1.1 VDD/Q91.9GB/s84.7GB/s83.9GB/s62.9ns6200 36-36-36-54-2T1.3 VDD/Q101.8GB/s94.2GB/s93.8GB/s57.0ns6000 32-34-34-56-2T1.375 VDD/Q98.4GB/s90.4GB/s90.3GB/s57.2ns6133 34-34-34-56-2T1.35 VDD/Q100.4GB/s92.6GB/s92.1GB/s55.7ns (*90K tREFI)6133 32-34-34-56-2T1.425 VDD/Q99.9 GB/s92.4GB/s92.0GB/s56.3ns6200 34-35-35-55-2T1.35 VDD/Q100.3GB/s93.2GB/s92.0GB/s56.3ns6000 36-36-36-54-2T1.3 VDD/Q98.3GB/s91.4GB/s90.2GB/s58.2ns


Can you post some timings?
Running 5000MHz C36/36/36/76 but my latency is so terrible compared to yours 😁 I have latency of 79ns


----------



## Silent Scone

cstkl1 said:


> thats not it. asus supports intel latest ucodes
> this however can break previous ram/chipset tuning. so have to retune. because adl has so many options it takes longer.
> 
> intel updates new ucodes for a reason
> 
> every board has diff tuning. takes time.
> 
> dont update if u are fine. ocers are updating because of greed thinking theres more ram oc tweaks and another batch of auto oc for more preformance. .



This.

Or accepting things for what they are. Having up-to-date ucode is important to some users. Overclocking can sometimes be impeded, I think that's what they call not being able to have your cake and eat it


----------



## Csavez™

My first stable test.
Teamgroup 6400.


----------



## Silent Scone

Csavez™ said:


> My first stable test.
> Teamgroup 6400.


One of the few times I've seen a user make use of the favourites menu, so instant kudos for that


----------



## robertr1

shamino1978 said:


> PRIME-Z690-P-WIFI-D4-ASUS-1011.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i see a lot, many of which i'm not familiar with, nvme, dmi information, stuff like fanxpert blah blah, and some memory rules


Instead of just asking and complaining, wanted to share testing feedback for a change 

Good news first:

1T finally works past 4000mhz. Had to use the "standard profile" option and was able to pass YC 2.5b with it which is a first
BLCK now stays at 100 and doesn't fluctuate down

Bad news:

The max oc with the same settings is lower. With the older bios, I was fine at 108 bclk but now I can only do 107. I tried in increments of .2 but nothing. That's about a 1 second delta is YC 2.5b and 50-60points in GB3 SC. This is a daily profile that's been running for a while btw not a bench special
Cstates are still not working right. Running balanced power plan in win11 is unstable. Need to keep the PC in "high" performance. I have one theory and that might be PPD 0 being set causing it. In the past, I've had stability issues running balanced power plan and PPD 0 so I'll test that next
Still hitting a frequency wall 4133 that needs bclk to move past. If it was an IMC issue it wouldn't work but using bclk, can almost get to 4175 on old bios (not new)

Overall, the bios doesn't add anything new but doesn't break much either. Here's the stable settings on the previous bios that I was trying to replicate without success.


----------



## marco.is.not.80

cstkl1 said:


> 1. it requires rtl algo enabled
> 2. it trains only when its full training or disable mrc fastboot


Ah, ok, I see that it won't be possible for me since I can't post at my current speed of 6000 / 1T without disabling full mrc training a long with enabling fastboot. :-( But thank you so much for the simple explanation!


----------



## DungeonKeeper1

Hi all 

I have:

12900k
ASUS z690 Formula
2x 16GB DDR5 6000 Gskill CL36

Bios is 0811.

I'm not a overclocker.
System runs under Standard settings exept the RAM. Runs at 6000 @ 1,32V VDD and 1,32V VDDQ.

Is the new Bios 1003 stable?
Can i upgrade?

Thanks a lot


----------



## asdkj1740

DungeonKeeper1 said:


> Hi all
> 
> I have:
> 
> 12900k
> ASUS z690 Formula
> 2x 16GB DDR5 6000 Gskill CL36
> 
> Bios is 0811.
> 
> I'm not a overclocker.
> System runs under Standard settings exept the RAM. Runs at 6000 @ 1,32V VDD and 1,32V VDDQ.
> 
> Is the new Bios 1003 stable?
> Can i upgrade?
> 
> Thanks a lot


if they are running fine you need not upgrade the bios.


----------



## DungeonKeeper1

Thank you a lot. 
I'll stay at 0811.


----------



## edkieferlp

robertr1 said:


> Instead of just asking and complaining, wanted to share testing feedback for a change
> 
> Good news first:
> 
> 1T finally works past 4000mhz. Had to use the "standard profile" option and was able to pass YC 2.5b with it which is a first
> BLCK now stays at 100 and doesn't fluctuate down
> 
> Bad news:
> 
> The max oc with the same settings is lower. With the older bios, I was fine at 108 bclk but now I can only do 107. I tried in increments of .2 but nothing. That's about a 1 second delta is YC 2.5b and 50-60points in GB3 SC. This is a daily profile that's been running for a while btw not a bench special
> Cstates are still not working right. Running balanced power plan in win11 is unstable. Need to keep the PC in "high" performance. I have one theory and that might be PPD 0 being set causing it. In the past, I've had stability issues running balanced power plan and PPD 0 so I'll test that next
> Still hitting a frequency wall 4133 that needs bclk to move past. If it was an IMC issue it wouldn't work but using bclk, can almost get to 4175 on old bios (not new)
> 
> Overall, the bios doesn't add anything new but doesn't break much either. Here's the stable settings on the previous bios that I was trying to replicate without success.


What does the PPD setting do?
I had to hunt it down in bios


----------



## sblantipodi

robertr1 said:


> Instead of just asking and complaining, wanted to share testing feedback for a change
> 
> Good news first:
> 
> 1T finally works past 4000mhz. Had to use the "standard profile" option and was able to pass YC 2.5b with it which is a first
> BLCK now stays at 100 and doesn't fluctuate down
> 
> Bad news:
> 
> The max oc with the same settings is lower. With the older bios, I was fine at 108 bclk but now I can only do 107. I tried in increments of .2 but nothing. That's about a 1 second delta is YC 2.5b and 50-60points in GB3 SC. This is a daily profile that's been running for a while btw not a bench special
> Cstates are still not working right. Running balanced power plan in win11 is unstable. Need to keep the PC in "high" performance. I have one theory and that might be PPD 0 being set causing it. In the past, I've had stability issues running balanced power plan and PPD 0 so I'll test that next
> Still hitting a frequency wall 4133 that needs bclk to move past. If it was an IMC issue it wouldn't work but using bclk, can almost get to 4175 on old bios (not new)
> 
> Overall, the bios doesn't add anything new but doesn't break much either. Here's the stable settings on the previous bios that I was trying to replicate without success.


Cstates creates instabilities even on my z690 extreme. I disabled them, CPUs frequency scaling works well as much as if cstates is enabled, who cares if Ecores are never parked, in any case it's so rare to see an Ecore parked.


----------



## affxct

sblantipodi said:


> Can you post some timings?
> Running 5000MHz C36/36/36/76 but my latency is so terrible compared to yours 😁 I have latency of 79ns


For 5000 36-36-36-54-2T on S16B, I would've used:
tRRDL 6
tRRDS 4
tRFC 300-360 (whichever trains and doesn't begin to cause data loss)
tREFI 45000-65536 depending on temperature of your RAM (you can do higher the faster the clock speed, but 2500MHz on D5 is kinda low)
tWR 9-13 (my board adds three, so 12/16, you'll have to see what your own board does to it)
tRTP 6-8
tFAW 16
tCKE 4
tCWL Auto (trains to tCL-2)
tXP 4
tPPD 0


----------



## Csavez™

6400 cl30



















The cl26 1T also knew, but it was not stable.


----------



## robertr1

edkieferlp said:


> What does the PPD setting do?
> I had to hunt it down in bios


It’s a power down/power savings setting for ram. With it being at 0, your ram never goes into a lower power state. It’s loosely like cstates for cpu.


----------



## edkieferlp

robertr1 said:


> It’s a power down/power savings setting for ram. With it being at 0, your ram never goes into a lower power state. It’s loosely like cstates for cpu.


Ok, thanks. I found tPPD =4 for me.
I'll leave it but good to know what it does.


----------



## cstkl1

sblantipodi said:


> Cstates creates instabilities even on my z690 extreme. I disabled them, CPUs frequency scaling works well as much as if cstates is enabled, who cares if Ecores are never parked, in any case it's so rare to see an Ecore parked.


on stock? 

cstate work. it is required for octvb which is recommended for adl since tvb voltage optimization works very well

also u can use legacy game scroll lock to park Ecores. it works very well


----------



## Dewmgaze

Trying to understand this drastically different voltage applied vs voltage set, and better understand how TVB is implemented.

My understanding is, because I've selected Sync all cores, that TVB is disabled. I've confirmed MSR 150 bit 63 is 0, which would indeed indicate TVB is disabled. Because TVB is disabled, I would assume that TVB Voltage Optimizations should have no impact, as there are no TVB voltage changes to optimize. This doesn't seem to be the case, because disabling TVBvopt is giving me a 100mv increase. Despite my assumption that this setting should have no impact while TVB is disabled, it also feels like this setting is working in reverse. My understanding is TVB should reduce voltage by 1.5mv per 1c lower than 100c. With my adaptive voltage set to 1.4, that should be the #11 v/f point at 100c, and if TVB is indeed turned on (shouldn't be) then at 36c my TVB should be lowing my voltage, not increasing it.

What am I missing?


----------



## Self Tapper

1003 on my Maximus Z690 Hero has turned a completely stable machine into four BSODs in the last twelve hours, all while the machine was idling. Altho the slight random factor is that the KB5008353 Cumulative Update installed immediately after the UEFI update, so can't definitively rule that out as the cause. Hmmmm... I guess it's easier to flash back to 0811 than to uninstall the OS update so that's the first thing to evaluate.


----------



## Tradition

So this is all i can get out of my 12700k anything above 3920 it wont boot or it needs 1.5v on SA to be somewhat stable
and CR1 wont boot beyond 3200mhz any ideas?


----------



## Cam1

How so many 12600K are doing 4000+ Gear 1 but no 12700K can get pass 4000 stable ?


----------



## bastian

@shamino1978 I'm not sure if this can be improved, but I like the new feature for setting a upper limit for CPU Package Temp, however, it seems to not always work as I've seen setting it to say 83c degrees that my monitor sees spikes to 87c.


----------



## Csavez™

6400 cl32
I relaxed a bit on trfc so I could go below 1.5. The settings are a bit raw, this is my 3rd day with it, I have hundreds of hours with micron samsung. 
A few asked for the cmo files, I uploaded them to wetransfer. (cl28-36)
Note, however, that each motherboard has a unique mc voltage, I had a micron / samsung / hynix, but the mc didn't change, in all cases 1.31xx, for a colleague also apex, for him 1.33xx.


----------



## RobertoSampaio

Csavez™ said:


> 6400 cl32
> I relaxed a bit on trfc so I could go below 1.5. The settings are a bit raw, this is my 3rd day with it, I have hundreds of hours with micron samsung.
> A few asked for the cmo files, I uploaded them to wetransfer. (cl28-36)
> Note, however, that each motherboard has a unique mc voltage, I had a micron / samsung / hynix, but the mc didn't change, in all cases 1.31xx, for a colleague also apex, for him 1.33xx.
> View attachment 2545325
> View attachment 2545326


Should I run TM5 anta777 extreme or high? What do you think?


----------



## criznit

Why are your voltages so high for CL32? 


Csavez™ said:


> 6400 cl32
> I relaxed a bit on trfc so I could go below 1.5. The settings are a bit raw, this is my 3rd day with it, I have hundreds of hours with micron samsung.
> A few asked for the cmo files, I uploaded them to wetransfer. (cl28-36)
> Note, however, that each motherboard has a unique mc voltage, I had a micron / samsung / hynix, but the mc didn't change, in all cases 1.31xx, for a colleague also apex, for him 1.33xx.
> View attachment 2545325
> View attachment 2545326


----------



## joneffingvo

*EDIT Definetely not stable at xmp 1 or xmp 2 as it started corrupting my data especially in 3dmark*

Just received the new Gskill 6400 C32, running XMP 1 on Z690 Hero and so far so good!


----------



## raad11

Dewmgaze said:


> Trying to understand this drastically different voltage applied vs voltage set, and better understand how TVB is implemented.
> 
> My understanding is, because I've selected Sync all cores, that TVB is disabled. I've confirmed MSR 150 bit 63 is 0, which would indeed indicate TVB is disabled. Because TVB is disabled, I would assume that TVB Voltage Optimizations should have no impact, as there are no TVB voltage changes to optimize. This doesn't seem to be the case, because disabling TVBvopt is giving me a 100mv increase. Despite my assumption that this setting should have no impact while TVB is disabled, it also feels like this setting is working in reverse. My understanding is TVB should reduce voltage by 1.5mv per 1c lower than 100c. With my adaptive voltage set to 1.4, that should be the #11 v/f point at 100c, and if TVB is indeed turned on (shouldn't be) then at 36c my TVB should be lowing my voltage, not increasing it.
> 
> What am I missing?
> 
> View attachment 2545310
> View attachment 2545311


I don't know but this is a known thing. I tuned the systems which were more difficult (low SP scores) with Voltage Optimizations disabled from the beginning for theoretically more stability/consistency because there's less variables affecting the overclock. Otherwise I leave it on and proceed from there.


Tradition said:


> So this is all i can get out of my 12700k anything above 3920 it wont boot or it needs 1.5v on SA to be somewhat stable
> and CR1 wont boot beyond 3200mhz any ideas?
> 
> 
> View attachment 2545316


Your timings are very tight. I'm running memory at 3900 14-15-15-28-2T Gear 1 with similar timings on the same board but at 1.52V in order to keep temperatures low. Though not quite as tight timings. I would max voltage to 1.6v DRAM, 1.45v/1.45v for SA/VDDQ minimum (up to 1.48-1.49v each) and see if it can stabilize, otherwise loosen some timings.

I would not expect more than 4000CL14 in Gear 1 since it is "rng" above that. I have a decent SP 12900K (on ROG Strix D4) that can't do more than 4000CL14 2xDR or 4100CL15 2xSR in Gear 1.

It's possible 12600K may have good IMC, but I have one on my Z690M-Plus D4 and it doesn't appear to be anything special.


----------



## raad11

joneffingvo said:


> Just received the new Gskill 6400 C32, running XMP 1 on Z690 Hero and so far so good!
> 
> View attachment 2545336


Nice, post some Aida benchmarks!


----------



## Csavez™

RobertoSampaio said:


> Should I run TM5 anta777 extreme or high? What do you think?


I use high and cbr23, if you go through this, no problem during games.


----------



## Csavez™

criznit said:


> Why are your voltages so high for CL32?


As I wrote, my 3rd day is in this memory, but if you have a better setting for 6400 cl32, don't tard yourself!
Not only do the main timings count, "sub timing" adds a lot to the tension!
Obviously you can have a 6400 cl32 with 1.4 volts, but there is a level ...


----------



## joneffingvo

raad11 said:


> Nice, post some Aida benchmarks!


Here you go... but i'm on trial version LOL


----------



## Tradition

joneffingvo said:


> Here you go... but i'm on trial version LOL
> 
> View attachment 2545343


are those hynix or samsung ics?


----------



## criznit

Here are my settings. I currently use 1.375 for memory voltage. This is my daily setup with the 6000 CL36 memory from g.skill.


----------



## joneffingvo

Tradition said:


> are those hynix or samsung ics?


Hynix!


----------



## Csavez™

criznit said:


> View attachment 2545345
> 
> 
> Here are my settings. I currently use 1.375 for memory voltage. This is my daily setup with the 6000 CL36 memory from g.skill.


Make an aida bench! thx
Let me ask you what tension you are talking about because there are a good couple. The picture I see is 1,425.


----------



## criznit

Csavez™ said:


> Make an aida bench! thx
> Let me ask you what tension you are talking about because there are a good couple. The picture I see is 1,425.



Here ya go!











In addition, I have VDDQ/VDD @ 1.435 but the memory voltage is at 1.375


----------



## Csavez™

_In addition, I have VDDQ/VDD @ 1.435 but the memory voltage is at 1.375_

Did you ask this:
_"Why are your voltages so high for CL32?"_
Mine 1.3185








and here is a samsung, (gskill 6000cl36)


----------



## ksm1

I've been using Version 0811 since it released with zero issues, I updated to Version 1003 yesterday and my games (Hell Let Loose & God of War) have been crashing consistently a few minutes into gameplay, low demanding games such as Cuphead have been fine. I even restarted my computer and received a BSOD.

I have since downgraded back to 0811 and all issues have stopped.

My Specs:
Prime Z690-A
i7 12700k
RTX 3080Ti
DDR5 RAM
Windows 11 latest updates

Just in case anyone else runs into the same issues as me.


----------



## criznit

Oh, you have your cpu overclocked as well thus the high reading on the VDDQ I'm assuming? I have mine at stock for now until I decide on what to do with this system.

Edit - Nvm, I wasn't feeling well yesterday so I misread the picture.


----------



## Tigra456

Muad_Dib69 said:


> Put your SA at 0.95V to try.


Didn’t helped…


----------



## akgis

joneffingvo said:


> Here you go... but i'm on trial version LOL


If you have maximus board(not sure for strix) you have AIDA 64 extreme licence included, install the old version that comes with the USB pen or Armoury crate and license will apply then install the most up to date from Aida64 site.


----------



## joneffingvo

Hmm something myself and @yahfz picked up was my system is having a really hard time any time "SPD" needs to be read (CPU-Z taking forever to load, and or HWinfo getting stuck at "analyzing memory configuration") any idea what could be causing this? It's literally a hit or miss, sometimes it loads perfectly sometimes not so much


----------



## bscool

z690 Strix d4 bios 1003 testing.

Didn't run long any term memtest but from intial testing I don't see any big differences other than vddq needs to be raised from 901.

Did not set a static vcore(which I usually do) just left vcore and llc on auto for intial testing.

52/42 cache auto c states enabled so cache can clock up to 47.


----------



## Silent Scone

joneffingvo said:


> Hmm something myself and @yahfz picked up was my system is having a really hard time any time "SPD" needs to be read (CPU-Z taking forever to load, and or HWinfo getting stuck at "analyzing memory configuration") any idea what could be causing this? It's literally a hit or miss, sometimes it loads perfectly sometimes not so much


Could be a few things. What board?

How the memory is configured, instability, or possibly another app polling the system. CPUZ may still need an update, X99 suffered from similar issues when querying SPD for awhile after launch. 

The fact you’re getting it in both monitoring apps makes it sound like a system configuration issue, though.


----------



## Mad1137

Guys. Someone already tested new official bios ?? 1003 ? Should I update ?


----------



## mikasalo500

Hi guys
i have the z690 extreme and just some memory here. Samsung 6000c36, fury 6000c40 and now the Teamgroup 6400c40. No matter what I do I can't get over 5600 mhz. I tried everything but no chance. Therefore, I have now achieved good timings with 5600. Do you have any tips what else I could try? Or is my extreme just bad?


----------



## Silent Scone

mikasalo500 said:


> Hi guys
> i have the z690 extreme and just some memory here. Samsung 6000c36, fury 6000c40 and now the Teamgroup 6400c40. No matter what I do I can't get over 5600 mhz. I tried everything but no chance. Therefore, I have now achieved good timings with 5600. Do you have any tips what else I could try? Or is my extreme just bad?
> 
> View attachment 2545446
> 
> View attachment 2545447


What’s the behaviour when selecting XMP profiles or setting higher memory ratios manually?

Instability?
No POST? If so what Qcode


----------



## cstkl1

mikasalo500 said:


> Hi guys
> i have the z690 extreme and just some memory here. Samsung 6000c36, fury 6000c40 and now the Teamgroup 6400c40. No matter what I do I can't get over 5600 mhz. I tried everything but no chance. Therefore, I have now achieved good timings with 5600. Do you have any tips what else I could try? Or is my extreme just bad?
> 
> View attachment 2545446
> 
> View attachment 2545447


cpu imc?


----------



## affxct

http://imgur.com/a/rVIxhsA


Finally got 6400 stable on my Strix-F. Really freakin' impressed with this board's topology. I paid $350 and the VRM is also insane for the price. Really good 'budget' board IMO.

Initially, I configured it with slightly tighter tRAS and tRC, slightly lower tRTP, and at 1.4V. I noticed some memory training failures so I increased VCCSA to 1.3 and training seemed to work more consistently. It was causing errors so I went to 1.325 and got through 25 runs of IBT V2. I woke up to 1300% coverage on HCI with like 15 errors and climbing so I went back to the drawing board and found that VCCSA was actually too high. Ended up having to increase DRAM voltage to 1.45, drop VCCSA back to 1.2, and then I made some timing adjustments just to be assured it would be stable. Funnily enough, I was getting CLOCK_WATCHDOG_TIMEOUT as my ring was unstable, and I ended up re-stabilizing it by backing off the uncore rail. DDR5 is so freakin' crazy. Make one adjustment in one area to have to go adjust another area to find a different path to stability. Strange AF for sure.


----------



## biigshow666

ksm1 said:


> I've been using Version 0811 since it released with zero issues, I updated to Version 1003 yesterday and my games (Hell Let Loose & God of War) have been crashing consistently a few minutes into gameplay, low demanding games such as Cuphead have been fine. I even restarted my computer and received a BSOD.
> 
> I have since downgraded back to 0811 and all issues have stopped.
> 
> My Specs:
> Prime Z690-A
> i7 12700k
> RTX 3080Ti
> DDR5 RAM
> Windows 11 latest updates
> 
> Just in case anyone else runs into the same issues as me.


I upgraded last Night and I've had to increase my core by .01v and it's stable again.


----------



## Csavez™

I ran the tm5 extreme test with 6400 cl28.


----------



## joneffingvo

Alright guys so a few observations after switching to the new g.skill 6400 cl32 ram... This was all done a Z690 HERO and 12900k + 1003 Bios

1. On BIOS 1003 + new ram (running both XMP 1 and XMP 2) windows struggled to read SPD, either causing CPU-Z to take forever to load or not load at all (same could be said about hwinfo64) prior to the new ram i was on g.skill 5600 which has been rock solid since day one. I knew something was really off when 3dmark took forever to load and kept giving me bogus readings (I also got 2-3 BSOD's so i knew something wasn't right)
2. Ran memtest within bios on xmp 1 and passed with flying colors
3. Figured maybe OS corrupted? Plugged in USB tried to do clean install and kept getting message "This PC can't run windows 11" never had this issue before and PTT and Secure boot both were enabled
4. At this point something told me to downgrade to 0070 beta bios @shamino1978 had posted
5. With 0070 loaded windows was able to clean install perfectly fine, and since then computer has no issues reading SPD (CPU-Z and HWInfo64 fire right up) 3dmark also runs properly with all hardware and clock speeds properly read
6. In CPU-Z under "SPD" at times slot #1-4 don't display anything
7. While running XMP 1, when computer is rebooted in windows the computer won't post
8. Running XMP 2 and computer seems rock solid (for now...)

tldr: 1003 bios +g.skill 6400 c32 = bad news bears, but 0070 works A+


----------



## CoUsT

I just updated BIOS to 1003 and I can see that XMP bugging itself out and making PC unstable is not yet fixed.

I tried multiple RAM kits and enabling XMP will cause one of the two: the system boots perfectly fine, RAM tests pass 1000-2000% coverage over night OR the system boots, the ethernet adapter doesn't work (corrupted state, have to fully power off PC), I get memory errors in the first 1% already.

Using the same frequency and timings as XMP or even higher frequency or tighter timings while using "manual" instead of "XMP" option will never lead to corrupted ethernet adapter and memory errors.


----------



## pR1maL

joneffingvo said:


> Hmm something myself and @yahfz picked up was my system is having a really hard time any time "SPD" needs to be read (CPU-Z taking forever to load, and or HWinfo getting stuck at "analyzing memory configuration") any idea what could be causing this? It's literally a hit or miss, sometimes it loads perfectly sometimes not so much


My Apex has this spd behavior on 1101 official. Never had that problem before, going back to 0811.

Edit: Now it's happening on 0811 too, so I flashed back to 1101. Probably has something to do with the ME firmware or driver, or something.


----------



## CoUsT

Is there a way to overclock the P-cores, E-cores and Ring with a simple, old and dumb P-states?

I'm not having a good time tuning stuff in BIOS and Intel XTU.

From missing VF Points on E-cores and Ring, to voltage going 1.4V when decreasing frequency on P-cores (ie. 3.6 GHz P-core and E-core causes voltage to go 1.4V). Ring at 4.6 GHz applying 1.43V and no way to tune it down. And a bunch of other weird issues.

I'm trying to *keep both P-cores and E-cores ON* and *keep the default Ring boosting algorithm* (when E-cores in use, keep Ring at 3.6 GHz, when E-cores not in use or when using legacy game compatiblity mode that parks E-cores then boost to 4.5-4.6 GHz Ring). I'm also trying to *keep lower P-states in case I run into power limits or thermal limits so the CPU can downclock*. My aim is to get 5 GHz P-cores and around 3.8 GHz E-cores and then around 4.0 GHz Ring with E-cores while keeping the boost to 4.6 GHz Ring when E-cores not in use.

Why it's so hard to tune Alder Lake? Unless I missed something crucial.


----------



## fortecosi

pR1maL said:


> My Apex has this spd behavior on 1101 official. Never had that problem before, going back to 0811.


I don´t have the problem on 1101, I have never had problem like this with the APEX.


----------



## truehighroller1

CoUsT said:


> I just updated BIOS to 1003 and I can see that XMP bugging itself out and making PC unstable is not yet fixed.
> 
> I tried multiple RAM kits and enabling XMP will cause one of the two: the system boots perfectly fine, RAM tests pass 1000-2000% coverage over night OR the system boots, the ethernet adapter doesn't work (corrupted state, have to fully power off PC), I get memory errors in the first 1% already.
> 
> Using the same frequency and timings as XMP or even higher frequency or tighter timings while using "manual" instead of "XMP" option will never lead to corrupted ethernet adapter and memory errors.



I have a detailed support ticket open with Asus right now and their team is working on resolving issues similar to ours by replicating my setup. They're taking it seriously from what I can tell.


----------



## bscool

CoUsT said:


> Is there a way to overclock the P-cores, E-cores and Ring with a simple, old and dumb P-states?
> 
> I'm not having a good time tuning stuff in BIOS and Intel XTU.
> 
> From missing VF Points on E-cores and Ring, to voltage going 1.4V when decreasing frequency on P-cores (ie. 3.6 GHz P-core and E-core causes voltage to go 1.4V). Ring at 4.6 GHz applying 1.43V and no way to tune it down. And a bunch of other weird issues.
> 
> I'm trying to *keep both P-cores and E-cores ON* and *keep the default Ring boosting algorithm* (when E-cores in use, keep Ring at 3.6 GHz, when E-cores not in use or when using legacy game compatiblity mode that parks E-cores then boost to 4.5-4.6 GHz Ring). I'm also trying to *keep lower P-states in case I run into power limits or thermal limits so the CPU can downclock*. My aim is to get 5 GHz P-cores and around 3.8 GHz E-cores and then around 4.0 GHz Ring with E-cores while keeping the boost to 4.6 GHz Ring when E-cores not in use.
> 
> Why it's so hard to tune Alder Lake? Unless I missed something crucial.


I wouldnt use XTU. I know some people do but the little I messed with it it over rides setting in the bios. I would uninstall that, but obviously each person can use what they want. Just telling what i use and what i wouldnt.

As for OCing this gen has been easy but I am sure a lot if do to good CPU bin plus I have expeirence from z590 and z690 is similar.

It is pretty simple how i do it. Ill list 2 ways using 12900k as example. Per core and Sync all

Method #1 *Per Core*
Go to bios set
P core to per core set all to 52,52,52 etc

E core 40.40.40 etc

Cache on auto so it can clock up and down

Set static vcore of what your cpu need 1.34 to 1.38 llc5 as example. You will have to test and find the voltage you need. If you dont want to set static vcore I cant help you as I just left if on auto but it will give quite a but more voltage than needed and run hotter.

To do method 2 Use *Sync all Core*

P core 52

E core 40

Cache auto

*C states must be set to ENABLED* *for cache to clock up(*to 47 on 12900k, 46 on 12700k?) *when using SYNC ALL CORE*.

This same method works on 12700k as I recently helped someone but they ended up using slightly lower clocks as 50/40. 1.32 vcore in Windows under load

Check out his Karhu memtest 50,000 percent  4000c15-15-15 with tight subs

He used the Gskill 4000c16-16-16 2x16 kit.

@SightUp screens


----------



## joneffingvo

So the only issue i have now is when i go to restart the computer, the computer won't post back up again... Not sure if thats a SA voltage or memory controller voltage issue? Im at the point where i might just return these memory sticks and go back to 5600mhz because atleast i know it was rock solid

edit: tried 0811 with xmp2 and that wouldn't even post...


----------



## bscool

Something I forgot to mention on new Srtix d4 1003 bios is check RTLs in Memtweakit or in bios as they usually do not train correctly. 

Here is what you can play with to get them to tighten/line up.

Not sure if the MCH FULL check disable or Fastboot needed still testing.

You will have to find the correct RTL for your timings.

Offset of 0 should work for everyone though. Tip from @cstkl1

You want RTLs all the same on same channel. As in when trained "off" the will be something like 

MC0 71,73,71

MC1 75, 77, 73


----------



## Martin778

Has anyone tried the new 6400C32 G.Skill kit? Thinking about upgrading from 6000C36


----------



## affxct

Martin778 said:


> Has anyone tried the new 6400C32 G.Skill kit? Thinking about upgrading from 6000C36


A dude on the other subforum has been having issues with it. I would assume they're fairly decent Hynix ICs.


----------



## Martin778

I wonder what VDDQ/IMC/SA do they require, not really happy seeeing 'purple' voltages with XMP or built in OC profiles with Sammy 6000C36 atm.


----------



## affxct

Martin778 said:


> I wonder what VDDQ/IMC/SA do they require, not really happy seeeing 'purple' voltages with XMP with 6000C36 atm.


The 6000C36 for me requires between 1.1-1.175 SA (it changed multiple times), 1.1-1.25 VDD2 (all voltages within that range work), and 1.3 on all three of TX/VDD/Q.


----------



## Martin778

Interesting, the 6000C32 profile runs 1.435V on TX/VDD/Q and 1.25 VCCSA.


----------



## joneffingvo

Martin778 said:


> Has anyone tried the new 6400C32 G.Skill kit? Thinking about upgrading from 6000C36


LOL! Check back last 2-3 pages... Mine got delivered to me yesterday and I just returned it back to Newegg


----------



## Martin778

Ok, so it's nothing to write home about. Might just as well roll the dice on green PCB Dell Hynix modules.
On another note, this platform can be infuriating like no other...with the first BIOSes I could run 6000C32 ASUS profile with AI OC, now I can't. AI OC at JEDEC 4800 works perfectly fine, boosting 5.5 SC / 5.2 multi, tested 30m in Cinebench R23 but if I then load the memory profile - nope, won't even complete a single run, yet the memory will pass Anta777 Extreme.

These controller voltages really do bug me though, I know back then ASUS X99 boards could wreak havoc on certain CPU's because of using way too high volts and I learned it the hard way when it 00'ed my 6950X back in 2016/17.


----------



## Tech Geek Mike

Martin778 said:


> Has anyone tried the new 6400C32 G.Skill kit? Thinking about upgrading from 6000C36


I have it, very difficult to get stable at XMP profiles. Here is an AIDA I was able to do at XMP1 and 1.45v (trouble posting w/ 1.40)










Anyone have any advice on the best way to get the XMP 1 stable for this kit? (GSKILL F5-6400J3239G16GX2-TZ5RK)


----------



## Nizzen

Tech Geek Mike said:


> I have it, very difficult to get stable at XMP profiles. Here is an AIDA I was able to do at XMP1 and 1.45v (trouble posting w/ 1.40)
> 
> View attachment 2545617
> 
> 
> Anyone have any advice on the best way to get the XMP 1 stable for this kit? (GSKILL F5-6400J3239G16GX2-TZ5RK)


Best way is to use Apex LOL


----------



## Tech Geek Mike

Nizzen said:


> Best way is to use Apex LOL


Okay so it turns out turning off MRC fast boot fixed post errors w/ XMP profile

I also have to admit I'm an idiot and still had an adaptive .05 underclock (**undervolt) on which was causing the instability during memtest etc. - disabling that and I'm error free.


----------



## truehighroller1

Tech Geek Mike said:


> Okay so it turns out turning off MRC fast boot fixed post errors w/ XMP profile
> 
> I also have to admit I'm an idiot and still had an adaptive .05 underclock on which was causing the instability during memtest etc. - disabling that and I'm error free.
> 
> View attachment 2545627


What do you mean by adaptive underclock?


----------



## Tech Geek Mike

truehighroller1 said:


> What do you mean by adaptive underclock?


My apologies, I meant undervolt. I had -.05 on the voltage curve for the CPU.


----------



## MarkDeMark

joneffingvo said:


> Alright guys so a few observations after switching to the new g.skill 6400 cl32 ram... This was all done a Z690 HERO and 12900k + 1003 Bios
> 
> 1. On BIOS 1003 + new ram (running both XMP 1 and XMP 2) windows struggled to read SPD, either causing CPU-Z to take forever to load or not load at all (same could be said about hwinfo64) prior to the new ram i was on g.skill 5600 which has been rock solid since day one. I knew something was really off when 3dmark took forever to load and kept giving me bogus readings (I also got 2-3 BSOD's so i knew something wasn't right)
> 2. Ran memtest within bios on xmp 1 and passed with flying colors
> 3. Figured maybe OS corrupted? Plugged in USB tried to do clean install and kept getting message "This PC can't run windows 11" never had this issue before and PTT and Secure boot both were enabled
> 4. At this point something told me to downgrade to 0070 beta bios @shamino1978 had posted
> 5. With 0070 loaded windows was able to clean install perfectly fine, and since then computer has no issues reading SPD (CPU-Z and HWInfo64 fire right up) 3dmark also runs properly with all hardware and clock speeds properly read
> 6. In CPU-Z under "SPD" at times slot #1-4 don't display anything
> 7. While running XMP 1, when computer is rebooted in windows the computer won't post
> 8. Running XMP 2 and computer seems rock solid (for now...)
> 
> tldr: 1003 bios +g.skill 6400 c32 = bad news bears, but 0070 works A+
> View attachment 2545546


Before dishing out another 700$, has anyone any positive feedback just yet using these new gskill 6400 Hynix modules?


----------



## Tech Geek Mike

MarkDeMark said:


> Before dishing out another 700$, has anyone any positive feedback just yet using these new gskill 6400 Hynix modules?


It's definitely fast, just very picky with current bios revision. To avoid the above POST issue I turned off MRC fast boot and that eliminated the problem. Now I'm just trying for absolutely zero errors on the XMP profile, they are running right now.


----------



## sugi0lover

MarkDeMark said:


> Before dishing out another 700$, has anyone any positive feedback just yet using these new gskill 6400 Hynix modules?











*Official* Intel DDR5 OC and 24/7 daily Memory Stability...


The revenge of the Samsung IC's on APEX GSKILL 600032U 1.435 VDD/VDDQ 1.25 IMC Voltage 1.25VCSSA 6600 C35/2T Triimed Z690 APEX BIOS 0702 If it's stable in Battlefield 2042 for 2 hours, you have a very stable OC on the memory :D I can run ramtest for hours, but crash in BF 2042 :p Stress the...




www.overclock.net




I posted 6400 cl32 ram oc. Check it out!


----------



## MarkDeMark

sugi0lover said:


> *Official* Intel DDR5 OC and 24/7 daily Memory Stability...
> 
> 
> The revenge of the Samsung IC's on APEX GSKILL 600032U 1.435 VDD/VDDQ 1.25 IMC Voltage 1.25VCSSA 6600 C35/2T Triimed Z690 APEX BIOS 0702 If it's stable in Battlefield 2042 for 2 hours, you have a very stable OC on the memory :D I can run ramtest for hours, but crash in BF 2042 :p Stress the...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I posted 6400 cl32 ram oc. Check it out!


Just saw that an hour ago. Great! Thanks. Did you try with the latest BIOS 1101?


----------



## sugi0lover

MarkDeMark said:


> Just saw that an hour ago. Great! Thanks. Did you try with the latest BIOS 1101?


Yes. The OC setup passed tm5 with BIOS 1101 and tried later with 9901. no difference to me.
I read some problem with Hero board & Bios 1101. My apex had no problem with Bios 1101 & gskill 6400 cl32 kit.


----------



## Martin778

65-67ns on that 6400C34 is pretty poor, because it's 2T, same for the transfer rates :-|
Honestly makes me want to buy them to see if they would go 1T on Apex...


----------



## db000

Martin778 said:


> Ok, so it's nothing to write home about. Might just as well roll the dice on green PCB Dell Hynix modules.
> On another note, this platform can be infuriating like no other...with the first BIOSes I could run 6000C32 ASUS profile with AI OC, now I can't. AI OC at JEDEC 4800 works perfectly fine, boosting 5.5 SC / 5.2 multi, tested 30m in Cinebench R23 but if I then load the memory profile - nope, won't even complete a single run, yet the memory will pass Anta777 Extreme.
> 
> These controller voltages really do bug me though, I know back then ASUS X99 boards could wreak havoc on certain CPU's because of using way too high volts and I learned it the hard way when it 00'ed my 6950X back in 2016/17.


Thanks for this comment. I downgraded from 1101 to 0811 and now my AI OC works fine with XMP 5600CL36 Dominator (Samsung).

---------------------
AIOC didn't work fine for me with 9901 or 1101. 9901 I did have a stable all-core 5.1 P-core, 4.0 E-core and 4.3 ring OC, same profile exported/imported was slightly unstable on 1101... Bumping the LLC worked, but that caused higher temps. The 6000CL32 gives me errors in Karhu RAM test.. I set manual SA voltage to 0.95 or 1.0v to boot with that preset profile.
I'm thinking that the temps of my sticks is causing the errors (after 50%-170%), is 55-60c fine? Should I stay below 50c for the sticks?


----------



## rent0n

Some weird behaviour on the Apex, really considering going for something else at this point. 2x 12900K, Kingston 6000C40 Hynix and G.Skill 6000C36 Samsung kits. The board had the vanilla 0231 BIOS on it. I installed the Hynix kit first and managed to boot up to 6600 2T and 6400 1T with fast settings / 2 sticks and 12900K1 (85SP). First issues I had the board wouldn't train after rebooting, even on XMP settings, I had to use the Retry button every time. Flashed the 0086 BIOS which wouldn't boot 1T above 6200 anymore, but at least the board would train normally. Flashed the 0090 afterwards which had the best overall results. Here comes the interesting part - I then swapped the CPU for the 12900K2 (88SP) and the system would not boot at all, no matter which of the 2 kits was installed I got code 55 and a black screen. Tried clearing CMOS and booting in safe mode, but no luck. When I removed the first stick and tried booting with only a single stick in DIMM 2, I could boot up to 7200 2T with a Samsung stick and 7000 2T with a Hynix stick. When a single stick in DIMM 1 is installed the board would not boot and all I get is code 55, as I said no luck with Retry, Clr CMOS, Safe boot.


----------



## sugi0lover

Martin778 said:


> 65-67ns on that 6400C34 is pretty poor, because it's 2T, same for the transfer rates :-|
> Honestly makes me want to buy them to see if they would go 1T on Apex...


Since I was focusing on 2T, I didn't try 1t much, but my previous stable 6530 cl28 1t with tight ram timings was stable and 6600 cl28 1t was bootable. I will try it later.


----------



## Martin778

I was referring to the new 6400MHz G.Skill kit's XMP setup


----------



## pR1maL

db000 said:


> Thanks for this comment. I downgraded from 1101 to 0811 and now my AI OC works fine with XMP 5600CL36 Dominator (Samsung).
> 
> AIOC didn't work fine for me with 9901 or 1101. 9901 I did have a stable all-core 5.1 P-core, 4.0 E-core and 4.3 ring OC, same profile exported/imported was slightly unstable on 1101... Bumping the LLC worked, but that caused higher temps. The 6000CL32 gives me errors in Karhu RAM test.. I set manual SA voltage to 0.95 or 1.0v to boot with that preset profile.
> I'm thinking that the temps of my sticks is causing the errors (after 50%-170%), is 55-60c fine? Should I stay below 50c for the sticks?


If you haven't yet, one thing to play around with LLC is AC_LL and DC_LL. This link provides some detail. I have an Apex, but I tried these values based upon the Extreme's impedance. The values are fairly close, decent results so far with these values and LLC 3, but I need to tweak a bit more. The methodology in the link favors LLC 1.









ASUS MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME & i9-12900K GUIDE - Load...


Disclaimer ! These settings and methods are outside Intel's specifications, just like any other overclocking method. ---------------------------------------------------- For Z790/13900K click here Introduction: In a world increasingly concerned with natural resources, the watchword is...




www.overclock.net







> *Choosing LLC, AC_LL and DC_LL:*
> 
> The first step in planning overclocking is to set the full load frequency.
> 
> But for everything to work well, and as expected, we must first set up the LLC, AC_LL and DC_LL.
> 
> If the chosen Full Load frequency has a unique VF point for this frequency, we will be more free to choose LLC, DC_LL and AC_LL.
> Otherwise, if the Full Load frequency does not have a unique VF point, we will have to choose the best Load Line set that allows us, through interpolation of the points, to set the voltage referring to the frequency chosen for Full Load.
> 
> The basic rule of adaptive voltage and TVB overclock (OCTVB) is to work with vdroop to your advantage.
> This way, using a less aggressive LLCs will give you greater leeway for high frequencies.
> 
> In a simplified way, load line should influence overclocking as follows:
> Low loads, low Vdroop, high voltages, high frequencies.
> High loads, high Vdroop, low voltages, low frequencies.
> 
> You can configure the TVB overclock using any LLC, it all depends on your processor and what you want to do with it.
> 
> This Is the Board Maximus Z-690 Extreme LLC Impedance:
> 
> LLC1: 1.75 milliohms
> LLC2: 1.46 milliohms
> LLC3: 1.1 milliohms
> LLC4: 0.98 milliohms
> LLC5: 0.73 milliohms
> LLC6: 0.49 milliohms
> LLC7: 0.24 milliohms
> LLC8: 0.01 milliohms (flat).
> 
> The impedance values of the DC_LL shall be used according to the LLC chosen, so that the CPU performs its internal voltage and power calculations accurately.
> 
> *Impedance stake:
> DC_LL=LLC*: The CPU performs correct VID and power calculations;
> *DC_LL<LLC*: The CPU performs higher than real VID and power calculations;
> *DC_LL>LLC*: The CPU performs lower than real VID and power calculations.
> 
> So, rule is: ALWAYS TUNE The DC_LL according to the LLC chosen.
> 
> 
> _Below are some configuration suggestions for the 12900K:_
> 
> LLC#1
> DC_LL = 1.75
> AC_LL = 0.60
> 
> LLC#2
> DC_LL = 1.46
> AC_LL = 0.46
> 
> LLC#3
> DC_LL 1.1
> AC_LL 0.25
> 
> LLC#4
> DC_LL 0.98
> AC_LL 0.20
> 
> *Undestanding the LLC, DC_LL and AC_LL numbers:*
> 
> LLC controls the output impedance of our VRM, and MB vendors allow us to change and control this impedance.
> 
> DC_LL is the parameter that informs the CPU the VRM impedance.
> If you decide to use LLC #1, the impedance is 1.75mohm, then you need to inform the CPU of this impedance using the DC_LL parameter.
> If you use LLC #4 then the DC_LL should be 0.98.
> 
> To find the LLC impedance, you need to test one by one LLC and change the DC_LL until the VRM power matches the CPU power and the VID matches the Vcore. Once they match, you found LLC impedance.
> 
> AC_LL is a parameter that compensates for voltage loss due to your load line impedance, and you need to guess and test a different number for each LLC.
> 
> If you use a high impedance LLC you will need a higher AC_LL, on the other hand if you use a low impedance LLC you will need a low AC_LL
> Note that on Asus MB, LLC # high means low impedance. And LLC # low means high impedance.
> 
> So never use a low impedance LLC with a high AC_LL... This will result in a very high voltage....
> That's why I recommend an IA VR voltage limit of 1500mv....
> So if you commit an error, the voltage will have a limit of 1.50v.
> 
> CONTINUED


----------



## sblantipodi

Highering LLC seems to have the same effect of highering the VID. 

So should I prefer to higher LLC or CPU voltage once I found a decent CPU voltage?


----------



## Fantik

Hi can anyone explain why my VID voltages are not equal in the cores? I'm using the latest BIOS 1103. With the 0803 the cores scale up and down all with the same VID voltage


----------



## Fantik

bscool said:


> z690 Strix d4 bios 1003 testing.
> 
> Didn't run long any term memtest but from intial testing I don't see any big differences other than vddq needs to be raised from 901.
> 
> Did not set a static vcore(which I usually do) just left vcore and llc on auto for intial testing.
> 
> 52/42 cache auto c states enabled so cache can clock up to 47.


Hi, same behaviour in the cores here. 
Why the core VID is different per core? In the 0803 my core VID are equal all cores. That's a normal behaviour? It's better like this or is possible to change?


----------



## db000

pR1maL said:


> If you haven't yet, one thing to play around with LLC is AC_LL and DC_LL. This link provides some detail. I have an Apex, but I tried these values based upon the Extreme's impedance. The values are fairly close, decent results so far with these values and LLC 3, but I need to tweak a bit more. The methodology in the link favors LLC 1.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ASUS MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME & i9-12900K GUIDE - Load...
> 
> 
> Disclaimer ! These settings and methods are outside Intel's specifications, just like any other overclocking method. ---------------------------------------------------- For Z790/13900K click here Introduction: In a world increasingly concerned with natural resources, the watchword is...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net


Thank you!! That really helped with AC_LL and DC_LL.

AI OC with LLC4(Auto), AC_LL 0.25 and DC_LL 1.1 (From your linked post, LLC#3).
I'll continue testing this same profile with 9901 and 1101 now. To rule out that error wasn't on my side 

Ignore Max temp on stick #1, think HWMonitor just buggin... Was around 48 the whole time on both sticks.


----------



## edkieferlp

db000 said:


> Thank you!! That really helped with AC_LL and DC_LL.
> 
> AI OC with LLC4(Auto), AC_LL 0.25 and DC_LL 1.1 (From your linked post, LLC#3).
> I'll continue testing this same profile with 9901 and 1101 now. To rule out that error wasn't on my side
> 
> Ignore Max temp on stick #1, think HWMonitor just buggin... Was around 48 the whole time on both sticks.


read that link again, it a lot to take in.
You should match the DC_LL with the LLC your using. so those values you posted are for LLC 3 level.
If you want to use LLC4 then these values should be the starting point.(LLC#4, AC_LL=0.20, DC_LL= 0.98 )

Note the DC_ll controls dies sense Vcore to VID (you got right values when they match or very close. The AC_LL fines tunes the Vcore.
Read the link in the section of LLC so you understand the relationship to AC/DC_ll settings.


----------



## Falkentyne

rent0n said:


> Some weird behaviour on the Apex, really considering going for something else at this point. 2x 12900K, Kingston 6000C40 Hynix and G.Skill 6000C36 Samsung kits. The board had the vanilla 0231 BIOS on it. I installed the Hynix kit first and managed to boot up to 6600 2T and 6400 1T with fast settings / 2 sticks and 12900K1 (85SP). First issues I had the board wouldn't train after rebooting, even on XMP settings, I had to use the Retry button every time. Flashed the 0086 BIOS which wouldn't boot 1T above 6200 anymore, but at least the board would train normally. Flashed the 0090 afterwards which had the best overall results. Here comes the interesting part - I then swapped the CPU for the 12900K2 (88SP) and the system would not boot at all, no matter which of the 2 kits was installed I got code 55 and a black screen. Tried clearing CMOS and booting in safe mode, but no luck. When I removed the first stick and tried booting with only a single stick in DIMM 2, I could boot up to 7200 2T with a Samsung stick and 7000 2T with a Hynix stick. When a single stick in DIMM 1 is installed the board would not boot and all I get is code 55, as I said no luck with Retry, Clr CMOS, Safe boot.


And what happens if you swap the CPUs back again?


----------



## db000

edkieferlp said:


> read that link again, it a lot to take in.
> You should match the DC_LL with the LLC your using. so those values you posted are for LLC 3 level.
> If you want to use LLC4 then these values should be the starting point.(LLC#4, AC_LL=0.20, DC_LL= 0.98 )
> 
> Note the DC_ll controls dies sense Vcore to VID (you got right values when they match or very close. The AC_LL fines tunes the Vcore.
> Read the link in the section of LLC so you understand the relationship to AC/DC_ll settings.


Yes, I'm aware that I used the example/suggested values for LLC#3 with LLC4. Will for sure play around with these.
Im keeping these settings for now until im done testing if 0811, 9901 or 1101 makes a difference in stability for me with the same profile on all three. Running same tests on 9901 now.


----------



## bscool

Fantik said:


> Hi, same behaviour in the cores here.
> Why the core VID is different per core? In the 0803 my core VID are equal all cores. That's a normal behaviour? It's better like this or is possible to change?


I don't know, I dont look at vid. I usually just look at vcore(under load and temps) in Windows. That is what matters are far as I know.

Also i am not using 1003 anymore and wouldnt recommend it unless someone has issues on older bioses or likes to play with new bioses. 707 and 901 is still the best for me on dr b die.


----------



## vlad.enthusiast

Hey guys! I hope you can help me with issues. I am really frustrated. I have assembled my PC and when I push the power button the system is not booting. I see various errors on the MB display such as CPU, RAM errors. Some CPU errors: 00, 7F, 66.

I have a core i9 12900 kf processor. Can you please point me to the solution or how to debug the issue? Thank you.


Spoiler: image


----------



## Gadfly

vlad.enthusiast said:


> Hey guys! I hope you can help me with issues. I am really frustrated. I have assembled my PC and when I push the power button the system is not booting. I see various errors on the MB display such as CPU, RAM errors. Some CPU errors: 00, 7F, 66.
> 
> I have a core i9 12900 kf processor. Can you please point me to the solution or how to debug the issue? Thank you.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: image
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2545842


If you have a 12900KF CPU you need a GPU installed, but you don't appear to have a GPU in your picture.


----------



## Fantik

vlad.enthusiast said:


> Hey guys! I hope you can help me with issues. I am really frustrated. I have assembled my PC and when I push the power button the system is not booting. I see various errors on the MB display such as CPU, RAM errors. Some CPU errors: 00, 7F, 66.
> 
> I have a core i9 12900 kf processor. Can you please point me to the solution or how to debug the issue? Thank you.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: image
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2545842


Hi, I have the same combo.
In my case I have to go to the BIOS and change the parameters of the GPU for PCI-E x 3 than I can enter in the Windows. And in the beginning I have the same errors CPU GPU MEM and I think this work for this now. It's a hell. You have to let the PC run, (Reboot Restart). I think the BIOS/MB have to learn 😉


----------



## borant

Martin778 said:


> 65-67ns on that 6400C34 is pretty poor, because it's 2T, same for the transfer rates :-|
> Honestly makes me want to buy them to see if they would go 1T on Apex...


----------



## pbytano

borant said:


> View attachment 2545906


I just picked up the Z690 Extreme and the new G-Skill CL32 6400 Kit and 12900K. I assume you are running the same memory kit? Are you stable? If so, what are your settings?


----------



## borant

pbytano said:


> I just picked up the Z690 Extreme and the new G-Skill CL32 6400 Kit and 12900K. I assume you are running the same memory kit? Are you stable? If so, what are your settings?


yes, it is 6400J3239 kit. It does not work well with earlier BIOS and I updated to 1003. I used XMP I setting with "Auto" command rate for initial training and then changed CR from 2T to 1T.
It is stable in MemTest86.


----------



## Falkentyne

Anyone try yeeting the internal Core PLL voltage to 1.2v to see if that does anything semi useful?

(yeeting PLL termination and CPU Standby voltages (both must be done at the same time or you get 00 on a cold boot) to 1.2v has been tested by Kingfaris10 as slightly improving Cache and E core OC stability a small amount. But Core and Ring PLL...¯\_(ツ)_/¯


----------



## RobertoSampaio

My best so far....

VDD/DQ/TX - 1.435v
MC - 1.30v
SA - 0.90v




































Trying to stabilize 6133MHz


----------



## vlad.enthusiast

Gadfly said:


> If you have a 12900KF CPU you need a GPU installed, but you don't appear to have a GPU in your picture.


I am dumb, lol. I thought KFs with come with an integrated graphics. 🤦‍♂️


----------



## ChaosAD

Falkentyne said:


> Anyone try yeeting the internal Core PLL voltage to 1.2v to see if that does anything semi useful?
> 
> (yeeting PLL termination and CPU Standby voltages (both must be done at the same time or you get 00 on a cold boot) to 1.2v has been tested by Kingfaris10 as slightly improving Cache and E core OC stability a small amount. But Core and Ring PLL...¯\_(ツ)_/¯


I remember reading in here that Core and Ring PLL set to 1.005v is said to increase stability a little more, its the first time thought i read about PLL termination and CPU standby set to 1.2v


----------



## X909

Does the Legacy Game Compatibility Mode work for you guys? It should park the eCores when Scroll Lock is enabled. It does nothing on my system (Windows 10, 21H2). If its activated or not, I see the eCores loaded in HWInfo....


----------



## edkieferlp

X909 said:


> Does the Legacy Game Compatibility Mode work for you guys? It should park the eCores when Scroll Lock is enabled. It does nothing on my system (Windows 10, 21H2). If its activated or not, I see the eCores loaded in HWInfo....


It might be because in Win10 all the P cores are parked by default, so you can't have both parked.
If you removed the parked P it might work?


----------



## acoustic

I thought it only worked on Win11?


----------



## X909

Is there any of you that has it working? How does it look like? 0% usage and "parked" in ressource manager when scroll lock is activated?


----------



## roachsa06

Martin778 said:


> Has anyone tried the new 6400C32 G.Skill kit? Thinking about upgrading from 6000C36





fortecosi said:


> I don´t have the problem on 1101, I have never had problem like this with the APEX.


What Part number on your ram G.Skill Z5 RGB 6000C36 (
is this it: about to order ran for my Apex and 12900K
*F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK*


----------



## roachsa06

Hi Team

New to forum:
I have APEX 690 with 12900K
Looking to buy ram now and was wondering what is the best kit for stock setting to begin my venture.
Also will update to new latest BIOS 1101. I hope they have more support than CL40 stuff.

Looking at the following:
I see some comment with GSkill working on 6000C36 but no part number.
I dont see much on Corsair stuff.

*F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK*

*CMT32GX5M2X5600C36
CMT32GX5M2X6200C36

Thanks for any help on this issue team!!

Scott*


----------



## Martin778

roachsa06 said:


> What Part number on your ram G.Skill Z5 RGB 6000C36 (
> is this it: about to order ran for my Apex and 12900K
> *F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK*


Yes but TZ5R*S* for silver. 6000 C36 is a Samsung kit and has been around for some time.
G.Skill runs better timings at 6000 36-36-36-76 where corsair runs 36-39-39-76 at 6200 but we don't know anything about secondary timings and chips used.


----------



## roachsa06

Martin778 said:


> Yes but TZ5R*S* for silver. 6000 C36 is a Samsung kit and has been around for some time.
> G.Skill runs better timings at 6000 36-36-36-76 where corsair runs 36-39-39-76 at 6200 but we don't know anything about secondary timings and chips used.


Thanks are you running BIOS 11011


----------



## Martin778

I run 0080 on the APEX.


----------



## roachsa06

Martin778 said:


> I run 0080 on the APEX.


Thanks I will keep mine at 0080 until all bugs are worked out thanks again Martin now just need to find Memory that is in stock. Going to use *F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK* since it has been proven by others and yourself.


----------



## Brandur

With the new 1101 Bios for Apex, my Teamgroup 6400 XMP wont run stable any more. With the 0811 everything was fine. Did anyone experience similar behaviour?


----------



## fortecosi

Brandur said:


> With the new 1101 Bios for Apex, my Teamgroup 6400 XMP wont run stable any more. With the 0811 everything was fine. Did anyone experience similar behaviour?


This is normal behaviour. It´s a new BIOS, _something_ was changed = it _may_ behave differently, depends on a change. You have to tune BIOS after every (well, almost) update anyway. That´s why saved profiles usually fails after an update.


----------



## roachsa06

sugi0lover said:


> 6400 cl32 kit


*Model F5-6400J3239G16GX2-TZ5RK*


----------



## Brandur

I rolled back to 0811, since I don't have the time to tune around the problem. Maybe someone experienced the same thing with their SK.Hynix Chips .


----------



## bern43

Do I need to download Armory Crate to get the 1 year AIDA Extreme that's supposed to come with my Apex Board? I assume I can just uninstall it after I redeem?


----------



## Shreve

bern43 said:


> Do I need to download Armory Crate to get the 1 year AIDA Extreme that's supposed to come with my Apex Board? I assume I can just uninstall it after I redeem?


I have the same quesition although I'm on a ROG Strix E


----------



## Eaton

bern43 said:


> Do I need to download Armory Crate to get the 1 year AIDA Extreme that's supposed to come with my Apex Board? I assume I can just uninstall it after I redeem?


Yes to both.


----------



## bronze900

Anyone with a Z690 Strix-A D4 get stuck on rog screen? Also when I mute when audio is playing on from Realtek audio, it mutes immediately but visually it takes a bit to show mute symbol. If u repeatedly mute/unmute you get lag, which is definitely not normal. Also I updated bios and it didn't update to the specified version and when i try to use the asus updater from the site, it gives me a check MEI driver is installed. Im getting cpu fan speed detection error when my cpu fan is plugged into the header. Should i consider returning the motherboard?


----------



## cstkl1

bronze900 said:


> Anyone with a Z690 Strix-A D4 get stuck on rog screen? Also when I mute when audio is playing on from Realtek audio, it mutes immediately but visually it takes a bit to show mute symbol. If u repeatedly mute/unmute you get lag, which is definitely not normal. Also I updated bios and it didn't update to the specified version and when i try to use the asus updater from the site, it gives me a check MEI driver is installed. Im getting cpu fan speed detection error when my cpu fan is plugged into the header. Should i consider returning the motherboard?


seems like software issue

btw happy cny to everybody. let the rog team and fae have their long waited break.


----------



## bronze900

I'm just gonna try return it. I've reinstalled windows 3 times and each time it'd get stuck on the ROG boot logo. The audio problem is software since before I install the drivers that are literally on the website, it will work fine. Getting stuck on the ROG screen will happen randomly, I'd sometimes boot in and one of my monitors wont work since it has somehow managed to take the res/hz out of range(?). Like its all bs but I don't see anyone else talking about being stuck on the rog screen or the audio problems, so even if the first person I see with these problems and board steps up, I have had enough head ache. I've tried different ram, changed m.2 drives -> same problems and on fresh windows installs. Same problems even after updating incrementally through all bios versions thinking I fixed it. CPU fan speed isn't being detected even though it runs and is plugged into the CPU fan header, one of the fans on the radiator refuses to work even though it worked on my last motherboard.


----------



## bscool

bronze900 said:


> Anyone with a Z690 Strix-A D4 get stuck on rog screen? Also when I mute when audio is playing on from Realtek audio, it mutes immediately but visually it takes a bit to show mute symbol. If u repeatedly mute/unmute you get lag, which is definitely not normal. Also I updated bios and it didn't update to the specified version and when i try to use the asus updater from the site, it gives me a check MEI driver is installed. Im getting cpu fan speed detection error when my cpu fan is plugged into the header. Should i consider returning the motherboard?


What bios are you on? If 1003 i would try bios 901. 

Not saying it will fix the aduio issue but most I see have issues on 1003 on Strix d4. I have a strix d4 and tested pretty much every bios and 1003 is the worst for me to date.

What memory are you using? It seems like lower memory speeds are ok on 1003 but higher speeds give more issues from what I have seen.

For audio I dont have any drivers installed other than defaults that Windows installed so i cant help you with drivers as i did try them and also noticed issues so i went with default Windows drivers.


----------



## bronze900

bscool said:


> What bios are you on? If 1003 i would try bios 901.
> 
> Not saying it will fix the aduio issue but most I see have issues on 1003 on Strix d4. I have a strix d4 and tested pretty much every bios and 1003 is the worst for me to date.
> 
> What memory are you using? It seems like lower memory speeds are ok on 1003 but higher speeds give more issues from what I have seen.
> 
> For audio I dont have any drivers installed other than defaults that Windows installed so i cant help you with drivers as i did try them and also noticed issues so i went with default Windows drivers.


I'll give it a try but honestly it'll just be something until I process a refund. I don't think we should be paying for a 300USD+ motherboard and accept these sorts of problems. Those audio drivers have been on the website for nearly 2 months  I heard good things about the Z690 MSI motherboards. Not worth the hassle...


----------



## Silent Scone

fortecosi said:


> This is normal behaviour. It´s a new BIOS, _something_ was changed = it _may_ behave differently, depends on a change. You have to tune BIOS after every (well, almost) update anyway. That´s why saved profiles usually fails after an update.


Hello,

Depending on the changes made - but it’s often because the OC was too conditional to begin with, although this topic potentially opens a can of worms for some users

I’ve used 90% of the test builds, I’ve not once had to deviate from my 6000 C30 1T profile.


----------



## GtiJason

roachsa06 said:


> Hi Team
> 
> New to forum:
> I have APEX 690 with 12900K
> Looking to buy ram now and was wondering what is the best kit for stock setting to begin my venture.
> Also will update to new latest BIOS 1101. I hope they have more support than CL40 stuff.
> 
> Looking at the following:
> I see some comment with GSkill working on 6000C36 but no part number.
> I dont see much on Corsair stuff.
> 
> *F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK*
> 
> *CMT32GX5M2X5600C36
> CMT32GX5M2X6200C36
> 
> Thanks for any help on this issue team!!
> 
> Scott*


I would not buy F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK since they are Samsung based IC's
Best kit's to start your DDR5 OC journey are going to be, ( all in stock at time of writing (Newegg and Amazon for Team/Kingston kits))
G.Skill - 6400J3239G16GX2-TZ5RK
Team Group T-Force - FF4D532G6400HC40BDC01
Corsair - CMT32GX5M2X6200C36
Kingston Fury - KF560C40BBK2-32 for a "budget" option $354.00 at Amazon

As for APEX bios version I'd currently use 0086 or if you need AVX support 0080


----------



## entiszzoot

anyone know if there is a beta of the PRIME-Z690-P-WIFI-D4 bios? and where to find it?
i have a probably ram compatibilty problem (5 sec delay after press power button ) whit G.Skill Trident Z F4-3600C16D-32GTZN ,but wanna try a new bios fist to go on rma 
any help pls?


----------



## Anonimoussex

entiszzoot said:


> anyone know if there is a beta of the PRIME-Z690-P-WIFI-D4 bios? and where to find it?
> i have a probably ram compatibilty problem (5 sec delay after press power button ) whit G.Skill Trident Z F4-3600C16D-32GTZN ,but wanna try a new bios fist to go on rma
> any help pls?


Check out in previous posts there was one a couple of days ago


----------



## roachsa06

GtiJason said:


> I would not buy F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK since they are Samsung based IC's
> Best kit's to start your DDR5 OC journey are going to be, ( all in stock at time of writing (Newegg and Amazon for Team/Kingston kits))
> G.Skill - 6400J3239G16GX2-TZ5RK
> Team Group T-Force - FF4D532G6400HC40BDC01
> Corsair - CMT32GX5M2X6200C36
> Kingston Fury - KF560C40BBK2-32 for a "budget" option $354.00 at Amazon
> 
> As for APEX bios version I'd currently use 0086 or if you need AVX support 0080


 Thanks for the insite.


----------



## Martin778

It's not that Samsung is "bad". They run 6000 C32 CR1 easy op Apex.

The only DDR5 chips that are bad now are Micron...


----------



## Syhndel

GtiJason said:


> I would not buy F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK since they are Samsung based IC's
> Best kit's to start your DDR5 OC journey are going to be, ( all in stock at time of writing (Newegg and Amazon for Team/Kingston kits))
> G.Skill - 6400J3239G16GX2-TZ5RK
> Team Group T-Force - FF4D532G6400HC40BDC01
> Corsair - CMT32GX5M2X6200C36
> Kingston Fury - KF560C40BBK2-32 for a "budget" option $354.00 at Amazon
> 
> As for APEX bios version I'd currently use 0086 or if you need AVX support 0080


100% agree. 

The g.skill 6000 with Samsung, are worthless. So many people have problem with them, even in xmp. There is no reason what so ever to buy them.

All posts in here from aida, tm5 etc means nothing when thier computers will crash in games.

Its like Ryzen users who used to love to post cinebench results, nice numbers, worthless in games.


----------



## entiszzoot

Anonimoussex said:


> Check out in previous posts there was one a couple of days ago


WOW I SOLVED IT ! thank you very much ! got the shamino bios 1011 that fixed my problem. Probably was a bios bad compatibility whit my ram. thank a lot man ! and thank to Shamino ! I was close to taking everything apart and shipping my mobo for rma! thank you !

ps.Sei italiano anche tu?


----------



## bern43

Installed Armoury Crate last night to get the AIDA64 license. Now trying to uninstall. What a nightmare. Windows uninstall left a bunch of files. And the official uninstaller tool is taking forever. I'd almost pay the licensing fee for AIDA just to never have to install this.


----------



## Martin778

Aida keys are all over the internet...


----------



## Minciu

Do you have any issues with DDR5 memory depending on how the cooling backplate pressure is placed or the cooling itself to the cpu?

board Z690-F + Arctic Liquid Freezer 2 + o11 mini

I have already encountered various problems with ALF2.
*1. *mount + bp LGA15xx - *A1 and A2 banks were not working.* (no CPU pressure + high temperatures)

*2. *(reassembly) mount + BP LGA15xx - *OK even with 1T + XMP Kingston 6000 in TM5 30min test* (no CPU compression + high temperatures - test was aborted because it's a waste of time and CPU was hurt from temperature 90*C+)

*3. *mount + BP LGA1700x - the huge backplate was higher than the board's mounting pins and it was weighing down on the case. *When XMP was launched it gave W10 blue screens or errors in TM5.


4.* LGA1700 mount + 15xx backplate - it fits the case, seems to work, but I've fixed it twice to be able to overclock the ram to 6400. TM5 errors above.* Also no way to even load the bios with 1T + XMP*. Even though I've managed to get the CPU-RAM pins well enough to get the TM5 to work for half an hour.

Lets say, it is almost good. But it was beter before some how. And only one what is change is mount cpu cooler ( ALF2 in my case scenario )

I don't know what the issue is, so it'is money and the price of the LGA1700 mount. Probably the expensive chipset was to cushion this pathological mount. I know the CPU has a tendency to band. My plan is still to replace the AIO and check the mod with the pads (flusher mod?).

Do you guys have hits like this on your Asusas too? Only Asus have such problems or other brands also? E.g. MSI? 

LGA1700 looks like it is weak and cheap design. 

If you are making APEX boards selection (1..2..3?) are the board to board differences for sure, or is it a draw in mounting Backplate and Cooler ?


----------



## dyanikoglu

Syhndel said:


> 100% agree.
> 
> The g.skill 6000 with Samsung, are worthless. So many people have problem with them, even in xmp. There is no reason what so ever to buy them.
> 
> All posts in here from aida, tm5 etc means nothing when thier computers will crash in games.
> 
> Its like Ryzen users who used to love to post cinebench results, nice numbers, worthless in games.


Latest beta bioses are all running nice with Samsung sticks on xmp. Not sure what's your source on this claim. I even OC'ed timings to C32 / CR1 on 6000Mhz without no issues.


----------



## Silent Scone

dyanikoglu said:


> Latest beta bioses are all running nice with Samsung sticks on xmp. Not sure what's your source on this claim. I even OC'ed timings to C32 / CR1 on 6000Mhz without no issues.


Yes,
Using C30 6000 1T with this exact kit on the Apex. Haven’t had any issues on any UEFI build.


----------



## GtiJason

GtiJason said:


> I would not buy F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK since they are Samsung based IC's
> Best kit's to start your DDR5 OC journey are going to be, ( all in stock at time of writing (Newegg and Amazon for Team/Kingston kits))
> G.Skill - 6400J3239G16GX2-TZ5RK
> Team Group T-Force - FF4D532G6400HC40BDC01
> Corsair - CMT32GX5M2X6200C36
> Kingston Fury - KF560C40BBK2-32 for a "budget" option $354.00 at Amazon
> 
> As for APEX bios version I'd currently use 0086 or if you need AVX support 0080


Just wanted to add that the OLOy 6200c32 kit is in stock again. I have this kit but it just arrived a few days ago so very limited testing and was with i3 12100F that seems to have a much weaker IMC than my i7 and i9. Only tried up to 6400c30-37-37-28-1T and VDD/VDDQ 1.430v max






Are you a human?







www.newegg.com


----------



## Simkin

dyanikoglu said:


> Latest beta bioses are all running nice with Samsung sticks on xmp. Not sure what's your source on this claim. I even OC'ed timings to C32 / CR1 on 6000Mhz without no issues.


They (G.Skill's) are also hot with no thermalpads on PMIC - yet another reason to stay away from them.

Got rid of mine and bought T-Force 6200 Hynix.


----------



## Simkin

The 1003 and 1101 bios on Apex, are they the same, except for added SLI key on the 1101?

I just flashed 1003 on mine.


----------



## Nizzen

Simkin said:


> They (G.Skill's) are also hot with no thermalpads on PMIC - yet another reason to stay away from them.
> 
> Got rid of mine and bought T-Force 6200 Hynix.


My new 6400c32 is 42c with 1 hour ramtest (1.47v). Using a fan over it. Not "delidded" yet 
Finally 6400 1t is easy stable in Battlefield 
Not final "voltages", but it's a start. Started testing 3 hours ago 
Using 0086 bios. Looks like this is the newest test bios.
No time to stability tests. Playing is more fun. He**, 3dmark is more fun 😁








Stock cache for now before stability tests on memory.
Is singlecore good?


----------



## Martin778

This is with E-Cores disabled?


----------



## Nizzen

Martin778 said:


> This is with E-Cores disabled?


Yes. Need more fps in Battlefield. Then e-cores need to go to sleep 😜


----------



## satinghostrider

Can someone point to where to download this 0086 bios? Been searching and I can seem to find it. Thanks!


----------



## bscool

satinghostrider said:


> Can someone point to where to download this 0086 bios? Been searching and I can seem to find it. Thanks!











ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0086.CAP


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com





source ASUS ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX | APEX 14


----------



## satinghostrider

bscool said:


> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0086.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> source ASUS ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX | APEX 14


Thanks a bunch mate.


----------



## Deceased

dyanikoglu said:


> Latest beta bioses are all running nice with Samsung sticks on xmp. Not sure what's your source on this claim. I even OC'ed timings to C32 / CR1 on 6000Mhz without no issues.


Disagree. My Asus z690-I can’t even run on stock settings (yes not even xmp enabled) with g skill 6000 cl40 on latest bios. Honestly it’s a joke that it’s not even stable without any change to Bios setting

Im still on 0010 as of today for stability. Either the ram sucks or the mb sucks.

I hope my incoming Corsair 6200 will resolve the issue.


----------



## Gking62

DELETED.


----------



## Jpmboy

Damn, all this ram fun with the APEX and DDR5...


----------



## satinghostrider

Deceased said:


> Disagree. My Asus z690-I can’t even run on stock settings (yes not even xmp enabled) with g skill 6000 cl40 on latest bios. Honestly it’s a joke that it’s not even stable without any change to Bios setting
> 
> Im still on 0010 as of today for stability. Either the ram sucks or the mb sucks.
> 
> I hope my incoming Corsair 6200 will resolve the issue.


You should look at your sticks first. I had issues with 6000c36 sticks no matter what I did to stabilise them even at XMP for days. Then 5600c36 I tried and it took me half hour to run 6000c321t stable. Didn't even bother trying XMP since I could run that preset. Ran TM5 to check after gaming for an hour and everything is rock solid. If you're running XMP, make sure it's XMP1 btw.

I'm guessing it's your sticks as those on that board can easily do good frequencies and timings. Only way is to try another kit to see if XMP works which I'm guessing could be the main cause. Alternatively, you could try bumping VDD/VDDQ by 0.05V and setting SA to 0.95V and see if it helps.


----------



## gecko991

My Gskill Z5 5600C36 TZ5RK set will do XMP2 on my Apex right up to 6000 at 1.28.


----------



## Deceased

satinghostrider said:


> You should look at your sticks first. I had issues with 6000c36 sticks no matter what I did to stabilise them even at XMP for days. Then 5600c36 I tried and it took me half hour to run 6000c321t stable. Didn't even bother trying XMP since I could run that preset. Ran TM5 to check after gaming for an hour and everything is rock solid. If you're running XMP, make sure it's XMP1 btw.
> 
> I'm guessing it's your sticks as those on that board can easily do good frequencies and timings. Only way is to try another kit to see if XMP works which I'm guessing could be the main cause. Alternatively, you could try bumping VDD/VDDQ by 0.05V and setting SA to 0.95V and see if it helps.


Yea I’m waiting for my new sticks to test which is the problem (I also suspect it’s the current stick causing all the issues).

I have tried many sorts of combinations of different SA/VDD/VDDQ/MC but all either bosd or crash with testmem5. And yea, I tried with XMP 1 on all sorts of bios version.

One thing that pisses me off is the fact that even without any tweaking/changes on bios,my pc can still get bosd and ram errors. Can’t believe non xmp profile would be unstable too.

even at 0010, its 95% stable (no memory errors now) but with 2 encounters of random shut downs (while not doing anything heavy) and I still don’t know why.

Should have gone for unify mb instead.


----------



## satinghostrider

Deceased said:


> Yea I’m waiting for my new sticks to test which is the problem (I also suspect it’s the current stick causing all the issues).
> 
> I have tried many sorts of combinations of different SA/VDD/VDDQ/MC but all either bosd or crash with testmem5. And yea, I tried with XMP 1 on all sorts of bios version.
> 
> One thing that pisses me off is the fact that even without any tweaking/changes on bios,my pc can still get bosd and ram errors. Can’t believe non xmp profile would be unstable too.
> 
> even at 0010, its 95% stable (no memory errors now) but with 2 encounters of random shut downs (while not doing anything heavy) and I still don’t know why.
> 
> Should have gone for unify mb instead.


Did you try adjusting SA to 0.95v while using XMP1? If still not completely stable, add 0.05V to VDD/VDDQ and try. If still not working, highly suspect your sticks. This is exactly what I went through with my early batch of 6000C36 sticks.


----------



## oc22jirM

Nizzen said:


> My new 6400c32 is 42c with 1 hour ramtest (1.47v). Using a fan over it. Not "delidded" yet
> Finally 6400 1t is easy stable in Battlefield
> Not final "voltages", but it's a start. Started testing 3 hours ago
> Using 0086 bios. Looks like this is the newest test bios.
> No time to stability tests. Playing is more fun. He**, 3dmark is more fun 😁
> View attachment 2546313
> 
> Stock cache for now before stability tests on memory.
> Is singlecore good?
> View attachment 2546317


Hey sir. Do you think I could have a chance with your ram settings if I keep the E cores enabled? Going to run through tonight if I can find some time. Having a bit of trouble with my 6400/c32 Trident z5 kit. Cheers


----------



## Deceased

satinghostrider said:


> Did you try adjusting SA to 0.95v while using XMP1? If still not completely stable, add 0.05V to VDD/VDDQ and try. If still not working, highly suspect your sticks. This is exactly what I went through with my early batch of 6000C36 sticks.


Yes, played with SA from auto to 0.95/1.0/1.1...vdd/vddq to from 1.30 change to 1.35. Any combination i tried to replicate after reading here, reddit, rog forum doesn't seems to be working for me. even lowering freq from 6000 to 5600, SA 0.95, vdd/vddq to 1.35 doesn't work as well. 

Yea i think my sticks are buggy, but i also think maybe it could be my z690-i too. Otherwise why does it works fine on 0010 on both xmp 1/2 and pass anta777 extreme1?

That's what makes me feel it could be the ram, or the mb (and the bios setting).


----------



## satinghostrider

Deceased said:


> Yes, played with SA from auto to 0.95/1.0/1.1...vdd/vddq to from 1.30 change to 1.35. Any combination i tried to replicate after reading here, reddit, rog forum doesn't seems to be working for me. even lowering freq from 6000 to 5600, SA 0.95, vdd/vddq to 1.35 doesn't work as well.
> 
> Yea i think my sticks are buggy, but i also think maybe it could be my z690-i too. Otherwise why does it works fine on 0010 on both xmp 1/2 and pass anta777 extreme1?
> 
> That's what makes me feel it could be the ram, or the mb (and the bios setting).


I'd try swapping sticks between the 2 DIMMs to see if that would help. But if that doesn't help, you can only isolate the sticks by testing a new kit as I had gone through the same. It's very annoying. I know it can't be my board because I can run 6000c321t with perfect stability with this 5600c36 kit for the last month or so.


----------



## Deceased

satinghostrider said:


> I'd try swapping sticks between the 2 DIMMs to see if that would help. But if that doesn't help, you can only isolate the sticks by testing a new kit as I had gone through the same. It's very annoying. I know it can't be my board because I can run 6000c321t with perfect stability with this 5600c36 kit for the last month or so.


Yes I did that swapping of ram slots too but makes no difference. Is your board the same as mine and you had the gskill 6000 but downgraded to 5600?


----------



## satinghostrider

Deceased said:


> Yes I did that swapping of ram slots too but makes no difference. Is your board the same as mine and you had the gskill 6000 but downgraded to 5600?


Nope mine is Apex. But I had the same problem as you. My 5600 kit was easier to oc with stability and xmp works fine. 6000c36 kit xmp and oc was not stable no matter what.


----------



## Mikka24

Hi. Anybody here with Corsair Platinum ddr5 6200 cl36

its Sk Hinyx M

which motherboard from Asus u would suggest?
Should I keep Sk hinyx m or go for Samsung?

Thanks in advance


----------



## jeiselramos

Mikka24 said:


> Hi. Anybody here with Corsair Platinum ddr5 6200 cl36
> 
> its Sk Hinyx M
> 
> which motherboard from Asus u would suggest?
> Should I keep Sk hinyx m or go for Samsung?
> 
> Thanks in advance


Sk hynix is better


----------



## Mikka24

jeiselramos said:


> Sk hynix is better


Thanks for reply


----------



## Nizzen

oc22jirM said:


> Hey sir. Do you think I could have a chance with your ram settings if I keep the E cores enabled? Going to run through tonight if I can find some time. Having a bit of trouble with my 6400/c32 Trident z5 kit. Cheers


I got it first stable with e-cores. 
Try vccSA =auto
Mc voltage = 1.25

You need patience 😅


----------



## Martin778

If there is one voltage I'd never leave on auto, it's VCCSA. All of these boards overshoot it a lot, like 1.25V where it takes 1.05-.10 to run stable.


----------



## Nizzen

Martin778 said:


> If there is one voltage I'd never leave on auto, it's VCCSA. All of these boards overshoot it a lot, like 1.25V where it takes 1.05-.10 to run stable.


Strange low vccsa isn't stable in everything, but higher is. Memtest is stable with low vccsa. Playing games isn't. Atleast in avx games like Battlefield V/2042.

I know @Carillo and @Mumriken has the same "problem", or is it reality? Maybe we have very tight timings, and low vccsa users don't?
Discuss 🤗


----------



## lowmotion

Deceased said:


> Disagree. My Asus z690-I can’t even run on stock settings (yes not even xmp enabled) with g skill 6000 cl40 on latest bios. Honestly it’s a joke that it’s not even stable without any change to Bios setting
> 
> Im still on 0010 as of today for stability. Either the ram sucks or the mb sucks.
> 
> I hope my incoming Corsair 6200 will resolve the issue.


Now i get red/orange/white, then go to the bios, set XMP, reboot, i get red/orange/red/orange-loop. After the shutdown it boots to safe mode again. The reason i cant boot XMP is not the DDR5. Its about the assembly of the socket. The pressure is too high, too low or not even. I am going to change that now.


----------



## 7empe

Nizzen said:


> Strange low vccsa isn't stable in everything, but higher is. Memtest is stable with low vccsa. Playing games isn't. Atleast in avx games like Battlefield V/2042.
> 
> I know @Carillo and @Mumriken has the same "problem", or is it reality? Maybe we have very tight timings, and low vccsa users don't?
> Discuss 🤗


On Sammies.
Tight timings and VCCSA=0.92V. Works in Karhu, TM5, Prime95 112k, BFV, BF2042.
Completely unstable with VCCSA=1.20V and more.










For 6600C34-T2, SA needs 0.95V. Completely unstable with SA=1.1V and more.










Oddly enough that for both RAM settings, SA on auto is always 1.25V. This may be also the case why some people can't boot XMP. Maybe CPU specific?


----------



## 7empe

[delete]


----------



## Nizzen

7empe said:


> [delete]


0.95SA is stable on g.skill Samsung, not Hynix for me.
Maybe combination cpu and Hynix. Whatever works I guess 😅


----------



## 7empe

Nizzen said:


> 0.95SA is stable on g.skill Samsung, not Hynix for me.
> Maybe combination cpu and Hynix. Whatever works I guess 😅


Yes, I think it is a combination of IC vendor and IMC.


----------



## jeiselramos

7empe said:


> On Sammies.
> Tight timings and VCCSA=0.92V. Works in Karhu, TM5, Prime95 112k, BFV, BF2042.
> Completely unstable with VCCSA=1.20V and more.
> 
> View attachment 2546371
> 
> 
> For 6600C34-T2, SA needs 0.95V. Completely unstable with SA=1.1V and more.
> 
> View attachment 2546372
> 
> 
> Oddly enough that for both RAM settings, SA on auto is always 1.25V. This may be also the case why some people can't boot XMP. Maybe CPU specific?


The problem is find the right SA when you don't know if your ram are stable or not


----------



## cstkl1

Nizzen said:


> Strange low vccsa isn't stable in everything, but higher is. Memtest is stable with low vccsa. Playing games isn't. Atleast in avx games like Battlefield V/2042.
> 
> I know @Carillo and @Mumriken has the same "problem", or is it reality? Maybe we have very tight timings, and low vccsa users don't?
> Discuss 🤗


bump L2

adl suffers from transient like cml
test p95 fft112 all avx off


----------



## sblantipodi

As I said in previous posts I can run 5GHz no problem on my 4x16GB,
but I can't even boot at 4.8GHz.

Shamino said me that the problem depends on the fact that at 5.0ghz memory is retrained and on 4.8GHz not.

How can I force the retrain on 4.8Ghz like it does on 5.0GHz?

Thanks


----------



## edkieferlp

sblantipodi said:


> As I said in previous posts I can run 5GHz no problem on my 4x16GB,
> but I can't even boot at 4.8GHz.
> 
> Shamino said me that the problem depends on the fact that at 5.0ghz memory is retrained and on 4.8GHz not.
> 
> How can I force the retrain on 4.8Ghz like it does on 5.0GHz?
> 
> Thanks


What about turning off that MRC fast boot option in memory section.


----------



## Nizzen

cstkl1 said:


> bump L2
> 
> adl suffers from transient like cml
> test p95 fft112 all avx off


What is L2? 😳
Sorry I'm noob


----------



## cstkl1

Nizzen said:


> What is L2? 😳
> Sorry I'm noob


the voltage knob after vcore

cpu L2 voltage.. default is 1.05.

i run 53x6,52x7,51x8 with octvb +2 with ecore auto, cache auto + ram oc
llc3 ac/dc 0.36/1.1 IA limit 1520
on fft112 stress test found upping L2 to 1.25
fixes all transient issues and when loading the profile with ram+cpu oc from ( load optimized) .. ram gets trained properly.
SA instead of setting it. leave it at offset auto = cpu default voltage. some cpu will be 0.85 and some is 0.925.
SA = auto .. is asus preset for the ram mhz
SA = offset AUTO is cpu default.

btw i use legacy game scroll lock when gaming.


----------



## Nizzen

cstkl1 said:


> the voltage knob after vcore
> 
> cpu L2 voltage.. default is 1.05.
> 
> i run 53x6,52x7,51x8 with octvb +2 with ecore auto, cache auto + ram oc
> llc3 ac/dc 0.36/1.1 IA limit 1520
> on fft112 stress test found upping L2 to 1.25
> fixes all transient issues and when loading the profile with ram oc from ( load optimized) .. ram gets trained properly.
> SA instead of setting it. leave it at offset auto = cpu default voltage. some cpu will be 0.85 and some is 0.925.
> SA = auto .. is asus preset for the ram mhz
> SA = offset AUTO is cpu default.
> 
> btw i use legacy game scroll lock when gaming.


Nice info! Will try


----------



## jeiselramos

cstkl1 said:


> SA instead of setting it. leave it at offset auto = cpu default voltage. some cpu will be 0.85 and some is 0.925.
> SA = auto .. is asus preset for the ram mhz
> SA = offset AUTO is cpu default.


what's the advantage of setting it to offset auto?


----------



## Martin778

Seriously guys, don't run auto voltages when you run XMP or other OC  Read out the default value and dial it in manually. This platform is still maturing and we don't know what it might cause when it has a bad day.
I've learnt my lesson with X99.


----------



## 7empe

cstkl1 said:


> the voltage knob after vcore
> 
> cpu L2 voltage.. default is 1.05.
> 
> i run 53x6,52x7,51x8 with octvb +2 with ecore auto, cache auto + ram oc
> llc3 ac/dc 0.36/1.1 IA limit 1520
> on fft112 stress test found upping L2 to 1.25
> fixes all transient issues and when loading the profile with ram+cpu oc from ( load optimized) .. ram gets trained properly.
> SA instead of setting it. leave it at offset auto = cpu default voltage. some cpu will be 0.85 and some is 0.925.
> SA = auto .. is asus preset for the ram mhz
> SA = offset AUTO is cpu default.
> 
> btw i use legacy game scroll lock when gaming.


Kudos! It’s really like that. SA on auto offset seems to be cpu specific and.it is 0.95 instead of 1.25 when used on auto. Also, using L2 adaptive goes up to 1.1V under load. On auto it was fixed at 1.05V. Trains better for CR=1T. Now moving with L2 to 1.25V to see if I can finally get rid of TM5 errors with 6400C32T1…


----------



## Arni90

Martin778 said:


> Seriously guys, don't run auto voltages when you run XMP or other OC  Read out the default value and dial it in manually. This platform is still maturing and we don't know what it might cause when it has a bad day.
> I've learnt my lesson with X99.


You know VCore is controlled by V/F points, and can be left on auto? Right?


----------



## cstkl1

jeiselramos said:


> what's the advantage of setting it to offset auto?


its the cpu default sa.


----------



## Nizzen

cstkl1 said:


> the voltage knob after vcore
> 
> cpu L2 voltage.. default is 1.05.
> 
> i run 53x6,52x7,51x8 with octvb +2 with ecore auto, cache auto + ram oc
> llc3 ac/dc 0.36/1.1 IA limit 1520
> on fft112 stress test found upping L2 to 1.25
> fixes all transient issues and when loading the profile with ram+cpu oc from ( load optimized) .. ram gets trained properly.
> SA instead of setting it. leave it at offset auto = cpu default voltage. some cpu will be 0.85 and some is 0.925.
> SA = auto .. is asus preset for the ram mhz
> SA = offset AUTO is cpu default.
> 
> btw i use legacy game scroll lock when gaming.


0086 bios, and no L2 🤣


----------



## cstkl1

Nizzen said:


> 0086 bios, and no L2 🤣
> View attachment 2546403


the option only shows up if E cores are enabled.


----------



## sblantipodi

edkieferlp said:


> What about turning off that MRC fast boot option in memory section.


Disabled it.
It still works at 5GHz but not on 4.8GHz,
4.8GHz does not even post.


----------



## Martin778

Arni90 said:


> You know VCore is controlled by V/F points, and can be left on auto? Right?


Vcore is not the problem as it's roughly pre-programmed, the other voltages like VCCSA and IMC are because it will guesstimate if run outside of Intels's spec.


----------



## Minciu

lowmotion said:


> Now i get red/orange/white, then go to the bios, set XMP, reboot, i get red/orange/red/orange-loop. After the shutdown it boots to safe mode again. The reason i cant boot XMP is not the DDR5. Its about the assembly of the socket. The pressure is too high, too low or not even. I am going to change that now.


So not only I have problem with assembly cooler ?

What do You have on CPU ? I will try avoid it to ;D 









[OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread


Anyone with a Z690 Strix-A D4 get stuck on rog screen? Also when I mute when audio is playing on from Realtek audio, it mutes immediately but visually it takes a bit to show mute symbol. If u repeatedly mute/unmute you get lag, which is definitely not normal. Also I updated bios and it didn't...




www.overclock.net


----------



## ClockerRocker

Haven't been on here since 2013! Didn't remember even making an account on here before until I went to sign up 

Anyways, I have a Z690 Apex, and I couldn't get my G.Skill Trident Z5 RGB RAM (F5-6400J3239G16GX2-TZ5RK) to show up in Aura, no matter what I did. But, turns out, all I had to do was install G.Skill's Trident Z Lighting Control on top of Aura, and it showed up in Aura no problem after a reboot! Just a tip for anyone having any similar issues.


----------



## ClockerRocker

Also, surprisingly, this 6400 MHz, CL32 G.Skill kit seems to work perfectly fine out of the box with XMP I on the latest BIOS (1101). Ran three cycles of TestMem5 on the anta777's Extreme1 profile and it passed fine, going to run a 20 cycle run overnight, though.


----------



## jahoney

Looking forward to the headache that is the cl32 6400 kit I just bought. I will be installing into z690-E mobo with 12700k. My initial goal will be stability to get all drivers set up and upgraded to windows 11 (current cpu 6700k does not support it). Ram/cpu/cooler arrives tomorrow hoping to start tomorrow night and have the hardware all installed by Friday night. 

I will post my findings and appreciate the work you’ve all done so far.


----------



## the_patchelor

Apex Z690, Samsung G.Skill 5600C36 @ 6200C32 non RGB no issues at all, tested almost all beta bioses since 0015.
Tomorrow the Hynix G.Skill 6400C32 "J" non RGB will arrive. let's see, looking forward


----------



## sblantipodi

the_patchelor said:


> Apex Z690, Samsung G.Skill 5600C36 @ 6200C32 non RGB no issues at all, tested almost all beta bioses since 0015.
> Tomorrow the Hynix G.Skill 6400C32 "J" non RGB will arrive. let's see, looking forward


with DDR5 if you have no issue means that you haven't tested it well enough xD


----------



## dyanikoglu

Is only difference between 1101 and 1003 the sli support for apex?


----------



## MC_SULY_514

Any Apex ppl running this kit G.SkiLL Trident Z5 RGB Series 32GB DDR5 6000MHz CL36 @ 1.30v 36-36-36-76 (F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK)?

Was getting BSOD/freezes with no overclock at call (ram nor cpu lol). waking up to desktop being frozen.
tried every combo from win10 to win11 to single memory sticks.
Don't even wanna talk about the overclocking ram let alone just pressing the XMP button lel
I have sealed corsair kit (DR5 6200 CMT32GX5M2X6200C36) just arrived as backup 

Updated the bios Version 1101 on the asus z690 apex 35 hours ago.
so far played a few hours of bf2042 since that was giving me the most memory ram crashes and a few other applications.
so far nothing, but too early to tell. im testing first with xmp, since manual overclocking was a nightmare to get stable earlier.

It has always passed memtest, and other memory tests since day1. it just always crashed when it was used in different applications.


----------



## MC_SULY_514

dyanikoglu said:


> Is only difference between 1101 and 1003 the sli support for apex?


yea


----------



## sblantipodi

MC_SULY_514 said:


> yea


There is no changelog how can you answer yes?


----------



## MC_SULY_514

sblantipodi said:


> There is no changelog how can you answer yes?


yes lol.. go on the website and click on the bios and it's there.
Obviously the stuff from the previous bios Version 1003 is carried over.

"ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX BIOS 1101 
-Include the SLI key to support NVIDIA NV Link technology to the compatible graphics cards. "


----------



## badjz

7empe said:


> On Sammies.
> Tight timings and VCCSA=0.92V. Works in Karhu, TM5, Prime95 112k, BFV, BF2042.
> Completely unstable with VCCSA=1.20V and more.
> 
> View attachment 2546371
> 
> 
> For 6600C34-T2, SA needs 0.95V. Completely unstable with SA=1.1V and more.
> 
> View attachment 2546372
> 
> 
> Oddly enough that for both RAM settings, SA on auto is always 1.25V. This may be also the case why some people can't boot XMP. Maybe CPU specific?


Anychnace you could kindly share your bios text for 6200c30?


----------



## sblantipodi

MC_SULY_514 said:


> yes lol.. go on the website and click on the bios and it's there.
> Obviously the stuff from the previous bios Version 1003 is carried over.
> 
> "ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX BIOS 1101
> -Include the SLI key to support NVIDIA NV Link technology to the compatible graphics cards. "


You have no changelog for 1101 so how can you tell us that the only changes between 1003 and 1101 is the sli addition?


----------



## MC_SULY_514

sblantipodi said:


> You have no changelog for 1101 so how can you tell us that the only changes between 1003 and 1101 is the sli addition?


you tripping lol
go look for yourself, it's listed.
go on asus forums, it's listed in more details.
ask with asus chat, im sure you would like that too
google is your friend, but i am not


----------



## criznit

Does anyone know why the 12900k will be stuck at 100Mhz lower than the actual clocks? I have my P-Cores overclocked to 5.1 but HWinfo says the clocks are 5000. Everything was reset to default and the problem still persists.

Update - I know this is an Asus thread, but MSI's latest bios has a "dashboard OC button" feature that allows the user to modify the CPU BLK via the remote control. This feature doesn't run at the entered value and should be disabled if you're not using it. Disabling this feature fixed my clocks and I'm back in business.


----------



## Csavez™

badjz said:


> Anychnace you could kindly share your bios text for 6200c30?


0086 Apex 6400 cl28 hynix, I experience the exact opposite, under 1.25 blue death, 1.33 I had to run tm5 extreme / usmus, cb r23 30min, and game.


----------



## sblantipodi

MC_SULY_514 said:


> you tripping lol
> go look for yourself, it's listed.
> go on asus forums, it's listed in more details.
> ask with asus chat, im sure you would like that too
> google is your friend, but i am not


ah ok, I now see it.
thank you my "not friend"


----------



## Ghoosti

Opusss sorry,

Hello,
I have an Asus Maximus Z690 extreme.
Often, for example during a Clear Cmos, I no longer have access to the bios using the F2?
The pc runs in a loop and I get a message: Post error or Cmos error.
Did you notice the same thing?
Thank you for your help and advices


----------



## Nizzen

Ghoosti said:


> Bonjour,
> j'ai un Asus Maximus Z690 extrême.
> Souvent, par exemple lors d'un Clear Cmos, je n'ai plus accès au bios à l'aide du F2 ?
> Le pc tourne en boucle et j'obtiens un message : Post error ou Cmos error.
> Avez-vous remarqué la même chose ?
> Merci pour votre aide et vos conseils


English forum. Pleace try again..
.


----------



## ClockerRocker

ClockerRocker said:


> Also, surprisingly, this 6400 MHz, CL32 G.Skill kit seems to work perfectly fine out of the box with XMP I on the latest BIOS (1101). Ran three cycles of TestMem5 on the anta777's Extreme1 profile and it passed fine, going to run a 20 cycle run overnight, though.


Well, I ran 11 cycles before calling it quits. 0 errors & no WHEA errors.


----------



## sblantipodi

Ghoosti said:


> Opusss sorry,
> 
> Hello,
> I have an Asus Maximus Z690 extreme.
> Often, for example during a Clear Cmos, I no longer have access to the bios using the F2?
> The pc runs in a loop and I get a message: Post error or Cmos error.
> Did you notice the same thing?
> Thank you for your help and advices


update to latest bios, double check that the memory is in the correct slots.
don't use XMP, don't overclock memory until you understood where to start.


----------



## Ghoosti

sblantipodi said:


> update to latest bios, double check that the memory is in the correct slots.
> don't use XMP, don't overclock memory until you understood where to start.


@ sblantipodi,

Bios 1101
Slots I have on 2 and 4
But sometimes I don't know how to have access to F2 to enter the bios?
thank you


----------



## sblantipodi

Ghoosti said:


> @ sblantipodi,
> 
> Bios 1101
> Slots I have on 2 and 4
> But sometimes I don't know how to have access to F2 to enter the bios?
> thank you


if you have cleared CMOS and you don't edited any setting in the bios good luck.
DDR5 is in an alpha state (aka unfinished products without the right QC) as much as the Extreme board.
try to remove one stick of ram just to check if the problem remains.

if this does not solve the problem you have two bios.
turn off the PC, switch to the other bios and check if the problem persist.


----------



## fortecosi

Ghoosti said:


> Opusss sorry,
> 
> Hello,
> I have an Asus Maximus Z690 extreme.
> Often, for example during a Clear Cmos, I no longer have access to the bios using the F2?
> The pc runs in a loop and I get a message: Post error or Cmos error.
> Did you notice the same thing?
> Thank you for your help and advices


I hope you are not using the clear CMOS while your PC is on and running? Always shut down the PC and turn off PSU before you clear CMOS.


----------



## TheSkaz

I have 2 sets of 2x16GB 5600C36 Corsair Dominator (Samsung) in a Maximus Extreme. if I only run 1 set, I can run XMP II, either set will run that just fine. If I run both sets, I cannot even boot. Running the latest BIOS (I have an SLI/NVLINK setup) , I am told that the 4 sticks are a lot for the IMC, is there something I can bump up maybe knowing that the sticks themselves will run XMP II?

And for those wondering why I need 64GB RAM, this is a workstation, and Gaming machine. I do ML programming AND get my butt kicked in COD. its therapeutic lol


----------



## Ghoosti

fortecosi said:


> I hope you are not using the clear CMOS while your PC is on and running? Always shut down the PC and turn off PSU before you clear CMOS.


Yes that's what I do and on restart, impossible to have F2 or SUPR to be able to enter the Bios.
I just removed the sticks and reinstalled them, he doesn't even offer me the F1!
I do not understand...


----------



## sblantipodi

fortecosi said:


> I hope you are not using the clear CMOS while your PC is on and running? Always shut down the PC and turn off PSU before you clear CMOS.


motherboard reboots itself when you clear cmos, 
that button is an hard reset + clear cmos.

there is really no need to shut down the PC and the PSU.


----------



## Ghoosti

sblantipodi said:


> motherboard reboots itself when you clear cmos,
> that button is an hard reset + clear cmos.
> 
> there is really no need to shut down the PC and the PSU.



But why does it not offer me F2?
Am I going to try FlashBack? with 1101


----------



## sblantipodi

Ghoosti said:


> But why does it not offer me F2?
> Am I going to try FlashBack?


but can you boot into the operating system or are you stuck with a black screen?


----------



## sblantipodi

TheSkaz said:


> I have 2 sets of 2x16GB 5600C36 Corsair Dominator (Samsung) in a Maximus Extreme. if I only run 1 set, I can run XMP II, either set will run that just fine. If I run both sets, I cannot even boot. Running the latest BIOS (I have an SLI/NVLINK setup) , I am told that the 4 sticks are a lot for the IMC, is there something I can bump up maybe knowing that the sticks themselves will run XMP II?
> 
> And for those wondering why I need 64GB RAM, this is a workstation, and Gaming machine. I do ML programming AND get my butt kicked in COD. its therapeutic lol


Same sticks here on an Extreme board, using Dominator 4x16GB 5600MHz C36.
I can't drive them more than 5000MHz C40 without errors.
IMC 1.28V, VDD/VDDQ 1.38V.
I need 1.150V SA to be stable on 4 sticks.

highering IMC and VDD/VDDQ does not help that much if at all.


----------



## Ghoosti

sblantipodi said:


> but can you boot into the operating system or are you stuck with a black screen?


black screen


----------



## sblantipodi

Ghoosti said:


> black screen


have you tried switching to the other BIOS?
there is a button on your mobo that let you switch to the other bios.
turn the pc off. press that button. the orange led will move in the second position. turn the pc on.


----------



## Gadfly

I really wish people understood that XMP profiles are incomplete (They only contain a few timings, most are still determined by the motherboard's defaults), are still overclocking, and that manual changes should be expected. 

It is like people just expect to load an XMP profile and have an instantly stable memory overclock with a full set of timings. That is not at all what XMP is or what it does. It is just a starting point.


----------



## sblantipodi

Gadfly said:


> I really wish people understood that XMP profiles are incomplete (They only contain a few timings, most are still determined by the motherboard's defaults), are still overclocking, and that manual changes should be expected.
> 
> It is like people just expect to load an XMP profile and have an instantly stable memory overclock with a full set of timings. That is not at all what XMP is or what it does. It is just a starting point.


on previous mobos/memory XMP is a completely working feature for non exotic kits.
with these mobos and memory we can't even get it stable on light OC.


----------



## Ghoosti

sblantipodi said:


> have you tried switching to the other BIOS?
> there is a button on your mobo that let you switch to the other bios.
> turn the pc off. press that button. the orange led will move in the second position. turn the pc on.


you're talking about the Button next to the Clear Cmos ?


----------



## sblantipodi

Ghoosti said:


> you're talking about the Button next to the Clear Cmos ?


no.









you can't be wrong, there are two orange leds above that button.
if you press it, you toggle the led from the first one, to the second one.

use the second led (second bios)


----------



## TheSkaz

sblantipodi said:


> no.
> View attachment 2546566
> 
> 
> you can't be wrong, there are two orange leds above that button.
> if you press it, you toggle the led from the first one, to the second one.
> 
> use the second led (second bios)


On the back, the IO panel, there is a switch BIOS button right next to the clear CMOS button. I assume it doesn the exact same thing


----------



## TheSkaz

sblantipodi said:


> Same sticks here on an Extreme board, using Dominator 4x16GB 5600MHz C36.
> I can't drive them more than 5000MHz C40 without errors.
> IMC 1.28V, VDD/VDDQ 1.38V.
> I need 1.150V SA to be stable on 4 sticks.
> 
> highering IMC and VDD/VDDQ does not help that much if at all.


This got me going. it finally POSTed and booted. the MC voltage was 1.28125 or something like that.. Assuming I changed the correct voltage (none said IMC directly)


----------



## Ghoosti

sblantipodi said:


> no.
> View attachment 2546566
> 
> 
> you can't be wrong, there are two orange leds above that button.
> if you press it, you toggle the led from the first one, to the second one.
> 
> use the second led (second bios)


Ok I switched to the other Bios
He offered me F2, I entered the bios (0238)
What do I do now, install the 1101 and then flip the button the other way?
Really thank you for your help


----------



## Gadfly

sblantipodi said:


> on previous mobos/memory XMP is a completely working feature for non exotic kits.
> with these mobos and memory we can't even get it stable on light OC.


It is still a completely working feature, the bios loads the timings included in the SPD data on the DIMM. That is all XMP is. 

There are no problems getting the memory stable on a "Light OC", but as is the normal with memory overclocking, you have going to have make changes to get the OC stable, and it will be different from CPU to CPU, Motherboard to motherboard (even of the same model), and dimm to dimm (even of the same part number).


----------



## sblantipodi

TheSkaz said:


> On the back, the IO panel, there is a switch BIOS button right next to the clear CMOS button. I assume it doesn the exact same thing


no, that one is the flashback one, not the bios switch button.



TheSkaz said:


> This got me going. it finally POSTed and booted. the MC voltage was 1.28125 or something like that.. Assuming I changed the correct voltage (none said IMC directly)


yes the bios says something like "memory controller voltage" but if it says 1.28125 you are right, it's that value 
glad that it worked. now you need some testing, it works for me but who knows if it works for you 
you can probably do even better.


----------



## TheSkaz

fair enough


Got the ram to 5200c40 so far... testing


----------



## truehighroller1

I have a question about overclocking my cache on this platform 12900k with the strix wifi a d4 BIOS 0901. 

Do I have to disable the e-cores to overclock the cache because I can't get it to boot when having them enabled. It will boot to the white light basically saying okay I'm good and it just sits there and never does anything else. I tried disabling ring bin down to no avail I pushed more voltage into the l2 via adaptive and manual to no avail as well. I set both min and max to 49 with ring bin down disabled. If I disable the e-cores bam boots right up.


----------



## Ghoosti

Ghoosti said:


> Ok I switched to the other Bios
> He offered me F2, I entered the bios (0238)
> What do I do now, install the 1101 and then flip the button the other way?
> Really thank you for your help





sblantipodi said:


> no.
> View attachment 2546566
> 
> 
> you can't be wrong, there are two orange leds above that button.
> if you press it, you toggle the led from the first one, to the second one.
> 
> use the second led (second bios)


 What do I do now, install the 1101 and then flip the button the other way ?


----------



## sblantipodi

Ghoosti said:


> What do I do now, install the 1101 and then flip the button the other way ?


if that way it works it seems that you have a problem with the first one.
I would not update the second bios until you can boot the first one. 
you now have a working bios at least.

switch back on the first bios and try to flashback to fix the first bios.


----------



## Ghoosti

sblantipodi said:


> if that way it works it seems that you have a problem with the first one.
> I would not update the second bios until you can boot the first one.
> you now have a working bios at least.
> 
> switch back on the first bios and try to flashback to fix the first bios.


Ok thank you very much for your help.
I will follow your advice and use the Flash Back


----------



## sblantipodi

Ghoosti said:


> Ok thank you very much for your help.
> I will follow your advice and use the Flash Back


no problem


----------



## TheSkaz

sblantipodi said:


> no, that one is the flashback one, not the bios switch button.
> 
> 
> 
> yes the bios says something like "memory controller voltage" but if it says 1.28125 you are right, it's that value
> glad that it worked. now you need some testing, it works for me but who knows if it works for you
> you can probably do even better.


5200 will boot but unstable under load
5000 is fine


TimeSpy Extreme


----------



## sblantipodi

TheSkaz said:


> 5200 will boot but unstable under load
> 5000 is fine
> 
> 
> TimeSpy Extreme


same here.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

truehighroller1 said:


> I have a question about overclocking my cache on this platform 12900k with the strix wifi a d4 BIOS 0901.
> 
> Do I have to disable the e-cores to overclock the cache because I can't get it to boot when having them enabled. It will boot to the white light basically saying okay I'm good and it just sits there and never does anything else. I tried disabling ring bin down to no avail I pushed more voltage into the l2 via adaptive and manual to no avail as well. I set both min and max to 49 with ring bin down disabled. If I disable the e-cores bam boots right up.


Yes, I've read that's normal behavior. I'm debating to disable the E-cores, but still testing for now. Just got the system up two days ago, so far so good.


----------



## truehighroller1

MrTOOSHORT said:


> Yes, I've read that's normal behavior. I'm debating to disable the E-cores, but still testing for now. Just got the system up two days ago, so far so good.


That sucks because she seemed to be zipping with it turned up but I swear I did notice a dip in fps. Maybe it's because I'm on windows 11. Congrats man! It's definitely an upgrade from x299.


----------



## pR1maL

Just to clarify for the people having issues with XMP, if XMP 1 doesn't work try XMP 2. XMP 1 uses some of your DIMM's timings (primary timings), and mixes those timings in with other sub-timings derived and validated by Asus themselves. XMP 2 on the other hand, loads all of the timings present in your dimm's profile. XMP 1 sub-timings are usually tighter than XMP 2. If one XMP profile doesn't work, the other may.

So, loading XMP 1 and then getting mad with the Dimm manufacturer when it doesn't work might not always be appropriate.

Additionally, loading bios profiles that you saved in previous bios versions doesn't always work. When you try a new bios and want to run XMP, you're probably going to have to load defaults, set XMP, reboot, and then configure your previous settings manually. Especially when there were some microcode updates or firmware updates.

Also, for the boards which have memory presets such as the Apex and Extreme, try using them. If they work, you can play around with timings and maybe relax some voltages. For example, the Apex has a Samsung C40 profile and a C32 profile. Those profiles tend to have higher voltages than the XMP profiles. Shamino posted his Alder Lake overclocking guide, which shows those same voltages.










Quoting Silent Scone,


> XMP I is the validated board profile that you will have seen on past generations. Every time a board is validated, this profile is the one used by the memory vendor and ASUS. On Z390, there is now the option to use the DIMM profile which is XMP II. These settings are not validated, so mileage will vary depending on the kit and CPU.
> 
> XMP I - Board optimised timings
> 
> XMP II - Default XMP timings
> 
> Often, XMP II timings will be slightly looser depending on the memory kit. If you check within the UEFI or memtweakit, you'll see a difference in memory subsets.
> 
> Same primaries, but subs will often be tighter on the ASUS profile. You can try both and check for instability.


EDIT: To discover the differences between the various profiles without applying them, I load the settings, and then hit "save changes and reset". It will present you with a list of the changes, and ask if you want to apply them. Then I just exit without saving and the changes don't apply. If one profile has certain lower timings I'll note those individual timings and try them with the other profile. 

Also, try Maximus Tweak mode 1 or 2. Quoting Silent Scone,



> The Tweak Modes are predefined presets for memory sub-settings and timings. Tweak Mode 1 is better for some module compatibility, Mode 2 is better for overclocking. Either can give better results depending on the memory configuration.


----------



## MC_SULY_514

Just thought i'd give an update on Asus z690 Apex memory problems, in case others have this problem.
apex bios 1101 helps with stability a lot. haven't had any issues for a few days.
on another note i noticed the DDR5 ram i have is "discontinued" and have contacted g.skill on this matter/problems i been having, and they approved my rma for a fresh replacements set.
i don't know if it will be that specific batch i listed but should be something "new'".

my g Ram: G.SkiLL Trident Z5 RGB Series 32GB DDR5 6000MHz CL36 @ 1.30v 36-36-36-76 (F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK) ("discontinued")
new batch: G.SKILL Trident Z5 RGB Series 32GB DDR5 6000MHz CL36 @ 1.35v 36-36-36-96 (F5-6000J3636F16GX2-TZ5RK) (released after 2 months of initial release)


----------



## CptSpig

Deceased said:


> Disagree. My Asus z690-I can’t even run on stock settings (yes not even xmp enabled) with g skill 6000 cl40 on latest bios. Honestly it’s a joke that it’s not even stable without any change to Bios setting
> 
> Im still on 0010 as of today for stability. Either the ram sucks or the mb sucks.
> 
> I hope my incoming Corsair 6200 will resolve the issue.





Jpmboy said:


> Damn, all this ram fun with the APEX and DDR5...


You got any plans build a Apex in the near future?


----------



## Jpmboy

CptSpig said:


> You got any plans build a Apex in the near future?
> 
> View attachment 2546679


I've been _very_ tempted, and the Apex is readily available here... I recently swapped out the guts of my 6950X/R5E-10 for a 5950X/ASUS x570 in the caselabs case (great chip at the OC I managed with it, really crap memory substructure tho - no suprise). My 10980XE/Omega rig has been flawless and still very fast, As yours was, ya get the just about the same AID64 memory performance from x299 (omega and Apex still running here) and Z690, but AID64 really can't show the memory benefit of Z690.
I'll likely hold off for the next chipset gen with DDR5, but my will power is certainly being tested. I do have an empty bench table calling me!


----------



## Jpmboy

MrTOOSHORT said:


> Yes, I've read that's normal behavior. I'm debating to disable the E-cores, but still testing for now. Just got the system up two days ago, so far so good.


Does the ring need to be scaled with cache? No less than 1/2 frequency?


----------



## CptSpig

Jpmboy said:


> I've been _very_ tempted, and the Apex is readily available here... I recently swapped out the guts of my 6950X/R5E-10 for a 5950X/ASUS x570 in the caselabs case (great chip at the OC I managed with it, really crap memory substructure tho - no suprise). My 10980XE/Omega rig has been flawless and still very fast, As yours was, ya get the just about the same AID64 memory performance from x299 (omega and Apex still running here) and Z690, but AID64 really can't show the memory benefit of Z690.
> I'll likely hold off for the next chipset gen with DDR5, but my will power is certainly being tested. I do have an empty bench table calling me!


I still have the X299 Apex running a 7980Xe and 32Gb 3600 CL 16 @ 4000. Using this machine for cad work.


----------



## Jpmboy

CptSpig said:


> I still have the X299 Apex running a 7980Xe and 32Gb 3600 CL 16 @ 4000. Using this machine for cad work.


Still an amazingly fast and capable rig years on!
my x299 Apex/7980XE is holding 3 Titan Vs, runs 24/7! Best new product in at least 2 generations.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Jpmboy said:


> Does the ring need to be scaled with cache? No less than 1/2 frequency?


Hey JP, I wouldn't know anything about that. Just read that it's easier to crank the cache a lot higher with E-cores disabled.

Nice to see you here.


----------



## Jpmboy

MrTOOSHORT said:


> Hey JP, I wouldn't know anything about that. Just read that it's easier to crank the cache a lot higher with E-cores disabled.
> 
> Nice to see you here.


Nice to be here for more than a drive-by 
yeah, i read that somewhere with regard to frequency alignment between cache and the core domain... but disabling the E-cores seems ahellofalot easier!


----------



## truehighroller1

Jpmboy said:


> Nice to be here for more than a drive-by
> yeah, i read that somewhere with regard to frequency alignment between cache and the core domain... but disabling the E-cores seems ahellofalot easier!


How would you align it though?


----------



## Deceased

satinghostrider said:


> Nope mine is Apex. But I had the same problem as you. My 5600 kit was easier to oc with stability and xmp works fine. 6000c36 kit xmp and oc was not stable no matter what.


Hey, my Corsair 6200 is here and I swapped out the problematic g skill 6000 cl40 sticks.

Guess what? I am now able to run on the latest bios (1003) at XMP1 profile without doing any other manual tweaks! Did a short memtest5 with no errors too.

The G skill sticks can’t even load properly on the latest bios and crash when doing memory tests. Something is really wrong with the first gen/batch of g skill sticks, especially the 6000 cl40.

Hope others who have similar issues as me can learn from this.


----------



## Jpmboy

truehighroller1 said:


> How would you align it though?


set the ring bus to no less than 1/2 cache frequency?


----------



## akgis

What are DDR5 normal operating temperatures and what range should aim for, before getting errors

I see both my sticks reacing 60º(gaming) and 63º ish at TM5 and stabilizing there can I go higher? Iam @1.4v for stability


----------



## truehighroller1

Jpmboy said:


> set the ring bus to no less than 1/2 cache frequency?


I haven't seen a ring bus option in mine just the l2 cache multiplier.


----------



## entiszzoot

shamino1978 said:


> PRIME-Z690-P-WIFI-D4-ASUS-1011.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i see a lot, many of which i'm not familiar with, nvme, dmi information, stuff like fanxpert blah blah, and some memory rules


hello mr. Shamino i am realy happy ,because with this version i solved my 5 second delay problem when i pressed the power button.Thank you very much !
But now there is a minor problem:
setting epr disable: my keyboard is not recognized at startup (but the delay is zero and my pc starts immediately)
setting ErP enable (s4 + s5): 2 second delay at start up

My ram : G.Skill Trident Z F4-3600C16D-32GTZN - 2x16 GB DDR4 3600 MHz

hope it can help
Greetings


----------



## J_Lab4645

If I was in the Asus UEFI engineering department and I read the last 50 pages of this forum, I would either turn to alcoholism or do exactly what was needed to shut down the incessant complaints of the lack of "plug' n play" DDR5 complaints. I would release UEFI updates that completely "relaxed" every possible CPU overclock and/or DDR5 XMP profiles timings/subtimings in order to acheive a common ground. In this way I would satisfy the vast majority of users but at the expense of performance. This is probable and most likely what is occurring or what may occur. Please DO NOT let this happen. A lot of us buy ASUS mobo's for a particular reason and we don't want that to change.


----------



## CptSpig

Jpmboy said:


> Still an amazingly fast and capable rig years on!
> my x299 Apex/7980XE is holding 3 Titan Vs, runs 24/7! Best new product in at least 2 generations.


The X299 is a capable machine. I have my 12900K overclocked to 5.5 per core adaptive daily and it decimates the 7980Xe OC'd to 5.1 on chilled water. I have my G.Skill DDR5 5600 kit OC'd to 6000 daily and it gets 101 Gb read on adia64. You would have a blast with one of these machines.


----------



## Arni90

J_Lab4645 said:


> If I was in the Asus UEFI engineering department and I read the last 50 pages of this forum, I would either turn to alcoholism or do exactly what was needed to shut down the incessant complaints of the lack of "plug' n play" DDR5 complaints. I would release UEFI updates that completely "relaxed" every possible CPU overclock and/or DDR5 XMP profiles timings/subtimings in order to acheive a common ground. In this way I would satisfy the vast majority of users but at the expense of performance. This is probable and most likely what is occurring or what may occur. Please DO NOT let this happen. A lot of us buy ASUS mobo's for a particular reason and we don't want that to change.


Have you ever looked at the DRAM timings on a Maximus board? There's a reason "Maximus Tweak" is there


----------



## Jpmboy

CptSpig said:


> The X299 is a capable machine. I have my 12900K overclocked to 5.5 per core adaptive daily and it decimates the 7980Xe OC'd to 5.1 on chilled water. I have my G.Skill DDR5 5600 kit OC'd to 6000 daily and it gets 101 Gb read on adia64. You would have a blast with one of these machines.


I'm sure I would. 5,5GHz per core is screaming! It better crush the 7980XE on a core count basis. 🤙


----------



## NefariousBIG

Jpmboy said:


> I've been _very_ tempted, and the Apex is readily available here... I recently swapped out the guts of my 6950X/R5E-10 for a 5950X/ASUS x570 in the caselabs case (great chip at the OC I managed with it, really crap memory substructure tho - no suprise). My 10980XE/Omega rig has been flawless and still very fast, As yours was, ya get the just about the same AID64 memory performance from x299 (omega and Apex still running here) and Z690, but AID64 really can't show the memory benefit of Z690.
> I'll likely hold off for the next chipset gen with DDR5, but my will power is certainly being tested. I do have an empty bench table calling me!
> 
> View attachment 2546683


Are you no longer using the S8?


----------



## ObviousCough

I'm trying to do >150 blck with my Apex and it keeps stopping at post code 97

Is there a voltage i need to adjust somewhere?


----------



## pR1maL

Arni90 said:


> Have you ever looked at the DRAM timings on a Maximus board? There's a reason "Maximus Tweak" is there


My particular F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RS kit can run multiple passes of TM5 Extreme 1 Anta777 @ 6000 1T command rate, IF I enable Tweak Mode 2. In Auto or Mode 1, it won't finish a single pass unless it's 2T cr. In mode 2 it actually has some stability to play with. At least with my particular 12900k and Apex. It's seems to be much less temp sensitive with these timings, and requires less voltage too. Of course, mileage will vary.

I love the challenges and opportunities presented by this cpu and chipset architecture. So many options to tweak, so many different strategies, the back and forth between successes and failures feels like winning rounds in a good boxing match. Time consuming though, so I just do other things while the tests run.


----------



## sblantipodi

akgis said:


> What are DDR5 normal operating temperatures and what range should aim for, before getting errors
> 
> I see both my sticks reacing 60º(gaming) and 63º ish at TM5 and stabilizing there can I go higher? Iam @1.4v for stability


the real question is... are you reading the PMIC temp or the memory chip temp?
and do you want the answer for the PMIC or the memory chip?

PMIC is a normal IC, no problem even above 90°C.

memory chip, I don't know... never experienced problems related to temps since I'm running at 5GHZ only.


----------



## pR1maL

*The Most Influential DDR5 Sub-Timings**Timin**Range**Notes*tWR32-72Try to keep tWR the same as tRAS. Lower is bettertRFC2300-600Setting this too low can limit the top-end frequencytRFCpb180-400Setting this too low can limit the top-end frequencytFAW18-32You generally want this set as low as it will gotREFI6240-65535You generally want this set as high as it will gotRDRD_dg7-15Value of 8 if possible, or as low as it will allowtWRWR_dg7-15Value of 8 if possible, or as low as it will allow
Timings provided by David Miller,
SOURCE:DDR5 Overclocking Guide: A Little More Performance Never Hurts - Overclockers


----------



## beardlessduck

J_Lab4645 said:


> If I was in the Asus UEFI engineering department and I read the last 50 pages of this forum, I would either turn to alcoholism or do exactly what was needed to shut down the incessant complaints of the lack of "plug' n play" DDR5 complaints. I would release UEFI updates that completely "relaxed" every possible CPU overclock and/or DDR5 XMP profiles timings/subtimings in order to acheive a common ground. In this way I would satisfy the vast majority of users but at the expense of performance. This is probable and most likely what is occurring or what may occur. Please DO NOT let this happen. A lot of us buy ASUS mobo's for a particular reason and we don't want that to change.


Compatibility should be the primary goal. Overclocker e-peen should be second to that for sure.


----------



## uplink

Deceased said:


> Hey, my Corsair 6200 is here and I swapped out the problematic g skill 6000 cl40 sticks.
> 
> Guess what? I am now able to run on the latest bios (1003) at XMP1 profile without doing any other manual tweaks! Did a short memtest5 with no errors too.
> 
> The G skill sticks can’t even load properly on the latest bios and crash when doing memory tests. Something is really wrong with the first gen/batch of g skill sticks, especially the 6000 cl40.
> 
> Hope others who have similar issues as me can learn from this.


 Hey there buddy,

I was running Apex with 5600 MHz CL36 memories from Corsair just fine, I'm running 1003 BiOS/UEFi. Three days ago I purchased the 6200 MHz CL36 memory and I have TONS of errors on XMP I. and still a LOT of errors on XMP II. Also G.Skill 6000 MHz CL36 were working just fine 

Any idea what I might be doing wrong?

I have 12900K, same as You.


----------



## D-EJ915

Jpmboy said:


> I've been _very_ tempted, and the Apex is readily available here... I recently swapped out the guts of my 6950X/R5E-10 for a 5950X/ASUS x570 in the caselabs case (great chip at the OC I managed with it, really crap memory substructure tho - no suprise). My 10980XE/Omega rig has been flawless and still very fast, As yours was, ya get the just about the same AID64 memory performance from x299 (omega and Apex still running here) and Z690, but AID64 really can't show the memory benefit of Z690.
> I'll likely hold off for the next chipset gen with DDR5, but my will power is certainly being tested. I do have an empty bench table calling me!
> 
> View attachment 2546683


If you're itching to tinker it's super fast but the next gen should be more ironed out, plus waiting on HEDT variant that is supposedly coming later this year too...

I swore I was going to only get 1 board and keep it simple this time to setup a new gaming rig but...



http://imgur.com/NfOQHmH


----------



## fortecosi

edited


----------



## truehighroller1

@Jpmboy

Yeah I pushed it to 5ghz with the l2 cache with the cores disabled tonight which seemed to be no problem but again maybe it's windows 11 but, I definitely lost about 40fps disabling ecores. I was averaging 170 with them disabled and now I'm getting about 210 with them enabled again. I'm running 4k dlss.


----------



## Arni90

I'm quite puzzled here, there seems to be a hard wall at DDR5-6600 for my CPU/board, I can bench and tighten timings without issue at DDR5-6600, while bumping frequency DDR5-6666 will instantly destroy stability, even if I loosen timings to completely nonsensical levels:

6600:







No issues in stress tests either

6666:







Quickly errors in stress tests

What I've tried:
MC Voltage from 1.25V to 1.45V - I can't boot below 1.30V or above 1.40V
SA Voltage from 0.95V to 1.45V - Doesn't seem to make any difference
Manually lower CPU core clock - No change
VDD/VDDQ voltage up to 1.75V - No change
Higher L2 cache voltage - No change
Disable E-cores - No change
DDR5-6800 - Has issues booting, but unstable when it boots.
Disable MC0 C1 - Removes 25% memory capacity and bandwidth, but allows 6666 to be benched.

Anyone here got some tips? It seems very strange to me that 6666 is so completely lacking in stability when 6600 can run stress tests for half a day


----------



## Nizzen

sblantipodi said:


> the real question is... are you reading the PMIC temp or the memory chip temp?
> and do you want the answer for the PMIC or the memory chip?
> 
> PMIC is a normal IC, no problem even above 90°C.
> 
> memory chip, I don't know... never experienced problems related to temps since I'm running at 5GHZ only.


My samsung sticks is failing in memtest around 63-65c. That's like passive cooling. Fan blowing over dimms, and temp is around 45c. With ~1.47v


----------



## lowmotion

Arni90 said:


> Anyone here got some tips? It seems very strange to me that 6666 is so completely lacking in stability when 6600 can run stress tests for half a day


Same here. Exactly the same.


----------



## sblantipodi

Is there someone who can help me booting at -200MHz?

I can boot and be stable at 5GHz but I want to be stable even at 4.8GHz for maximum stability of I will find some instability in the future.

As I said I can boot and test without errors at 5GHz but my Extreme mobo hangs on detect memory of I set 4.8Ghz.

I disabled mcr fastboot in bios but it doesn't helped.

4x16GB Samsung here on extreme 1101 bios.

Thanks.


----------



## joneffingvo

CptSpig said:


> The X299 is a capable machine. I have my 12900K overclocked to 5.5 per core adaptive daily and it decimates the 7980Xe OC'd to 5.1 on chilled water. I have my G.Skill DDR5 5600 kit OC'd to 6000 daily and it gets 101 Gb read on adia64. You would have a blast with one of these machines.


care to share your timings and voltages? I have the same sticks


----------



## BiuBiuBiu

Has anyone tried 4 sticks 2x(2x16GB) and boot successful with XMP? I have 4 x F5-6400J3239G16GX2-TZ5RS, cannot boot on both Z690 glacial and strix Z690-f with XMP enabled. Always blank until a POST fails screen.

It can get into Windows when all BIOS settings are default, and it will run at DDR5-4000.


----------



## Nizzen

BiuBiuBiu said:


> Has anyone tried 4 sticks 2x(2x16GB) and boot successful with XMP? I have 4 x F5-6400J3239G16GX2-TZ5RS, cannot boot on both Z690 glacial and strix Z690-f with XMP enabled. Always blank until a POST fails screen.
> 
> It can get into Windows when all BIOS settings are default, and it will run at DDR5-4000.


Impossible. Buy 4x ddr5 kit. They are max 5200mhz I think.


----------



## uplink

BiuBiuBiu said:


> Has anyone tried 4 sticks 2x(2x16GB) and boot successful with XMP? I have 4 x F5-6400J3239G16GX2-TZ5RS, cannot boot on both Z690 glacial and strix Z690-f with XMP enabled. Always blank until a POST fails screen.
> 
> It can get into Windows when all BIOS settings are default, and it will run at DDR5-4000.


 Yup, You need to dial down the freq. to 4400 MHz and they'll boot up, the rest is about fine tuning. I mean You can theoretically get to 5200 MHz and that's that, with four sticks.


----------



## Arni90

BiuBiuBiu said:


> Has anyone tried 4 sticks 2x(2x16GB) and boot successful with XMP? I have 4 x F5-6400J3239G16GX2-TZ5RS, cannot boot on both Z690 glacial and strix Z690-f with XMP enabled. Always blank until a POST fails screen.
> 
> It can get into Windows when all BIOS settings are default, and it will run at DDR5-4000.


There are two people in this thread who have tried, the limit is probably somewhere between 5200 and 5600


----------



## kpblxa

I got 4 sticks running stable at 4400, 4800 and 5000... past that get errors, no xmp ... mobo z690 formula, ram chips by spectek


----------



## asdkj1740

kpblxa said:


> I got 4 sticks running stable at 4400, 4800 and 5000... past that get errors, no xmp ... mobo z690 formula, ram chips by spectek


5000 is already strong enough for four sticks!


----------



## kpblxa

Also these were purchased as single module kits.... had no choice at that time. With 4 running as they are...Happy so far..


----------



## asdkj1740

kpblxa said:


> Also these were purchased as single module kits.... had no choice at that time. With 4 running as they are...Happy so far..


you are lucky enough to get four same pmic and die.


----------



## kpblxa

I guess so...
They get very hot under stress...that's the only downside running above 4400


----------



## Paragram

Hi guys I'm occasionally blue screening with my 12900K, Z690 Apex and C36 6000 Trident Z5. Im on the latest bios just using XMP 1 any recommendations?


----------



## uplink

Paragram said:


> Hi guys I'm occasionally blue screening with my 12900K, Z690 Apex and C36 6000 Trident Z5. Im on the latest bios just using XMP 1 any recommendations?


 Run Memtest, full 4 runs and see for Yourself .


----------



## Paragram

uplink said:


> Run Memtest, full 4 runs and see for Yourself .


The one built into the Asus bios itself?


----------



## uplink

Paragram said:


> The one built into the Asus bios itself?


 For example, or the official one, the one built in Asus BiOS/UEFi is a bit out of date, but it will do the job just fine.


----------



## fortecosi

Paragram said:


> Hi guys I'm occasionally blue screening with my 12900K, Z690 Apex and C36 6000 Trident Z5. Im on the latest bios just using XMP 1 any recommendations?


increase VDD/VDDQ by 0.01V


----------



## Ghoosti

Hello to you,
I have something strange.
Maximus Z690 Extreme and Corsair 6200.
I can't boot to a new bios (1003, 1001)? I have the message "POST ERROR" in a loop.
If I use Bios #2 (0231) using the toggle button, I can boot!
Do you have any idea, I'm going crazy with this card....

Thanks for your help and advice


----------



## TZeroBR

Ghoosti said:


> Hello to you,
> I have something strange.
> Maximus Z690 Extreme and Corsair 6200.
> I can't boot to a new bios (1003, 1001)? I have the message "POST ERROR" in a loop.
> If I use Bios #2 (0231) using the toggle button, I can boot!
> Do you have any idea, I'm going crazy with this card....
> 
> Thanks for your help and advice


I've been through this (Z690 Formula) and the solution was:

Set the *FLEXKEY* button in the OLD BIOS to *BIOS OPTIMIZED DEFAULT*
Save before updating as OPTIMIZED DEFAULT
Update the BIOS
If it doesn't restart as you said, turn off the machine from the PSU.... turn the PSU on and press the FLEXKEY button


----------



## enzo972_326

Hi all,
is sli capable for Rog Maximus z690 Formula ?


----------



## Nizzen

enzo972_326 said:


> Hi all,
> is sli capable for Rog Maximus z690 Formula ?


No.
Only Apex and extreme/glacial


----------



## Ghoosti

TZeroBR said:


> I've been through this (Z690 Formula) and the solution was:
> 
> Set the *FLEXKEY* button in the OLD BIOS to *BIOS OPTIMIZED DEFAULT*
> Save before updating as OPTIMIZED DEFAULT
> Update the BIOS
> If it doesn't restart as you said, turn off the machine from the PSU.... turn the PSU on and press the FLEXKEY button


Won't flashing with the new bios erase the previous *FLEXKEY *setting ?


----------



## enzo972_326

Nizzen said:


> No.
> Only Apex and extreme/glacial


thank you very much, have a good sunday


----------



## affxct

fortecosi said:


> edited


My low-SP brother, we meet again.


----------



## uplink

Hey there guys, any idea whether @shamino1978 is having a time off? I mean no rush, but these new memory kits that are available are not doing that great on our Strix/Maximus boards from what I read, including me :/


----------



## Mikka24

Hi. Just quick 2 questions.

1. Would not having Cpu 12900k make big difference in stability of my Corsair 6200 cl36 on Z690 Extreme? (I have 12700k)

2. Sk hinyx m vs Samsung? Which one to keep?


----------



## uplink

Mikka24 said:


> Hi. Just quick 2 questions.
> 
> 1. Would not having Cpu 12900k make big difference in stability of my Corsair 6200 cl36 on Z690 Extreme? (I have 12700k)
> 
> 2. Sk hinyx m vs Samsung? Which one to keep?


1. Nope, not really, but, having Extreme doesn't make any sense, unless You're enthusiast, and if You are, You wanna have 12900K/KS no matter what.
2. depends on whether You want out of stock good operability [SK Hynix] or You like to tweak a lot [Samsung].


----------



## Mikka24

Dakujem pekne


----------



## sblantipodi

Hi all,
I have set my VDD/VDDQ to 1.390V but HwInfo reports a max VDD of 1.8V :O











is this a bug in hwinfo or in my Extreme motherboard that is killing my RAM with crazy voltages?


----------



## pat-Geek

Nizzen said:


> No.
> Only Apex and extreme/glacial


Yeah, for some reason Asus ROG decided that HERO and FORMULA customers were not worth getting the SLI support on the Alder Lake generation despite paying the "MAXIMUS" tax. I'm a long time Maximus customer and this choice will have an influence in my purchasing decision going into next gen Intel platforms. You can tell Shamino and whoever works at ROG that I will choose other brands if Asus keeps making pay more for less generation after generation.


----------



## Nizzen

pat-Geek said:


> Yeah, for some reason Asus ROG decided that HERO and FORMULA customers were not worth getting the SLI support on the Alder Lake generation despite paying the "MAXIMUS" tax. I'm a long time Maximus customer and this choice will have an influence in my purchasing decision going into next gen Intel platforms. You can tell Shamino and whoever works at ROG that I will choose other brands if Asus keeps making pay more for less generation after generation.


Are you actually using SLI, or you just want to tell the world a story?


----------



## pat-Geek

Nizzen said:


> Are you actually using SLI, or you just want to tell the world a story?


I already told you a few weeks ago that I'm using dual Turing GPUs. I went from Z490 Hero to Z690 Hero with the same GPUs.


----------



## Nizzen

pat-Geek said:


> I already told you a few weeks ago that I'm using dual Turing GPUs. I went from Z490 Hero to Z690 Hero with the same GPUs.


Then why did you ask again, when you knew the answer? 😅


----------



## rrkhamidullin

.


----------



## pat-Geek

Nizzen said:


> Then why did you ask again, when you knew the answer? 😅


What? I'm not asking for anything. I'm complaining. Nobody was informed at launch this would have been the case. This is a poor decision from Team ROG. There's nothing that justifies that the APEX and EXTREME/GLACIAL get an exclusive feature over the HERO and FORMULA when all of these "MAXIMUS" boards have the same 16x PCIe 5.0 lanes with x8/x8 bifurcation.


----------



## rrkhamidullin

BiuBiuBiu said:


> Has anyone tried 4 sticks 2x(2x16GB) and boot successful with XMP? I have 4 x F5-6400J3239G16GX2-TZ5RS, cannot boot on both Z690 glacial and strix Z690-f with XMP enabled. Always blank until a POST fails screen.
> 
> It can get into Windows when all BIOS settings are default, and it will run at DDR5-4000.


It boots but can't pass memtest. MB Hero, bios 1003 (all defaults except XMP1 profile set), 12900k, F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5K + F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5S. Though with bios 1003 it can't pass memtest with just one kit (XMP1) installed.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

pat-Geek said:


> What? I'm not asking for anything. I'm complaining. Nobody was informed at launch this would have been the case. This is a poor decision from Team ROG. There's nothing that justifies that the APEX and EXTREME/GLACIAL get an exclusive feature over the HERO and FORMULA when all of these "MAXIMUS" boards have the same 16x PCIe 5.0 lanes with x8/x8 bifurcation.


Why on earth would you buy a Hero? It's a 4-dimmer with no backplate, a 6-layer PCB and a price tag of $600. The Apex kind of made sense at launch, but now that the real XOC boards have been released, it too is overpriced nonsense.

Their DDR4 boards are still ok, but overpriced.


----------



## pat-Geek

geriatricpollywog said:


> Why on earth would you buy a Hero? It's a 4-dimmer with no backplate, a 6-layer PCB and a price tag of $600. The Apex kind of made sense at launch, but now that the real XOC boards have been released, it too is overpriced nonsense.
> 
> Their DDR4 boards are still ok, but overpriced.


I've been happy with every HERO motherboards I've got so far. Z690 is the first generation where I'm a bit disappointed. Also, from what I've seen so far on this thread the HERO seemed to have much better success at booting with 4x DIMMs than the much more expensive EXTREME.


----------



## biigshow666

Any thoughts / experience on delidding 12900k? Supercool kit enroute! Will pass on the tool after my delidding if there is any interest


----------



## Paragram

Anyone with an Apex board using Trident C36 6000 samsung what bios are you using and are you getting any errors just using XMP?


----------



## satinghostrider

Paragram said:


> Anyone with an Apex board using Trident C36 6000 samsung what bios are you using and are you getting any errors just using XMP?


0811 for Samsung seems to be the most stable so far. I've not tested XMP so far on 1101 but running Asus Preset 6000C321T is hard to get stable on 1101. Reverted back to 0811 and everything works again. XMP works fine on 0811 too unless your kit might be some of the ones that does have issues.


----------



## sblantipodi

sblantipodi said:


> Hi all,
> I have set my VDD/VDDQ to 1.390V but HwInfo reports a max VDD of 1.8V :O
> 
> View attachment 2547186
> 
> 
> 
> is this a bug in hwinfo or in my Extreme motherboard that is killing my RAM with crazy voltages?


Is there someone experiencing a similar problem?
Is this normal or not?


----------



## Silent Scone

Paragram said:


> Anyone with an Apex board using Trident C36 6000 samsung what bios are you using and are you getting any errors just using XMP?



I still have the C36 kit currently as have been too busy to pull anything else. Previous builds worked fine also.

No problems at XMP, however current settings:
UEFI 1101
C30-34-34-54 1T
VDD 1.45v
VDDQ 1.45v
VDDQTX [Auto]
MCVDD 1.25v
VCCSA 0.98v


----------



## TZeroBR

Ghoosti said:


> Won't flashing with the new bios erase the previous *FLEXKEY *setting ?


I have not thought about it. You may be right but I think that when I updated the BIOS from 802 to 811 the button continued to function (but my memory might be betraying me)


----------



## Ghoosti

TZeroBR said:


> Je n'y ai pas pensé. Vous avez peut-être raison mais je pense que lorsque j'ai mis à jour le BIOS de 802 à 811, le bouton a continué à fonctionner (mais ma mémoire pourrait me trahir)
> [/DEVIS]


----------



## cstkl1

biigshow666 said:


> Any thoughts / experience on delidding 12900k? Supercool kit enroute! Will pass on the tool after my delidding if there is any interest


@snakeeyes111 
he wrote a indepth article igors


----------



## jeiselramos

satinghostrider said:


> 0811 for Samsung seems to be the most stable so far. I've not tested XMP so far on 1101 but running Asus Preset 6000C321T is hard to get stable on 1101. Reverted back to 0811 and everything works again. XMP works fine on 0811 too unless your kit might be some of the ones that does have issues.


I have stabilized 6000C321t profile and 6600C32 2t with 1101


----------



## biigshow666

cstkl1 said:


> @snakeeyes111
> he wrote a indepth article igors


Yes I read the article and reached out to super cool. Unfortunately had to make a fb account to get any movement with their webstore but they were great to deal with and quick to act. So far it was great to do business with the supercool team.


----------



## Tideman

Paragram said:


> Anyone with an Apex board using Trident C36 6000 samsung what bios are you using and are you getting any errors just using XMP?


Enter the frequency, timings and voltages in manually.

I was not stable with this kit using XMP. I was failing AIDA64 stress and had crashes in Firefox. Even on 0811. Setting the ram manually completely fixed those issues.

On bios 1003 currently. Passes all cycles of TM5 anta777 Extreme.


----------



## sblantipodi

Tideman said:


> Enter the frequency, timings and voltages in manually.
> 
> I was not stable with this kit using XMP. I was failing AIDA64 stress and had crashes in Firefox. Even on 0811. Setting the ram manually completely fixed those issues.
> 
> On bios 1003 currently. Passes all cycles of TM5 anta777 Extreme.


Most people try to find a reason to the instability that is not reasonable.

Is there any reasons why this can be possible?
No. There is no reason why this is possible.

The only answer to this weird behaviour is that you are not stable.

I don't know if it's a ddr5 problem or an Asus one but finding errors on this platform is difficult when you are at the edge of stability. This creates weird fairy tales like the one that entering values manually changes something 😁


----------



## Ghoosti

Hello, 
I'm on 0811 and desperately trying to flash 1101.
I always get the POST ERROR message with code d6.
I have 2980 Pro in RAID0 on M2.2 and M2.3, would this cause a problem?
Thanks for your help and advice


----------



## sblantipodi

Ghoosti said:


> Hello,
> I'm on 0811 and desperately trying to flash 1101.
> I always get the POST ERROR message with code d6.
> I have 2980 Pro in RAID0 on M2.2 and M2.3, would this cause a problem?
> Thanks for your help and advice


I would not be surprised if that's the cause of the problem.
Extreme is the most rushed board of the bunch and the most problematic ones.
Did you tried the flashback option?
Does the flash procedure ends correctly?


----------



## Arni90

biigshow666 said:


> Yes I read the article and reached out to super cool. Unfortunately had to make a fb account to get any movement with their webstore but they were great to deal with and quick to act. So far it was great to do business with the supercool team.


What did it end up costing?


----------



## adna

strix-f bios 1003
can't boot with default setting. but xmp is fine. same 0070

i have problem with 1 stick of my fury5200 pmic. when i test my fury6000 i'm so sad. 
my fury6000 can't pass same setting with my fury5200.

fury6000C40[hynix]
6400-30-38-38-28
sa | vdd | vddq/tx | mc = 0.9 | 1.45 | 1.4/1.4 | 1.25


----------



## Ghoosti

sblantipodi said:


> Je ne serais pas surpris que ce soit la cause du problème.
> Extreme est la planche la plus pressée du groupe et la plus problématique.
> As-tu essayé l'option flashback ?
> La procédure flash se termine-t-elle correctement ?
> [/DEVIS]
> 
> Oui, FlashBack se termine avec succès.
> Vraiment bizarre cette carte, j'ai pu flasher 0702, 0803, 0811 !


----------



## Ghoosti

sblantipodi said:


> Je ne serais pas surpris que ce soit la cause du problème.
> Extreme est la planche la plus pressée du lot et la plus problématique.
> As-tu essayé l'option flashback ?
> La procédure flash se termine-t-elle correctement ?
> [/DEVIS]
> 
> J'ai essayé avec le 1003 et le 1101, même problème !!!
> Il ne reconnaîtrait pas les disques NVMe en RAID ?
> Cependant avec un Clear Cmos, tous les paramètres devaient revenir à 0, donc le bios devrait voir le NVMe sans le RAID ?


----------



## jahoney

Just wanted to update — got the cl32 6400 kit running xmp 1 on my z690-E. BIOS 1003 seemed to help with that. With ai overclocking on it’s pushing the cpu to 5.3.

Wondering if theres voltages I should check to make sure they’re in line with what’s safe for this $$$$$$$ ram. Definitely don’t wanna buy more of it. Any input?

Also I have more thermal headroom if I can push this cpu (12700k) a bit more, any advice?

Thanks.


----------



## biigshow666

Arni90 said:


> What did it end up costing?


It was 5294 thb which is the delid tool, waterblock, liquid metal and shipping to Canada. Fairly reasonable imo


----------



## Paragram

Silent Scone said:


> I still have the C36 kit currently as have been too busy to pull anything else. Previous builds worked fine also.
> 
> No problems at XMP, however current settings:
> UEFI 1101
> C30-34-34-54 1T
> VDD 1.45v
> VDDQ 1.45v
> VDDQTX [Auto]
> MCVDD 1.25v
> VCCSA 0.98v


Hey man I'm a bit of a noob in the bios, where do I find:
VDDQTX
MCVDD 
VCCSA

Also is the "1T" meaning XMP 1?


----------



## Brandur

As some people in german forums post, that some XMP problems with the Apex are not related to BIOS problems, but to problems with the individual Ram slots, that for example can't handle speeds over 6000 Mhz, I think I am swopping my Apex for a MSI. Are there any issues known, that the early Apex boards are somehow "broken" and have RAM slots, that can't handle specific RAM speeds?


----------



## fortecosi

Brandur said:


> As some people in german forums post, that some XMP problems with the Apex are not related to BIOS problems, but to problems with the individual Ram slots, that for example can't handle speeds over 6000 Mhz, I think I am swopping my Apex for a MSI. Are there any issues known, that the early Apex boards are somehow "broken" and have RAM slots, that can't handle specific RAM speeds?


Nothing is broken, as you can see on the forum, many users can run 6k+ easily. Note that the CPU IMC plays big role about it too.


----------



## Brandur

People reported, that one DIMM Slot can go up to 6800Mhz, and the other can't handle speeds over 6000Mhz. So this must be an issue, that has nothing to do with BIOS or IMC. As I mentioned, I have one of the first Apex, that were sold. The issue could have been resolved with later production charges...


----------



## criznit

Brandur said:


> As some people in german forums post, that some XMP problems with the Apex are not related to BIOS problems, but to problems with the individual Ram slots, that for example can't handle speeds over 6000 Mhz, I think I am swopping my Apex for a MSI. Are there any issues known, that the early Apex boards are somehow "broken" and have RAM slots, that can't handle specific RAM speeds?


Come on over to the MSI Unify X side! I swapped this board out during the whole Maximus Hero fiasco and haven't looked back! This board was able to take the first gen g.skill 6000 CL36 kits to 6666 CL38 with ease and I'm currently using 6600 CL36 for my daily @ 1.435 VDD/VDDQ

Edit - You know what I meant...


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

criznit said:


> Come on over to the MSI Unify X side! I swapped this board out during the whole Crosshair Hero fiasco and haven't looked back! This board was able to take the first gen g.skill 6000 CL36 kits to 6666 CL38 with ease and I'm currently using 6600 CL36 for my daily @ 1.435 VDD/VDDQ


Mean Maximus Hero?


I have the Apex and it's working great. But if I had to change it would be the Unify X no doubt.


----------



## CptSpig

Brandur said:


> As some people in german forums post, that some XMP problems with the Apex are not related to BIOS problems, but to problems with the individual Ram slots, that for example can't handle speeds over 6000 Mhz, I think I am swopping my Apex for a MSI. Are there any issues known, that the early Apex boards are somehow "broken" and have RAM slots, that can't handle specific RAM speeds?





Brandur said:


> People reported, that one DIMM Slot can go up to 6800Mhz, and the other can't handle speeds over 6000Mhz. So this must be an issue, that has nothing to do with BIOS or IMC. As I mentioned, I have one of the first Apex, that were sold. The issue could have been resolved with later production charges...


Simply not true. I have the apex running G.Skill 5600 CL36 kit at 6200 CL32 24/7 with no issues.


----------



## zzztopzzz

I'm just a casual AMD/Ryzen/Nvidia guy, but I am very interested in the new Z690 mobo's and Intel 12900K. And please, I'm not here to pick a fight with anyone's preferences, but just what make a motherboard worth $600-$800. I don't see it. To me, it would have to be superior in every respect; i.e. chipset, memory management, etc. Looking forward to your input.


----------



## bscool

I have been looking to buy z690 DDR5 board and I see quite a few used/refurb Apex on Amazon and Newegg/Ebay. I see no used/refurbed Unify X. So I wonder why that is, maybe it is jut because Apex is more popular so it gets returned more? But why is it getting returned if it is a good board?


Also 2 different users on Hwbot used same mem and cpus in different Apex MB and they found 1 Apex will only run 6200 as example and another MB with same components run 6800 to 7000.


ASUS ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX | APEX 14

"I have 2 Z690 APEX
the first board have a maximum boot at 6200Mhz on DIMM_A & 6400Mhz on DIMM_B
And the second board have a maximum boot at 7000Mhz on DIMM_A & 7400Mhz on DIMM_B
Both motherboards are boot tested via Ram T-Force Delta 6400Mhz.

I think some boards are actually having issues with RAM slots"

Keep reading another guy found the same.

So it is not just a variation between slot but between MBs. I can see have a variance of a few percent between 2 different Apex but 10% plus seems excessive. With 1 board doing 6200 and another board doing 7000 with all the same components.

Maybe the Unify X has the same variance just not enough users have it to post feedback? Seems weird though that we arent hearing about it from any Unify X users.


----------



## Self Tapper

Hey everyone, random thing that might not be relevant to any of the rest of you, but then again...

Changing ILM spacing on (Maximus Z690 Hero) socket earlier and, checking over the socket visually, noticed something that didn't look quite right, so took a photo...










Anyone spot anything wrong? Look really closely at the bottom right section of pins










That is what looks to be a very short offcut of copper wire strand, or possibly the tag end of a through-hole component. You can tell from the size relative to the socket fingers how small it is - but it was there and would have been enough to short out two or more pins or lands had it been (in)appropriately positioned.

I was able to carefully tease it out with a fine needle under a magnifier. It definitely _wasn't_ a broken 'finger' - it's completely the wrong shape and all the fingers are present and correct.

What confuses me is how it could have got in there. It's not impossible it could have dropped in while the CPU was out. But I work in clean conditions and the processor has only been out once prior to this since I got the board. It's difficult to imagine it's been in there since manufacture, but then again, it was difficult to imagine some of these boards could have been manufactured with a component installed reverse polarity too, and that did happen.

So, if any of you happen to have your CPU out, it might be worth a quick look at the socket with a magnifier, just to be certain you haven't got any foreign objects hanging around in it.


----------



## cstkl1

biigshow666 said:


> Yes I read the article and reached out to super cool. Unfortunately had to make a fb account to get any movement with their webstore but they were great to deal with and quick to act. So far it was great to do business with the supercool team.


just talk to him on fb/messenger


----------



## JB4

CptSpig said:


> I have the apex running G.Skill 5600 CL36 kit at 6200 CL32 24/7 with no issues.


That's impressive. What voltage? Any other relevant setting so I can try this with my G.Skill 5600 CL36 kit?


----------



## bigfootnz

I've done gaming test with switching off E cores to see what impact will be on gaming. Most of the test were done on 1440p and just few either 1080p or 720p just for sake of test. What I've found that on 720p and 1080p, yes there can be reason to switch off E core but on 1440p I do not see any advantage, except that you can push P core 100 or 200MHz more but again that will not make any difference on 1440p or even less on 4k.

My tests was done on 52x4, 51x8 + TVB+1, E core and Ring auto, with 6400C30 2T memory with tight all timings (50-51ns in Aida)

First test 52x4, 51x8 + TVB+1, E core and Ring (3600) auto:

























































Second test was same settings 52x4, 51x8 + TVB+1, and Ring auto (4700) with E cores just disable with scroll lock:

























































Third test with E cores disabled in BIOS and 52x4, 51x8 + TVB+1, Ring (4700) auto:


----------



## gecko991

I got the Apex.


----------



## IIISLIDEIII

bscool said:


> I have been looking to buy z690 DDR5 board and I see quite a few used/refurb Apex on Amazon and Newegg/Ebay. I see no used/refurbed Unify X. So I wonder why that is, maybe it is jut because Apex is more popular so it gets returned more? But why is it getting returned if it is a good board?
> 
> 
> Also 2 different users on Hwbot used same mem and cpus in different Apex MB and they found 1 Apex will only run 6200 as example and another MB with same components run 6800 to 7000.
> 
> 
> ASUS ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX | APEX 14
> 
> "I have 2 Z690 APEX
> the first board have a maximum boot at 6200Mhz on DIMM_A & 6400Mhz on DIMM_B
> And the second board have a maximum boot at 7000Mhz on DIMM_A & 7400Mhz on DIMM_B
> Both motherboards are boot tested via Ram T-Force Delta 6400Mhz.
> 
> I think some boards are actually having issues with RAM slots"
> 
> Keep reading another guy found the same.
> 
> So it is not just a variation between slot but between MBs. I can see have a variance of a few percent between 2 different Apex but 10% plus seems excessive. With 1 board doing 6200 and another board doing 7000 with all the same components.
> 
> Maybe the Unify X has the same variance just not enough users have it to post feedback? Seems weird though that we arent hearing about it from any Unify X users.


- or unify users are far fewer than users with apex, so the lower the number, the less likely people are to come and talk about problems

-o apex actually have some problems that unify doesn't, obviously not all apex


----------



## affxct

sblantipodi said:


> Hi all,
> I have set my VDD/VDDQ to 1.390V but HwInfo reports a max VDD of 1.8V :O
> 
> View attachment 2547186
> 
> 
> 
> is this a bug in hwinfo or in my Extreme motherboard that is killing my RAM with crazy voltages?


I’ve seen it too. Not sure what causes it.


----------



## Silent Scone

Paragram said:


> Hey man I'm a bit of a noob in the bios, where do I find:
> VDDQTX
> MCVDD
> VCCSA
> 
> Also is the "1T" meaning XMP 1?


*Extreme Tweaker > Advanced Memory Settings (page bottom)*
VDDQTX
Memory Controller VDD

*Extreme Tweaker*
CPU System Agent (VCCSA)

*Extreme Tweaker > DRAM Timing Config*
1T refers to command rate. Leave at 2T initially, much easier.









ROG Z690 Overclocking Info[6815].pdf







drive.google.com


----------



## affxct

Totally not stable but kinda cool for the fact that it's S16B on a Z690-F.


----------



## joneffingvo

CptSpig said:


> Simply not true. I have the apex running G.Skill 5600 CL36 kit at 6200 CL32 24/7 with no issues.


Care to share your memory timings and voltages?


----------



## CptSpig

joneffingvo said:


> Care to share your memory timings and voltages?


See attachment for 6000. For 6200 everything is the same except VDD and VDDQ went from 1.435v to 1.450v. Bios is 1101


----------



## heyitsrud

Hey guys, was wondering if I could get some input.

I'm running a 12900k with a ddr5 kit ( F5-6000U4040E16GX2-TZ5RS ) on a z690 extreme w/ 1101 BIOS.

Previously had a z690 hero with this kit of ram because it came as a bundle, but unfortunately, my board had the inverted capacitor and had to be recalled. It didn't explode or anything, but I had to return it for safety. For what it's worth, with the hero I was able to enable XMP and didn't have any problems with stability. I didn't memtest with the hero, but for the two weeks that rig was running I didn't have any BSODs.

With the extreme, I have not been successful in achieving the advertised speeds of 6000 on either XMP 1, 2, or even fiddling a little with vdd (1.33 vdd) and vddq (1.35vddq).
I'm a bit new to manually adjusting settings on RAM. The only successful (no errors) runs I've had were at default (no XMP enabled) and reducing 5600 Mhz, which is what I'm running on now.

Has anyone else had problems or success with this kit of ram and getting advertised speeds? Any help would be appreciated. Thanks very much!


----------



## jeiselramos

CptSpig said:


> See attachment for 6000. For 6200 everything is the same except VDD and VDDQ went from 1.435v to 1.450v. Bios is 1101


I have stabilized 6000C32 1T with 1.38, 6133 1.40 and 6200 1.43, same BIOS


----------



## Section31

heyitsrud said:


> Hey guys, was wondering if I could get some input.
> 
> I'm running a 12900k with a ddr5 kit ( F5-6000U4040E16GX2-TZ5RS ) on a z690 extreme w/ 1101 BIOS.
> 
> Previously had a z690 hero with this kit of ram because it came as a bundle, but unfortunately, my board had the inverted capacitor and had to be recalled. It didn't explode or anything, but I had to return it for safety. For what it's worth, with the hero I was able to enable XMP and didn't have any problems with stability. I didn't memtest with the hero, but for the two weeks that rig was running I didn't have any BSODs.
> 
> With the extreme, I have not been successful in achieving the advertised speeds of 6000 on either XMP 1, 2, or even fiddling a little with vdd (1.33 vdd) and vddq (1.35vddq).
> I'm a bit new to manually adjusting settings on RAM. The only successful (no errors) runs I've had were at default (no XMP enabled) and reducing 5600 Mhz, which is what I'm running on now.
> 
> Has anyone else had problems or success with this kit of ram and getting advertised speeds? Any help would be appreciated. Thanks very much!


I think it's motherboard related. I am having similar situation atm.


----------



## CptSpig

jeiselramos said:


> I have stabilized 6000C32 1T with 1.38, 6133 1.40 and 6200 1.43, same BIOS


Nice! Stabilized? Booting into Windows or did you test with Memtest86, RamTestPro or something eles?


----------



## jeiselramos

CptSpig said:


> Nice! Stabilized? Booting into Windows or did you test with Memtest86, RamTestPro or something eles?


Tm5, this is the 6000C32 and 6133 with same settings only bump up the voltage
















Inviato dal mio IN2023 utilizzando Tapatalk


----------



## joneffingvo

CptSpig said:


> See attachment for 6000. For 6200 everything is the same except VDD and VDDQ went from 1.435v to 1.450v. Bios is 1101


Hell yeah! Thanks man


----------



## joneffingvo

damn 27 seconds into ram test and 1 error... the memory gods hate me


----------



## sblantipodi

heyitsrud said:


> Hey guys, was wondering if I could get some input.
> 
> I'm running a 12900k with a ddr5 kit ( F5-6000U4040E16GX2-TZ5RS ) on a z690 extreme w/ 1101 BIOS.
> 
> Previously had a z690 hero with this kit of ram because it came as a bundle, but unfortunately, my board had the inverted capacitor and had to be recalled. It didn't explode or anything, but I had to return it for safety. For what it's worth, with the hero I was able to enable XMP and didn't have any problems with stability. I didn't memtest with the hero, but for the two weeks that rig was running I didn't have any BSODs.
> 
> With the extreme, I have not been successful in achieving the advertised speeds of 6000 on either XMP 1, 2, or even fiddling a little with vdd (1.33 vdd) and vddq (1.35vddq).
> I'm a bit new to manually adjusting settings on RAM. The only successful (no errors) runs I've had were at default (no XMP enabled) and reducing 5600 Mhz, which is what I'm running on now.
> 
> Has anyone else had problems or success with this kit of ram and getting advertised speeds? Any help would be appreciated. Thanks very much!


I have tried my CPU and my memory kits on the hero and they works much better than on the extreme.

It's a shame that Asus doesn't comment on this. Extreme have some design flaws that creates huge problems on memory.
Asus doesn't admit it and we have a 1200€ mobo that will not be fixed and that works worse than a mobo that costs half the price.
This is Asus in 2022.


----------



## jahoney

So has anyone gotten better (lower) timings out of this cl 32 6400 trident z5 kit? Latency is not great on mine running on XMP 1. Not sure if I should just randomly start trying to input lower timings and run memtest? 32-39-39-102 seems like there is room for improvement, especially the last number. Also would like to lower command rate to 1. Any advice?


----------



## mikasalo500

.


heyitsrud said:


> Hey guys, was wondering if I could get some input.
> 
> I'm running a 12900k with a ddr5 kit ( F5-6000U4040E16GX2-TZ5RS ) on a z690 extreme w/ 1101 BIOS.
> 
> Previously had a z690 hero with this kit of ram because it came as a bundle, but unfortunately, my board had the inverted capacitor and had to be recalled. It didn't explode or anything, but I had to return it for safety. For what it's worth, with the hero I was able to enable XMP and didn't have any problems with stability. I didn't memtest with the hero, but for the two weeks that rig was running I didn't have any BSODs.
> 
> With the extreme, I have not been successful in achieving the advertised speeds of 6000 on either XMP 1, 2, or even fiddling a little with vdd (1.33 vdd) and vddq (1.35vddq).
> I'm a bit new to manually adjusting settings on RAM. The only successful (no errors) runs I've had were at default (no XMP enabled) and reducing 5600 Mhz, which is what I'm running on now.
> 
> Has anyone else had problems or success with this kit of ram and getting advertised speeds? Any help would be appreciated. Thanks very much!


*I had the exact same thing with the board. More than 5600 were not possible stable. I then got the Apex and now 6400 are stable with fast timings....*


----------



## mikasalo500

sblantipodi said:


> Ich habe meine CPU und meine Speicherkits auf dem Hero ausprobiert und sie funktionieren viel besser als auf dem Extrem.
> 
> Schade, dass sich Asus dazu nicht äußert. Extreme haben einige Designfehler, die große Speicherprobleme verursachen.
> Asus gibt es nicht zu und wir haben ein 1200€ Mobo, das nicht repariert wird und das schlechter funktioniert als ein Mobo, das die Hälfte des Preises kostet.
> Das ist Asus im Jahr 2022.
> [/ZITIEREN]
> 
> Das ist absolut richtig


----------



## Silent Scone

heyitsrud said:


> Hey guys, was wondering if I could get some input.
> 
> I'm running a 12900k with a ddr5 kit ( F5-6000U4040E16GX2-TZ5RS ) on a z690 extreme w/ 1101 BIOS.
> 
> Previously had a z690 hero with this kit of ram because it came as a bundle, but unfortunately, my board had the inverted capacitor and had to be recalled. It didn't explode or anything, but I had to return it for safety. For what it's worth, with the hero I was able to enable XMP and didn't have any problems with stability. I didn't memtest with the hero, but for the two weeks that rig was running I didn't have any BSODs.
> 
> With the extreme, I have not been successful in achieving the advertised speeds of 6000 on either XMP 1, 2, or even fiddling a little with vdd (1.33 vdd) and vddq (1.35vddq).
> I'm a bit new to manually adjusting settings on RAM. The only successful (no errors) runs I've had were at default (no XMP enabled) and reducing 5600 Mhz, which is what I'm running on now.
> 
> Has anyone else had problems or success with this kit of ram and getting advertised speeds? Any help would be appreciated. Thanks very much!


Signal voltages carry the most weight, try setting System Agent 0.98 and Memory Controller voltage 1.25v (Extreme Tweaker>Advanced Memory Settings) to start.

Enable MRC Fastboot Disable MRC Full Check


----------



## cstkl1

sblantipodi said:


> I have tried my CPU and my memory kits on the hero and they works much better than on the extreme.
> 
> It's a shame that Asus doesn't comment on this. Extreme have some design flaws that creates huge problems on memory.
> Asus doesn't admit it and we have a 1200€ mobo that will not be fixed and that works worse than a mobo that costs half the price.
> This is Asus in 2022.


rma the extreme


----------



## safedisk

ROG MZ690A G.SKILL SAMSUNG 7000CL32

Samsung not bad 

SA : 1.35V
VDD : 1.53V
VDDQ : 1.46V
IVR Tran : 1.55V
MC Voltage : 1.4V


----------



## geriatricpollywog

safedisk said:


> View attachment 2547681
> 
> 
> ROG MZ690A G.SKILL SAMSUNG 7000CL32
> 
> Samsung not bad
> 
> SA : 1.35V
> VDD : 1.53V
> VDDQ : 1.46V
> IVR Tran : 1.55V
> MC Voltage : 1.4V


Is this the spiritual successor to B-die?


----------



## Weeman1986

Hello, I have an Asus Extreme and G.Skill 6000 CL40. I can't get over 6000Mhz with both sticks. If I insert one on the left, it doesn't matter which one, it ends at 6000, but the right one is stable up to 6600 and boot up to 7000, no matter which stick.
The board definitely has problems. Can someone please reproduce this?


----------



## fortecosi

voltage, timimngs, skews... ?


----------



## Weeman1986

Irrelevant if one site works and one doesn't.


----------



## heyitsrud

Section31 said:


> I think it's motherboard related. I am having similar situation atm.





sblantipodi said:


> I have tried my CPU and my memory kits on the hero and they works much better than on the extreme.
> 
> It's a shame that Asus doesn't comment on this. Extreme have some design flaws that creates huge problems on memory.
> Asus doesn't admit it and we have a 1200€ mobo that will not be fixed and that works worse than a mobo that costs half the price.
> This is Asus in 2022.





mikasalo500 said:


> .
> 
> 
> *I had the exact same thing with the board. More than 5600 were not possible stable. I then got the Apex and now 6400 are stable with fast timings....*


Sorry to hear I'm not the only one. Thanks everyone.


----------



## Silent Scone

geriatricpollywog said:


> Is this the spiritual successor to B-die?


Not really, it just shows what can be done with an understanding of what some of these settings do electrically and the right CPU and sticks. Hynix is still easier to work with


----------



## bastian

Weeman1986 said:


> Hello, I have an Asus Extreme and G.Skill 6000 CL40. I can't get over 6000Mhz with both sticks. If I insert one on the left, it doesn't matter which one, it ends at 6000, but the right one is stable up to 6600 and boot up to 7000, no matter which stick.
> The board definitely has problems. Can someone please reproduce this?


Running 6200 on my Extreme no problems.


----------



## Nizzen

Weeman1986 said:


> Hello, I have an Asus Extreme and G.Skill 6000 CL40. I can't get over 6000Mhz with both sticks. If I insert one on the left, it doesn't matter which one, it ends at 6000, but the right one is stable up to 6600 and boot up to 7000, no matter which stick.
> The board definitely has problems. Can someone please reproduce this?


Go for 6000 first 

Try this with XMP settings


skew control/odts/
rtt WR 48
rtt Nom rd 34
rtt nom wr 34
rtt park 34
rtt parkdqs 34

rtt ca group A 240
rtt cs group A 0
rtt ck group A 0

rtt ca group B 40
rtt cs group B 40
rtt ck group B 40

Ron odt up/down: 34/34

skew control/comp control:

DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL0_dqvrefup 159
DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL0_dqvrefdn 94
DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL0_dqodtvrefup 128
DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL0_dqodtvrefdn 99

DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL1_cmdvrefup 145
DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL1_ctlvrefup 118
DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL1_clkvrefup 128
DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL1_ckecsvrefup 0
DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL2_cmdvrefdn 92
DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL2_ctlvrefdn 103
DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL2_clkvrefdn 92

VCCSA 0.95, mc voltage 1.25v

vdd/vddq 1.35v-1.37v


----------



## Weeman1986

Posting is not the problem, but everything from 6000Mhz, sometimes 6000Mhz, gives errors in a few seconds on channel A. on channel B everything is ok up to 6600.
I had exakt the same voltages, for 6600 a little bit more mc.


----------



## Nizzen

Weeman1986 said:


> Posting is not the problem, but everything from 6000Mhz, sometimes 6000Mhz, gives errors in a few seconds on channel A. on channel B everything is ok up to 6600.
> I had exakt the same voltages, for 6600 a little bit more mc.


Tested skew control/odts/ yet?


----------



## fortecosi

Nizzen said:


> Tested skew control/odts/ yet?





Nizzen said:


> Tested skew control/odts/ yet?


He said it´s irrelevant, just let him be down. Some people don´t deserve any help.


----------



## Weeman1986

Nizzen said:


> Tested skew control/odts/ yet?


No not yet, I'm still at work, but thanks for that, I'll test it!


----------



## mattxx88

I read some time ago that there was talk of SP fake reading in some conditions
how to be sure the sp reading is correct?


----------



## Nizzen

mattxx88 said:


> I read some time ago that there was talk of SP fake reading in some conditions
> how to be sure the sp reading is correct?


Use latest bios.


----------



## Weeman1986

Nizzen said:


> Go for 6000 first
> 
> Try this with XMP settings
> 
> 
> skew control/odts/
> rtt WR 48
> rtt Nom rd 34
> rtt nom wr 34
> rtt park 34
> rtt parkdqs 34
> 
> rtt ca group A 240
> rtt cs group A 0
> rtt ck group A 0
> 
> rtt ca group B 40
> rtt cs group B 40
> rtt ck group B 40
> 
> Ron odt up/down: 34/34
> 
> skew control/comp control:
> 
> DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL0_dqvrefup 159
> DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL0_dqvrefdn 94
> DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL0_dqodtvrefup 128
> DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL0_dqodtvrefdn 99
> 
> DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL1_cmdvrefup 145
> DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL1_ctlvrefup 118
> DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL1_clkvrefup 128
> DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL1_ckecsvrefup 0
> DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL2_cmdvrefdn 92
> DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL2_ctlvrefdn 103
> DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL2_clkvrefdn 92
> 
> VCCSA 0.95, mc voltage 1.25v
> 
> vdd/vddq 1.35v-1.37v


I set everything up, but it stays the same. Thanks anyway!


----------



## Paragram

Silent Scone said:


> *Extreme Tweaker > Advanced Memory Settings (page bottom)*
> VDDQTX
> Memory Controller VDD
> 
> *Extreme Tweaker*
> CPU System Agent (VCCSA)
> 
> *Extreme Tweaker > DRAM Timing Config*
> 1T refers to command rate. Leave at 2T initially, much easier.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG Z690 Overclocking Info[6815].pdf
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


I got 1T 30-34-34-54 6000 with just your same VDD and VDDQ and the ram is been working perfectly! Didn't touch VDDQTX, MCVDD or VCCSA, is it worth still changing them or leave default?


----------



## Silent Scone

Paragram said:


> I got 1T 30-34-34-54 6000 with just your same VDD and VDDQ and the ram is been working perfectly! Didn't touch VDDQTX, MCVDD or VCCSA, is it worth still changing them or leave default?


If stable no huge need to deviate from auto rules unless you're that way inclined. Just save the CMO profile in case you feel a need to tune further.


----------



## Ghoosti

Hello to you,
I really need your help, I'm about to throw this card out the window.
I have been fighting with this card for 15 days.
Let me explain:
I had configured a Samasung 980 PRO RAID0 on M.2_2 and M.2_3
I try to do a BIOS update from 0811 to 1101 and the impossible, POST ERROR.
My provider tells me it's because I did a RAID!
I just removed the RAID, I put 1 ssd in M.2_1 and I left the other in M.2_2.
I did an ERASE SSD using the tool provided in bios 0811.
I do an F5 to load the default values.
I reboot into bios + EZ Flash around 1101 and Bam POST ERROR I believe d6.

I do not know what to do

I'm really disgusted

I've been ASUS since X58 and never seen this, so much hassle with a card @ €999!!!

Thanks for your advices....


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Ghoosti said:


> Bonjour à vous,
> J'ai vraiment besoin de votre aide, je suis sur le point de jeter cette carte par la fenêtre.
> Cela fait 15 jours que je combats avec cette carte.
> Laisse-moi expliquer:
> J'avais configuré un Samasung 980 PRO RAID0 sur M.2_2 et M.2_3
> J'essaie de faire une mise à jour du BIOS de 0811 à 1101 et l'impossible, POST ERROR.
> Mon fournisseur me dit que c'est parce que j'ai fait un RAID !
> Je viens de retirer le RAID, j'ai mis 1 ssd en M.2_1 et j'ai laissé l'autre en M.2_2.
> J'ai fait un ERASE SSD en utilisant l'outil fourni dans le bios 0811.
> Je fais un F5 pour charger les valeurs par défaut.
> Je redémarre dans le bios + EZ Flash vers 1101 et le message d'erreur Bam POST ERROR, je crois d6.
> 
> je ne sais pas quoi faire
> 
> je suis vraiment dégoûté
> 
> Je suis ASUS depuis X58 et je n'ai jamais vu ça, tant de soucis avec une carte @ 999 € !!!
> 
> Merci pour vos conseils....


This is an english speaking/writing forum sir.



Ghoosti said:


> Hello to you,
> I really need your help, I'm about to throw this card out the window.
> I have been fighting with this card for 15 days.
> Let me explain:
> I had configured a Samasung 980 PRO RAID0 on M.2_2 and M.2_3
> I try to do a BIOS update from 0811 to 1101 and the impossible, POST ERROR.
> My provider tells me it's because I did a RAID!
> I just removed the RAID, I put 1 ssd in M.2_1 and I left the other in M.2_2.
> I did an ERASE SSD using the tool provided in bios 0811.
> I do an F5 to load the default values.
> I reboot into bios + EZ Flash around 1101 and Bam POST ERROR error message, I believe d6.
> 
> I do not know what to do
> 
> I'm really disgusted
> 
> I've been ASUS since X58 and never seen this, so much hassle with a card @ €999!!!
> 
> Thanks for your advices....


----------



## truehighroller1

safedisk said:


> View attachment 2547681
> 
> 
> ROG MZ690A G.SKILL SAMSUNG 7000CL32
> 
> Samsung not bad
> 
> SA : 1.35V
> VDD : 1.53V
> VDDQ : 1.46V
> IVR Tran : 1.55V
> MC Voltage : 1.4V


What sticks are those?


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

truehighroller1 said:


> What sticks are those?


Hey man, it says in cpuz under the SPD section.


----------



## truehighroller1

MrTOOSHORT said:


> Hey man, it says in cpuz under the SPD section.


If I'm going to do this, I want to make sure I get the right thing first time. I'm looking at the following on newegg and I'm confused by it.

G.SKILL Trident Z5 RGB Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin DDR5 SDRAM DDR5 6000 Intel XMP 3.0 Desktop Memory Model F5-6000J3636F16GX2-TZ5RK - Newegg.com

Which is lower timings but cheaper. Then the following which is why I'm confused here.

G.SKILL Trident Z5 RGB Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin DDR5 SDRAM DDR5 6000 Intel XMP 3.0 Desktop Memory Model F5-6000J4040F16GX2-TZ5RK - Newegg.com\\

Higher timings but more expensive? WTH?


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

*truehighroller1*


One is just on sale. I'd go for the Hynix sets though, 6400MHz G.Skills, or the 6200MHz Corsair Doms. I have the 5600MHz Samsung Doms, awesome for me and the price was good. Only got them because the store had them local. Next set if I care to change is the 6200Mhz Doms. But really happy my current set.


----------



## truehighroller1

MrTOOSHORT said:


> *truehighroller1*
> 
> 
> One is just on sale. I'd go for the Hynix sets though, 6400MHz G.Skills, or the 6200MHz Corsair Doms. I have the 5600MHz Samsung Doms, awesome for me and the price was good. Only got them because the store had them local. Next set if I care to change is the 6200Mhz Doms. But really happy my current set.


How do you like your apex?


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

truehighroller1 said:


> How do you like your apex?


I think it's a great board. Very stable for me. The only issue is the cpu runs hot. I did the socket washer mod and it helped a little bit. I have a Sig V2 block so I'm good there. I learned the bios no problem from using past Asus boards, easy transition to Z690. The guys here have showed so much info with there testing screenshots and shamino's bios' releases, it made the Apex a fun and pretty easy board to use.


----------



## CptSpig

MrTOOSHORT said:


> *truehighroller1*
> 
> 
> One is just on sale. I'd go for the Hynix sets though, 6400MHz G.Skills, or the 6200MHz Corsair Doms. I have the 5600MHz Samsung Doms, awesome for me and the price was good. Only got them because the store had them local. Next set if I care to change is the 6200Mhz Doms. But really happy my current set.


I have the G.Skill 5600's running 24/7 at 6200 on the Apex. Just ordered the G.Skill 6400's for a test drive.


truehighroller1 said:


> How do you like your apex?


I really like the Apex it's made for true overclocking not XMP. I still have my X299 Apex running daily best board I ever owned.


----------



## CptSpig

MrTOOSHORT said:


> I think it's a great board. Very stable for me. The only issue is the cpu runs hot. I did the socket washer mod and it helped a little bit. I have a Sig V2 block so I'm good there. I learned the bios no problem from using past Asus boards, easy transition to Z690. The guys here have showed so much info with there testing screenshots and shamino's bios' releases, it made the Apex a fun and pretty easy board to use.


My 12900K idles at around 19c and never gets above 35c playing Farcry6 for hours. Still using the Koolance 390-Ci block. No need for washer mod CPU sits fine.


----------



## Ghoosti

MrTOOSHORT said:


> This is an english speaking/writing forum sir.


Yes Sorry, I corrected


----------



## truehighroller1

MrTOOSHORT said:


> I think it's a great board. Very stable for me. The only issue is the cpu runs hot. I did the socket washer mod and it helped a little bit. I have a Sig V2 block so I'm good there. I learned the bios no problem from using past Asus boards, easy transition to Z690. The guys here have showed so much info with there testing screenshots and shamino's bios' releases, it made the Apex a fun and pretty easy board to use.





CptSpig said:


> I have the G.Skill 5600's running 24/7 at 6200 on the Apex. Just ordered the G.Skill 6400's for a test drive.
> 
> I really like the Apex it's made for true overclocking not XMP. I still have my X299 Apex running daily best board I ever owned.



I ordered the 6200 corsair and the apex.

Thank you both!


----------



## Falkentyne

Ghoosti said:


> Hello to you,
> I really need your help, I'm about to throw this card out the window.
> I have been fighting with this card for 15 days.
> Let me explain:
> I had configured a Samasung 980 PRO RAID0 on M.2_2 and M.2_3
> I try to do a BIOS update from 0811 to 1101 and the impossible, POST ERROR.
> My provider tells me it's because I did a RAID!
> I just removed the RAID, I put 1 ssd in M.2_1 and I left the other in M.2_2.
> I did an ERASE SSD using the tool provided in bios 0811.
> I do an F5 to load the default values.
> I reboot into bios + EZ Flash around 1101 and Bam POST ERROR I believe d6.
> 
> I do not know what to do
> 
> I'm really disgusted
> 
> I've been ASUS since X58 and never seen this, so much hassle with a card @ €999!!!
> 
> Thanks for your advices....


What motherboard? "Asus" doesn't tell us much.

D6 is usually related to the PCI Express Video card in the X16 slot.
How are you getting post code D6 and still somehow able to use 1101?
Did you switch to the backup BIOS after you got D6, or something?
Your post is sort of jumbled up so it's hard to follow.
Of course the obvious solution is not to use 1101, then, if 0811 was working fine for you? Why fix what isn't broken?


----------



## Ghoosti

Falkentyne said:


> What motherboard? "Asus" doesn't tell us much.
> 
> D6 is usually related to the PCI Express Video card in the X16 slot.
> How are you getting post code D6 and still somehow able to use 1101?
> Did you switch to the backup BIOS after you got D6, or something?
> Your post is sort of jumbled up so it's hard to follow.
> Of course the obvious solution is not to use 1101, then, if 0811 was working fine for you? Why fix what isn't broken?


Yes sorry,
Maximus Z690 Extreme | 12900 KF | 2x16 Corsair Dominator platinum 6200 | 2x Samsung 980 pro SSDs | Rog Strix Gaming GTX 1080 TI.

I don't know how to use 1101, I went back to 0811.
Yes I know how to switch to bios 2 which is in 0231
I wanted to switch to the 1101 to see if it would make things better, because if I have too many OC's I can't get into the bios with F2 or DEL anymore.

I also tried the SAFEMODE and RETRY button but still can't get into the bios to change the OC settings.

Thanks for your help


----------



## owikh84

For some reasons it is so difficult to stabilize 6400+ on the Extreme (tested on BIOS 0811/0070/0090/1003/1101), so I decided to go back testing the same Kingston 5600C40 (Hynix) on the Hero. I must say that it was so easy overclocking on the Hero. Feels like whatever setting I applied on it will work perfectly LOL. BTW, I also have the Kingston 6000C40 (Hynix) that is not stable at 6400 even with loose timings and various voltage combos.

12900K SP88 - Stock
Maximus Z690 HERO | BIOS 1003
Kingston Fury Beast KF556C40BBK2-32 (Hynix)

*2x16GB DDR5-6400 30-37-37-28-2T
VDD/VDDQ/TX VDDQ 1.45v | SA 0.95v | MC 1.35v* (still can be reduced)








* SPD hub temp reading on one stick ~ 63.8C is a bug

Update 12/2:
Turns out that I just need 1.25v of MC. As for VDD/VDDQ/TX, anything lower than 1.44v will give error in about 1 hour.
I also adjusted some subtimings and still managed to achieve stability.
Again, it is confirmed that my other Hynix kit in the form of Kingston 6000C40 cannot use the same settings and won't be stable at 6400C30.

12900K SP88 - Stock
Maximus Z690 HERO | BIOS 1003
Kingston Fury Beast KF556C40BBK2-32 (Hynix)

*2x16GB DDR5-6400 30-37-37-28-2T
VDD/VDDQ/TX VDDQ 1.44v | SA 0.95v | MC 1.25v* 








* SPD hub temp reading on one stick ~ 63.8C is a bug


----------



## AZRYNO

Hey all. I just got my PC built, my first time building one. 

i9-12900K, ASUS Strix Z690-f and using Corsair Dominator 5600.

Im having issues with the PC not booting up in the recommended Dimm configuration (A2 B2). Thought my ram was bad but I can get the PC to boot with both sticks in B slots and the Bios recognizes them and I can use the PC like normal but from my understanding thats just running in single channel and not the best way to go. Seems like neither of the A slots work. I get an Orange light on the mobo on the DRAM LED when i put a stick in an A slot. I updated the Bios to the latest version and still wont accept anything in the A slots. Is my mobo bad? or am I doing something wrong?


----------



## acraigl

AZRYNO said:


> Hey all. I just got my PC built, my first time building one.
> 
> i9-12900K, ASUS Strix Z690-f and using Corsair Dominator 5600.
> 
> Im having issues with the PC not booting up in the recommended Dimm configuration (A2 B2). Thought my ram was bad but I can get the PC to boot with both sticks in B slots and the Bios recognizes them and I can use the PC like normal but from my understanding thats just running in single channel and not the best way to go. Seems like neither of the A slots work. I get an Orange light on the mobo on the DRAM LED when i put a stick in an A slot. I updated the Bios to the latest version and still wont accept anything in the A slots. Is my mobo bad? or am I doing something wrong?


I have a similar setup, but the i7 and different memory (G.SKILL Trident Z5 6000). I don't have any issue with using the recommended slots. Are you running without any XMP config?


----------



## truehighroller1

Apparently, I got the last 6200 doms yesterday. I bought them direct from corsair's website yesterday and this morning checking it says notify me when in stock. On a side note, my new Apex is on its way to me now. I'm super excited but will hate breaking everything down again in my loop. I might go ahead and put my EK block on the CPU this time around since I had them send me a mount bracket for the 1700.


----------



## bastian

jeiselramos said:


> I have stabilized 6000C32 1T with 1.38, 6133 1.40 and 6200 1.43, same BIOS


Should be able to try for 6200 32 / 1t


----------



## jeiselramos

bastian said:


> Should be able to try for 6200 32 / 1t


6200C32 1T is faster than 6600C32 2T in tm5 anta Extreme and games


----------



## Martin778

And now either the new BIOS is broken or the IMC/DIMMs are degrading - can't pass Anta777 Extreme at 6000C32 ASUS profile anymore...worked fine weeks ago.
I'm seriously getting fed up with this nonsense "Now it works, and now it doesn't". First the 6000C36 XMP was unstable, then it was, then the AI OC disabled separate perf/eff core OC, then the AI OC combined with RAM OC got unstable and now neither the 6000C32 or AI OC are stable anymore...with cherry on top the i225V NIC is STILL broken:


Dump FileCrash TimeBug Check StringBug Check CodeParameter 1Parameter 2Parameter 3Parameter 4Caused By DriverCaused By AddressFile DescriptionProduct NameCompanyFile VersionProcessorCrash AddressStack Address 1Stack Address 2Stack Address 3Computer NameFull PathProcessors CountMajor VersionMinor VersionDump File SizeDump File Time021122-11078-01.dmp11-2-2022 23:09:22UNEXPECTED_KERNEL_MODE_TRAP0x0000007f00000000`00000008ffffcd00`85d70e70ffff8601`a94d0fe0fffff801`49c094a7ntoskrnl.exentoskrnl.exe+3f73b0x64ntoskrnl.exe+3f73b0C:\Windows\Minidump\021122-11078-01.dmp2415190412.721.25211-2-2022 23:10:12

_Network interface:_
Intel(R) Ethernet Controller (3) I225-V
Network link is disconnected.

All the time...and if you happen to play a game, it will happily randomly BSOD with the NIC driver or it will freeze within a couple of minutes in game (you then also see the Xbox controller disconnect) and reboot after about 30 seconds.
Everything worked perfectly for weeks before. Tried flashing the latest official BIOS, updated my NIC driver, all available firmware packages and it's still the same error galore, rendering the machine useless as it stands now.
Both SSD's are perfect according to CrystalDiskInfo, GPU just finished running 1h of Unigine Heaven, no issues there as well. Reinstalled to Windows 11, full clean install and all drivers including latest NIC driver from intel, still crashing in games and all kinds of network related BSODs.
After lots of reading it's apparently still the i225V NIC cancer occuring since Z490 and so it turns out even the newest REV03 is faulty - sooner or later. I don't know what to do, all of the 2x DIMM boards seem to use this piece of garbage NIC. As it stands I'm almost ready to sell off the whole platform and only keep the GPU, PSU and the SSD's.


----------



## Paragram

Silent Scone said:


> If stable no huge need to deviate from auto rules unless you're that way inclined. Just save the CMO profile in case you feel a need to tune further.


Nice one, appreciate the help brother!


----------



## Nytestryke

@Silent Scone Read your AL OC guide from a few posts back, good info. Getting my F5-6000U4040E16GX2-TZ5RK in the next week, samsung memory but I have an SP93 12900k. I've been lurking through this thread since it started picking up some good information from others, looking forward to posting some results.


----------



## Silent Scone

Nytestryke said:


> @Silent Scone Read your AL OC guide from a few posts back, good info. Getting my F5-6000U4040E16GX2-TZ5RK in the next week, samsung memory but I have an SP93 12900k. I've been lurking through this thread since it started picking up some good information from others, looking forward to posting some results.


The guide is Peter's (Shamino) from his work leading up to launch, it's not mine.


----------



## Nytestryke

Silent Scone said:


> The guide is Peter's (Shamino) from his work leading up to launch, it's not mine.


Ah no worries, @shamino1978 Thanks for the guide.


----------



## truehighroller1

Martin778 said:


> And now either the new BIOS is broken or the IMC/DIMMs are degrading - can't pass Anta777 Extreme at 6000C32 ASUS profile anymore...worked fine weeks ago.
> I'm seriously getting fed up with this nonsense "Now it works, and now it doesn't". First the 6000C36 XMP was unstable, then it was, then the AI OC disabled separate perf/eff core OC, then the AI OC combined with RAM OC got unstable and now neither the 6000C32 or AI OC are stable anymore...with cherry on top the i225V NIC is STILL broken:
> 
> 
> Dump FileCrash TimeBug Check StringBug Check CodeParameter 1Parameter 2Parameter 3Parameter 4Caused By DriverCaused By AddressFile DescriptionProduct NameCompanyFile VersionProcessorCrash AddressStack Address 1Stack Address 2Stack Address 3Computer NameFull PathProcessors CountMajor VersionMinor VersionDump File SizeDump File Time021122-11078-01.dmp11-2-2022 23:09:22UNEXPECTED_KERNEL_MODE_TRAP0x0000007f00000000`00000008ffffcd00`85d70e70ffff8601`a94d0fe0fffff801`49c094a7ntoskrnl.exentoskrnl.exe+3f73b0x64ntoskrnl.exe+3f73b0C:\Windows\Minidump\021122-11078-01.dmp2415190412.721.25211-2-2022 23:10:12
> 
> _Network interface:_
> Intel(R) Ethernet Controller (3) I225-V
> Network link is disconnected.
> 
> All the time...and if you happen to play a game, it will happily randomly BSOD with the NIC driver or it will freeze within a couple of minutes in game (you then also see the Xbox controller disconnect) and reboot after about 30 seconds.
> Everything worked perfectly for weeks before. Tried flashing the latest official BIOS, updated my NIC driver, all available firmware packages and it's still the same error galore, rendering the machine useless as it stands now.
> Both SSD's are perfect according to CrystalDiskInfo, GPU just finished running 1h of Unigine Heaven, no issues there as well. Reinstalled to Windows 11, full clean install and all drivers including latest NIC driver from intel, still crashing in games and all kinds of network related BSODs.
> After lots of reading it's apparently still the i225V NIC cancer occuring since Z490 and so it turns out even the newest REV03 is faulty - sooner or later. I don't know what to do, all of the 2x DIMM boards seem to use this piece of garbage NIC. As it stands I'm almost ready to sell off the whole platform and only keep the GPU, PSU and the SSD's.



That's not good. I just ordered the apex... I don't play wireless either so I'm going to have issues I see it coming now. That or I'll end up using wireless I guess. I have a capable router.

Found this useful information about the problem.



Spoiler





__
https://www.reddit.com/r/ASUS/comments/kppyoi




I'll be checking my revision as soon as mine shows up I guess.


----------



## Nizzen

jeiselramos said:


> 6200C32 1T is faster than 6600C32 2T in tm5 anta Extreme and games [emoji6]


I need to test 6800c30 2t vs 6400c30 1t in games somw day I have time!


----------



## cstkl1

truehighroller1 said:


> That's not good. I just ordered the apex... I don't play wireless either so I'm going to have issues I see it coming now. That or I'll end up using wireless I guess. I have a capable router.
> 
> Found this useful information about the problem.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> https://www.reddit.com/r/ASUS/comments/kppyoi
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'll be checking my revision as soon as mine shows up I guess.


z490 .. z590 was fixed


----------



## truehighroller1

cstkl1 said:


> z490 .. z590 was fixed


No it's not. There are people having issues still to this day z690 boards. On that reddit post I posted if you read through the comments you'll see them.


----------



## Slackaveli

Jpmboy said:


> I've been _very_ tempted, and the Apex is readily available here... I recently swapped out the guts of my 6950X/R5E-10 for a 5950X/ASUS x570 in the caselabs case (great chip at the OC I managed with it, really crap memory substructure tho - no suprise). My 10980XE/Omega rig has been flawless and still very fast, As yours was, ya get the just about the same AID64 memory performance from x299 (omega and Apex still running here) and Z690, but AID64 really can't show the memory benefit of Z690.
> I'll likely hold off for the next chipset gen with DDR5, but my will power is certainly being tested. I do have an empty bench table calling me!
> 
> View attachment 2546683


Im too tempted. Already have a 6000c36 samsung kit and 12700k, just waiting on my Unify-x. Gonna be buh-b ye binned 10900k @ 5.3/5.0 4000c15 <439ns rig. Welcome to ram tuning hell- the weird part is thats kinda the attraction to me bwahahhahaa


----------



## Mappi75

Hello got my Apex/12700K/DDR5-6000, CL36-36-36-96

Loaded xmp and it looks stable atm ^^

When i want to disable the ram rgb with the armorycrate software (latest update)
i can disable only one ram stick - the other is still "on".

Somebody else with this problem?

(i want to use armory crate because mobo/mouse/keyboard/360hz display is from asus)


----------



## jeiselramos

Nizzen said:


> I need to test 6800c30 2t vs 6400c30 1t in games somw day I have time!


Let we know what is faster


----------



## cstkl1

truehighroller1 said:


> No it's not. There are people having issues still to this day z690 boards. On that reddit post I posted if you read through the comments you'll see them.


6 boards
no prob
router mikrotik rb4011 

some router switches do not play well with it. ironically one of it was intel which few isp in north america uses in their provided package. 

i can check my router on number of times link was down on the port connected. none. comp runs 24/7. 

z490 extreme few ppl had issues with b2. 

so its sometimes a combination of things.


----------



## shamino1978

updated octool with blutetooth to androidphone app
cpu/BT CTL








OCTool0212.zip


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com





android bluetooth app raw apk file








btctl.apk


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com




flip phone to landscape when osc selected when voltician connected
turn on both bluetooth on pc and phone
run app on phone and run octool on pc and select connect to the device. then device will start updating.


----------



## Ghoosti

Hello everyone,
Did you encounter problems flashing from 0811 to 1003 or 0811 to 1101?
I flash with Flashback, I may not have the right procedure..
I don't understand why I can't do it, I get a POST ERROR every time.
Is there something particular in these 2 bios?
Is my card having a problem?
Thanks for your advice


----------



## truehighroller1

cstkl1 said:


> 6 boards
> no prob
> router mikrotik rb4011
> 
> some router switches do not play well with it. ironically one of it was intel which few isp in north america uses in their provided package.
> 
> i can check my router on number of times link was down on the port connected. none. comp runs 24/7.
> 
> z490 extreme few ppl had issues with b2.
> 
> so its sometimes a combination of things.



Yeah so, it's still a problem, got it.

@Martin778

Do you use a network switch? I read that it might be local traffic related / switch related. Local traffic kicks up, issue pops up. Any backup servers you have running etc. could kick the issue off apparently. At one point they had the issue resolved with a proper driver / firmware update apparently and once you updated its driver, issue comes back.


----------



## Mappi75

Can anyone confirm?

Is the Optimus Signature V2 compatible with LGA 1700 ? (Apex Board)? 

I contacted the support and they said there is no need of anything,
but one user here said he has bad temps... so it does not fit really?


----------



## Martin778

truehighroller1 said:


> Yeah so, it's still a problem, got it.
> 
> @Martin778
> 
> Do you use a network switch? I read that it might be local traffic related / switch related. Local traffic kicks up, issue pops up. Any backup servers you have running etc. could kick the issue off apparently. At one point they had the issue resolved with a proper driver / firmware update apparently and once you updated its driver, issue comes back.


The network runs like this at the moment: 1Gbit SM fiber -> TP-Link converter to copper -> Zyxel T50 -> Netgear GS105 (TV + media player, Unifi AC AP Pro w. PoE injector) -> TP Link SG1024 (2 PCs, RPi with Adguard DNS, UniFi AC Lite AP with PoE injector) -> HP 1920 8G PoE+ (Roon server running W10, Unifi AC Lite AP, RPi with Unifi Controller software).
All the switches are running on factory settings.
Can't imagne what is going wrong as this setup has been running for about 2 years before and even with the Apex, I used it since late nov/early dec without any network related issues BUT what's been happening lately is that every evening the network performance would randomly drop to 2MBps stuck at 20-25ms ping for everyone and around that point the NIC on the Apex seemed to go nuts.
I've done a Wireshark capture from my PC with the Z690 Apex before it crashed but don't really have the knowledge to analyze the traffic...I also tried locking the link speed on the i225V to 1Gbit full duplex but that didn't do anything.


----------



## truehighroller1

Martin778 said:


> The network runs like this at the moment: 1Gbit SM fiber -> TP-Link converter to copper -> Zyxel T50 -> Netgear GS105 (TV + media player, Unifi AC AP Pro w. PoE injector) -> TP Link SG1024 (2 PCs, RPi with Adguard DNS, UniFi AC Lite AP with PoE injector) -> HP 1920 8G PoE+ (Roon server running W10, Unifi AC Lite AP, RPi with Unifi Controller software).
> All the switches are running on factory settings.
> Can't imagne what is going wrong as this setup has been running for about 2 years before and even with the Apex, I used it since late nov/early dec without any network related issues BUT what's been happening lately is that every evening the network performance would randomly drop to 2MBps stuck at 20-25ms ping for everyone and around that point the NIC on the Apex seemed to go nuts.
> I've done a Wireshark capture from my PC with the Z690 Apex before it crashed but don't really have the knowledge to analyze the traffic...I also tried locking the link speed on the i225V to 1Gbit full duplex but that didn't do anything.


It's a driver / firmware bug that's related to your network setup. You could plug directly into your provider router or your router no switches etc. and it would go away. Not that it's your fault. It shouldn't be an issue in this time and age but, that's what the issue is. Intel needs to fix it / Asus needs to tell them to fix it.


----------



## Martin778

So strange that it worked fine before...now Windows11 also complains about a duplicate server name?








Bogus event 2505


Heya folks, Ned here again. A few customers have reported this known issue on Windows 11 machines & you may see this event at boot up and perhaps occasionally afterwards. In the Event Log, in the System channel, you see: Log Name: System Source: Server Date: 10/25/2021 3:01:46 PM Event ID...



techcommunity.microsoft.com




That's impossible as I've already changed the name of this machine twice to see if the error goes away. I also see weird log entries for Netwtw10:
7025 - Dump after return from D3 before cmd
7026 - Dump after return from D3 after cmd
BTHUSB - Bluetooth verification codes (pairing keys) cannot be stored on the local adapter. Bluetooth keyboards may not work in the system BIOS during system boot. (translated from Dutch)
ID27: Intel(R) Ethernet Controller (3) I225-V Network link is disconnected.
ID157: Disk 2 was unexpectedly removed. (<- apperently this is some kind of a ghost volume made up by Xbox app?)


I think something is about to die as I now run 4800 CL40, started TM5, it threw 5 errors straight away and BSOD'ed, this is running 100% BIOS defaults (F5). I have another set of DDR5 laying around but it looks like the controller or the DIMMs died...or something is completely bugged?

+
2 seconds and it either completely freezes or BSODs in TM5 and again, this is not even with XMP, full BIOS defaults:


Spoiler










Now swapped for Crucial 4800 C40's:


Spoiler










No issues, later on I ran TM5 Anta777 Extreme, no crashes in Forza either.
Swapped the G.Skills back in, running JEDEC 4800MHz - crashes are back. Long story short, the 6000C36 G.Skills somehow commited seppuku - big F.
I hope I can get a refund on these to buy, this time a Hynix kit, from a different brand.


----------



## Garlicky

I updated my bios to 1003 and my max ram speed went from 3733 to 4000, board is strix A d4, very POG


----------



## bscool

Garlicky said:


> I updated my bios to 1003 and my max ram speed went from 3733 to 4000, board is strix A d4, very POG


Are you still using 4x8? From what I can tell it improves 2x8 and 4x8. Seems like it is better for SR mem. DR has issues booting higher than older bioses for me.


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> Are you still using 4x8? From what I can tell it improves 2x8 and 4x8. Seems like it is better for SR mem. DR has issues booting higher than older bioses for me.


They're still working in the background on the issue through my ticket that I have open through them.


----------



## uplink

Any news on potentially new BiOS/UEFi for Z690 Maximus boards? I'm running Apex since 1011 and I'm unable to use either Corsair 6200 MHz CL36, nor my new G.Skill 6400 MHz CL32. I mean, yeah, the Corsair ain't in QVL, so I'll pass on that one, but G.Skill is, at least on the side of G.Skill...so now "they're" selling memory that is QVL, but doesn't work? Why?

I tried everythingm VDD/VDDQ on Samsung G.Skill memory from 1.435/1.435 to 1.4/1.45 and even 1.45/1.45I even tried increments and decrements of 0.05v.

This is really a majestic time waste, I'm not gona go "full enthusiast" next generation, no siree...


----------



## fortecosi

uplink said:


> Any news on potentially new BiOS/UEFi for Z690 Maximus boards? I'm running Apex since 1011 and I'm unable to use either Corsair 6200 MHz CL36, nor my new G.Skill 6400 MHz CL32. I mean, yeah, the Corsair ain't in QVL, so I'll pass on that one, but G.Skill is, at least on the side of G.Skill...so now "they're" selling memory that is QVL, but doesn't work? Why?
> 
> I tried everythingm VDD/VDDQ on Samsung G.Skill memory from 1.435/1.435 to 1.4/1.45 and even 1.45/1.45I even tried increments and decrements of 0.05v.
> 
> This is really a majestic time waste, I'm not gona go "full enthusiast" next generation, no siree...


I am able to boot up to 6800 with my Dominators 5600C36 on the Apex. Just don´t use XMP, type values manually, profit!
Set only VCCSA to 1.15V, MC 1.25-1.3V, VDD/Q by the module value, and set primary timings, rest all auto for now.


----------



## CptSpig

uplink said:


> Any news on potentially new BiOS/UEFi for Z690 Maximus boards? I'm running Apex since 1011 and I'm unable to use either Corsair 6200 MHz CL36, nor my new G.Skill 6400 MHz CL32. I mean, yeah, the Corsair ain't in QVL, so I'll pass on that one, but G.Skill is, at least on the side of G.Skill...so now "they're" selling memory that is QVL, but doesn't work? Why?
> 
> I tried everythingm VDD/VDDQ on Samsung G.Skill memory from 1.435/1.435 to 1.4/1.45 and even 1.45/1.45I even tried increments and decrements of 0.05v.
> 
> This is really a majestic time waste, I'm not gona go "full enthusiast" next generation, no siree...


I have the Apex board also running G.Skill 6400 kit. F5 load optimized defauts. Manually set Freq. to 6400 timmings to 32-39-39-102 with VDD and VDDQ to 1.40v. Sync PMIC save and boot. Don't use XMP. If all is good you can start tweeking. You can test with memtest 86 in the bios so you don't curupt the OS.


----------



## Feklar

Same here. Apex with 1101 bios and 6400 G.Skill kit. I set timings manually to spec and 1.4V. Also tried XMP1 and have had no errors in memtest and 23 consecutive runs of cine23 and hours of gaming and not a single error or crash. I'm running a simple all core overclock of 51 and nothing else special in the settings.


----------



## Garlicky

bscool said:


> Are you still using 4x8? From what I can tell it improves 2x8 and 4x8. Seems like it is better for SR mem. DR has issues booting higher than older bioses for me.


Yes, still 4x8


----------



## owikh84

Hero is stronger than my Extreme XD.

12900K SP88 - Stock
Maximus Z690 HERO | BIOS 1003
Kingston Fury Beast KF556C40BBK2-32 (Hynix)

*2x16GB DDR5-6600 32-40-40-28-2T
VDD/VDDQ 1.55v | TX VDDQ 1.56v | SA 1.25v (Auto) | MC 1.35v*








* SPD Hub Temp max reading at 63.8c is a bug.


----------



## sblantipodi

owikh84 said:


> Hero is stronger than my Extreme XD.
> 
> 12900K SP88 - Stock
> Maximus Z690 HERO | BIOS 1003
> Kingston Fury Beast KF556C40BBK2-32 (Hynix)
> 
> *2x16GB DDR5-6600 32-40-40-28-2T
> VDD/VDDQ 1.55v | TX VDDQ 1.56v | SA 1.25v (Auto) | MC 1.35v*
> View attachment 2548322
> 
> * SPD Hub Temp max reading at 63.8c is a bug.


Same here, I have an Extreme and a Hero now, same components works better on the Hero than the Extreme.

I payed the Hero 620€, I payed the Extreme 1200€.

This is a shame for Asus.


----------



## uplink

fortecosi said:


> I am able to boot up to 6800 with my Dominators 5600C36 on the Apex. Just don´t use XMP, type values manually, profit!
> Set only VCCSA to 1.15V, MC 1.25-1.3V, VDD/Q by the module value, and set primary timings, rest all auto for now.





CptSpig said:


> I have the Apex board also running G.Skill 6400 kit. F5 load optimized defauts. Manually set Freq. to 6400 timmings to 32-39-39-102 with VDD and VDDQ to 1.40v. Sync PMIC save and boot. Don't use XMP. If all is good you can start tweeking. You can test with memtest 86 in the bios so you don.t curupt the OS.





Feklar said:


> Same here. Apex with 1101 bios and 6400 G.Skill kit. I set timings manually to spec and 1.4V. Also tried XMP1 and have had no errors in memtest and 23 consecutive runs of cine23 and hours of gaming and not a single error or crash. I'm running a simple all core overclock of 51 and nothing else special in the settings.


 Thank You guys for Your replies! I'll try to apply them tonight and will report back 🤝

//edit: I'm not managing tonight, I needed to work, I'll be working "nonstop" till tuesday, so on wednesday. I'll try the settings for Corsair, since I want to keep the "weaker", but prettier 6200 MHz CL36 Corsair Dominator, instead of G.Skill 6400 MHz CL32, although, if I've gotten my dirty pawz on some nice passive coolers for DDR5 chips, I'll keep the G.SKill


----------



## Maj0

hi, trying to run *32GB (2x 16GB) G.Skill Trident Z5 DDR5-6000 DIMM CL40-40-40-76 Dual Kit with Samsung Chips* on Asus Z690 Apex.
But isnt stable in MemTest - not with default options and sadly neither with XMP I. Only running stable on 2400 Mhz... Anyone any idea ?


----------



## CptSpig

uplink said:


> Thank You guys for Your replies! I'll try to apply them tonight and will report back 🤝


I started tunning my 6400 kit and they resopnd very well. I need to align the RLT's and then go to 6600 for 24/7. See attached.


----------



## uplink

CptSpig said:


> I started tunning my 6400 kit and they resopnd very well. See attached.


 Could You please post Your .cmo file from Your BiOS/UEFi? Your profile export?


----------



## uplink

Maj0 said:


> hi, trying to run *32GB (2x 16GB) G.Skill Trident Z5 DDR5-6000 DIMM CL40-40-40-76 Dual Kit with Samsung Chips* on Asus Z690 Apex.
> But isnt stable in MemTest - not with default options and sadly neither with XMP I. Only running stable on 2400 Mhz... Anyone any idea ?


 Yup, hit VDD to 1.35 and VDDQ to 1.375 and You should run on XPM I. as smooth as it gets, or XMP II, if I. didn't work. I'm a lamer, so I can't tell You more, since I don't know more, but this helped me with G.Skills 6000 MHz CL36 and worked like a charm.


----------



## Maj0

thanks - tried. Sadly Memtest is throwing errors. Any idea ?


----------



## Nizzen

Maj0 said:


> thanks - tried. Sadly Memtest is throwing errors. Any idea ?


skew control/odts/
rtt WR 48
rtt Nom rd 34
rtt nom wr 34
rtt park 34
rtt parkdqs 34

rtt ca group A 240
rtt cs group A 0
rtt ck group A 0

rtt ca group B 40
rtt cs group B 40
rtt ck group B 40

Ron odt up/down: 34/34

skew control/comp control:

DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL0_dqvrefup 159
DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL0_dqvrefdn 94
DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL0_dqodtvrefup 128
DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL0_dqodtvrefdn 99

DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL1_cmdvrefup 145
DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL1_ctlvrefup 118
DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL1_clkvrefup 128
DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL1_ckecsvrefup 0
DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL2_cmdvrefdn 92
DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL2_ctlvrefdn 103
DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL2_clkvrefdn 92

mc voltage 1.25v

vdd/vddq 1.35v
-----------
This fixed my G.skill 6000c40 samsung xmp the first week. Tip is from shamino...

Try VCCSA 1.15v if Auto SA isn't working.


----------



## Maj0

Thanks - mentest still throwing errors. Any ideas ?


----------



## Nizzen

Maj0 said:


> Thanks - mentest still throwing errors. Any ideas ?



Save profile and turn off the computer and power off. Hold "clerar cmos" for 10 seconds. Turn on computer. Load profile. Disable fastboot in "memory timing menu"


----------



## borant

CptSpig said:


> I started tunning my 6400 kit and they resopnd very well. I need to align the RLT's and then go to 6600 for 24/7. See attached.


You are close to my current 24/7 6400C30 1T. It runs stable for hours.
It could be better than 6600 if you want to keep 24/7 under 1.5V.


----------



## CptSpig

uplink said:


> Could You please post Your .cmo file from Your BiOS/UEFi? Your profile export?


I could not get the bios to see my USB it would only see my NSTF drives. I will try later.
See attached for a stable 24/7 6400 with tighter timming. *VDD 1.41/VDDQ/TX VDDQ 1.415v | MC 1.25v*


----------



## CptSpig

borant said:


> You are close to my current 24/7 6400C30 1T. It runs stable for hours.
> It could be better than 6600 if you want to keep 24/7 under 1.5V.


See attached for a stable 24/7 6400 with tighter timming. *VDD 1.41/VDDQ/TX VDDQ 1.415v | MC 1.25v*


----------



## borant

CptSpig said:


> See attached for a stable 24/7 6400 with tighter timming. *VDD 1.41/VDDQ/TX VDDQ 1.425v | MC 1.25v*


Any specific reason why you keep spending time with 2T giving you inferior latency? I gave you 1T command rate example just to get an idea what could be performance while keeping 6400 clock.
It is up to you, the only reason for my comment was that most of posts here are about bench oriented OC but you seems to be interested in daily 24/7.


----------



## CptSpig

borant said:


> Any specific reason why you keep spending time with 2T giving you inferior latency? I gave you 1T command rate example just to get an idea what could be performance while keeping 6400 clock.
> It is up to you, the only reason for my comment was that most of posts here are about bench oriented OC but you seems to be interested in daily 24/7.


First day with this kit. I was trying to help uplink with his Apex and 6400 kit. Not even close to my Daily and benck OC. See attached for my DDR4 CR1 on my X299 Apex.


----------



## kazetsubakii

Asking for some assistance or guidance - Im new here but have been lurking since the X299 days of DDR4 OCing and the advice I've read and seen here has been invaluable.

New Build: Z690-I 1003 Bios
12900K - 280MM RAD, Stock for Now
GSkill DDR5 6000 36-36-36-76 @ 6000 32-34-34-72 (I think it’s Samsung)
1000w SFX-L PSU
Etc etc

Every few reboots (not all the time, my VDD (SWA) voltage will drop from whatever I have it set to 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, everything in between, down to 1.0xx for a few seconds and then back up. Sometimes this happens on DIMM 0 and sometimes it happens on DIMM 2, but not during the same reboot. It will always be on the same stick during the session. Rebooting normally fixes this but every 5 or so reboots, this pops up.

Now I have noticed no instability, in fact, seems pretty ok. I ran RamTest to 20,000% with this anomaly and TM5 777 with no errors.

Could this just be a monitoring bug? or do you think I am really seeing voltage fluctuation? Any help is appreciated.


Things I've Tried:

IVR VDDQ, VDD, VDDQ changed from 1.30, to 1.35, 1.4, 1.45, 1.5
1.8V to 1.8, 1.9
VPP to 1.8, 1.85. 1.9
CPU LLC to 3, 4, 5
ECore L2 to 1.1, 1.2, 1.25
VCCSA Auto 0.95, 1.1, 1.20, 1.25
IMC 1.1, 1.2, 1.25, 1.3, 1.325
Memory Reseat, DIMM Switch slots


----------



## fortecosi

kazetsubakii said:


> Asking for some assistance or guidance - Im new here but have been lurking since the X299 days of DDR4 OCing and the advice I've read and seen here has been invaluable.
> 
> New Build: Z690-I 1003 Bios
> 12900K - 280MM RAD, Stock for Now
> GSkill DDR5 6000 36-36-36-76 @ 6000 32-34-34-72 (I think it’s Samsung)
> 1000w SFX-L PSU
> Etc etc
> 
> Every few reboots (not all the time, my VDD (SWA) voltage will drop from whatever I have it set to 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, everything in between, down to 1.0xx for a few seconds and then back up. Sometimes this happens on DIMM 0 and sometimes it happens on DIMM 2, but not during the same reboot. It will always be on the same stick during the session. Rebooting normally fixes this but every 5 or so reboots, this pops up.
> 
> Now I have noticed no instability, in fact, seems pretty ok. I ran RamTest to 20,000% with this anomaly and TM5 777 with no errors.
> 
> Could this just be a monitoring bug? or do you think I am really seeing voltage fluctuation? Any help is appreciated.
> 
> 
> Things I've Tried:
> 
> IVR VDDQ, VDD, VDDQ changed from 1.30, to 1.35, 1.4, 1.45, 1.5
> 1.8V to 1.8, 1.9
> VPP to 1.8, 1.85. 1.9
> CPU LLC to 3, 4, 5
> ECore L2 to 1.1, 1.2, 1.25
> VCCSA Auto 0.95, 1.1, 1.20, 1.25
> IMC 1.1, 1.2, 1.25, 1.3, 1.325
> Memory Reseat, DIMM Switch slots


It´s totally normal just ignore it. And btw hwinfo is lying sometimes.


----------



## dr.silkyworm

Hey guys I currently am waiting on my RMA'd Asus z690 Maximus Hero.. Started with Corsair CMT32GX5M2B5200C38, but now purchased and have 4 kits of the following thinking I may swap the Corsair 5200C38 out. The first 2 are on the qvl and the third one isn't but is shown as "compatible" I guess on the G. Skill website". The kits are Team Group FF3D532G6400HC40BDC01, G. Skill F5-6000u3636e16gx2-tz5rk and F5-6400J3239G16GX2-TZ5RK.. , and another 2 kits of Corsair CMT32GX5M2X6200C36 not in the qvl. I bought 2 of each thinking I could fill my four slots but I hear it's not that simple.. is that the case? Also any recommendations on what kit would be the best, I'm a novice at most stuff. But when it comes to memory overclockling/compatibility with my board is where my knowledge kind of hits a dead end.. Any help would be appreciated, first time user on this website.. Need to return these kits pretty soon as well.. Thanks in advance.. Personally I was thinking of going with the team group because it's on the qvl, even though I really would love my Corsair 6000+ but it not being on the qvl. Makes me just want to stick with something that will work out of box "at its rated speed" and still be able to mess with timings later..

Thank You for your time and assistance


----------



## Simkin

dr.silkyworm said:


> Hey guys I currently am waiting on my RMA'd Asus z690 Maximus Hero.. Started with Corsair CMT32GX5M2B5200C38, but now purchased and have 4 kits of the following thinking I may swap the Corsair 5200C38 out. The first 2 are on the qvl and the third one isn't but is shown as "compatible" I guess on the G. Skill website". The kits are Team Group FF3D532G6400HC40BDC01, G. Skill F5-6000u3636e16gx2-tz5rk and F5-6400J3239G16GX2-TZ5RK.. , and another 2 kits of Corsair CMT32GX5M2X6200C36 not in the qvl. I bought 2 of each thinking I could fill my four slots but I hear it's not that simple.. is that the case? Also any recommendations on what kit would be the best, I'm a novice at most stuff. But when it comes to memory overclockling/compatibility with my board is where my knowledge kind of hits a dead end.. Any help would be appreciated, first time user on this website.. Need to return these kits pretty soon as well.. Thanks in advance.. Personally I was thinking of going with the team group because it's on the qvl, even though I really would love my Corsair 6000+ but it not being on the qvl. Makes me just want to stick with something that will work out of box "at its rated speed" and still be able to mess with timings later..
> 
> Thank You for your time and assistance


F5-6400J3239G16GX2-TZ5RK would be the best to keep if hardcore memory oc is the goal, probably the best binned Hynix IC to buy right now.

The TeamGroup is also Hynix, "less binned" than the G.Skill 6400 i would guess but they have thermalpads on the PMIC and a better cooling solution overall compared to the G.Skill.

Corsair 6200 also Hynix, and also good thermals with pads on the PMIC like TeamGroup.

I see no reason *what so ever* to even consider keeping the G.Skill 6000 Samsung kit when you have these Hynix kits.


----------



## pbytano

borant said:


> yes, it is 6400J3239 kit. It does not work well with earlier BIOS and I updated to 1003. I used XMP I setting with "Auto" command rate for initial training and then changed CR from 2T to 1T.
> It is stable in MemTest86.


I just got my system together with the 12900K/Z690 Extreme and GSkill 6400J3239 kit (2x16GB). BIOS is 1101. Mine is stable at XMP I, but memory training fails if I than set it manually to 1N. I assume 1N = 1T? Any ideas on where to start?


----------



## fortecosi

pbytano said:


> I just got my system together with the 12900K/Z690 Extreme and GSkill 6400J3239 kit (2x16GB). BIOS is 1101. Mine is stable at XMP I, but memory training fails if I than set it manually to 1N. I assume 1N = 1T? Any ideas on where to start?


you can start here: _Official_ Intel DDR5 OC and 24/7 daily Memory Stability Thread | Page 100 | Overclock.net


----------



## pR1maL

pbytano said:


> I just got my system together with the 12900K/Z690 Extreme and GSkill 6400J3239 kit (2x16GB). BIOS is 1101. Mine is stable at XMP I, but memory training fails if I than set it manually to 1N. I assume 1N = 1T? Any ideas on where to start?


Try Maximus Tweak mode 1 or 2. I suggest trying Mode 2.

Quoting Silent Scone,


> The Tweak Modes are predefined presets for memory sub-settings and timings. Tweak Mode 1 is better for some module compatibility, Mode 2 is better for overclocking. Either can give better results depending on the memory configuration.


----------



## borant

pbytano said:


> I just got my system together with the 12900K/Z690 Extreme and GSkill 6400J3239 kit (2x16GB). BIOS is 1101. Mine is stable at XMP I, but memory training fails if I than set it manually to 1N. I assume 1N = 1T? Any ideas on where to start?


You need full shutdown when making switch to 1T. Another idea - many folks here reported issues with 1101 and I had some issues with it too before downgraded to 1003.
Try to increase VDD/VDDQ higher as well.


----------



## truehighroller1

Simkin said:


> F5-6400J3239G16GX2-TZ5RK would be the best to keep if hardcore memory oc is the goal, probably the best binned Hynix IC to buy right now.
> 
> The TeamGroup is also Hynix, "less binned" than the G.Skill 6400 i would guess but they have thermalpads on the PMIC and a better cooling solution overall compared to the G.Skill.
> 
> I see no reason *what so ever* to even consider keeping the G.Skill 6000 Samsung kit or the Corsair when you have these Hynix kits.


The Corsair 6200 is hynix as well actually.


----------



## Simkin

truehighroller1 said:


> The Corsair 6200 is hynix as well actually.


Yes, i see now he first tried the 5200 Corsair, and also have 6200. That kit also has good thermals like the TeamGroup.


----------



## joneffingvo

truehighroller1 said:


> The Corsair 6200 is hynix as well actually.


Picking up a set of these on Friday... Any special settings/timings needed to run with Apex?


----------



## dr.silkyworm

Simkin said:


> Yes, i see now he first tried the 5200 Corsair, and also have 6200. That kit also has good thermals like the TeamGroup.


I know it doesn't matter that much too you guys, but the fact FF3D532G6400HC40BDC01 is on Heros qvl.. Makes me wanna go with that. But do not get me wrong, the look of the Corsair Dominators are gonna be hard to beat in my opinion, but they don't have any other Than micron on qvl.. 

ALSO I know this isn't XMP. Net or whatever, but that's currently what I'm aiming for as my motherboard is currently being RMA'D right now..


----------



## pbytano

pR1maL said:


> Try Maximus Tweak mode 1 or 2. I suggest trying Mode 2.
> 
> Quoting Silent Scone,





borant said:


> You need full shutdown when making switch to 1T. Another idea - many folks here reported issues with 1101 and I had some issues with it too before downgraded to 1003.
> Try to increase VDD/VDDQ higher as well.


Thanks Borant. I will give this a shot and keep everyone posted. Where you recommend VDD/VDDQ as a starting point? I believe mine are are both set to 1.4v from XMP.


----------



## truehighroller1

joneffingvo said:


> Picking up a set of these on Friday... Any special settings/timings needed to run with Apex?


Not yet. I just ordered mine direct from corsair last Friday so they're coming from Taiwan. I did find this post though that would help you get a grip on where to start and I plan to use it for a starting point as well once I get mine.

FEATURED - Corsair Dominator Platinum RGB 32GB DDR5-6200 CL36 - CMT32GX5M2X6200C36 | Overclockers Forums


----------



## borant

pbytano said:


> Thanks Borant. I will give this a shot and keep everyone posted. Where you recommend VDD/VDDQ as a starting point? I believe mine are are both set to 1.4v from XMP.


I currently run maximum allowed standard voltage 1.435V without enabling high voltages in BIOS.
I'm only interested in 24/7 daily profile and try to fit maximum OC performance within this voltage budget.
It allows me to go up to stable 6400C30 1T for now as I posted. I have no time to tune WR timings yet so it remains work in progress for now.


----------



## kazetsubakii

I’m


fortecosi said:


> It´s totally normal just ignore it. And btw hwinfo is lying sometimes.


oh ok, thanks for the info. I thought HWInfo was the most rock solid monitoring platform out there and didn't expect random variance only sometimes like that. Was thinking I had a real issue.


----------



## bscool

Been messing with the Apex a little bit. Still new to ddr5 so a lot of learning to do.

Highest I have booted with both sticks with loose timings is 7000.


----------



## Mappi75

So better to buy the 6400 G.Skill Kit than the 6.000 ?
Got the 6000 Samsung Kit - my vendor would take the kit back +€220 more for the 6400.
What do you think?


----------



## CptSpig

Mappi75 said:


> So better to buy the 6400 G.Skill Kit than the 6.000 ?
> Got the 6000 Samsung Kit - my vendor would take the kit back +€220 more for the 6400.
> What do you think?


Yes, better to get the 6400 kit.


----------



## CptSpig

borant said:


> You are close to my current 24/7 6400C30 1T. It runs stable for hours.
> It could be better than 6600 if you want to keep 24/7 under 1.5V.


See attached for a stable 24/7 6400 CR1. *VDD 1.41/VDDQ/TX VDDQ 1.415v | MC 1.25v*


----------



## Simkin

dr.silkyworm said:


> I know it doesn't matter that much too you guys, but the fact FF3D532G6400HC40BDC01 is on Heros qvl.. Makes me wanna go with that. But do not get me wrong, the look of the Corsair Dominators are gonna be hard to beat in my opinion, but they don't have any other Than micron on qvl..
> 
> ALSO I know this isn't XMP. Net or whatever, but that's currently what I'm aiming for as my motherboard is currently being RMA'D right now..


The Apex QVL list states Micron for the teamgroup 6200/6400, but no Micron runs these speed to my knowledge, these kits are Hynix.

The same QVL list also says the Samsung 6000 kits are running Hynix, which is also wrong, they are Samsung.


----------



## skullbringer

bios 1101, I think per core usage OC is buggy when bclk is not 100

I set 109 bclk and by core usage 1 x54, 2 x53 ... in bios

after boot settings are correct in tool / controls, but highest single core boost I see is ~ 5.3 GHz:










when I then just click "+By Core Usage" and "Apply" in bottom right in tool / controls without changing any settings, then I get correct single core boost:










sorry for tagging you, but I think it's justified this time  @shamino1978


----------



## shamino1978

when I then just click "+By Core Usage" and "Apply" in bottom right in tool / controls without changing any settings, then I get correct single core boost: 
thats exactly why the checkbox is there, tool doesnt know if you want to set only specific cores and let the active core ratio limits be synched up to the max of all specific cores, or that you just want to limit some specific cores and still limit by number of active cores at the same time.


----------



## affxct

Anyone had a chance to test out the memory OCing on the B660-I?


----------



## criznit

The one thing I've noticed is that the Samsung B-die chips don't like high tRefi values. The highest I can get it with 100% stability is 40000. I doubt it matters for daily usage, but it still sucks


----------



## bl4ckdot

@shamino1978
I would like to report a bug on Apex (1101), when using Oloy Blade5 Kit, with "GMT" pmic, we can't boot other 1.43v. This is an unlocked pmic that can be oc very well on other boards. Could you please look at that issue ?
Thank you very much


----------



## yahfz

dr.silkyworm said:


> I know it doesn't matter that much too you guys, but the fact FF3D532G6400HC40BDC01 is on Heros qvl..


It’s also on the APEX QVL and the XMP doesn't work lol. Kinda crazy how it’s been 4 months since the launch and the XMP for a kit that’s in the ****ing QVL doesn’t even work on the supposedly best ASUS board for memory. If i didn’t know how to overclock myself id be ****ed, I wonder how many people have returned sticks/boards because XMP doesn’t work. Not to mention that a lot of work has been done bios wise, look at how many bios the apex had and none of them made XMP work either.

Imagine having to bin boards and cpu's just to enable XMP.


----------



## shamino1978

bl4ckdot said:


> @shamino1978
> I would like to report a bug on Apex (0086), when using Oloy Blade5 Kit, with "GMT" pmic, we can't boot other 1.43v. This is an unlocked pmic that can be oc very well on other boards. Could you please look at that issue ?
> Thank you very much


this was reported before, i think there were newer bioses that fixed this


----------



## bl4ckdot

shamino1978 said:


> this was reported before, i think there were newer bioses that fixed this


We will try an other bios. Just to correct myself, this was using BIOS 1101.


----------



## shamino1978

bl4ckdot said:


> We will try an other bios. Just to correct myself, this was using BIOS 1101.


ok, then its prolly just an internel test version, i will check this tomorow


----------



## Ghoosti

@Shamino 1978, 
I have a technical question and I think that will certainly be able to enlighten me.

On my Maximus Z690 Extreme, I can flash 0231 / 0803 / 0811 but not 1003 or 1101 !

Would there be a fundamental change in the 1003 and 1101 compared to the others?

Many of us around me have the same problem...

We all have an NVMe in M2-2 and another in M2-3

Many thanks for your help and advice.


----------



## shamino1978

Ghoosti said:


> @Shamino 1978,
> I have a technical question and I think that will certainly be able to enlighten me.
> 
> On my Maximus Z690 Extreme, I can flash 0231 / 0803 / 0811 but not 1003 or 1101 !
> 
> Would there be a fundamental change in the 1003 and 1101 compared to the others?
> 
> Many of us around me have the same problem...
> 
> We all have an NVMe in M2-2 and another in M2-3
> 
> Many thanks for your help and advice.


ok , with ezflash? and whats the error message?


----------



## Ghoosti

shamino1978 said:


> ok , with ezflash? and whats the error message?


I tried EZ flash and Flash back the message is POST ERROR (d6) I have the message after the post DETEC HDD and in reboot, I no longer have access to F2.
I have to go back to 0811 and it works


----------



## shamino1978

hmm d6 is vga not detected.
discrete graphics right?
which slot, what card?


----------



## Ghoosti

shamino1978 said:


> hmm d6 est vga non détecté.
> graphiques discrets, n'est-ce pas ?
> quel emplacement, quelle carte ?
> [/DEVIS]
> 
> 1er emplacement
> Asus Rog Strix 1080Ti
> SSD 980 PRO en M2-2 et SSD 980PRO en M2-3


----------



## shamino1978

after flashing d6 then clr cmos, still d6?
and if switch to another slot and clear cmos, still the same? 
could it be some pcie lane switching between the card and some nvme?


----------



## Ghoosti

after flashing d6 then clr cmos, still d6?
I will try again


----------



## Ghoosti

shamino1978 said:


> after flashing d6 then clr cmos, still d6?
> and if switch to another slot and clear cmos, still the same?
> could it be some pcie lane switching between the card and some nvme?


Yes always d6 and CMOS ERROR


----------



## skullbringer

shamino1978 said:


> when I then just click "+By Core Usage" and "Apply" in bottom right in tool / controls without changing any settings, then I get correct single core boost:
> thats exactly why the checkbox is there, tool doesnt know if you want to set only specific cores and let the active core ratio limits be synched up to the max of all specific cores, or that you just want to limit some specific cores and still limit by number of active cores at the same time.


53x109 = 5777
49x109 = 5340

why is last ever applied to single core boost? limit should be 53x or 54x, no?


----------



## Mikka24

I can confirm same issue. Z690 extreme, m2.2 m600 pro xt, m2.3 980 pro, 12700k, 6200 cl36, rtx 3080 ti first pcie slot.. after flashing to 1101 same post error and code d6, its cycling between cpu and ram…for few minutes on oled screen and then r6 code and post error message on oled.. restart button wont work. Have to power it down or clear cmos… it was working fine on older bios..


----------



## Sayenah

I knew the 3rd Apex would still be a pain, and now it is proving itself. 

Apex Z690/12900k Asus AI OC/3090 Strix/G.Skill 6400c32 XMP1 setup. BIOS 1101. 

Really, really slow boot issue. Like the board is training memory each time all over again (RAM cold boot passes Memtest86 with XMP1 on, system is stable in OCCT)

Switching off XMP1 doesn’t do anything. 

Cleared CMOS, same issue. 

What’s the cause of this long drawn out boot? Takes a whole damn minute to be in windows 11


----------



## bscool

Sayenah said:


> I knew the 3rd Apex would still be a pain, and now it is proving itself.
> 
> Apex Z690/12900k Asus AI OC/3090 Strix/G.Skill 6400c32 XMP1 setup. BIOS 1101.
> 
> Really, really slow boot issue. Like the board is training memory each time all over again (RAM cold boot passes Memtest86 with XMP1 on, system is stable in OCCT)
> 
> Switching off XMP1 doesn’t do anything.
> 
> Cleared CMOS, same issue.
> 
> What’s the cause of this long drawn out boot? Takes a whole damn minute to be in windows 11


Are you using a PCI e sound card? Or riser cable or some other add in cards or multiple nvme drivers? I have seen people have issues with these items.

I have had a Razer TKL KB cause really slow boot issues on many Asus MB in the past few gens(so much so I stopped using the KB). So there are a lot of different things(usb 3 docks etc) that can cause issues. As example the same Razer KB on MSI MB rarely causes issues with booting but occaionally does.


I just got an Apex and the 6400 gskill and have had no issues in the few days I have had it. Another friend of mine got the same setup as I am running and he also is running 6600 on mem no issues.


----------



## Sayenah

bscool said:


> Are you using a PCI e sound card? Or riser cable or some other add in cards or multiple nvme drivers? I have seen people have issues with these items.
> 
> I have had a Razer TKL KB cause really slow boot issues on many Asus MB in the past few gens(so much so I stopped using the KB). So there are a lot of different things(usb 3 docks etc) that can cause issues. As example the same Razer KB on MSI MB rarely causes issues with booting but occaionally does.
> 
> 
> I just got an Apex and the 6400 gskill and have had no issues in the few days I have had it. Another friend of mine got the same setup as I am running and he also is running 6600 on mem no issues.


I removed the Asus ThunderboltEX4 card. It is a PCIe card; uses the X4 slot. 

Removed every single USB device attached. 

Slow boot issue remains. It goes through memory training exercise of some sort. 

I am running an all-core 5.4GHz OC stable. 

What BIOS are you on?


----------



## CptSpig

Sayenah said:


> I removed the Asus ThunderboltEX4 card. It is a PCIe card; uses the X4 slot.
> 
> Removed every single USB device attached.
> 
> Slow boot issue remains. It goes through memory training exercise of some sort.
> 
> I am running an all-core 5.4GHz OC stable.
> 
> What BIOS are you on?


Is fast boot enabled? How many seconds is is boot logo set?


----------



## bscool

Sayenah said:


> I removed the Asus ThunderboltEX4 card. It is a PCIe card; uses the X4 slot.
> 
> Removed every single USB device attached.
> 
> Slow boot issue remains. It goes through memory training exercise of some sort.
> 
> I am running an all-core 5.4GHz OC stable.
> 
> What BIOS are you on?


I have been using 0086 mostly but 1101 also worked well. 

54 all core is that with e core on?

I havent tested CPU oc much just been running 52/40/44.


----------



## Sayenah

CptSpig said:


> Is fast boot enabled? How many seconds is is boot logo set?


Fast boot disabled or enabled literally makes zero impact. Fast boot just leads to shaving 2-3 seconds haha. Tested it thrice just now.

Boot logo is set for 3 seconds.

Seems to get stuck on code 4F for a long time


----------



## Sayenah

bscool said:


> I have been using 0086 mostly but 1101 also worked well.
> 
> 54 all core is that with e core on?
> 
> I havent tested CPU oc much just been running 52/40/44.


Yes sir. E-core on; 4.1 on those 

This is the Asus AI OC so I am going by what the Asus AI suite is telling me. I am certainly not an expert on CPU OC. 

Worth noting the software goes through a learning process; during that it is incredibly liberal with voltage sometimes spiking 1.5V, however that tapers off after 6-12 hours. Right now my CPU core voltage stays around 1.25-ish spiking up to 1.39-ish every once in a while.


----------



## fortecosi

Sayenah said:


> Yes sir. E-core on; 4.1 on those
> 
> This is the Asus AI OC so I am going by what the Asus AI suite is telling me. I am certainly not an expert on CPU OC.
> 
> Worth noting the software goes through a learning process; during that it is incredibly liberal with voltage sometimes spiking 1.5V, however that tapers off after 6-12 hours. Right now my CPU core voltage stays around 1.25-ish spiking up to 1.39-ish every once in a while.


Sorry I am noob myself about CPU OC, I will just say what I read on the forum before, 1.5V spikes in light CPU usage is just fine, no wories. 100% high usage on all 24 threads - there would be 1.5V probably more dangerous.

btw in memory timings, what´s your setting for MCH full check?


----------



## CptSpig

Sayenah said:


> Fast boot disabled or enabled literally makes zero impact. Fast boot just leads to shaving 2-3 seconds haha. Tested it thrice just now.
> 
> Boot logo is set for 3 seconds.
> 
> Seems to get stuck on code 4F for a long time


Odd F4 is Recovery Firmware image is loaded.


----------



## Sayenah

CptSpig said:


> Odd F4 is Recovery Firmware image is loaded.


No 4F.


----------



## CptSpig

Sayenah said:


> No 4F.


Sorry it's 4F: DXE IPL is Started. Driver Execution Environment (DXE) phase is where most of the system initialization is performed. Shut down the system due a clear c'mos. Turn off the power supply and take out the battery for a few five minutes. Put the battery back in and start up the machine.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

@bscool is your Z690 DDR4 platform still up and running? Can you post some DDR4 vs DDR5 benchmarks?

Preferably 3DMark and SoTR. Here is my SoTR competition thread.









Benchmark Competition: Shadow of the Tomb Raider


I'm pleased to host the Shadow of the Tomb Raider benchmark competition. SoTR is an excellent way to test how your memory overclock translates to gaming performance. It's also a useful tool for comparing DDR4 to DDR5. Rules: -Entries will be ranked by average FPS. -Must self-report system info...




www.overclock.net


----------



## bscool

geriatricpollywog said:


> @bscool is your Z690 DDR4 platform still up and running? Can you post some DDR4 vs DDR5 benchmarks?
> 
> Preferably 3DMark and SoTR. Here is my SoTR competition thread.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Benchmark Competition: Shadow of the Tomb Raider
> 
> 
> I'm pleased to host the Shadow of the Tomb Raider benchmark competition. SoTR is an excellent way to test how your memory overclock translates to gaming performance. It's also a useful tool for comparing DDR4 to DDR5. Rules: -Entries will be ranked by average FPS. -Must self-report system info...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net


No I only 1 cpu so no ddr4 12th gen running just got the Apex going and I dont have SoTR just the demo version.


----------



## Agent-A01

bscool said:


> I just got an Apex and the 6400 gskill and have had no issues in the few days I have had it. Another friend of mine got the same setup as I am running and he also is running 6600 on mem no issues.







_Your clothes apex. Give them to me. Now_


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> No I only 1 cpu so no ddr4 12th gen running just got the Apex going and I dont have SoTR just the demo version.


I would but, I'm not paying for a game I won't play anyway. That and the fact that warzone takes advantage of the e-cores and they're saying to disable the e-cores so the game doesn't take advantage of the new technology so why test how it runs??


----------



## shamino1978

skullbringer said:


> 53x109 = 5777
> 49x109 = 5340
> 
> why is last ever applied to single core boost? limit should be 53x or 54x, no?


yes, from your screenshot it doesnt look right in the first picture its already showing 54x , are u doing all these with other monitoring software,


----------



## Antsu

truehighroller1 said:


> I would but, I'm not paying for a game I won't play anyway. That and the fact that warzone takes advantage of the e-cores and they're saying to disable the e-cores so the game doesn't take advantage of the new technology so why test how it runs??


I don't even get close to 100% CPU usage on 8C8T in WZ. Adjust your render thread setting to half of your (real) corecount, e.g. 4 for 12900K and watch the CPU usage drop, but FPS stay the same. And for what it's worth, I am mostly GPU bound at 800x600 lowest possible settings on a 3090 @ 2200Mhz, so if you are playing on a realistic resolution, you will be GPU bound for sure.


----------



## truehighroller1

Antsu said:


> I don't even get close to 100% CPU usage on 8C8T in WZ. Adjust your render thread setting to half of your (real) corecount, e.g. 4 for 12900K and watch the CPU usage drop, but FPS stay the same. And for what it's worth, I am mostly GPU bound at 800x600 lowest possible settings on a 3090 @ 2200Mhz, so if you are playing on a realistic resolution, you will be GPU bound for sure.



It's simple honestly. Fps comparison. Do it in warzone post the results. Words mean nothing results mean everything. I've done the comparison in warzone. There's a fifty fps difference with enabling and disabling.


----------



## borant

CptSpig said:


> See attached for a stable 24/7 6400 CR1. *VDD 1.41/VDDQ/TX VDDQ 1.415v | MC 1.25v*


It seems like you may have issues with your overclock or cooling performance. Note core speed in CPU-Z is 500 mhz and in AIDA64 North Bridge clock is 2200. It looks like throttling.


----------



## CptSpig

uplink said:


> Could You please post Your .cmo file from Your BiOS/UEFi? Your profile export?


I was able to get a text file of my settings.


----------



## shamino1978

bl4ckdot said:


> We will try an other bios. Just to correct myself, this was using BIOS 1101.











ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-9902.zip


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com




pls try this to see if ok


----------



## CptSpig

borant said:


> It seems like you may have issues with your overclock or cooling performance. Note core speed in CPU-Z is 500 mhz and in AIDA64 North Bridge clock is 2200. It looks like throttling.


I don't think it's a cooling problem. It's a glich with ADIA64. See attached.


----------



## bl4ckdot

shamino1978 said:


> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-9902.zip
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pls try this to see if ok


It worked  Thank you


----------



## skullbringer

shamino1978 said:


> yes, from your screenshot it doesnt look right in the first picture its already showing 54x , are u doing all these with other monitoring software,


what do you mean other monitoring software? 

let me restate: bios settings applied at boot = wrong behavior. bios settings applied with tool / controls = correct behavior.

I think bios uses whatever multi to get to the frequency of max selected multi (1 core usage) * 100. so instead of using 109x53, it's doing 109x49 because 109x49 is closest to 100x53.


----------



## shamino1978

skullbringer said:


> what do you mean other monitoring software?
> 
> let me restate: bios settings applied at boot = wrong behavior. bios settings applied with tool / controls = correct behavior.
> 
> I think bios uses whatever multi to get to the frequency of max selected multi (1 core usage) * 100. so instead of using 109x53, it's doing 109x49 because 109x49 is closest to 100x53.


i just tried same settings one ratio lower as cpus not stable cant replicate what u said. im on the 9902 i just posted.
adaptive voltage set, by p and e core usage, with bclk
thats all, no ovtcb no vf pts, no cache.,
are both p and e cores selected to by core usage in your bios?
and the ratios of "by core usage " manually keyed in? if not obviously the bios would auto down the ratios to prevent from crashing when bclking


----------



## TZeroBR

shamino1978 said:


> i just tried same settings one ratio lower as cpus not stable cant replicate what u said. im on the 9902 i just posted.
> adaptive voltage set, by p and e core usage, with bclk
> thats all, no ovtcb no vf pts, no cache.,
> are both p and e cores selected to by core usage in your bios?
> and the ratios of "by core usage " manually keyed in? if not obviously the bios would auto down the ratios to prevent from crashing when bclking


Could you please indicate the link of Bios 9902?


----------



## jeiselramos

TZeroBR said:


> Could you please indicate the link of Bios 9902?











Dropbox - Error


Dropbox is a free service that lets you bring your photos, docs, and videos anywhere and share them easily. Never email yourself a file again!




www.dropbox.com


----------



## dr.silkyworm

yahfz said:


> It’s also on the APEX QVL and the XMP doesn't work lol. Kinda crazy how it’s been 4 months since the launch and the XMP for a kit that’s in the ****ing QVL doesn’t even work on the supposedly best ASUS board for memory. If i didn’t know how to overclock myself id be ****ed, I wonder how many people have returned sticks/boards because XMP doesn’t work. Not to mention that a lot of work has been done bios wise, look at how many bios the apex had and none of them made XMP work either.
> 
> Imagine having to bin boards and cpu's just to enable XMP.


What did you have to do to make it run stable and at what speed /timings?


----------



## TZeroBR

jeiselramos said:


> Dropbox - Error
> 
> 
> Dropbox is a free service that lets you bring your photos, docs, and videos anywhere and share them easily. Never email yourself a file again!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


Dropbox is really bad!!!!
Even though I have an account, I can't access this link.
Even so I thank you


----------



## bscool

TZeroBR said:


> Dropbox is really bad!!!!
> Even though I have an account, I can't access this link.
> Even so I thank you


The bios is a few post up ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-9902.zip


----------



## TZeroBR

bscool said:


> The bios is a few post up ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-9902.zip


Thanks Bro !!!!


----------



## pbytano

borant said:


> You need full shutdown when making switch to 1T. Another idea - many folks here reported issues with 1101 and I had some issues with it too before downgraded to 1003.
> Try to increase VDD/VDDQ higher as well.


I gave 1003 a go and I'm seeing some improvement in stability for this GSkill 6400 CL32 kit, sticking with the default Command Rate 2 for now. Kahru gets 1 error at around 1350% after multiple tries. I am running 1.435v for VDD/VDDQ/VDDQX, 1.35v Memory Controller and 1.25v for VCCSA. Using XMP 1 and Tweak Mode 1, Command Rate 2. Tweak Mode 2 crashes Kahru at 17%... Any ideas for getting better stability or should I consider RMA'ing this board? 

Note: I wish there was a 2-slot version of the Extreme...


----------



## pbytano

pbytano said:


> I gave 1003 a go and I'm seeing some improvement in stability for this GSkill 6400 CL32 kit, sticking with the default Command Rate 2 for now. Kahru gets 1 error at around 1350% after multiple tries. I am running 1.435v for VDD/VDDQ/VDDQX, 1.35v Memory Controller and 1.25v for VCCSA. Using XMP 1 and Tweak Mode 1, Command Rate 2. Tweak Mode 2 crashes Kahru at 17%... Any ideas for getting better stability or should I consider RMA'ing this board?
> 
> Note: I wish there was a 2-slot version of the Extreme...


Also, I thought I'd mention the memory only gets to 38C under full load in Kahru. Idle is at 28C


----------



## satinghostrider

pbytano said:


> Also, I thought I'd mention the memory only gets to 38C under full load in Kahru. Idle is at 28C


Try setting your vccsa to auto first and see how that goes.


----------



## uplink

CptSpig said:


> I was able to get a text file of my settings.


 I'll test it and will report back, finally woke up from two day horror of 12 hours shifts, "voluntary" 12 hours shifts


----------



## pbytano

satinghostrider said:


> Try setting your vccsa to auto first and see how that goes.


Will do. I'll report back tonight


----------



## Mappi75

Switched from the

G.Skill Trident Z5 RGB black DIMM Kit 32GB, DDR5-6000, CL36-36-36-96
(F5-6000J3636F16GX2-TZ5RK):









to the:

32GB G.Skill Trident Z5 silver DIMM Kit 32GB, DDR5-6400, CL32-39-39-102
(F5-6400J3239G16GX2-TZ5S):








*please watch only the first line only - after that i worked on the pc..

6000 (RGB 1,35v) / 6400 (non-RGB 1,40v):

DDR5 DIMM [#0]
temp. max 43,8 / 45,8
DDR5 DIMM [#2]
temp. max 45,8 / 44

non rgb 2 degrees lower than rgb in idle


----------



## Maj0

Nizzen said:


> Save profile and turn off the computer and power off. Hold "clerar cmos" for 10 seconds. Turn on computer. Load profile. Disable fastboot in "memory timing menu"


Hi,

thanks for the input. Sadly none of this is working.Still errors on memtest. Don’t know if RAM bador just UEFI of ASUS Apex

starting to lose trust in this Apex Board.

anyone has an idea How I can run Samsung Chips 6000 MHz ??


----------



## skullbringer

shamino1978 said:


> i just tried same settings one ratio lower as cpus not stable cant replicate what u said. im on the 9902 i just posted.
> adaptive voltage set, by p and e core usage, with bclk
> thats all, no ovtcb no vf pts, no cache.,
> are both p and e cores selected to by core usage in your bios?
> and the ratios of "by core usage " manually keyed in? if not obviously the bios would auto down the ratios to prevent from crashing when bclking


ok, thank you for checking. ratios are all keyed in manually (16 values total), with v/f points offset, cache auto or manual does not matter. 

I will try 9902 and provide you bios profile if I see same behavior.


----------



## borant

pbytano said:


> I gave 1003 a go and I'm seeing some improvement in stability for this GSkill 6400 CL32 kit, sticking with the default Command Rate 2 for now. Kahru gets 1 error at around 1350% after multiple tries. I am running 1.435v for VDD/VDDQ/VDDQX, 1.35v Memory Controller and 1.25v for VCCSA. Using XMP 1 and Tweak Mode 1, Command Rate 2. Tweak Mode 2 crashes Kahru at 17%... Any ideas for getting better stability or should I consider RMA'ing this board?
> 
> Note: I wish there was a 2-slot version of the Extreme...


did you clear CMOS after rolling back from 1101? it is better to start with full reset and load defaults first.

Unfortunately there is not that many MB options with other than Intel 225 Ethernet and similar connectivity options.
I hope Asus will be cleaning up initial issues soon, early adopter should never expect stable product from the beginning of ne DDR generation.
I wish Asus was not bundling Extreme with extra $300 accessories like DAC, Voltician and DRGB Fan hub


----------



## Mappi75

Here is my xmp/voltages from the G.Skill 6400 (no manual tweaks)








Karhu stable @ 7200% and still running (+10730%)


----------



## truehighroller1

Should I reinstall windows when going from the wifi d4 mb to the apex mb? I'm guessing yes but, figured I'd ask.


----------



## Mappi75

I would evey time reinstall windows..to avoid any problems.


----------



## CptSpig

truehighroller1 said:


> Should I reinstall windows when going from the wifi d4 mb to the apex mb? I'm guessing yes but, figured I'd ask.


I had no issues installing my drive from X299 to Z690 it updated the hardware with no issues. Windows 11 Pro. after it installed I cloned the drive to my new NVME Samsung 1T 980 Pro.


----------



## Mappi75

How many threads should i set in HCI MemTestPro 7.0 with a 12700K ?

Edit: its 20 with all cores active.


----------



## skullbringer

skullbringer said:


> ok, thank you for checking. ratios are all keyed in manually (16 values total), with v/f points offset, cache auto or manual does not matter.
> 
> I will try 9902 and provide you bios profile if I see same behavior.


ok I'm seeing same behavior with 9902, here is the profile export.

bios has max multi for 1 core set to x51, but after boot the hightest I see is x48. then again open tool / controls, dont change anything just apply bottom right. now I see x51.









bclk_percoreusage_vf.CMO


1 file sent via WeTransfer, the simplest way to send your files around the world




we.tl


----------



## uplink

fortecosi said:


> I am able to boot up to 6800 with my Dominators 5600C36 on the Apex. Just don´t use XMP, type values manually, profit!
> Set only VCCSA to 1.15V, MC 1.25-1.3V, VDD/Q by the module value, and set primary timings, rest all auto for now.


Hey there buddy, so I tried the following:


manually set ALL the values, not only primary with VCSAA1.15v, MC1.25 and1.3, set VDD/VDDQ to 1.3 as it'smodule's default, and no joy, *won't even boot*
manually set PRiMRAY values only, left secondary to auto,with VCSAA1.15v, MC1.25 and1.3, set VDD/VDDQ to 1.3 as it'smodule's default, and no joy, *won't even boot either*
set XMP II. values with VCSAA1.15v, MC1.25 and1.3, set VDD/VDDQ to 1.3 as it'smodule's default and could enter BiOS/UEFi and test in Memtest, had least errors, but still many
set XMP I. values with VCSAA1.15v, MC1.25 and1.3, set VDD/VDDQ to 1.3 as it'smodule's default, was able to boot, but had tons of errors in MemTest
Now for some reason I'm able to boot manual primary values with VCSAA1.15v, MC1.25 and1.3, set VDD/VDDQ to 1.3 as it'smodule's default, and will report back as soon as I pass/fail 

I tried many more combinations in between, it's like that memory has incosistent behaviour, not sure why.


----------



## CptSpig

uplink said:


> Hey there buddy, so I tried the following:
> 
> 
> manually set ALL the values, not only primary with VCSAA1.15v, MC1.25 and1.3, set VDD/VDDQ to 1.3 as it'smodule's default, and no joy, *won't even boot*
> manually set PRiMRAY values only, left secondary to auto,with VCSAA1.15v, MC1.25 and1.3, set VDD/VDDQ to 1.3 as it'smodule's default, and no joy, *won't even boot either*
> set XMP II. values with VCSAA1.15v, MC1.25 and1.3, set VDD/VDDQ to 1.3 as it'smodule's default and could enter BiOS/UEFi and test in Memtest, had least errors, but still many
> set XMP I. values with VCSAA1.15v, MC1.25 and1.3, set VDD/VDDQ to 1.3 as it'smodule's default, was able to boot, but had tons of errors in MemTest
> Now for some reason I'm able to boot manual primary values with VCSAA1.15v, MC1.25 and1.3, set VDD/VDDQ to 1.3 as it'smodule's default, and will report back as soon as I pass/fail
> 
> I tried many more combinations in between, it's like that memory has incosistent behaviour, nto sure why.


What Kit 6200 or 6400?


----------



## uplink

CptSpig said:


> What Kit 6200 or 6400?


 6200 MHz CL36 from Corsair, CMT32GX5M2X6200C36, but now I'm on a roll! So far no errors, I'm on a test 10, I've set everything as You wrote, but I'm playing a lot with MC voltage, I'm going by 0.15 increments [the values that board will let me by hitting + and - ] and it's working so far. I'll report at the end of this night, I'll try to let it run, will turn off the PC, and will let it run again, if it's stable, I'll try to go higher.

Now I'm on *primary values* manually set in, and everytihing else as You wrote nad *now* it works, so I'll try to achieve stability.

Thank You for now buddy!


----------



## truehighroller1

I ended up just installing the motherboard without reinstalling windows 11 and it booted fine. Updating BIOS!


----------



## NakedCommando

Is there any consensus about which BIOS version is the best for DDR4 high speed ram. I can just about get xmp to post (4000mhz CL16) but I get a tonne of errors instantly on TM5. 

This is on 1003 may I add


----------



## uplink

CptSpig said:


> What Kit 6200 or 6400?


 So, my last config for today for CMT32GX5M2X6200C36 is:

general settings - auto
primary timings - manual [CL36]
secondary timings - auto
freq: 6200 MHz
VCSSA:1.15v [as You instructed me]
MC: 1.2 [as You instructed me, the 1.225, 1.25, 1.275 and 1.3 didn't work that well]
and this is the trick/settings from my G.Skill 6000MHz CL36 Samsung modules, and so far it's working:

VDD/VDDQ: 1.3/1.3 [stock XMP] didn't work well
VDD/VDDQ: 1.35/1.375 - had one full run, after turn off/cold boot it threw errors on me
VDD/VDDQ: 1.375/1.4 - I'm on this run, I've passed first 10 minutes, turned off PC, turned on and now I passed another 10 minutes [the Hammering doesn't seem to be the problem anymore for Corsair], so I'm leaving this one full run, and will turn it off and on and will leave full wall run for night [4 runs].

Thank You mightily @CptSpig for Your assistance! Much obliged and appreciated. Once I reach dead end, or some viable result, I'll update myself. Thank You once more! 🙇‍♂️


----------



## borant

Just in case if someone is looking for 12900KS - I received the update for my order from BLT like ETA from Intel is mid March


----------



## pbytano

borant said:


> did you clear CMOS after rolling back from 1101? it is better to start with full reset and load defaults first.
> 
> Unfortunately there is not that many MB options with other than Intel 225 Ethernet and similar connectivity options.
> I hope Asus will be cleaning up initial issues soon, early adopter should never expect stable product from the beginning of ne DDR generation.
> I wish Asus was not bundling Extreme with extra $300 accessories like DAC, Voltician and DRGB Fan hub


I definitely cleared the CMOS, followed F5 to load the defaults. Still no dice... How did you personally test for memory stability?


----------



## borant

pbytano said:


> I definitely cleared the CMOS, followed F5 to load the defaults. Still no dice... How did you personally test for memory stability?


For checking any fundamental issue with timing, voltage etc during tuning any test tool like TM5 or Memtest is good enough but long term stability is all about prolonged stress test capability. I found OCCT and AIDA64 are most convenient for long term tests. 
I found that AIDA64 is most time saving to me. If the whole setup is wrong it will report "hardware failure" almost immediately, if some timing need further tuning then failure will be within 6 min, if some more deeper issue exists then it will fail after 15-20 min. This saves me from spending my time running multiple tools and I always re-verify result with OCCT.


----------



## CptSpig

pbytano said:


> I definitely cleared the CMOS, followed F5 to load the defaults. Still no dice... How did you personally test for memory stability?


I use memtest86 in the bios to tune the memory. Once stable I use memtest pro in windows 500 to 1000%.


----------



## shamino1978

skullbringer said:


> ok I'm seeing same behavior with 9902, here is the profile export.
> 
> bios has max multi for 1 core set to x51, but after boot the hightest I see is x48. then again open tool / controls, dont change anything just apply bottom right. now I see x51.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bclk_percoreusage_vf.CMO
> 
> 
> 1 file sent via WeTransfer, the simplest way to send your files around the world
> 
> 
> 
> 
> we.tl


as expected , you set vr voltage limit, like many users who use this and expect no clipping. its clipping from this.
set it higher or set your adaptive voltage to something lower instead of auto. 
i will also see what the tool does different,


----------



## joneffingvo

truehighroller1 said:


> Not yet. I just ordered mine direct from corsair last Friday so they're coming from Taiwan. I did find this post though that would help you get a grip on where to start and I plan to use it for a starting point as well once I get mine.
> 
> FEATURED - Corsair Dominator Platinum RGB 32GB DDR5-6200 CL36 - CMT32GX5M2X6200C36 | Overclockers Forums


Picked my set up tonight! So far 1 hour into RAM test on xmp 2 and no errors!

EDIT: Spoke too soon


----------



## bscool

truehighroller1 said:


> Should I reinstall windows when going from the wifi d4 mb to the apex mb? I'm guessing yes but, figured I'd ask.


May as well wait since it may get corrupted if you plan on testing mem oc 

Dont ask me how I know


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> May as well wait since it may get corrupted if you plan on testing mem oc
> 
> Dont ask me how I know


I've done it once already myself lol. I'm off work tomorrow and the wife is asleep now sO, I'm going to try dialing some stuff in now.

Update:

These are default xmp 2 timings here which appear to work.


----------



## skullbringer

shamino1978 said:


> as expected , you set vr voltage limit, like many users who use this and expect no clipping. its clipping from this.
> set it higher or set your adaptive voltage to something lower instead of auto.
> i will also see what the tool does different,


thank you, that actually fixed it! don't think it behaved that way with 100 bclk

can you explain for me simple how 1.309 V/F7 + 200 mV Offset can trigger 1600 IA VR limit? bclk adaptive voltage maybe?


----------



## joneffingvo

Would you guys consider this stable? Xmp 1 profile with Corsair 6200


----------



## shamino1978

1.309 V/F7 + 200 mV -> adaptive voltage is not default , because auto is not default when u oc, bios will set a particular voltage that it deems suitable. in this case maybe it sets 1.5 since llc is level 1 and freq is 5.6+g
so its 1.5xv + 200mv that u set + ac LL 0.6mohms culminating in a pretty high number. do u even need to set that +200 ?


----------



## Slackaveli

truehighroller1 said:


> If I'm going to do this, I want to make sure I get the right thing first time. I'm looking at the following on newegg and I'm confused by it.
> 
> G.SKILL Trident Z5 RGB Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin DDR5 SDRAM DDR5 6000 Intel XMP 3.0 Desktop Memory Model F5-6000J3636F16GX2-TZ5RK - Newegg.com
> 
> Which is lower timings but cheaper. Then the following which is why I'm confused here.
> 
> G.SKILL Trident Z5 RGB Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin DDR5 SDRAM DDR5 6000 Intel XMP 3.0 Desktop Memory Model F5-6000J4040F16GX2-TZ5RK - Newegg.com\\
> 
> Higher timings but more expensive? WTH?


Bro, the 6000c36/40 kits are Hynix or Samsung. The J is Hynix, the U is Samsung. First letter after the speed.


----------



## skullbringer

I needed + 200 to retain stability with 1600 ia vr limit. without limit, even just +100 gives me 1.6+ Vcore idle which is too much ofc. 
after disabling bclk adaptive voltage, I'm getting 1.45 Vcore idle, much better.

what do you think of the ac 0.60, dc 1.75 setup for LLC1? some people say to always keep them to the same value


----------



## Silent Scone

joneffingvo said:


> Would you guys consider this stable? Xmp 1 profile with Corsair 6200
> View attachment 2548863


For systems where memory integrity isn't hypercritical like a gaming system, 30 to 60 minutes is ample. I always tend to suggest to people that it may flip a bit after 8 hours or 2 days, for all they know, which is entirely plausible

From Karhu's FAQ.

Q: How long should I test? 
A: Error detection rates by test duration*:



 
Duration ≤ 1 min: 47,44 %
 
Duration ≤ 5 min: 74,41 %
 
Duration ≤ 10 min: 83,66 %
 
Duration ≤ 30 min: 95,67 %
 
Duration ≤ 60 min: 98,43 %


----------



## shamino1978

skullbringer said:


> I needed + 200 to retain stability with 1600 ia vr limit. without limit, even just +100 gives me 1.6+ Vcore idle which is too much ofc.
> after disabling bclk adaptive voltage, I'm getting 1.45 Vcore idle, much better.
> 
> what do you think of the ac 0.60, dc 1.75 setup for LLC1? some people say to always keep them to the same value


dc is only to let some monitoring software report closer to actual, doesnt affect your stability.
ac is whatever u need to remain stables across workloads. its easier imo just to use ac values and forget about vf pt offset. 
ie remove vf pt offsets and increase ac ll till you are stable. its nicer because the ac ll adds lesser voltage when current is lower.


----------



## Simkin

Slackaveli said:


> Bro, the 6000c36/40 kits are Hynix or Samsung. The J is Hynix, the U is Samsung. First letter after the speed.


No 6000 G.skill kit is Hynix, not U and not J. I have had both and they are Samsung.

Only 6400 is Hynix.


----------



## Nikos4Life

Hi there! ,

I am finding impossible to make my equipment stable with the XMP Profile (6000CL36)

My current setup is:
12900K (Custom Watercooled)
Asus Extreme 1101 BIOS
F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RS (white version)

I have read the values you have suggested through this thread but still no way.

I have tried the following values:

XMP I
Asus MCE On
VCCSA From 1.1 to 1.25
VDD @ From 1.30 to 1.40
VDDQ @ From 1.30 to 1.40
Update IVR Transmitter Voltage: From 1.35 to 1.40
Memory controller Voltage: From 1.25 to 1.45
Mem Tweaks I&II

No way to pass MemTest without errors

Anything else I can try before thinking my CPU is the reason?

Also I have seen the *beta BIOS for the APEX (9902)* some pages before,is that safe to run with my Extreme?

What makes me most desperate is that sometimes I have managed to pass MemTest but the next time I reboot it does not work.
For example I remember a run that happened with the following values:

VCCSA From 1.3
VDD @ From 1.45
VDDQ @ From 1.45
Update IVR Transmitter Voltage: From 1.45
Memory controller Voltage: From 1.45

But I do not even know if this voltage range is safe to use :|

PS: MemTest with Auto values (no XMP) passes perfectly fine.

Thanks in advance


----------



## owikh84

Maximus Z690 HERO - debug code 28
RIP?

Update: solved with a BIOS flashback. Credits to cstkl1 for the tips.


----------



## Simkin

Nikos4Life said:


> Hi there! ,
> 
> I am finding impossible to make my equipment stable with the XMP Profile (6000CL36)
> 
> My current setup is:
> 12900K (Custom Watercooled)
> Asus Extreme 1101 BIOS
> F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RS (white version)
> 
> I have read the values you have suggested through this thread but still no way.
> 
> I have tried the following values:
> 
> XMP I
> Asus MCE On
> VCCSA From 1.1 to 1.25
> VDD @ From 1.30 to 1.40
> VDDQ @ From 1.30 to 1.40
> Update IVR Transmitter Voltage: From 1.35 to 1.40
> Memory controller Voltage: From 1.25 to 1.45
> Mem Tweaks I&II
> 
> No way to pass MemTest without errors
> 
> Anything else I can try before thinking my CPU is the reason?
> 
> Also I have seen the *beta BIOS for the APEX (9902)* some pages before,is that safe to run with my Extreme?
> 
> What makes me most desperate is that sometimes I have managed to pass MemTest but the next time I reboot it does not work.
> For example I remember a run that happened with the following values:
> 
> VCCSA From 1.3
> VDD @ From 1.45
> VDDQ @ From 1.45
> Update IVR Transmitter Voltage: From 1.45
> Memory controller Voltage: From 1.45
> 
> But I do not even know if this voltage range is safe to use :|
> 
> PS: MemTest with Auto values (no XMP) passes perfectly fine.
> 
> Thanks in advance


My 6000C36 kit could pass memtest one day, download flight sim 2020 (which is also a good stability test as it crosscheck the packages) play games, but the next day give me 3-4 bsod in a row booting into windows or simply bsod opening my mail. At stock 4800 I had no issues.

I returned mine.


----------



## Nikos4Life

Simkin said:


> My 6000C36 kit could pass memtest one day, download flight sim 2020 (which is also a good stability test as it crosscheck the packages) play games, but the next day give me 3-4 bsod in a row booting into windows or simply bsod opening my mail. At stock 4800 I had no issues.
> 
> I returned mine.



Thanks! Just in case the kit are the problem I have just bought 6200CL36 kit from Corsair and going to return the GSkill one. 

Will come tomorrow with more info.


----------



## akgis

Jumped the gun and bought the 6400Cl32 Gskill kit, the 6000CL32 has been a nightmare and headache going to RMA

All in all got a good deal on th 6400 kit for 550euro same cost of the 6000CL32


----------



## uplink

@CptSpig thank You for Your assistance, now I'm fully stable [I believe] on:


no XMP
frequency: 6200 MHz
Primary memory timing: as can be seen on a screenshot
Secondary memory timing: auto
VCCSA: *1.15v* as You suggested
VDD: *1.375v* [setting from Samsung modules, that worked for my G.Skill 6000 MHz CL36 modules on Apex]
VDDQ: *1.400v* [setting from Samsung modules, that worked for my G.Skill 6000 MHz CL36 modules on Apex]
MC: *1.25v* as You suggested [more didn't do it right, less either, 1.25 is the sweet spot]
*temperature:* didn't go over 40°C [I have active cooling, see photo attached]

Thank You 🙇‍♂️


----------



## CptSpig

uplink said:


> @CptSpig thank You for Your assistance, now I'm fully stable [I believe] on:
> 
> 
> no XMP
> frequency: 6200 MHz
> VCCSA: *1.15v* as You suggested
> VDD: *1.375v* [setting from Samsung modules, that worked for my G.Skill 6000 MHz CL36 modules on Apex]
> VDDQ: *1.400v* [setting from Samsung modules, that worked for my G.Skill 6000 MHz CL36 modules on Apex]
> MC: *1.25v* as You suggested [more didn't do it right, less either, 1.25 is the sweet spot]
> *temperature:* didn't go over 40°C [I have active cooling, see photo attached]
> 
> Thank You 🙇‍♂️


Good job! Props on the machine very nice.


----------



## joneffingvo

I'm having a problem that's baffling me currently running AI OC (all voltages set to auto besides memory profile) + XMP 1. The computer passed Cine r23 (30 mins) and OCCT (small, sse, extreme, 1 hour) no problem. Then ran 3dmark which it ran fine, however after it completed the test the computer was frozen... NO BSOD or anything just frozen even the front RGB lights on my lian li were frozen. This problem also only happens intermittently.


----------



## NakedCommando

NakedCommando said:


> Is there any consensus about which BIOS version is the best for DDR4 high speed ram. I can just about get xmp to post (4000mhz CL16) but I get a tonne of errors instantly on TM5.
> 
> This is on 1003 may I add


Anyone help?


----------



## bscool

NakedCommando said:


> Anyone help?


Which MB and memory? On Strix d4 with DR b die 901 is best for me. 4133c15-15-15.

When I tried 1003 it is harder to boot 4000+ consitently. It is fine once working but if you are tuning a new memory oc it will be a nightmare going over 4000 if you dont know all the timings you need to manually enter as you need to reboot and test. I would use 901 if on DR b die.









ASUS ROG Strix Z690-A Gaming WiFi D4 Thread


0901 bios just relased but there is no description :)




www.overclock.net


----------



## Bilco

borant said:


> Just in case if someone is looking for 12900KS - I received the update for my order from BLT like ETA from Intel is mid March


Looks like they pulled the listings. I wonder if we are going to see cancelations or what. I was around 178 for the trays which they supposedly have 639 incoming for.


----------



## dante`afk

whats newer 9902 or 1101 ? 

what is up with these number conventions.


----------



## sugi0lover

dante`afk said:


> whats newer 9902 or 1101 ?
> 
> what is up with these number conventions.


9902 is the newest beta, Feb 16th built.
1101 is the official one, Jan 26th built.


----------



## ikjadoon

Deceased said:


> Disagree. My Asus z690-I can’t even run on stock settings (yes not even xmp enabled) with g skill 6000 cl40 on latest bios. Honestly it’s a joke that it’s not even stable without any change to Bios setting
> 
> Im still on 0010 as of today for stability. Either the ram sucks or the mb sucks.
> 
> I hope my incoming Corsair 6200 will resolve the issue.


I have the Z690-I STRIX and I passed Memtest86 overnight with the G.SKILL 6000 36-36-36-76 kit using XMP I (aka G.SKILL + ASUS timings). Same latest BIOS (1003) as you. I don't understand how yours can't run at 4800 

At least I think I did. Memtest reports "4800" on the testing screen, but Memtest also reports the configured speed at 6000. I never turned XMP off, so I assume Memtest did test at XMP speeds. Is there some toggle in the built-in Memtest to enable XMP? Or if XMP is on in BIOS, XMP is automatically enabled within Memtest, too?


----------



## Martin778

Corsair Dominator Platinum RGB CMT32GX5M2X6200C36
Anyone know what IC's these are?


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Martin778 said:


> Corsair Dominator Platinum RGB CMT32GX5M2X6200C36
> Anyone know what IC's these are?


Hynix


----------



## Martin778

Ok, probably going to buy these. They are waaay cheaper here than TForce 6400's, let alone the G.Skill.


----------



## Deceased

ikjadoon said:


> I have the Z690-I STRIX and I passed Memtest86 overnight with the G.SKILL 6000 36-36-36-76 kit using XMP I (aka G.SKILL + ASUS timings). Same latest BIOS (1003) as you. I don't understand how yours can't run at 4800
> 
> At least I think I did. Memtest reports "4800" on the testing screen, but Memtest also reports the configured speed at 6000. I never turned XMP off, so I assume Memtest did test at XMP speeds. Is there some toggle in the built-in Memtest to enable XMP? Or if XMP is on in BIOS, XMP is automatically enabled within Memtest, too?


I’ve observed that it seems like the cl36 sticks is less problematic than cl40.

the cl40 just doesn’t work for my z690-I even without turning on xmp.

I’ve changed to Corsair Dominator 6200 kits and it’s working much better now. Can pass mem test 86, anta777 and occt without errors now.

Though now I have another issue, which is random freeze at light load. I hope it’s not ram issue again.


----------



## Martin778

I also just ordered the Corsair sticks. Hope to get a refund on the Samsung G.Skills...


----------



## sblantipodi

my Extreme is the same crap as when I bought it.
my Here rocks really better, is there some fix for this "broken mobo"?

A new revision, a new beta bios that fixed the problems with 4 RAM sticks?
Using 1101...


----------



## yahfz

sblantipodi said:


> my Extreme is the same crap as when I bought it.
> my Here rocks really better, is there some fix for this "broken mobo"?
> 
> A new revision, a new beta bios that fixed the problems with 4 RAM sticks?
> Using 1101...


My apex sucks too, XMP doesn’t even work even though my sticks are on the QVL. The best i can do is 6200c28, any higher in freq it errors, i’ve tried everything.


----------



## truehighroller1

yahfz said:


> My apex sucks too, XMP doesn’t even work even though my sticks are on the QVL. The best i can do is 6200c28, any higher in freq it errors, i’ve tried everything.



I'm on bios 9902 for my apex and have the tforce 6400 cas40 and they're running the xmp II. I had to hold the clear CMOS button for a minute then load defaults reboot then load xmp II to get them stable.


----------



## Martin778

I think it's more a case of the current memory modules sucking big time. DDR4 it was the same all over...it started with 2133-2400MHz and now we have modules running double that speed.
I hope that with DDR5 they won't chase the rabbit with frequency but focus more on tightening the timings, maybe in a few months will will start getting C24-26 modules.


----------



## bastian

Martin778 said:


> I also just ordered the Corsair sticks. Hope to get a refund on the Samsung G.Skills...


Corsair Hynix def the way to go. Very good overclockers and great ram cooling.


----------



## Martin778

I hope so, haven't used Corsair RAMs in years as for me with DDR4 G.Skill was king, together with exotic stuff like Galax HOF and 8Pack TForce.
I've heard that TridentZ5 has no PMIC cooling...wondering if that's true, the heatsinks are certainly more flimsy than in Trident Z DDR4. Makes me think why my 6000c36 died so soon, even when active cooled, they started throwing errors at 4800C40 JEDEC speed, can't make anything else out of that it's the memory modules being defective.

The most bizarre thing is that they seemed to break my whole home network, each evening when I got back home from work and started using my PC (the issue wasn't immdiately obvious as they wouldn't crash when browsing the web) at some point the whole network was collapsing to just 2Mbps throughput, it never happened when the PC was off.
It got back to normal after I swapped the memory in my desktop.


----------



## bscool

truehighroller1 said:


> I'm on bios 9902 for my apex and have the tforce 6400 cas40 and they're running the xmp II. I had to hold the clear CMOS button for a minute then load defaults reboot then load xmp II to get them stable.


Have you tried seeing how high you can boot and check variance between slots?

From what I have seen good is 200mhz or less between slots and bad is 600 to 800. Mine is pretty good at 200mhz between slots. Highest I have been able to run y cruncher is 6800c34 with loose subtimings. So far looks like 6600c30 to 6600c32 is where Ill end up unless I figure out something else with voltages or another setting.

Found a few settings that limit me to 6400c30.

tWR 48, tRTP-23/24. Running those tight like I see other doing at 20/10 I can only get 6400c30 stable. Loosening them to 48/24 lets me stablize 6600/6666

Trrdl-8 trrd-s-8. If set to 6/4 again limits me to 6400. Might be I have weak dim or dims. Didnt bin dims indivually.

Also tWTR-S setting below 12 limits me to 6400 for memtest stability.

Here screens from testing. Timings slightly different in screens but to give you an idea of timings and Aida64 run.

It could be I need more voltage to stabilize tight subs but so far even increasing voltage hasnt helped but could be user error.


----------



## xillian1337

joneffingvo said:


> I'm having a problem that's baffling me currently running AI OC (all voltages set to auto besides memory profile) + XMP 1. The computer passed Cine r23 (30 mins) and OCCT (small, sse, extreme, 1 hour) no problem. Then ran 3dmark which it ran fine, however after it completed the test the computer was frozen... NO BSOD or anything just frozen even the front RGB lights on my lian li were frozen. This problem also only happens intermittently.


Sounds like u have a problem With your GPU (maybe)
Do you use a riser cable?

The z690 set PCIe 16x to 4.0 or 5.0 if its on AUTO... I set it to 3.0 (Gen3) and my System runs without freezes


----------



## criznit

Is it worth going from 6000 CL36 samsung to the new 6400 CL36 sticks? I was able to get 6600 CL36 stable for daily use and didn't know if the new sticks would be better.


----------



## Martin778

No because no one is buying second hand performance DDR5, especially Samsungs unless they're dirt cheap. 
So if you have money to burn, go for it


----------



## CptSpig

criznit said:


> Is it worth going from 6000 CL36 samsung to the new 6400 CL36 sticks? I was able to get 6600 CL36 stable for daily use and didn't know if the new sticks would be better.


The 6400 kit is by far the best G.Skill DDR5. Go to this link to see how good this is at OC'g. DDR5 OC


----------



## yahfz

@shamino1978 any way we can have a microcode switch in bios like msi is doing to get avx512? It gets tiring to replace it in every bios


----------



## shamino1978

yahfz said:


> @shamino1978 any way we can have a microcode switch in bios like msi is doing to get avx512? It gets tiring to replace it in every bios


ucodes taking up too much room, the "other" more popular switch has taken up the space.


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> Have you tried seeing how high you can boot and check variance between slots?
> 
> From what I have seen good is 200mhz or less between slots and bad is 600 to 800. Mine is pretty good at 200mhz between slots. Highest I have been able to run y cruncher is 6800c34 with loose subtimings. So far looks like 6600c30 to 6600c32 is where Ill end up unless I figure out something else with voltages or another setting.
> 
> Found a few settings that limit me to 6400c30.
> 
> tWR 48, tRTP-23/24. Running those tight like I see other doing at 20/10 I can only get 6400c30 stable. Loosening them to 48/24 lets me stablize 6600/6666
> 
> Trrdl-8 trrd-s-8. If set to 6/4 again limits me to 6400. Might be I have weak dim or dims. Didnt bin dims indivually.
> 
> Also tWTR-S setting below 12 limits me to 6400 for memtest stability.
> 
> Here screens from testing. Timings slightly different in screens but to give you an idea of timings and Aida64 run.
> 
> It could be I need more voltage to stabilize tight subs but so far even increasing voltage hasnt helped but could be user error.



You're the man, seriously. Thank you bs. I'm saving profiles now at this point in the BIOS as I step up from here. This is with the new CPU so I don't know if, maybe the IMC is better with this one or not. I'd have to put the other one back in again and test these profiles that I've saved to see for sure..










I cranked the voltages up to the one guy's voltages instead of yours though. I know they're high but, my temps on the memory are cool still and I'm going to the moon until I crash and corrupt windows lol.

Update: For some reason I couldn't get your 6666 settings to run but, I did get these settings to run at 6666.


----------



## yahfz

shamino1978 said:


> ucodes taking up too much room, the "other" more popular switch has taken up the space.


That's really unfortunate. I've seen a lot of people buying msi instead just for that feature alone.

On another note, is there any way you can make the "Max Boost Target" work as the Boost +2? From what I seen, only the first core is affected when using "max boost target" instead of all cores when using the +1/2 boost profile. Would be really cool to have a selectable boost profile so we can do like +5 Boost Profile instead of the usual maximum +2.


----------



## Nizzen

yahfz said:


> That's really unfortunate. I've seen a lot of people buying msi instead just for that feature alone.
> 
> On another note, is there any way you can make the "Max Boost Target" work as the Boost +2? From what I seen, only the first core is affected when using "max boost target" instead of all cores when using the +1/2 boost profile. Would be really cool to have a selectable boost profile so we can do like +5 Boost Profile instead of the usual maximum +2.
> View attachment 2549296


What do you use avx 512 for? I have it on my 7980xe but never used it other than benchmarks


----------



## yahfz

Nizzen said:


> What do you use avx 512 for? I have it on my 7980xe but never used it other than benchmarks


RPCS3. There's 100K members in our Discord Server and almost all of them had to buy MSI boards cause they don't know how to replace a microcode lol.


----------



## Nizzen

yahfz said:


> RPCS3. There's 100K members in our Discord Server and almost all of them had to buy MSI boards cause they don't know how to replace a microcode lol.


12900k and 3090 to play Playstation 3 games. Ok


----------



## yahfz

Nizzen said:


> 12900k and 3090 to play Playstation 3 games. Ok


Why not 

PC Games are too easy to run anyways


----------



## LionAlonso

Nizzen said:


> 12900k and 3090 to play Playstation 3 games. Ok


Why judge others decision?
The thing is 12900k dont oficially support avx 512.
If MSi goes the same way as Asrock in the past and add this type of functions, then yes, the solution is to buy MSI motherboard.
U cant force a company to introduce sth like that.


----------



## yahfz

LionAlonso said:


> Why judge others decision?
> The thing is 12900k dont oficially support avx 512.
> If MSi goes the same way as Asrock in the past and add this type of functions, then yes, the solution is to buy MSI motherboard.
> U cant force a company to introduce sth like that.


^^ This. Also RPCS3 isn't all I do with my computer, but when I do, AVX-512 helps a LOT, specially on a lower end CPU like i3/i5-12400 in RPCS3. I know how to replace microcode myself and that's fine with me if we don't get the microcode switch like MSI. But other people have no idea and they're "forced" to get an msi board instead.


----------



## Falkentyne

Emulation is srs bsns.
That being said, it's still a fringe group, just like the people who want SLI, and that doesn't matter if it's MAME or consoles. The only reason you get big numbers is because of the law of large numbers--the larger the population is, the more people who will be using such a feature, but if it's 1% of total users, it doesn't matter if it's 1 out of 100 or 10,000 out of 1 million. 
I guess the PS3 scene is similar to the years old Dreamcast scene, with their arcade perfect games (DC games were so arcade perfect they were even allowed at major fighting game tournaments, when the arcade boards/chassis were unable to be transported--of course getting sticks that worked back then was another issue, as some people refuse to use pads).
In Asus defense, at least they posted the microcode and supplied the instructions to install it. I don't believe MSI did that before adding a toggle, and how many of their boards have the toggle function? (but I don't exactly read their forums either). But if there's no room left in the UEFI space for a toggle, there isn't anything Asus can do about it.


----------



## ikjadoon

Deceased said:


> I’ve observed that it seems like the cl36 sticks is less problematic than cl40.
> 
> the cl40 just doesn’t work for my z690-I even without turning on xmp.
> 
> I’ve changed to Corsair Dominator 6200 kits and it’s working much better now. Can pass mem test 86, anta777 and occt without errors now.
> 
> Though now I have another issue, which is random freeze at light load. I hope it’s not ram issue again.


Eh, I think you're right. Seems like the CL36 units are different. Nice to hear the Corsair 6200 kit is working much better; it's only right that XMP works on these boards. Alder Lake seems to have a pretty decent DDR5 IMC, relative to what DDR5 is available.

Thaiphoon Burner isn't reading the SPDs here, but if anyone needs to verify which kit is working, here's the little info for this kit:

ASUS ROG STRIX Z690-I Gaming Wi-Fi (BIOS 1003)
32 GB G.SKILL Trident Z5 | F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5K (@ XMP I)
Intel Core i7-12700K
MemTest86 *pass *(embedded ASUS version; whatever the default test is, ran overnight)










As an aside, I confirmed MemTest does actually test w/ XMP, but it only shows the SPD speeds on the testing page.


----------



## WaXmAn

*ASUS Z690 APEX or EVGA Z690 DARK K|NGP|N??? *


----------



## asdkj1740

yahfz said:


> That's really unfortunate. I've seen a lot of people buying msi instead just for that feature alone.
> 
> On another note, is there any way you can make the "Max Boost Target" work as the Boost +2? From what I seen, only the first core is affected when using "max boost target" instead of all cores when using the +1/2 boost profile. Would be really cool to have a selectable boost profile so we can do like +5 Boost Profile instead of the usual maximum +2.
> View attachment 2549296


msi has removed the microcode selection option in the latest beta bios.
even "avx 512 enabled" is chosen cpuz shows no avx512.

edited: seems there is a way to still enable avx512 in the latest beta bios of msi, according to skullbringer.








[OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread


Well look at that, switched to A2+B2 and XMP2 boots. Not entirely sure what XMP training means? I'm getting too old for this stuff.. User name does not match :ROFLMAO:




www.overclock.net


----------



## joneffingvo

xillian1337 said:


> Sounds like u have a problem With your GPU (maybe)
> Do you use a riser cable?
> 
> The z690 set PCIe 16x to 4.0 or 5.0 if its on AUTO... I set it to 3.0 (Gen3) and my System runs without freezes


I do actually... also it's set to 4.0 (RTX 3090)


----------



## truehighroller1

WaXmAn said:


> *ASUS Z690 APEX or EVGA Z690 DARK K|NGP|N??? *


EVGA dark and apex and everything else and 100 different cpus and thirty memory kits. Go all out homie.

We got money from these fools do it then we'll rub it in their slave faces~~~~~!!!!!!!!

This is fine gif.

I have a sp1290 CPU straight from China dog. My cousin's little one year old from my uncle made it 😂. Sorry , sorry.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

WaXmAn said:


> *ASUS Z690 APEX or EVGA Z690 DARK K|NGP|N??? *


MSI Z690 Unify or EVGA Z690 DARK K|NGP|N?

The DARK board looks more ‘Murica so I signed up for the auto-notify.


----------



## Nizzen

WaXmAn said:


> *ASUS Z690 APEX or EVGA Z690 DARK K|NGP|N??? *


Evga Dark kingpin has zero stock in Europe, so there is no choice here. When it's in stock, we are playing with Asus z790 Apex 😆


----------



## shamino1978

yahfz said:


> That's really unfortunate. I've seen a lot of people buying msi instead just for that feature alone.
> 
> On another note, is there any way you can make the "Max Boost Target" work as the Boost +2? From what I seen, only the first core is affected when using "max boost target" instead of all cores when using the +1/2 boost profile. Would be really cool to have a selectable boost profile so we can do like +5 Boost Profile instead of the usual maximum +2.
> View attachment 2549296


Thats exactly what it does, it would target the top core and boost till specified while the rest gets up to +2 . You need to set it higher if you are not seeing tjis.


----------



## Martin778

Nizzen said:


> 12900k and 3090 to play Playstation 3 games. Ok


You would not believe how insanely lot of power PS emulation needs when you want to run on a modern monitor, I could max out a 1080/2080Ti emulating PS2...it took people like what, 15 years to emulate PS2 in 60FPS and upsanpling?


----------



## Akadaka

WaXmAn said:


> *ASUS Z690 APEX or EVGA Z690 DARK K|NGP|N??? *


Given the results on here the Apex hands down.


----------



## Martin778

EVGA has lackluster BIOS support when compared to ASUS, the MB community is tiny and they are more prone to teething issues, speaking from own experience but YMMV.

Just got my Corsair 6200 C36's, running without issues at XMP II. Haven't tried XMP I. Now I know why G.Skill has XMP issues, they're slower than the G.Skills because they run CR2 and poor timings.
XMP II, all voltages by XMP / auto:


Spoiler














XMP I has a lot lower tRFC but somehow performs worse in latency tests. The Aida dev really need to step up the game to make it less OS dependant.


----------



## Mappi75

Looks for me 6666mhz is the sweet spot which runs with "normal" or same voltages like for 6400.
(still testing but it looks good tm5 1usmus_v3 at Cycle 14)

6800Mhz wont run stable doesnt matter how much voltage..
ATM totally on air cooling (open table build) using timings from the 7400mhz profile (by Carillo)

12700K/Apex/32GB G.Skill 6400CL32 non-RGB

Or should i use a/the Beta Bios instead the latest 1101?

Edit: 20 Cyles stable now with lower timings:

6666 Mhz 32-*40*-*40*-30-2T


----------



## joneffingvo

Martin778 said:


> EVGA has lackluster BIOS support when compared to ASUS, the MB community is tiny and they are more prone to teething issues, speaking from own experience but YMMV.
> 
> Just got my Corsair 6200 C36's, running without issues at XMP II. Haven't tried XMP I. Now I know why G.Skill has XMP issues, they're slower than the G.Skills because they run CR2 and poor timings.
> XMP II, all voltages by XMP / auto:
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2549371
> 
> 
> 
> XMP I has a lot lower tRFC but somehow performs worse in latency tests. The Aida dev really need to step up the game to make it less OS dependant.


for me xmp 2 ran into errors 1 hour and 16 mins into “ram test”. However xmp 1 ran 2 hours without a problem


----------



## RamGuy

I just got finished with my LGA1700 build, I was going to get the Gigabyte Z690 Aorus XTREME Waterforce but my retailer wasn't able to get any. I ended up with Asus Z690 Maximus Hero at a heavy discount instead. Z690 Hero with latest BIOS + G.Skill TridentZ Z5 RGB DDR5-5600 SL C36 DC - 32GB (F5-5600U3636C16GX2-TZ5RS) + Intel Core i9-12900K.

Just did some quick BIOS settings, to begin with, nothing fancy. But neither XPM1 nor XPM2 is working for me. It will loop during boot several times, ending up entering safe boot and ignoring all my settings. They work just fine in auto mode.

G.Skill lists the Z690 Hero on its QVL, and Asus lists F5-5600U3636C16GX2-TZ5RS on its QVL. It's been ages since I've had issues booting with RAM running with XMP1, where would I begin to get my system to post without dropping down to SPD speeds?


----------



## bastian

yahfz said:


> That's really unfortunate. I've seen a lot of people buying msi instead just for that feature alone.
> 
> On another note, is there any way you can make the "Max Boost Target" work as the Boost +2? From what I seen, only the first core is affected when using "max boost target" instead of all cores when using the +1/2 boost profile. Would be really cool to have a selectable boost profile so we can do like +5 Boost Profile instead of the usual maximum +2.
> View attachment 2549296


Max Boost Target doesn't seem to appear for me in the Extreme. Is it BIOS specific or model specific?


----------



## affxct

RamGuy said:


> I just got finished with my LGA1700 build, I was going to get the Gigabyte Z690 Aorus XTREME Waterforce but my retailer wasn't able to get any. I ended up with Asus Z690 Maximus Hero at a heavy discount instead. Z690 Hero with latest BIOS + G.Skill TridentZ Z5 RGB DDR5-5600 SL C36 DC - 32GB (F5-5600U3636C16GX2-TZ5RS) + Intel Core i9-12900K.
> 
> Just did some quick BIOS settings, to begin with, nothing fancy. But neither XPM1 nor XPM2 is working for me. It will loop during boot several times, ending up entering safe boot and ignoring all my settings. They work just fine in auto mode.
> 
> G.Skill lists the Z690 Hero on its QVL, and Asus lists F5-5600U3636C16GX2-TZ5RS on its QVL. It's been ages since I've had issues booting with RAM running with XMP1, where would I begin to get my system to post without dropping down to SPD speeds?


If you’re in A2/B2 and you can’t train XMP, get the sticks replaced. Had the same issue with my initially 5600C36 kit that couldn’t train on 3 ADL chips. The 6000C36 kit I purchased with the store credit is doing just great.


----------



## affxct

bastian said:


> Max Boost Target doesn't seem to appear for me in the Extreme. Is it BIOS specific or model specific?


A bit random, but how’d you manage to get 1T working on the Extreme?


----------



## gecko991

Got my Gskill Z5 5600 kit running at 5985 stock settings, will do 6310 at 38. I need to grab a set of the new 6400 no doubt.


----------



## RamGuy

affxct said:


> If you’re in A2/B2 and you can’t train XMP, get the sticks replaced. Had the same issue with my initially 5600C36 kit that couldn’t train on 3 ADL chips. The 6000C36 kit I purchased with the store credit is doing just great.


I'm using A1+B1, should I switch to A2+B2?


----------



## affxct

RamGuy said:


> I'm using A1+B1, should I switch to A2+B2?


Yep you’ll never train XMP in A1/B1.


----------



## RamGuy

Well look at that, switched to A2+B2 and XMP2 boots. Not entirely sure what XMP training means? I'm getting too old for this stuff..


----------



## affxct

RamGuy said:


> Well look at that, switched to A2+B2 and XMP2 boots. Not entirely sure what XMP training means? I'm getting too old for this stuff..


It’s not really specific to XMP. Memory needs to train in order to communicate with your CPU (in a nutshell). On modern motherboards, the first slots of either channel generally are a lot worse, and XMP is often difficult, or - in the case of DDR5 - impossible to train in the two inferior DIMM slots.


----------



## uplink

dante`afk said:


> whats newer 9902 or 1101 ?
> 
> what is up with these number conventions.


 Hey there. Hmm, where did You get the 9902? I was able to see only 9901, or something like that. The latest BiOS/UEFi available to me is the one from previous month [1003/1101]. Is there a different thread with newer BiOS/UEFi versions?

Please let me know, thank You


----------



## bastian

affxct said:


> A bit random, but how’d you manage to get 1T working on the Extreme?


I set it and it worked lol. VDD/Q @ 1.4v. VCCSA 1.2, MC 1.28. Memtest passed.

I think most people having issues with 1T are Samsung/Micron users and those using 4 sticks.


----------



## fortecosi

RamGuy said:


> Well look at that, switched to A2+B2 and XMP2 boots. Not entirely sure what XMP training means? I'm getting too old for this stuff..


You really should read the manual before you insert your DIMM sticks into the motherboard. 99% people here know it. But new people like you always read the manual 1st. It will save a lot of your time.
Anyway, happy overclocking


----------



## affxct

bastian said:


> I set it and it worked lol. VDD/Q @ 1.4v. VCCSA 1.2, MC 1.28. Memtest passed.
> 
> I think most people having issues with 1T are Samsung/Micron users and those using 4 sticks.


Mmm perhaps. Kinda interesting to think about. Makes me want Hynix even more now.


----------



## yahfz

shamino1978 said:


> it would target the top core and boost till specified while the rest gets up to +2.





> While the rest gets up to +2


Would you mind adding an option to change the maximum of Boost Profile +2 to whatever the user wants? Like Boost Profile +4 for instance, the only way to currently do that is through OCTool so would be nice to be able to do it through bios.

I thought that "Max Boost Target" would be that, but as you explained it only boosts the best core to the set value and the rest get a +2 which is not what I want, I want to change that +2 to +3/4/5 etc.


----------



## sugi0lover

uplink said:


> Hey there. Hmm, where did You get the 9902? I was able to see only 9901, or something like that. The latest BiOS/UEFi available to me is the one from previous month [1003/1101]. Is there a different thread with newer BiOS/UEFi versions?
> 
> Please let me know, thank You


Check page 185~


----------



## bastian

affxct said:


> Mmm perhaps. Kinda interesting to think about. Makes me want Hynix even more now.


I had Samsung and Micron kits before Hynix and the Hynix are definitely the best.


----------



## affxct

bastian said:


> I had Samsung and Micron kits before Hynix and the Hynix are definitely the best.


Just a bit of a gamble with the Adata’s. I kinda don’t want the Kingston’s to be dead honest. I would go for some Adata’s and take the risk, but my kit won’t sell. D5 in South Africa is abundant at MSRP and literally no one cares for it. They need to ship some of this stock back to the vendors so they can help you EU and NA guys out .


----------



## bscool

RamGuy said:


> Well look at that, switched to A2+B2 and XMP2 boots. Not entirely sure what XMP training means? I'm getting too old for this stuff..


User name does not match


----------



## satinghostrider

bscool said:


> User name does not match


Definitely made my Sunday. 😂😂😂


----------



## Martin778

Corsair 6200 C32's are not stable at XMP II either it seems, 1 error before the end of the test. A garbage platform it has been so far when it comes to DDR5 memory.


----------



## kazetsubakii

Martin778 said:


> Corsair 6200 C32's are not stable at XMP II either it seems, 1 error before the end of the test. A garbage platform it has been so far when it comes to DDR5 memory.


not sure which memory manufacture Is in those kits, hynix, micron or Samsung, but on my gskill 6000CL36 Samsung kit, XMP I autos my memory controller to 1.25v and XMP II hard sets my memory controller voltage to 1.1 - both are not stable. Once I manually hard change my memory controller to 1.35v I am stable and can test TM5 and RamTest for 12 hours with no errors.


----------



## kazetsubakii

Every few reboots (5 or so, at random), my z690-I (1003bios) / 12900k / 3080TI system will not show a screen, but posts and boots into windows. Almost as if my pcie gpu didn’t initialize. I know I’m in windows because I can hit alt+f4 and tab enter to shut down properly. At first I thought my oc was bad and no post, but this isn’t the case at all. What could be causing this? Any thoughts on a fix? Is there a specific pcie slot voltage setting I might tinker with? I disabled all my OC setting except for XMP II, problem still persists, not turning XMP off to see if this fixes it because if I can’t XMP on a system I’m just gonna return all the parts. Stable in windows tho, OCCT, IBTv2, ADIA, TM5, RamTest, 3dMark


----------



## Ghoosti

kazetsubakii said:


> Tous les quelques redémarrages (environ 5, au hasard), mon système z690-I (1003bios) / 12900k / 3080TI n'affichera pas d'écran, mais publiera et démarrera dans Windows. Presque comme si mon gpu pcie ne s'initialise pas. Je sais que je suis sous Windows car je peux appuyer sur alt + f4 et tabuler pour m'arrêter correctement. Au début, je pensais que mon oc était mauvais et qu'il n'y avait pas de message, mais ce n'est pas du tout le cas. Qu'est-ce qui peut causer cela? Des idées sur un correctif? Existe-t-il un paramètre de tension de slot pcie spécifique avec lequel je pourrais bricoler? J'ai désactivé tous mes paramètres OC à l'exception de XMP II, le problème persiste, je ne désactive pas XMP pour voir si cela le résout, car si je ne peux pas utiliser XMP sur un système, je vais simplement renvoyer toutes les pièces. Stable sous Windows, OCCT, IBTv2, ADIA, TM5, RamTest, 3dMark
> [/CITATION]
> 
> Êtes-vous connecté via Displayport ?
> J'ai le même problème, je me connecte maintenant en HDMI et maintenant l'écran s'affiche et j'ai accès à F2


----------



## skullbringer

asdkj1740 said:


> msi has removed the microcode selection option in the latest beta bios.
> even "avx 512 enabled" is chosen cpuz shows no avx512.


can confirm, this really sucks. any other important improvements in latest release? otherwise i'm staying on A22 

EDIT: correction, A23 still has working avx512. but you have to disable e cores, then reboot, then ucode selector switch appears, then you select avx512 trial and enable avx512, save and reboot again. and then you have to cold boot the system yourself for ucode and e core disable to apply.


----------



## Martin778

Don't know what kind of janky software TM5 is either but I disabled AI OC, ran TM5 again to see if that single error would disappear, came back 3h later just to see TM5 decided not to use any RAM for the test, no errors, just showing 30GB+ available.


----------



## edkieferlp

Martin778 said:


> Don't know what kind of janky software TM5 is either but I disabled AI OC, ran TM5 again to see if that single error would disappear, came back 3h later just to see TM5 decided not to use any RAM for the test, no errors, just showing 30GB+ available.


I noticed when using it it seems little buggy. The time to finish for same ram amount is all over the place, but most times for my 16gig it does it in 1.5hrs but sometimes it looks like it pauses or stops for a while (takes 2hrs). Maybe it set to take lower priority than any OS/background processes, that is only thing that comes to mind.

When I use Memtest86 I can set a stop watch to it but again thats running from USB, so no OS involed.


----------



## criznit

My new daily!!!


----------



## Mappi75

looks same: 















As i already wrote: 6666 Mhz seems to be the sweet spot. 100% stable - no coldboot problems


----------



## Martin778

Gotta try these, my XMP timings are getting crazy bad, tested 67ns today at 6200 C36. iCue and Armoury Crate must be breaking the OS...
Anyone had luck with controlling the RGB on their Dominator RGB RAM?


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Martin778 said:


> Gotta try these, my XMP timings are getting crazy bad, tested 67ns today at 6200 C36. iCue and Armoury Crate must be breaking the OS...
> Anyone had luck with controlling the RGB on their Dominator RGB RAM?


Bios/Tweaker's Paradise/SPD Write Disable :False

Then you have control over Dominator RGB with iCue.

sidenote, I am happy with my aida numbers using Samsung sticks.


----------



## Martin778

Yeah, so far I don't really see the Hynix superiority that much. These 6666+ results run voltages way above my comfort zone (1.4v+) anyways.

By the way my Doms don't even get detected in iCUE/Armoury Crate. Wonder if changing the SPD Write setting would do something...


----------



## CptSpig

This is my daily memory OC. G.Skill 6400 kit at 6600 on APEX BD. CPU 5.5 (SP92 P-cores and SP69 E-cors) AI tune. 1.47 VVDQ and 1.48 VDD MC 1.3475 on air. Low voltage and RLT's Align.


----------



## Martin778

Reinstalled my OS back to W10, didn't install iCue or Armoury Crate this time, latency dropped from 67 to 61ns in Aida. WTH!
This is more relevant then, Corsair 6200 C36 (Hynix), XMP II:








(Clean Windows 10 21H2).
+
Installed iCUE, not even started, the latency rose to 64-64.5ns, confirmed after few consecutive tests....then after a reboot it's back to 61.8ns, removed iCUE and dropped to 61ns.
To be brutally honest, AIDA doesn't seem like an ideal benchmark that way...


----------



## asdkj1740

skullbringer said:


> can confirm, this really sucks. any other important improvements in latest release? otherwise i'm staying on A22
> 
> EDIT: correction, A23 still has working avx512. but you have to disable e cores, then reboot, then ucode selector switch appears, then you select avx512 trial and enable avx512, save and reboot again. and then you have to cold boot the system yourself for ucode and e core disable to apply.


yeah it is quite "shady" now. sometimes the avx512 enabled option would even be disappeared. but during my ddr5 oc times, i have never ever seen the microcode selection option again on the latest beta bios.
i remember on the previous bios, even microcode of avx512 is selected, i still need to enable the avx512 (namely two options needed to be enabled) so as to let cpuz shown avx512.
if i simply select avx512 microcode then leave the below avx options as auto, it would not truly work.

ps. i disable e cores all the time.


----------



## Silent Scone

Martin778 said:


> Reinstalled my OS back to W10, didn't install iCue or Armoury Crate this time, latency dropped from 67 to 61ns in Aida. WTH!
> This is more relevant then, Corsair 6200 C36 (Hynix), XMP II:
> View attachment 2549544
> 
> (Clean Windows 10 21H2).
> +
> Installed iCUE, not even started, the latency rose to 64-64.5ns, confirmed after few consecutive tests....then after a reboot it's back to 61.8ns, removed iCUE and dropped to 61ns.
> To be brutally honest, AIDA doesn't seem like an ideal benchmark that way...


When we're talking nanosecond differences this is hardly surprising. Any kind of background activity will knock the score off-kilter. If this is the type of performance benchmarking we're looking for, then you may as well launch in diagnostic mode and disable all services. Ideally, it should really only be used to see if you're heading in the right direction.

Or some users like to claim certain settings feel "more snappy". This one has always tickled me lol


----------



## Ghoosti

In view of the RAM results of our Z690 Extreme cards, which do not seem to match this magnificent card.
I am sure that Mr. Shimano will release a bios for us from which he has the secret to raising this card to its real level and remove some competition...
Mr. Shimano thank you again for the work you have done


----------



## sblantipodi

Ghoosti said:


> In view of the RAM results of our Z690 Extreme cards, which do not seem to match this magnificent card.
> I am sure that Mr. Shimano will release a bios for us from which he has the secret to raising this card to its real level and remove some competition...
> Mr. Shimano thank you again for the work you have done


Shamino can't fix design flaws. Extreme simply can't keep up with cheaper boards and this is ridiculous.


----------



## cstkl1

Ghoosti said:


> In view of the RAM results of our Z690 Extreme cards, which do not seem to match this magnificent card.
> I am sure that Mr. Shimano will release a bios for us from which he has the secret to raising this card to its real level and remove some competition...
> Mr. Shimano thank you again for the work you have done


well i hope the bike manufacturer can help @shamino1978 to cycle faster. 

lol.


----------



## asdkj1740

Ghoosti said:


> In view of the RAM results of our Z690 Extreme cards, which do not seem to match this magnificent card.
> I am sure that Mr. Shimano will release a bios for us from which he has the secret to raising this card to its real level and remove some competition...
> Mr. Shimano thank you again for the work you have done


last time i check the intel rts for raptor lake is week 46-53.
i would rather have them put more effort to the coming up stuffs.


----------



## mikasalo500

Martin778 said:


> Reinstalled my OS back to W10, didn't install iCue or Armoury Crate this time, latency dropped from 67 to 61ns in Aida. WTH!
> This is more relevant then, Corsair 6200 C36 (Hynix), XMP II:
> View attachment 2549544
> 
> (Clean Windows 10 21H2).
> +
> Installed iCUE, not even started, the latency rose to 64-64.5ns, confirmed after few consecutive tests....then after a reboot it's back to 61.8ns, removed iCUE and dropped to 61ns.
> To be brutally honest, AIDA doesn't seem like an ideal benchmark that way...
> [/ZITIEREN]
> 
> Even with Icue you can use the task manager to end everything you don't need before you start the bench, then the latency will be fine...


----------



## warbucks

CptSpig said:


> This is my daily memory OC. G.Skill 6400 kit at 6600 on APEX BD. CPU 5.5 (SP92 P-cores and SP69 E-cors) AI tune. 1.47 VVDQ and 1.48 VDD MC 1.3475 on air. Low voltage and RLT's Align.
> 
> View attachment 2549535


What vcore and vccsa in bios? What's your chip SP, 84-86?


----------



## Martin778

@mikasalo500
That's not possible with Armoury Crate / iCue. If you kill any of the processes they will just restart. Tried.
Maybe one would have to try through services.msc.


----------



## Nizzen

Martin778 said:


> @mikasalo500
> That's not possible with Armoury Crate / iCue. If you kill any of the processes they will just restart. Tried.
> Maybe one would have to try through services.msc.


Disable Crate in bios. Then run Armoury Crate uninstaller


----------



## Mappi75

Is there someone who can confirm that Beta Bios 9902 is in some way better than the last offical bios?
Did you reach higher speed or lower voltage, lower timings? Thanks 

Edit: is there some rule how to set the tREFI?
Or only high as possible?


----------



## ProJewks

Hi guys, I've been reading up and down this forum for a while now trying to get my Z690 Formula, 12900k, and Trident Z5 6000 C40 to run stable. I was wondering what bios and settings you have on to run stable? I can't launch a game without it crashing. I haven't overclocked my 12900k either, actually undervolting it. Thanks for the help! Only reason I've only just started testing was because I couldn't get the MB to post until I figured out I had to force the PCIE slots to gen 3, among other things.


----------



## sblantipodi

After days of testing I had found a stable setting during the tests but I discovered that it hangs from time to time during boot, reboot, turn off the pc.

I can't even handle 4.6GHz on 4 sticks with
1.28V MC
1.35V VDD/VDDQ 
1.15V SA 

Extreme is an extreme crap.

Works well on the Hero.


----------



## CptSpig

warbucks said:


> What vcore and vccsa in bios? What's your chip SP, 84-86?


Here is 6800 CL30 CR2 on the Apex. See HWinfo64 for voltages and temperatrues on air P-Cores SP92 and E-Cores SP69. Adia64 with iCUE and Armoury Crate runing.









.


----------



## bigfootnz

Does anyone has experience with Hyper M.2 card which comes with Hero? When I plug card in 3rd Pci-e slot, as per manual in that slot both M.2 should be working on Hyper card. I’ve in bios enabled dual M.2. PC start correctly, I can enter BIOS and see both M.2 but when start booting into windows there are problems. Either needs like whole minute to start and I can see only one M.2 in windows. Or Pc is stuck after BIOS with F6 code. Thanks


----------



## cstkl1

bigfootnz said:


> Does anyone has experience with Hyper M.2 card which comes with Hero? When I plug card in 3rd Pci-e slot, as per manual in that slot both M.2 should be working on Hyper card. I’ve in bios enabled dual M.2. PC start correctly, I can enter BIOS and see both M.2 but when start booting into windows there are problems. Either needs like whole minute to start and I can see only one M.2 in windows. Or Pc is stuck after BIOS with F6 code. Thanks


i use my own add on card ( cause gen 4 8x gpu is enough)

board detects it automatically.


----------



## sblantipodi

sblantipodi said:


> After days of testing I had found a stable setting during the tests but I discovered that it hangs from time to time during boot, reboot, turn off the pc.
> 
> I can't even handle 4.6GHz on 4 sticks with
> 1.28V MC
> 1.35V VDD/VDDQ
> 1.15V SA
> 
> Extreme is an extreme crap.
> 
> Works well on the Hero.


is there some fix for the Extreme? I want an answer from Asus.
I can test for hours without errors but hangs on reboot, shutdown...

this is clearly a design flaws even considering the fact that I'm running 4.4GHz on 4 sticks with the same problems even with high voltages.

Asus how can you explain it?
Why don't you recall the Extreme and admit that there are design flaws?


----------



## jeiselramos

sblantipodi said:


> is there some fix for the Extreme? I want an answer from Asus.
> I can test for hours without errors but hangs on reboot, shutdown...
> 
> this is clearly a design flaws even considering the fact that I'm running 4.4GHz on 4 sticks with the same problems even with high voltages.
> 
> Asus how can you explain it?
> Why don't you recall the Extreme and admit that there are design flaws?


Are you still with 2 different kits? Or did you buy another kit?


----------



## bigfootnz

cstkl1 said:


> i use my own add on card ( cause gen 4 8x gpu is enough)
> 
> board detects it automatically.


I assume that you are using second pci-e slot which then operates at 8x just like gpu?


----------



## arrow0309

bscool said:


> Which MB and memory? On Strix d4 with DR b die 901 is best for me. 4133c15-15-15.
> 
> When I tried 1003 it is harder to boot 4000+ consitently. It is fine once working but if you are tuning a new memory oc it will be a nightmare going over 4000 if you dont know all the timings you need to manually enter as you need to reboot and test. I would use 901 if on DR b die.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ASUS ROG Strix Z690-A Gaming WiFi D4 Thread
> 
> 
> 0901 bios just relased but there is no description :)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net


I still have the older 707 with 2x16gb DR B-die @4000 cl15. 
And don't know what to do, update to 901, 1003 or just wait for the next one. 
I've heard the new 1003 gives better sc performance in cpu benchmark (at default XMP) but yeah, looses some memory OC.


----------



## ProJewks

ProJewks said:


> Hi guys, I've been reading up and down this forum for a while now trying to get my Z690 Formula, 12900k, and Trident Z5 6000 C40 to run stable. I was wondering what bios and settings you have on to run stable? I can't launch a game without it crashing. I haven't overclocked my 12900k either, actually undervolting it. Thanks for the help! Only reason I've only just started testing was because I couldn't get the MB to post until I figured out I had to force the PCIE slots to gen 3, among other things.


so, I’ve ordered another set of trident z5 6000 c40 but these are J’s instead of U’s. I’m hoping they aren’t Samsung… I’m hoping they run stable. I tried last night with the ones I have at 6000, 5600, and even 5000MHz at VDD/VDDQ/VDDTX/MC at 1.35 and SA at 1.25. No luck. As soon as I launch a game computer freezes and I have to restart. Again everything is stock except for 12900k v cache at -50mV offset for temperature purposes.


----------



## Muad_Dib69

ProJewks said:


> Hi guys, I've been reading up and down this forum for a while now trying to get my Z690 Formula, 12900k, and Trident Z5 6000 C40 to run stable. I was wondering what bios and settings you have on to run stable? I can't launch a game without it crashing. I haven't overclocked my 12900k either, actually undervolting it. Thanks for the help! Only reason I've only just started testing was because I couldn't get the MB to post until I figured out I had to force the PCIE slots to gen 3, among other things.


Just load the 6000 profile for samsung in cas32. change it for 2t instead of 1t. put 1.40v for voth vddd,095sa and 1.25 mc and it should work. Else load XMP1 and raise volatage the same. you can then try to lower it.


----------



## ProJewks

Muad_Dib69 said:


> Just load the 6000 profile for samsung in cas32. change it for 2t instead of 1t. put 1.40v for voth vddd,095sa and 1.25 mc and it should work. Else load XMP1 and raise volatage the same. you can then try to lower it.


Ok so I’ve understood most of what you said but I’ve been trying to figure out what people mean when you say 2T vs 1T and when you say profile from Samsung do you mean XMP 2? I’m working on everything in my bios and this is the first build I’ve done having to mess with ram settings to get things to run stable. Thanks for clarification!

EDIT:
ok figured it out. I did everything you’ve said. Just fyi, my sticks are c40 not c36 so hopefully it boots up fine. I have started the boot process on my formula so waiting for it to cycle on. Will let you know what happens with the first set of settings. If no go, I’ll try XMP1.


----------



## Muad_Dib69

ProJewks said:


> Ok so I’ve understood most of what you said but I’ve been trying to figure out what people mean when you say 2T vs 1T and when you say profile from Samsung do you mean XMP 2? I’m working on everything in my bios and this is the first build I’ve done having to mess with ram settings to get things to run stable. Thanks for clarification!


Your DDR is 6000 cas 40.40.40.2 or something like that. It's the base of the speed. you can see it at the four 1st value in the bios menu.


----------



## ProJewks

Muad_Dib69 said:


> Your DDR is 6000 cas 40.40.40.2 or something like that. It's the base of the speed. you can see it at the four 1st value in the bios menu.


So, I've tried samsung profile with 2T and failed due to instability. Trying XMP1 with those voltages and setting Command rate to 2T to see if it'll be stable.

Update:
Still unstable. I'm running on 0070 going up to 1003 now and going to retest.


----------



## Muad_Dib69

the xmp is 2T. You need to do a relaod bios default every time before changing everything. I have bios 811 on my formula.
Also it's very hard to insert DDR correctly. so use included mem test. If you have crazy error try 1 then the other. many time one of my bank was not correctly insterted. With xmp and a bit more voltage it should be stable.


----------



## bastian

sblantipodi said:


> Shamino can't fix design flaws. Extreme simply can't keep up with cheaper boards and this is ridiculous.


If it is a design flaw how am I running 6200 30-38-38-75-1T on my Extreme no problems?


----------



## ProJewks

Muad_Dib69 said:


> the xmp is 2T. You need to do a relaod bios default every time before changing everything. I have bios 811 on my formula.
> Also it's very hard to insert DDR correctly. so use included mem test. If you have crazy error try 1 then the other. many time one of my bank was not correctly insterted. With xmp and a bit more voltage it should be stable.


I was on 1003, ran XMP1 with all the voltage settings you suggested on 2T. Everything seemed to run ok. Did a cinebench stability run and it completed the 30 min test. I started up call of duty VG and when it finally got into the main menu, system froze. I don't know what I can do to narrow down what the reason is. I've done mem diagnostics and memtests and all were fine. Are you saying to try one stick in A2 at a time? Also, I am running 4 of them.

Update: Tried 6000 and 5800, both ended up in failures. I've set it to Auto but kept the voltages the same and will see how it operates. If this fails, I will probably fall back to 0811 and try again from the start. Thanks Maud.


----------



## Ghoosti

bastian said:


> it is a design flaw how am I running 6200 30-38-38-75-1T on my Extreme no problems?
> [/CITATION]
> 
> I have the same RAM and I can't get below 38!
> Could you share your cmo settings?
> thank you for your help


----------



## Nizzen

ProJewks said:


> so, I’ve ordered another set of trident z5 6000 c40 but these are J’s instead of U’s. I’m hoping they aren’t Samsung… I’m hoping they run stable. I tried last night with the ones I have at 6000, 5600, and even 5000MHz at VDD/VDDQ/VDDTX/MC at 1.35 and SA at 1.25. No luck. As soon as I launch a game computer freezes and I have to restart. Again everything is stock except for 12900k v cache at -50mV offset for temperature purposes.


They are samung LOL


----------



## ProJewks

Nizzen said:


> They are samung LOL


I may have a bad set. I'm just trying to get anything stable at this point.


----------



## bastian

Ghoosti said:


> I have the same RAM and I can't get below 38!
> Could you share your cmo settings?
> thank you for your help


VDD/Q @ 1.4v. VCCSA 1.2, MC 1.28. 

6200 @ 30-38-38-75-1T


----------



## Ghoosti

bastian said:


> VDD/Q @ 1.4v. VCCSA 1.2, MC 1.28.
> 
> 6200 @ 30-38-38-75-1T
> [/CITATION]
> 
> Thanks very much 👍👍👍


----------



## ProJewks

Muad_Dib69 said:


> the xmp is 2T. You need to do a relaod bios default every time before changing everything. I have bios 811 on my formula.
> Also it's very hard to insert DDR correctly. so use included mem test. If you have crazy error try 1 then the other. many time one of my bank was not correctly insterted. With xmp and a bit more voltage it should be stable.


So after the last update, running everything on auto with those voltage settings allowed me to run a cinebench stability test and get into the game and fiddle around with settings for 5 min before freezing up on me. Rolling back to 0811 and trying again.

Update:
No luck with both settings. I'm going to chalk it up to being binned unfortunately. (or because the bios isn't our friend atm). Just received new RAM, will try it out on 0811 and hopefully it'll workout.


----------



## cstkl1

bigfootnz said:


> I assume that you are using second pci-e slot which then operates at 8x just like gpu?


yup.


----------



## fortecosi

sblantipodi said:


> is there some fix for the Extreme? I want an answer from Asus.
> I can test for hours without errors but hangs on reboot, shutdown...
> 
> this is clearly a design flaws even considering the fact that I'm running 4.4GHz on 4 sticks with the same problems even with high voltages.
> 
> Asus how can you explain it?
> Why don't you recall the Extreme and admit that there are design flaws?


Listen. I trust in Shamino. He is exceptionally good and proven it many many many times. So, if it could be fixed by a BIOS update, it would be already fixed. So IMO, there is a design flaw which may not be fixed.


----------



## ProJewks

No luck. I'm able to get into a game and about 5-10 min in Windows freezes. I'm rolling all the way back to 0702 and leaving everything default to start from scratch.


----------



## vincemcmasters

I am having unstable XMP 1 and XMP 2 profiles with my Corsair Dominator DDR5 5200mhz memory, I am using four 16gb sticks, so 64 gb, I am running the Asus ROG Strix Z-690 Gaming E Motherboard and a Intel 12900k. I have updated to the latest bios, the ram states it is XMP 3.0 ready but I do not see an xmp 3.0, I have googled my heart out and just cant find the information I need to figure this out myself. Has any one else run into a similar problem and found a good fix for a stable XMP 1 or 2, and or preferably found out how to see xmp 3? Thank you for taking the time to read this I appreciate any feed back!


----------



## Ghoosti

fortecosi said:


> Listen. I trust in Shamino. He is exceptionally good and proven it many many many times. So, if it could be fixed by a BIOS update, it would be already fixed. So IMO, there is a design flaw which may not be fixed.
> [/CITATION]
> 
> I also think there is a problem with this card.
> I also have great confidence in Mr Simano.
> That's why the defect bothers me, someone from Asus should confirm it, a manufacturing defect can happen ex Hero BUT a prestigious manufacturer like Asus, should do something and recall the cards if it's confirmed ....


----------



## Martin778

Asus will never admit a fault that is not clearly visible, like with the Hero, forget it. If the Extreme bothers you, sell it and get an Apex or Unify-X...or wait for BIOS updates.


----------



## Ghoosti

Martin778 said:


> Asus will never admit a fault that is not clearly visible, like with the Hero, forget it. If the Extreme bothers you, sell it and get an Apex or Unify-X...or wait for BIOS updates.
> [/CITATION]
> 
> Yes I can wait for a Bios update, but in view of the info above, I'm not sure it will work.
> Maybe Mr Shimano could confirm?
> To sell it ! I will still not sell to someone else a card that would potentially have a defect! this is not right...


----------



## carlox97

shamino1978 said:


> the boards that support sli finally with official sli key
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-1101.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-1101.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-GLACIAL-ASUS-1101.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (should be similar to what i posted just now)
> 
> 
> These ones that dont support sli:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PRIME-Z690M-PLUS-D4-ASUS-1011.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PRIME-Z690-P-WIFI-D4-ASUS-1011.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PRIME-Z690-P-D4-ASUS-1011.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-D4-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-WIFI-D4-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-WIFI-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-I-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-G-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-F-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-E-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-FORMULA-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ProArt-Z690-CREATOR-WIFI-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PRIME-Z690-A-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com



@shamino1978 @cstkl1 
Hi, I have a PRIME Z690-P D4 with the following problem:

Default BIOS Settings
AI Tweaker -> AI OC Tuner -> XMP I
*"AI Tweaker -> DRAM Timing Control -> DRAM Command Rate" to 1T causes Windows BSODs (related to memory) on BIOS 1008 & 1011 Beta, but IT WORKS FINE on BIOS 0605.*

All other BIOS settings are Default. Please, let the team know about this one.


----------



## entiszzoot

Hi, i have this problem on on my motherboard (PRIME Z690-P WIFI D4): when activate ERP in the bios and then press the power button, I have a delay of 1,5 seconds at the start. Its that normal?
The strange thing deactivate ERP my pc starts immediately, but my keyboard is not recognized. I have to unplug the usb cable and re insert in!
my bios is the 1008 (no beta)
my ram : G.Skill Trident 2x16 GB b-die 3600 mhz CL16 16-16-36
Can anyone help me pls?


----------



## Silent Scone

bastian said:


> If it is a design flaw how am I running 6200 30-38-38-75-1T on my Extreme no problems?


The major difference at the enthusiast level between tackling these things is those of us who fundamentally accept that the underlying mechanisms can't account for every scenario and may require manual tuning or intervention.

Or, those of us who prefer to believe the problem lies completely elsewhere and has nothing to do with lack of knowledge. Some users still aren't able to comprehend why combining memory kits is ill-advised. It's almost as if they believe this is pseudo-nonsense to distract people from a problem elsewhere. If someone isn't able to understand why this isn't recommended, then you can't expect them to understand what most of the MRC settings do electronically or how to dial things out methodically. They want a magic bullet which in some scenarios does not exist depending on what settings they're trying to achieve, and with what components


----------



## X909

... but the industrie creates the illusion that extreme OC is a daily business. I mean, look in the motherboards advertisements or even in the QVL. MSI lies about 4000 Mhz DDR4 with 4 DR Modules. Never in my life without massive research and tuning every training parameter manually.


----------



## edkieferlp

vincemcmasters said:


> I am having unstable XMP 1 and XMP 2 profiles with my Corsair Dominator DDR5 3200mhz memory, I am using four 16gb sticks, so 64 gb, I am running the Asus ROG Strix Z-690 Gaming E Motherboard and a Intel 12900k. I have updated to the latest bios, the ram states it is XMP 3.0 ready but I do not see an xmp 3.0, I have googled my heart out and just cant find the information I need to figure this out myself. Has any one else run into a similar problem and found a good fix for a stable XMP 1 or 2, and or preferably found out how to see xmp 3? Thank you for taking the time to read this I appreciate any feed back!


Your post is a little confusing, you write "Corsair Dominator DDR5 3200mhz memory" which is it DDR4 or 5?
Either case 4 sticks you will have problems with DDR5 hitting high freq's, you will probably be limited to around the 4400-5000mhz.
Same with DDR4 but not as bad should be able to hit high 3x00 to 4000.


----------



## Silent Scone

X909 said:


> ... but the industrie creates the illusion that extreme OC is a daily business. I mean, look in the motherboards advertisements or even in the QVL. MSI lies about 4000 Mhz DDR4 with 4 DR Modules. Never in my life without massive research and tuning every training parameter manually.


I don't think the lines are that obscured, but it depends on the knowledge gap. Even if we factor that no overclocking is ever guaranteed, the APEX product page claims maximum validation is only 6600MHz, despite many users showing stability results beyond this.


----------



## RamGuy

Been running:

Asus Z690 Maximus Hero @ 1003
G.Skill TridentZ Z5 RGB DDR5-5600 SL C36 DC - 32GB (F5-5600U3636C16GX2-TZ5RS) running as XMP2
Asus 3090 RoG Strix OC
Samsung 980 Pro 2TB NVMe
Windows 11 Pro for Workstation Build 22000.527

Everything is being cooled by 3x 360 radiators in a custom loop.

Currently, everything is running AUTO. XMP2 has been loaded, and I have disabled Asus Multicore Enhancement, tuned fan profiles etc. When it comes to settings related to CPU, RAM and voltages are pretty much default besides what is being loaded via XMP2.

Memtest86 did four passes without any issues.


Still, I have two occasions where my computer shuts itself down only showing Event ID: 41 - Source: Kernel-Power in Windows 11 Event Viewer. Both times my system has barely had any load, just sitting in RDP while working.

Of course with this amount of cooling headroom I might have to set some power limits just to not have Alder Lake go all crazy on me. But when sitting in RDP there is no load pushing the CPU in any meaningful way so I highly doubt it's going all that crazy. I have enabled all ASPM settings for power efficiency while working from home. I suppose it might cause issues with various voltage drops and whatnot. Still strange to not be able to have stable ASPM on a system in 2022.


Does anyone have similar issues? Not sure where to even begin.


----------



## Simkin

RamGuy said:


> Been running:
> 
> Asus Z690 Maximus Hero @ 1003
> G.Skill TridentZ Z5 RGB DDR5-5600 SL C36 DC - 32GB (F5-5600U3636C16GX2-TZ5RS) running as XMP2
> Asus 3090 RoG Strix OC
> Samsung 980 Pro 2TB NVMe
> Windows 11 Pro for Workstation Build 22000.527
> 
> Everything is being cooled by 3x 360 radiators in a custom loop.
> 
> Currently, everything is running AUTO. XMP2 has been loaded, and I have disabled Asus Multicore Enhancement, tuned fan profiles etc. When it comes to settings related to CPU, RAM and voltages are pretty much default besides what is being loaded via XMP2.
> 
> Memtest86 did four passes without any issues.
> 
> 
> Still, I have two occasions where my computer shuts itself down only showing Event ID: 41 - Source: Kernel-Power in Windows 11 Event Viewer. Both times my system has barely had any load, just sitting in RDP while working.
> 
> Of course with this amount of cooling headroom I might have to set some power limits just to not have Alder Lake go all crazy on me. But when sitting in RDP there is no load pushing the CPU in any meaningful way so I highly doubt it's going all that crazy. I have enabled all ASPM settings for power efficiency while working from home. I suppose it might cause issues with various voltage drops and whatnot. Still strange to not be able to have stable ASPM on a system in 2022.
> 
> 
> Does anyone have similar issues? Not sure where to even begin.


XMP2 most likely the issue. My system could bsod on light load, or idle, while not on higher load or gaming with G.Skill 6000 using XMP profile.

G.Skill 5600/6000 with Samsung IC and XMP profile seems to be rather troublesome for many.


----------



## biigshow666

just finished delidding with the supercool kit for the 12900k. very easy to do.. I have no need for it anymore. send a message if you're interested and you just have to pay the shipping.


----------



## ikjadoon

Simkin said:


> XMP2 most likely the issue. My system could bsod on light load, or idle, while not on higher load or gaming with G.Skill 6000 using XMP profile.
> 
> G.Skill 5600/6000 with Samsung IC and XMP profile seems to be rather troublesome for many.


I'm curious if the mini-ITX boards have better DDR5 compatibility? They have only 2x DDR5 slots. My Samsung 6000 / CL36 worked at XMP1 (which I believe has tighter timings than XMP2) out of the box on my Z690-I: load, idle, benches, etc. No BSODs, no errors, etc. 

Or, as some have noted, G.SKILL's 6000 / CL36 kits are more stable than their 5600 / CL36 kits. I can't explain why: how does _increasing_ the speeds lead to wider compatibility? Maybe a different batch of Samsung ICs?

@RamGuy: I'd try running them at SPD just to rule out the RAM completely (or, instead, blame it completely). I'm on Windows 11, though with the 6000 / CL36 1.3V kit, with the UEFI nearly on all defaults. But if you're passing MemTest...


----------



## sblantipodi

bastian said:


> If it is a design flaw how am I running 6200 30-38-38-75-1T on my Extreme no problems?


because you are using 2 sticks, not 4.


----------



## Akadaka

sblantipodi said:


> because you are using 2 sticks, not 4.


So using 2 sticks does not effect the OC'ing on 4 slot DIMM MB's like the Hero/Formula/Extreme?


----------



## sblantipodi

After months of testing, this is the Asus Extreme Crap.
4x16GB Samsung 5600MHz @ 4.4GHz C40
1.35VDD/VDDQ
1.150V SA
1.28V MC

This is my last Asus.
Asus give us a refund!!!


----------



## Martin778

4400 C40? You can just as well dump that Extreme, the DDR5's and buy the Z690 Strix D4.
If you have a webshop that's not doing trouble with returns, I'd suggest you go and buy an MSI or AORUS Master or something like that and compare how they handle four sticks. You might end up with the same story on all boards with 4x banks running like hot poop. Buying 2x32 and a 2 DIMM board is also an idea.


----------



## Akadaka

sblantipodi said:


> After months of testing, this is the Asus Extreme Crap.
> 4x16GB Samsung 5600MHz @ 4.4GHz C40
> 1.35VDD/VDDQ
> 1.150V SA
> 1.28V MC
> 
> This is my last Asus.
> Asus give us a refund!!!


A small compromise might be to run 2x32GB 5200mhz if you want 64gigs you lose a little speed but not sure their is anyway around running 4 sticks at that speed.


----------



## bastian

sblantipodi said:


> because you are using 2 sticks, not 4.


You really shouldn't be using 4 sticks to OC memory.....

Any technically anything over 4800mhz DDR5 is considered an OC, btw.


----------



## morph.

sblantipodi said:


> After months of testing, this is the Asus Extreme Crap.
> 4x16GB Samsung 5600MHz @ 4.4GHz C40
> 1.35VDD/VDDQ
> 1.150V SA
> 1.28V MC
> 
> This is my last Asus.
> Asus give us a refund!!!


complains about 4 sticks and cries foul lol... Has no understanding about imc load and strain gg.


----------



## Nizzen

sblantipodi said:


> After months of testing, this is the Asus Extreme Crap.
> 4x16GB Samsung 5600MHz @ 4.4GHz C40
> 1.35VDD/VDDQ
> 1.150V SA
> 1.28V MC
> 
> This is my last Asus.
> Asus give us a refund!!!


Congratulation!

You won a blocked award...


----------



## Feklar

Ok Apex parents, mine is doing something not normal. It always ran fine for months. Now when ever I restart, I get a qcode 53 hang. I can only do a hard reset and it boots normally. Also my dimm temps have disappeared from aida64 and in hwinfo as well. No SPD info. CPUZ on the SPD page shows nothing. No memory at all. Same in Aida64 SPD page. Memory works normally and I have tried both of my GSkill sets 6000 and 6400 and the same thing for both sets. In the bios I have dimm temps and spd info just not in any external monitoring software. Any clues? This only started this week and any issues that come out of no where are bad sign. I'm thinking the board could be going bad or at least the embedded controller chip. Not good.


----------



## shamino1978

Feklar said:


> Ok Apex parents, mine is doing something not normal. It always ran fine for months. Now when ever I restart, I get a qcode 53 hang. I can only do a hard reset and it boots normally. Also my dimm temps have disappeared from aida64 and in hwinfo as well. No SPD info. CPUZ on the SPD page shows nothing. No memory at all. Same in Aida64 SPD page. Memory works normally and I have tried both of my GSkill sets 6000 and 6400 and the same thing for both sets. In the bios I have dimm temps and spd info just not in any external monitoring software. Any clues? This only started this week and any issues that come out of no where are bad sign. I'm thinking the board could be going bad or at least the embedded controller chip. Not good.


53 means board has problem reading spd. pull ac power and start a fresh and try not to run multiple spd accessing softwares at the same time. and clean the dram gold fingers just to be sure,


----------



## Feklar

Shut down, pulled power plug for ~15 minutes. Plug back in, clear cmos and boot. Bios shows SPD and dimm temps are there. Boot in to windows 10 everything works and runs normally. Launch cpuz and go to spd tab and nothing. Blank for slots 1 and 2. Close cpuz and go to aida64 spd page, same nothing. Close everything and launch hwinfo. No memory temps or voltages there either. Every reboot triggers a code 53 and yellow light. Cold starts do not. Wasn't the qcode 53 with yellow light also on the Z690 Hero before failure? The motherboard knows what memory, voltages and how warm, it just doesn't want anyone else to know. Fiddlesticks.


----------



## sblantipodi

morph. said:


> complains about 4 sticks and cries foul lol... Has no understanding about imc load and strain gg.





bastian said:


> You really shouldn't be using 4 sticks to OC memory.....
> 
> Any technically anything over 4800mhz DDR5 is considered an OC, btw.


I'm not able to run 4.4GHz on 4 sticks. Is 4.4GHz considered OC on a 1200€ mobo?
I always bought 4 sticks mobo, even with DDR4 400MHz OC (with 4 sticks base clock is 4GHz) was never a problem.

I can't run 4.4GHz stable man, 4.4GHz C40.
The motherboard hangs on boot

this should be the extreme minimum for an extreme board.

I can test for hours even at 5GHz but at some point, the lights on the RAM stops working and if I reboot the pc hangs on detecting memory.


----------



## shamino1978

Feklar said:


> Shut down, pulled power plug for ~15 minutes. Plug back in, clear cmos and boot. Bios shows SPD and dimm temps are there. Boot in to windows 10 everything works and runs normally. Launch cpuz and go to spd tab and nothing. Blank for slots 1 and 2. Close cpuz and go to aida64 spd page, same nothing. Close everything and launch hwinfo. No memory temps or voltages there either. Every reboot triggers a code 53 and yellow light. Cold starts do not. Wasn't the qcode 53 with yellow light also on the Z690 Hero before failure? The motherboard knows what memory, voltages and how warm, it just doesn't want anyone else to know. Fiddlesticks.


I will check with cpuz, if you dont use cpuz but use say hwinfo?


----------



## Feklar

Correct. HWinfo shows no voltages or temps for the dimms, just basic timings. Aida64 shows the same, no temps for dimms, no spd info there either.


----------



## MarkDeMark

Here's a funny one. Pick your language. As many languages as there are tabs. The global community BIOS. And I mean global. Reboot and it's gone. Comes back a week later or so. And no - it isn't corrupted, just quirky. 😄


----------



## morph.

Feklar said:


> Ok Apex parents, mine is doing something not normal. It always ran fine for months. Now when ever I restart, I get a qcode 53 hang. I can only do a hard reset and it boots normally. Also my dimm temps have disappeared from aida64 and in hwinfo as well. No SPD info. CPUZ on the SPD page shows nothing. No memory at all. Same in Aida64 SPD page. Memory works normally and I have tried both of my GSkill sets 6000 and 6400 and the same thing for both sets. In the bios I have dimm temps and spd info just not in any external monitoring software. Any clues? This only started this week and any issues that come out of no where are bad sign. I'm thinking the board could be going bad or at least the embedded controller chip. Not good.


did you use thaiphoon burner if so that's probably bricked it like a set of ram I had previously.


----------



## ikjadoon

sblantipodi said:


> I'm not able to run 4.4GHz on 4 sticks. Is 4.4GHz considered OC on a 1200€ mobo?
> I always bought 4 sticks mobo, even with DDR4 400MHz OC (with 4 sticks base clock is 4GHz) was never a problem.
> 
> I can't run 4.4GHz stable man, 4.4GHz C40.
> The motherboard hangs on boot
> 
> this should be the extreme minimum for an extreme board.
> 
> I can test for hours even at 5GHz but at some point, the lights on the RAM stops working and if I reboot the pc hangs on detecting memory.


That's also poor reporting by tech journalists. *In that configuration (4x DIMMs)*, Intel's official Alder Lake IMC certification is _*only*_ DDR5-4000 single-rank or DDR5-3600 dual-rank. That is not a typo, unfortunately.

Recent replies haven't quite mentioned this yet:










In short:

Two-DIMM slot motherboards (mini-ITX, EVGA DARK) + two DIMMs populated: *DDR5-4800*
Four-DIMM slot motherboards (99% mATX / ATX) + two DIMMs populated: *DDR5-4400*
Four-DIMM slot motherboards + four DIMMs populated: *DDR5-4000* (if 1R) // *DDR5-3600* (if 2R)

Slots per channel: motherboard has how many slots per channel? Four-DIMM slot is two slots per channel.
DIMMs populated per channel: how many DIMMs (memory modules) are in each channel?

Merely having _four DIMM slots on the motherboard_ adds more stress to the ADL DDR5 IMC (e.g., all four need to be routed) versus two DIMM slots. We don't even need to populate them with anything. Your motherboard (and most motherboards discussed in this thread) have four slots, so they're all automatically downgraded to DDR5-4400 _or lower_ in _*any*_ RAM configuration. Then by populating all four slots, ADL DDR5 gets its knees taken out and falls to DDR5-4000 (1R) // DDR5-3600 (2R). 

The why: beyond the IMC stress and DDR5's immaturity, it depends on *motherboard layers & daisy-chaining*, e.g., how DIMM slots traces are *connected to the IMC / CPU socket*.

Intel is sneaky here in that they hide the actual DDR5 specifications behind "up to".


> Up to DDR5 4800 MT/s
> Up to DDR4 3200 MT/s


That "up to" is doing a whole hell lot of work for Intel, TBH. RAM is unfortunately significantly more sensitive than even this issue (one reason I stopped OC'ing beyond XMP on a daily driver system): a great video by Ian Cutress from AnandTech.


----------



## morph.

sblantipodi said:


> I'm not able to run 4.4GHz on 4 sticks. Is 4.4GHz considered OC on a 1200€ mobo?
> I always bought 4 sticks mobo, even with DDR4 400MHz OC (with 4 sticks base clock is 4GHz) was never a problem.
> 
> I can't run 4.4GHz stable man, 4.4GHz C40.
> The motherboard hangs on boot
> 
> this should be the extreme minimum for an extreme board.
> 
> I can test for hours even at 5GHz but at some point, the lights on the RAM stops working and if I reboot the pc hangs on detecting memory.


Seriously.. IMC is CPU based, how do you not know this or understand this?

Motherboard binning is a thing but not as dramatic as CPU imc's run 2 sticks or move on.


----------



## Feklar

morph. said:


> did you use thaiphoon burner if so that's probably bricked it like a set of ram I had previously.


Never used that program. I have 2 different sets of G.Skill ram different chips and speeds and both sets show no temps, voltages or spd info.


----------



## ProJewks

I'm still running G Skill 6000C40 and can't even come close to running stable at lower speeds. I have RMA'd 2 sets and will try the new ones when they here. Right now, I ordered some more from amz and these are just as instable. Will return once I get the RMA'd ones. Any one else still struggling to run stable?

Edit: Also, I want to know what temps are the RAM running? I'm logging via HWINFO and can see my temps reach 50-55 and then it stop because my system froze and ended the test. (Using OCCT Mem Test). Thanks!

Update:I just tested at 4.4G stock timing (C40) with VDD @ 1.35, SA @ 1.15, MC @ 1.28 and system hung 2:28 into the test.. shortest run yet lol.


----------



## Falkentyne

Feklar said:


> Never used that program. I have 2 different sets of G.Skill ram different chips and speeds and both sets show no temps, voltages or spd info.


You said you used TWO sets of dimms on that board and neither showed SPD info? Or just one set of dimms?
If you only have one dimm set, here's what you do.
Go to some local computer store or shop that sells Z690 motherboards. Ask them if they are nice enoug to install the dimms and hwinfo to see if they can get the readings (preferably an Asus or MSI board).
If the RAM works and you can see the SPD info in windows there, then do a clean install of windows 11 install on your home system on a USB flash drive or some spare SSD or HDD that you have sitting around, install all of the Asus drivers (chipset, EC, ITE, etc) and hwinfo and then see if it works. If it still doesn't, RMA the motherboard. If it does, well you found the problem. If the RAM doesn't work at the shop itself, you saved yourself some time, RMA the RAM.
If you don't have access to a shop or a friend with a Z690 motherboard, well, you're going to have to make some difficult decisions, sorry.


----------



## morph.

ProJewks said:


> I'm still running G Skill 6000C40 and can't even come close to running stable at lower speeds. I have RMA'd 2 sets and will try the new ones when they here. Right now, I ordered some more from amz and these are just as instable. Will return once I get the RMA'd ones. Any one else still struggling to run stable?
> 
> Edit: Also, I want to know what temps are the RAM running? I'm logging via HWINFO and can see my temps reach 50-55 and then it stop because my system froze and ended the test. (Using OCCT Mem Test). Thanks!
> 
> Update:I just tested at 4.4G stock timing (C40) with VDD @ 1.35, SA @ 1.15, MC @ 1.28 and system hung 2:28 into the test.. shortest run yet lol.


At about 55 degrees or higher, the memory can likely error out try cooling it.

What bios version are u running?

Have you just tried lowering the mem spd to say 5800 as a test for stability?

Your CPU IMC could be badly binned.


----------



## stahlhart




----------



## ProJewks

morph. said:


> At about 55 degrees or higher, the memory can likely error out try cooling it.
> 
> What bios version are u running?
> 
> Have you just tried lowering the mem spd to say 5800 as a test for stability?
> 
> Your CPU IMC could be badly binned.


I really hope that's not the case. I'm tired of draining this loop over and over again. I'm running a test right now 4400MHz, 1.325VCC, 0.98SA, 1.25MC. The test is running for about 10+ min and I see temps reaching 55C now. I can also see my RGB lights on my fans switch from the static light I've set, to rainbow puke, back to my setting.

This time around, I've reset CMOS and removed power before setting the RAM config. This is the first time I've got the ram to actually complete a 15min OCCT 80% Memory Test.


----------



## morph.

I'm certain, you want the ram to run under 55 degrees at that temperature point or above you will be on a knifes edge with stability. A fan blowing directly on the DIMMs can greatly reduce temps.

As you can see in my signature I have no issues running this and even with tighter timings and whatnot.

I've used OCCT/Mem test pro and memory is stable under 55 degrees usually with a fan above the modules intaking air to the chassis it sits max around 52-55 degrees on these mem stress tests.


----------



## Feklar

Falkentyne said:


> You said you used TWO sets of dimms on that board and neither showed SPD info? Or just one set of dimms?
> If you only have one dimm set, here's what you do.
> Go to some local computer store or shop that sells Z690 motherboards. Ask them if they are nice enoug to install the dimms and hwinfo to see if they can get the readings (preferably an Asus or MSI board).
> If the RAM works and you can see the SPD info in windows there, then do a clean install of windows 11 install on your home system on a USB flash drive or some spare SSD or HDD that you have sitting around, install all of the Asus drivers (chipset, EC, ITE, etc) and hwinfo and then see if it works. If it still doesn't, RMA the motherboard. If it does, well you found the problem. If the RAM doesn't work at the shop itself, you saved yourself some time, RMA the RAM.
> If you don't have access to a shop or a friend with a Z690 motherboard, well, you're going to have to make some difficult decisions, sorry.


Thanks for the advice. I have 2 different sets of ram. One is the GSkill 6000 C36 and the other is 6400 C32. Both are new and neither set shows temps or spd info. They both however hang on qcode 53 but only when restarting, not with a cold reboot. This was on a clean install on Win10. The thing is everything worked perfectly for months until it didn't. It looks like the board will need to be replaced. I called Asus tech support earlier though. The guy was nice enough. He asked if I had checked to make sure the power supply fan was turning. I didn't have the courage to tell him I use the power supply in eco mode so the fan rarely spins, since explaining that would have taken the rest of the day. You have to love tier one support.


----------



## ProJewks

morph. said:


> I'm certain, you want the ram to run under 55 degrees at that temperature point or above you will be on a knifes edge with stability. A fan blowing directly on the DIMMs can greatly reduce temps.
> 
> As you can see in my signature I have no issues running this and even with tighter timings and whatnot.
> 
> I've used OCCT/Mem test pro and memory is stable under 55 degrees usually with a fan above the modules intaking air to the chassis it sits max around 52-55 degrees on these mem stress tests.


What Bios version are you using? The fact that on Auto leads to instability is really strange, I might start for scratch and installl a fresh W11 copy.


----------



## morph.

Currently on v0811 been lazy to upgrade to the latest as everything stable.

I never run auto voltages and ill put money down that 10mins and 55degrees with ram stress/stability tests is your problem your not cooling ur dimms properly.


----------



## Silent Scone

ProJewks said:


> I really hope that's not the case. I'm tired of draining this loop over and over again. I'm running a test right now 4400MHz, 1.325VCC, 0.98SA, 1.25MC. The test is running for about 10+ min and I see temps reaching 55C now. I can also see my RGB lights on my fans switch from the static light I've set, to rainbow puke, back to my setting.
> 
> This time around, I've reset CMOS and removed power before setting the RAM config. This is the first time I've got the ram to actually complete a 15min OCCT 80% Memory Test.


It's correct that temperature-induced instability can be an issue but like with all semiconductors it also depends on how conditional the overclock is. Running cooler is always going to help regardless.


----------



## nickolp1974

To all that are having trouble with DDR5 out of curiosity what cache are you running??? My IMC is reasonable and I can run pretty good settings 6400 c28 cr1 tight is no bother and validate 7400mhz but I tend to keep cache low, around the x40 mark otherwise errors and boot loops, training issues etc. I know some here run upto x50 I can only dream of that unless I'm missing a setting??


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

nickolp1974 said:


> To all that are having trouble with DDR5 out of curiosity what cache are you running??? My IMC is reasonable and I can run pretty good settings 6400 c28 cr1 tight is no bother and validate 7400mhz but I tend to keep cache low, around the x40 mark otherwise errors and boot loops, training issues etc. I know some here run upto x50 I can only dream of that unless I'm missing a setting??


I run x45 cache. Ram @6666MHz cl36. E-cores on x41. Cpu @5.1GHz. Runs hot so I will delid eventually.


----------



## nickolp1974

MrTOOSHORT said:


> I run x45 cache. Ram @6666MHz cl36. E-cores on x41. Cpu @5.1GHz. Runs hot so I will delid eventually.


Is that CR1 or 2 on the men's??


----------



## Silent Scone

nickolp1974 said:


> To all that are having trouble with DDR5 out of curiosity what cache are you running??? My IMC is reasonable and I can run pretty good settings 6400 c28 cr1 tight is no bother and validate 7400mhz but I tend to keep cache low, around the x40 mark otherwise errors and boot loops, training issues etc. I know some here run upto x50 I can only dream of that unless I'm missing a setting??


With e-cores enabled @ 6000-6400 1T 42 is about as far as I can push stability. Mileage varies as always, though. Some samples can maybe do 4.4 - 4.5. Higher is possible with efficiency cores disabled


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

CR2


----------



## CptSpig

MrTOOSHORT said:


> I run x45 cache. Ram @6666MHz cl36. E-cores on x41. Cpu @5.1GHz. Runs hot so I will delid eventually.


Is you CPU and GPU on water? I am running 5.5 P-cores, 3.9 E-cores and memory at 6800 CL30. CPU 20c, GPU, 25c and memory at 26.5c. See attached HWinfo64 for temps.


----------



## Afferin

Hey, I'm looking for some advice. I'm having a series of issues that kinda point towards maybe some severe degradation, but I'd like to know if there's anything I can do.

The best I can get stable is 6400 34-38-38-34 2T. 6600 will boot but I can't get it stable. This is at 1.425v VDD, VDDQ, VDDQ TX, and 1.15v VCCSA and 1.225v IMC.
I can't get 1T to boot no matter what. Not even at 6000CL40
I'm using the Team Force 6400CL40 kit
Optimized defaults will not run. If I clear CMOS and load optimized defaults, it boot loops and will not turn on with default settings.
CPU SP is 83
Running on a Formula

I'm trying to get 1T working, or maybe just get 6600+ stable. Does anyone have any tips?


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

CptSpig said:


> Is you CPU and GPU on water? I am running 5.5 P-cores, 3.9 E-cores and memory at 6800 CL30. CPU 20c, GPU, 25c and memory at 26.5c. See attached HWinfo64 for temps.


Yes I am under water. A guy with a AIO 420 is kicking my butt with temps and his oc is higher. Obviously there is a IHS or solder problem on mine.


----------



## sblantipodi

morph. said:


> Seriously.. IMC is CPU based, how do you not know this or understand this?
> 
> Motherboard binning is a thing but not as dramatic as CPU imc's run 2 sticks or move on.


bacause I installed my CPU and my 4 sticks on my brother's Hero and it works like a charm.
do you think that the problem is the CPU?


----------



## CptSpig

MrTOOSHORT said:


> Yes I am under water. A guy with a AIO 420 is kicking my butt with temps and his oc is higher. Obviously there is a IHS or solder problem on mine.


Have you pulled the CPU block to look at the paste coverage?


----------



## morph.

Afferin said:


> Hey, I'm looking for some advice. I'm having a series of issues that kinda point towards maybe some severe degradation, but I'd like to know if there's anything I can do.
> 
> The best I can get stable is 6400 34-38-38-34 2T. 6600 will boot but I can't get it stable. This is at 1.425v VDD, VDDQ, VDDQ TX, and 1.15v VCCSA and 1.225v IMC.
> I can't get 1T to boot no matter what. Not even at 6000CL40
> I'm using the Team Force 6400CL40 kit
> Optimized defaults will not run. If I clear CMOS and load optimized defaults, it boot loops and will not turn on with default settings.
> CPU SP is 83
> Running on a Formula
> 
> I'm trying to get 1T working, or maybe just get 6600+ stable. Does anyone have any tips?


My formula with my gskill6000c36 won’t run at 1T either. How far can you push the speed and 2T on the team 6400s?


----------



## Afferin

morph. said:


> My formula with my gskill6000c36 won’t run at 1T either. How far can you push the speed and 2T on the team 6400s?


I can get 6600 to boot, 6800 with an insane amount of voltage, but for now I've settled on 6400 34-38-38-34 because both of those error like crazy. That's the best I can do (to my knowledge).


----------



## bscool

Anyone on Apex if you are having issues past 6400 with getting stable try bios 9902 and replace u code with 15. Might be a fluke but it has been much easier to get 6666c30 stable than 9902 or 1101 with u code 18.

Might work for other MB so worth a try if you like to mess around.


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> Anyone on Apex if you are having issues past 6400 with getting stable try bios 9902 and replace u code with 15. Might be a fluke but it has been much easier to get 6666c30 stable than 9902 or 1101 with u code 18.
> 
> Might work for other MB so worth a try if you like to mess around.


I wonder if the bios they gave me to try for the strix fixes the issues with my memory on that board.. hear me out here if, they could implement fixes though it's different memory etc obviously, on apex as well. I was trying tonight with my new set of tforce 6400 sticks and same issues. I can get cas 28 6400 stable mind you but, higher then that and I get issues even after loosening settings etc.


----------



## bscool

truehighroller1 said:


> I wonder if the bios they gave me to try for the strix fixes the issues with my memory on that board.. hear me out here if, they could implement fixes though it's different memory etc obviously, on apex as well. I was trying tonight with my new set of tforce 6400 sticks and same issues. I can get cas 28 6400 stable mind you but, higher then that and I get issues even after loosening settings etc.


What was broke though for mem oc on Strix d4 901 was great for me on DR b die 4133c15 to 4266c16. New bios is not always better, never has been.

I thought you could run 4133c15 bios 901 with DR on Strix what more do you want? You just want to run the lastest bios because it is the lastest? I dont get it. Use what works. That is why they have more one bios. I guess I dont understand you thinking.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

CptSpig said:


> Have you pulled the CPU block to look at the paste coverage?


I looked at the paste spread and it looks just ok, not the best. I'm looking at HWinfo during Y-Cruncher, I'm hitting 465w. This is only at 1.25v load for 5.1Ghz. Others with 1.35v load are hitting that wattage. I'm lowering voltages beside vcore to see if the watts go down for the same time score. One thing I noticed is my 5.1GHz is beating others @5.3 in some benchmarks, so they are are throttling somewhere and they don't even know it.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Dropped wattage from 465w to 236w. Sub 60s in Y-Cruncher @5100MHz, not bad eh:


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> What was broke though for mem oc on Strix d4 901 was great for me on DR b die 4133c15 to 4266c16. New bios is not always better, never has been.
> 
> I thought you could run 4133c15 bios 901 with DR on Strix what more do you want? You just want to run the lastest bios because it is the lastest? I dont get it. Use what works. That is why they have more one bios. I guess I dont understand you thinking.


I work on stuff I can't even talk about for a living. My thinking is improvement not moving backwards.


----------



## bscool

truehighroller1 said:


> I work on stuff I can't even talk about for a living. My thinking is improvement not moving backwards.


What are you trying to improve though on the Strix? No bios is going to let you run higher ram speeds or tighter timing than what is already available on 901 with DR b die. We are at the limit if the IMC and subtimings already.


----------



## Silent Scone

Afferin said:


> Hey, I'm looking for some advice. I'm having a series of issues that kinda point towards maybe some severe degradation, but I'd like to know if there's anything I can do.
> 
> The best I can get stable is 6400 34-38-38-34 2T. 6600 will boot but I can't get it stable. This is at 1.425v VDD, VDDQ, VDDQ TX, and 1.15v VCCSA and 1.225v IMC.
> I can't get 1T to boot no matter what. Not even at 6000CL40
> I'm using the Team Force 6400CL40 kit
> Optimized defaults will not run. If I clear CMOS and load optimized defaults, it boot loops and will not turn on with default settings.
> CPU SP is 83
> Running on a Formula
> 
> I'm trying to get 1T working, or maybe just get 6600+ stable. Does anyone have any tips?


 1T on 4 DIMM boards is tough, won’t be degradation. I’d aim for tight 6400 2T


----------



## edkieferlp

MrTOOSHORT said:


> Dropped wattage from 465w to 236w. Sub 60s in Y-Cruncher @5100MHz, not bad eh:
> 
> View attachment 2550089
> View attachment 2550090


Curious, what did you change?
465w with that voltage and clock doesn't seem possible, AC_LL/DC_LL set correctly for LLC?


----------



## 7empe

bscool said:


> Anyone on Apex if you are having issues past 6400 with getting stable try bios 9902 and replace u code with 15. Might be a fluke but it has been much easier to get 6666c30 stable than 9902 or 1101 with u code 18.
> 
> Might work for other MB so worth a try if you like to mess around.


Can you explain how to switch between ucode versions within the same bios version? Where did you find ucode v15? Thanks.


----------



## bscool

7empe said:


> Can you explain how to switch between ucode versions within the same bios version? Where did you find ucode v15? Thanks.


I followed @Falkentyne guide (12900k) Patching older ucode to restore AVX512


----------



## BroadPwns

Sup, does anyone know, why HPET is ditched in retail versions of Z690? Der8auer showed that he had it enabled and running well in his video debunking Gigabytes OC record, but after enabling it in system (it's disabled by default too) it's just a stutterfest. I've checked the bios in hexeditor after extracting adjacent Page and the bios is by default disabled (Z690-A Strix D4).


----------



## bscool

Testing new Apex. 2022 manufactuing date.

Slot1/cha(weakest channel) boots 7400 and runs Aida64 bench compared to original MB with same memory and CPU slot1/cha 7000 was limit for Adia64 bench.

So looks like 200 to 400mhz better on new board depending on test. Just got the board today so havent tested much

Original MB 6800c30 limit for y cruncher. New MB 6933c30 to 7000c32 so far.

Original 6666c30 Karhu stable. New MB 6800c30 so far.

Using same timings to compare boards.

Cooling Arctic 420 AIO.


----------



## snootaiscool

carlox97 said:


> @shamino1978 @cstkl1
> Hi, I have a PRIME Z690-P D4 with the following problem:
> 
> Default BIOS Settings
> AI Tweaker -> AI OC Tuner -> XMP I
> *"AI Tweaker -> DRAM Timing Control -> DRAM Command Rate" to 1T causes Windows BSODs (related to memory) on BIOS 1008 & 1011 Beta, but IT WORKS FINE on BIOS 0605.*
> 
> All other BIOS settings are Default. Please, let the team know about this one.


Weirdly enough on my Prime P WIFI D4, I notice that manually using Command Rate 2T outright causes my BIOS to fail to post properly. Setting it to Auto though allows it to run perfectly fine and boot into Windows with Command Rate 2T no problem.

Also the board (and/or the 2 x 16 G. Skill Ripjaws DDR4-4000 1.4v CL16 kit itself, I really don't ****ing know) really does not like me ****ing with the voltage at all past 1.42v. Anything below or beyond that throws post errors at well when posting with XMP settings because reasons. So tuning with my setup seems to downright impossible on 1008, which isn't all that great as you would imagine. I haven't checked if disabling E-Cores or downgrading the BIOS would help any matters though, but XMP at least has proven to be stable with 1.35V of System Agent with at least 8 cycles in Extreme1 anta777 TM5.


----------



## sblantipodi

After months of testing I found some setting that can be stable for hours of testing @4.6GHz but from time to time they hangs on reboot/boot.

I decided to use fail safe default and use the OC that way, all on auto with ram at 4GHz on 4 sticks.

PC continue to hang on reboot from time to time.

Any idea?


----------



## BroadPwns

sblantipodi said:


> After months of testing I found some setting that can be stable for hours of testing @4.6GHz but from time to time they hangs on reboot/boot.
> 
> I decided to use fail safe default and use the OC that way, all on auto with ram at 4GHz on 4 sticks.
> 
> PC continue to hang on reboot from time to time.
> 
> Any idea?


Tinker with ODT settings and use TM5 Absolut profile to find the perfect value. Have fun.


----------



## sblantipodi

BroadPwns said:


> Tinker with ODT settings and use TM5 Absolut profile to find the perfect value. Have fun.


should I tweak settings even at 4GHz?
Isn't 4GHz considered the JDEC specs for 4 sticks like mine?

At this point I really doubt that it is a problem of settings. Am I wrong?


----------



## BroadPwns

sblantipodi said:


> should I tweak settings even at 4GHz?
> Isn't 4GHz considered the JDEC specs for 4 sticks like mine?
> 
> At this point I really doubt that it is a problem of settings. Am I wrong?


DDR5 JEDEC is 4800 MHz? 5200 MHz? DDR4 JEDEC (highest) is 3200 MHz.

I'm currently in testing of B-Die Dual Rank 3200 CL14 that could not for sheit give me more than 6 minutes of TM5 Extreme at auto ODTs with even as bad settings as 3800 MHz 16-16-16-36, whereas after meddling with ODTs I just passed 80 minutes of Absolut preset on 4000 15-16-15-30-2T (no secondaries and tertiaries just yet, and since RTL tuning _does not work_ at Strix D4, lower timings are not possible in my case, no ODT combination helps). Both cases were ran with Vsa 1.32 V, VDDQ 1.4 V and VDRAM at 1.5V.


----------



## sblantipodi

BroadPwns said:


> DDR5 JEDEC is 4800 MHz? 5200 MHz? DDR4 JEDEC (highest) is 3200 MHz.
> 
> I'm currently in testing of B-Die Dual Rank 3200 CL14 that could not for sheit give me more than 6 minutes of TM5 Extreme at auto ODTs with even as bad settings as 3800 MHz 16-16-16-36, whereas after meddling with ODTs I just passed 80 minutes of Absolut preset on 4000 15-16-15-30-2T (no secondaries and tertiaries just yet, and since RTL tuning _does not work_ at Strix D4, lower timings are not possible in my case, no ODT combination helps). Both cases were ran with Vsa 1.32 V, VDDQ 1.4 V and VDRAM at 1.5V.


Intel says that the base frequency is lowered to 4GHz when using 4 sticks.
the problem is that I cannot even use it at 4GHz without hanging at boot from time to time.


----------



## BroadPwns

Well, if you have DDR5, then gl hf with 4 sticks. I haven't seem anyone being able to do anything with 4 sticks of DDR5.


----------



## Nizzen

BroadPwns said:


> Well, if you have DDR5, then gl hf with 4 sticks. I haven't seem anyone being able to do anything with 4 sticks of DDR5.


2x32GB Hynix is the way to go, IF you need 64GB 

I think this kit is Micron, but it's official 5200mhz:
In stock here in Norway

*Corsair Vengeance DDR5-5200 BK C40 DC - 64GB*
Minne (RAM), 64 GB: 2 x 32 GB (Dual Channel), DIMM 288-pin, DDR5, 5200 MHz / PC5-41600, CL40-40-40-77, 1.25 V


*Corsair Dominator Platinum RGB DDR5-5200 C40 DC - 64GB*
Minne (RAM), 64 GB: 2 x 32 GB (Dual Channel), DIMM 288-pin, DDR5, 5200 MHz / PC5-41600, CL40-40-40-77, 1.25 V, ikke-bufret, ECC, svart - Dominator Platinum RGB with CAPELLUX RGB LED


----------



## sblantipodi

BroadPwns said:


> Well, if you have DDR5, then gl hf with 4 sticks. I haven't seem anyone being able to do anything with 4 sticks of DDR5.


yes, it's difficult on Asus 


Nizzen said:


> 2x32GB Hynix is the way to go, IF you need 64GB
> 
> I think this kit is Micron, but it's official 5200mhz:
> In stock here in Norway
> 
> *Corsair Vengeance DDR5-5200 BK C40 DC - 64GB*
> Minne (RAM), 64 GB: 2 x 32 GB (Dual Channel), DIMM 288-pin, DDR5, 5200 MHz / PC5-41600, CL40-40-40-77, 1.25 V


so why Asus sells 4 sticks mobo? can asus chime in on this?
isn't 4GHz not possible on their 4 sticks boards?


----------



## BroadPwns

sblantipodi said:


> yes, it's difficult on Asus
> 
> 
> so why Asus sells 4 sticks mobo? can asus chime in on this?
> isn't 4GHz not possible on their 4 sticks boards?


Literally every ATX Z690 is 4 DIMM, wth. It's not just Asus. Have you checked QVLs?


----------



## Nizzen

BroadPwns said:


> Literally every ATX Z690 is 4 DIMM, wth. It's not just Asus. Have you checked QVLs?


Who buy anything else than 2x Dimm board for memory OC?  
Apex, unify X and Dark is ATX


----------



## BroadPwns

Nizzen said:


> Who buy anything else than 2x Dimm board for memory OC?
> Apex, unify X and Dark is ATX


Everyone else, who actually uses PC for more than e-painis, I guess and value their cash. Dual DIMM Z690 are so freaking expensive, you simply need to live from overclocking to actually justify buying these.


----------



## Nizzen

BroadPwns said:


> Everyone else, who actually uses PC for more than e-painis, I guess and value their cash. Dual DIMM Z690 are so freaking expensive, you simply need to live from overclocking to actually justify buying these.


Do what you want  
I love overclocking memory and it looks like doing this gain the most performance. Overclocking cpu not so much. Atleast in games 
Remember this is OCN, not everyone-else.net


----------



## sblantipodi

BroadPwns said:


> Literally every ATX Z690 is 4 DIMM, wth. It's not just Asus. Have you checked QVLs?


damn, do I need to check QVL to run 4GHz on a 1200€ mobo?


----------



## Silent Scone

Half of the problem is users seem hell-bent on filling all slots because it "looks good". That's some of the reason T-Topology was adopted on most SKUs till recently...That's more e-peen than buying a 2 DIMM board IMO.


----------



## BroadPwns

sblantipodi said:


> damn, do I need to check QVL to run 4GHz on a 1200€ mobo?


Welcome to DDR5. Either stick to 2 DIMMs or keep crying, there's sadly no other answer. Your 1200 euro board (xD) is of very same capabilities as a 300 euro one, an other sad truth. There's really no point in sticking to a solution that just does not work and is troublesome ever since Z490 came out, as T topology was officially ditched then.


----------



## skullbringer

sblantipodi said:


> yes, it's difficult on Asus
> 
> 
> so why Asus sells 4 sticks mobo? can asus chime in on this?
> isn't 4GHz not possible on their 4 sticks boards?


if you close your eyes hard enough, ignore intel documentation and wish for your own version of reality to be true, have fun


----------



## Silent Scone

BroadPwns said:


> Welcome to DDR5. Either stick to 2 DIMMs or keep crying, there's sadly no other answer. Your 1200 euro board (xD) is of very same capabilities as a 300 euro one, an other sad truth. There's really no point in sticking to a solution that just does not work and is troublesome ever since Z490 came out, as T topology was officially ditched then.


Buying more DIMMs to go slower isn't anything new. I'm not sure what you're attempting to say however badly, as T-Toplogy was designed for users like you who are fascinated with the more is better mantra.

More memory populated - more concessions are needed, this remains the same regardless of the memory topology.


----------



## Nizzen

BroadPwns said:


> Welcome to DDR5. Either stick to 2 DIMMs or keep crying, there's sadly no other answer. Your 1200 euro board (xD) is of very same capabilities as a 300 euro one, an other sad truth. There's really no point in sticking to a solution that just does not work and is troublesome ever since Z490 came out, as T topology was officially ditched then.


Why complain if you aren't buying it anyway? Sounds like guru3d forum members  They are complaining about anything they aren't using or buying. They just complain for the sake of complaining


----------



## BroadPwns

Nizzen said:


> Why complain if you aren't buying it anyway? Sounds like guru3d forum members  They are complaining about anything they aren't using or buying. They just complain for the sake of complaining


Where did I complain :v. Guy asked who buys 4 DIMMed mobos so I answered honestly.


----------



## pR1maL

12900k / Apex
2x16 G.Skill F5-6000U3636E 16GX2-TZ5RS (1.3v Samsung) 

Switched to 2x16 F5-6400J3239G 16GX2-TZ5RK (1.4v Hynix). 

The Samsung kit was always an utter pain in the arse. Forget tweaking to for gains, just getting it to run XMP or even manual settings was an ordeal. I'd find a stable configuration and it would be able to pass numerous runs of TM5 Anta Extreme. I could reboot or cold boot, and run as many passes as I wanted with no issues. I'd be convinced it was stable. Then I'd come back and fire it up the next day, and it would fail the tests in short order. It made me start hating on this platform, and doubting Asus / Intel. 

The Hynix, it doesn't seem to care what I do. Totally different experience. It passes XMP I, XMP II, and I can actually tweak to find gains beyond the XMP spec. It runs 10c cooler than the Samsung despite the .1v increase. I tried every bios with the Samsung and hated every minute of it, and with the Hynix establishing a stable baseline tune was easy as flashing 1101, setting XMP I, and then adding my core OC. They appear to have the same heat spreaders, but the Samsung would hit nearly 55c with a Corsair Dominator air cooler on them. The Hynix never passes 45c and idles in the low 30's.

The Samsung was also erratic with respect to training. The RTL's would be strangely offset, and were inconsistent from day to day. I'm gonna RMA it directly to G.Skill and then sell them for dirt cheap. I was really starting to think I had a bad IMC, or a bad board. Turns out that it's G.Skill that should be embarrassed and ashamed for selling this overheating Samsung crap at that speed bin. I feel like the industry took advantage of early adopters, but then that's nothing new. I mean, what does G.Skill's binning process even look like? I know they don't test dimms for a hour.

It feels like a lot of early adopters had a bad roll of the dice this round. And with the prices of everything right now, swapping parts out to find a weak link can be super expensive. I wouldn't let a stranger touch Samsung DDR5 with a ten foot pole, without warning them it might just be a snake. No way I'd even remotely recommend the 6000UE sticks to anyone.

edit: forgot to mention that the 6000 Samsung was 100% TM5 Extreme stable at 5600, from day to day, but not at 5800 or higher. My 12900k is only SP77, so I was really wondering it was the memory controller. Glad to find out that it wasn't the IMC, or the mobo. The experience went from being stressful, to painless.


----------



## adna

quick boot check (stable not test)
12900kf+strix-f
Hynix 4x16GB @ 6400-30-38-38-28
sa | mc | vdd/vddq/tx = 0.9 | 1.3 | 1.4


----------



## Arni90

BroadPwns said:


> Welcome to DDR5. Either stick to 2 DIMMs or keep crying, there's sadly no other answer. Your 1200 euro board (xD) is of very same capabilities as a 300 euro one, an other sad truth. There's really no point in sticking to a solution that just does not work and is troublesome ever since Z490 came out, as T topology was officially ditched then.


This fascination with T-topology is ridiculous, and is usually made by people with no real experience with it.

MSI's daisy chain boards outperformed T-top layouts on Z390.
Good 4 DIMM Z490 boards were far superior to Z390 T-topology, even with all 4 DIMMs populated.


----------



## Afferin

adna said:


> quick boot check (stable not test)
> 12900kf+strix-f
> Hynix 4x16GB @ 6400-30-38-38-28
> sa | mc | vdd/vddq/tx = 0.9 | 1.3 | 1.4
> View attachment 2550305


Hey, I'm relatively new to OC'ing but how in the heck did you manage to get 4x16gb sticks to boot at 6400 with those voltages?? I can barely get 2x16 to boot at 6400CL30 at 1.5v! Are you a wizard? <_>


----------



## BroadPwns

Arni90 said:


> This fascination with T-topology is ridiculous, and is usually made by people with no real experience with it.
> 
> MSI's daisy chain boards outperformed T-top layouts on Z390.
> Good 4 DIMM Z490 boards were far superior to Z390 T-topology, even with all 4 DIMMs populated.


Z490 boards got new processors with IMC vastly outperforming what 8th gen offered.


----------



## pR1maL

Arni90 said:


> This fascination with T-topology is ridiculous, and is usually made by people with no real experience with it.
> 
> MSI's daisy chain boards outperformed T-top layouts on Z390.
> Good 4 DIMM Z490 boards were far superior to Z390 T-topology, even with all 4 DIMMs populated.


My understanding is the high-speed data transmission lines can experience signal reflections. If you send a signal through a circuit which is left unterminated, that signal will reach the end of the circuit and "bounce back", the reflected waveform can interfere with subsequent signals on the circuit. Many circuits use "termination resistors" to dampen the unwanted reflections. 
In the case of dram, I would assume it's why certain 4 stick motherboards (Daisy Chain in particular) want you to use the farthest slots of each channel when you run 2 sticks, and part of the reason why 2 stick boards clock better.


----------



## Silent Scone

Arni90 said:


> This fascination with T-topology is ridiculous, and is usually made by people with no real experience with it.
> 
> MSI's daisy chain boards outperformed T-top layouts on Z390.
> Good 4 DIMM Z490 boards were far superior to Z390 T-topology, even with all 4 DIMMs populated.


I ran 4266 4x8GB on Z390 / 9900K. I don’t recall seeing that configuration working on daisy chain boards (however it was some time ago).

The design got to a point where the maximum frequency both fully populated and without was almost the same. The layout and transmission line impedances greatly reduced skew between slots in the same channel. Now that module density is greater along with the price, majority of kits are two DIMM so the designs benefits began to become outweighed by the negatives.

Although, even the lack of 4 DIMM kits hasn’t stopped users trying to populate all slots…


----------



## CptSpig

G.Skill 6400 kit on Apex at 6600 CR1, 6800 CR2 and 7000 CR2 all on air cooling. See HWiNFO64 for voltages and temperatures.


----------



## BroadPwns

Does anyone know how to actually control RTLs on Strix D4? Or is it just a big no-no in all Asus Z690?


----------



## Nizzen

BroadPwns said:


> Does anyone know how to actually control RTLs on Strix D4? Or is it just a big no-no in all Asus Z690?


I just enable "round trip latency" on Apex. Don't know if it's on Strix


----------



## BroadPwns

I have it enabled too, but if I disable it and punch in RTLs got from the automatic training, it just will not post, ever. Any value on offset prevents booting even on stock RAM speed, RTL training enabled or not. I'm asking as I need 73/73 RTLs for 4000 MHz 15-16-15 (Dual Rank B-Die, two sticks), board did get a single time 73/73 and TM5 Absolut passed two hours, but after restart it just sticked to 71/73, which made TM5 spew errors within minutes. Tried every method I could think of, including using different bios (901 with inserted UC 15 just bootloops lol), after a few hours of trials I gave up and just came back to 16-16-16.


----------



## pR1maL

BroadPwns said:


> Does anyone know how to actually control RTLs on Strix D4? Or is it just a big no-no in all Asus Z690?


Try disabling MRC fast boot in dram timings?


----------



## BroadPwns

pR1maL said:


> Try disabling MRC fast boot in dram timings?


No change, just a bootloop until recovery triggers.


----------



## truehighroller1

BroadPwns said:


> No change, just a bootloop until recovery triggers.


You can't set them manually. The only thing you can do is set your vcssa higher to get it to set tighter timings but only to an extent. You can't just keep upping it to get tighter timings or anything. Just if you set it to low it will set lower timings is all. You can turn off fast boot after adjusting it's voltage up to make it retrain.


----------



## BroadPwns

I see, thanks.


----------



## bscool

Just finished running Karhu and playing some CSGO and then ran Aida64 and y cruncher so # could probably be better on fresh reboot but they are what they are.

bios 9902 with ucode 15.

No binning cpu or mem I only bought 1 of each. MB is the key it looks like as original MB only did 6666c30.

Ram air cooled and cpucooler AIO ambient temp 72f.

New MB much more consistent with training memory and not needing to clear cmos when setting new timings.


----------



## Dewmgaze

Is Adaptive voltage mode just broken on these boards? The way I understand it, the "Additional Turbo Voltage" field of adaptive voltage should only take effect if, taken from Shaminos post (MCE explanations and others):

1) When cpu frequency is smaller than or equal to the highest default boost freq, for eg 5.3 on 10900k (lets call this p0 freq):
whatever you set as an adaptive voltage is ignored by the cpu since it only references its own native vf curve at freq <=p0freq

2) And even if you are at a freq higher than p0 freq, if you set a value that is smaller than its native p0 freq vid, this gets ignored too.


To break #1, I can set a 52 sync all cores, leave v/f point offsets all at 0, and do an adaptive voltage of say, 1.3. I can boot windows, change the adaptive slider in AI Suite, and watch voltage change. It shouldn't, per rule #1, 52x is below the OC ratio of 53x.

To break #2, if I boot with 54x4,53x8 per core oc, with adaptive of 1.4 set, and I update the v/f point offset #11 for the OC ratio so that it's total vid is 1.4, and then in AI Suite I can lower the adaptive slider, and watch voltage decrease, but it shouldn't because this value is lower than the v/f point.

Honestly, what is the point of adaptive voltage anyways? If it were working as expected, wouldn't you be able to achieve the same effect by just using v/f point offset on point #11?


----------



## bscool

Sharing this here if anyone wants to try it bios 9902 for Apex with ucode 15

Can be flashed via ez flash in bios no need for flashback. Use at your own risk.









9902uc15.cap


CAP File



1drv.ms


----------



## dante`afk

@bscool how do you see when the board was manufactured?


----------



## bscool

dante`afk said:


> @bscool how do you see when the board was manufactured?


On the box. I dont know for sure if that is what matters. Just what I saw testing my original MB vs this newer release.


----------



## jeiselramos

BroadPwns said:


> Does anyone know how to actually control RTLs on Strix D4? Or is it just a big no-no in all Asus Z690?


SenseAmp Offset Training disable and then set your initial and max value and offset 0


----------



## Silent Scone

pR1maL said:


> 12900k / Apex
> 2x16 G.Skill F5-6000U3636E 16GX2-TZ5RS (1.3v Samsung)
> 
> Switched to 2x16 F5-6400J3239G 16GX2-TZ5RK (1.4v Hynix).
> 
> 
> It feels like a lot of early adopters had a bad roll of the dice this round. And with the prices of everything right now, swapping parts out to find a weak link can be super expensive. I wouldn't let a stranger touch Samsung DDR5 with a ten foot pole, without warning them it might just be a snake. No way I'd even remotely recommend the 6000UE sticks to anyone.


My system at home is still using Samsung, it's used almost every day for work. Hynix does appear to be much easier to work with in terms of the need for gradual tuning. It's quite difficult to build a platform around different memory ICs if they differ too much


----------



## sblantipodi

is there someone who knows if Corsair 
*CMT32GX5M2X6200C36*
is Hynix?


----------



## bscool

sblantipodi said:


> is there someone who knows if Corsair
> *CMT32GX5M2X6200C36*
> is Hynix?


Looks hynix FEATURED - Corsair Dominator Platinum RGB 32GB DDR5-6200 CL36 - CMT32GX5M2X6200C36


----------



## BroadPwns

jeiselramos said:


> SenseAmp Offset Training disable and then set your initial and max value and offset 0


Ignores what I type there, unless it works on a different bios than 901.


----------



## owikh84

bscool said:


> On the box. I dont know for sure if that is what matters. Just what I saw testing my original MB vs this newer release.


I was wondering is there any 2022 manufactured Extreme available right now?
I am thinking to send my board (bought in 2021) for RMA, probably can fix my 6400+ issue.


----------



## bscool

owikh84 said:


> I was wondering is there any 2022 manufactured Extreme available right now?
> I am thinking to send my board (bought in 2021) for RMA, probably can fix my 6400+ issue.


I have no idea.


----------



## sblantipodi

can SPD Write Protection Disable cause RAM instability ?
is there some extreme overclockes here that have RGB on the RAM?


----------



## joneffingvo

sblantipodi said:


> can SPD Write Protection Disable cause RAM instability ?
> is there some extreme overclockes here that have RGB on the RAM?


I was worried about this too, but it had no effect on stability with my Corsair 6200 (32gb) RAM and is still stable


----------



## Dewmgaze

sblantipodi said:


> is there someone who knows if Corsair
> *CMT32GX5M2X6200C36*
> is Hynix?


I have this and mine is Hynix. I dunno if that means they're always Hynix though.


----------



## Silent Scone

owikh84 said:


> I was wondering is there any 2022 manufactured Extreme available right now?
> I am thinking to send my board (bought in 2021) for RMA, probably can fix my 6400+ issue.


The Extreme is only officially validated up to 6400


----------



## Nizzen

Cheap Dell 4800 Hynix on air:


----------



## SuperMumrik

Nizzen said:


> Cheap Dell 4800 Hynix on air


Yeah... Those Dell greens on Apex are completely insane!












Spoiler: 7000c30



If someone in Norway want's them, send me a DM =)


----------



## truehighroller1

SuperMumrik said:


> Yeah... Those Dell greens on Apex are completely insane!
> 
> View attachment 2550409
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: 7000c30
> 
> 
> 
> If someone in Norway want's them, send me a DM =)


What's your CPU sp's pcores and ecores?


----------



## darth_meh

ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX BIOS 1003
01. Improve system performance and Window 11 OS stability.

Does anyone happen to know what Windows 11 OS stability fixes were made in this BIOS?


----------



## truehighroller1

darth_meh said:


> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX BIOS 1003
> 01. Improve system performance and Window 11 OS stability.
> 
> Does anyone happen to know what Windows 11 OS stability fixes were made in this BIOS?


Probably the Unicode is updated but, that's my guess.


----------



## BroadPwns

12700k with pathetic 67 SP, G.Skill F4-3200C14D-16GTZR, 1201 bios, kit is BCPB, but Thaiphoon reports B1 PCB layer, ODT 80 Write, 60 Park, 0 Norm. Seems not all B-Die kits are born equal and I got a mediocre at most, 4133 MHz in G1 (didn't try G2, going for max performance, not clock) doesn't boot even with 1.4 V SA, 1.6 V DRAM and 1.52 V VDDQ. TM5 Absolut (default 1500% time) with just 3 cycles in 3:30 h, it's literally killing me. CPU is stock at the moment, as I have 85C with 173 W power draw in Cinebench R23 with a Liquid Freezer II 360 mm + Arctic MX5, there's a 0.1-0.2mm deep concavity, so combining with the flat surface of coolers block results in a rather poor contact. I thought of sanding it down but Raptor Lake is around the corner and I can't really decide because of that.










Which brings me to a point, where I think my previous "stable" 4000 15-16-15 one hour run of Absolut was actually a lie, as observing it now, each consequent test initial three took actually significantly more time and it didn't seem to be just skipping them. Though still unsure about the whole behaviour, as even voltages mentioned above didn't help, as well as no combination of ODT made them stable for even 10 minutes whatsoever with errors always in 1st or 4th test (while it was already deep into 6th) and I've tried literally every combination.


----------



## bscool

@BroadPwns I have no idea about bios 1201. There are a few people on this forum running 4000 to 4133c15 on bios 901 with DR b die on the Strix d4.

So you never could get bios 901 to work? Last bios I used was 901 as it was the best for DR b die.

The people I know still running Strix @geriatricpollywog and @Agent-A01 might have tested 1201 and can give you feedback.


----------



## BroadPwns

bscool said:


> @BroadPwns I have no idea about bios 1201. There are a few people on this forum running 4000 to 4133c15 on bios 901 with DR b die on the Strix d4.
> 
> So you never could get bios 901 to work? Last bios I used was 901 as it was the best for DR b die.
> 
> The people I know still running Strix @geriatricpollywog and @Agent-A01 might have tested 1201 and can give you feedback.


There's literally no difference in my case. Exactly same behaviour, exactly same capacities. Curiously enough, inserting microcode 15 delivered by Falkentyne and through his method made the motherboard to simply boot loop on CPU check (red LED). Didn't try with ordinary UBU method, but I honestly doubt it will create any miracle.


----------



## bscool

BroadPwns said:


> There's literally no difference in my case. Exactly same behaviour, exactly same capacities. Curiously enough, inserting microcode 15 delivered by Falkentyne and through his method made the motherboard to simply boot loop on CPU check (red LED). Didn't try with ordinary UBU method, but I honestly doubt it will create any miracle.


Might be your memory then. Have you tested it on other MB?

I have bunch of DR b die and my weakest kit could only do 4000c16-16-16 better kits did 4000c14 to 4133c15 on Strix d4.


----------



## BroadPwns

bscool said:


> Might be your memory then. Have you tested it on other MB?
> 
> I have bunch of DR b die and my weakest kit could only do 4000c16-16-16 better kits did 4000c14 to 4133c15 on Strix d4.


Only Z690-A Pro I didn't open yet.


----------



## bscool

BroadPwns said:


> Only Z690-A Pro I didn't open yet.


I notice you have sa at 1.25. I needed 1.35 sa to be stable but I also ran tigher timings. I know other guys like @geriatricpollywog and others running 4000+ run 1.35v sa on Strix with DRs.


----------



## BroadPwns

bscool said:


> I notice you have sa at 1.25. I needed 1.35 sa to be stable but I also ran tigher timings. I know other guys like @geriatricpollywog and others running 4000+ run 1.35v sa on Strix with DRs.


As I mentioned, raising SA to even 1.4 V did not produce any results better than I got right now, on any bios I've tried. I tried for two days straight with SA at 1.35V too.


----------



## bscool

BroadPwns said:


> As I mentioned, raising SA to even 1.4 V did not produce any results better than I got right now, on any bios I've tried. I tried for two days straight with SA at 1.35V too.


Ok I thought you were talking about for gear 2. Sounds like it is the memory then.

What is the plan to try the MSI and keep which ever is better?


----------



## BroadPwns

bscool said:


> Ok I thought you were talking about for gear 2. Sounds like it is the memory then.
> 
> What is the plan to try the MSI and keep which ever is better?


I was mostly curious about the Strix and tried finding any justification for its price so I took it for a test run, I'd be swapping to Z690-A Pro anyway, even if the MSI will do 3800 MHz at most. I am disappointed in memory sticks though.


----------



## bscool

BroadPwns said:


> I was mostly curious about the Strix and tried finding any justification for its price so I took it for a test run, I'd be swapping to Z690-A Pro anyway, even if the MSI will do 3800 MHz at most. I am disappointed in memory sticks though.


It could be the IMC too though. I helped a few people with mem oc on strix and most could at least boot 4133 but not all could get it stable. So if you cant even boot 4133 on bios 901 I would guess it is a combo of IMC and memory since you cant tighten 4000 up more than c17.


----------



## owikh84

Silent Scone said:


> The Extreme is only officially validated up to 6400


Yeah I know. But unfortunately my Extreme can only run up to 6200 stable.
The same CPU and RAM are able to run up to 6600 stable on the Hero.
I am looking for all 100k ~50ns in AIDA64 so aiming for at least 6400 on the Extreme.


----------



## joneffingvo

sblantipodi said:


> is there someone who knows if Corsair
> *CMT32GX5M2X6200C36*
> is Hynix?


That's the RAM i'm using and yes its Hynix


----------



## BroadPwns

Oh, I forgot to mention that I yeeted away mcupdate_genuineintel.dll, so only the bios' one would be injected, wonder how that affected memory OC, i remember it being 1A in there or something. Definitely higher hex than current 18. Can't find any repository containing AL microcodes though. I also have overvoltage Jumper on Enabled, but I doubt it does anything other than enable over 1.7 V on vcore.


----------



## owikh84

adna said:


> quick boot check (stable not test)
> 12900kf+strix-f
> Hynix 4x16GB @ 6400-30-38-38-28
> sa | mc | vdd/vddq/tx = 0.9 | 1.3 | 1.4
> View attachment 2550305


Well done mate! 
Managing to boot 4x16gb at 6000+ is amazing.


----------



## Lolinternets69

Hi everyone!
Long time lurker, decided to finally make an account here. I had a quick question, I just unboxed my z690 formula and noticed the above (circled in red). Looks to be like a switch vs a grounding point. Anyone else here have a formula they could take a peek at and see if the white metal part actually touches it?


----------



## Silent Scone

owikh84 said:


> Yeah I know. But unfortunately my Extreme can only run up to 6200 stable.
> The same CPU and RAM are able to run up to 6600 stable on the Hero.
> I am looking for all 100k ~50ns in AIDA64 so aiming for at least 6400 on the Extreme.


I would normally recommend aiming for one or two bins below the maximum validation on past generations, can’t really suggest Z690 is any different. That’s not to say these things aren’t possible - plenty of users running 6400 on the Extreme, but there’s always a reason why the validations stop where they do and why expectations need to be kept in check. 

Feature rich board often mean concessions sometimes need to be made that may impact signal inductance and crosstalk when compared to other SKUs, that’s why boards like the APEX exist in the first place.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

bscool said:


> @BroadPwns I have no idea about bios 1201. There are a few people on this forum running 4000 to 4133c15 on bios 901 with DR b die on the Strix d4.
> 
> So you never could get bios 901 to work? Last bios I used was 901 as it was the best for DR b die.
> 
> The people I know still running Strix @geriatricpollywog and @Agent-A01 might have tested 1201 and can give you feedback.


I haven't tested 1201 yet. I am using 0901.


bscool said:


> I notice you have sa at 1.25. I needed 1.35 sa to be stable but I also ran tigher timings. I know other guys like @geriatricpollywog and others running 4000+ run 1.35v sa on Strix with DRs.


I am running 1.45v at 4200 14-15-15. I just tested 1.35v and it BSODs in AIDA. 1.40V passes, but I haven't checked for stability:











Keep in mind, memory kit matters when it comes to speed, timings, and high voltage tolerance. That's why some B-die kits cost $250 and others cost $600. You can't beat yourself up over the extra 5% bandwidth and 1% fps if you have a regular memory kit.


----------



## BroadPwns

On a side note, Liquid Freezers II LGA 1700 kit comes with a little flaw. Blockpumps sledges are a little too long and their reach VRM heatsink and rest on it in two points, making terrible contact. Didn't notice it until now, when I disassemblied it for motherboard change. Will send photos to Arctic later on too. 90 C at 190W was way too high for LF II 360 mm, to be normal.


----------



## ikjadoon

BroadPwns said:


> On a side note, Liquid Freezers II LGA 1700 kit comes with a little flaw. Blockpumps sledges are a little too long and their reach VRM heatsink and rest on it in two points, making terrible contact. Didn't notice it until now, when I disassemblied it for motherboard change. Will send photos to Arctic later on too. 90 C at 190W was way too high for LF II 360 mm, to be normal.
> View attachment 2550463
> View attachment 2550464


Same (if we’re talking the black metal brackets) when using AC’s LGA1700 bracket on the Z690-I. I trimmed it off with a Dremel, going slow to avoid bending the bracket. AC should release a new revision.

Post-Dremel: 25C ambient, R23 10 min, PL2 = 4096W (actual was 200W+ but don’t remember), i7-12700K, MX-5, AC LF II 280, fans at 1500 RPM

72C avg core, 80C avg package


----------



## bscool

BroadPwns said:


> On a side note, Liquid Freezers II LGA 1700 kit comes with a little flaw. Blockpumps sledges are a little too long and their reach VRM heatsink and rest on it in two points, making terrible contact. Didn't notice it until now, when I disassemblied it for motherboard change. Will send photos to Arctic later on too. 90 C at 190W was way too high for LF II 360 mm, to be normal.
> View attachment 2550463
> View attachment 2550464


I am using Arctic AIO without issue on the Strix and have a friend also using it.

You do need to remove bottom cover though as it will hit.









ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II LGA1700 - User Manual


Get your ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II LGA1700 user manual. Detailed explanation with coloured schematics, photos, animations and videos.




support.arctic.de













ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II LGA1700 - User Manual


Get your ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II LGA1700 user manual. Detailed explanation with coloured schematics, photos, animations and videos.




support.arctic.de


----------



## BroadPwns

bscool said:


> I am using Arctic AIO without issue on the Strix and have a friend also using it.
> 
> You do need to remove bottom cover though as it will hit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II LGA1700 - User Manual
> 
> 
> Get your ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II LGA1700 user manual. Detailed explanation with coloured schematics, photos, animations and videos.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> support.arctic.de
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II LGA1700 - User Manual
> 
> 
> Get your ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II LGA1700 user manual. Detailed explanation with coloured schematics, photos, animations and videos.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> support.arctic.de


I did remove it and the sledges just ate into the radiator, as seen on my photos.


----------



## borant

BroadPwns said:


> I did remove it and the sledges just ate into the radiator, as seen on my photos.


I used ALF for a few months with similar issues and now swapped it for custom loop. The result is that I can now run 5.2 all cores with any kind of stress test limited by core current power limit only.
And of course other benefits like silent fans, RAM cooling and no hot air breathing from radiator. Pay once, cry once.


----------



## affxct

ProJewks said:


> so, I’ve ordered another set of trident z5 6000 c40 but these are J’s instead of U’s. I’m hoping they aren’t Samsung… I’m hoping they run stable. I tried last night with the ones I have at 6000, 5600, and even 5000MHz at VDD/VDDQ/VDDTX/MC at 1.35 and SA at 1.25. No luck. As soon as I launch a game computer freezes and I have to restart. Again everything is stock except for 12900k v cache at -50mV offset for temperature purposes.


They are Samsung. I actually liked my 6000U’s but a stick died. Going to try and get a full refund on them, but I’ve purchased Adata Lancer’s and I’m hoping they’re Hynix. G.Skill QC has sucked.


----------



## Agent-A01

bscool said:


> @BroadPwns I have no idea about bios 1201. There are a few people on this forum running 4000 to 4133c15 on bios 901 with DR b die on the Strix d4.
> 
> So you never could get bios 901 to work? Last bios I used was 901 as it was the best for DR b die.
> 
> The people I know still running Strix @geriatricpollywog and @Agent-A01 might have tested 1201 and can give you feedback.


I'm trying it now.

Was visited today by the random million errors bug.
Stable for well over a month tm5, memtest, y cruncher etc then had a 0x3b BSOD in a game.

Rebooted and checked TM5 and dozens of errors in a second.
No idea why that happens, doesn't make any sense..


----------



## bscool

Agent-A01 said:


> I'm trying it now.
> 
> Was visited today by the random million errors bug.
> Stable for well over a month tm5, memtest, y cruncher etc then had a 0x3b BSOD in a game.
> 
> Rebooted and checked TM5 and dozens of errors in a second.
> No idea why that happens, doesn't make any sense..


Which bios were you on when this happened?


----------



## Agent-A01

bscool said:


> Which bios were you on when this happened?


1003. Like I said, multiple passes stable. Same timings as usual with manual RTLs set as others reported it would not train correctly.

1203 is stable right now at stock so I'll check if previous timings are ok


----------



## BroadPwns

How can you even set RTLs manually, like what the heck. I've tried all tricks described here and it was either fail to POST or straight out ignored input. And it's like this on every bios, 0707 upwards.


----------



## bscool

BroadPwns said:


> How can you even set RTLs manually, like what the heck. I've tried all tricks described here and it was either fail to POST or straight out ignored input. And it's like this on every bios, 0707 upwards.


Here is how I set them. 

But best solution I found is not use bios 1003 and stayed on 901 and I had no issues or need to set RTLs.











ASUS ROG Strix Z690-A Gaming WiFi D4 Thread


Guys I just figured out why windows 11 or windows 10 couldn’t see my drive when trying to instal windows it was becuase I had Intel rst enabled. This YouTube video is super helpful for anyone just starting up. You know I should have said something about that. I screwed around with that and...




www.overclock.net


----------



## BroadPwns

bscool said:


> Here is how I set them.
> 
> But best solution I found is not use bios 1003 and stayed on 901 and I had no issues or need to set RTLs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ASUS ROG Strix Z690-A Gaming WiFi D4 Thread
> 
> 
> Guys I just figured out why windows 11 or windows 10 couldn’t see my drive when trying to instal windows it was becuase I had Intel rst enabled. This YouTube video is super helpful for anyone just starting up. You know I should have said something about that. I screwed around with that and...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net


71/73 is pretty much what board keep throwing in with tCL of 15, can you try to set it to 73/73 through this method and report back what timings you got?


----------



## bscool

BroadPwns said:


> 71/73 is pretty much what board keep throwing in with tCL of 15, can you try to set it to 73/73 through this method and report back what timings you got?


Rtls have to be set according to your frequency and timings.

When I tested 4133c15 I could set them to 71/71/71/71(edit might have been with 4133c14, cant remember).

I am not on Stix ddr4 right now as I only have 1 12900k and it is in Apex.

I looked at your timings from the other day and 73 will not work. 75/75/75/75 might work or 77/77/77/77

You have to stay within the window that they are when on auto. Or post your new timings and show memtweakit and I can help you if you show last screen with rtls.









[OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread


@bscool how do you see when the board was manufactured? On the box. I dont know for sure if that is what matters. Just what I saw testing my original MB vs this newer release.




www.overclock.net


----------



## BroadPwns

bscool said:


> Rtls have to be set according to your frequency and timings.
> 
> When I tested 4133c15 I could set them to 71/71/71/71(edit might have been with 4133c14, cant remember).
> 
> I am not on Stix ddr4 right now as I only have 1 12900k and it is in Apex.
> 
> I looked at your timings from the other day and 73 will not work. 75/75/75/75 might work or 77/77/77/77
> 
> You have to stay within the window that they are when on auto. Or post your new timings and show memtweakit and I can help you if you show last screen with rtls.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread
> 
> 
> @bscool how do you see when the board was manufactured? On the box. I dont know for sure if that is what matters. Just what I saw testing my original MB vs this newer release.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net


And that's exactly why I said setting RTLs does not work. Either it's 1:1 what auto sets or it's "dead". There's no margin at all. Plus, if I input minimum 73, maksimum 75, offset 0 it will do 71 anyway.


----------



## bscool

BroadPwns said:


> And that's exactly why I said setting RTLs does not work. Either it's 1:1 what auto sets or it's "dead". There's no margin at all.


You have always had to set rtls according to frequency and timings. It is a waste of timing setting them on z690 but you keep asking about it so I told you how to do it.


----------



## BroadPwns

bscool said:


> You have always had to set rtls according to frequency and timings. It is a waste of timing setting them on z690 but you keep asking about it so I told you how to do it.


Forgot to write that setting "range" is ignored anyway. Always? Far from it. Z97 and Z390 allowed to modify RTL in a range of at least 2 of what motherboard suggested on auto settings. Disabling the trainings simply locked RTLs to 73 on 1st bank and 81 to 2nd, any input was ignored, so...


----------



## Delpize

Does anyone have information about, how much fps min would difference between 7000mhz c32 and 3733c13, lets consider as 11900k and 12900k are same performance, please tag me


----------



## BroadPwns

Delpize said:


> Does anyone have information about, how much fps min would difference between 7000mhz c32 and 3733c13, lets consider as 11900k and 12900k are same performance, please tag me


It's enough saying 12900k decimates 117... pardon, 11900k on a simple 5600 MHz XMP.


----------



## safedisk

*ROG MAXIMUS Z690 Series Beta Bios 1302*

01. Improve system compatibility.
02. Improve system performance.

ROG MAXIMUS Z690 HERO BETA BIOS 1302

ROG MAXIMUS Z690 FORMULA BETA BIOS 1302

ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX BETA BIOS 1302

ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME BETA BIOS 1302

ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME GLACIAL BETA BIOS 1302


----------



## edkieferlp

Agent-A01 said:


> 1003. Like I said, multiple passes stable. Same timings as usual with manual RTLs set as others reported it would not train correctly.
> 
> 1203 is stable right now at stock so I'll check if previous timings are ok


What do you think happened, did you try bios reset then with the same settings?
Is it possible bios got corrupted if the above was tried.


----------



## Delpize

BroadPwns said:


> It's enough saying 12900k decimates 117... pardon, 11900k on a simple 5600 MHz XMP.


Sorry but what?


----------



## BroadPwns

Delpize said:


> Sorry but what?


What what? 12900k alone runs circles around 11900k without any superb RAM overclocking.


----------



## Afferin

safedisk said:


> View attachment 2550553
> 
> 
> 
> *ROG MAXIMUS Z690 Series Beta Bios 1302*
> 
> 01. Improve system compatibility.
> 02. Improve system performance.
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 HERO BETA BIOS 1302
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 FORMULA BETA BIOS 1302
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX BETA BIOS 1302
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME BETA BIOS 1302
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME GLACIAL BETA BIOS 1302


SafeDisk? More like SafeDisPC! This update allowed me to bump up my CPU OC by 100MHz all-around for the same voltage. Still can't get 1T or 6800 on my RAM, but I'll take a free CPU performance bump! Thanks!

Edit: I lied. I have, for the first time ever, booted 6800. Will test stability.


----------



## db000

safedisk said:


> View attachment 2550553
> 
> 
> 
> *ROG MAXIMUS Z690 Series Beta Bios 1302*
> 
> 01. Improve system compatibility.
> 02. Improve system performance.
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 HERO BETA BIOS 1302
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 FORMULA BETA BIOS 1302
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX BETA BIOS 1302
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME BETA BIOS 1302
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME GLACIAL BETA BIOS 1302


AWESOME! I love this picture!   Gorgeous looking MB 
Testing now


----------



## Nikos4Life

safedisk said:


> View attachment 2550553
> 
> 
> 
> *ROG MAXIMUS Z690 Series Beta Bios 1302*
> 
> 01. Improve system compatibility.
> 02. Improve system performance.
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 HERO BETA BIOS 1302
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 FORMULA BETA BIOS 1302
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX BETA BIOS 1302
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME BETA BIOS 1302
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME GLACIAL BETA BIOS 1302


Good afternoon, 

thanks for sharing this new BIOS. Unfortunately on my board (ASUS Extreme) it doesn't seem to fix the issues with RAM compatibility and its XMP profiles. 

I have 2 DDR5 kits currently: 

Gskill 6000 CL36
Corsair 6200 CL36 

I have changed the CPU (12900K SP80 -> 12900K-> SP 86 (P96/E68)) 

As we speak I am trying to pass 1 hour RAM Test with the following values: 

Corsair 6200 CL36 - (XMP1 -> 36-39-39-76- TRC 115 - TRFC 911 - 2T- GM2)

SA Voltage -> 1.30 V
VDDQ TX Voltage -> 1.40V
VDD Voltage -> 1.40V 
VDDQ Voltage -> 1.35V 


It seems a bit random the error issue, if I may. 

I'm not clear if it's a CPU, board or memory problem. 

Is there any tool to modify the RAM voltages without having to go to the BIOS? It would help to be able to find the correct value more quickly. 

I have used AI Suite in the past but not that it has been to my liking. 
If I can avoid having to install it and use a simpler tool that would be great. 


CPU Settings: 

No OC yet, Asus MCE Auto, LLC Level 4

Thanks for helping here!


----------



## db000

Nikos4Life said:


> Good afternoon,
> 
> thanks for sharing this new BIOS. Unfortunately on my board (ASUS Extreme) it doesn't seem to fix the issues with RAM compatibility and its XMP profiles.
> 
> I have 2 DDR5 kits currently:
> 
> Gskill 6000 CL36
> Corsair 6200 CL36
> 
> I have changed the CPU (12900K SP80 -> 12900K-> SP 86 (P96/E68))
> 
> As we speak I am trying to pass 1 hour RAM Test with the following values:
> 
> Corsair 6200 CL36 - (XMP1 -> 36-39-39-76- TRC 115 - TRFC 911 - 2T- GM2)
> 
> SA Voltage -> 1.30 V
> VDDQ TX Voltage -> 1.40V
> VDD Voltage -> 1.40V
> VDDQ Voltage -> 1.35V
> 
> 
> It seems a bit random the error issue, if I may.
> 
> I'm not clear if it's a CPU, board or memory problem.
> 
> Is there any tool to modify the RAM voltages without having to go to the BIOS? It would help to be able to find the correct value more quickly.
> 
> I have used AI Suite in the past but not that it has been to my liking.
> If I can avoid having to install it and use a simpler tool that would be great.
> 
> 
> CPU Settings:
> 
> No OC yet, Asus MCE Auto, LLC Level 4
> 
> Thanks for helping here!


You can Download OCTool from here, latest is OcTool0208. Works on Asus boards.









OC_Tool


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com





Start Tool.exe and Go to Intel -> DDR5 PMIC for voltage control. Verify change in HWinfo.


----------



## bastian

safedisk said:


> View attachment 2550553
> 
> 
> 
> *ROG MAXIMUS Z690 Series Beta Bios 1302*
> 
> 01. Improve system compatibility.
> 02. Improve system performance.
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 HERO BETA BIOS 1302
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 FORMULA BETA BIOS 1302
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX BETA BIOS 1302
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME BETA BIOS 1302
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME GLACIAL BETA BIOS 1302


Very good BIOS


----------



## bastian

Nikos4Life said:


> Good afternoon,
> 
> thanks for sharing this new BIOS. Unfortunately on my board (ASUS Extreme) it doesn't seem to fix the issues with RAM compatibility and its XMP profiles.
> 
> I have 2 DDR5 kits currently:
> 
> Gskill 6000 CL36
> Corsair 6200 CL36
> 
> I have changed the CPU (12900K SP80 -> 12900K-> SP 86 (P96/E68))
> 
> As we speak I am trying to pass 1 hour RAM Test with the following values:
> 
> Corsair 6200 CL36 - (XMP1 -> 36-39-39-76- TRC 115 - TRFC 911 - 2T- GM2)
> 
> SA Voltage -> 1.30 V
> VDDQ TX Voltage -> 1.40V
> VDD Voltage -> 1.40V
> VDDQ Voltage -> 1.35V
> 
> 
> It seems a bit random the error issue, if I may.
> 
> I'm not clear if it's a CPU, board or memory problem.
> 
> Is there any tool to modify the RAM voltages without having to go to the BIOS? It would help to be able to find the correct value more quickly.
> 
> I have used AI Suite in the past but not that it has been to my liking.
> If I can avoid having to install it and use a simpler tool that would be great.
> 
> 
> CPU Settings:
> 
> No OC yet, Asus MCE Auto, LLC Level 4
> 
> Thanks for helping here!


It is entirely possible you got some bad ram. I would exchange the Corsair for a new kit at the retailer if you can or RMA with Corsair.


----------



## CptSpig

Nikos4Life said:


> Good afternoon,
> 
> thanks for sharing this new BIOS. Unfortunately on my board (ASUS Extreme) it doesn't seem to fix the issues with RAM compatibility and its XMP profiles.
> 
> I have 2 DDR5 kits currently:
> 
> Gskill 6000 CL36
> Corsair 6200 CL36
> 
> Is there any tool to modify the RAM voltages without having to go to the BIOS? It would help to be able to find the correct value more quickly.


XMP is not a guarantee to work on any board. Use the memtest86 in the bios that way you do not corrupt the OS while tunning your memory. The way I tune my memory is to clear the c'mos power off the PW and then power back on boot into the bios. F5 optimize defaults F10 save and restart into the bios. Set the dram frequency to 6000 for your G.skill or 6200 for Corsair. Now go to timings and set Sync all PMIC and set voltages. Boot into windows and check to see if it is running at the desired frequency. If everything is ok boot back into windows and start tuning primary first and get stable. Now secondaries and then tertiary.


----------



## borant

Nikos4Life said:


> It seems a bit random the error issue, if I may.
> 
> I'm not clear if it's a CPU, board or memory problem.


What is happening "random"-ly? Is it like sometimes test is successful but another time detecting errors after 15-30 min?
If so then it seems like temperature related stability issues, try to put any fan over DIMMs and compare results.
I initially tried fan first and now put RAM on water cooling - the infamous in this thread issue with one day stable/another day failing is now completely gone for me.


----------



## sblantipodi

owikh84 said:


> Yeah I know. But unfortunately my Extreme can only run up to 6200 stable.
> The same CPU and RAM are able to run up to 6600 stable on the Hero.
> I am looking for all 100k ~50ns in AIDA64 so aiming for at least 6400 on the Extreme.


hero runs memory better than Extreme. so many people saying the same.
can Asus explain why?
I think that Extreme users deserves an explanations.


----------



## bscool

Apex bios 1302 with ucode 15

I just did some short testing and so far both with original ucode 18 and the u code 15 work fine for me.

Edit can be flashed via EZ flash in bios so Flashback is not a requirement even though modded









1302 ucode15.cap


CAP File



1drv.ms


----------



## darth_meh

safedisk said:


> *ROG MAXIMUS Z690 Series Beta Bios 1302*
> 
> 01. Improve system compatibility.
> 02. Improve system performance.


Gotta love these detailed release notes.


----------



## truehighroller1

darth_meh said:


> Gotta love these detailed release notes.


It's literally the same pos bios.

I went from 6400 xmp II to 5900 to 5800 finally, stable 🤣.

What a waste of money wow. Literally ddr4 z690 is better by, far.


----------



## Agent-A01

edkieferlp said:


> What do you think happened, did you try bios reset then with the same settings?
> Is it possible bios got corrupted if the above was tried.


No chance BIOS is corrupted.
Those settings were stable for a long time. I always load defaults when updating bios.

Updated BIOS to 1203 and the same behavior, previous stable settings are not stable anymore.

Just going from 4133 > 4100 fixes the mass amount of errors.

Weird stuff for sure


----------



## lowmotion

@safedisk 

Any z690-I Bios on the way?


----------



## Ghoosti

bastian said:


> Very good BIOS


I'm in the same Mobo Ram configuration as you and I can't even boot in 6200 36-39-39-76 2T @ 1.3v or 1.4 or 1.435
The same RAM to boot has 6600 on an APEX with no issues, so I don't think it's down to RAM.
I know that the Extreme is less efficient than the Apex but I thought that 6200 or 6400 was possible with +- normal timings and voltage.

would you mind sharing your .cmo file?

thank you for your help


----------



## sblantipodi

Ghoosti said:


> I know that the Extreme is less efficient than the Apex but I thought that 6200 or 6400 was possible with +- normal timings and voltage.


Extreme is less efficient than the entire lineup xD


----------



## Ghoosti

sblantipodi said:


> Extreme is less efficient than the entire lineup xD


Yes I know, I've been following the forum for quite a while.
Je ne cherche pas l'OC maximum car je suis novice, c'est pourquoi 6000 ou 6200 ou 6400 me convient avec des timings serrés si possible.
There are so many settings in the bios that I may be missing something ?


----------



## owikh84

Ghoosti said:


> I'm in the same Mobo Ram configuration as you and I can't even boot in 6200 36-39-39-76 2T @ 1.3v or 1.4 or 1.435
> The same RAM to boot has *6600 on an APEX* with no issues, so I don't think it's down to RAM.
> I know that the Extreme is less efficient than the Apex but I thought that 6200 or 6400 was possible with +- normal timings and voltage.
> 
> would you mind sharing your .cmo file?
> 
> thank you for your help


Is your Apex manufactured in year 2022? Check on the label.


----------



## edkieferlp

Agent-A01 said:


> No chance BIOS is corrupted.
> Those settings were stable for a long time. I always load defaults when updating bios.
> 
> Updated BIOS to 1203 and the same behavior, previous stable settings are not stable anymore.
> 
> Just going from 4133 > 4100 fixes the mass amount of errors.
> 
> Weird stuff for sure


yeah, that is weird, sounds like something is degrading, maybe the memory controller or some component (like caps) on MB.
Are you running real high for Vdimms, SA ?
This platform theirs not much info on SA ceiling.

Yet we are only into few months run time so not much, you might of just been on the edge before.


----------



## Ghoosti

owikh84 said:


> Is your Apex manufactured in year 2022? Check on the label.


I don't have the APEX but an EXTREME from 2021.
I tried my Corsair 6200 on a friend's APEX to see if it worked properly.


----------



## safedisk

*ROG STRIX Z690 Series Beta Bios 1302*

01. Improve system compatibility.
02. Improve system performance.

ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI BETA BIOS 1302

ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4 BETA BIOS 1301

ROG STRIX Z690-E GAMING WIFI BETA BIOS 1302

ROG STRIX Z690-F GAMING WIFI BETA BIOS 1302

ROG STRIX Z690-G GAMING WIFI BETA BIOS 1302

ROG STRIX Z690-I GAMING WIFI BETA BIOS 1302


----------



## stahlhart

Getting some ACPI Event ID 15s for an embedded controller now (beta BIOS 1302, Strix-E).

Edit: above problem appears to have corrected somehow, for now anyway. Not seeing any significant performance gains, but stability as good if not better than 1003.


----------



## dante`afk

anyone able to run this through asus? no zero and O combination works


----------



## Zaudi

owikh84 said:


> Yeah I know. But unfortunately my Extreme can only run up to 6200 stable.
> The same CPU and RAM are able to run up to 6600 stable on the Hero.
> I am looking for all 100k ~50ns in AIDA64 so aiming for at least 6400 on the Extreme.


same here.
My Hero performs overall better than my Formula


----------



## TZeroBR

Zaudi said:


> same here.
> My Hero performs overall better than my Formula



Today, EVERYTHING is a matter of luck (washing machines, cars, refrigerators, wives...)
As soon as I received my Z690 FORMULA, I dismantled all the aesthetic fairing, installed a cooler on the PCH, TeamGroup 6200CL38 memory, RTX 3090 and intel 12900KF with BIOS 811 (overclocked to 5.7 boost and 5.3 normal). The only thing I always demanded was PSU above 1000W (today, Corsair HXi1200)
Since always it runs without any problems or any fluctuation. (I better keep it a secret)


----------



## Nikos4Life

Hi there,

Does anyone knows if all the problems to get the Asus Extreme MB to work with RAM above 6200 whether it is related to the date of manufacture of the board?

Shall we expect this to get better through BIOS update? 

Thanks


----------



## Pauliesss

I actually wanted to build a new PC with Z690 APEX + G.SKILL 32GB KIT DDR5 6400MHz CL32 Trident Z5 but after the discussion I've seen online I'm a bit worried about the RAM stability. Shall I go with MSI Unify instead?


----------



## Nizzen

Nikos4Life said:


> Hi there,
> 
> Does anyone knows if all the problems to get the Asus Extreme MB to work with RAM above 6200 whether it is related to the date of manufacture of the board?
> 
> Shall we expect this to get better through BIOS update?
> 
> Thanks


Combination of many factors. 4 slot motherboard, imc, knowledge and userfailure.


----------



## Dewmgaze

Nizzen said:


> Combination of many factors. 4 slot motherboard, imc, knowledge and userfailure.


Plenty of Strix boards out there doing 6400 and 6600. I don't think the 4 dimm really affects anything lower than 6600.
Personally I've tested 2 Strix-E boards, 2 12900ks, and a samsung and hynix ram kits, in various combinations. I was stuck at 6200 and still getting errors with most combinations, but the new 12900k solved it, same board same kit was immediately able to be stabilized at 6600 and then timings tightened down. The only other change made was I removed the 1mm washers on the ILM mod, due to a couple people here suggesting CPU mounting pressure may have a negative impact on DRAM frequency. So for me it was either the IMC or removing the washers that let my same Strix-E board easily break past 6200.

Pic of me at 6666mhz, which was able to pass 6 hours of TM5 and several OCCT, but would crap out sometimes in y-cruncher, so I settled at 6600 which can pass a pi5b (123 seconds)


----------



## Zaudi

Dewmgaze said:


> […] 2 12900ks, […]
> View attachment 2550777


KS? Are you sure?


----------



## Dewmgaze

Zaudi said:


> KS? Are you sure?


12900k, plural, I had 2 of them, so 12900Ks. It's there in the context.


----------



## sblantipodi

Hynix is so much easyer on 4 sticks... hope to get a decent frequency...
Samsung doesn't work at all on my Extreme, no matter the frequency, the settings, the latency.


----------



## shrimpmaster

safedisk said:


> View attachment 2550650
> 
> 
> *ROG STRIX Z690 Series Beta Bios 1302*
> 
> 01. Improve system compatibility.
> 02. Improve system performance.
> 
> ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI BETA BIOS 1302
> 
> ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4 BETA BIOS 1301
> 
> ROG STRIX Z690-E GAMING WIFI BETA BIOS 1302
> 
> ROG STRIX Z690-F GAMING WIFI BETA BIOS 1302
> 
> ROG STRIX Z690-G GAMING WIFI BETA BIOS 1302
> 
> ROG STRIX Z690-I GAMING WIFI BETA BIOS 1302


Any chance we can get Z690-TUF D4?


----------



## SuperMumrik

Testing 1302 with ucode 15


----------



## 7empe

1302 on Apex has the same bug as previous versions. When on Adaptive voltage, the per-core E-Core multiplier is fixed to 128.


----------



## Hyper2020

Finally got my Apex and was hoping for a fresh batch of 22 but got 2021-11. I hope there will be no serious problems with it when overclocking memory. At least another month to wait until the memory comes and I can collect and test.


----------



## Mappi75

Where can i see the production date of the Apex?
On the label there is no date...


----------



## Hyper2020

Mappi75 said:


> Where can i see the production date of the Apex?
> On the label there is no date...


Year and month


----------



## Agent-A01

edkieferlp said:


> yeah, that is weird, sounds like something is degrading, maybe the memory controller or some component (like caps) on MB.
> Are you running real high for Vdimms, SA ?
> This platform theirs not much info on SA ceiling.
> 
> Yet we are only into few months run time so not much, you might of just been on the edge before.


Well I found out that one of the ram sticks heatsinks wasn't making contact to the ICs, so that explains the memory errors.
Mem voltage has only been 1.51~ and SA 1.435(around 1.42 real voltage)

But now I'm on bios 1301 and it will not post past 4000.. 

Has my chip degraded? I don't know because bios 1301 sucks for me.
Anyone else tried it? Seems like the same **** as the bios after 707, where it would not post past 4000..

P.S. Another noctua fan bites the dust. This is the 4th noctua NF-A12 that's died from repeated posting(trying to post 4133).


----------



## nickolp1974

SuperMumrik said:


> Testing 1302 with ucode 15
> View attachment 2550792


thats impresive, whats your cooling???


----------



## Self Tapper

safedisk said:


> View attachment 2550553
> 
> 
> 
> *ROG MAXIMUS Z690 Series Beta Bios 1302*
> 
> 01. Improve system compatibility.
> 02. Improve system performance.
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 HERO BETA BIOS 1302
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 FORMULA BETA BIOS 1302
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX BETA BIOS 1302
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME BETA BIOS 1302
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME GLACIAL BETA BIOS 1302


Not keen on the Hero flavour of this one. Flashed, reset, and then manually re-entered the same settings that have been 100% stable since 1003. Initially seemed okay, and then found that the system wouldn't resume from sleep (0x97 Q-Code every time). And then experienced a couple of IRQL_NOT_LESS (etc) BSODs while the system was idling. 

Have flashed back to 1003 for the time being. Will try 1302 over the weekend again and see if I can narrow down the source(s) of the problem.


----------



## sblantipodi

SuperMumrik said:


> Testing 1302 with ucode 15
> View attachment 2550792


never used ycruncher before, is it a test for memory or cpu? or both?
it is just to measure performance or for stability?

where can I get the "asus version"?


----------



## SuperMumrik

nickolp1974 said:


> thats impresive, whats your cooling???


Water @10C ish (chilled)
Edit: That 0C is bugged


----------



## SuperMumrik

sblantipodi said:


> never used ycruncher before, is it a test for memory or cpu? or both?
> it is just to measure performance or for stability?
> 
> where can I get the "asus version"?


It's a benchmark, but it's quite the load on cpu and memory. I pulled north of 400Watts there


----------



## nickolp1974

SuperMumrik said:


> Water @10C ish (chilled)
> Edit: That 0C is bugged


v. nice cpu even at that temp


----------



## Dewmgaze

Agent-A01 said:


> This is the 4th noctua NF-A12 that's died from repeated posting


Why does posting cause these fans to die?


----------



## bscool

Pauliesss said:


> I actually wanted to build a new PC with Z690 APEX + G.SKILL 32GB KIT DDR5 6400MHz CL32 Trident Z5 but after the discussion I've seen online I'm a bit worried about the RAM stability. Shall I go with MSI Unify instead?


Do you want to run more than 6400+ easily? Then safe bet is Unify itx or Unify X.

Ok binning boards or trying to get 2022 Apex then buy Apex.

I was in the same spot debating between Apex and Unify X and I bought Apex. Was limited to 6400 for Karhu and games stable. Could get 6666 Karhu Stable but crashed out of CSGO. New 2022 Apex with same mem and cpu 7000c32 Karhu, y cruncher and games stable.

If you can get a good Apex it is amazing. Get one not so good past 6400 will test your patients  Maybe you need that in your life? learning patients


----------



## bscool

sblantipodi said:


> never used ycruncher before, is it a test for memory or cpu? or both?
> it is just to measure performance or for stability?
> 
> where can I get the "asus version"?








BenchMate







benchmate.org





It has many test/benches built in. You need to use benchmate to see detailed results like he showed.

Hit f6 at end of run to display detailed results.

Y cruncher will stress/test both cpu and mem. I like to use it as a quick way to test a memory oc before running longer memests.


----------



## sblantipodi

SuperMumrik said:


> It's a benchmark, but it's quite the load on cpu and memory. I pulled north of 400Watts there


where can I download the rog version?

the one I found on google


y-cruncher - A Multi-Threaded Pi Program


seems very different from what I see in the screenshots here.


----------



## sblantipodi

bscool said:


> BenchMate
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> benchmate.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It has many test/benches built in. You need to use benchmate to see detailed results like he showed.
> 
> Hit f6 at end of run to display detailed results.
> 
> Y cruncher will stress/test both cpu and mem. I like to use it as a quick way to test a memory oc before running loner memests.


thanks!!!


----------



## Pauliesss

bscool said:


> Do you want to run more than 6400+ easily? Then safe bet is Unify itx or Unify X.
> 
> Ok binning boards or trying to get 2022 Apex then buy Apex.
> 
> I was in the same spot debating between Apex and Unify X and I bought Apex. Was limited to 6400 for Karhu and games stable. Could get 6666 Karhu Stable but crashed out of CSGO. New 2022 Apex with same mem and cpu 7000c32 Karhu, y cruncher and games stable.
> 
> If you can get a good Apex it is amazing. Get one not so good past 6400 will test your patients  Maybe you need that in your life? learning patients


Haha, yeah, maybe I really need that in my life. Thanks for your reply.


----------



## edkieferlp

Agent-A01 said:


> Well I found out that one of the ram sticks heatsinks wasn't making contact to the ICs, so that explains the memory errors.
> Mem voltage has only been 1.51~ and SA 1.435(around 1.42 real voltage)
> 
> But now I'm on bios 1301 and it will not post past 4000..
> 
> Has my chip degraded? I don't know because bios 1301 sucks for me.
> Anyone else tried it? Seems like the same **** as the bios after 707, where it would not post past 4000..
> 
> P.S. Another noctua fan bites the dust. This is the 4th noctua NF-A12 that's died from repeated posting(trying to post 4133).


Well that is good you found the issue and that makes sense since B die is temp sensitive.

I am still on 707 bios and so far all is good, nothing funny (knock on wood) but I am not pushing the system as hard as others.
CPU P cores (50,50,49,49,48,47), E cores 38, ring 38 and mem at [email protected]
I am on NH-U14S cooler, if I stay away from AVX heavy loads temps are below 70 in CB2x, Y cruncher etc.


----------



## Agent-A01

Dewmgaze said:


> Why does posting cause these fans to die?


I have no idea.
The tuf I had killed 3 fans and the Strix-a killed this one.
So board issues or fan PWM controller susceptible to failure? Idk, I'm gonna email noctua.



edkieferlp said:


> Well that is good you found the issue and that makes sense since B die is temp sensitive.
> 
> I am still on 707 bios and so far all is good, nothing funny (knock on wood) but I am not pushing the system as hard as others.
> CPU P cores (50,50,49,49,48,47), E cores 38, ring 38 and mem at [email protected]
> I am on NH-U14S cooler, if I stay away from AVX heavy loads temps are below 70 in CB2x, Y cruncher etc.


Well It's probably fixed If i were to return to an older bios. I won't know until then. But at this point I'm tired of messing with it.
If others say it doesn't work well(bios 1301) for them either I may revert.

I do know that I couldn't post 4133 or 4100 on the TUF(still have it on a bench setup) with bios 1201 so I'd suggest avoiding that update too


----------



## Tibby67

All good here z690 Asus Extreme


----------



## sugi0lover

I posted this OC result with ASUS Z690 EXTREME at DDR5 forum before (not my result)
Even though it's 4 slot mb, 6600 1T was done nicely.

Bios Ver. 1101 / SA1.3 / MC 1.4 / VDD 1.58 / VDDQ 1.53


----------



## owikh84

Delete


----------



## MarkDeMark

Delete


----------



## MarkDeMark

sugi0lover said:


> I posted this OC result with ASUS Z690 EXTREME at DDR5 forum before (not my result)
> Even though it's 4 slot mb, 6600 1T was done nicely.
> 
> Bios Ver. 1101 / SA1.3 / MC 1.4 / VDD 1.58 / VDDQ 1.53
> View attachment 2550833
> 
> View attachment 2550834


*F5-6666* @sugi0lover - 6666 new product?


----------



## sugi0lover

MarkDeMark said:


> *F5-6666* @sugi0lover - 6666 new product?


I don't know. It's not my OC. I shared the result from the other PC forum.


----------



## owikh84

MarkDeMark said:


> *F5-6666* @sugi0lover - 6666 new product?


CPU ES + RAM ES + Mobo ES


----------



## sblantipodi

is there someone who tried the new beta, is there some improvements on the extreme or it is the same thing if not worse?


----------



## 七海nana7mi

owikh84 said:


> It's combo of IMC + RAM + mobo. If possible try to get the 2022 Apex/Extreme.
> 
> 2021 Apex/Extreme + strong IMC + strong RAM = OK
> 2022 Apex/Extreme + strong IMC + strong RAM = even better
> 2021 Apex/Extreme + weak IMC + strong RAM = bad
> 2021 Apex/Extreme + strong IMC + weak RAM = bad
> 2022 Apex/Extreme + strong/weak IMC/RAM = OK
> 
> Why only Apex & Extreme are affected? Coincidentally Apex & Extreme are manufactured under ASUS Auto-Extreme process.
> 
> ES vs retail? So far only retail 2021 Apex & Extreme are affected. 2021 ES no issues.
> 
> Why manufacturing date suddenly appeared on the box label for 2022 manufactured boards? There must be a reason.


spreading such false rumors may make u unpopular user of ASUS


----------



## Nizzen

owikh84 said:


> CPU ES + RAM ES + Mobo ES


It's the friend of Safedisk. That's why everything is ES


----------



## Mappi75

Hyper2020 said:


> Year and month


Strange..on my package the is noch such production date - never saw this on a package from asus (EU/Germany).
But my Apex got the first bios so i think it must be an old one.

Edit:
the package got the same label with all infomation but the part with the production code is not mentioned - its complete blank..


----------



## DoomDash

New to this thread: Asus Strix-E here. For the life of me couldn't get XMP stable anywhere near the rated speeds (6000). I've tried raising voltages in a few places and no dice. I have got it stable at 5400MHZ but anymore and nothing but memtest errors and stability issues. Running the latest beta firmware. Hopefully this can be sorted out in BIOS updates? 

Also this may be off topic and a stupid question, but I noticed my highest cpu 3dmark score was when I ran 3dmark successful once at 6000MHZ. Is there a direct correlation between memory and CPU performance?


----------



## D-EJ915

Mappi75 said:


> Strange..on my package the is noch such production date - never saw this on a package from asus (EU/Germany).
> But my Apex got the first bios so i think it must be an old one.
> 
> Edit:
> the package got the same label with all infomation but the part with the production code is not mentioned - its complete blank..


neither of mine had production information there, it is a california warning message instead


----------



## stahlhart

DoomDash said:


> New to this thread: Asus Strix-E here. For the life of me couldn't get XMP stable anywhere near the rated speeds (6000). I've tried raising voltages in a few places and no dice. I have got it stable at 5400MHZ but anymore and nothing but memtest errors and stability issues. Running the latest beta firmware. Hopefully this can be sorted out in BIOS updates?
> 
> Also this may be off topic and a stupid question, but I noticed my highest cpu 3dmark score was when I ran 3dmark successful once at 6000MHZ. Is there a direct correlation between memory and CPU performance?


I have 6000 stable on this motherboard with a 5600 kit using manual settings. Recommend setting SA to offset mode with auto value (should result in about 0.92V), and bumping up VDD, VDDQ and PMIC voltages slightly.(mine are at 1.275V, 1.275V and 1.25V, respectively).

If you do get it working, I would like to compare notes on latency -- I currently have a floor of about 62-63nS that I can't get under, and am trying to see if it's the board or the memory.


----------



## Mappi75

Sorry, short question:

the* ram voltage is* in my* Apex Bios limited to 1,4350v* ? I cant go higher?
What did i have to change? Thanks! (1101 Bios / G.Skill 32GB 6400 at 6666)

Edit: ok HW Info shows only 1,395v - should i dont use the xmp profile and set all manual?
And then the voltages goes higher?

BTW: i used the RDR2 bench for testing ram stability and it was the first game which crashes (with ultra details maxed out all),
the i found out it was not the RAM. I replaced the nvngx_dlss.dll with a newer version 2.3.7 and now bench and game runs stable.
Not ram related problem.


----------



## Nizzen

DoomDash said:


> New to this thread: Asus Strix-E here. For the life of me couldn't get XMP stable anywhere near the rated speeds (6000). I've tried raising voltages in a few places and no dice. I have got it stable at 5400MHZ but anymore and nothing but memtest errors and stability issues. Running the latest beta firmware. Hopefully this can be sorted out in BIOS updates?
> 
> Also this may be off topic and a stupid question, but I noticed my highest cpu 3dmark score was when I ran 3dmark successful once at 6000MHZ. Is there a direct correlation between memory and CPU performance?


Yes, always has 
In most new games when playing on high fps, memory has the biggest impact of the performance. That's why we are searching for the best memory performance 
When cpubound, you are most likely memory performance bound too. Atleast in games, and many other memory intensive apps


----------



## Zaudi

Mappi75 said:


> Where can i see the production date of the Apex?
> On the label there is no date...


If there is no Date on it, it is the first Release sample


----------



## db000

Mappi75 said:


> Sorry, short question:
> 
> the* ram voltage is* in my* Apex Bios limited to 1,4350v* ? I cant go higher?
> What did i have to change? Thanks! (1101 Bios / G.Skill 32GB 6400 at 6666)
> 
> Edit: ok HW Info shows only 1,395v - should i dont use the xmp profile and set all manual?
> And then the voltages goes higher?
> 
> BTW: i used the RDR2 bench for testing ram stability and it was the first game which crashes (with ultra details maxed out all),
> the i found out it was not the RAM. I replaced the nvngx_dlss.dll with a newer version 2.3.7 and now bench and game runs stable.
> Not ram related problem.


You can enable "High DRAM Voltage Mode" for more then 1.4350v. See example below with 1.44v


----------



## asdkj1740

DoomDash said:


> New to this thread: Asus Strix-E here. For the life of me couldn't get XMP stable anywhere near the rated speeds (6000). I've tried raising voltages in a few places and no dice. I have got it stable at 5400MHZ but anymore and nothing but memtest errors and stability issues. Running the latest beta firmware. Hopefully this can be sorted out in BIOS updates?
> 
> Also this may be off topic and a stupid question, but I noticed my highest cpu 3dmark score was when I ran 3dmark successful once at 6000MHZ. Is there a direct correlation between memory and CPU performance?


let me guess, Samsung kit?
are you sure you are having the latest beta bios? which one is that?


----------



## totio

Hello all. Just to report that my G.Skill F5-6000U3636E16G x2 kit also refuse to work stable (or the IMC of my 12900K is not able to keep up) at 6000 (XMP I or II).
Best that I can get stable with my ASUS Z690 Max Extreme mobo on Auto settings is 5600 at JEDEC timings (BIOS/UEFI version is 1101):


----------



## DoomDash

asdkj1740 said:


> let me guess, Samsung kit?
> are you sure you are having the latest beta bios? which one is that?


G.Skill. I have the BIOS posted from this thread from 3 days ago. 1302 IIRC.


----------



## Mappi75

Can run 32GB 6.666Mhz 30-40-40-30 at *1,45v* - but i'am going back to 32-40-40-28 at *1,40v* which cost me 0,5ns but less power.


----------



## Gadfly

owikh84 said:


> It's combo of IMC + RAM + mobo. If possible try to get the 2022 Apex/Extreme.
> 
> 2021 Apex/Extreme + strong IMC + strong RAM = OK
> 2022 Apex/Extreme + strong IMC + strong RAM = even better
> 2021 Apex/Extreme + weak IMC + strong RAM = bad
> 2021 Apex/Extreme + strong IMC + weak RAM = bad
> 2022 Apex/Extreme + strong/weak IMC/RAM = OK
> 
> Why only Apex & Extreme are affected? Coincidentally Apex & Extreme are manufactured under ASUS Auto-Extreme process.
> 
> ES vs retail? So far only retail 2021 Apex & Extreme are affected. 2021 ES no issues.
> 
> Why manufacturing date suddenly appeared on the box label for 2022 manufactured boards? There must be a reason.


The manufacturing date is on my 11/2021 Apex, which I am returning until I can get 2022 board.


----------



## truehighroller1

Gadfly said:


> The manufacturing date is on my 11/2021 Apex, which I am returning until I can get 2022 board.


Good idea. Mine's 21 and total junk so far.


----------



## Gadfly

truehighroller1 said:


> Good idea. Mine's 21 and total junk so far.


I wonder what exactly changed on the 22 boards


----------



## truehighroller1

Gadfly said:


> I wonder what exactly changed on the 22 boards


Don't know. I know that some people don't even have a time stamp and yet I do, and other people do as well. I just ordered another one for $100 more and printed the return label for my original.


----------



## Hyper2020

Hyper2020 said:


> Finally got my Apex and was hoping for a fresh batch of 22 but got 2021-11. I hope there will be no serious problems with it when overclocking memory. At least another month to wait until the memory comes and I can collect and test.


I have a friend who also bought an Apex the other day and his board is identical to my 2021-11, he has a Corsair DOMINATOR Platinum RGB [CMT32GX5M2X6200C36] 32 GB kits and he doesn't want to overclock yet but use this kits on 6000-6200. He asks if he should try to find/buy a 2022 board, or leave this board with a weak Dimm0 and try to use 6000-6200 and adjust manually ?


----------



## Silent Scone

Gadfly said:


> I wonder what exactly changed on the 22 boards


Likely nothing. My day one board is fine. The pseudosciences that keep cropping up are hard to quantify in any meaningful way. Validation is spec'd up to 6600 officially as things stand and there are people doing that on the Apex in droves.


----------



## Nizzen

Gadfly said:


> I wonder what exactly changed on the 22 boards


Maybe better controlled impedances of pcb  
Variance in pcb may impact the dimm OC. Looks random, just like SP rating and imc on the cpu's

@Arni90 Is your Unify-x better on the same memory frequency than Apex, or is it just OC higher on memory for you. 

Same timings on different boards may be a nice "comparing test"


----------



## Silent Scone

Nizzen said:


> Maybe better controlled impedances of pcb
> Variance in pcb may impact the dimm OC. Looks random, just like SP rating and imc on the cpu's
> 
> @Arni90 Is your Unify-x better on the same memory frequency than Apex, or is it just OC higher on memory for you.
> 
> Same timings on different boards may be a nice "comparing test"


You can only control these things so much and they've always been tight, the copper pour itself varies. Personally, I think people are chasing ghosts with this stuff. You get a #metoo scenario where no one user problem is the same. With the record standing at nearly 9GHz on the Apex, it doesn't sound plausible that pedestrian frequencies would be impacted by such things.

This is my take, at least.


----------



## truehighroller1

Silent Scone said:


> You can only control these things so much and they've always been tight, the copper pour itself varies. Personally, I think people are chasing ghosts with this stuff. You get a #metoo scenario where no one user problem is the same. With the record standing at nearly 9GHz on the Apex, it doesn't sound plausible that pedestrian frequencies would be impacted by such things.
> 
> This is my take, at least.



There're people who've been sent boards to test and they're now way further memory frequency wise with the newer board, sounds to me like some variable mentioned above. Some bad electronics perhaps that got past quality control.. 

One thing's for sure, people have been directly contacted and sent better boards for a reason.. Just wish I was one of them as I've spent a lot of time stabilizing this thing and fighting it tooth and nail. Purchasing multiple different ram kits cpu's and now a new motherboard as well...


----------



## Silent Scone

truehighroller1 said:


> There're people who've been sent boards to test and they're now way further memory frequency wise with the newer board, sounds to me like some variable mentioned above. Some bad electronics perhaps that got past quality control..
> 
> One thing's for sure, people have been directly contacted and sent better boards for a reason.. Just wish I was one of them as I've spent a lot of time stabilizing this thing and fighting it tooth and nail. Purchasing multiple different ram kits cpu's and now a new motherboard as well...


Like I just said, it makes no engineering sense that there would be that much variance. It's not something that happens. I.e one board at 6GHz or 6.4GHz whilst max frequency validation is closer to 9GHz. It's crazy talk. Variance makes more sense at one end of the spectrum, not both. I believe Shamino has already gone on record much earlier in the thread to say PCB impedances were within normal variance, perhaps that got missed.

I'm not sure who these people are you're speaking about, whether it's just people getting replacement boards under RMA (normal procedure), or they're sampled. ROG has sampled users for years, I was one of them. Ordinarily, it's due to them being headhunted as providing helpful feedback. Not sure where "better boards" comes from, though - you'd have to cite your source on that one,

As to any other changes, one can only speculate. All I know is my day one retail board performs fine, and with the more cantankerous Samsung DIMMs, too.


----------



## truehighroller1

Silent Scone said:


> Like I just said, it makes no engineering sense that there would be that much variance. It's not something that happens. I.e one board at 6GHz or 6.4GHz whilst max frequency validation is closer to 9GHz. It's crazy talk. Variance makes more sense at one end of the spectrum, not both. I believe Shamino has already gone on record much earlier in the thread to say PCB impedances were within normal variance, perhaps that got missed.
> 
> I'm not sure who these people are you're speaking about, whether it's just people getting replacement boards under RMA (normal procedure), or they're sampled. ROG has sampled users for years, I was one of them. Ordinarily, it's due to them being headhunted as providing helpful feedback. Not sure where "better boards" comes from, though - you'd have to cite your source on that one,
> 
> As to any other changes, one can only speculate. All I know is my day one retail board performs fine, and with the more cantankerous Samsung DIMMs, too.


Have you not been paying attention to the ddr5 oc thread? If not go have a look, it was sent to the person specifically for testing better memory performance or not and it is performing better then the original. Your post are argh, just go look.

Not only that, the person knows and stated such that other people have been sent them as well and are misleading people with their memory clocks that are higher then the normies.. Facts.

The narrative is falling apart.


----------



## Silent Scone

truehighroller1 said:


> Have you not been paying attention to the ddr5 oc thread? If not go have a look, it was sent to the person specifically for testing better memory performance or not and it is performing better then the original. Your post are argh, just go look.
> 
> Not only that, the person knows and stated such that other people have been sent them as well and are misleading people with their memory clocks that are higher then the normies.. Facts.
> 
> The narrative is falling apart.


My posts are what? Sorry if I don't lay down and simply accept 4th hand info, I guess that comes with the territory of trying to get to the bottom of things. Regardless, my stance on the above remains the same, and users receiving new boards doesn't really fill in any gaps unless they've found something you've not specified. i.e changes they've been made aware of. Some of those guys are also shooting for much higher frequencies.

I noticed you edited this. There isn't a narrative, users are sampled boards all the time. I speak from experience. And in my experience, people like you make their own "narrative". Which usually contains far more misinformation than it does anything useful.


----------



## truehighroller1

Silent Scone said:


> My posts are what? Sorry if I don't lay down and simply accept 4th hand info, I guess that comes with the territory of trying to get to the bottom of things. Regardless, my stance on the above remains the same, and users receiving new boards doesn't really fill in any gaps unless they've found something you've not specified. i.e changes they've been made aware of.


Read the thread. It's falling apart.


----------



## Silent Scone

truehighroller1 said:


> Read the thread. It's falling apart.


That's because I'm not running that one  (just kidding)

I don't really see what you're talking about. Looks like the usual tuning story of this works on my machine but doesn't on my machine. Isn't that memory overclocking in a nutshell? Either way, happy for someone to discredit what I've said above, it's a public forum.



Carillo said:


> I have been able to run 7000mhz on 4 different Apex retail boards with my cpu... But only 2 memory kits could do it.. All boards produced in 2021


I believe even our good friend and resident Blastipodi has come to his senses after trying Hynix modules recently, after much cursing all and sundry including the board for his problems


----------



## truehighroller1

Silent Scone said:


> That's because I'm not running that one  (just kidding)
> 
> I don't really see what you're talking about. Looks like the usual tuning story of this works on my machine but doesn't on my machine. Isn't that memory overclocking in a nutshell? Either way, happy for someone to discredit what I've said above, it's a public forum.


Quick run down by all means not everything but the meat for sure.


----------



## xl_digit

bscool said:


> On the box. I dont know for sure if that is what matters. Just what I saw testing my original MB vs this newer release.




there is a new Part Number on you example.


*
i got 2 APEX (2021) -- Part No.: 90MB18I0-M0EAY0
yours having (2022) -- Part No.: 90MB18I0-M0UAY1*



thats wired, this Part No. issn´t listed anywhere.
i only can find the original / also on ASUS Website.

@bscool


----------



## Silent Scone

truehighroller1 said:


> Quick run down by all means not everything but the meat for sure.


Lots going on there. Bscool not being able to get 1T working at all on the new board for instance? I feel no more informed than I was 10 minutes ago lol.

Ultimately, nobody in there can tell you anything conclusive. Sometimes, there isn't anything conclusive to find that's easily understood unless you're an electrical engineer. I responded to Nizzen about variance and told you why I didn't think that was specifically the case, and you ignored my reasoning and went with that idea anyway. Unfortunately, that's how these discussions end up leading people down the garden path.

Other than that, I can only go by my own experience with my old board. This stuff isn't easy, that's why in some instances one can only suggest it works on their machine if they try X&Y. A lot of users don't understand what most of the MRC settings even do, myself included - so you can't expect to be able to dial all instability out 100% of the time. That's not to say what I'm saying is absolute - just that there isn't a definitive answer.


----------



## truehighroller1

Silent Scone said:


> Lots going on there. Bscool not being able to get 1T working at all on the new board for instance? I feel no more informed than I was 10 minutes ago lol.
> 
> Ultimately, nobody in there can tell you anything conclusive. Sometimes, there isn't anything conclusive to find that's easily understood unless you're an electrical engineer. I responded to Nizzen about variance and told you why I didn't think that was specifically the case, and you ignored my reasoning and went with that idea anyway. Unfortunately, that's how these discussions end up leading people down the garden path.
> 
> Other than that, I can only go by my own experience with my old board. This stuff isn't easy, that's why in some instances one can only suggest it works on their machine if they try X&Y. A lot of users don't understand what most of the MRC settings even do, myself included - so you can't expect to be able to dial all instability out 100% of the time. That's not to say what I'm saying is absolute - just that there isn't a definitive answer.





xl_digit said:


> there is a new Part Number on you example.
> 
> 
> 
> *i got 2 APEX (2021) -- Part No.: 90MB18I0-M0EAY0
> yours having (2022) -- Part No.: 90MB18I0-M0UAY1*
> 
> 
> 
> thats wired, this Part No. issn´t listed anywhere.
> i only can find the original / also on ASUS Website.
> 
> @bscool


@Silent Scone

Still nothing from you on this one? New part number now noted as well. Nothing to see here, right?


----------



## pR1maL




----------



## Silent Scone

truehighroller1 said:


> @Silent Scone
> 
> Still nothing from you on this one? New part number now noted as well. Nothing to see here, right?


I mean we can agree that spotting a new PN is the kind of detective work you'd expect from Frank Drebin lol. It's called the Naked Gun, not Jumping the Gun .

New part numbers assigned to the same SKU aren't anything new, it can mean some parts are manufactured elsewhere. It's a common occurrence as some platform cycles mature. In other words, "no word on this" is because I don't know, and neither do you.


----------



## Arni90

Nizzen said:


> Maybe better controlled impedances of pcb
> Variance in pcb may impact the dimm OC. Looks random, just like SP rating and imc on the cpu's
> 
> @Arni90 Is your Unify-x better on the same memory frequency than Apex, or is it just OC higher on memory for you.
> 
> Same timings on different boards may be a nice "comparing test"


Performance seems to be exactly the same at the same timings. However, the Z690 Unify-X has *far* lower VDDQ requirements for me, I can easily run 1.45V instead of 1.65V for 6400 C30

I have no doubts that there exists Z690 Apex boards that have good signal integrity, but the average board seems to be hot garbage.


----------



## pR1maL

I think I'm going to pick up a Unify X, just to fulfill my curiosity. My Apex is from Nov 21. I can get it stable, but I wouldn't exactly call this board fun. It behaves similar to BuildZoid's in many respects. Now I understand why he took so long to review his Apex, it's not like him to get a board that he really, really wanted and then wait 2 months to post content with it. 

Just watched his Unify X results and it trains and boots ultra fast. My Apex takes forever. From power on until the enter bios screen appears is 37.4 seconds. 1:16 until the desktop appears. 

The Apex is overpriced for what it is imo, and the unfortunate people who purchased the Extreme..... I don't know what to say. You can't even resell the stuff in good conscience without telling the buyer to possibly expect mediocre results or potential issues, and giving them price break. You think that you'll avoid risk by purchasing the best 2 dim board, but you end up still playing the silicon lottery. When you lose, you lose big, because everything is priced through the roof now. It's not just a matter of $200 memory sticks and $300 motherboards anymore. Next time that a new DDR platform arrives I won't buy the expensive board, I'll buy a board in a position like the Unify X.

You can buy a real pocket oscilloscope and a Unify X for the price of the Apex and it's bobo oscilloscope that uses Asus software. Really, I just have to de-program myself after buying Asus boards for the last decade plus, and forget brand loyalty. It doesn't make sense anymore, imo.

Hearing what BZ said about Asus binning Apex boards during the initial run and handing out cherry picked boards, it doesn't make me think too highly of them whether it's right or not. To me it means Asus knew that some of the boards were not really up to Apex standards, when the whole point of the Apex is being sold as an extreme overclocker's board. It seems like an intentional breech of trust to me.


----------



## Silent Scone

pR1maL said:


> I think I'm going to pick up a Unify X, just to fulfill my curiosity. My Apex is from Nov 21. I can get it stable, but I wouldn't exactly call this board fun. It behaves similar to BuildZoid's in many respects. Now I understand why he took so long to review his Apex, it's not like him to get a board that he really, really wanted and then wait 2 months to post content with it.
> 
> Just watched his Unify X results and it trains and boots ultra fast. My Apex takes forever. From power on until the enter bios screen appears is 37.4 seconds. 1:16 until the desktop appears.
> 
> The Apex is overpriced for what it is imo, and the unfortunate people who purchased the Extreme..... I don't know what to say. You can't even resell the stuff in good conscience without telling the buyer to possibly expect mediocre results or potential issues, and giving them price break. You think that you'll avoid risk by purchasing the best 2 dim board, but you end up still playing the silicon lottery. When you lose, you lose big, because everything is priced through the roof now. It's not just a matter of $200 memory sticks and $300 motherboards anymore. Next time that a new DDR platform arrives I won't buy the expensive board, I'll buy a board in a position like the Unify X.
> 
> You can buy a real pocket oscilloscope and a Unify X for the price of the Apex and it's bobo oscilloscope that uses Asus software. Really, I just have to de-program myself after buying Asus boards for the last decade plus, and forget brand loyalty. It doesn't make sense anymore, imo.
> 
> Hearing what BZ said about Asus binning Apex boards during the initial run and handing out cherry picked boards, it doesn't make me think too highly of them whether it's right or not. To me it means Asus knew that some of the boards were not really up to Apex standards, when the whole point of the Apex is being sold as an extreme overclocker's board. It seems like an intentional breech of trust to me.


From hitting the power button, my Apex system hits the desktop in 38 seconds. That’s 31% of the time it takes to boil a modern kettle. 0 coffees per power on isn’t a real benchmark metric, but I suppose if it were, the Unify X would be a solid contender for a world record.

Or like I tell people on any platform such things come up, just send the system into S3 resume.


----------



## bscool

New Apex boots a bit faster than my old board. Never timed it but probably around 20 to 25 seconds.


----------



## Mappi75

Got 16,5 seconds with old Board (running 6666Mhz 32-40-40-28-2)


----------



## bscool

@safedisk posted new bios 1304



ASUS ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX | APEX 14



*ROG MAXIMUS Z690/STRIX Z690 Series Beta Bios 1304*

01. Improve system performance

ROG MAXIMUS Z690 HERO BETA BIOS 1304

ROG MAXIMUS Z690 FORMULA BETA BIOS 1304

ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX BETA BIOS 1304

ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME BETA BIOS 1304

ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME GLACIAL BETA BIOS 1304



*ROG STRIX Z690 Series Beta Bios 1304*

01. Improve system performance

ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI BETA BIOS 1304

ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4 BETA BIOS 1304

ROG STRIX Z690-E GAMING WIFI BETA BIOS 1304

ROG STRIX Z690-F GAMING WIFI BETA BIOS 1304

ROG STRIX Z690-G GAMING WIFI BETA BIOS 1304

ROG STRIX Z690-I GAMING WIFI BETA BIOS 1304


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> @safedisk posted new bios 1304
> 
> 
> 
> ASUS ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX | APEX 14
> 
> 
> 
> *ROG MAXIMUS Z690/STRIX Z690 Series Beta Bios 1304*
> 
> 01. Improve system performance
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 HERO BETA BIOS 1304
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 FORMULA BETA BIOS 1304
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX BETA BIOS 1304
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME BETA BIOS 1304
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME GLACIAL BETA BIOS 1304
> 
> 
> 
> *ROG STRIX Z690 Series Beta Bios 1304*
> 
> 01. Improve system performance
> 
> ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI BETA BIOS 1304
> 
> ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4 BETA BIOS 1304
> 
> ROG STRIX Z690-E GAMING WIFI BETA BIOS 1304
> 
> ROG STRIX Z690-F GAMING WIFI BETA BIOS 1304
> 
> ROG STRIX Z690-G GAMING WIFI BETA BIOS 1304
> 
> ROG STRIX Z690-I GAMING WIFI BETA BIOS 1304



This bios is stable at running my xmp II profile which none have been until now. Amazing 😍


----------



## sblantipodi

Hi all,
I'm pretty sure that Armoury Crate + Corsair iCue creates the "hang on boot" problem on my Asu Extreme board.

How to reproduce.

Run cinebench 10 times for 30 minutes, soon or later the RAM RGB stops working, PC continue to be stable.
Reboot the PC, it hangs on detect memory and I need to safe boot.

This happens only if I disable SPD Write protection.
If I enable SPD Write protection the issue does not occur.

It's strange that I'm the only one experiencing this problem.

PS: I have Corsair Dominator SK Hinyx, and after a week of intense test, I can't find any instability with these kits.
(Ram Test, TM5, memtest 86, OCCT, programming / code compiling)


----------



## dante`afk

cute, asus handing out freebies?

guess I gotta do the old good amazon switcheroo


----------



## shrimpmaster

bscool said:


> @safedisk posted new bios 1304
> 
> 
> 
> ASUS ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX | APEX 14
> 
> 
> 
> *ROG MAXIMUS Z690/STRIX Z690 Series Beta Bios 1304*
> 
> 01. Improve system performance
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 HERO BETA BIOS 1304
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 FORMULA BETA BIOS 1304
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX BETA BIOS 1304
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME BETA BIOS 1304
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME GLACIAL BETA BIOS 1304
> 
> 
> 
> *ROG STRIX Z690 Series Beta Bios 1304*
> 
> 01. Improve system performance
> 
> ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI BETA BIOS 1304
> 
> ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4 BETA BIOS 1304
> 
> ROG STRIX Z690-E GAMING WIFI BETA BIOS 1304
> 
> ROG STRIX Z690-F GAMING WIFI BETA BIOS 1304
> 
> ROG STRIX Z690-G GAMING WIFI BETA BIOS 1304
> 
> ROG STRIX Z690-I GAMING WIFI BETA BIOS 1304


@safedisk
Z690 TUF left out again... 😥

Last good bios for this board was 0807 and 0812, long time ago.


----------



## truehighroller1

dante`afk said:


> cute, asus handing out freebies?
> 
> guess I gotta do the old good amazon switcheroo


I was going to send mine back and ordered another one but they want $162 restock fee. So, cancelled my order and I'm working with Asus instead. Testing both memory slots right now for them. So far slot one failed memtest 86 bios built in, and slot 2 is still running.

Bios 1304 does do better for me but, pass three failed earlier. It's random too, it will only get through one pass then two passes then not even one then almost three passes...


----------



## LionAlonso

shrimpmaster said:


> @safedisk
> Z690 TUF left out again... 😥
> 
> Last good bios for this board was 0807 and 0812, long time ago.


Last and only.
U will see.
Anyways, if it works there is no problem if you dont update BIOS.
My tuf works flawlessly with 807 and dualrank bdie at 4133 with my 12900K.
I dont see the need to update to a new bios, opposite as when i had my 5900X where every AGESA had some kind of problem!


----------



## sblantipodi

sblantipodi said:


> Hi all,
> I'm pretty sure that Armoury Crate + Corsair iCue creates the "hang on boot" problem on my Asus Extreme board.
> 
> Using 4x16GB SK Hynix Corsair Dominator Platinum.
> 
> How to reproduce.
> 
> Run cinebench 10 times for 30 minutes, soon or later the RAM RGB stops working, PC continue to be stable.
> Reboot the PC, it hangs on detect memory and I need to safe boot.
> 
> This happens only if I disable SPD Write protection.
> If I enable SPD Write protection the issue does not occur.
> 
> It's strange that I'm the only one experiencing this problem.
> 
> PS: I have Corsair Dominator SK Hinyx, and after a week of intense test, I can't find any instability with these kits.
> (Ram Test, TM5, memtest 86, OCCT, programming / code compiling)


can @shamino1978 or @safedisk comment on this?
is this the reason why the default value on Asus board is SPD Write Protect set to TRUE?


----------



## truehighroller1

truehighroller1 said:


> I was going to send mine back and ordered another one but they want $162 restock fee. So, cancelled my order and I'm working with Asus instead. Testing both memory slots right now for them. So far slot one failed memtest 86 bios built in, and slot 2 is still running.
> 
> Bios 1304 does do better for me but, pass three failed earlier. It's random too, it will only get through one pass then two passes then not even one then almost three passes...



Slot 1 failed slot 2 passed. Further escalating up the chain of command with asus because I refuse to take my desktop down for two weeks while they fix this one and send it back to me while other people have been sent new ones for free to test and keep, for free.

I've been using their hardware for 20 years or more now. I hope to get treated accordingly.


----------



## joneffingvo

truehighroller1 said:


> This bios is stable at running my xmp II profile which none have been until now. Amazing 😍


Testing my Corsair 6200 with XMP II now!


----------



## truehighroller1

joneffingvo said:


> Testing my Corsair 6200 with XMP II now!


It's better but, per testing with asus today, my slot one is failing. Better bios though for sure. Mine failed at pass 3 on about the time I commented.


----------



## joneffingvo

truehighroller1 said:


> It's better but, per testing with asus today, my slot one is failing. Better bios though for sure. Mine failed at pass 3 on about the time I commented.


Yeah... 1 Error 43 minutes into RAM test. Back to XMP 1 I go


----------



## bscool

truehighroller1 said:


> It's better but, per testing with asus today, my slot one is failing. Better bios though for sure. Mine failed at pass 3 on about the time I commented.


Maybe if you can get RMA you will get a newer version? I know someone who RMAed and new board was better. His username is escaping me rigth now. And it might still be luck to what MB you get.


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> Maybe if you can get RMA you will get a newer version? I know someone who RMAed and new board was better. His username is escaping me rigth now. And it might still be luck to what MB you get.


Guessing on how they're treating me so far here on this forum which they're obviously patrolling, I'm gonna guess they send me junk back.


----------



## pR1maL

sblantipodi said:


> Hi all,
> I'm pretty sure that Armoury Crate + Corsair iCue creates the "hang on boot" problem on my Asu Extreme board.
> 
> How to reproduce.
> 
> Run cinebench 10 times for 30 minutes, soon or later the RAM RGB stops working, PC continue to be stable.
> Reboot the PC, it hangs on detect memory and I need to safe boot.
> 
> This happens only if I disable SPD Write protection.
> If I enable SPD Write protection the issue does not occur.
> 
> It's strange that I'm the only one experiencing this problem.
> 
> PS: I have Corsair Dominator SK Hinyx, and after a week of intense test, I can't find any instability with these kits.
> (Ram Test, TM5, memtest 86, OCCT, programming / code compiling)


My Apex has that same RGB stops working problem. When it stops working I am unable to read either stick's SPD with CPUID or any other app. 

I thought it was my G.Skill Sammy 6000 c36. But my G.Skill 6400 Hynix does it too. I thought it was a crate related bug. The Sammy wouldn't pass TM5 Anta Extreme, but the Hynix does.

I do have crate installed, but I don't have ICUE installed. I do have 3 corsair lighting nodes, but I sent their ICUE profiles to the lighting node hardware and uninstalled ICUE afterwards. Come to think of it, I never installed ICUE with this OS install.

I'm going to have to get off my butt and test my slots one at a time. I don't want to hate on Asus, because they've always treated me well and they recently RMA'd my "red led of death" 3090 in 6 days, no questions asked.


----------



## sblantipodi

pR1maL said:


> My Apex has that same RGB stops working problem. When it stops working I am unable to read either stick's SPD with CPUID or any other app.
> 
> I thought it was my G.Skill Sammy 6000 c36. But my G.Skill 6400 Hynix does it too. I thought it was a crate related bug. The Sammy wouldn't pass TM5 Anta Extreme, but the Hynix does.
> 
> I do have crate installed, but I don't have ICUE installed. I do have 3 corsair lighting nodes, but I sent their ICUE profiles to the lighting node hardware and uninstalled ICUE afterwards. Come to think of it, I never installed ICUE with this OS install.
> 
> I'm going to have to get off my butt and test my slots one at a time. I don't want to hate on Asus, because they've always treated me well and they recently RMA'd my "red led of death" 3090 in 6 days, no questions asked.


Have you tried rebooting the PC when the RGB hangs?
Does the PC hang on reboot?


----------



## bscool

truehighroller1 said:


> Guessing on how they're treating me so far here on this forum which they're obviously patrolling, I'm gonna guess they send me junk back.


Maybe that is why the sent me a MB. I was ok just running 6400 I know it has no effect on my life if I can run 6400 or 7000.

Want the MB I have that does 7000? Will that make your life complete? it is yours.


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> Maybe that is why the sent me a MB. I was ok just running 6400 I know it has no effect on my life if I can run 6400 or 7000.
> 
> Want the MB I have that does 7000? Will that make your life complete? it is yours.


I can't even run 6400. I have respect for you man. You're honest, I'm good but thank you. I'd rather see how they act as a company with respect to me seeing how I've been a customer so long.


----------



## pR1maL

sblantipodi said:


> Have you tried rebooting the PC when the RGB hangs?
> Does the PC hang on reboot?


Mine doesn't hang on reboot.


----------



## sblantipodi

Oh ohhhh...
Someone posted a video on this some hours ago.
It seems that crate bundles a crappy software that causes instability.


----------



## bscool

Apex bios 1304 ucode 15

Testing both default 1304(ucode 18) and with u code 15 both stable for 7000c32 with my past setting from quick testing. Scores slightly better with ucode 15 depending on bench.

As always use at your own risk. Can be flash via EZ flash from within bios.









1304 ucode 15.CAP


CAP File



1drv.ms


----------



## safedisk

shrimpmaster said:


> @safedisk
> Z690 TUF left out again... 😥
> 
> Last good bios for this board was 0807 and 0812, long time ago.


Hey here  

*TUF GAMING Z690 Series Beta Bios 1304*

01. Improve system performance

TUF GAMING Z690 PLUS BETA BIOS 1304

TUF GAMING Z690 PLUS D4 BETA BIOS 1304

TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS WIFI BETA BIOS 1304

TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS WIFI D4 BETA BIOS 1304


----------



## safedisk

bscool said:


> Apex bios 1304 ucode 15
> 
> Testing both default 1304 and with u code both stable for 7000c32 with my past setting from quick testing. Scores slightly better with ucode 15 depending on bench.
> 
> As always use at your own risk. Can be flash via EZ flash from within bios.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1304 ucode 15.CAP
> 
> 
> CAP File
> 
> 
> 
> 1drv.ms


avx 512 mod bios?


----------



## bscool

safedisk said:


> avx 512 mod bios?


Yes


----------



## safedisk

sblantipodi said:


> can @shamino1978 or @safedisk comment on this?
> is this the reason why the default value on Asus board is SPD Write Protect set to TRUE?


what bios version are you using?
There was an ARGB problem with aura sync in some bios versions
Try the 1304 version
Thanks


----------



## truehighroller1

safedisk said:


> what bios version are you using?
> There was an ARGB problem with aura sync in some bios versions
> Try the 1304 version
> Thanks


If you could get me a new es board with a good memory number one slot that'd be great too . I know you have powers 😂. I have a ticket open for it with Asus.


----------



## bscool

Just bought geekbench 3 here are my daily clock for cpu and mem using Arctic 420 AIO cooler and air cooled mem.

CPU 52/40/44 is what i run for daily use.






ASUS System Product Name - Geekbench Browser


Benchmark results for an ASUS System Product Name with an Intel Core i9-12900KF processor.



browser.geekbench.com





The benches below are with e cores disabled.






ASUS System Product Name - Geekbench Browser


Benchmark results for an ASUS System Product Name with an Intel Core i9-12900KF processor.



browser.geekbench.com





bios 1304 u code 15

Timings are not as tight as most but that is all I can get to be stable past 6400.

MB 2022 date.


----------



## bscool

Tried something I saw @Falkentyne post about setting AVX 512 offset to -1 and AVX2 to 0. Dropped about 1 second off Y cruncher with e cores disabled.

This run has both AVX2 and AVX 512 set to -1. Didnt see a different in Y cruncher between AVX2 to 0 or -1.

Other probably knew about this but I had not tried it yet.


----------



## Silent Scone

truehighroller1 said:


> This bios is stable at running my xmp II profile which none have been until now. Amazing 😍





joneffingvo said:


> Yeah... 1 Error 43 minutes into RAM test. Back to XMP 1 I go


Why would you want to use XMP 2 over XMP 1? Have you checked what the DIMM profiles timings are?


----------



## truehighroller1

Silent Scone said:


> Why would you want to use XMP 2 over XMP 1? Have you checked what the DIMM profiles timings are?



I just figured it should run xmp II better because it sets all the sub timings as well. I've looked at them before in the spd section of the bios and through hwimfo. I've manually set things as well but not on the new bios yet. I'm about to go to work now.

I'll check it some more later when I get home. Appreciate the response, thank you.


----------



## Silent Scone

truehighroller1 said:


> I just figured it should run xmp II better because it sets all the sub timings as well. I've looked at them before in the spd section of the bios and through hwimfo. I've manually set things as well but not on the new bios yet. I'm about to go to work now.
> 
> I'll check it some more later when I get home. Appreciate the response, thank you.


Just check memory subsets for both profiles. The board optimised timings on XMP1 is the validated profile, memory subsets can be tighter. Considering where your head is at with some of this stuff, I would use whatever is most stable.

GSKILL 6000C36. (1.44VDD/VDDQ). Haven't wavered from this kit yet due to time constraints.


----------



## truehighroller1

Silent Scone said:


> Just check memory subsets for both profiles. The board optimised timings on XMP1 is the validated profile, memory subsets can be tighter. Considering where your head is at with some of this stuff, I would use whatever is most stable.



Okay I'll go at it some more. I was able to get a pretty good overclock on my ddr4 memory with this imc. I've got a good idea what it likes on the subs with these sticks. I'll check it all again though and set xmp I, voltages etc. The sticks I returned / swapped we're better which sucks but whatever. 

Thank you.


----------



## sblantipodi

safedisk said:


> what bios version are you using?
> There was an ARGB problem with aura sync in some bios versions
> Try the 1304 version
> Thanks


@safedisk I was using 1101 on Extreme.
I tried with 4 sticks of 4x16GB Corsair Dominator Platinum 5600MHz C36 (Samsung chips)
and now trying 4 sticks of 4x16GB Corsair Dominator Platinum 6200MHz C36 (SK Hynix chips)

as I said I'm running Asus Armoury Crate and Corsair iCue on Windows 11, I use crate only for the OLED management on my Extreme mobo and for drivers update.
I use Corsair iCue for the rest of RGB (RAM, fans, AIO, led strip).

With BIOS older than 1101 setting SPD Write Protection to FALSE causes the RGB on my Dominator RAM to abruptly stop under heavy load,
not easy to reproduce since it happen randomly. 
When that happen, a reboot causes the PC to hang on post, "DETECT MEMORY" is shown on the OLED of my Extreme during the hang.
This happen with both Samsung and SK Hynix.

With 1304 the RGB issue seems fixed and I'm not experiencing the hang on boot.
I really hope that after three months I can start enjoing my new PC for programming and gaming.

I'll continue testing, I report back if problems occurs.
Now all seems rock solid with 4x16GB Hynix at 5.2GHz.

For all RGB lovers I suggest to try my software/firmware/PCB in the signature xD


----------



## edkieferlp

bscool said:


> Tried something I saw @Falkentyne post about setting AVX 512 offset to -1 and AVX2 to 0. Dropped about 1 second off Y cruncher with e cores disabled.
> 
> This run has both AVX2 and AVX 512 set to -1. Didnt see a different in Y cruncher between AVX2 to 0 or -1.
> 
> Other probably knew about this but I had not tried it yet.


Does Y cruncher use AVX 512?
for me it lists AVX and AVX2 but I am running E cores so no AVX512.


----------



## IronAge

truehighroller1 said:


> I've been using their hardware for 20 years or more now. I hope to get treated accordingly.


When you RMA your Apex i bet you get back what you sent.


----------



## bscool

edkieferlp said:


> Does Y cruncher use AVX 512?
> for me it lists AVX and AVX2 but I am running E cores so no AVX512.


Yes if you disable e cores it will use avx512. My score with e cores is in the 59 second range vs 55 e cores disabled and using avx512.

"y-cruncher makes heavy use of AVX and AVX512 instructions if the processor supports them. So in order to successfully run a y-cruncher benchmark, your system needs to be stable with these heavier workloads"



y-cruncher - FAQ


----------



## asdkj1740

y0=2021
y1=2022


----------



## Mappi75

Whats the max voltage for G.Skill 6400 Kit which i can test or use 24/7 with fan cooling?
Testing 6800Mhz @ 1,52v


----------



## truehighroller1

IronAge said:


> When you RMA your Apex i bet you get back what you sent.


I'm trying to just hold out until they can cross ship me one. Hoping they do the right thing even, just send me one. They're saying they're out of inventory and that a lot of people have RMA'd theirs as well having similar issues. If they were to send me one like other people that is different in some way and will run higher frequency because obviously something's changed, I would totally send them this one back no problem.




Silent Scone said:


> Just check memory subsets for both profiles. The board optimised timings on XMP1 is the validated profile, memory subsets can be tighter. Considering where your head is at with some of this stuff, I would use whatever is most stable.
> 
> GSKILL 6000C36. (1.44VDD/VDDQ). Haven't wavered from this kit yet due to time constraints.
> 
> View attachment 2551424



I tried running the xmp I and it failed as well first pass after clearing cmos etc. of course. I'll keep going at it I guess. I'll setup the main primary timings and work in the subsets etc. by hand and go from there. I appreciate your response.


----------



## db000

Mappi75 said:


> Whats the max voltage for G.Skill 6400 Kit which i can test or use 24/7 with fan cooling?
> Testing 6800Mhz @ 1,52v


You might wanna post this question here insted.








*Official* Intel DDR5 OC and 24/7 daily Memory Stability...


Let it begin, boys... @cstkl1 @Nizzen @PhoenixMDA http://www.adata.com/us/ https://gskill.com/ There's this guide: MemTestHelper/DDR4 OC Guide.md at oc-guide · integralfx/MemTestHelper While it's written for DDR4, and the specific timing recommendations don't really apply...




www.overclock.net





But im running 1.55v with Fan atm, no issues. 49c load and 35c idle~, around 41~42 gaming. 1x 120mm fan.


----------



## bscool

Mappi75 said:


> Whats the max voltage for G.Skill 6400 Kit which i can test or use 24/7 with fan cooling?
> Testing 6800Mhz @ 1,52v


I dont know what is "safe" but I have been running 1.6v and running Karhu it gets up to around 48c and in gaming between 35 to 40c depending on game.

I have Phanteks new 120mm 30mm thick fan on the dims so it cools well. Average rpm around 1200-1500 under loads.









IMG_20220221_095050829.jpg


JPG Image



1drv.ms


----------



## LionAlonso

shrimpmaster said:


> @safedisk
> Z690 TUF left out again... 😥
> 
> Last good bios for this board was 0807 and 0812, long time ago.


If u try 1304 Tuf bios keep us informed here.


----------



## SuperMumrik

I run 1.65 Vdd on my g.skill sticks, but I'm not concerned.. 
However, I will report back if I kill them 😅


----------



## adna

strix-f bios 1304 test
gskill6400c32 @ 6666-30-39-39-28 2t
sa | vdd | vddq | tx | mc
0.9 | 1.52 | 1.45 | 1.45 | 1.25


----------



## Silent Scone

Hard to say at this stage. Normally highest validation of XMP certification is good for point of reference, but this is only 1.4v. If you’re worried about such things stick to the data sheet, if not there’s always warranty lol.

I wouldn’t envisage anyone in here is feeding them enough voltage to find out anytime soon.


----------



## primoz.osolnik0

On my Z690 apex I am currently running my Gskill 6000 CL36 kit at 6000 CL 32,24,34,28 command rate 1 and voltage 1,4350 volts. It is stable for normal uses and passes memtest no problem but in Aida it fails in about 10 minutes, I noticed that temperature of ram reaches 60 degress before error. Couse I am using a watercooling loop, will getting it under water as vell benefit this. I read that samsung chips got unstable after 55.


----------



## Silent Scone

primoz.osolnik0 said:


> View attachment 2551488
> 
> On my Z690 apex I am currently running my Gskill 6000 CL36 kit at 6000 CL 32,24,34,28 command rate 1 and voltage 1,4350 volts. It is stable for normal uses and passes memtest no problem but in Aida it fails in about 10 minutes, I noticed that temperature of ram reaches 60 degress before error. Couse I am using a watercooling loop, will getting it under water as vell benefit this. I read that samsung chips got unstable after 55.


Memtest86?

Lower temps always help. Point of failure depends on the condition of the OC, though.


----------



## primoz.osolnik0

It passes memtest without a problem...version that is included in motherboard bios. I ran aida test for 3 times and it always gets like this around 60 degress on memory.


----------



## asdkj1740

adna said:


> strix-f bios 1304 test
> gskill6400c32 @ 6666-30-39-39-28 2t
> sa | vdd | vddq | tx | mc
> 0.9 | 1.52 | 1.45 | 1.45 | 1.25
> View attachment 2551487


sick tm5 finish time!


----------



## Silent Scone

primoz.osolnik0 said:


> It passes memtest without a problem...version that is included in motherboard bios. I ran aida test for 3 times and it always gets like this around 60 degress on memory.


I was asking if you meant Memtest86. It's really only valid enough to give you a baseline for testing for faulty modules or avoiding OS corruption. The settings aren't stable enough to pass AIDA's memory routines


----------



## pR1maL

truehighroller1 said:


> I tried running the xmp I and it failed as well first pass after clearing cmos etc. of course. I'll keep going at it I guess. I'll setup the main primary timings and work in the subsets etc. by hand and go from there. I appreciate your response.


Buildzoid made some interesting points about Hynix timings in his Apex video, or at least I found them interesting. I listened to it once, but I didn't really take the time to listen thoroughly and jot down some notes. He usually very thorough in his methodology, so I need to give his comments a shot.


----------



## 七海nana7mi

sblantipodi said:


> @safedisk I was using 1101 on Extreme.
> I tried with 4 sticks of 4x16GB Corsair Dominator Platinum 5600MHz C36 (Samsung chips)
> and now trying 4 sticks of 4x16GB Corsair Dominator Platinum 6200MHz C36 (SK Hynix chips)
> 
> as I said I'm running Asus Armoury Crate and Corsair iCue on Windows 11, I use crate only for the OLED management on my Extreme mobo and for drivers update.
> I use Corsair iCue for the rest of RGB (RAM, fans, AIO, led strip).
> 
> With BIOS older than 1101 setting SPD Write Protection to FALSE causes the RGB on my Dominator RAM to abruptly stop under heavy load,
> not easy to reproduce since it happen randomly.
> When that happen, a reboot causes the PC to hang on post, "DETECT MEMORY" is shown on the OLED of my Extreme during the hang.
> This happen with both Samsung and SK Hynix.
> 
> With 1304 the RGB issue seems fixed and I'm not experiencing the hang on boot.
> I really hope that after three months I can start enjoing my new PC for programming and gaming.
> 
> I'll continue testing, I report back if problems occurs.
> Now all seems rock solid with 4x16GB Hynix at 5.2GHz.
> 
> For all RGB lovers I suggest to try my software/firmware/PCB in the signature xD


use 1304 u can try dram oc，in hero i try 16*4 6vb bcqk can 6000 now，but，at present, 4dimm mb is better than 32*2.
For rog, there are only itx, atx 2dimm and 4dimm dram plans，so hero＝ fromul＝extreme，because there are differences between manufacturing processes and materials
1304 bios for 16*4 Samsung, it has greatly improved in my test
but，Samsung i only have asus v07,gskill i no know,


----------



## zeezey

I flashed ver 1304 on my z690 formula and it seems to have bricked it. Stuck in reboot loop can’t even get to BIOS.


----------



## CptSpig

zeezey said:


> I flashed ver 1304 on my z690 formula and it seems to have bricked it. Stuck in reboot loop can’t even get to BIOS.


Clear c'mos and use Bios FlashBack. See attached.


----------



## zeezey

CptSpig said:


> Clear c'mos and use Bios FlashBack. See attached.


Tried both still stuck in loop. Tried previous bios version for flashback as well.


----------



## truehighroller1

pR1maL said:


> Buildzoid made some interesting points about Hynix timings in his Apex video, or at least I found them interesting. I listened to it once, but I didn't really take the time to listen thoroughly and jot down some notes. He usually very thorough in his methodology, so I need to give his comments a shot.



I was stable at 6000 now trying 6200 all stock primary's and secondaries and tertiary timings.


----------



## CptSpig

zeezey said:


> Tried both still stuck in loop. Tried previous bios version for flashback as well.


Try switching to bios 2 and boot. IF this works clear c'mos and flash to 1101 on bios 2 and then bios 1. If this does not work try to clear c'mos switch off power supply. Remove batterie for one hour. install batterie switch on power supply. Run bios falsh back with 1101. Make sure you are renaming the cap file and you usb is FAT32.


----------



## grifers

Good evening. The crappy ASUS application to change the RGB colours of the board, the Armory crate that does not work with the latest BIOS of my TUF Gaming z690 D4 Plus board, the bios 1304. It seems that AURA also updated the firmware with the new bios and now the Amory crate doesn't work. I start the program and it keeps "loading" continuously and does not recognize anything. In the bios are enabled the 2 things (install Asus services and the application armory crate that).

By the way, the application itself is a pain, it installs a lot of junk, a lot of bloatware, a lot of services. Then when you uninstall them, there are still a couple of services running in the background (from asus, I can't remember their names).


----------



## edkieferlp

grifers said:


> Good evening. The crappy ASUS application to change the RGB colours of the board, the Armory crate that does not work with the latest BIOS of my TUF Gaming z690 D4 Plus board, the bios 1304. It seems that AURA also updated the firmware with the new bios and now the Amory crate doesn't work. I start the program and it keeps "loading" continuously and does not recognize anything. In the bios are enabled the 2 things (install Asus services and the application armory crate that).
> 
> By the way, the application itself is a pain, it installs a lot of junk, a lot of bloatware, a lot of services. Then when you uninstall them, there are still a couple of services running in the background (from asus, I can't remember their names).


The first thing I did when I got my TUF was to disable the armor crate in bios.


----------



## truehighroller1

truehighroller1 said:


> I was stable at 6000 now trying 6200 all stock primary's and secondaries and tertiary timings.



Passed 6200 memtest86 bios built in all stock xmp I manually entered by hand after CMOS clear. Can't play a minute of warzone literally haven't even been able to launch it into a game. Three days down now. This is disheartening. Hey I'll wait 48 more hours for another, response saying they can't help me from Asus support again though because they have no stock left of my motherboard because so many people have rma'd their motherboards already 😂. I'm sticking this though until the end, don't care.

Things are gonna change I can feel it 🤣.


----------



## bscool

truehighroller1 said:


> Passed 6200 memtest86 bios built in all stock xmp I manually entered by hand after CMOS clear. Can't play a minute of warzone literally haven't even been able to launch it into a game. Three days down now. This is disheartening. Hey I'll wait 48 more hours for another, response saying they can't help me from Asus support again though because they have no stock left of my motherboard because so many people have rma'd their motherboards already 😂. I'm sticking this though until the end, don't care.
> 
> Things are gonna change I can feel it 🤣.



Don't stop believin'
Hold on to the feelin'


----------



## edkieferlp

pR1maL said:


> Buildzoid made some interesting points about Hynix timings in his Apex video, or at least I found them interesting. I listened to it once, but I didn't really take the time to listen thoroughly and jot down some notes. He usually very thorough in his methodology, so I need to give his comments a shot.


I wrote down the 3 training edits he made even though I am on DDR4.
here ones he switched but view the vid as you get the whole story.

SenseAmp Offset Training [Auto] > disabled
Round Trip Latency [Auto] > enabled
Turn Around Timing Training [Auto] > disabled


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> Don't stop believin'
> Hold on to the feelin'


This is why I like you. Sense of humor.. 😆


----------



## bscool

truehighroller1 said:


> This is why I like you. Sense of humor.. 😆


Lol remember when that guy said something about "gay" to you in the ddr4 thread. Still has me laughing thinking about it.


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> Lol remember when that guy said something about "gay" to you in the ddr4 thread. Still has me laughing thinking about it.



Trolls man, trolls.

I just put it on defaults and am playing with my brothers now. I'm off work tomorrow so me and the wife are gonna watch a few shows after. Our four kids are off school tomorrow too so they're upstairs playing.

I love it that I paid more money for this motherboard and memory and have about 40% less performance so far 😂.

Stock defaults just locked up 🤣 ***. **** stock defaults locked up.


----------



## bigfootnz

When I've OC P cores to 5.2GHz on some programs there is AVX2 offset of -1. I know that someone has said that I need to put like -1 to AVX512 or something like that to remove this offset. But I cannot find that info anywhere. Does someone know how to remove that AVX2 offet on Asus Maximus? Thanks


----------



## Silent Scone

truehighroller1 said:


> Passed 6200 memtest86 bios built in all stock xmp I manually entered by hand after CMOS clear. Can't play a minute of warzone literally haven't even been able to launch it into a game. Three days down now. This is disheartening. Hey I'll wait 48 more hours for another, response saying they can't help me from Asus support again though because they have no stock left of my motherboard because so many people have rma'd their motherboards already 😂. I'm sticking this though until the end, don't care.
> 
> Things are gonna change I can feel it 🤣.


Use Memtest86 as a prefix before testing in the OS with a suite such as Karhu.

Weren’t you only just saying you had XMP stable yesterday? Can you tell me your memory kit part number?


----------



## nickolp1974

bigfootnz said:


> When I've OC P cores to 5.2GHz on some programs there is AVX2 offset of -1. I know that someone has said that I need to put like -1 to AVX512 or something like that to remove this offset. But I cannot find that info anywhere. Does someone know how to remove that AVX2 offet on Asus Maximus? Thanks


just woke up so bare with!! isn't it just below the Digi sub section in advanced? enable user specify and set your value


----------



## bigfootnz

nickolp1974 said:


> just woke up so bare with!! isn't it just below the Digi sub section in advanced? enable user specify and set your value


There is special section AVX offset, but if I remeber correctly Intel has enoforced like max x51 multi for AVX2 and you have to put like AVX512 -1 to disable this. But I do not remember this correctly.


----------



## DungeonKeeper1

Is 1304 stable? Z690 Formula.


----------



## Akadaka

DungeonKeeper1 said:


> Is 1304 stable? Z690 Formula.


Was wondering the same thing, I'm not really having issues with the Bios 1003, so I see no reason really to update it, given it can be risky if your power or something goes out or it fails.


----------



## DungeonKeeper1

Hello Akadaka!

Thank you for the info. I'm almost at 0811 and read here much problems with 1003. So i stay at 0811. But now 1304 is available and i'm happy to read any positive if, this version is rockstable.
But in otherwise i think, why should i update? My System runs stable for now.
It's really hard to decide, update or no update. 

(And sorry for my bad english)

Greetings to australia  
(i like your country music  )


----------



## IronAge

1304 supposed to run G.SKILL 6000 with Samsung IC @ XMP II without crashing with 2DPC boards as well.


----------



## Maj0

hi, trying to run *32GB (2x 16GB) G.Skill Trident Z5 DDR5-6000 DIMM CL40-40-40-76 Dual Kit with Samsung Chips* on Asus Z690 Apex on latest UEFI beta build 1304
But isnt stable in MemTest - not with default options and sadly neither with XMP I. Only running stable on 2400 Mhz... Anyone any idea ?


----------



## Silent Scone

Maj0 said:


> hi, trying to run *32GB (2x 16GB) G.Skill Trident Z5 DDR5-6000 DIMM CL40-40-40-76 Dual Kit with Samsung Chips* on Asus Z690 Apex on latest UEFI beta build 1304
> But isnt stable in MemTest - not with default options and sadly neither with XMP I. Only running stable on 2400 Mhz... Anyone any idea ?


Try the Samsung memory profile from within the DRAM Timing Configurator page.

Also try XMP1 +
[Optional - Tweak Mode 2]

VDD 1.435v
VDDQ 1.435v
VDDQTX [Auto]
MCVDD 1.25v
VCCSA 0.98v


----------



## Maj0

thanks for the answer. Did it exactly with those values little bit less and little bit more Voltage - Memtest is showing errors, no matter what I select.


----------



## Silent Scone

Maj0 said:


> thanks for the answer. Did it exactly with those values little bit less and little bit more Voltage - Memtest is showing errors, no matter what I select.


Check SPD info for both modules is correct in UEFI
Try MCVDD 1.3v
Also try Tweak Mode 2
CPU System Agent 0.98 - 1.05v


----------



## Maj0

thanks - tried also tweak mode 2 and mcvdd lower and higher. not booting or memtest errors.

SPD Info for both modules is fine. Also entered the SPD Info manually to the Board on both sticks or just one stick - isnt changing anything. Memtest only stable in stock frequency. 

Currently no more idea how to run XMP1 stable with latest firmware 1304 on apex board...

The Memory profiles for samsung chips are a bad joke for me, arent still booting. as way way too enthusiastic.

Any more ideas what could work?


----------



## asdkj1740

IronAge said:


> 1304 supposed to run G.SKILL 6000 with Samsung IC @ XMP II without crashing with 2DPC boards as well.


you have seen the change log?


----------



## Silent Scone

Maj0 said:


> thanks - tried also tweak mode 2 and mcvdd lower and higher. not booting or memtest errors.
> 
> SPD Info for both modules is fine. Also entered the SPD Info manually to the Board on both sticks or just one stick - isnt changing anything. Memtest only stable in stock frequency.
> 
> Currently no more idea how to run XMP1 stable with latest firmware 1304 on apex board...
> 
> The Memory profiles for samsung chips are a bad joke for me, arent still booting. as way way too enthusiastic.
> 
> Any more ideas what could work?


Kill the AC to the machine between testing settings. Make sure to try the Samsung profiles available under DRAM Timing Configurator.


----------



## Afferin

DungeonKeeper1 said:


> Is 1304 stable? Z690 Formula.





Akadaka said:


> Was wondering the same thing, I'm not really having issues with the Bios 1003, so I see no reason really to update it, given it can be risky if your power or something goes out or it fails.


I'm using a Formula too and it seems not only stable, but uses slightly less voltage for my CPU OC.


----------



## Maj0

thanks - loading the Samsung profiles are leading to system isnt booing anymore as they are way too enthusiastic.

@IronAge "1304 supposed to run G.SKILL 6000 with Samsung IC @ XMP II without crashing with 2DPC boards as well. "


would be happy if XMP I would run stable in memtest. Ram is getting quiet hot at around 71C it throws errors.
Killing AC isnt changing sth for me sadly.

So any idea?


----------



## Silent Scone

Maj0 said:


> thanks - loading the Samsung profiles are leading to system isnt booing anymore as they are way too enthusiastic.
> 
> @IronAge "1304 supposed to run G.SKILL 6000 with Samsung IC @ XMP II without crashing with 2DPC boards as well. "
> 
> 
> would be happy if XMP I would run stable in memtest. Ram is getting quiet hot at around 71C it throws errors.
> Killing AC isnt changing sth for me sadly.
> 
> So any idea?


Who knows. Usually a combination of things inc weak IMC. You're going to need to get a fan on those modules. The PMIC temps can impede stability on the early Samsung kits. IIRC, before I could do much of anything with those kits I needed active cooling.


----------



## Akadaka

Afferin said:


> I'm using a Formula too and it seems not only stable, but uses slightly less voltage for my CPU OC.


Is this with 1304?


----------



## truehighroller1

Silent Scone said:


> Use Memtest86 as a prefix before testing in the OS with a suite such as Karhu.
> 
> Weren’t you only just saying you had XMP stable yesterday? Can you tell me your memory kit part number?


It was making it through passes of memtest86 then failed towards the end of the third pass. I spoke to soon is all. FF3D532G6400HC40BDC01

As a side note mine are being actively cooled with a fan after reading some of the most recent post here I figured I should make that part clear. They reach 51C tops during TM5 so not heat related. They idle 38 I believe.

28C actually looking at them now.


----------



## Maj0

Tried a new Z690 Apex - with the G-Skill Samsung Chips .... no Chance to run XMP I on the Apex with Samsung!...

Any ideas ?


----------



## truehighroller1

Maj0 said:


> Tried a new Z690 Apex - with the G-Skill Samsung Chips .... no Chance to run XMP I on the Apex with Samsung!...
> 
> Any ideas ?


Did you put a fan on the memory yet?


----------



## Nizzen

Maj0 said:


> thanks for the answer. Did it exactly with those values little bit less and little bit more Voltage - Memtest is showing errors, no matter what I select.


Check dimm temp on load with hwinfo. Keep dimms under 60c. Under 50c or less is the best for stability.


----------



## bastian

BIOS 1304 is now official on ASUS site


----------



## 七海nana7mi

real top z690 oc mb
hero！
need more adjustments,compared with that joke mb, hero brought us too many surprises.

and， this is commercial version，2021.10 made，no gift from anyone.


----------



## Maj0

How to keep the RAM temperature stable when selecting XMP I ? ... I mean i am using 7 coolers in my system...


----------



## truehighroller1

Maj0 said:


> How to keep the RAM temperature stable when selecting XMP I ? ... I mean i am using 7 coolers in my system...



Fan in front of the memory blowing on it.


----------



## Maj0

but srsly another fan just for the ram to run XMPI? have 3 on top one behind and three on front...


----------



## truehighroller1

Maj0 said:


> but srsly another fan just for the ram to run XMPI? have 3 on top one behind and three on front...


Yes.


----------



## Silent Scone

truehighroller1 said:


> It was making it through passes of memtest86 then failed towards the end of the third pass. I spoke to soon is all. FF3D532G6400HC40BDC01
> 
> As a side note mine are being actively cooled with a fan after reading some of the most recent post here I figured I should make that part clear. They reach 51C tops during TM5 so not heat related. They idle 38 I believe.
> 
> 28C actually looking at them now.


doesnt matter, active cooling always worth trying. No different to other platforms.


----------



## truehighroller1

Silent Scone said:


> doesnt matter, active cooling always worth trying. No different to other platforms.


Agreed I have mine actively cooled with a fan blowing right on them.


----------



## Maj0

okay. so InGame RAM isnt hotter than 50 Degree ....


----------



## 7empe

Be careful with 1304 Apex. PC restart and all my saved BIOS profiles got wiped out... just like after flashing new BIOS.
Still Aura can't be disabled on power off.
RAM stability similar (bad) as with the previous versions.


----------



## truehighroller1

7empe said:


> Be careful with 1304 Apex. PC restart and all my saved BIOS profiles got wiped out... just like after flashing new BIOS.
> Still Aura can't be disabled on power off.
> RAM stability similar (bad) as with the previous versions.



Which BIOS should I use? 0086?


----------



## 7empe

truehighroller1 said:


> Which BIOS should I use? 0086?


I tried almost every version. Can't recommend any particular one. I would take the last official one and stick to it.


----------



## Mappi75

Does someone reach more than 6666 Mhz with Tweak Mode 1/2 releated?
Or does it not matter?

(flashed to 1303 but over 6666mhz the ram is not stable - booting 7000 no problem)


Edit: but it seems that 1304 bios need more voltage for ram then the previous version.


----------



## 7empe

Mappi75 said:


> Does someone reach more than 6666 Mhz with Tweak Mode 1/2 releated?
> Or does it not matter?
> 
> (flashed to 1303 but over 6666mhz the ram is not stable - booting 7000 no problem)


6800c30. Mode doesn’t matter to me.


----------



## grifers

edkieferlp said:


> The first thing I did when I got my TUF was to disable the armor crate in bios.


But then with which software can I change the rgb of the board to fixed colour, it is only possible with the armoury crater, isn't it?


----------



## 七海nana7mi

hero 0028
hynix 16*2 6933 30 40 pass mtpro


----------



## truehighroller1

七海nana7mi said:


> hero 0028
> hynix 16*2 6933 30 40 pass mtpro
> 
> View attachment 2551574


What're your voltages?


----------



## 七海nana7mi

truehighroller1 said:


> What're your voltages?


vdd 1.6v vddq 1.5v


----------



## truehighroller1

七海nana7mi said:


> vdd 1.6v vddq 1.5v


What about your imc and vscca?


----------



## Arni90

When changing base clock, does anyone else experience their previously stable memory overclock becoming unstable?

For example 64x 100 MHz vs 56x 114.25 MHz.

I thought there was some limitation in my 12900K causing this, but I can change base clock without issues on the Z690 Unify-X. Curious to know if this was something only my Z690 Apex had issues with, or multiple.


----------



## Silent Scone

7empe said:


> 6800c30. Mode doesn’t matter to me.


Tweak Mode 2 is most likely more useful with Samsung. Hynix kits don't need the same concessions that using the modes accommodates for


----------



## IronAge

truehighroller1 said:


> Which BIOS should I use? 0086?


For Apex with Hynix IC Modules 0086 is Choice of Hwbot Champions.


----------



## truehighroller1

edkieferlp said:


> I wrote down the 3 training edits he made even though I am on DDR4.
> here ones he switched but view the vid as you get the whole story.
> 
> SenseAmp Offset Training [Auto] > disabled
> Round Trip Latency [Auto] > enabled
> Turn Around Timing Training [Auto] > disabled


This helped and it makes sense now. I have an early production board just like he does. Thank you for posting this.


----------



## edkieferlp

truehighroller1 said:


> This helped and it makes sense now. I have an early production board just like he does. Thank you for posting this.


glad it could help, that is why I posted it, seeing many here have trouble with 5x00+ freq's.
I also checked my DDR4 MB bios and I have those settings too but I don't have issues with speeds I run (3867).

Oh, did those settings make posting real long, his MB takes forever to boot compared to mine.


----------



## truehighroller1

edkieferlp said:


> glad it could help, that is why I posted it, seeing many here have trouble with 5x00+ freq's.
> I also checked my DDR4 MB bios and I have those settings too but I don't have issues with speeds I run (3867).
> 
> Oh, did those settings make posting real long, his MB takes forever to boot compared to mine.


Yeah I still need a new motherboard but this helped a lot. My decent, imc is crying inside I can hear it 😂


----------



## truehighroller1

If people here had a chance to get an extreme glacier mind you I've heard people complaining about their extremes as well would you take that over this, the apex? I'm leaning towards no.

Asus told me to kick rocks 🤣. Escalated again, I pushed back. This is terrible! Worst customer experience I've ever had in my life. Now, l wait another 24-48 business hours for a response from the same management team that told me to kick rocks originally. This thing's still not stable. Even after watching that video that buildzoid made that was definitely helpful., A tiny bit it would seem anyway.


----------



## getskillplz

Im kinda new to ram OC. I got the G.Skill Trident 6000 CL 36 (Samsung). 

What i did i changed the speed to 6200 and put the voltage to 1.45. I also reduced the timing to get the max speed i can get out of it. But i get errors after a few seconds in memtest. 
Any what i also have to edit? Im on a Maximus Hero with Bios 1302. 
I mean there are alot of videos already but its stilly kinda confusing so would be cool if someone can tell me what should check, functions in bios. 

Thanks!

CPU is running on 5,2 @ P-Cores & 4,1 E-Cores.


----------



## Maj0

@getskillrunning stable on xmp I ?


----------



## bscool

truehighroller1 said:


> If people here had a chance to get an extreme glacier mind you I've heard people complaining about their extremes as well would you take that over this, the apex? I'm leaning towards no.
> 
> Asus told me to kick rocks 🤣. Escalated again, I pushed back. This is terrible! Worst customer experience I've ever had in my life. Now, l wait another 24-48 business hours for a response from the same management team that told me to kick rocks originally. This thing's still not stable. Even after watching that video that buildvoid made that was definitely helpful., the tiny bit it would seem anyway.


Why keeping buying Asus if you have so many issues. I would just get a Unify X and then if you still have issues you will know it wasnt the MB if it runs say 6600to 6800 stable it was MB.

I have used both MSI and Asus the last few gens and I prefer Asus but it I was set on running high frequency the easy choice is Unify X if you dont want to bin Apex.


----------



## centvalny

تسجيل الدخول إلى فيسبوك


قم بتسجيل الدخول إلى فيسبوك لبدء المشاركة والتواصل مع أصدقائك وعائلتك والأشخاص الذين تعرفهم.




www.facebook.com




Dunno why the link shows with urdu, but good info about xmp.


----------



## Ghoosti

@ truehighroller1

I have an Extreme on 1304 and still cannot do 6200 xmp1, error in Memtest 😢


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> Why keeping buying Asus if you have so many issues. I would just get a Unify X and then if you still have issues you will know it wasnt the MB if it runs say 6600to 6800 stable it was MB.
> 
> I have used both MSI and Asus the last few gens and I prefer Asus but it I was set on running high frequency the easy choice is Unify X if you dont want to bin Apex.


It's the principle of the matter. Buildzoid said himself the early models were bad. It's a joke that thing was sold to a customer. I reinstalled my wifi d4, right back to stable. I checked over the apex. I don't see anything obvious wrong with it.



Ghoosti said:


> @ truehighroller1
> 
> I have an Extreme on 1304 and still cannot do 6200 xmp1, error in Memtest 😢



That's why I'm scared to get an extreme too.. I'd rather just get a good Apex which is what I assumed I had paid good money for, guess I was wrong. Sorry to hear that man. I feel your pain.


----------



## Feklar

grifers said:


> But then with which software can I change the rgb of the board to fixed colour, it is only possible with the armoury crater, isn't it?


Use openrgb. It's free and works perfectly without having to use armoury crate or aura. I'd never use AC or Aura again.


----------



## Akadaka

Has anyone updated to 1304 with the Formula? and if so how stable is it?


----------



## getskillplz

Maj0 said:


> @getskillrunning stable on xmp I ?


Yep, it runs stable without any errors on xmp I

EDIT: sry im using XMP 2, still runs stable <


----------



## DungeonKeeper1

Me not. Staying save on 0811.


----------



## Silent Scone

truehighroller1 said:


> It's the principle of the matter. Buildzoid said himself the early models were bad. It's a joke that thing was sold to a customer. I reinstalled my wifi d4, right back to stable. I checked over the apex. I don't see anything obvious wrong with it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's why I'm scared to get an extreme too.. I'd rather just get a good Apex which is what I assumed I had paid good money for, guess I was wrong. Sorry to hear that man. I feel your pain.



If you'd like, send me your CPU, motherboard, and memory and I'll tune it for you FOC. I'll even swap boards if it helps bring this discourse to a close lol.
Use a different motherboard, whatever model or vendor it may be, and surmise some more philosophy as to why the outcome occurred and what's to blame.
Try Hynix kits if not done so already as they seem to fall more in favour with the platform, and more importantly with users looking for plug & play.

Or you can continue to die on the hill you're currently on. There are no guarantees with overclocking.


----------



## pcdiye

Whether there some fault design for the hyper M.2 card shipped with the Z690 hero ?

I noticed that with 1003 bios default, bios can recognize the 2 SSDs on hyper card, but only 1 of the 2 be recognized by windows 11 (latest stable version, not dev channel.)
From asus support team's feedback, mark PCH ASPM DISABLE can work around this bug. But this workaround makes PCH temp goes high to 70+, previously also something near 70.

With the 1304 bios, finally windows 11 can recognize the 2 SSDs on hyper card now. But it will lose 1 again if click reboot from the Start of windows 11.
Absolutely it is a BIOS bug. I really suspect that asus bios team test what they released.
This should be serious issue, basic function you are selling are not promised. How we could expect more additional performance from ASUS ?

EDIT:

There do exist good things, with 1304 bios, the PCH temp drops greatly from previous idle 70+ to about 57.
I think in other posts there are ROG guys says 70+ is normal, it is just kidding.
Anyway, the basic funtions asus selling should be promised. Otherwise, I just think the hyper card design is a fault one like the inverted capacitor fire.
The stupid RGB lights doesn't worth the ROG tax we spent.


----------



## truehighroller1

Silent Scone said:


> If you'd like, send me your CPU, motherboard, and memory and I'll tune it for you FOC. I'll even swap boards if it helps bring this discourse to a close lol.
> Use a different motherboard, whatever model or vendor it may be, and surmise some more philosophy as to why the outcome occurred and what's to blame.
> Try Hynix kits if not done so already as they seem to fall more in favour with the platform, and more importantly with users looking for plug & play.
> 
> Or you can continue to die on the hill you're currently on. There are no guarantees with overclocking.



My memory is hynix 6400 cas 40 on qvl. I've swapped memory 3 times and CPU three times.

I'm back on my wifi d4 0901 BIOS.










The CPU has a decent IMC, It's the motherboard. It would be lower latency if I didn't have armory crate installed.


----------



## sugi0lover

truehighroller1 said:


> My memory is hynix 6400 cas 40 on qvl. I've swapped memory 3 times and CPU three times.
> 
> I'm back on my wifi d4 0901 BIOS.
> 
> View attachment 2551664
> 
> 
> The CPU has a decent IMC, It's the motherboard. It would be lower latency if I didn't have armory crate installed.


I read somewhere that you can't tell your imc is good for DDR5 based on DDR4 result. heard they are separate. 
Can someone who has more knowledge eloborate this? I am also curious.


----------



## truehighroller1

sugi0lover said:


> I read somewhere that you can't tell your imc is good for DDR5 based on DDR4 result. heard they are separate.
> Can someone who has more knowledge eloborate this? I am also curious.



I saw someone say him pushing his blck further on his new cpu was pointing towards a better imc as well. I don't know. I'd love to see someone make an easy way to tell honestly. I don't think three different cpus would have bad imc's though as I went through three different cpu's and this one is my best bin. It's a SP 97 Pcore and SP68 Ecore combined sp87 global.

My cpu was very close to bscool's memory overclocking wise on this board. Asus sent him an engineering sample when he could not do over 6400 on his apex he bought, and now he can do 7000 with the ES he was sent. I honestly think the one thing I haven't tried changing out, the motherboard is the issue. I was literally on @geriatricpollywog in 3dmark bench scores and that is without putting this outside like he was. He's got a beasty setup.


----------



## bscool

My old 2021 I could run 6800c30 y cruncher what can you run @truehighroller1 with your MB? 6400 was highest I ran games but passed Karhu at 6666c30

With 2022 MB I can run 7000c32 y cruncher. 7000c32 Karhu

On z690 Strix d4 I was 4266c16 memtest stable with DR. My IMC isnt the best but it up there.

So even my old Apex is doing much better than yours so I think it is somewhat my imc is better and I think I spend maybe? more time tweaking. I went thru testing every single sub timing which few people will do as it take a massive amount of time. Same for voltages I have literally weeks of tuning into this.

If you cant get 6400 to 6666 stable like I could on my old MB I think it is down to more than the MB being the issue for you. And did this all with 1 cpu and 1 kit of mem on old Apex. I have not binned cpus and ddr5 on the old Apex.

Link to my Karhu with 6666c30 and 6800 y cruncher on 2021 Apex









[OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread


CR2




www.overclock.net













*Official* Intel DDR5 OC and 24/7 daily Memory Stability...


are these the stock ddr4 heatsinks and do they fit ddr5? Or are these custom copper ones? I found the posts from @sugi0lover. I knew I read it somewhere in here. https://www.overclock.net/threads/official-intel-ddr5-oc-and-24-7-daily-memory-stability-thread.1794772/post-28938076...




www.overclock.net


----------



## Silent Scone

sugi0lover said:


> I read somewhere that you can't tell your imc is good for DDR5 based on DDR4 result. heard they are separate.
> Can someone who has more knowledge eloborate this? I am also curious.


 Do you mean other than 4133MHz being substantially less than 6200MHz? The higher frequency we run, the tighter the timing budget becomes and the less overhead there is. Doesn't make much sense to cross-reference two different designs. On top of that, there's a wider burst length, and each DIMM is compressed of two channels. You're fairly well versed so I'm sure you can appreciate as much as I can that all those things make cross-referencing a bit of a moot point.


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> My old 2021 I could run 6800c30 y cruncher what can you run @truehighroller1 with your MB? 6400 was highest I ran games but passed Karhu at 6666c30
> 
> With 2022 MB I can run 7000c32 y cruncher. 7000c32 Karhu
> 
> On z690 Strix d4 I was 4266c16 memtest stable with DR. My IMC isnt the best but it up there.
> 
> So even my old Apex is doing much better than yours so I think it is somewhat my imc is better and I think I spend maybe? more time tweaking. I went thru testing every single sub timing which few people will do as it take a massive amount of time. Same for voltages I have literally weeks of tuning into this.
> 
> If you cant get 6400 to 6666 stable like I could on my old MB I think it is down to more than the MB being the issue for yo. And did this all with 1 cpu and 1 kit of mem on old Apex. I have not binned cpus and ddr5 on the old Apex.
> 
> Link to my Karhu with 6666c30 on 2021 Apex
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread
> 
> 
> CR2
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Official* Intel DDR5 OC and 24/7 daily Memory Stability...
> 
> 
> are these the stock ddr4 heatsinks and do they fit ddr5? Or are these custom copper ones? I found the posts from @sugi0lover. I knew I read it somewhere in here. https://www.overclock.net/threads/official-intel-ddr5-oc-and-24-7-daily-memory-stability-thread.1794772/post-28938076...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net



I was able to boot into windows 6600 I didn't try any further because I could never get 6400 stable. I wanted to be stable there first then work my way up like I did with this board. I tried for a month all voltages and, all timings etc. Same as buildzoid, came to conclusion that the board just doesn't want to do any higher. I had a stable oc at cas 28 6200 1t at one point updated bios and lost the config obviously but, again wanted 6400 stable first. I spent way to much time, trying to tweak that thing.


----------



## bscool

truehighroller1 said:


> I was able to boot into windows 6600 I didn't try any further because I could never get 6400 stable. I wanted to be stable there first then work my way up like I did with this board. I tried for a month all voltages and, all timings etc. Same as buildzoid, came to conclusion that the board just doesn't want to do any higher. I had a stable oc at cas 28 6200 1t at one point updated bios and lost the config obviously but, again wanted 6400 stable first. I spent way to much time, trying to tweak that thing.


See I had no issue with 6400 easy even 1t. Buildzoid doesnt have a good IMC he has even said that. Even on other ddr5 mb he doesnt very good clocks or timings.


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> See I had no issue with 6400 easy even 1t. Buildzoid doesnt have a good IMC he has even said that. Even on other ddr5 mb he doesnt very good clocks or timings.



I tried three different cpus. All the same. I believe he also said he can boot higher on other boards to so and he also said if you can't go any higher it's the board not something you're doing wrong...






Starts off right where he mentions what I just said. The early boards are not that great. The newer ones seem to be more consistent. He goes on to say if you bought an apex close to launch and it sucks, it's because it sucks that's what's going on with that. It's not that you're doing something wrong.


----------



## sugi0lover

Silent Scone said:


> Do you mean other than 4133MHz being substantially less than 6200MHz? The higher frequency we run, the tighter the timing budget becomes and the less overhead there is. Doesn't make much sense to cross-reference two different designs. On top of that, there's a wider burst length, and each DIMM is compressed of two channels. You're fairly well versed so I'm sure you can appreciate as much as I can that all those things make cross-referencing a bit of a moot point.


I just found the posting in Korean PC forum.
12세대 메모리 컨트롤러 채널과 DDR5의 연결, DDR5 용 tm5 추천 설정
(It's written in Korean, so you may need chrome translation)
The writer says that 12th gen has two memory controllers for DDR5 (one mc for DDR4), and each mc consists of two channels, so unlike DDR4, both memory controllers should be good for overcloking DDR5.
I don't actually know what he said is true or not.


----------



## Arni90

sugi0lover said:


> I read somewhere that you can't tell your imc is good for DDR5 based on DDR4 result. heard they are separate.
> Can someone who has more knowledge eloborate this? I am also curious.


The voltages are separate at the very least. DDR4 memory controller mostly cares about system agent voltage, while DDR5 memory controller is "MC VDD" / VDD2 as well as VDDQ to some extent.

I've tested both DDR4 and DDR5 on my 12900K. It could do 4266 with DDR4 at 1.45V VCCSA, while DDR5-6800C30 is stable at 1.25V VDD2 and 1.40V CPU-side VDDQ on the MSI Z690 Unify-X (6933 boots, not stable).

The Maximus Z690 Apex I had needed 1.325V MC VDD to run 6400C30, with both CPU-side and memory-side VDDQ at 1.65V.



I also had massive issues with memory stability if I touched base clock on the Z690 Apex, I could get 6400C30 stable at 100 MHz base clock, but 115 base clock and 6210 was completely unstable. Do you have similar experiences with base clock on your Z690 Apex @sugi0lover ?


----------



## sugi0lover

Arni90 said:


> The voltages are separate at the very least. DDR4 memory controller mostly cares about system agent voltage, while DDR5 memory controller is "MC VDD" / VDD2 as well as VDDQ to some extent.
> 
> I've tested both DDR4 and DDR5 on my 12900K. It could do 4266 with DDR4 at 1.45V VCCSA, while DDR5-6800C30 is stable at 1.25V VDD2 and 1.40V CPU-side VDDQ on the MSI Z690 Unify-X (6933 boots, not stable).
> 
> The Maximus Z690 Apex I had needed 1.325V MC VDD to run 6400C30, with both CPU-side and memory-side VDDQ at 1.65V.
> 
> 
> 
> I also had massive issues with memory stability if I touched base clock on the Z690 Apex, I could get 6400C30 stable at 100 MHz base clock, but 115 base clock and 6210 was completely unstable. Do you have similar experiences with base clock on your Z690 Apex @sugi0lover ?


Thanks for sharing info.
About bclk oc, I have never went that high bclk. My bclk oc is like only under 103.


----------



## Arni90

sugi0lover said:


> Thanks for sharing info.
> About bclk oc, I have never went that high bclk. My bclk oc is like only under 103.


I think it could help pinpoint the issues with memory overclocking at the very least. If the issue is only present on boards that struggle with DDR5 overclocking, then people know what to look for. While if the issue is present on all boards, then there's another weird bug with the Z690 Apex.


----------



## edkieferlp

Silent Scone said:


> Do you mean other than 4133MHz being substantially less than 6200MHz? The higher frequency we run, the tighter the timing budget becomes and the less overhead there is. Doesn't make much sense to cross-reference two different designs. On top of that, there's a wider burst length, and each DIMM is compressed of two channels. You're fairly well versed so I'm sure you can appreciate as much as I can that all those things make cross-referencing a bit of a moot point.


Yeah but that is not apples vs apples, as DDR5 runs in gear2 where DDR4 can run gear1 and even with CR=1. I don't think we can compare one against another if one runs good vers the other bad. There are just too many changes in DDR4 to DDR5. it is not like before with DDR3 vers DDR4.


----------



## Silent Scone

edkieferlp said:


> Yeah but that is not apples vs apples, as DDR5 runs in gear2 where DDR4 can run gear1 and even with CR=1. I don't think we can compare one against another if one runs good vers the other bad. There are just too many changes in DDR4 to DDR5. it is not like before with DDR3 vers DDR4.


Frequency is still intrinsically related to signaling regardless but you're right the different gearing is another factor to add into an already mixed bag.



sugi0lover said:


> I just found the posting in Korean PC forum.
> 12세대 메모리 컨트롤러 채널과 DDR5의 연결, DDR5 용 tm5 추천 설정
> (It's written in Korean, so you may need chrome translation)
> The writer says that 12th gen has two memory controllers for DDR5 (one mc for DDR4), and each mc consists of two channels, so unlike DDR4, both memory controllers should be good for overcloking DDR5.
> I don't actually know what he said is true or not.


There are in fact two different memory controllers, that's correct. It depends on the DPC and board configuration

Scatterbench covered this at launch quite well (See 6.6)



https://skatterbencher.com/2021/11/04/alder-lake-overclocking-whats-new/


----------



## bscool

Anyone compare mode 1 vs mode 2 to and look at RTL/IOLs? I see no difference in how they are trained on both 2021 and 2022 Apex.

Other users say they train tighter on mode 2.

Discussing it over in another thread _Official_ Intel DDR5 OC and 24/7 daily Memory Stability...

Just curious to see/hear others results.


----------



## truehighroller1

Unfortunately you only have about ten people to get opinions from at this point.


----------



## bscool

truehighroller1 said:


> Unfortunately you only have about ten people to get opinions from at this point.


You dont need a 2022 Apex to see if mode 1 is different on rtls/iol from mode 2 that is what I was asking. I was just stating I tested on both 2021 and 2022 and saw no difference.

I am guessing it has to do with many factors and @shamino1978 could tell us for sure if mode 2 will always train them tighter.

I just thought it was interesting some say mode 2 trains them tigher but it doesnt for me.


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> You dont need a 2022 Apex to see if mode 1 is different on rtls/iol from mode 2 that is what I was asking. I was just stating I tested on both 2021 and 2022 and saw no difference.
> 
> I am guessing it has to do with many factors and @shamino1978 could tell us for sure if mode 2 will always train them tighter.
> 
> I just thought it was interesting some say mode 2 trains them tigher but it doesnt for me.



I was being funny and depressed same time. I didn't see a difference myself. From what I read hynix won't make a difference Samsung will.

Hey hey Asus contacted me for my address!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## leftheaded

question about the Formula PCIe lane config...

Formula manual says the chipset provides:

"1 x PCIe 4.0 x16 slot (support x4 mode or x4/x4 mode)***"
"***When ROG Hyper M.2 card is installed on PCIEX16(G4), Hyper M.2_1 *and *Hyper M.2_2 slots can support PCIe 4.0 x4 mode." 
"Enable the PCIEX16(G4) to support x4/x4 mode for 2 SSDs under BIOS settings."

and I'm trying to figure out if there will be (theoretical) performance bottlenecks on the following use:

PCIEX16(G5)_1 = x16 from CPU, RTX 3090
M.2_1 = x4 from CPU, 2TB NVMe OS
PCIEX16(G4) = x4/x4 from chipset, ROG Hyper M.2 card with 2x 2TB NVMe data in RAID0
but what I actually want is that above with a dual port 25Gbe NIC. So what about this:

PCIEX16(G5)_1 = x16 from CPU, RTX 3090
M.2_1 = x4 from CPU, 2TB NVMe OS
PCIEX16(G4) = x4 from chipset, dual-port 25Gb NIC
M.2_2 = PCIe 3.0 x4 from chipset, 2TB NVMe data in RAID0 with M.2_3
M.2_3 = PCIe 4.0 x4 from chipset, 2TB NVMe data
Does RAID0 help alleviate some of the performance hit from saturating the PCIe 3.0 M.2_2 slot?


----------



## 七海nana7mi

sugi0lover said:


> I just found the posting in Korean PC forum.
> 12세대 메모리 컨트롤러 채널과 DDR5의 연결, DDR5 용 tm5 추천 설정
> (It's written in Korean, so you may need chrome translation)
> The writer says that 12th gen has two memory controllers for DDR5 (one mc for DDR4), and each mc consists of two channels, so unlike DDR4, both memory controllers should be good for overcloking DDR5.
> I don't actually know what he said is true or not.


this is true，there are two imc in adl，but from my practice, it's not unrelated，If d4 g1 is high frequency, d5 g2 won't suck，but it's not necessarily very good


----------



## pcdiye

In fact, i checked the datasheet of ADL on Intel website several monthes ago, if i remember correctly, the 2 memory controllers are independent.


----------



## Silent Scone

bscool said:


> Anyone compare mode 1 vs mode 2 to and look at RTL/IOLs? I see no difference in how they are trained on both 2021 and 2022 Apex.
> 
> Other users say they train tighter on mode 2.
> 
> Discussing it over in another thread _Official_ Intel DDR5 OC and 24/7 daily Memory Stability...
> 
> Just curious to see/hear others results.


Changing Tweak Modes doesn't impact RTLs on my system however TM2 provides MRC tweaks for me that help with 6400 and above.


----------



## Mappi75

Question to the 6.666+ Mhz Users:

1. Did you load -first- the xmp profile and then stepping up to 7000+ Mhz
2. Or did you setup all manual in the bios without touching the xmp profile?

Thank you (still no chance to reach over 6666mhz, i will swap the ram sticks on the mobo too)


----------



## bscool

@Mappi75 I dont set xmp. I just enable the high voltage setting for memory and manually set vdd and vddq.

I have tried setting other mem voltages manually and didnt notice much of a difference either way so now I leave everything else on auto other than for cpu I set llc and manual vcore.

Edit this on the last couple of bioses like 1302 and 1304. On older bioses I set more voltages manually didnt really try them with voltages left on auto.


----------



## Mappi75

Thank you, swapping the ram sticks does not work for me.

But ATM it looks good set Voltage to 1,53v on both sticks and 7000mhz
the board uses (by its own) 40-40-40-76-2 and tm5 still running (normaly it crashes very early).

Hope this will work! 
Edit: crash after 40 minutes much longer stable the normal, will try 1,55v
i will try to master 6800 first.


----------



## 7empe

Apex 11/2021 and 6800c30 tested by y-cruncher. RTLs have significant influence on stability, however I can’t correlate them with any of TM. If board has 62/57/63/57, y-cruncher is stable. If it is 62/57/62/57 it is not. So far I did not find a trigger that may cause this difference in training.


Silent Scone said:


> Changing Tweak Modes doesn't impact RTLs on my system however TM2 provides MRC tweaks for me that help with 6400 and above.


What kind of MRC tweaks?


----------



## Silent Scone

7empe said:


> Apex 11/2021 and 6800c30 tested by y-cruncher. RTLs have significant influence on stability, however I can’t correlate them with any of TM. If board has 62/57/63/57, y-cruncher is stable. If it is 62/57/62/57 it is not. So far I did not find a trigger that may cause this difference in training.
> 
> What kind of MRC tweaks?


Whichever one’s enable me to achieve more stability whilst in Mode 2 on Samsung modules. Normally impedance matching etc


----------



## truehighroller1

7empe said:


> Apex 11/2021 and 6800c30 tested by y-cruncher. RTLs have significant influence on stability, however I can’t correlate them with any of TM. If board has 62/57/63/57, y-cruncher is stable. If it is 62/57/62/57 it is not. So far I did not find a trigger that may cause this difference in training.
> 
> What kind of MRC tweaks?



You can control them but, I'm guessing you might know that. Under the RTL s section you can set the range to boot to and it works. You can set the range to be between five numbers, both sets of rtls, both channels. I used it to get mine to align correctly when they were not, towards the end of me messing with it.

So, ch a or whatever 57-62 next 52-57, ch b 57-62 next 52-57

They will then align first boot.


----------



## vigorito

My xmp on strix is broken on 1304 gaming E model,im gettings bsods one after another,when i disable xmp its all normal,12700/adata xpg lancer 5300 2x16gb rgb,after cmos reset its the same maybe i should reseat the ram? if not i guess im going back to 1303..any thoughts


----------



## Lord Alzov

Mappi75 said:


> Question to the 6.666+ Mhz Users:
> 
> 1. Did you load -first- the xmp profile and then stepping up to 7000+ Mhz
> 2. Or did you setup all manual in the bios without touching the xmp profile?
> 
> Thank you (still no chance to reach over 6666mhz, i will swap the ram sticks on the mobo too)


Manual


----------



## 七海nana7mi

if your dram in your mb can't 6800 join os or no can pass test
i think u no need again do frequency test
resistance no good，this incurable
only can compress timing,improve efficiency or reduce delay
if only need high frequency show
close these


----------



## stahlhart

vigorito said:


> My xmp on strix is broken on 1304 gaming E model,im gettings bsods one after another,when i disable xmp its all normal,12700/adata xpg lancer 5300 2x16gb rgb,after cmos reset its the same maybe i should reseat the ram? if not i guess im going back to 1303..any thoughts


XMP appears to be working okay with 1304 on mine -- I say "appears to be" because I didn't stay there very long, only for the initial setup after updating the BIOS.

Have you tried manual settings for frequency, gear mode and BCLK, and leaving all other timing settings at auto, just to start off?


----------



## sblantipodi

I'm moved, I'm programming since days, compiling code, testing with memtest/ram test during night, no error at all with 1304, Extreme, 4 sticks Corsair Hynix @ 5.2GHz C36.
I'm moved... xD


----------



## Mappi75

I'am not 100% sure but for me it looks that offical bios 1304 is more difficult to get stable,
on 1101 my 6666 32-40-40-30-2T setup was 100% stable at 1,40v ram voltage and 1,15 SA.

On 1304 i have now difficulties to get -this- setup stable now i must running higher DRAM voltage (1,42-1,45)
but still not sure if its now 100% perfect stable (still testing). Something is wrong here...

(as always i do a real bios reset and so on, testing with tm5/Karhu/hci memtest and GSAT)

So no wonder that i cant go any higher than 6666+ mhz when with bios 1304 the old setup is not stable anymore..

Cooling is no problem using Noctua NF-A8 PWM 80mm fans which have an excellent
mm H2O of 2,37 (as layman: it makes much more concentrated wind than 90mm or 120mm models). I do a real world comparison all noctua fans.


----------



## vigorito

stahlhart said:


> XMP appears to be working okay with 1304 on mine -- I say "appears to be" because I didn't stay there very long, only for the initial setup after updating the BIOS.
> 
> Have you tried manual settings for frequency, gear mode and BCLK, and leaving all other timing settings at auto, just to start off?


I had never tried manual setting since i had always problems  just xmp,okay so i have to set it up manual to a 5200mhz freq. and thats it ? what about that gear and bclk what i have to input there?
this is not only bug with asus,mobo has shipped with 1003 bios,issue is every time i get into bios to change some value (basic ones) bios just freeze itself so and i have to press power button and restart,if i want to change something i had to do quick about 1min maximum,if it freeze all value that i changed are not saved (cmos reset does not help via back button or battery) ,so yesterday i updated to 1304 and freezing is still there but i have more time to change settings,lets say about 2min plus xmp its totally broken,its not working in any combination,few min ago i swap ram from 2/4 to 1/3 ,same issue,maybe i can do one more time cmos but honesty not sure thats gonna help,i did it 20 times


----------



## sblantipodi

sblantipodi said:


> I'm moved, I'm programming since days, compiling code, testing with memtest/ram test during night, no error at all with 1304, Extreme, 4 sticks Corsair Hynix @ 5.2GHz C36.
> I'm moved... xD


Ok I was joking. 
Ram led stopped working and the PC hanged on the next reboot.

@safedisk isn't 1304 supposed to fix this problem?
4x16GB Hynix here on Extreme.

When the PC freeze on reboot it hangs in detect memory shown on the oled screen and 01 error code.


----------



## Mappi75

Is there any hint behind that some guys lowering the VDDQ (SWB) Voltages?

VDD (SWA) Voltage (is set higher)
VDDQ (SWB) Voltage (is set lower)

does this works better with different voltages?
or it doesn't matter when both running with the same voltage?

Thanks.


----------



## Nizzen

Mappi75 said:


> Is there any hint behind that some guys lowering the VDDQ (SWB) Voltages?
> 
> VDD (SWA) Voltage (is set higher)
> VDDQ (SWB) Voltage (is set lower)
> 
> does this works better with different voltages?
> or it doesn't matter when both running with the same voltage?
> 
> Thanks.


Running 1T, I'm running the same voltage. Running high speed and 2t. My Vddq is about 0.1v lower than Vdd. Maybe random, but whatever works. For me it looks like my cpu or dimms don't like much more than 1.5v Vddq. Vdd at 1.65v is ok


----------



## vigorito

if we are using xmp 1/2,what option has to be under AI tweaking :
1) lets asus optimize
2) Disable enforce all limits
3) Enable unlock all limits

and anyone here is with 2x16gb,which ram slot are you using


----------



## edkieferlp

vigorito said:


> if we are using xmp 1/2,what option has to be under AI tweaking :
> 1) lets asus optimize
> 2) Disable enforce all limits
> 3) Enable unlock all limits
> 
> and anyone here is with 2x16gb,which ram slot are you using


Those settings are for the power limits and current.
The "disable enforce all limits" is the most aggressive of the bunch in limited power, this is Intel's spec.
If you want max power available use 3, enable unlock all limits.

On the memory slot usage check the manual but for most Intel-based platforms you use the very last slot from the CPU socket, skip one, and next one in.
So if we count from CPU socket out, 1, 2, 3, 4 slots you use 2 and 4 for two sticks.


----------



## vigorito

okay,i set manualy dram freq to 5200mhz,nothing else around dram settings i wasnt changing,works for now


----------



## edkieferlp

truehighroller1 said:


> You can control them but, I'm guessing you might know that. Under the RTL s section you can set the range to boot to and it works. You can set the range to be between five numbers, both sets of rtls, both channels. I used it to get mine to align correctly when they were not, towards the end of me messing with it.
> 
> So, ch a or whatever 57-62 next 52-57, ch b 57-62 next 52-57
> 
> They will then align first boot.


Are you talking about these?

Round Trip Latency Init Value MC0 CHA [Auto]
Round Trip Latency Max Value MC0 CHA [Auto]


----------



## truehighroller1

edkieferlp said:


> Are you talking about these?
> 
> Round Trip Latency Init Value MC0 CHA [Auto]
> Round Trip Latency Max Value MC0 CHA [Auto]



Yes. There should be four sets of those in there. The first two control mc0 and the second two sets control mc1 or whatever they call it. Guessing they look like this then based on your posting the first set.

Round Trip Latency Init Value MC0 CHA [57]
Round Trip Latency Max Value MC0 CHA [62]

Round Trip Latency Init Value MC0 CHB [52]
Round Trip Latency Max Value MC0 CHB [57]

Round Trip Latency Init Value MC1 CHA [57]
Round Trip Latency Max Value MC1 CHA [62]

Round Trip Latency Init Value MC1 CHB [52]
Round Trip Latency Max Value MC1 CHB [57]


Those settings would fix his issue ^^

Those will allow you to tell it what to boot too. With limits I'm sure but, if it is one rtl off like he mentioned in putting the numbers for instance that I told him too based on his situation, will fix it first boot. I did it myself on mine and it works every time first boot.

I'm just saying with limits because I'm sure you can't force it to boot to a lower rtl using that. You'll have to boot and see the general area that you should be in number wise rtl wise that the system wants to be around for your memory speed. Hell you might be able to lower one rtl, I don't know but I wouldn't depend on that being the case but it will fix the issue he was talking about with one being one rtl off.

I'm waiting on my motherboard replacement from asus otherwise I would have posted the exact wording sorry. I'm supposed to get a call from them today about my replacement they're sending me.


----------



## edkieferlp

truehighroller1 said:


> Yes. There should be four sets of those in there. The first two control mc0 and the second two sets control mc1 or whatever they call it. Guessing they look like this then based on your posting the first set.
> 
> Round Trip Latency Init Value MC0 CHA [57]
> Round Trip Latency Max Value MC0 CHA [62]
> 
> Round Trip Latency Init Value MC0 CHB [52]
> Round Trip Latency Max Value MC0 CHB [57]
> 
> Round Trip Latency Init Value MC1 CHA [57]
> Round Trip Latency Max Value MC1 CHA [62]
> 
> Round Trip Latency Init Value MC1 CHB [52]
> Round Trip Latency Max Value MC1 CHB [57]
> 
> 
> Those settings would fix his issue ^^
> 
> Those will allow you to tell it what to boot too. With limits I'm sure but, if it is one rtl off like he mentioned in putting the numbers for instance that I told him too based on his situation, will fix it first boot. I did it myself on mine and it works every time first boot.
> 
> I'm just saying with limits because I'm sure you can't force it to boot to a lower rtl using that. You'll have to boot and see the general area that you should be in number wise rtl wise that the system wants to be around for your memory speed. Hell you might be able to lower one rtl, I don't know but I wouldn't depend on that being the case but it will fix the issue he was talking about with one being one rtl off.
> 
> I'm waiting on my motherboard replacement from asus otherwise I would have posted the exact wording sorry. I'm supposed to get a call from them today about my replacement they're sending me.


Yup, I only posted part of default settings, mine look like this but my question is, did you have to check first that the "Round Trip Latency Init Value MC1 CHB [52]" would boot at 52 or it just tries to get there and you may wind up with a 54 or whatever higher works?

here is what I have on mine and I get 73 on both channels. (you can see I didn't set initial values as this works )

Round Trip Latency Init Value MC0 CHA [Auto]
Round Trip Latency Max Value MC0 CHA [73]
Round Trip Latency Offset Value Mode Sign MC0 CHA [-]
Round Trip Latency Offset Value MC0 CHA [0]
Round Trip Latency Init Value MC1 CHA [Auto]
Round Trip Latency Max Value MC1 CHA [73]
Round Trip Latency Offset Value Mode Sign MC1 CHA [-]
Round Trip Latency Offset Value MC1 CHA [0]


----------



## truehighroller1

edkieferlp said:


> Yup, I only posted part of default settings, mine look like this but my question is, did you have to check first that the "Round Trip Latency Init Value MC1 CHB [52]" would boot at 52 or it just tries to get there and you may wind up with a 54 or whatever higher works?
> 
> here is what I have on mine and I get 73 on both channels. (you can see I didn't set initial values as this works )
> 
> Round Trip Latency Init Value MC0 CHA [Auto]
> Round Trip Latency Max Value MC0 CHA [73]
> Round Trip Latency Offset Value Mode Sign MC0 CHA [-]
> Round Trip Latency Offset Value MC0 CHA [0]
> Round Trip Latency Init Value MC1 CHA [Auto]
> Round Trip Latency Max Value MC1 CHA [73]
> Round Trip Latency Offset Value Mode Sign MC1 CHA [-]
> Round Trip Latency Offset Value MC1 CHA [0]



Hey, if it works. I just gave it a range for the heck of it, no reason really. It worked and I remembered that it worked. If that works too, do it.

If you can force it lower as well and your stable post back that it worked to lower it as well. I did not mess with the offset values that you have posted there in your comment just the initial and max value ones for both controllers and both channels of the two controllers.


----------



## edkieferlp

truehighroller1 said:


> Hey, if it works. I just gave it a range for the heck of it, no reason really. It worked and I remembered that it worked. If that works too, do it.
> 
> If you can force it lower as well and your stable post back that it worked to lower it as well. I did not mess with the offset values that you have posted there in your comment just the initial and max value ones for both controllers and both channels of the two controllers.


ok, thanks, I may mess with it if I feel ambitious as I am running stable now for weeks, memory wise.
I was just curious about how that line worked.


----------



## totio

Just to report back after updating to the 1304 BIOS for Asus Maximus Z690 Extreme: again both profiles XMP I & II are unstable with a 6000 Samsung kit.
Errors start showing up in the first minute of testing with TM5 ...
So for the people that *consider *buying *expensive *boards like this one -- don't expect any high speed support out of the box. You have to be a *hard core enthusiast *to be able to tune your memory to the default rated XMP profiles after weeks of testing. At this point don't consider DDR5 XMP a feature in the Extreme mobos, but more like a beta experimental option that will need a lot of time to achieve.

I spent a month already, trying every possible tweaking option in the UEFI/BIOS, and sadly, the best that my setup is able to achieve as "stable" was [email protected] timings.


----------



## Mappi75

Maybe try an older Bios or previous one.

For me 1304 is more unstable than 1101 HCI Memtest will find errors in the end (which tm5 and Karhu doesn't).


----------



## sblantipodi

Mappi75 said:


> Maybe try an older Bios or previous one.
> 
> For me 1304 is more unstable than 1101 HCI Memtest will find errors in the end (which tm5 and Karhu doesn't).


Most people says that memtest isn't as good as tm5 or karhu but I find memtest more reliable in finding errors.


----------



## edkieferlp

Searching a real jack of all trades – Intel 12th Gen Alder Lake IMC binning with DDR4, DDR5 and SP values and interesting findings | igor'sLAB


What do you do with two Core i9-12900K trays? That's right, binning! Today we have a very special treat for you from the south of Germany. The system integrator MIFCOM has kindly provided us with a…




www.igorslab.de


----------



## truehighroller1

edkieferlp said:


> Searching a real jack of all trades – Intel 12th Gen Alder Lake IMC binning with DDR4, DDR5 and SP values and interesting findings | igor'sLAB
> 
> 
> What do you do with two Core i9-12900K trays? That's right, binning! Today we have a very special treat for you from the south of Germany. The system integrator MIFCOM has kindly provided us with a…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.igorslab.de


Interesting article for sure. He was also sent a hand picked apex from safedisk... I see he mentions he will be comparing the hand picked motherboard to retail ones shortly as well. Take away from the article you can see a difference of about 400Mhz between the CPUs he tested in capability. He uses the memory I have as well which is a bonus.


----------



## edkieferlp

truehighroller1 said:


> Interesting article for sure. He was also sent a hand picked apex from safedisk... I see he mentions he will be comparing the hand picked motherboard to retail ones shortly as well. Take away from the article you can see a difference of about 400Mhz between the CPUs he tested in capability. He uses the memory I have as well which is a bonus.


Yeah, I might be wrong but my impression from this forum posts is he seems to me getting better DDR5 results, freq wise than users here.
The DDR4 results seem "about" the same, maybe tiny better on his side.

It would be nice if some software could integrate similar algorisms for SP# for outside of high-end Asus MB. But again as the article points out SP# alone doesn't tell the whole story OC wise.


----------



## superino091

sorry guys I need a hand.
since i switched to bios 1304, it happens to me that when i play every now and then i have a micro shots in the games, but the fps are stable so no drops.
returning to the previous bios 1101 which was existing of the described problem, now the problem is also with the bios 1101 and others.
my tests are:
reinstall Windows 11
try games both in oc and all in default
update all drivers
I would not like some windows 11 update to bring this problem, but I don't remember doing any kind of update a few days ago
the video card is a rtx 2080ti
some advice?
Thanks in advance


----------



## Silent Scone

truehighroller1 said:


> Interesting article for sure. He was also sent a hand picked apex from safedisk... I see he mentions he will be comparing the hand picked motherboard to retail ones shortly as well. Take away from the article you can see a difference of about 400Mhz between the CPUs he tested in capability. He uses the memory I have as well which is a bonus.


That's because board binning and variance are and have always been present in the industry. At frequencies where this stuff matters. At 7650 Mbps, it very much likely matters.


----------



## truehighroller1

Silent Scone said:


> That's because board binning and variance are and have always been present in the industry. At frequencies where this stuff matters. At 7650 Mbps, it very much likely matters.



They should at least be able to get to the rated/stated 6600 and perhaps a little over is all I'm saying.


----------



## Arni90

Silent Scone said:


> That's because board binning and variance are and have always been present in the industry. At frequencies where this stuff matters. At 7650 Mbps, it very much likely matters.


While I get the concept of board binning, the huge variance between boards on the Z690 Apex is beyond ridiculous for it's selling price. The Z690 Apex I had didn't have the faintest chance of running 1T above 6000 stable on both DIMM slots, and struggled to just run y-cruncher at 6600 C32 2T, while other people are posting results up to 7466.

It's not like the stupidly overbuilt VRM, True Voltician, 60W USB-C power delivery, M.2 expansion card, USB stick, and SLI support are all that useful. There's no way anyone will be able to push a 12900K to even make *12* of the 105A power stages on a Z690 Apex sweat, let alone the 24 ASUS put on it.

The fact that some people here are implying that the Z690 Apex lottery is an acceptable situation makes my head spin. If it was a 350 USD board, maybe, but it's literally twice that.


----------



## Gadfly

Arni90 said:


> While I get the concept of board binning, the huge variance between boards on the Z690 Apex is beyond ridiculous for it's selling price. The Z690 Apex I had didn't have the faintest chance of running 1T above 6000 stable on both DIMM slots, and struggled to just run y-cruncher at 6600 C32 2T, while other people are posting results up to 7466.
> 
> It's not like the stupidly overbuilt VRM, True Voltician, 60W USB-C power delivery, M.2 expansion card, USB stick, and SLI support are all that useful. There's no way anyone will be able to push a 12900K to even make *12* of the 105A power stages on a Z690 Apex sweat, let alone the 24 ASUS put on it.
> 
> The fact that some people here are implying that the Z690 Apex lottery is an acceptable situation makes my head spin. If it was a 350 USD board, maybe, but it's literally twice that.


Well said. When you pay a super premium price, for what is marketed as a premium overclocking product only to have a 1 in 10 chance (If not lower odds based on the results here) of getting a high quality board; it is un-acceptable. I have used ASUS ROG boards exclusively for the past 15+ years on 20+ builds. I have always been willing to pay the premium prices so that the variance in the "motherboard lottery" is minimal. If that is no longer the case, why spend the extra money for the ROG product vs other main board manufactures? 

What is ASUS's stance on this? Are they replacing boards with poor signal integrity and poor memory overclocking ability? Or are they just saying that overclocking is never guaranteed and enjoy your $700+ paper weight?


----------



## Gadfly

Silent Scone said:


> That's because board binning and variance are and have always been present in the industry. At frequencies where this stuff matters. At 7650 Mbps, it very much likely matters.


Not to this degree. We are not talking about a variance of 100mhz of memclk board to board per the norm; we are seeing much, much larger variances, issues with stability at any speeds on the earlier boards, huge variances between slot 1 and 2, not to mention generally much lower memory clocks on the ROG Z690 boards vs other manufactures. 

Whatever is going on with the Apex design/manufacturing it is far outside of what has always been present in the industry....


----------



## owikh84

Delete


----------



## Arni90

Next


owikh84 said:


> My source from ASUS has confirmed that there was indeed a QC failure during production of 2021 Apex (and probably Extreme too). However, I am not sure how they are going to settle it LOL.


So they know they have an issue, but don't want to issue a recall? For some of the most expensive motherboards they make?

While it seems plausible, I really hope they're not that stupid. This is a sure-fire way to destroy trust in a brand.


----------



## pcdiye

No, I think you guys are wrong. You paid ASUS tax just for RGB, NOT for quality and reliability.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

MSI's spec sheet for Unify X states it does 6800+ MHZ on DDR5.

Asus's spec sheet for the Apex states it does 6600 MHZ on DDR5.

Why are people blaming Asus for poor overclocking? It's your fault for buying the board and paying a $200 premium.


----------



## asdkj1740

owikh84 said:


> My source from ASUS has confirmed that there was indeed a QC failure during production of 2021 Apex (and probably Extreme too). However, I am not sure how they are going to settle it LOL.
> 
> Just have to requote what I said earlier:
> 
> It's combo of IMC + RAM + mobo. If possible try to get the 2022 Apex/Extreme.
> 
> 2021 Apex/Extreme + strong IMC + strong RAM = OK
> 2022 Apex/Extreme + strong IMC + strong RAM = even better
> 2021 Apex/Extreme + weak IMC + strong RAM = bad
> 2021 Apex/Extreme + strong IMC + weak RAM = bad
> 2022 Apex/Extreme + strong/weak IMC/RAM = OK
> 
> Why only Apex & Extreme are affected? Coincidentally Apex & Extreme are manufactured under ASUS Auto-Extreme process.
> 
> ES vs retail? So far only retail 2021 Apex & Extreme are affected. 2021 ES no issues.
> 
> Why manufacturing date suddenly appeared on the box label for 2022 manufactured boards? There must be a reason.


they should recall y0 editiion and ship the new y1 edition to all current users of apex.
be a better vendor than gskill please.

z490
apex $399 / hero $399

z590 
apex $599 / hero $499

z690
apex $719 / hero $599
unifyx$ $499 / tachyon $549 / aqua oc $1399 / dark kingpin $829


----------



## Silent Scone

Arni90 said:


> While I get the concept of board binning, the huge variance between boards on the Z690 Apex is beyond ridiculous for it's selling price. The Z690 Apex I had didn't have the faintest chance of running 1T above 6000 stable on both DIMM slots, and struggled to just run y-cruncher at 6600 C32 2T, while other people are posting results up to 7466.
> 
> It's not like the stupidly overbuilt VRM, True Voltician, 60W USB-C power delivery, M.2 expansion card, USB stick, and SLI support are all that useful. There's no way anyone will be able to push a 12900K to even make *12* of the 105A power stages on a Z690 Apex sweat, let alone the 24 ASUS put on it.
> 
> The fact that some people here are implying that the Z690 Apex lottery is an acceptable situation makes my head spin. If it was a 350 USD board, maybe, but it's literally twice that.


We're not in disagreement that something somewhere is causing it. Perhaps where some people are going wrong is making the assumption that what people are seeing is the kind of variance that XOC board binning accounts for, when it's often perhaps something that can be dialed out by tuning MRC settings, or even something else entirely.
I've not been able to work on a supposed "bad board" and I have no issues with my day one board. It would be good to try one if you're willing to ship?



owikh84 said:


> It's combo of IMC + RAM + mobo.


That's always the case.



owikh84 said:


> ES vs retail? So far only retail 2021 Apex & Extreme are affected. 2021 ES no issues.


Can you elaborate on what you feel the difference is meant to be between an ES sample and retail? If anything, an ES would be worse as those boards would be pre-production.


----------



## jeiselramos

owikh84 said:


> My source from ASUS has confirmed that there was indeed a QC failure during production of 2021 Apex (and probably Extreme too). However, I am not sure how they are going to settle it LOL.
> 
> Just have to requote what I said earlier:
> 
> It's combo of IMC + RAM + mobo. If possible try to get the 2022 Apex/Extreme.
> 
> 2021 Apex/Extreme + strong IMC + strong RAM = OK
> 2022 Apex/Extreme + strong IMC + strong RAM = even better
> 2021 Apex/Extreme + weak IMC + strong RAM = bad
> 2021 Apex/Extreme + strong IMC + weak RAM = bad
> 2022 Apex/Extreme + strong/weak IMC/RAM = OK
> 
> Why only Apex & Extreme are affected? Coincidentally Apex & Extreme are manufactured under ASUS Auto-Extreme process.
> 
> ES vs retail? So far only retail 2021 Apex & Extreme are affected. 2021 ES no issues.
> 
> Why manufacturing date suddenly appeared on the box label for 2022 manufactured boards? There must be a reason.


Yesterday i tried my apex with single slot and it's bad. 
36-44-44-84 1.5vdd/vddq everything else on auto 
Slot A 
6600 Boot
6800 BSOD 
Slot B 
7400 Boot
That's ****ing insane, 800mhz between slots


----------



## sblantipodi

owikh84 said:


> My source from ASUS has confirmed that there was indeed a QC failure during production of 2021 Apex (and probably Extreme too). However, I am not sure how they are going to settle it LOL.
> 
> Just have to requote what I said earlier:
> 
> It's combo of IMC + RAM + mobo. If possible try to get the 2022 Apex/Extreme.
> 
> 2021 Apex/Extreme + strong IMC + strong RAM = OK
> 2022 Apex/Extreme + strong IMC + strong RAM = even better
> 2021 Apex/Extreme + weak IMC + strong RAM = bad
> 2021 Apex/Extreme + strong IMC + weak RAM = bad
> 2022 Apex/Extreme + strong/weak IMC/RAM = OK
> 
> Why only Apex & Extreme are affected? Coincidentally Apex & Extreme are manufactured under ASUS Auto-Extreme process.
> 
> ES vs retail? So far only retail 2021 Apex & Extreme are affected. 2021 ES no issues.
> 
> Why manufacturing date suddenly appeared on the box label for 2022 manufactured boards? There must be a reason.


I think that we deserves some explanations on this, isn't it?


----------



## sblantipodi

sblantipodi said:


> Ok I was joking.
> Ram led stopped working and the PC hanged on the next reboot.
> 
> @safedisk isn't 1304 supposed to fix this problem?
> 4x16GB Hynix here on Extreme.
> 
> When the PC freeze on reboot it hangs in detect memory shown on the oled screen and 01 error code.


@safedisk is there someone working on this issue?


----------



## geriatricpollywog

sblantipodi said:


> @safedisk is there someone working on this issue?


I think someone needs to call Steve from Gamer’s Nexus.


----------



## asdkj1740

geriatricpollywog said:


> I think someone needs to call Steve from Gamer’s Nexus.


i disagree with that idea.
enthusiasts do not need a drama.
lets give a bit more time for asus to release a statement//following up moves.


----------



## lolhaxz

My extreme will do no faster, any significant timings tightened and and errors show up, settings below will pass Karthu for hours no problems and have absolute reboot consistency.

6200MHz shows errors after 5-10 minutes, no matter how loose the 2nd/3rd.. even 6000/6200 1T boots fine with full check off - errors similar to 6400MHz, after a few minutes.
6400MHz show errors after a few minutes - but it will boot it consistently fine.

Bios versions for me have had absolutely zero effect.

I just order some Corsair 6200MHz (CMT32GX5M2X6200C36) - let's see if Hynx (I hope they are Hynx!) does any better than the 6000 Gskill's I have atm - yes a pure waste of money, but I'm curious - the money is clearly better spent on a non 4-dimm ASUS board. (or a ASUS board at all)

Very much expecting the new dimm's will face the exact same limits.

1.275V MC, 0.95v SA, 1.4v DIMM (played with all these alot, SA needs to be low, > 1.35V VDIMM doesn't help, but run 1.4v anyway)

I also experimented alot with skew, the following provides measurably better consistency at higher speeds (but does not really gain any additional overall stability - ie 1T 6200 is impossible without setting below)

RTT WR - 48, RTT NOM RD - 48, RTT NOM WR - 48, RTT PARK - 48, RTT PARK DQS - 48, CA/CS/CK Auto, Pull-up/Pull-down - 48 ... it likes them all low, all 4 channels same.


----------



## Arni90

Silent Scone said:


> We're not in disagreement that something somewhere is causing it. Perhaps where some people are going wrong is making the assumption that what people are seeing is the kind of variance that XOC board binning accounts for, when it's often perhaps something that can be dialed out by tuning MRC settings, or even something else entirely.
> I've not been able to work on a supposed "bad board" and I have no issues with my day one board. It would be good to try one if you're willing to ship?


I don't have the board now, I got an RMA accepted.

I tried playing around with MC calculation voltage, VDD calculation, as well as the regular voltages. I needed to push VDDQ to 1.65V just to maintain some semblance of stability at 6600 C32, but I could lower VDDQ down to 1.55V if I lowered tCL to 36.

Maximum bootable multiplier was 6933 with two sticks: Intel Core i9 12900K @ 4900 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR
Maximum bootable multiplier on slot b was 7466: Intel Core i9 12900K @ 4900 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR

I could also run y-cruncher at 6800 with 2 sticks if I disabled the correct channel on MC0, but performance was obviously quite poor.

Maximum stable y-cruncher frequency was 6600, which easily allowed me to tweak timings. 6666 failed y-cruncher instantly even at 40-50-50-50 and auto subtimings.

Raising base clock by 15 MHz and aiming for 6200-6600 memory frequency with loose timings was so unstable that AIDA64 caused BSODs, I could only raise base clock by lowering memory frequency to 54XX-56XX.

sugi0lover uploaded his 6800 settings a month or two ago, I could only boot into windows with the same settings by changing DRAM frequency to 6400, 6200 was able to run y-cruncher.


----------



## Gadfly

owikh84 said:


> Why manufacturing date suddenly appeared on the box label for 2022 manufactured boards? There must be a reason.


My retail Apex has manufacturing date on the label, and it was made in 11/2021. So they were putting the date on the label before 2022


----------



## Muad_Dib69

Some feedback from Formula MB. We are some people using the watercooling on VRM and we experienced some issue with the water becoming white and a kind of transparent glue beign spread in th water. Even with a first flushing before using it it stuck all waterblock canal and make it stop working 88 degre in idle. I had to clean everyting. so be careful when using it you should rince it a lot maybe with hot water.


----------



## Mappi75

I wrote that for me 1304 Bios works "bad" then 1101,
but now i found the error which hci memtest pro found:

Write Recovery Time (tWR) id had to rise one step from 24 > 25.
Now the setup works stable 

Or does it cooperate/coexists with another subtiming setting?


----------



## akgis

1304 on hero made default IMC voltage to 1.4 like ***?

This is how the "stability" is fixed?


----------



## truehighroller1

akgis said:


> 1304 on hero made default IMC voltage to 1.4 like ***?
> 
> This is how the "stability" is fixed?


That's funny they're trying to send me a hero instead of the apex for replacement 😂.


----------



## asdkj1740

truehighroller1 said:


> That's funny they're trying to send me a hero instead of the apex for replacement 😂.


not a bad deal if they are willing to also refund $120 msrp differential between these two models.


----------



## Gadfly

truehighroller1 said:


> That's funny they're trying to send me a hero instead of the apex for replacement 😂.


I'd tell them to F off.


----------



## pR1maL

Gadfly said:


> I'd tell them to F off.


I'd respond by asking them to send me a Unify X.


----------



## Gadfly

pR1maL said:


> I'd respond by asking them to send me a Unify X.


 LOL


----------



## nickolp1974

Just done very crude memory tests to check channels on Apex which was purchased in December. Ran memtest from bios for quick 10 mins on each test or untill fail, sticks on basic Dell greens 4800
Timings used 30-42-42-28-2t trefi 130560 trfc 340 rest auto

Best stick CH A -7000mhz CH B -7200mhz
worst stick CH A -6800mhz CH B -7000mhz

Voltage VDD 1.63v VDDQ 1.62v MC 1.318v SA 1.35v

tried upto 1.66v and CH B nearly manages another bin but fails memtest pretty quick, within 30 secs

Even at these settings Ch B felt like it had more wiggle room as it would boot with the next speed bin but bsod where as CH A would just keep looping



So judging by this i think my Apex is ok??? I think my results are within margin of error due to Channel A always being weaker


----------



## geriatricpollywog

nickolp1974 said:


> Just done very crude memory tests to check channels on Apex which was purchased in December. Ran memtest from bios for quick 10 mins on each test or untill fail, sticks on basic Dell greens 4800
> Timings used 30-42-42-28-2t trefi 130560 trfc 340 rest auto
> 
> Best stick CH A -7000mhz CH B -7200mhz
> worst stick CH A -6800mhz CH B -7000mhz
> 
> Voltage VDD 1.63v VDDQ 1.62v MC 1.318v SA 1.35v
> 
> tried upto 1.66v and CH B nearly manages another bin but fails memtest pretty quick, within 30 secs
> 
> Even at these settings Ch B felt like it had more wiggle room as it would boot with the next speed bin but bsod where as CH A would just keep looping
> 
> 
> 
> So judging by this i think my Apex is ok??? I think my results are within margin of error due to Channel A always being weaker


You can get the same or better memory overclock from a $400 Unify ITX or $500 Unify-X, so 7000 is not a very good overclock for a $720 board or however many pounds it costs you guys.


----------



## bscool

nickolp1974 said:


> Just done very crude memory tests to check channels on Apex which was purchased in December. Ran memtest from bios for quick 10 mins on each test or untill fail, sticks on basic Dell greens 4800
> Timings used 30-42-42-28-2t trefi 130560 trfc 340 rest auto
> 
> Best stick CH A -7000mhz CH B -7200mhz
> worst stick CH A -6800mhz CH B -7000mhz
> 
> Voltage VDD 1.63v VDDQ 1.62v MC 1.318v SA 1.35v
> 
> tried upto 1.66v and CH B nearly manages another bin but fails memtest pretty quick, within 30 secs
> 
> Even at these settings Ch B felt like it had more wiggle room as it would boot with the next speed bin but bsod where as CH A would just keep looping
> 
> 
> 
> So judging by this i think my Apex is ok??? I think my results are within margin of error due to Channel A always being weaker


I would check what you can get chA/slot 1 to pass memtest/Karhu at as that will be the "weak" link in most cases.

Find the difference in channels. Say chA can only run 6400 Karhu stable and chB does 7000 then it is up to you to decide what to do.

From what I have seen if you can run 6400 to 6600 plus on chA Karhu stable you are doing good.


----------



## nickolp1974

bscool said:


> I would check what you can get chA/slot 1 to pass memtest/Karhu at as that will be the "weak" link in most cases.
> 
> Find the difference in channels. Say chA can only run 6400 Karhu stable and chB does 7000 then it is up to you to decide what to do.
> 
> From what I have seen if you can run 6400 to 6600 plus on chA Karhu stable you are doing good.


 have you a link to Karhu and 6400 cr1?


----------



## bscool

nickolp1974 said:


> have you a link to Karhu and 6400 cr1?





RAM Test - Karhu Software



Here is @sugi0lover 66000c30 1t cmo you could use it to get an idea of what he set.









*Official* Intel DDR5 OC and 24/7 daily Memory Stability...


Will this MSI board be okay to obtain 6400+ speeds with or is a unify X really needed? ( MSI Z690 MPG Force WiFi DDR5 Intel LGA 1700 ATX Motherboard - Micro Center ) Just looking to save 150$ if i can. My local MC has the regular Unify (NON X) would this be better then this "Force" for memory...




www.overclock.net


----------



## nickolp1974

bscool said:


> RAM Test - Karhu Software
> 
> 
> 
> Here is @sugi0lover 66000c30 1t cmo you could use it to get an idea of what he set.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Official* Intel DDR5 OC and 24/7 daily Memory Stability...
> 
> 
> Will this MSI board be okay to obtain 6400+ speeds with or is a unify X really needed? ( MSI Z690 MPG Force WiFi DDR5 Intel LGA 1700 ATX Motherboard - Micro Center ) Just looking to save 150$ if i can. My local MC has the regular Unify (NON X) would this be better then this "Force" for memory...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net


thanks


----------



## truehighroller1

asdkj1740 said:


> not a bad deal if they are willing to also refund $120 msrp differential between these two models.


They said they will not make up the difference in price when I asked them if they would.



Gadfly said:


> I'd tell them to F off.


They said they still don't have stock and still can't send me an advanced replacement at this time. This is day seven now and they refuse to send me a new one.


----------



## StarCatMan

totio said:


> Just to report back after updating to the 1304 BIOS for Asus Maximus Z690 Extreme: again both profiles XMP I & II are unstable with a 6000 Samsung kit.
> Errors start showing up in the first minute of testing with TM5 ...
> So for the people that *consider *buying *expensive *boards like this one -- don't expect any high speed support out of the box. You have to be a *hard core enthusiast *to be able to tune your memory to the default rated XMP profiles after weeks of testing. At this point don't consider DDR5 XMP a feature in the Extreme mobos, but more like a beta experimental option that will need a lot of time to achieve.
> 
> I spent a month already, trying every possible tweaking option in the UEFI/BIOS, and sadly, the best that my setup is able to achieve as "stable" was [email protected] timings.


Sadly, I concur with everything you stated. It's extremely disappointing.


----------



## Voodoo Hoodoo

StarCatMan said:


> Sadly, I concur with everything you stated. It's extremely disappointing.


It's your RAM or IMC.

I'm running 6400 (gskill C32 kit) on an Extreme on XMP I, with no stability issues.

This is an SP 86 CPU.


----------



## asdkj1740

truehighroller1 said:


> They said they will not make up the difference in price when I asked them if they would.
> 
> 
> They said they still don't have stock and still can't send me an advanced replacement at this time. This is day seven now and they refuse to send me a new one.


then ask for full refund if you would like to go for msi unifyx or other 2dimm mobos of z690.
to me even a 6600mhz dual channel max's apex is good enough, but there are lots of users of apex who really aim at super high dram frequency with sufficient money to bin lots of cpus and dram sticks, they deserve y1 2022 edition of apex.


----------



## nickolp1974

Just a quick one, I'm on Apex I i have M2 win11 and ssd win 10, I can't seem to disable one or the other so it boots direct to that is, instead it gives me the option at boot. In boot priorities it only lists the M2, what am I missing here??


----------



## edkieferlp

nickolp1974 said:


> Just a quick one, I'm on Apex I i have M2 win11 and ssd win 10, I can't seem to disable one or the other so it boots direct to that is, instead it gives me the option at boot. In boot priorities it only lists the M2, what am I missing here??


If you don't see the win10 drive, could it be that the win11 is a GPT volume and win10 is legacy MBR?

Since these MB are UEFI/secure boot all boot drives need to be GPT AFAIK.


----------



## lolhaxz

Voodoo Hoodoo said:


> It's your RAM or IMC.
> 
> I'm running 6400 (gskill C32 kit) on an Extreme on XMP I, with no stability issues.
> 
> This is an SP 86 CPU.
> 
> View attachment 2552245


Yes - but look at your timings, they are _*ridiculously*_ loose, my 6000/C32 has higher performance in almost every metric.

How long can you run Karthu or Memtest for?

IMO IMC is very unlikely to be a consideration at 6400 unless we are talking about extreme tight timings... like CR1


----------



## nickolp1974

edkieferlp said:


> If you don't see the win10 drive, could it be that the win11 is a GPT volume and win10 is legacy MBR?
> 
> Since these MB are UEFI/secure boot all boot drives need to be GPT AFAIK.


So is there no way I can just switch 1 off in bios, I can just unplug the SSD but the M2 win 11 is not an option down that route.


----------



## edkieferlp

nickolp1974 said:


> So is there no way I can just switch 1 off in bios, I can just unplug the SSD but the M2 win 11 is not an option down that route.


Is what I posted above correct, one drive is GPT, and the other is MBR?
If so you can convert the MBR to GPT but other than that I am not familiar with dual boot options.


----------



## corvus2606

Hey All,

Anyone using a Corsair H150i Elite Capellix with their z690 board? if so, How do you control it?

I have one on a z690-e gaming wifi. It seems the BIOS takes control of the commander core and won't let iCue see it or control it. so i'm stuck with whatever fan curves the bios decides on, and all of my fans and cooler are lit up red with no control available.

honestly, I just want to control my cooler from icue, getting control of the RGB would be nice too.

I've also had problems with one of my M.2 drives disappearing when I use the AI overclock. everything else is fine, but I nearly lost 1tb of data so i'm not running an overclock at the moment.

Appreciate any advice anyone has.


----------



## nickolp1974

edkieferlp said:


> Is what I posted above correct, one drive is GPT, and the other is MBR?
> If so you can convert the MBR to GPT but other than that I am not familiar with dual boot options.


Not sure, not clued up on this kinda stuff. Win 11 was installed 1st then I put 10 on the SSD, I should of perhaps removed the M2 at install of win 10


----------



## edkieferlp

nickolp1974 said:


> Not sure, not clued up on this kinda stuff. Win 11 was installed 1st then I put 10 on the SSD, I should of perhaps removed the M2 at install of win 10


here info on it.
will show how to see volume type and if you want to convert, how too.








Still using BIOS? It's time to switch to UEFI — here's how on Windows 10


In this guide, we'll show you the steps to use the MBR2GPT tool to convert a drive using MBR to GPT to properly switch from BIOS to UEFI without reinstalling Windows 10 or losing your data.




www.windowscentral.com


----------



## Silent Scone

lolhaxz said:


> Yes - but look at your timings, they are _*ridiculously*_ loose, my 6000/C32 has higher performance in almost every metric.
> 
> How long can you run Karthu or Memtest for?
> 
> IMO IMC is very unlikely to be a consideration at 6400 unless we are talking about extreme tight timings... like CR1
> 
> View attachment 2552259


Can I ask what kind of sample size you're basing that information on? As far as I'm aware (from sources with a reasonable pool size of CPUs) anything above 6000 is a lottery. DDR5 doesn't do away with silicon variance, some are better than others.

Despite your approximation of how you feel about his timings, it's the profile validated by the memory vendor and board vendor. It's probably stable, too.


----------



## Simkin

owikh84 said:


> My source from ASUS has confirmed that there was indeed a QC failure during production of 2021 Apex (and probably Extreme too). However, I am not sure how they are going to settle it LOL.
> 
> Just have to requote what I said earlier:
> 
> It's combo of IMC + RAM + mobo. If possible try to get the 2022 Apex/Extreme.
> 
> 2021 Apex/Extreme + strong IMC + strong RAM = OK
> 2022 Apex/Extreme + strong IMC + strong RAM = even better
> 2021 Apex/Extreme + weak IMC + strong RAM = bad
> 2021 Apex/Extreme + strong IMC + weak RAM = bad
> 2022 Apex/Extreme + strong/weak IMC/RAM = OK
> 
> Why only Apex & Extreme are affected? Coincidentally Apex & Extreme are manufactured under ASUS Auto-Extreme process.
> 
> ES vs retail? So far only retail 2021 Apex & Extreme are affected. 2021 ES no issues.
> 
> Why manufacturing date suddenly appeared on the box label for 2022 manufactured boards? There must be a reason.


Does this go for most 2021 boards, or just a few?
Every 2022 board is ok, even an early 2022 board?

Isnt also ASUS Auto-Extreme process something they started with in 2015?


----------



## Simkin

corvus2606 said:


> Hey All,
> 
> Anyone using a Corsair H150i Elite Capellix with their z690 board? if so, How do you control it?
> 
> I have one on a z690-e gaming wifi. It seems the BIOS takes control of the commander core and won't let iCue see it or control it. so i'm stuck with whatever fan curves the bios decides on, and all of my fans and cooler are lit up red with no control available.
> 
> honestly, I just want to control my cooler from icue, getting control of the RGB would be nice too.
> 
> I've also had problems with one of my M.2 drives disappearing when I use the AI overclock. everything else is fine, but I nearly lost 1tb of data so i'm not running an overclock at the moment.
> 
> Appreciate any advice anyone has.


H170i Elite LCD on Z690 Apex, using iCUE and custom fan profiles, also running a Commander Pro controlling case fans, only issue i have had is that my custom fan profiles disappear if i have bsod or hard reset my system (Windows 11 Pro) other than that its working fine.

Also using AI OC, no issues so far, running four M.2 NVMe, two on board and two on ROG DIMM (all Samsung 970/980)


----------



## corvus2606

Simkin said:


> H170i Elite LCD on Z690 Apex, using iCUE and custom fan profiles, also running a Commander Pro controlling case fans, only issue i have had is that my custom fan profiles disappear if i have bsod or hard reset my system (Windows 11 Pro) other than that its working fine.
> 
> Also using AI OC, no issues so far, running four M.2 NVMe, two on board and two on ROG DIMM (all Samsung 970/980)


Thanks for the info. Corsair have offered to replace the commander core, but of course, they have no stock... It could be related to something specific to the Z690-E, but I doubt it.

About ready to chuck in the towel and return this motherboard for a different brand

In relation to the overclock. I updated the BIOS and that seems to have sorted that one.


----------



## pR1maL

Silent Scone said:


> Can I ask what kind of sample size you're basing that information on? As far as I'm aware (from sources with a reasonable pool size of CPUs) anything above 6000 is a lottery. DDR5 doesn't do away with silicon variance, some are better than others.
> 
> Despite your approximation of how you feel about his timings, it's the profile validated by the memory vendor and board vendor. It's probably stable, too.


I'm not sure what I believe about Alder Lake IMC's anymore. Igor's labs tested 2 trays of 12900k's.



> For the DDR5 clock rate, we see a relatively even distribution with clustering in the middle and single outliers at 7650 and 7250 Mbps, respectively, and the average is 7447 Mbps.



















Searching a real jack of all trades – Intel 12th Gen Alder Lake IMC binning with DDR4, DDR5 and SP values and interesting findings | igor'sLAB


What do you do with two Core i9-12900K trays? That's right, binning! Today we have a very special treat for you from the south of Germany. The system integrator MIFCOM has kindly provided us with a…




www.igorslab.de







> So enthusiasts and overclockers in search of the golden CPU will have to reconsider how exactly they define “golden”. Alternatively, the search for a true Alder Lake all-rounder is likely to be far more exhausting and time-consuming than previously assumed in many forums. Finding a CPU that can do everything very well is like winning the lottery and the leakage is the bonus number – “Silicon lottery” is a very fitting description after all.
> 
> However, our search for a golden DDR5 IMC has taken a much more positive course. The CPU with 7650 Mbps at its peak in dual-channel has already almost cracked the 7900 Mbps at ambient temperature with a single module and is thus currently 15th in the world in terms of RAM clock. However, I’m still testing whether this can also be applied to daily overclocks and thus our RAM tests.


----------



## bscool

pR1maL said:


> I'm not sure what I believe anymore. Igor's labs tested 2 trays of 12900k's.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Searching a real jack of all trades – Intel 12th Gen Alder Lake IMC binning with DDR4, DDR5 and SP values and interesting findings | igor'sLAB
> 
> 
> What do you do with two Core i9-12900K trays? That's right, binning! Today we have a very special treat for you from the south of Germany. The system integrator MIFCOM has kindly provided us with a…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.igorslab.de


What do you mean?

Max boot frequency vs memtest/games/aplication stable is and always has been quite different.

I can boot 7000 on first gen Apex vs 6400 to 6666 Karhu and 6800 y cruncher stable.

2022 Apex same thing I can boot much higher than is actually stable in actual use. Boot 7466 vs 7000 Karhu/y cruncher stable

It seems like people are taking his max frequency boot numbers for daily stable.

" I don’t test for complete stability in my IMC binning – also because it wouldn’t be feasible in terms of time – but only determine the highest clock frequency with which it is still possible to boot into Windows and open HWInfo."

I am just guessing but I would say take off 100-200mhz from ddr4 from max boot to daily stable(karhu/memtest, y cruncher, games etc) and ddr5 400-600mhz as an "average".


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> What do you mean?
> 
> Max boot frequency vs memtest/games/aplication stable is and always has been quite different.
> 
> I can boot 7000 on first gen Apex vs 6400 to 6666 Karhu and 6800 y cruncher stable.
> 
> 2022 Apex same thing I can boot much higher than is actually stable in actual use. Boot 7466 vs 7000 Karhu/y cruncher stable
> 
> It seems like people are taking his max frequency boot numbers for daily stable.
> 
> " I don’t test for complete stability in my IMC binning – also because it wouldn’t be feasible in terms of time – but only determine the highest clock frequency with which it is still possible to boot into Windows and open HWInfo."
> 
> I am just guessing but I would say take off 100-200mhz from ddr4 from max boot to daily stable(karhu/memtest, y cruncher, games etc) and ddr5 400-600mhz as an "average".


I'm stable at 5800. That's what he means. It's the boards.

Buildzoid was stable at 6133.


----------



## entiszzoot

any new bios for PRIME Z690-P WIFI D4 ?
last bios its a 1013 beta ..damn so slow
shamino plssss


----------



## geriatricpollywog

bscool said:


> What do you mean?
> 
> Max boot frequency vs memtest/games/aplication stable is and always has been quite different.
> 
> I can boot 7000 on first gen Apex vs 6400 to 6666 Karhu and 6800 y cruncher stable.
> 
> 2022 Apex same thing I can boot much higher than is actually stable in actual use. Boot 7466 vs 7000 Karhu/y cruncher stable
> 
> It seems like people are taking his max frequency boot numbers for daily stable.
> 
> " I don’t test for complete stability in my IMC binning – also because it wouldn’t be feasible in terms of time – but only determine the highest clock frequency with which it is still possible to boot into Windows and open HWInfo."
> 
> I am just guessing but I would say take off 100-200mhz from ddr4 from max boot to daily stable(karhu/memtest, y cruncher, games etc) and ddr5 400-600mhz as an "average".


On the Strix D4 with bios 0901, max boot = max stable. 4200-4300 depending on whether my ram is cold or not.

By the way, do you know which Asus bios revision kills AVX-512?


----------



## bscool

geriatricpollywog said:


> On the Strix D4 with bios 0901, max boot = max stable. 4200-4300 depending on whether my ram is cold or not.
> 
> By the way, do you know which Asus bios revision kills AVX-512?


I think 901 was the last one that had avx512 on strix d4.


----------



## Voodoo Hoodoo

lolhaxz said:


> Yes - but look at your timings, they are _*ridiculously*_ loose, my 6000/C32 has higher performance in almost every metric.
> 
> How long can you run Karthu or Memtest for?
> 
> IMO IMC is very unlikely to be a consideration at 6400 unless we are talking about extreme tight timings... like CR1
> 
> View attachment 2552259


As I said, it's literally just XMP I set and forget, of course it's going to be loose.

This wasn't to show a demonstration of my RAM OC skills (which don't really exist). 

I can run Karhu for as long as I want, zero errors.

You don't seem to understand XMP is just a preset of extremely forgiving settings designed to work on the majority of use cases to enable people who don't want to lose 20-30 hours of their life dialling in another 5% performance.

Congrats on the tight C30.


----------



## Super suave

My launch Apex was a hot piece of garbage, warped pcb was what really did it in for me. Love my unify x ;p


----------



## Nizzen

Super suave said:


> My launch Apex was a hot piece of garbage, warped pcb was what really did it in for me. Love my unify x ;p


So what are you waiting for? Try 7000+ 😁


----------



## Nizzen

From our OC friends in Thailand:


----------



## johnnyqueso

Was anyone able to mount an Arctic Liquid Freezer II 420mm on an Asus Apex or Extreme?

It's listed on Arctic's website as incompatible: ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II 420 - User Manual

The Hero and Formula are missing from that list, so I'm wondering what the difference could be with mounting.


----------



## bscool

johnnyqueso said:


> Was anyone able to mount an Arctic Liquid Freezer II 420mm on an Asus Apex or Extreme?
> 
> It's listed on Arctic's website as incompatible: ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II 420 - User Manual
> 
> The Hero and Formula are missing from that list, so I'm wondering what the difference could be with mounting.


I and a few other have used Arctic AIO on Apex and Extreme. It is tight but works.

I removed the bottom plastic as I also used it on Strix d4 before Apex and left it off. Not sure if it needs to be removed for Apex or Extreme.









ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II LGA1700 - User Manual


Get your ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II LGA1700 user manual. Detailed explanation with coloured schematics, photos, animations and videos.




support.arctic.de













IMG_20220221_095050829.jpg


JPG Image



1drv.ms


----------



## Nizzen

johnnyqueso said:


> Was anyone able to mount an Arctic Liquid Freezer II 420mm on an Asus Apex or Extreme?
> 
> It's listed on Arctic's website as incompatible: ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II 420 - User Manual
> 
> The Hero and Formula are missing from that list, so I'm wondering what the difference could be with mounting.


I used Arctioc II 420 on Apex z690 the first weeks. Worked great! It was a close fit, but it fitted


----------



## johnnyqueso

bscool said:


> I and a few other have used Arctic AIO on Apex and Extreme. It is tight but works.
> 
> I removed the bottom plastic as I also used it on Strix d4 before Apex and left it off. Not sure if it needs to be removed for Apex or Extreme.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II LGA1700 - User Manual
> 
> 
> Get your ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II LGA1700 user manual. Detailed explanation with coloured schematics, photos, animations and videos.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> support.arctic.de
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IMG_20220221_095050829.jpg
> 
> 
> JPG Image
> 
> 
> 
> 1drv.ms


Did you have to modify the mounting bracket at all? I would be using it with the LGA 1700 bracket for the 12900k.

Also, have you seen any issues with the cold plate of the cooler not making proper contact with the chip? It sure is a tight fit.

Thanks for the info, it's much appreciated.


----------



## bscool

johnnyqueso said:


> Did you have to modify the mounting bracket at all? I would be using it with the LGA 1700 bracket for the 12900k.
> 
> Also, have you seen any issues with the cold plate of the cooler not making proper contact with the chip? It sure is a tight fit.
> 
> Thanks for the info, it's much appreciated.


I didnt have to modify or file the brackets and I get very good temps. I compared to Raystorm block and temps are the same for me.


----------



## truehighroller1

Little update. I got a phone call from Asus tonight after I gave up and sent them my motherboard " they received it today earlier " for them to fix it because they keep saying that they have no stock of the Apex to send me an advanced replacement. They offered for them to give me a full refund. I want a freaking apex that works. I said okay let me look in the background to see if there are any online which I could buy after the full refund. None.

Tell me what you guys think about this situation because it's real and I'm in it and omg, this is terrible at this point support wise. The only motherboard they're willing to offer me is a lower model not even one step up.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

truehighroller1 said:


> Little update. I got a phone call from Asus tonight after I gave up and sent them my motherboard for them to fix it because they keep saying that they have no stock of the Apex to send me an advanced replacement. They offered for them to give me a full refund. I want a freaking apex that works. I said okay let me look in the background to see if there are any online which I could buy after the full refund. None.
> 
> Tell me what you guys think about this situation because it's real and I'm in it and omg, this is terrible at this point support wise. The only motherboard they're willing to offer me is a lower model not even one step up.


They offered you a full refund on a perfectly good motherboard outside of the return policy. The Apex only supports 6600mhz officially. You need a Unify-X or ITX if you want a guaranteed 6800+.


----------



## truehighroller1

geriatricpollywog said:


> The Apex only supports 6600mhz officially. You need a Unify-X or ITX if you want a guaranteed 6800+.


I was only stable at 5800. I couldn't get any better stability wise on that thing. They received it earlier today and I get a call tonight saying yo, we'll just give your money back. They have no stock left to replace it or fix it. There were none online when I googled it. 

I wasn't expecting 7800Mhz man, only 6600 at least. Tried three different cpus and memory, no go past 5800. Something was obviously seriously wrong with it and they're now trying to buy me out but not help me either.


----------



## truehighroller1

@safedisk @Silent Scone 



truehighroller1 said:


> I was only stable at 5800. I couldn't get any better stability wise on that thing. They received it earlier today and I get a call tonight saying yo, we'll just give your money back. They have no stock left to replace it or fix it. There were none online when I googled it.
> 
> I wasn't expecting 7800Mhz man, only 6600 at least. Tried three different cpus and memory, no go past 5800. Something was obviously seriously wrong with it and they're now trying to buy me out but not help me either.



Can anyone throw me a bone safedisk silentscone anyone please. There's obviously something wrong like I said and I'm getting treated like crap, lord have mercy please. They have my motherboard at this point. I have nothing now and they're holding it captive now and won't fix it and for obvious reasons. They know there was something wrong with it.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

truehighroller1 said:


> I was only stable at 5800. I couldn't get any better stability wise on that thing. They received it earlier today and I get a call tonight saying yo, we'll just give your money back. They have no stock left to replace it or fix it. There were none online when I googled it.
> 
> I wasn't expecting 7800Mhz man, only 6600 at least. Tried three different cpus and memory, no go past 5800. Something was obviously seriously wrong with it and they're now trying to buy me out but not help me either.


Getting your money back is literally the best possible outcome. Now you can go buy a motherboard with good DDR5 memory overclocking. Asus makes some great DDR4 Z690 boards but people have showed over and over that very few samples of the DDR5 boards have good memory overclocking.


----------



## truehighroller1

geriatricpollywog said:


> Getting your money back is literally the best possible outcome. Now you can go buy a motherboard with good DDR5 memory overclocking. Asus makes some great DDR4 Z690 boards but people have showed over and over that very few samples of the DDR5 boards have good memory overclocking.


There's nothing out there besides for the unity x or whatever and I honestly respect to them for pulling off what they have with it, I just don't want that one. I would totally buy the evga king pin dark but, good luck getting one of those too.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

truehighroller1 said:


> There's nothing out there besides for the unity x or whatever and I honestly respect to them for pulling off what they have with it, I just don't want that one. I would totally buy the evga king pin dark but, good luck getting one of those too.


My auto-notify came up for the Kingpin Dark but it was over $800 so I didn’t buy it. Had I known you wanted one, I’da sold it to you.


----------



## FireKillerGR

truehighroller1 said:


> I'm getting treated like crap, lord have mercy please





truehighroller1 said:


> They offered for them to give me a full refund


While I understand the frustration of spending big $ and things not working out; I fail to understand the above.
How are you treated like crap while you are offered a full refund?
They can't fix your mobo & according to them, they don't have stock. What is there that can be done other than getting a full refund? 😅

Just get your refund and buy either a different mobo or a new apex.


----------



## truehighroller1

FireKillerGR said:


> While I understand the frustration of spending big $ and things not working out; I fail to understand the above.
> How are you treated like crap while you are offered a full refund?
> They can't fix your mobo & according to them, they don't have stock. What is there that can be done other than getting a full refund? 😅
> 
> Just get your refund and buy either a different mobo or a new apex.


Because they've had trolls coming on here saying there's nothing's wrong when obviously there is and then now I have no replacement?? They're not fixing it because they know I will post what was wrong with it and probably oust what was wrong with all the other ones that people have been saying they're having issues with, thus causing more issues for their company.

There are no knew Apex motherboards they're done making " causing issues for customers " them at this point do you not know how to read? Jesus Christ you trolls are so obvious. You're not saving the Asus brand with this obvious brigade.

**** here with this nonsense.


----------



## FireKillerGR

truehighroller1 said:


> Because they've had trolls coming on here saying there's nothing's wrong when obviously there is and then now I have no replacement??
> 
> There are no knew Apex motherboards they're done making them at this point do you not know how to read? Jesus Christ you trolls are so obvious. You're not saving the Asus brand with this obvious brigade.
> 
> **** here with this nonsense.


I believe the only thing I asked is what else could have been done considering the lack of stock to replace your mobo in this case.
Even recommended you opting for the full refund so you can buy something else instead.

Anyway, for someone that is overclocking since the early days (hence someone theoretically mature) you failed to act your age here.

Cheers.


----------



## truehighroller1

FireKillerGR said:


> I believe the only thing I asked is what else could have been done considering the lack of stock to replace your mobo in this case.
> Even recommended you opting for the full refund so you can buy something else instead.
> 
> Anyway, for someone that is overclocking since the early days (hence someone theoretically mature) you failed to act your age here.
> 
> Cheers.


They asked me to take a hit financially for a cheaper motherboard because they have no stock. Geez, I don't know maybe an offer of me actually getting a better motherboard a step up perhaps to make things, right? That is instead of saying would you like to take a $150 hit on our behalf sir for our junk motherboard with obvious QC issues?

I mean after all they've given probably about ten to fifteen people here ES hand picked samples out of all of the motherboards they created that were the best ones out of the lot to come on here and post how great their motherboards overclock memory wise, seems fair to me to treat me an actual paying customer with respect. So Asus has been screwing customers over for years is what you're saying?

I've been overclocking longer then you know look at my account here and how old it is. Probably the oldest here. Tell me about the past of overclocking again young man please, inform me old wise one.

You make rockets for a living don't you? Obvious trolls.


----------



## EEE-RAY

Need some advice guys - I have an Apex and the Gskill 6400 C32 kit. In both xmp1 and xmp2 I get memtest errors quite quickly. This occurs even with the CPU at stock voltage/clocks (yes I know technically XMP is overclocking).

I have the latest 1305 bios.

I am a complete memory OCing noob - I've never had XMP not work for me before. 
Does anyone have any advice/experience on how I should approach to trying to troubleshoot problems? What can I try? I know that some of the Apex boards have been really sketchy but I would have thought 6400 is well within the capabilities =/


----------



## truehighroller1

EEE-RAY said:


> Need some advice guys - I have an Apex and the Gskill 6400 C32 kit. In both xmp1 and xmp2 I get memtest errors quite quickly. This occurs even with the CPU at stock voltage/clocks (yes I know technically XMP is overclocking).
> 
> I have the latest 1305 bios.
> 
> I am a complete memory OCing noob - I've never had XMP not work for me before.
> Does anyone have any advice/experience on how I should approach to trying to troubleshoot problems? What can I try? I know that some of the Apex boards have been really sketchy but I would have thought 6400 is well within the capabilities =/



Burn it in a fire in your back yard please. Asus support has screwed me and other customers having issues with this motherboard the one you mention over so bad at this point. I'm full raging at these jerks at this point. It's literally a trash can on fire at this point man give up.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

EEE-RAY said:


> Need some advice guys - I have an Apex and the Gskill 6400 C32 kit. In both xmp1 and xmp2 I get memtest errors quite quickly. This occurs even with the CPU at stock voltage/clocks (yes I know technically XMP is overclocking).
> 
> I have the latest 1305 bios.
> 
> I am a complete memory OCing noob - I've never had XMP not work for me before.
> Does anyone have any advice/experience on how I should approach to trying to troubleshoot problems? What can I try? I know that some of the Apex boards have been really sketchy but I would have thought 6400 is well within the capabilities =/


Instead of XMP, try the Hynix 6200MHz profile in the Dram timings section. Set your voltages accordingly after that. See if this helps.

If it goes well, you can up the ram to 6400MHz and see if it works there.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

truehighroller1 said:


> Burn it in a fire in your back yard please. Asus support has screwed me and other customers having issues with this motherboard the one you mention over so bad at this point. I'm full raging at these jerks at this point. It's literally a trash can on fire at this point man give up.


They… gave… you… your… money… back


----------



## nickolp1974

truehighroller1 said:


> @safedisk @Silent Scone
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can anyone throw me a bone safedisk silentscone anyone please. There's obviously something wrong like I said and I'm getting treated like crap, lord have mercy please. They have my motherboard at this point. I have nothing now and they're holding it captive now and won't fix it and for obvious reasons. They know there was something wrong with it.


OCUK in the uk ship to the US https://www.overclockers.co.uk/asus...ntel-z690-ddr5-atx-motherboard-mb-6hg-as.html


----------



## pR1maL

asdkj1740 said:


> a complete oc noob who bought apex and trident z5 6400 kit...............i am dying............................


I find it more comical that 1500 worth of gear won't even run xmp on the "Apex". 

But it won't, because the Apex is the "Apex" in name only. In reality, it's jist another pos board. But go ahead and shame the customers when the board designers hand the world a hot mess so bad the bios engineers can't even unfuck it. 

So much team football in the world. Seeding the internet with cherry picked samples does not equal quality, it's theater


----------



## asdkj1740

pR1maL said:


> I find it more comical that 1500 worth of gear won't even run xmp on the "Apex".
> 
> But it won't, because the Apex is the "Apex" in name only. In reality, it's jist another pos board. But go ahead and shame the customers when the board designers hand the world a hot mess so bad the bios engineers can't even unfuck it.
> 
> So much team football in the world. Seeding the internet with cherry picked samples does not equal quality, it's theater


how can you be so sure the ram kit has nothing to do with the instability problem )) 6969


----------



## Mappi75

For testing ram stabiltiy i first use tm5 which found very fast errors ...

when tm5 is 100% stable with a lots of cycles then i used hci memtest pro v7 which still found errors,
in my case it was Write Recvery Time (tWR) which i have to rise from 24 to 25.

Then hci was runnning for hours and hours stable (gaming was stable too).

But then i used Karhu and it found still errors:

IMC VDD (Memory controller) i had to set a higher voltage from 1,20v to 1,25v
and now its still stable running @34.000%.

Looks (for me) DDR5 is much more sensitive then DDR4.
So you have to test with different programs.

On DDR4 a combination of GSAT & HCI was enough for testing,
GSAT i used normaly as first then hci/Karhu.

GSAT is very good in finding errors if one hour pass you have to test two hours (it still will find errors when 1 hour passes).
and at last 4 hours is the final test.

I wrote a (german) GSAT "how to" (install and use this in Windows) maybe this one is for you too 








Leserartikel - Intel Core i-Serie - RAM Overclocking (Auswirkungen auf Spiele)


Ah, Du hast auch nen 7820x da werden 3600 so oder so "schwer" werden.




www.computerbase.de





GSAT is the ultimate test when other says they found a 100% stable setup,
GSAT proof it was not 


Edit: does GSAT not work on Windows 11 ?


----------



## Arni90

asdkj1740 said:


> a complete oc noob who bought apex and trident z5 6400 kit...............i am dying............................


Why not? It's not like ASUS tries to make overclocking difficult on the Apex boards, with predefined timing sets, Silicon Prediction, and auto voltages compensating sufficiently to get good results even without much experience.

I'd easily recommend the XII and XIII Apex to someone just learning to overclock. For DDR5 I'd wait for the Z790 Apex.


----------



## Silent Scone

pR1maL said:


> I find it more comical that 1500 worth of gear won't even run xmp on the "Apex".


To be frank, if understanding what XMP actually does you'd appreciate how little sense this statement makes. XMP is not automatic overclocking or guaranteed in any way, which also means anything beyond this isn't, either. This is regardless of the board in use.

1. The higher the frequency the more likely there is user intervention needed. There are plenty of users running kits stable just as much as there are users blaming all and sundry for not being able to achieve certain frequencies as if there is some self-invented assurance for running components and subsystems out of spec. Whilst anything outside of JEDEC isn't assured, above 6000 can be considered a lottery.

2. The IO the kit is rated at is based on both primary and a number of secondary timings which is another reason the board QVL exists.

3. Memory kits are also binned at stock CPU frequency.

By and large, the biggest factor that eats into the timing budget is the CPU. Variance is a big part also which is why the "sum of its parts" philosophy has been thrown around with Z690 more than once. What this means is we have a broad range of processor margins where voltage swing is different, some of which may not climatize well to some of the pre-applied settings outside of reference code when combined with certain kits. This is why you get some users "magically" finding more success with different kits. Some of these types of variances found between slots can be dialed out by tuning certain MRC settings, although even then the variance is normal due to less snaking, layer, the number of vias, and last but certainly not least the CPU IMC.

Another example of this is people complaining about certain voltages being set too high automatically for a given frequency. What one user claims is "too high" can be needed for some samples, and vice versa. Yet, users complain about this anyway. This is because they don't understand that signal stage requirement varies from CPU to CPU and "more" is not always better. This is something that I've even brought up with overclockers in the media, as they otherwise believed this was true. None of us here are qualified enough to lay blame on any singular thing, however, it helps to keep an open mind. Not least of all as world-record-holding boards aren't often associated with being comical.






Mappi75 said:


> For testing ram stabiltiy i first use tm5 which found very fast errors ...
> 
> when tm5 is 100% stable with a lots of cycles then i used hci memtest pro v7 which still found errors,
> in my case it was Write Recvery Time (tWR) which i have to rise from 24 to 25.
> 
> Then hci was runnning for hours and hours stable (gaming was stable too).
> 
> But then i used Karhu and it found still errors:
> 
> IMC VDD (Memory controller) i had to set a higher voltage from 1,20v to 1,25v
> and now its still stable running @15.000%.
> 
> Looks (for me) DDR5 is much more sensitive then DDR4.
> So you have to test with different programs.
> 
> On DDR4 a combination of GSAT & HCI was enough for testing,
> GSAT i used normaly as first then hci/Karhu.
> 
> GSAT is very good in finding errors if one hour pass you have to test two hours (it still will find errors when 1 hour passes).
> and at last 4 hours is the final test.
> 
> I wrote a (german) GSAT "how to" (install and use this in Windows) maybe this one is for you too
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Leserartikel - Intel Core i-Serie - RAM Overclocking (Auswirkungen auf Spiele)
> 
> 
> Ah, Du hast auch nen 7820x da werden 3600 so oder so "schwer" werden.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.computerbase.de
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> GSAT is the ultimate test when other says they found a 100% stable setup,
> GSAT proof it was not



Different data patterns will flag different instability. This is why some tests are harder to pass than others depending on the platform as it depends on where the system is most comfortable (the swing in current is affected by different patterns).


----------



## bscool

EEE-RAY said:


> Need some advice guys - I have an Apex and the Gskill 6400 C32 kit. In both xmp1 and xmp2 I get memtest errors quite quickly. This occurs even with the CPU at stock voltage/clocks (yes I know technically XMP is overclocking).
> 
> I have the latest 1305 bios.
> 
> I am a complete memory OCing noob - I've never had XMP not work for me before.
> Does anyone have any advice/experience on how I should approach to trying to troubleshoot problems? What can I try? I know that some of the Apex boards have been really sketchy but I would have thought 6400 is well within the capabilities =/


This is what I would do. Put just 1 stick in chB/slot 2 to keep things simple.

Test XMP 1 and if it runs and passes memtet/Karhu then put that same stick into slot1/chA.

If you cant get XMP 1 stable in chA/slot 1 return MB.

If you want to keep the MB lower clocks until stable. So you might end up at 6200, 6000, 5800etc or lower as chA/slot 1 will be your limiting factor most likely.

And for bios do you mean 1304? I have not seen a 1305 bios for Apex.


----------



## jeiselramos

Mappi75 said:


> For testing ram stabiltiy i first use tm5 which found very fast errors ...
> 
> when tm5 is 100% stable with a lots of cycles then i used hci memtest pro v7 which still found errors,
> in my case it was Write Recvery Time (tWR) which i have to rise from 24 to 25.
> 
> Then hci was runnning for hours and hours stable (gaming was stable too).
> 
> But then i used Karhu and it found still errors:
> 
> IMC VDD (Memory controller) i had to set a higher voltage from 1,20v to 1,25v
> and now its still stable running @15.000%.
> 
> Looks (for me) DDR5 is much more sensitive then DDR4.
> So you have to test with different programs.
> 
> On DDR4 a combination of GSAT & HCI was enough for testing,
> GSAT i used normaly as first then hci/Karhu.
> 
> GSAT is very good in finding errors if one hour pass you have to test two hours (it still will find errors when 1 hour passes).
> and at last 4 hours is the final test.
> 
> I wrote a (german) GSAT "how to" (install and use this in Windows) maybe this one is for you too
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Leserartikel - Intel Core i-Serie - RAM Overclocking (Auswirkungen auf Spiele)
> 
> 
> Ah, Du hast auch nen 7820x da werden 3600 so oder so "schwer" werden.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.computerbase.de
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> GSAT is the ultimate test when other says they found a 100% stable setup,
> GSAT proof it was not


I can't run more than 18000 in gsat, how can I fix? 
I'm on w11, on w10 i never had this issue


----------



## EEE-RAY

bscool said:


> This is what I would do. Put just 1 stick in chB/slot 2 to keep things simple.
> 
> Test XMP 1 and if it runs and passes memtet/Karhu then put that same stick into slot1/chA.
> 
> If you cant get XMP 1 stable in chA/slot 1 return MB.
> 
> If you want to keep the MB lower clocks until stable. So you might end up at 6200, 6000, 5800etc or lower as chA/slot 1 will be your limiting factor most likely.
> 
> And for bios do you mean 1304? I have not seen a 1305 bios for Apex.


sorry I mean 1304.

so I tried the 6200 Hynix chip preset and it failed the bios memtest86 within minutes. It’s got tighter timings than xmp so I am not too surprised.

i then tested it at xmp timings and 6000 and 6200 with passed the Bios benchmark.
For ****s and giggles I ran 6400 again and this time it passed. I am currently running memtestpro and am currently at 126% without errors and counting. this is very weird because the first time I tried 6400 it failed within minutes for the internal bench.

My question is; is my ram at xmp settings unstable regardless of how long it runs memtestpro/aida etc because of that failed run at the very beginning? I know it could be down to luck it is weird to get multiple errors within minutes of starting, vs no errors now after hours with different tests. all I’ve done is move the settings around A bit (but ultimately using the same xmp 1 setting) and restarting the pc a few times testing


----------



## bscool

EEE-RAY said:


> sorry I mean 1304.
> 
> so I tried the 6200 Hynix chip preset and it failed the bios memtest86 within minutes. It’s got tighter timings than xmp so I am not too surprised.
> 
> i then tested it at xmp timings and 6000 and 6200 with passed the Bios benchmark.
> For ****s and giggles I ran 6400 again and this time it passed. I am currently running memtestpro and am currently at 126% without errors and counting. this is very weird because the first time I tried 6400 it failed within minutes for the internal bench.
> 
> My question is; is my ram at xmp settings unstable regardless of how long it runs memtestpro/aida etc because of that failed run at the very beginning? I know it could be down to luck it is weird to get multiple errors within minutes of starting, vs no errors now after hours with different tests. all I’ve done is move the settings around A bit (but ultimately using the same xmp 1 setting) and restarting the pc a few times testing


I am betting it is the MB. That is the same symptoms I had with my first 2021 Apex. But mine didnt happen until higher frequencies(past 6400). To get 6600 to 6666 stable was really difficult usually required clear cmos and entering values.

Getting new 2022 MB no issues even at 7000.

You will see if you take 1 stick at a time like I said and if slot 2 is easy to get working and slot 1 is a difficult than even with 2 sticks you will struggle to get it stable.

The bios memtest86 is better than nothing but I wouldnt put any trust in it. Use Karhu or memestpro or tm5 etc in Windows to really test. Also y cruncher is a good quick test. I liike benchmate version BenchMate

Use y cruncher 2.5b for a quick test. If cant run that no sense in running memory tests for hours in my opinion.


----------



## EEE-RAY

bscool said:


> I am betting it is the MB. That is the same symptoms I had with my first 2021 Apex. But mine didnt happen until higher frequencies(past 6400). To get 6600 to 6666 stable was really difficult usually required clear cmos and entering values.
> 
> Getting new 2022 MB no issues even at 7000.
> 
> You will see if you take 1 stick at a time like I said and if slot 2 is easy to get working and slot 1 is a difficult than even with 2 sticks you will struggle to get it stable.
> 
> The bios memtest86 is better than nothing but I wouldnt put any trust in it. Use Karhu or memestpro or tm5 etc in Windows to really test. Also y cruncher is a good quick test. I liike benchmate version BenchMate
> 
> Use y cruncher 2.5b for a quick test. If cant run that no sense in running memory tests for hours in my opinion.


I passed the bios memtest 86 some time ago. I am currently running memtest pro in windows. I am at >200% coverage so far without errors.

iwill let it cook overnight. If i get any errors i might just drop it to 6000 or 6200 and call it day for now and save troubleshooting for when I have more time. I chose an apex board and g skill kit believing this combo would be the least troublesome (historically I’ve always had good runs with apex boards and that memory brand)


----------



## bscool

EEE-RAY said:


> I passed the bios memtest 86 some time ago. I am currently running memtest pro in windows. I am at >200% coverage so far without errors.
> 
> iwill let it cook overnight. If i get any errors i might just drop it to 6000 or 6200 and call it day for now and save troubleshooting for when I have more time. I chose an apex board and g skill kit believing this combo would be the least troublesome (historically I’ve always had good runs with apex boards and that memory brand)


I would think it will be ok then if you got that far in memtest. 

It is just that when you go into the bios again and make any changes and if it trains memory then it may not be stable if it is on the edge like it sounds.

Hopefully it keeps working for you.


----------



## Mappi75

jeiselramos said:


> I can't run more than 18000 in gsat, how can I fix?
> I'm on w11, on w10 i never had this issue



Same problem here...but 18000 would be killed to and did not run correctly.


----------



## darth_meh

Silent Scone said:


> To be frank, if understanding what XMP actually does you'd appreciate how little sense this statement makes. XMP is not automatic overclocking or guaranteed in any way, which also means anything beyond this isn't, either. This is regardless of the board in use.


That may be the case, but ASUS marketing doesn't hesitate to market XMP as an EZ mode memory overclocking feature. I also think it's funny that ASUS makes four slot DDR5 motherboards, but then tell users they can't realistically use all four slots.

Also - just curious - is your position that ASUS motherboards are infallible, because you seem quick to blame CPUs, CPU IMCs, memory kits, and end users but never your products. That's rich coming from a company that launched the Hero with a backwards capacitor. A little humility and appreciation for customers that drop $800 on a motherboard would serve ASUS well.

FWIW, I bought an Apex at launch, and I still can't even run 5200Mhz XMP stable. But I'm sure that's MY fault.


----------



## Nizzen

darth_meh said:


> That may be the case, but ASUS marketing doesn't hesitate to market XMP as an EZ mode memory overclocking feature. I also think it's funny that ASUS makes four slot DDR5 motherboards, but then tell users they can't realistically use all four slots.
> 
> Also - just curious - is your position that ASUS motherboards are infallible, because you seem quick to blame CPUs, CPU IMCs, memory kits, and end users but never your products. That's rich coming from a company that launched the Hero with a backwards capacitor. A little humility and appreciation for customers that drop $800 on a motherboard would serve ASUS well.
> 
> FWIW, I bought an Apex at launch, and I still can't even run 5200Mhz XMP stable. But I'm sure that's MY fault.


Why not send the MB back to the store? Not even 5200mhz stable, and something is wrong. Haven't heard anyone in the world! that can't do that on z690 😅


----------



## Silent Scone

darth_meh said:


> That may be the case, but ASUS marketing doesn't hesitate to market XMP as an EZ mode memory overclocking feature. I also think it's funny that ASUS makes four slot DDR5 motherboards, but then tell users they can't realistically use all four slots.
> 
> Also - just curious - is your position that ASUS motherboards are infallible, because you seem quick to blame CPUs, CPU IMCs, memory kits, and end users but never your products. That's rich coming from a company that launched the Hero with a backwards capacitor. A little humility and appreciation for customers that drop $800 on a motherboard would serve ASUS well.
> 
> FWIW, I bought an Apex at launch, and I still can't even run 5200Mhz XMP stable. But I'm sure that's MY fault.


Nothing is infallible, that’s different to throwing out invalid statements about XMP in an attempt to besmirch something that’s not easily understood, but I’ve already responded to this so no need to repeat. Personally, I’ve been quite open about trying to obtain a “bad board”.

Number of slots and performance is always intrinsically related. I’m not sure what your point of reference is for running DDR5 in 2DPC as there’s only one platform available at the moment.

I have a launch board, too. Also a 5200 micron kit that works fine. If you’re genuinely struggling that much, perhaps contact support for your region.


----------



## darth_meh

Nizzen said:


> Why not send the MB back to the store? Not even 5200mhz stable, and something is wrong. Haven't heard anyone in the world! that can't do that on z690 😅


This was an exchange. At launch, XMP on Z690 was a buggy mess so I figured I'd just hold onto it until the BIOS issues got resolved. It's rock solid @ stock. My bad.


----------



## Simkin

So, how many have a launch Apex in here and run 6400+ without issues?


----------



## 7empe

bscool said:


> I am betting it is the MB. That is the same symptoms I had with my first 2021 Apex. But mine didnt happen until higher frequencies(past 6400). To get 6600 to 6666 stable was really difficult usually required clear cmos and entering values.
> 
> Getting new 2022 MB no issues even at 7000.
> 
> You will see if you take 1 stick at a time like I said and if slot 2 is easy to get working and slot 1 is a difficult than even with 2 sticks you will struggle to get it stable.
> 
> The bios memtest86 is better than nothing but I wouldnt put any trust in it. Use Karhu or memestpro or tm5 etc in Windows to really test. Also y cruncher is a good quick test. I liike benchmate version BenchMate
> 
> Use y cruncher 2.5b for a quick test. If cant run that no sense in running memory tests for hours in my opinion.


I had tm5 errors within 1st cycle of 1usmus_v3 while y-cruncher was stable. Y-cruncher is veeeery sensitive on MC and CPU stability - more than the memory itself.


----------



## Lord Alzov

Simkin said:


> So, how many have a launch Apex in here and run 6400+ without issues?


Buy apex from start on 2021. 7200 cl32 unstable 7000cl30 can stable 6933cl30 FULL STABLE. 6666cl30t1 STABLE.


----------



## 7empe

Simkin said:


> So, how many have a launch Apex in here and run 6400+ without issues?


I have Apex production date 11/2021. Stable up to 7000. Now running these:


----------



## bscool

7empe said:


> I had tm5 errors within 1st cycle of 1usmus_v3 while y-cruncher was stable. Y-cruncher is veeeery sensitive on MC and CPU stability - more than the memory itself.


It is just another tool. Not meant as a be all end all.

Everyone is free to use whatever they want. I have had my system pass every stress type bench I threw at it and then loaded csgo and crashed to desktop in a few seconds.


----------



## Nizzen

Simkin said:


> So, how many have a launch Apex in here and run 6400+ without issues?


Me atleast LOL


----------



## Silent Scone

6933 C38 Samsung on day one board, plan to grab Hynix before long (time constraints)


----------



## Csavez™

Mappi75 said:


> I'am not 100% sure but for me it looks that offical bios 1304 is more difficult to get stable,
> on 1101 my 6666 32-40-40-30-2T setup was 100% stable at 1,40v ram voltage and 1,15 SA.
> 
> On 1304 i have now difficulties to get -this- setup stable now i must running higher DRAM voltage (1,42-1,45)
> but still not sure if its now 100% perfect stable (still testing). Something is wrong here...
> 
> (as always i do a real bios reset and so on, testing with tm5/Karhu/hci memtest and GSAT)
> 
> So no wonder that i cant go any higher than 6666+ mhz when with bios 1304 the old setup is not stable anymore..
> 
> Cooling is no problem using Noctua NF-A8 PWM 80mm fans which have an excellent
> mm H2O of 2,37 (as layman: it makes much more concentrated wind than 90mm or 120mm models). I do a real world comparison all noctua fans.


Good for me, the 1304 bios.


----------



## Gadfly

Voodoo Hoodoo said:


> It's your RAM or IMC.
> 
> I'm running 6400 (gskill C32 kit) on an Extreme on XMP I, with no stability issues.
> 
> This is an SP 86 CPU.
> 
> View attachment 2552245


As we have clearly seen in this thread, it most likely is the board. It appears there are some serious QA issues with the Apex boards, especially those made before Jan 22.


----------



## EEE-RAY

bscool said:


> I would think it will be ok then if you got that far in memtest.
> 
> It is just that when you go into the bios again and make any changes and if it trains memory then it may not be stable if it is on the edge like it sounds.
> 
> Hopefully it keeps working for you.


Argh so I got one error in one thread (of 24 threads) after 1100% memtestpro.

So it _is_ on the very edge of stability. If you had to tweak one thing to try to get it stable what would you try first?
Its already at 1.4V, is there any scope for increase on this?

EDIT: 
I just reset the bios to default and back to XMP1 - in memtestpro instantly got hundreds of errors (and ongoing). I then reset the bios to default again, restart the computer a few times, and back to XMP 1, now it has no errors so far in this (admittedly short) 20 minute run. What accounts for this crazy variable between edge of stability and very very unstable?


----------



## bscool

EEE-RAY said:


> Argh so I got one error in one thread (of 24 threads) after 1100% memtestpro.
> 
> So it _is_ on the very edge of stability. If you had to tweak one thing to try to get it stable what would you try first?
> Its already at 1.4V, is there any scope for increase on this?
> 
> EDIT:
> I just reset the bios to default and back to XMP1 - in memtestpro instantly got hundreds of errors (and ongoing). I then reset the bios to default again, restart the computer a few times, and back to XMP 1, now it has no errors so far in this (admittedly short) 20 minute run. What accounts for this crazy variable between edge of stability and very very unstable?


Welcome to what many have with certain Apex MB.

About the only thing I know of to "fix:" it is lower clocks to ones that will easily run. 

I would try 6200. 

I doubt messing with any voltages at 6400(it seems to be your "wall") will do much good long term. You will think you found a "fix" but then it is unstable when running memory tests.


----------



## EEE-RAY

Ok so dud board 

Is board problems mainly for refrequency or does it affect timing too? If I back to 6000 can I try to tighten timings to try to return some of the lost performance or will that provoke the same sort of instability?


----------



## bscool

EEE-RAY said:


> Ok so dud board
> 
> Is board problems mainly for refrequency or does it affect timing too? If I back to 6000 can I try to tighten timings to try to return some of the lost performance or will that provoke the same sort of instability?


You should be able to tighten timings no problems. At least going by my MB and a friend that has Apex and others I have seen they can tighten timings with no issues it it just clock/frequency limits.


----------



## Falkentyne

bscool said:


> You should be able to tighten timings no problems. At least going by my MB and a friend that has Apex and others I have seen they can tighten timings with no issues it it just clock/frequency limits.


This whole thing seems similar to b-die PCB revision/date and chips (samsung chips are beyond me).
2018 2x16 B-die: no problem running cas 15 3600 1T whatsoever at tight timings.
But 2T bottoms out at 3733 CL 17 for stable at reasonable timings, and 3866 2T is impossible without oversized pajama loose timings that make it not worth even trying it.

2020 B-die: 1T fine at 3400 CL14. 1T impossible at C15 3600 without super loose timings, even at 1.5v it's just too difficult to daily. But 2T is good up to 16/16/16/34 @ 4266-4400 mhz (depending on board/CPU) at reasonable voltages. Worst 1T, miles better scaling 2T.


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> You should be able to tighten timings no problems. At least going by my MB and a friend that has Apex and others I have seen they can tighten timings with no issues it it just clock/frequency limits.


 Want to send me that board they sent to you for cash money?


----------



## bscool

truehighroller1 said:


> Want to send me that board they sent to you for cash money?


No. I dont think it would be the right for me to sell something they sent me to test/try.


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> No. I dont think it would be the right for me to sell something they sent me to test/try.



*****, Yeah okay. Sell outs. You guys make me sick. If it was Jesus you would stab him in the side bro.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

truehighroller1 said:


> ***, Yeah okay. Sell outs. You guys make me sick. If it was Jesus you would stab him in the side bro.


Holy hell. With all that's going on in the world you are literally throwing a hissy fit over an $800 motherboard that doesn't overclock as high as someone else's $800 motherboard.


----------



## truehighroller1

geriatricpollywog said:


> Holy hell. With all that's going on in the world you are literally throwing a hissy fit over an $800 motherboard that doesn't overclock as high as someone else's $800 motherboard.


He said he would send it to me two weeks ago bro. **** with your calling the kettle black. I offered him cash money. What a joke. Asus can't even fix mine it's so ****ing broke but, I'm the bad guy ***?? lol


ASUS CAN LITERALLY NOT FIX MINE THEY HAVE IT AND CAN'T FIX IT! DO YOU NOT SEE IT'S NOT MY FAULT?


----------



## bscool

truehighroller1 said:


> He said he would send it to me two weeks ago bro. *** with your calling the kettle black. I offered him cash money. What a joke. Asus can't even fix mine it's so ****ing broke but, I'm the bad guy **?? lol
> 
> 
> ASUS CAN LITERALLY NOT FIX MINE THEY HAVE IT AND CAN'T FIX IT! DO YOU NOT SEE IT'S NOT MY FAULT?


I said would send it to you because you are a freakin baby.


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> I said would send it to you because you are a freakin baby.



Asus has my motherboard and can't fix it, they have said this themselves. I invested money into another cpu three times and memory three times. You assclowns have said it was my fault from the get go now Asus is saying it's their fault and they can't even fix my motherboard.

I have invested all of this money and time and put up with you and everyone else's abuse and it's still my fault even though now they admit it's their fault now that I sent them the motherboard and yet you still say it's me?

You guys are complete abusive assholes.


----------



## bscool

-


----------



## DoomDash

So I was looking at the supported memory for the Strix on ASUS's website and I just noticed mine was not on there. I have 6000MHZ G.Skill but with 36-36-36-96 timings. All the ones listed as supported on their end are at most 36-36-36-76. Is this possibly a reason I can't get anywhere near the 6000MHZ XMP speeds (5400mhz max for me so far)? I've literally never had to shop for memory like this before.... let me know. 



> VendorsPart No.SizeRAM SpeedSupported SpeedSS/DSChip BrandTimingVoltageSocket SupportG.SKILLF5-6000U4040A16GX2-RS5K2x 16GB60006000SSSK Hynix40-40-40-761.251,2G.SKILLF5-6000U3636E16GX2-RS5K2x 16GB60006000SSSamsung36-36-36-761.31,2G.SKILLF5-6000U3636E16GX2-RS5W2x 16GB60006000SSSamsung36-36-36-761.31,2G.SKILLF5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5K2x 16GB60006000SSSamsung36-36-36-761.31,2G.SKILLF5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK2x 16GB60006000SSSamsung36-36-36-761.31,2G.SKILLF5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RS2x 16GB60006000SSSamsung36-36-36-761.31,2G.SKILLF5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5S2x 16GB60006000SSSamsung36-36-36-761.31,2G.SKILLF5-6000U4040E16GX2-RS5K2x 16GB60006000SSSamsung40-40-40-761.31,2G.SKILLF5-6000U4040E16GX2-RS5W2x 16GB60006000SSSamsung40-40-40-761.31,2G.SKILLF5-6000U4040E16GX2-TZ5K2x 16GB60006000SSSamsung40-40-40-761.31,2G.SKILLF5-6000U4040E16GX2-TZ5RK2x 16GB60006000SSSamsung40-40-40-761.31,2G.SKILLF5-6000U4040E16GX2-TZ5RS2x 16GB60006000SSSamsung40-40-40-761.31,2G.SKILLF5-6000U4040E16GX2-TZ5S2x 16GB60006000SSSamsung40-40-40-761.31,2


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> -



Nothing huh? Totes my fault, right? You want the rma number bro? You want to call them and ask them about it bro? Totally their motherboard issue not my fault nothing to say bro? Nothing bro? You want to abuse me more bro? Sorry you can't now because it has been proven to be their fault at this point want the rma code bro????? Nothing?


----------



## bscool

truehighroller1 said:


> Nothing huh? Totes my fault, right? You want the rma number bro? You want to call them and ask them about it bro? Totally their motherboard issue not my fault nothing to say bro? Nothing bro? You want to abuse me more bro? Sorry you can't now because it has been proven to be their fault at this point want the rma code bro????? Nothing?


I deleted it because there is no point.

You are right. I am wrong. You win.


----------



## yahfz

I went to mcdonald’s and paid for a sundae, they said the ice cream machine broke so they refunded my money… you know what’s weird? I didn’t yell at people around me for it


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> I deleted it because there is no point.
> 
> You are right. I am wrong. You win.


It's not a win, you were being an abusive jerk and everyone else for that matter and now that I have been proven right you guys still won't say sorry and back off. That's wrong, you guys are acting like children not me. Calling me cry baby? Who's being the cry baby now I have been proven right and you're the one crying out calling me a cry baby?

It was broke. They admit it, broke.


----------



## bscool

truehighroller1 said:


> It's not a win, you were being an abusive jerk and everyone else for that matter and now that I have been proven right you guys still won't say sorry and back off. That's wrong, you guys are acting like children not me. Calling me cry baby? Who's being the cry baby now I have been proven right and you're the one crying out calling me a cry baby?
> 
> It was broke. They admit it, broke.


You need to get some help.


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> You need to get some help.



Says the person who can't admit they were wrong. This is awesome. You wonder why I'm so happy right now? You guys look like total morons right now. You can't just admit you were wrong. You must be more abusive instead. I'm sure I will get a ban for being abusive, yet you guys are the ones being abusive.


----------



## bscool

truehighroller1 said:


> Says the person who can't admit they were wrong.


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


>





truehighroller1 said:


> Says the person who can't admit they were wrong. This is awesome. You wonder why I'm so happy right now? You guys look like total morons right now. You can't just admit you were wrong. You must be more abusive instead. I'm sure I will get a ban for being abusive, yet you guys are the ones being abusive.


Asus say's it's broke. 🤣


----------



## yahfz

truehighroller1 said:


> It was broke. They admit it, broke.


So what else do you want? A medal for RMAing? They don’t have spare boards to ship you and they’ve already refunded you, RMA successfully complete. Stop being weird and harassing others, go touch some grass.


----------



## truehighroller1

yahfz said:


> So what else do you want? A medal for RMAing? They don’t have spare boards to ship you and they’ve already refunded you, RMA successfully complete. Stop being weird and harassing others, go touch some grass.



To stop getting abusive comments from assholes when I was right? ehhhemm abusive comment from ******* quoted above.


----------



## Falkentyne

yahfz said:


> So what else do you want? A medal for RMAing? They don’t have spare boards to ship you and they’ve already refunded you, RMA successfully complete. Stop being weird and harassing others, go touch some grass.


What's going on?
Someone I have on my ignore list going off the deep end again?


----------



## truehighroller1

Falkentyne said:


> What's going on?
> Someone I have on my ignore list going off the deep end again?


Abusive comment, ignore reality. I'm never wrong 🤣. You guys are complete idiots.

Oh by the way Asus says my motherboard is broke like I said from the get go. 😂

Let's keep the idiot troll train rolling guys I like this.

*****

He said his motherboard was broke we laughed and said no it'S your fault idiot then Asus says yeah it's def broke then we say YEAH you're cry baby??? 🤣

We all block cry baby ***?????

Calling next comment. you cry baby here's my free motherboard hand picked posting 8900Mhz memory stable lol!!

There's something wrong with him mentally because he's calling our hypocrisy out and we don't like that.


----------



## EEE-RAY

I am literally the newest member of this forum but guys, come on, its just a subpar motherboard. 
As someone who is also affected I know it is frustrating but life won't be fundamentally worse as a result of our boards having crappy overclocks. Lesson learned, buy something else/don't be a first adopter etc etc etc. (I know this place self selects against these traits).

At the risk of sounding over the top, there are so many other things wrong with the world these last few years, crappy Apex boards are like rank #2823299 on the list of problems for the world.


----------



## warbucks

bscool said:


> You need to get some help.


Where are the forum mods? This guy has been doing nothing but trolling this thread with his nonsense because he has a bad board and won't take the FULL refund Asus has offered him and just go get a Unify-X and shut his mouth once and for all. He's the one trolling and acting like a bloody child and filling this tread with useless drivel. Unreal.


----------



## truehighroller1

EEE-RAY said:


> I am literally the newest member of this forum but guys, come on, its just a subpar motherboard.
> As someone who is also affected I know it is frustrating but life won't be fundamentally worse as a result of our boards having crappy overclocks. Lesson learned, buy something else/don't be a first adopter etc etc etc. (I know this place self selects against these traits).
> 
> At the risk of sounding over the top, there are so many other things wrong with the world these last few years, crappy Apex boards are like rank #2823299 on the list of problems for the world.



Not according to the trolls trolling me bro apex #1.


----------



## Nizzen

Is this guru3d forums?


----------



## Mappi75

Any thoughts what i can still optimize?
(still no chance to hit 6800)

6666-32-40-40-30-2









TM5 1usmus_v3 Cycles=20 stable
HCI MemTest Pro v7 = 8 hours stable
Karhu = 34.000+% stable

Wondering that tWR <25 case errrors in hci


----------



## EEE-RAY

Ok this is a noob question: in HWinfo under memory it lists several frequency/latency variations under "XMP" settings

e.g.
3200 (6400) 32-39-39-102
3000 30-37-37-96
2800 28-35-35-90

Obviously the first setting is the out of box XMP settings
Where do the other settings with slower speed and tighter timings come from?


----------



## DoomDash

Enough with the drama.


DoomDash said:


> So I was looking at the supported memory for the Strix on ASUS's website and I just noticed mine was not on there. I have 6000MHZ G.Skill but with 36-36-36-96 timings. All the ones listed as supported on their end are at most 36-36-36-76. Is this possibly a reason I can't get anywhere near the 6000MHZ XMP speeds (5400mhz max for me so far)? I've literally never had to shop for memory like this before.... let me know.


Got buried under pointless drama. How important is a MBA's supported memory list?


----------



## Neur0Mortis

Swapped out my dear Formula and just finished installing a new Extreme. Anybody else getting a lot of coil wine on Asus Z690 boards? Didn't have this problem with the formula _(bud did have plenty of other problems)_.

Edit: Nevermind. Found the problem. It's not coil wine. It's the stupid ROG Hub. Thought I'd use it, but yeah. . .


----------



## vigorito

Is there any ETA for new version of bios then 1304,current one is totally broken for any xmp for strix gaming E wi fi


----------



## Csavez™

Above 6400, it makes a mistake, once it's good / once it's not, the motherboard is faulty, even though it was designed for overclocking, we tested 5 boards with friends (production in 2021), all of which have this phenomenon. Five pieces of voltage need to be coordinated by the end user for even xmp to work properly ???
This Z690 / ddr5 is a test that we are doing instead of the manufacturers, here something has gone very far.
A new bios is coming out, which was good until then, stable, it's not there anymore, you can start all over again. I'm very bored already.
I'm staying on the 6400, thinking about returning this motherboard and buying an msi! In the lower voice, I have 500 hours of ddr5 sucking.


----------



## Carillo

truehighroller1 said:


> Abusive comment, ignore reality. I'm never wrong 🤣. You guys are complete idiots.
> 
> Oh by the way Asus says my motherboard is broke like I said from the get go. 😂
> 
> Let's keep the idiot troll train rolling guys I like this.
> 
> ***
> 
> He said his motherboard was broke we laughed and said no it'S your fault idiot then Asus says yeah it's def broke then we say YEAH you're cry baby??? 🤣
> 
> We all block cry baby ***?????
> 
> Calling next comment. you cry baby here's my free motherboard hand picked posting 8900Mhz memory stable lol!!
> 
> There's something wrong with him mentally because he's calling our hypocrisy out and we don't like that.


Have you considered a new hobby? This can not possibly give you any pleasure as a hobby should do ..


----------



## Nizzen

Carillo said:


> Have you considered a new hobby? This can not possibly give you any pleasure as a hobby should do ..


----------



## truehighroller1

Carillo said:


> Have you considered a new hobby? This can not possibly give you any pleasure as a hobby should do ..


After 28 years of doing it and going to college for it I think I'm fine. The company and the paid trolls are the ones being jerks. Just making themselves look bad to customers. I'm good with that.

Also I feel quiet vindicated now that I've been proven right and there is indeed a problem with the motherboard so, what's wrong with that?

Lets be honest it's quiet funny you trolls are crawling out of the wood work to point and laugh when I was right. I mean what are you laughing at exactly? The fact that I was right??

Doesn't really make sense lol.


----------



## Arni90

The ASUS apologists here puzzle me, and it's quite obvious who they are. I get that there are people here who have gotten their boards for free, but putting the blame on "poor IMC" or "bad memory" hasn't helped anyone.

I get the frustration with @truehighroller1 and his posting, as it's incredibly repetetive. But on a positive note it's at least opened up for some discussion on why some people end up with poor results.


----------



## Nizzen

Arni90 said:


> The ASUS apologists here puzzle me, and it's quite obvious who they are. I get that there are people here who have gotten their boards for free, but putting the blame on "poor IMC" or "bad memory" hasn't helped anyone.
> 
> I get the frustration with @truehighroller1 and his posting, as it's incredibly repetetive. But on a positive note it's at least opened up for some discussion on why some people end up with poor results.


Some here lost the lottery, and some lost the patient 
Some her tend to win every time. Wonder why


----------



## truehighroller1

Nizzen said:


> Some here lost the lottery, and some lost the patient
> Some her tend to win every time. Wonder why


Obvious troll is obvious


----------



## beardlessduck

Asus should probably post all of the beta BIOSes on their own forum. This forum is an unbelievable ****show.


----------



## truehighroller1

beardlessduck said:


> Asus should probably post all of the beta BIOSes on their own forum. This forum is an unbelievable ****show.


They post them on hwbot not here.


----------



## Nizzen

beardlessduck said:


> Asus should probably post all of the beta BIOSes on their own forum. This forum is an unbelievable ****show.


I don't know why you are here, but I'm here to learn. This forums is the best place for it, IF you want to learn. Dodge all the ****show is easy. Use this button on the members profile:


----------



## truehighroller1

Nizzen said:


> I don't know why you are here, but I'm here to learn. This forums is the best place for it, IF you want to learn. Dodge all the ****show is easy. Use this button on the members profile:
> View attachment 2552732


Obvious troll is obvious. Ignore the guys with bad motherboards lol.


----------



## Carillo

Point is @Arni90 and @truehighroller1, if you keeps spamming the forums with whining and "feal sorry for yourself" comments, OCN is going to end up like Guru3d forums. There will be no one left.


----------



## truehighroller1

Carillo said:


> Point is @Arni90 and @truehighroller1, if you keeps spamming the forums with whining and "feal sorry for yourself" comments, OCN is going to end up like Guru3d forums. There will be no one left.


We attack people then complain, got it. Hypocrites.

Blame him blame him. He was right.... Blame him blame him 😂 so funny you guys.

It's like people that ruin California then move somewhere else then ruin it too then blame everyone one else.


----------



## Carillo

truehighroller1 said:


> We attack people then complain, got it. Hypocrites.
> 
> Blame him blame him. He was right.... Blame him blame him 😂 so funny you guys.


I feal sorry for you man, hope you get your issues sorted out. Peace out.


----------



## truehighroller1

Carillo said:


> I feal sorry for you man, hope you get your issues sorted out. Peace out.


He has a bad motherboard hahaha. You guys are morons seriously.


----------



## Silent Scone

EEE-RAY said:


> EDIT:
> I just reset the bios to default and back to XMP1 - in memtestpro instantly got hundreds of errors (and ongoing). I then reset the bios to default again, restart the computer a few times, and back to XMP 1, now it has no errors so far in this (admittedly short) 20 minute run. What accounts for this crazy variable between edge of stability and very very unstable?


Differences in training. Most likely retraining new settings whilst the system is warm as this affects driver calibration


----------



## dante`afk

truehighroller1 said:


> Little update. I got a phone call from Asus tonight after I gave up and sent them my motherboard " they received it today earlier " for them to fix it because they keep saying that they have no stock of the Apex to send me an advanced replacement. They offered for them to give me a full refund. I want a freaking apex that works. I said okay let me look in the background to see if there are any online which I could buy after the full refund. None.
> 
> Tell me what you guys think about this situation because it's real and I'm in it and omg, this is terrible at this point support wise. The only motherboard they're willing to offer me is a lower model not even one step up.


newewgg and amazon have plenty z690 apex in stock?


----------



## geriatricpollywog

dante`afk said:


> newewgg and amazon have plenty z690 apex in stock?


Asus gave him a full refund which is absolutely terrible and unacceptable.


----------



## truehighroller1

geriatricpollywog said:


> Asus gave him a full refund which is absolutely terrible and unacceptable.


I didn't except the refund. I want it fixed. How many times do I have to say that?


----------



## edkieferlp

I don't think you can blame any one thing, MB, memory, or CPU this time around with speeds greater than 4800.
I think this is the first time we have seen so aggressive move up on freq of ram in such a short time of a new ram type, this plus a totally new platform, it's just not going to be great out of box OC.

With past ram DDR2, DDR3, DDR4 it took like a yr before we saw really higher clocked ram. This time we are at near 7000 in a few months' time.

I think it will take Z790 and 13xxx series before this gets close to ironing out.


----------



## dante`afk

honestly, I tried the asus RMA as well, obviously no stock.

I can't be bothered with unify-x. So I just lowered my OC from 6600 to 6000 and be done with it. if I ever am in the mood to fiddle with it around again I'll do it, but for now there's no real world performance difference if I have it at 6000 with tight timings or 6600 or 7200.

only the number is higher, nothing else.


----------



## Gadfly

edkieferlp said:


> I don't think you can blame any one thing, MB, memory, or CPU this time around with speeds greater than 4800.
> I think this is the first time we have seen so aggressive move up on freq of ram in such a short time of a new ram type, this plus a totally new platform, it's just not going to be great out of box OC.
> 
> With past ram DDR2, DDR3, DDR4 it took like a yr before we saw really higher clocked ram. This time we are at near 7000 in a few months' time.
> 
> I think it will take Z790 and 13xxx series before this gets close to ironing out.


I disagree with this.

For example. I have a CPU and RAM kit that will run memory 6800+ stable on my MSI motherboard, If I put that exact same CPU and Memory kit in my APEX, it will only run stable at 6000 but only with loser timings and only with move voltage than is required on the other motherboard, Clearly the issue with with the motherboard. I can also run a simple test and compare to the two memory slots. One slot will boot over 7000, and the other slot will only post at 6600 (Post, but won't boot). In this case it is really simple; the motherboard is defective.

That is what we are talking about here and it is is not really isolated. A large number of Apex owners (mostly with the 2021 boards) purchased defective boards (to include some rather well known overclockers such as Buildzoid). It is upsetting, but it is not the end of the world.

What is more annoying is that though it is obvious that Asus knows about the issue; the process of getting Asus to accept an RMA and issue a refund/replacement is a massive pain in the ass that takes a lot of time. IMHO what we are looking for Asus to do here is admit there is a problem and create an easy replacement program for the 2021 boards Apex and ship anyone that requests a replacement a new (Not refurbished) 2022 production board.

Yes, It will cost Asus a lot of money, Yes a whole bunch of boards will end up getting recycled; but they are charging a premium price for a premium product. They should stand behind it. They had a issue, they clearly fixed the issue, and now it is time for them to admit it and make it right. Currently, all they are offering is that you ship your board off to a repair center, wait 2 weeks, and they will send it back. We all know they will not be able to "repair" signal integrity issues with a RAM slot; which leaves customers stuck with with their boards.


----------



## Gadfly

warbucks said:


> TAKE THE FULL REFUND AND GO BUY A NEW APEX IN STOCK AT NEWEGG. Jesus christ. For a grown ass man you act like you're 12.


Asus is not offering refunds...

They are only offering that customers send boards to a "repair" facility, wait two weeks, if it "works" they send the board back to you. If you are outside of your return widow from the retailer you are stuck with the defective board.


----------



## FireKillerGR

truehighroller1 said:


> If you could get me a new es board with a good memory number one slot that'd be great too . I know you have powers 😂. I have a ticket open for it with Asus.


Eventually I think that the overall attitude is about getting a binned mobo and nothing less than that.
Reasons that make me believe that (aside of the above comment) are:
A) tons of posts complaining/spamming about the mobo & the rma process. Probably more than 50-60 at this point just on this forum alone that turned this thread into his personal diary.
B) Not accepting a full refund when he got options to buy something else (or even retry for a 2022 apex)
C) as an experienced user (his words) he should know that the mobo cant be repaired/improved which is what he is asking for & results in a never-ending circle of complaints.
(why have a "repaired mobo" at hand when you can get your money back and buy something else?)


----------



## truehighroller1

FireKillerGR said:


> Eventually I think that the overall attitude is about getting a binned mobo and nothing less than that.
> Reasons that make me believe that (aside of the above comment) are:
> A) tons of posts complaining/spamming about the mobo & the rma process. Probably more than 50-60 at this point just on this forum alone that turned this thread into his personal diary.
> B) Not accepting a full refund when he got options to buy something else (or even retry for a 2022 apex)
> C) as an experienced user (his words) he should know that the mobo cant be repaired/improved which is what he is asking for & results in a neverending circle of complaints.


They said mine's defective.


----------



## joneffingvo

Gadfly said:


> Asus is not offering refunds...
> 
> They are only offering that customers send boards to a "repair" facility, wait two weeks, if it "works" they send the board back to you. If you are outside of your return widow from the retailer you are stuck with the defective board.


you've obviously missed the last 3-4 pages


----------



## FireKillerGR

truehighroller1 said:


> They said mine's defective.


yes and I don't want to make you repeat the following you stated 4 hours ago (post #4457):
"I didn't except the refund. I want it *fixed*. *How many times do I have to say that?*"

Thats why I wrote *C)* according to your comment (#4370):
"I've been overclocking longer then you know look at my account here and how old it is. Probably the oldest here. Tell me about the past of overclocking again young man please, inform me old wise one."

Why have a repaired mobo at hand when you can get your money back and have the freedom to buy whatever you want brand new? 

Not even going after the point that for *an experienced user* (your words) you probably *do not understand* the nature of the issue and how likely its to be repair-able (unless you play dumb to keep on with your complaints' diary "its day 123 since I started my RMA case")


----------



## Gadfly

FireKillerGR said:


> Eventually I think that the overall attitude is about getting a binned mobo and nothing less than that.
> Reasons that make me believe that (aside of the above comment) are:
> A) tons of posts complaining/spamming about the mobo & the rma process. Probably more than 50-60 at this point just on this forum alone that turned this thread into his personal diary.
> B) Not accepting a full refund when he got options to buy something else (or even retry for a 2022 apex)
> C) as an experienced user (his words) he should know that the mobo cant be repaired/improved which is what he is asking for & results in a never-ending circle of complaints.
> (why have a "repaired mobo" at hand when you can get your money back and buy something else?)


You are not reading. We are not talking about not getting a "binned" motherboard, but defective boards. 

Asus is not offering refunds.


----------



## FireKillerGR

Gadfly said:


> You are not reading. We are not talking about not getting a "binned" motherboard, but defective boards.
> 
> Asus is not offering refunds.


I 100% understand and wrote that I get the overall issue and that it really sucks to spend that much money and eventually be unhappy with how the mobo is clocking (or not clocking).
Thing is, the above user *was offered a full refund* cause there was* no stock* for them to give him a replacement and he *declined *trying to force ASUS to *repair* (?) his faulty motherboard.

His words, not mine.


----------



## Gadfly

joneffingvo said:


> you've obviously missed the last 3-4 pages


No, I have not, Asus will not offer me a refund, nor will they give me a replacement, They will only allow me to send my board in for a repair.


----------



## Gadfly

FireKillerGR said:


> I 100% understand and wrote that I get the overall issue and that it really sucks to spend that much money and eventually be unhappy with how the mobo is clocking (or not clocking).
> Thing is, the above user *was offered a full refund* cause there was* no stock* for them to give him a replacement and he *declined *trying to force ASUS to *repair* (?) his faulty motherboard.
> 
> His words, not mine.


Asus flat out refused to give me a refund, or a replacement. If they offered a refund, I'd jump on it. There is no way to "repair" the issues with these boards.


----------



## FireKillerGR

Gadfly said:


> Asus flat out refused to give me a refund, or a replacement. If they offered a refund, I'd jump on it. There is no way to "repair" the issues with these boards.


Since I was talking/quoting on truehightroller's post, I was referring to his #4,360 post where he stated about the full refund ("They offered for them to give me a full refund. ") .

My comments/points apply on his case.


----------



## truehighroller1

FireKillerGR said:


> Since I was talking/quoting on truehightroller's post, I was referring to his #4,360 post where he stated about the full refund ("They offered for them to give me a full refund. ") .
> 
> My comments/points apply on his case.


Apex Batch Issues 2021 (asus.com)


----------



## Jpmboy

truehighroller1 said:


> Little update. I got a phone call from Asus tonight after I gave up and sent them my motherboard " they received it today earlier " for them to fix it because they keep saying that they have no stock of the Apex to send me an advanced replacement. They offered for them to give me a full refund. I want a freaking apex that works. I said okay let me look in the background to see if there are any online which I could buy after the full refund. None.
> 
> Tell me what you guys think about this situation because it's real and I'm in it and omg, this is terrible at this point support wise. The only motherboard they're willing to offer me is a lower model not even one step up.


would the refund cover *this Apex price*?


----------



## Gadfly

Jpmboy said:


> would the refund cover *this Apex price*?


Pretty sure he wouldn't want an open box Apex from newegg.... would you?

That said if Asus would offer me a refund / replacement I would jump all over it.


----------



## truehighroller1

Gadfly said:


> Pretty sure he wouldn't want an open box Apex from newegg.... would you?
> 
> That said if Asus would offer me a refund / replacement I would jump all over it.



Not me, I'd rather be treated like royalty like others except I've been in the community longer than all of them.


----------



## Gadfly

truehighroller1 said:


> Not me, I'd rather be treated like royalty like others except I've been in the community longer than all of them.


If I were you I would take the refund and consider yourself lucky; that is more that Asus is doing for most people. At least you will get your money back and get to buy a new board. Most people with defective Apex boards are just having to suck up the $750 loss.


----------



## IronAge

geriatricpollywog said:


> Holy hell. With all that's going on in the world you are literally throwing a hissy fit over an $800 motherboard that doesn't overclock as high as someone else's $800 motherboard.


Nothing wrong about it, rants not beeing repeated often enough tend to be ignored by the responsible.



> ... while ASUS Enhanced Memory Profile technology makes it easy to ramp up DDR5 performance.


Asus praises its lovely overclockers dream and shows a pathetic customer policy towards regular buyers who can't even run their DDR5-6000 XMP profiles, while the ones with the cherry picked samples toss their 7000+ Screens @ them.

Guess who pays for the cherry picked samples in the end ?


----------



## FireKillerGR

truehighroller1 said:


> Not me, I'd rather be treated like royalty like others except I've been in the community longer than all of them.


Ok that finally makes sense.
So, it was never about getting refunded or getting the mobo repaired (I mentioned how likely this is on a previous post) but rather about getting a binned mobo.

Glad that we got to the bottom of it after almost a triple digit amount of comments here just on your case alone. 🙂


----------



## Jpmboy

FireKillerGR said:


> Ok that finally makes sense.
> So, it was never about getting refunded or getting the mobo repaired (I mentioned how likely this is on a previous post) but rather about getting a binned mobo.
> 
> Glad that we got to the bottom of it after almost a triple digit amount of comments here just on your case alone. 🙂


The "Lab" samples are not binned like you hint at... They may be engineering builds which, like CPUs, can be more robust simply because production "efficiency" has not done it's "magic" yet.

Yeah, didn't notice that link was to an open box. 

@truehighroller1 - Try B&H Photo?, nvm... they ran out too.


----------



## warbucks

truehighroller1 said:


> Not me, I'd rather be treated like royalty like others except I've been in the community longer than all of them.


How long you've been in a community has no bearing on anything. Your sense of entitlement is coming through strong here.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

IronAge said:


> Nothing wrong about it, rants not beeing repeated often enough tend to be ignored by the responsible.


I guess you missed the part where truhighroller threw a hissy fit at bscool (not Asus) after bscool kindly refused to sell him the motherboard Asus sent him to try.


----------



## truehighroller1

Jpmboy said:


> The "Lab" samples are not binned like you hint at... They may be engineering builds which, like CPUs, can be more robust simply because production "efficiency" has not done it's "magic" yet.
> 
> Yeah, didn't notice that link was to an open box.
> 
> @truehighroller1 - Try B&H Photo?, nvm... they ran out too.



Nothing against your jpmboy, love you bro but, holy ####. I've never been trolled so hard in my life, seriously holy crap. This is insanity. It's like the gates of hell have been opened. Why because I was sold a bad f motherboard. Bring it on trolls.



geriatricpollywog said:


> I guess you missed the part where truhighroller threw a hissy fit at bscool (not Asus) after bscool kindly refused to sell him the motherboard Asus sent him to try.


Bro, you're a loser, it's not working seriously. I laugh at you man.



warbucks said:


> How long you've been in a community has no bearing on anything. Your sense of entitlement is coming through strong here.


Pointless self entitlement comment. Congrats bro, you're one of them?



FireKillerGR said:


> Ok that finally makes sense.
> So, it was never about getting refunded or getting the mobo repaired (I mentioned how likely this is on a previous post) but rather about getting a binned mobo.
> 
> Glad that we got to the bottom of it after almost a triple digit amount of comments here just on your case alone. 🙂



Loser, what #5? I'll serve you one of our good boards now good job bro..

Oh by the way in case you guys don't see it here quoted you're, the trolls who're acting like immature little children lol.

Not you jpmboy.

To sum things up real quick.

You have certain people here who said my board wasn't bad and it's my fault.

Now my board has been proven bad those same people claim I'm the bad guy because my board is bad and I complain about $800 products not being good? You guys are idiots seriously. Look in the mirror.


----------



## centvalny

Do you have any screen shot of your tests or the serial# of your retail board?


----------



## truehighroller1

centvalny said:


> Do you have any screen shot of your tests or the retail board?



I took pictures of it 360 before sending it back yes.

Why what's up?


----------



## centvalny

Post it here then. I wanna see your ram settings with team 6400 probly I can help


----------



## truehighroller1

centvalny said:


> Post it here then. I wanna see your ram settings with team 6400 probly I can help



I had xmp I set, didn't work. I had xmp II set, didn't work. I set the memory timings all manual still failed, all with no overclock on the CPU. Complete stock settings and even added voltage to it at one point to see if it was that, switched out the CPU twice as well.

I also switched out to gskill 6400 hynix and it failed as well. I read where someone posted settings to turn off in the memory training options, didn't work. I tried voltages up and down everywhere, didn't work. I reset the bios, cleared it everytime etc as well. I switched to the secondary bios and updated it to the most recent bios. I reflashed all the bios up to the most recent bios. I don't have the board anymore unfortunately at this point, Asus does.

I appreciate your help more then you know. You can tell me what you were going to suggest though as it might help someone else.

At one point silent scone gave me advice to set everything manually, didn't work.


----------



## centvalny

truehighroller1 said:


> I had xmp I set, didn't work. I had xmp II set, didn't work. I set the memory timings all manual still failed, all with no overclock on the CPU. Complete stock settings and even added voltage to it at one point to see if it was that, switched out the CPU twice as well.
> 
> I also switched out to gskill 6400 hynix and it failed as well. I read where someone posted settings to turn off in the memory training options, didn't work. I tried voltages up and down everywhere, didn't work. I reset the bios, cleared it everytime etc as well. I don't have the board anymore unfortunately at this point, Asus does.
> 
> I appreciate your help more then you know. You can tell me what you were going to suggest though as it might help someone else.
> 
> At one point silent scone gave me advice to set everything manually, didmt work.


Where is the memset screen shots of your settings? Post it here! Here in brooklyn we say pics or it didnt happen.


----------



## truehighroller1

centvalny said:


> Where is the memset screen shots of your settings? Post it here! Here in brooklyn we say pics or it didnt happen.



I'd have to look through my screen shots on my PC. I'll look tomorrow when I get home from work. It was all stock settings though xmp for that memory, nothing special. The one thing I did keep noticing is that my pmic voltage wasn't always reading correctly through the memory timing app everyone here uses ASRock.

I noticed that everyone posting timings always seemed to read correctly but mine never did read the voltage right. I could see the correct voltage in hardware monitor but not that app.

Here's one I took at 6000mhz. It's was on my phone.

I'm sure I have more on my PC. Notice the voltage..


----------



## centvalny

truehighroller1 said:


> I'd have to look through my screen shots on my PC. I'll look tomorrow when I get home from work. It was all stock settings though xmp for that memory, nothing special. The one thing I did keep noticing is that my pmic voltage wasn't always reading correctly through the memory timing app everyone here uses ASRock.
> 
> I noticed that everyone posting timings always seemed to read correctly but mine never did read the voltage right. I could see the correct voltage in hardware monitor but not that app.
> 
> Here's one I took at 6000mhz. It's was on my phone.
> 
> I'm sure I have more on my PC. Notice the voltage..


Thats a start! Awesome, post more with bios ver. I will try to replicate your settings.


----------



## truehighroller1

centvalny said:


> Thats a start! Awesome, post more with bios ver. I will try to replicate your settings.



Bios 1304. Those were the default settings though 100%. I tried using all voltages up and down, nothing would pass stable.

Here's 6400. Same thing, odd voltage readings.


----------



## FireKillerGR

truehighroller1 said:


> Nothing against your jpmboy, love you bro but, holy ####. I've never been trolled so hard in my life, seriously holy crap. This is insanity. It's like the gates of hell have been opened. Why because I was sold a bad f motherboard. Bring it on trolls.
> 
> 
> 
> Bro, you're a loser, it's not working seriously. I laugh at you man.
> 
> 
> 
> Pointless self entitlement comment. Congrats bro, you're one of them?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Loser, what #5? I'll serve you one of our good boards now good job bro..
> 
> Oh by the way in case you guys don't see it here quoted you're, the trolls who're acting like immature little children lol.
> 
> Not you jpmboy.
> 
> To sum things up real quick.
> 
> You have certain people here who said my board wasn't bad and it's my fault.
> 
> Now my board has been proven bad those same people claim I'm the bad guy because my board is bad and I complain about $800 products not being good? You guys are idiots seriously. Look in the mirror.


You clearly fail to understand something super simple and you keep playing the "I am being trolled" card. 
At no point I wrote/assumed that your mobo isn't affected; even wrote that I understand the frustration of spending that much money and end up unhappy with the product you purchased.

Issue with most here (as far as I have seen) has been that you were offered a full refund, declined and kept going with the "I am being treated as $h1t by ASUS RMA".

Anyway, no point to further comment on your case. Gl & hf


----------



## IronAge

after all it is Asus QA that has failed, since there are too many running into the memory issues with the 2021 Batches.

unfortunately Asus won't publish what they have changed to keep RMA numbers low.

it is not so very unilkely getting a board swapped by previous buyer even when buying a new board from Amazon.

if Asus offered me a refund i would take it and run for MSI Unify X or Gigabyte Tachyon or wait for 2022 Batch hitting the shelves.


----------



## Simkin

To not issue a recall for this, is like pissing the costumers in the face, plain and simple.

So far my Apex is 1 hour stable on memtest86 6200 c32 2t on hynix, no luck on 6400 so far, but have not had the time to fiddle much yet.


----------



## FireKillerGR

Simkin said:


> To not issue a recall for this, is like pissing the costumers in the face, plain and simple.
> 
> So far my Apex is 1 hour stable on memtest86 6200 c32 2t on hynix, no luck on 6400 so far, but have not had the time to fiddle much yet.


Was your mobo 100% new btw? I recall @Carillo binning retail mobos last year and returning the rest back to the shop(s).

Imagine getting a used reject...


----------



## Simkin

FireKillerGR said:


> Was your mobo 100% new btw? I recall @Carillo binning retail mobos last year and returning the rest back to the shop(s).
> 
> Imagine getting a used reject...


Bought it on day one it be became available, so no used board 100% sure.

I don't know how my mb is yet as i have to test it more (lack of time due to kid, waiting for ddr5 etc), it might be good or it could be dogshit, but alot of people having issues with the Apex now.


----------



## 7empe

IMO expectations are far too high for Apex or any other DDR5 boards. According to the spec Apex supports DDR5 OC up to 6600. Anything above is a combination of silicon lottery, skills and luck. Anything below that can be limited due to the same factors. XMP is an OC. On my Extreme XII Z490 I couldn't run 4x8gb at advertised XMP 4400c16 without pumping much more voltage than XMP had in the profile. Not mentioning how mature the DDR4 is...


----------



## Nizzen

Any 7000+ tight timings with msi unify x yet?


----------



## criznit

Nizzen said:


> Any 7000+ tight timings with msi unify x yet?


I've seen a few in the 24/7 Daily DDR5 thread, but I question the voltages. I get that we can pump as much voltage as possible to reach the high numbers, but what are the safe values? I decided to stop at 1.435 since asus had that value listed for their 6400 numbers but I don't feel comfortable going above that. I have a Unify X board as well and I'm able to get to 6666 CL36 on 1.435 VDD/VDDQ.


----------



## Nizzen

criznit said:


> I've seen a few in the 24/7 Daily DDR5 thread, but I question the voltages. I get that we can pump as much voltage as possible to reach the high numbers, but what are the safe values? I decided to stop at 1.435 since asus had that value listed for their 6400 numbers but I don't feel comfortable going above that. I have a Unify X board as well and I'm able to get to 6666 CL36 on 1.435 VDD/VDDQ.


Safe is whatever yo can cool 
1.7vdd is no problem to cool for me.


----------



## Silent Scone

No reported degradation as far as I'm aware


----------



## Gadfly

7empe said:


> IMO expectations are far too high for Apex or any other DDR5 boards. According to the spec Apex supports DDR5 OC up to 6600. Anything above is a combination of silicon lottery, skills and luck. Anything below that can be limited due to the same factors. XMP is an OC. On my Extreme XII Z490 I couldn't run 4x8gb at advertised XMP 4400c16 without pumping much more voltage than XMP had in the profile. Not mentioning how mature the DDR4 is...


I don't think anyone is expecting 7000+ with tight timings without binning components; The issue at hand isn't one person complaining that they are not getting 7000+, or other people buying a pile of boards and returning all but the best binned boards, or Asus sending select people binned boards; that is normal, expected, and not the issue.

Everyone if focusing on beating up @truehighroller1 and ignoring the real issue here.

The real issue is the high percentage of the 2021 Apex boards that have issues with one of the RAM slots resulting in poor performance and instability. Asus clearly figured out what was wrong and fixed it as it appears the 2022 boards no longer have this issue; but they the are not doing anything to replace all the defective boards they sold people with the fixed 2022+ boards. All Asus will offer is an RMA number so you can send your board to a repair shop. They boot the board at defaults, if it works, they send it back saying that is fine, and you are stuck with the defective board. Asus is NOT offering refunds, nor are they offering a replacement with a new 2022 board.

Everyone can test their boards pretty easily:

Set the following:

CPU VDDQ: 1500
VDD2: 1350
System Agent 1350
VDD/VDDQ: 1500
Primary Timings: 34-44-44-44-34 2T (All others Auto)
Gear 2 mode (1:2 IMC/Ram)
Fixed memory voltage for example: 1.35v or 1.4v
Then install a single ram stick and keep increasing memory speed until it stops booting, then repeat with *the same memory stick* in the other memory slot. If the slots have more than about a 50-75mhz delta between the two then you have the same issue that is affecting so many others. (Note: Even 75mhz is on the high side). It is very common for people with early Apex boards to find a 100, 200, 400, and even 600mhz delta between the slots depending on how bad the issue is. Common experiences on affected boards are to suffer seemingly random instability, Pass stress testing only to have random crashes, random training failures on reboots, hard system crashes, requires very high voltages just to run stable even with slow memory speeds, etc. etc. My Apex will not run over 6000, even with a CPU + Memory kit combo that will run 6800+ on another motherboard.

This is not about one person, nor is it about expectations being set to high, it is about Asus selling defective boards and not doing anything to make it right.

So please, test your boards, and reply to this post with your results. Please include the manufacturing date if possible, (it is on the sticker on your MB box); and when you purchased the board. I will roll up all the results publish a spread sheet.


----------



## Silent Scone

Setting an arbitrary value for VCCSA is setting yourself or others up for a fail before you even get started.


----------



## Simkin

7empe said:


> IMO expectations are far too high for Apex or any other DDR5 boards. According to the spec Apex supports DDR5 OC up to 6600. Anything above is a combination of silicon lottery, skills and luck. Anything below that can be limited due to the same factors. XMP is an OC. On my Extreme XII Z490 I couldn't run 4x8gb at advertised XMP 4400c16 without pumping much more voltage than XMP had in the profile. Not mentioning how mature the DDR4 is...


So when people are getting higher memory speed with the same cpu/ddr5 kit on a half the price msi board, they have too high expectation to the Apex?


----------



## vigorito

So how i can find out when buying new ddr5 kits what is default speed of ram? since bios is broken on my strix z690 Gaming e and xmp doesent work at all 4800 to 5200mhz,so i if i buy 6000hz advertized kits i can get probably at least 5600mhz default speed? and yes i tried manual setting 5200mhz and i am getting bsods too but not as often as in xmp settings


----------



## J_Lab4645

......As we pause for a commercial break, this public service announcement is brought to you by icouldnthelpmyself.com.


----------



## CptSpig

Simkin said:


> So when people are getting higher memory speed with the same cpu/ddr5 kit on a half the price msi board, they have too high expectation to the Apex?


Where are the screen shots of people getting higher memory overclocks on the MSI boards. I have no problem getting 7000 on my retail 2021 Apex, 12900K and G.Skill 6400 kit all purchased from the EGG. The memory is air cooled CPU and GPU on water..


----------



## Gadfly

CptSpig said:


> Where are the screen shots of people getting higher memory overclocks on the MSI boards. I have no problem getting 7000 on my retail 2021 Apex, 12900K and G.Skill 6400 kit all purchased from the EGG. The memory is air cooled CPU and GPU on water..


What is your boards manufacturing date (If it is a very early board it might not have the date on the box)?


----------



## SoldierRBT

CptSpig said:


> Where are the screen shots of people getting higher memory overclocks on the MSI boards. I have no problem getting 7000 on my retail 2021 Apex, 12900K and G.Skill 6400 kit all purchased from the EGG. The memory is air cooled CPU and GPU on water..


The problem isn't how high you can boot and run AIDA. It's stabilizing the frequency. My 2021 board boots and can run AIDA at 7000C30 and even trains 7200 but max stability is 6666MHz. People reporting problems have boards that can't even stabilize 6000-6200. There're still a few 2021 boards that are good. I've seen 3 that can stabilize up to 6933MHz (how many you need to bin, idk). For 7K+, you need a 2022 board. Even with a 2022 board, you're trading 1T for higher 2T. 

At the moment, I'm running 6400C28 1T which is fine for daily. I'll try 6600 1T when I get my sticks on water.


----------



## Carillo

FireKillerGR said:


> Was your mobo 100% new btw? I recall @Carillo binning retail mobos last year and returning the rest back to the shop(s).
> 
> Imagine getting a used reject...


The shop's in Norway don't sell returned boards as NEW ones. They sell them as B-stock at reduced prices.


----------



## 7empe

Simkin said:


> So when people are getting higher memory speed with the same cpu/ddr5 kit on a half the price msi board, they have too high expectation to the Apex?


I can run 7000 cl30 on my apex made on 11/2021. It does not mean that every single board can do that, with every single cpu and every 6000+ memory kit. Few people share stable 7000 results other few people complain on not having xmp stable. Both groups are the opposite margins of the gauss distribution.


----------



## Carillo

Nizzen said:


> Safe is whatever yo can cool
> 1.7vdd is no problem to cool for me.


Post reults with 1,7VDD or it did not happen


----------



## 7empe

SoldierRBT said:


> The problem isn't how high you can boot and run AIDA. It's stabilizing the frequency. My 2021 board boots and can run AIDA at 7000C30 and even trains 7200 but max stability is 6666MHz. People reporting problems have boards that can't even stabilize 6000-6200. There're still a few 2021 boards that are good. I've seen 3 that can stabilize up to 6933MHz (how many you need to bin, idk). For 7K+, you need a 2022 board. Even with a 2022 board, you're trading 1T for higher 2T.
> 
> At the moment, I'm running 6400C28 1T which is fine for daily. I'll try 6600 1T when I get my sticks on water.


Just curious, what's the vdd/vddq for 6400c28 1t for you? I need 1.53/1.53 with very tight timings, but when the they pass the 33+C they need 1.55 for stability (and with 1.53V the tREFI/tRFC cannot compensate the current leakage no matter the value I use).


----------



## IronAge

Carillo said:


> The shop's in Norway don't sell returned boards as NEW ones. They sell them as B-stock at reduced prices.


and the sun always shines bright in norway too.  

something can be pre-owned and binned and have no signs of usage.

the good Apex have 2022-1 on the label of the retail box.


----------



## SoldierRBT

7empe said:


> Just curious, what's the vdd/vddq for 6400c28 1t for you? I need 1.53/1.53 with very tight timings, but when the they pass the 33+C they need 1.55 for stability (and with 1.53V the tREFI/tRFC cannot compensate the current leakage no matter the value I use).
> 
> View attachment 2552930


This is what I've been using for a month. Stable up to 48C I need 1.55v VDD 1.50v VDDQ. My sticks are similar to yours. 1.53v VDD works under 35C.


----------



## CptSpig

Gadfly said:


> What is your boards manufacturing date (If it is a very early board it might not have the date on the box)?


No date on the box early 2021.



SoldierRBT said:


> The problem isn't how high you can boot and run AIDA. It's stabilizing the frequency. My 2021 board boots and can run AIDA at 7000C30 and even trains 7200 but max stability is 6666MHz. People reporting problems have boards that can't even stabilize 6000-6200. There're still a few 2021 boards that are good. I've seen 3 that can stabilize up to 6933MHz (how many you need to bin, idk). For 7K+, you need a 2022 board. Even with a 2022 board, you're trading 1T for higher 2T.
> 
> At the moment, I'm running 6400C28 1T which is fine for daily. I'll try 6600 1T when I get my sticks on water.


This is stable memtest86 in the bios.

Where are the screen shots of the MSI boards doing better than the APEX?


----------



## Carillo

IronAge said:


> and the sun always shines bright in norway too.
> 
> something can be pre-owned and binned and have no signs of usage.


What's your point ?


----------



## 7empe

SoldierRBT said:


> This is what I've been using for a month. Stable up to 48C I need 1.55v VDD 1.50v VDDQ. My sticks are similar to yours. 1.53v VDD works under 35C.
> View attachment 2552931


1.50V VDDQ works for me too. I'm running 1.45V VDDQTx and 1.25V IMC.


----------



## borant

7empe said:


> 1.50V VDDQ works for me too. I'm running 1.45V VDDQTx and 1.25V IMC.


+1 with 1.55 VDD/ 1.50 VDDQ for 6400C28 1T but on Extreme MB.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

Nizzen said:


> Any 7000+ tight timings with msi unify x yet?


You probably won't get a lot of replies on this Asus thread, but since I have an Asus DDR4 board, I hang out here.

I was able to get 7200cl30 game stable with my $400 Z690i Unify. It still had occassional errors in memtest. I never bothered to stabilize it before putting the motherboard and ram back in their boxes and reinstalling my Z690-A Strix DDR4 board. Even compared to 7200cl30, my golden (literally lol) DDR4 RAM produced higher FPS in games despite using an Asus DDR4 board.

This is of course using a CPU, motherboard, and RAM (Gskill 6400cl30) kit that I bought off the shelf at my local Microcenter. Not engineering samples or freebies.


----------



## Nizzen

borant said:


> +1 with 1.55 VDD/ 1.50 VDDQ for 6800C28 1T but on Extreme MB.


Aida64?


----------



## bscool

Got a new 12900kf to test on ddr4 and dddr5. Just did some quick testing on Strix d4 and it is a little better than my old IMC can run 4266c15-16-16 y cruncher.

Drawback no avx512. Didnt bother doing long term Karhu as it will be moved to test on 2021 Apex for 1t and 2022 for 7000c32. Right now it is running 7000c32 Karhu.

SP 87 101/61 in Apex bios 1304

SP 86 99/61 in Strix d4 bios 901


----------



## bscool

2022 Apex

I tested this new 12900kf IMC and compared my old OS vs EVA OS.

Latency is much more consistent in the stripped down EVA OS where it will be in the 48 to 49ns range almost every run vs regular windows that jumps from 49 to 54ns from run to run.

Here is a link to where I downloaded the EVA iso. In his mega folder. 17.55 GB folder on MEGA

WIN ISOs


----------



## warbucks

bscool said:


> Got a new 12900kf to test on ddr4 and dddr5. Just did some quick testing on Strix d4 and it is a little better than my old IMC can run 4266c15-16-16 y cruncher.
> 
> Drawback no avx512. Didnt bother doing long term Karhu as it will be moved to test on 2021 Apex for 1t and 2022 for 7000c32. Right now it is running 7000c32 Karhu.
> 
> SP 87 101/61 in Apex bios 1304
> 
> SP 86 99/61 in Strix d4 bios 901


I picked up another 12900k a few weeks back but it was worse than my current one so I returned it. I'll wait for the 12900ks.


----------



## borant

Nizzen said:


> Aida64?


Of course, full stress test CPU+FPU+cache+RAM if we are talking about true stability


----------



## Nizzen

borant said:


> Of course, full stress test CPU+FPU+cache+RAM if we are talking about true stability


I want to se the result  Aida memory benchmark


----------



## borant

Nizzen said:


> I want to se the result  Aida memory benchmark


 I posted it before. Nothing surprising in it:


----------



## Nizzen

borant said:


> I posted it before. Nothing surprising in it:
> 
> View attachment 2552984





borant said:


> +1 with 1.55 VDD/ 1.50 VDDQ for 6800C28 1T but on Extreme MB.


I want to see 6800c28 1t, not 6400 1t


----------



## borant

Nizzen said:


> I want to see 6800c28 1t, not 6400 1t


Now I got it. Of course it was my typo, 6400C28 1T  I can only offer 6800C30 2T 

P.S. May be I should try 6800 1T with new KS  It already killed BIOS 1 while playing with 7000 @1.59


----------



## Simkin

Tried some more memory oc yesterday. 6200 Teamgroup Hynix on my early Apex (no date on box)

6200 32-37-37-52 2T trains, boots and pass memtest86 "full test" 1 hour in bios.
6400 same timings 2T trains, boots but failes on second pass on test 3, tried adjusting voltages but does seem to stop on second pass test 3.
6400 1T does no even train.

VDD/VDDQ around 1.41, VDDQ transmitter auto, MC 1.25, SA tried 0.95, 1.1 and 1.12, all other voltages on auto, except cpu offset -0.030 (AI OC)

Anyone who would give some tips on voltages for 6400 CL32-37-37-52 ish both 1T and 2T?


----------



## 7empe

Simkin said:


> Tried some more memory oc yesterday. 6200 Teamgroup Hynix on my early Apex (no date on box)
> 
> 6200 32-37-37-52 2T trains, boots and pass memtest86 "full test" 1 hour in bios.
> 6400 same timings 2T trains, boots but failes on second pass on test 3, tried adjusting voltages but does seem to stop on second pass test 3.
> 6400 1T does no even train.
> 
> VDD/VDDQ around 1.41, VDDQ transmitter auto, MC 1.25, SA tried 0.95, 1.1 and 1.12, all other voltages on auto, except cpu offset -0.030 (AI OC)
> 
> Anyone who would give some tips on voltages for 6400 CL32-37-37-52 ish both 1T and 2T?


If you fail in test #3 - is your cache stable? What's the frequency and with or without e-cores?

Apex production date 11/2021.
BIOS 1304
G.skill 6400 CL32 (see signature).
P-Cores: 52x all core up to 54x all -core (OCTVB) and 55x on 3-cores
E-Cores: 41x
Cache: 43x
CPU (SP88) adaptive voltage: 1.55V at LLC4

6400 CL28-37-37-28-2T (CWL 26)

vdd = 1.40V
vddq = 1.40V
vddqTx = 1.40V
SA = Offset Auto (this will give you default voltage for your CPU, in my case it is 0.95V)
MC (VDD2) = 1.25V
6400 CL28-37-37-28-1T (CWL 26)

vdd = 1.55V (for all-round stability, but stable with 1.53V < 33C SPD Hub temperature reading)
vddq = 1.50V
vddqTx = 1.40V
SA = Offset Auto (this will give you default voltage for your CPU, in my case is is 0.95V)
MC (VDD2) = 1.25V
Timings the same for both:


----------



## Simkin

7empe said:


> If you fail in test #3 - is your cache stable? What's the frequency and with or without e-cores?
> 
> Apex production date 11/2021.
> BIOS 1304
> G.skill 6400 CL32 (see signature).
> P-Cores: 52x all core up to 54x all -core (OCTVB) and 55x on 3-cores
> E-Cores: 41x
> Cache: 43x
> CPU (SP88) adaptive voltage: 1.55V at LLC4
> 
> 6400 CL28-37-37-28-2T (CWL 26)
> 
> vdd = 1.40V
> vddq = 1.40V
> vddqTx = 1.40V
> SA = Offset Auto (this will give you default voltage for your CPU, in my case it is 0.95V)
> MC (VDD2) = 1.25V
> 6400 CL28-37-37-28-1T (CWL 26)
> 
> vdd = 1.55V (for all-round stability, but stable with 1.53V < 33C SPD Hub temperature reading)
> vddq = 1.50V
> vddqTx = 1.40V
> SA = Offset Auto (this will give you default voltage for your CPU, in my case is is 0.95V)
> MC (VDD2) = 1.25V
> Timings the same for both:
> 
> View attachment 2552990


Cache is running 4.1, e-cores is 3.9 heavy and 4.1/4.2 light if i remember correctly. P-cores is 5.1 all core heavy and 5.3/5.4 on some cores light. SP88 with SP97 on p cores. Have not had any stability issues so far with memory on stock.


----------



## IronAge

warbucks said:


> I picked up another 12900k a few weeks back but it was worse than my current one so I returned it. I'll wait for the 12900ks.


no big surprise, Intel supposed to pick out the best dice for the 12900KS during the past weeks and still supply is low.

on ebay and other marketplaces quite a few sub SP80 12900K being offered.


----------



## 7empe

Simkin said:


> Cache is running 4.1, e-cores is 3.9 heavy and 4.1/4.2 light if i remember correctly. P-cores is 5.1 all core heavy and 5.3/5.4 on some cores light. SP88 with SP97 on p cores. Have not had any stability issues so far with memory on stock.


Can you list the timings used with 6200 32-37-37-52?


----------



## 7empe

Apex production date 11/2021.


----------



## thewebsiteisdown

7empe said:


> Apex production date 11/2021.
> 
> View attachment 2553052


Good thing they at least made five, good ones in the first batch. Good run mate.


----------



## 7empe

thewebsiteisdown said:


> Good thing they at least made five, good ones in the first batch. Good run mate.


----------



## Lord Alzov

Simkin said:


> Tried some more memory oc yesterday. 6200 Teamgroup Hynix on my early Apex (no date on box)
> 
> 6200 32-37-37-52 2T trains, boots and pass memtest86 "full test" 1 hour in bios.
> 6400 same timings 2T trains, boots but failes on second pass on test 3, tried adjusting voltages but does seem to stop on second pass test 3.
> 6400 1T does no even train.
> 
> VDD/VDDQ around 1.41, VDDQ transmitter auto, MC 1.25, SA tried 0.95, 1.1 and 1.12, all other voltages on auto, except cpu offset -0.030 (AI OC)
> 
> Anyone who would give some tips on voltages for 6400 CL32-37-37-52 ish both 1T and 2T?


6666CL30 T1 AIR COOLING
1.56 memory
1.344 SA on load
1.332 MC on load
1.526 VDDQ TX on load


----------



## thewebsiteisdown

7empe said:


>


Out of curiosity, you have a picture of yours, your product tag that is?


----------



## borant

7empe said:


> Apex production date 11/2021.


1.56 VDD/ 1.57 VDDQ ?


----------



## 7empe

borant said:


> 1.56 VDD/ 1.57 VDDQ ?


1.55 vdd, 1.57 vddq, 1.50 tx, 1.30 mc, 0.95 sa


----------



## dante`afk

the right and correct way to go for a big company like asus is, show face, acknowledge the problem, put out an announcement and offer RMAs or exchanges.

hiding your dic* between your two legs and turn your back and walk away to your loyal customer base for horrendous priced motherboards is insulting.


----------



## criznit

Buildzoid released a video explaining DDR5 voltages today! intel 12th gen DDR5 overclocking voltages: I give up edition


----------



## ChaosAD

dante`afk said:


> the right and correct way to go for a big company like asus is, show face, acknowledge the problem, put out an announcement and offer RMAs or exchanges.
> 
> hiding your dic* between your two legs and turn your back and walk away to your loyal customer base for horrendous priced motherboards is insulting.


I can't agree more, problems in production can happen to every company, especially in such early/rushed products. But when its such a big company like Asus, behind a top tier and expensive product like Apex, and its proven and common knowledge that there is an issue with the early motherboards (pre 2022), the least you can do is to make an official statement with an apology and an RMA/full refund to your loyal early adopters.


----------



## Gadfly

I am wondering if they paused production to make a change to the Apex. All major retailers I have checked are out of new stock (Amazon, Newegg, Microcenter, B&H). but there are no shortage of open box boards sitting around. 

It will be interesting to see if there are any changes when they start showing up in inventory again.


----------



## IronAge

I doubt that PCB has changed, maybe some SMD filter parts replaced with better quality.

sb with 2022-1 Board should take some close ups of the socket area PCB front & back.


----------



## Murlo26

Supposedly I am getting my exchanged Apex on April 9th, or that is their estimation anyway. They received my Apex board two weeks ago (3/10). I assume I will be getting a newer and hopefully "fixed" version. I had to disassemble my custom loop and I spent literally hours upon hours troubleshooting. My closer slot to the CPU was a good 600mhz worse than the far slot, which sounds in line with others. I bought two sets of DDR5, originally I got a samsung gskill kit and then tried an SK hynix as those seemed to be more stable, neither could run even xmp, even with tons of voltage adjustments. I am really hoping they get me something soon. I would probably switch boards but my custom loop is based on that board and I don't want to risk having to redo that. Plus the other board, which I was originally going to buy (kingpin) is out of stock. The kingpin board took forever to get released so I went with what I thought was a good alternative. I have never had issues with previous ASUS boards so I am sad this is taking so long. In the past I always bought the hero boards but as I was going all out this time with customer water cooling I figured I would try the apex...


----------



## satinghostrider

Murlo26 said:


> Supposedly I am getting my exchanged Apex on April 9th, or that is their estimation anyway. They received my Apex board two weeks ago (3/10). I assume I will be getting a newer and hopefully "fixed" version. I had to disassemble my custom loop and I spent literally hours upon hours troubleshooting. My closer slot to the CPU was a good 600mhz worse than the far slot, which sounds in line with others. I bought two sets of DDR5, originally I got a samsung gskill kit and then tried an SK hynix as those seemed to be more stable, neither could run even xmp, even with tons of voltage adjustments. I am really hoping they get me something soon. I would probably switch boards but my custom loop is based on that board and I don't want to risk having to redo that. Plus the other board, which I was originally going to buy (kingpin) is out of stock. The kingpin board took forever to get released so I went with what I thought was a good alternative. I have never had issues with previous ASUS boards so I am sad this is taking so long. In the past I always bought the hero boards but as I was going all out this time with customer water cooling I figured I would try the apex...


The new ones are night and day for Apex.
I personally checked it runs XMP flawlessly and I could boot 7400 on my SP84. I'm able to do 6800C32 daily at 1.5V. Probably can squeeze down to C30 but I'm abit scared to run past 1.5V on the Kingston Fury kit unless I watercool that. I've lost alot of time as well and didn't want to introduce any new headache so I settled for air. Hope your new board works out for you. Just make sure it's a 2022 production board.


----------



## Simkin

My apex dont have a date on the box, but is the date labeled for every month/year?

Every 2022 board is good?

Dont remember what user in here, but he (and a friend of him if i remember correctly) both swapped from 2021 to 2022 apex and could not run 1T at all (their 2021 board could), not even lower 6000 speeds - which might indicate not all 2022 is good? even they could run much higher 2T speeds? i dont know.

So far my "day one" Apex with Teamgroup Hynix 6200 32-37-37-54 *1T* with 1.43vdd/1.41vddq, 1.12sa 1.26mc is stable 100% coverage in HCI memtestpro. gonna push it to 400% atleast to be sure.

However, it seems to me the training of the memory is a bit off sometimes, after beeing stable 100% in memtest pro, i tried changing some timings and voltages, but got errors, so i cleared cmos, F5, and went back to my profile that passed 100% in memtest earlier, but now i got 1 error after about 30% coverage, normal behavior?


----------



## Gadfly

satinghostrider said:


> I'm able to do 6800C32 daily at 1.5V.


Can you post your full timings for that profile please?


----------



## satinghostrider

Simkin said:


> My apex dont have a date on the box, but is the date labeled for every month/year?
> 
> Every 2022 board is good?
> 
> Dont remember what user in here, but he (and a friend of him if i remember correctly) both swapped from 2021 to 2022 apex and could not run 1T at all (their 2021 board could), not even lower 6000 speeds - which might indicate not all 2022 is good? even they could run much higher 2T speeds? i dont know.
> 
> So far my "day one" Apex with Teamgroup Hynix 6200 32-37-37-54 *1T* with 1.43vdd/1.41vddq, 1.12sa 1.26mc is stable 100% coverage in HCI memtestpro. gonna push it to 400% atleast to be sure.
> 
> However, it seems to me the training of the memory is a bit off sometimes, after beeing stable 100% in memtest pro, i tried changing some timings and voltages, but got errors, so i cleared cmos, F5, and went back to my profile that passed 100% in memtest earlier, but now i got 1 error after about 30% coverage, normal behavior?


From my experience,

My previous board can't be stable with anything past 6000Mhz. I ran 6000CR1 0811 bios no issues. Anything more just craps the stability. Even 6200Mhz at CR2.

2022 production board has a manufacturing date on it. My 2021 November unit didn't have that printed. My 2022 production board could do 6200/6400CR1 no issues. Can boot 7400 not stable obviously so 6800C32 to me was a good speed with a max voltage of 1.5V. I've had 0 issues with reboot stability. If you're changing timings and voltages together and it still fails on your last known good profile, load optimise defaults. Switch off your system and remove the power plug. Let it sit for a minute and switch it back on. Load back your profile and try again.


----------



## satinghostrider

Gadfly said:


> Can you post your full timings for that profile please?


Sure I'll post when I'm home.


----------



## J_Lab4645

Simkin said:


> My apex dont have a date on the box, but is the date labeled for every month/year?
> 
> Every 2022 board is good?
> 
> Dont remember what user in here, but he (and a friend of him if i remember correctly) both swapped from 2021 to 2022 apex and could not run 1T at all (their 2021 board could), not even lower 6000 speeds - which might indicate not all 2022 is good? even they could run much higher 2T speeds? i dont know.
> 
> So far my "day one" Apex with Teamgroup Hynix 6200 32-37-37-54 *1T* with 1.43vdd/1.41vddq, 1.12sa 1.26mc is stable 100% coverage in HCI memtestpro. gonna push it to 400% atleast to be sure.
> 
> However, it seems to me the training of the memory is a bit off sometimes, after beeing stable 100% in memtest pro, i tried changing some timings and voltages, but got errors, so i cleared cmos, F5, and went back to my profile that passed 100% in memtest earlier, but now i got 1 error after about 30% coverage, normal behavior?



This has been mentioned in previous posts somewhere buried back a few weeks and I can confirm it works on my 2021 Apex but after any kind of voltage and/or Ram timing change you can't just restart, boot into windows and Memtest. After your changes, boot into Windows. Now don't login but Shutdown. Unplug or remove AC power for 30-45 sec. Plug back in and reboot. This isn't a magic solution for a bad voltage and/or timing change. This is a solution for a profile that is known to be good/stable but doesn't "take" after a restart. It's something goofy with the bios.

For Example: I have a know good/stable Ram profile saved to bios. Now I go in and fu** around with increasing frequency and/or voltages/timings. I restart and begin stability testing. I now realize my changes suck after getting lots of errors. I go back to my known good profile saved in bios and restart pc. If I just login and begin stability testing, my good profile will toss out errors. But after a restart, get to windows, Shutdown. Pull plug- wait 40 seconds. Reboot. Login and now good/stable profile "takes" and passes all tests. Don't know what's up, but it works.


----------



## Simkin

J_Lab4645 said:


> This has been mentioned in previous posts somewhere buried back a few weeks and I can confirm it works on my 2021 Apex but after any kind of voltage and/or Ram timing change you can't just restart, boot into windows and Memtest. After your changes, boot into Windows. Now don't login but Shutdown. Unplug or remove AC power for 30-45 sec. Plug back in and reboot. This isn't a magic solution for a bad voltage and/or timing change. This is a solution for a profile that is known to be good/stable but doesn't "take" after a restart. It's something goofy with the bios.
> 
> For Example: I have a know good/stable Ram profile saved to bios. Now I go in and fu** around with increasing frequency and/or voltages/timings. I restart and begin stability testing. I now realize my changes suck after getting lots of errors. I go back to my known good profile saved in bios and restart pc. If I just login and begin stability testing, my good profile will toss out errors. But after a restart, get to windows, Shutdown. Pull plug- wait 40 seconds. Reboot. Login and now good/stable profile "takes" and passes all tests. Don't know what's up, but it works.


When you go back to your working/stable profile, do you turn off MCH Fastboot, let it train, and then enter bios and turn it off again?


----------



## IronAge

it is about time SB from Asus comes up with a solution for those who want to trade in a bad Apex.

i am getting increasingly angry about Asus warranty policy and communication. 

i wanted to keep my 11/2021 Apex for Raptor Lake as well and buy higher binned DDR5 for it.

Asus could as well take the Boards back and rework them and/or sell them in Asia.


----------



## Murlo26

satinghostrider said:


> The new ones are night and day for Apex.
> I personally checked it runs XMP flawlessly and I could boot 7400 on my SP84. I'm able to do 6800C32 daily at 1.5V. Probably can squeeze down to C30 but I'm abit scared to run past 1.5V on the Kingston Fury kit unless I watercool that. I've lost alot of time as well and didn't want to introduce any new headache so I settled for air. Hope your new board works out for you. Just make sure it's a 2022 production board.


I assume I am getting a 2022 board but I will for sure check it. They approved the exchange a week ago and said the boards for exchange aren't available until April 9th so I am guessing they are waiting on new inventory but we will see when I get it. My one "good" slot on my previous apex ran my hynix kit to 6600 on stock XMP voltage so I am hoping my SP91 12900k give me a solid over clock when the board is a better one. I am looking forward to trying for sure.


----------



## Gadfly

IronAge said:


> it is about time SB from Asus comes up with a solution for those who want to trade in a bad Apex.
> 
> i am getting increasingly angry about Asus warranty policy and communication.
> 
> i wanted to keep my 11/2021 Apex for Raptor Lake as well and buy higher binned DDR5 for it.
> 
> Asus could as well take the Boards back and rework them and/or sell them in Asia.


I am waiting to see what they are doing/changing. 

There are no new Apex boards anywhere, so I am hoping when they new boards come back in stock Asus will start allowing RMA w/ advance exchanges for new boards. When I contacted them about my board, They told me that they have "no stock" of Apex boards currently and are not offering advance exchanges; and will never offer refunds directly to customers. They also told me they will only exchange my defective board for a used "repaired" board, and never a new board. Which, candidly, is unacceptable to me; sending in a garbage board and getting another garbage board someone else RMA'd just wastes time and shipping costs. 

So for now I am sitting on my RMA number to see how this plays out over the next few weeks; hopefully they make it right.


----------



## J_Lab4645

Simkin said:


> When you go back to your working/stable profile, do you turn off MCH Fastboot, let it train, and then enter bios and turn it off again?


My working/stable UEFI profile saved in bios has MCH Fastboot "Enabled" so no need for what you've stated above.


----------



## jomama22

Gadfly said:


> I am waiting to see what they are doing/changing.
> 
> There are no new Apex boards anywhere, so I am hoping when they new boards come back in stock Asus will start allowing RMA w/ advance exchanges for new boards. When I contacted them about my board, They told me that they have "no stock" of Apex boards currently and are not offering advance exchanges; and will never offer refunds directly to customers. They also told me they will only exchange my defective board for a used "repaired" board, and never a new board. Which, candidly, is unacceptable to me; sending in a garbage board and getting another garbage board someone else RMA'd just wastes time and shipping costs.
> 
> So for now I am sitting on my RMA number to see how this plays out over the next few weeks; hopefully they make it right.


Possibly a pcb supplier change would be my guess. Don't think any sort of redesign is necessary, just better tolerance control of trace layouts/copper layers (given the wide performance gaps between boards). Also, considering the lack of stock, a pcb supplier change makes sense (few 2022 boards produced before Chinese new year started, April delivery dates for more 2022 boards (Amazon had a listing up about 2-3 weeks ago with an April estimated delivery as well)).


----------



## bscool

Simkin said:


> My apex dont have a date on the box, but is the date labeled for every month/year?
> 
> Every 2022 board is good?
> 
> Dont remember what user in here, but he (and a friend of him if i remember correctly) both swapped from 2021 to 2022 apex and could not run 1T at all (their 2021 board could), not even lower 6000 speeds - which might indicate not all 2022 is good? even they could run much higher 2T speeds? i dont know.
> 
> So far my "day one" Apex with Teamgroup Hynix 6200 32-37-37-54 *1T* with 1.43vdd/1.41vddq, 1.12sa 1.26mc is stable 100% coverage in HCI memtestpro. gonna push it to 400% atleast to be sure.
> 
> However, it seems to me the training of the memory is a bit off sometimes, after beeing stable 100% in memtest pro, i tried changing some timings and voltages, but got errors, so i cleared cmos, F5, and went back to my profile that passed 100% in memtest earlier, but now i got 1 error after about 30% coverage, normal behavior?


That was probably me and a friend that cannot run 1t on the 2022 MB. Not saying all 2022 cant do 1t just sharing info. Both our 2021 MB could run 6400 1t easy using same CPU and memory.

Maybe other 2022 users can post there finding on 1t. I know one guy I talked to that has 2022 said his still can do 1t at 6600. So not sure what the difference is. But if most cant run 1t it would show a trend.

I think @skullbringer has both and is doing a testing or comparison on both MB so hopefully he will test 1t on new Apex. He is always very thourough with his testing.


----------



## Gadfly

Does anyone have a conservative 7000C32/C34 timing profile that was able to pass stability testing?


----------



## bscool

Gadfly said:


> Does anyone have a conservative 7000C32/C34 timing profile that was able to pass stability testing?


Mine is one of the looser timings I have seen. I cant run mem timings as tight or I get errors.


----------



## Gadfly

bscool said:


> Mine is one of the looser timings I have seen. I cant run mem timings as tight or I get errors.


Thanks! If you were to loosen it up to C34, what would you change? Looking to make a 24/7 / binning profile that can be run at lower voltages; maybe 1.5-1.55v.

I am still getting the hang of DDR5, and I have to admit the effect of some voltages just mystifies me; especially VDDQ TX; at 1.206v Stable, passes stress testing with no errors, 1.212v Hundreds of errors per min; it is whacky as hell. 

Also, do you manually set your IRQ/Terminations? 

Thanks again @bscool u rock.


----------



## bscool

Gadfly said:


> Thanks! If you were to loosen it up to C34, what would you change? Looking to make a 24/7 / binning profile that can be run at lower voltages; maybe 1.5-1.55v.
> 
> I am still getting the hang of DDR5, and I have to admit the effect of some voltages just mystifies me; especially VDDQ TX; at 1.206v Stable, passes stress testing with no errors, 1.212v Hundreds of errors per min; it is whacky as hell.
> 
> Also, do you manually set your IRQ/Terminations?
> 
> Thanks again @bscool u rock.


If tcl 34 I would leave tCWL on auto in bios so it should go to 32. 

tWRRD sg 62

tWRRD dg 50

I dont set IRQ/Terminations

Something I recently saw when testing this new 12900kf is my rtls trained differently with new CPU and I had to manually set them so they were like in my screen shot. With new CPU it trained them 1 tick higher on MC1 and it wasnt stable.









ASUS ROG Strix Z690-A Gaming WiFi D4 Thread


Guys I just figured out why windows 11 or windows 10 couldn’t see my drive when trying to instal windows it was becuase I had Intel rst enabled. This YouTube video is super helpful for anyone just starting up. You know I should have said something about that. I screwed around with that and...




www.overclock.net





Link is showing z690 ddr4 but same idea applies to ddr5 if you want to test for "influence" rtls.


----------



## jomama22

Gadfly said:


> Thanks! If you were to loosen it up to C34, what would you change? Looking to make a 24/7 / binning profile that can be run at lower voltages; maybe 1.5-1.55v.
> 
> I am still getting the hang of DDR5, and I have to admit the effect of some voltages just mystifies me; especially VDDQ TX; at 1.206v Stable, passes stress testing with no errors, 1.212v Hundreds of errors per min; it is whacky as hell.
> 
> Also, do you manually set your IRQ/Terminations?
> 
> Thanks again @bscool u rock.


Tx should really be set much higher on the apex, ideally around max(vdd,vddq). 1.45v is a good starting point if they are in the 1.4v range, 1.5-1.55v if they are in the 1.5v range.


----------



## Gadfly

jomama22 said:


> Tx should really be set much higher on the apex, ideally around max(vdd,vddq). 1.45v is a good starting point if they are in the 1.4v range, 1.5-1.55v if they are in the 1.5v range.


My board won't even run 4800 with vdd vddq at 1.45 and TX at 1.45. Most stable has been 1.19v to 1.22v. Any higher than that, no matter ram speed, no matter DRAM VDD/Q, it will kick hundreds of memory errors per second.


----------



## Simkin

Gadfly said:


> I am wondering if they paused production to make a change to the Apex. All major retailers I have checked are out of new stock (Amazon, Newegg, Microcenter, B&H). but there are no shortage of open box boards sitting around.
> 
> It will be interesting to see if there are any changes when they start showing up in inventory again.


Still plenty Apex available here in Norway, but i dont know if its old stock or newer 2022 boards.


----------



## Neur0Mortis

Gadfly said:


> My board won't even run 4800 with vdd vddq at 1.45 and TX at 1.45. Most stable has been 1.19v to 1.22v. Any higher than that, no matter ram speed, no matter DRAM VDD/Q, it will kick hundreds of memory errors per second.


I've been having similar problems on my z690 Extreme. Know it's not 1:1 with Apex, but last night I stayed up and tested each stick of RAM in each slot 1 at a time to ensure neither the ram nor the slots were defective. All came out 100% clean. Then, inserting both sticks together again, testing came out clean. Now, what I hadn't been doing all along was what was mentioned here below:



J_Lab4645 said:


> This has been mentioned in previous posts somewhere buried back a few weeks and I can confirm it works on my 2021 Apex but after any kind of voltage and/or Ram timing change you can't just restart, boot into windows and Memtest. After your changes, boot into Windows. Now don't login but Shutdown. Unplug or remove AC power for 30-45 sec. Plug back in and reboot. This isn't a magic solution for a bad voltage and/or timing change. This is a solution for a profile that is known to be good/stable but doesn't "take" after a restart. It's something goofy with the bios.
> 
> For Example: I have a know good/stable Ram profile saved to bios. Now I go in and fu** around with increasing frequency and/or voltages/timings. I restart and begin stability testing. I now realize my changes suck after getting lots of errors. I go back to my known good profile saved in bios and restart pc. If I just login and begin stability testing, my good profile will toss out errors. But after a restart, get to windows, Shutdown. Pull plug- wait 40 seconds. Reboot. Login and now good/stable profile "takes" and passes all tests. Don't know what's up, but it works.


Plan on testing this further tonight, but I tend to believe there may be something here as my ability to run clean testing was seemingly random but not unheard of. If this creates some consistency for me, then it's a whole new ballgame on how to approach this going forward.


----------



## Gadfly

Neur0Mortis said:


> I've been having similar problems on my z690 Extreme. Know it's not 1:1 with Apex, but last night I stayed up and tested each stick of RAM in each slot 1 at a time to ensure neither the ram nor the slots were defective. All came out 100% clean. Then, inserting both sticks together again, testing came out clean. Now, what I hadn't been doing all along was what was mentioned here below:
> 
> 
> 
> Plan on testing this further tonight, but I tend to believe there may be something here as my ability to run clean testing was seemingly random but not unheard of. If this creates some consistency for me, then it's a whole new ballgame on how to approach this going forward.


I will give it a shot, thanks.

EDIT: @Neur0Mortis Holy @#$!, it worked... What the actual hell. After HOURS of beating my head against the wall trying get ANYTHING to pass the bios X86, I stopped a run that already had 10-15 errors, rebooted, went to Windows log on screen, powered off, turned off PSU for 30 seconds, powered on, and just passed x86 for literally the first time at 6400. I didn't change anything at all. Just powered it down, and turned it back on again. 

This basically invalidates all of the testing I have done on this janky ass motherboard.


----------



## D-EJ915

Gadfly said:


> I will give it a shot, thanks.
> 
> EDIT: @Neur0Mortis Holy @#$!, it worked... What the actual hell. After HOURS of beating my head against the wall trying get ANYTHING to pass the bios X86, I stopped a run that already had 10-15 errors, rebooted, went to Windows log on screen, powered off, turned off PSU for 30 seconds, powered on, and just passed x86 for literally the first time at 6400. I didn't change anything at all. Just powered it down, and turned it back on again.
> 
> This basically invalidates all of the testing I have done on this janky ass motherboard.


I had weird problems with USB on both of my apex boards, thought it was a bad board at first but like you said cutting it off for a while and draining power/battery and then on again and the ports started to work again. The strangest thing I've seen on a board in a long time.


----------



## Gadfly

D-EJ915 said:


> I had weird problems with USB on both of my apex boards, thought it was a bad board at first but like you said cutting it off for a while and draining power/battery and then on again and the ports started to work again. The strangest thing I've seen on a board in a long time.


Yeah... this board is more sketch than gas station sushi.


----------



## Zarok77

I had 3 apex all performed the same, running 7200 on air, and passing gb3 at 8000mhz in xoc. Can't complain. Saw people hate the tachyon for the same reason or having nightmare just being in msi bios. Ddr5 is ne tech need time to be refined by manufacturers and also known by the final user


----------



## Gadfly

Zarok77 said:


> I had 3 apex all performed the same, running 7200 on air, and passing gb3 at 8000mhz in xoc. Can't complain. Saw people hate the tachyon for the same reason or having nightmare just being in msi bios. Ddr5 is ne tech need time to be refined by manufacturers and also known by the final user


Sell me one of these magical motherboards


----------



## bscool

XOC benches vs daily stable Karhu 10,000% 2 different things.

I can bench 2021 Apex at 7000 but wanna pass a memory test I need to lower to 6400 to 6600. I guess it depends what a person wants or expects.


----------



## Gadfly

bscool said:


> XOC benches vs daily stable Karhu 10,000% 2 different things.
> 
> I can bench 2021 Apex at 7000 but wanna pass a memory test I need to lower to 6400 to 6600. I guess it depends what a person wants or expects.


I would be plenty happy with a stable 6400 with at least semi decent timings. Thus far no joy, even at 6400C40, or even 6200C36 2T….

pretty sure this board is just broken. same memory, same CPU in friend’s MSI fires right up and runs 6800C32 or 6600C30 without an issue. _shrug_


----------



## Neur0Mortis

Gadfly said:


> I would be plenty happy with a stable 6400 with at least semi decent timings. Thus far no joy, even at 6400C40, or even 6200C36 2T….
> 
> pretty sure this board is just broken. same memory, same CPU in friend’s MSI fires right up and runs 6800C32 or 6600C30 without an issue. _shrug_


I'm leaning towards our bios currently being borked more than anything else. I'm running my Tridentz 6400 @ XMP and things _seem _stable enough for regular usage (even encoded severable h265 vids in Handbrake). Still not passing clean TM5/Extreme though; however, I'm hoping we get some additional RAM compatibility code in the next bios revisions. G.Skill has these boards in their QVL, but Asus' QVL is still signficantly lacking.

Edit: And, just like that, I was able to run clean via Extreme with a slight voltage adjustment. Think I'll leave it as is until the next bios release.


----------



## badjz

Anyone have 6400 C1 with tight timings running stable on extreme? If so, can you please post your profile? Keen to test, I can’t seem to get stable, no matter what I throw at it…


----------



## Nizzen

badjz said:


> Anyone have 6400 C1 with tight timings running stable on extreme? If so, can you please post your profile? Keen to test, I can’t seem to get stable, no matter what I throw at it…


A guy from Clock Em UP:
Not 1t but 6600 2t tight
He has actual this borard for sale now too.


----------



## affxct

Nizzen said:


> A guy from Clock Em UP:
> He has actual this borard for sale now too.
> View attachment 2553360


He managed 6600C28 on the Taichi as well. Dude's a freakin' magician. I think the kit he uses probably helps to a degree though.


----------



## Nizzen

affxct said:


> He managed 6600C28 on the Taichi as well. Dude's a freakin' magician. I think the kit he uses probably helps to a degree though.


He has overclocked memory for years, so he IS a true magician with memory. I got many good profiles from him over the years. He is the reason I bough SuperCool Computer dimm coolers and direct die blocks  Produced i Thailand. Maybe the best cpublocks and dimm coolers in the world 
He is making his own "luck"
Some call it skill....

Thermatake 4800


----------



## sugi0lover

badjz said:


> Anyone have 6400 C1 with tight timings running stable on extreme? If so, can you please post your profile? Keen to test, I can’t seem to get stable, no matter what I throw at it…


[OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread
The link is 6600 1T on extreme.


----------



## Gadfly

Nizzen said:


> He has overclocked memory for years, so he IS a true magician with memory. I got many good profiles from him over the years. He is the reason I bough SuperCool Computer dimm coolers and direct die blocks  Produced i Thailand. Maybe the best cpublocks and dimm coolers in the world
> He is making his own "luck"
> Some call it skill....
> 
> Thermatake 4800


Don't think they make the RAM coolers anymore, at least they are not on the website. I have been looking for a good cooling solution for the APEX, have not found one yet.


----------



## Nizzen

Gadfly said:


> Don't think they make the RAM coolers anymore, at least they are not on the website. I have been looking for a good cooling solution for the APEX, have not found one yet.


I bought DDR5 dimm block 2 months ago  Direct cooling over the ic and 1-2c delta with 1.65vdd 
You need to contact them on facebook. LOL


----------



## Gadfly

Nizzen said:


> I bought DDR5 dimm block 2 months ago  Direct cooling over the ic and 1-2c delta with 1.65vdd
> You need to contact them on facebook. LOL


got a pic?


----------



## Nizzen

Gadfly said:


> got a pic?


Best pics I got with computer online:

























Dual loop: Mora on cpu and 360 fat on dimm LOL. 
Qd's for fast switching hardware. 2x 3090 strix oc watercooled is for Benchmarks 

HOF looks best on air


----------



## Simkin

7empe said:


> Can you list the timings used with 6200 32-37-37-52?












Not the best latency, but so far this is stable Anta extreme1 3 cycles and one run of cinebench r23, in my experience is cinebench tends to bsod with unstable memory, atleast for me, 6200 CL32 1T. i raised tRAS a bit to 64.

Not gonna push it more until i get my ram fan, and need to try this as a daily and in gaming first.

tWR is actually set to 24 in bios, Asrock program shows 11, and VDD/VDDQ is also a bit higher there than i set in bios, and there is also a difference between channel A/B.. why?

MC 1.2680v Sa 1.12v


----------



## Gadfly

niiice @Nizzen


----------



## Gadfly

Simkin said:


> View attachment 2553383
> 
> 
> Not the best latency, but so far this is stable Anta extreme1 3 cycles and one run of cinebench r23, in my experience is cinebench tends to bsod with unstable memory, atleast for me, 6200 CL32 1T. i raised tRAS a bit to 64.
> 
> Not gonna push it more until i get my ram fan, and need to try this as a daily and in gaming first.
> 
> tWR is actually set to 24 in bios, Asrock program shows 11, and VDD/VDDQ is also a bit higher there than i set in bios, and there is also a difference between channel A/B.. why?
> 
> MC 1.2680v Sa 1.12v


There is a bios option to "Sync all PMIC", try that. You also have diff RTL's between channels, that intentional?


----------



## Simkin

Gadfly said:


> There is a bios option to "Sync all PMIC", try that. You also have diff RTL's between channels, that intentional?


Sync all PMIC is "ON" 

You also have diff RTL's between channels, that intentional? - No its not.


----------



## J_Lab4645

Gadfly said:


> I will give it a shot, thanks.
> 
> EDIT: @Neur0Mortis Holy @#$!, it worked... What the actual hell. After HOURS of beating my head against the wall trying get ANYTHING to pass the bios X86, I stopped a run that already had 10-15 errors, rebooted, went to Windows log on screen, powered off, turned off PSU for 30 seconds, powered on, and just passed x86 for literally the first time at 6400. I didn't change anything at all. Just powered it down, and turned it back on again.
> 
> This basically invalidates all of the testing I have done on this janky ass motherboard.



I'm telling you- I even do this with any overclock change I do on my CPU. YOU CAN'T JUST RESTART AFTER A BIOS CHANGE. .....After restart into Windows. ....SHUTDOWN. UNPLUG. Restart. ....Happy Camper!


----------



## Neur0Mortis

J_Lab4645 said:


> I'm telling you- I even do this with any overclock change I do on my CPU. YOU CAN'T JUST RESTART AFTER A BIOS CHANGE. .....After restart into Windows. ....SHUTDOWN. UNPLUG. Restart. ....Happy Camper!


No doubt man. Since starting this when adjusting, things have been muuuuuuuuuch better. Still having trouble getting stable. I can get clean RAM tests, but then CPU tests get errors. I can get clean CPU tests, but then have errors with the RAM. This ish is driving me batty. . . almost to the point to rebuilding my 10900k rig just to reconstitute a stable system for regular use.

Edit: Dropping back to 1101 bios from 1304, I was _finally_ able to get some stability for both the CPU & RAM. No errors in either, but just running the RAM at the rated XMP & the CPU @ 5.1/4.1/4.2 instead of my usual 5.2/4.2/4.4. Will mess with it a bit more tonight, but stability trumps all else for me right now since I work from home a lot.


----------



## Gadfly

J_Lab4645 said:


> I'm telling you- I even do this with any overclock change I do on my CPU. YOU CAN'T JUST RESTART AFTER A BIOS CHANGE. .....After restart into Windows. ....SHUTDOWN. UNPLUG. Restart. ....Happy Camper!


Yep, it is amazing. I am finally starting to find some repeatability that allows proper testing. Hopefully I can knock out out a decent 1T profile today. Thanks so much.


----------



## Exilon

Does the Adaptive Turbo Boost toggle on Z690 Strix do anything?


----------



## DannyG13

Need a little advice if anyone has it, for my Z690 ROG Strix Wifi Gaming F and Team Delta 6400 DDR5.

So I'm trying to get the RAM 100% reliable and happy at the full 6400 but I'm bumping into a few errors in some stress tests. It's rock solid at the standard 4800, but when I go higher get a few issues.

Can anyone kindly give me some voltage etc advice for the BIOS - it posts fine and works, but it's just not quite solid enough.

What settings should I be changing, on this board, and what to? Thanks!

Specs - 12900K, Win 10 64.


----------



## Silent Scone

DannyG13 said:


> Need a little advice if anyone has it, for my Z690 ROG Strix Wifi Gaming F and Team Delta 6400 DDR5.
> 
> So I'm trying to get the RAM 100% reliable and happy at the full 6400 but I'm bumping into a few errors in some stress tests. It's rock solid at the standard 4800, but when I go higher get a few issues.
> 
> Can anyone kindly give me some voltage etc advice for the BIOS - it posts fine and works, but it's just not quite solid enough.
> 
> What settings should I be changing, on this board, and what to? Thanks!
> 
> Specs - 12900K, Win 10 64.


The simplest tuning comes from CPU System Agent and Memory Controller Voltage (Advanced Memory Settings).

These need to be tuned for your CPU and memory kit so asking for values doesn't always end well.

System Agent: 0.9v to 1.2v
MC Voltage: 1.2v to 1.4v

Note that 6400 is the maximum validated frequency for your board, I'd often advise people to opt for a frequency 1 or 2 bins below the maximum validation.


----------



## Thanh Nguyen

Where can I order 2022 apex mobo guys?


----------



## dante`afk

bogdans convenience store might have some


----------



## DannyG13

Silent Scone said:


> The simplest tuning comes from CPU System Agent and Memory Controller Voltage (Advanced Memory Settings).
> 
> These need to be tuned for your CPU and memory kit so asking for values doesn't always end well.
> 
> System Agent: 0.9v to 1.2v
> MC Voltage: 1.2v to 1.4v
> 
> Note that 6400 is the maximum validated frequency for your board, I'd often advise people to opt for a frequency 1 or 2 bins below the maximum validation.


That's great, concise and simple advice, appreciated. Will have a looksee at these. Thanks.


----------



## stahlhart

.


----------



## Gadfly

Thanh Nguyen said:


> Where can I order 2022 apex mobo guys?


]

right now all major retailers are out of stock. I’d wait for newegg/Amazon to restock To be sure you get a 2022.


----------



## D-EJ915

Person never paid for my board so I relisted it lol, good times. Guess I can play with it more while waiting for it to end again.


----------



## sblantipodi

my Z690 Extreme still hangs on boot if I disable SPD Write Protection (it happens randomly after heavy load and then a reboot).
no problem if I enable the protection.

Using iCue and Armory Crate. A fix is needed.


----------



## Simkin

sblantipodi said:


> my Z690 Extreme still hangs on boot if I disable SPD Write Protection (it happens randomly after heavy load and then a reboot).
> no problem if I enable the protection.
> 
> Using iCue and Armory Crate. A fix is needed.


My Apex also sometimes hangs on boot, (all i get is a black screen) and it also using some time to boot if it does not hang. Im however using a dual boot with two Windows 11 (one is for memory/cpu testing only so i dont corrupt my main OS) so that may have something to do with my long boot time.

Sometimes also my keyboard is either not working, or blinking after entering windows, and have also seen my USB ports on my case not working (USB.3.0 via header on MB) then i need to restart. Using iCUE, and Armor is also installed. I can hear there is some clicking/noises going on on boot, i think its from the Corsair pump.

Other than that, stable system so far with 12900K AI OC and memory running 6200 CL32 1T (Hynix)

My Apex is from launch, no date on box.


----------



## sblantipodi

Simkin said:


> My Apex also sometimes hangs on boot, (all i get is a black screen) and it also using some time to boot if it does not hang. Im however using a dual boot with two Windows 11 (one is for memory/cpu testing only so i dont corrupt my main drive) so that may have something to do with my long boot time.
> 
> Sometimes also my keyboard is either not working, or blinking after entering windows, and have also seen my USB ports on my case not working (USB.3.0 via header on MB) then i need to restart. Using iCUE and Armor is also installed. I can hear there is some clicking/noises going on on boot, i think its from from the Corsair pump.


have you tried enabling SPD Write Protection?


----------



## Simkin

sblantipodi said:


> have you tried enabling SPD Write Protection?


No i have not. What does this do?


----------



## sblantipodi

Simkin said:


> No i have not. What does this do?


SPD can't be written by default, so if you don't know what that settings does I think that it's not your problem.
if you want to control RGB on the RAM sticks for example, you need to disable the SPD Write Protection in BIOS since these software writes some values in the SPD to control the RGB.


----------



## db000

sblantipodi said:


> have you tried enabling SPD Write Protection?


 It is Enabled by Default. You can Disable it tho.


----------



## sblantipodi

Can someone tell me why Armory Crate stopped detecting drivers update while on the Asus site there are drivers update?


----------



## sblantipodi

Simkin said:


> No i have not. What does this do?


it enables other software to write SPD, normal humans disable that setting to let software like Corsair iCue to control the RGB on the RAM.


----------



## edkieferlp

sblantipodi said:


> SPD can't be written by default, so if you don't know what that settings does I think that it's not your problem.
> if you want to control RGB on the RAM sticks for example, you need to disable the SPD Write Protection in BIOS since these software writes some values in the SPD to control the RGB.


I am not into RGB stuff but ran across this app, maybe it's better than the ones your using.








SignalRGB


Control and sync your RGB devices from one free application. SignalRGB is the only RGB software you'll ever need.




www.signalrgb.com





Edit: Here is another open-source.





OpenRGB


Open source RGB lighting control that doesn't depend on manufacturer software




openrgb.org


----------



## bscool

z690 Apex with Samsung DDR5 Memory Issues? - Page 8


Hi, I have a new build put together and the memory is giving me all sorts of issues. I have seen a few people saying that the Apex board might have some dim slot issues but not sure if that is actually an issue. I snagged up a 6000mhz CL36 G Skill kit and tried pairing with my apex board and...



rog.asus.com





"Yes, we confirmed the issue in our lab. For anyone who has XMP overlocked in BIOS when installing DDR5 6000 or higher frequency memory in QVL, please RMA the motherboard. We will provide a motherboard that works."


----------



## Murlo26

bscool said:


> z690 Apex with Samsung DDR5 Memory Issues? - Page 8
> 
> 
> Hi, I have a new build put together and the memory is giving me all sorts of issues. I have seen a few people saying that the Apex board might have some dim slot issues but not sure if that is actually an issue. I snagged up a 6000mhz CL36 G Skill kit and tried pairing with my apex board and...
> 
> 
> 
> rog.asus.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Yes, we confirmed the issue in our lab. For anyone who has XMP overlocked in BIOS when installing DDR5 6000 or higher frequency memory in QVL, please RMA the motherboard. We will provide a motherboard that works."


That was my thread, glad they are finally "admitting" it....progress! I am trying to get him to confirm the board they are sending back to me, as of right now they are saying they are sending me a refurb board which doesn't feel right.


----------



## bscool

Murlo26 said:


> That was my thread, glad they are finally "admitting" it....progress! I am trying to get him to confirm the board they are sending back to me, as of right now they are saying they are sending me a refurb board which doesn't feel right.


Hmm interesting. Let us know how the replacement board works.

They are probably sending you one of the MB @Carillo returned that wouldnt do 7000c28 memtest stable


----------



## yahfz

It only took them 6 months to say something about it and those who don't read their forum still have no idea. Not even an official statement from the company on their social medias etc, just a single forum comment. I really hope they're offering advanced RMA's for this..


----------



## Murlo26

yahfz said:


> View attachment 2553749
> 
> 
> It only took them 6 months to say something about it and those who don't read their forum still have no idea. Not even an official statement from the company on their social medias etc, just a single forum comment. I really hope they're offering advanced RMA's for this..


As I said, that comment is my thread on the ASUS forums. I can tell you this...my mobo was received by them 3/10 (really more like 3/7 but they took 3 days to say they had it), originally said it would take 7-10 days, then that turned into 4/9 delivery and now 4/16. It is also now a refurb board. They said they won't give me a new one because of the following: 

"Unit will be replaced with refurbished replacement. This unit is not eligible for New In Box Replacement since it has never been serviced by ASUS before and was not purchased within 1-2 months. The replacement is expected to arrive at our facility on 2022/04/16 ". 

So whatever that means...I spent weeks troubleshooting this before I could send it back so not sure why they can't send me a new one...it kinda sucks.


----------



## Murlo26

bscool said:


> Hmm interesting. Let us know how the replacement board works.
> 
> They are probably sending you one of the MB @Carillo returned that wouldnt do 7000c28 memtest stable


Sounds a lot better than my old board lol.


----------



## bscool

Looks like the post has been deleted that I linked to. @yahfz screened it though


----------



## yahfz

Not only they admitted that the motherboard is flawed but now they're trying to bury it. Unbelivable.


----------



## sblantipodi

yahfz said:


> View attachment 2553749
> 
> 
> It only took them 6 months to say something about it and those who don't read their forum still have no idea. Not even an official statement from the company on their social medias etc, just a single forum comment. I really hope they're offering advanced RMA's for this..


I tought that this was a joke... Damn, Asus really fell down.
is this the communication they have with customers? not an official statement, nothing.
and what about other boards like Extreme, Hero and others? Do they have the same defect?
they admitted the problem months after the release and now they say that they can't give you a new motherboard because two months are passed since you bought it.

#boycott Asus


----------



## Simkin

Had a Seasonic PSU with cold boot issue a few years back, even if i did not have a receipt for it, Seasonic filed a rma and gave me a new one, they where very helpful and the rma process was fast and painless.

Asus should learn from companies like this.


----------



## Herald

Im one of the people affected with the whole apex slot 1 problem. Was bashing my head for months on what im doing wrong, turns out it was the mobo. Just wow. Deep down i knew i should have gone for the unify x. So both the enthusiast asus boards (hero and apex) had issues....im speechless. 

Im stuck at 5200c32 with my z5 6000c36, anything above that is just not stable. Yay


----------



## Simkin

Herald said:


> Im one of the people affected with the whole apex slot 1 problem. Was bashing my head for months on what im doing wrong, turns out it was the mobo. Just wow. Deep down i knew i should have gone for the unify x. So both the enthusiast asus boards (hero and apex) had issues....im speechless.
> 
> Im stuck at 5200c32 with my z5 6000c36, anything above that is just not stable. Yay


I had the Z5 6000 CL36, it did not run XMP 1 or 2 on my Apex (booted but random bsod). I did not try a whole lot other than adjusting VDD/VDDQ and ended up returing the kit. But i have read others who had one kit not working with XMP, but another one who would of those Samsung D5 kits, so makes me wonder if the problem lies on these kits or the Apex (or both) because my Teamgroup 6200 with Hynix ic is so far stable running 6200 CL32 1T.

As mentioned in this thread, power down the system and pull out the powercord for a minute or so is crucial after adjusting voltage on the Apex.


----------



## Herald

Simkin said:


> I had the Z5 6000 CL36, it did not run XMP 1 or 2 on my Apex. I did not try a whole lot other than adjusting VDD/VDDQ and ended up returing the kit. But i have read others who had one kit not working with XMP, but another one who would of those Samsung D5 kits, so makes me wonder if the problem lies on these kits or the Apex, because my Teamgroup 6200 with Hynix ic is so far stable running 6200 CL32 1T.


Tried single stick 6600, booted like nobodys business.


----------



## xl_digit

there are new G.Skill Modules on the QVL for the Apex, 
but the Information is unconfirmed, these Modules are not in the Vendors Part list on G.Skills Website.


----------



## sblantipodi

Herald said:


> Im one of the people affected with the whole apex slot 1 problem. Was bashing my head for months on what im doing wrong, turns out it was the mobo. Just wow. Deep down i knew i should have gone for the unify x. So both the enthusiast asus boards (hero and apex) had issues....im speechless.
> 
> Im stuck at 5200c32 with my z5 6000c36, anything above that is just not stable. Yay


Is the problem related to Samsung only or it afflicts SK Hynix too?


----------



## Neur0Mortis

xl_digit said:


> there are new G.Skill Modules on the QVL for the Apex,
> but the Information is unconfirmed, these Modules are not in the Vendors Part list on G.Skills Website.
> 
> View attachment 2553792


Interestingly enough though, the QVL seems to apply to the non-K. If you select K from the dropdown just above the table, nothing over 6400 is listed.


----------



## asdkj1740

bscool said:


> z690 Apex with Samsung DDR5 Memory Issues? - Page 8
> 
> 
> Hi, I have a new build put together and the memory is giving me all sorts of issues. I have seen a few people saying that the Apex board might have some dim slot issues but not sure if that is actually an issue. I snagged up a 6000mhz CL36 G Skill kit and tried pairing with my apex board and...
> 
> 
> 
> rog.asus.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Yes, we confirmed the issue in our lab. For anyone who has XMP overlocked in BIOS when installing DDR5 6000 or higher frequency memory in QVL, please RMA the motherboard. We will provide a motherboard that works."


why i cant find the original comment of this((
so only apex or hero and extreme are also incluced.


----------



## bscool

asdkj1740 said:


> why i cant find the original comment of this((
> so only apex or hero and extreme are also incluced.


They removed the post so who knows what will happen. It was in the Apex post I linked so I assume they were talking about Apex only,


----------



## asdkj1740

Simkin said:


> I had the Z5 6000 CL36, it did not run XMP 1 or 2 on my Apex (booted but random bsod). I did not try a whole lot other than adjusting VDD/VDDQ and ended up returing the kit. But i have read others who had one kit not working with XMP, but another one who would of those Samsung D5 kits, so makes me wonder if the problem lies on these kits or the Apex (or both) because my Teamgroup 6200 with Hynix ic is so far stable running 6200 CL32 1T.
> 
> As mentioned in this thread, power down the system and pull out the powercord for a minute or so is crucial after adjusting voltage on the Apex.


i believe gskill ram is another matter.
even gigabyte is still suffering from it. there are lots of user reports toward this ram in reddit.


----------



## acoustic

Wow, so there actually was a defect with the APEX on some of the early run models? And ASUS is dragging their feet replacing people's $800 motherboards when they send them in for RMA..?

That is very, very disappointing. Between that and the price hikes, I'm really not sure what they're thinking. You can't make everyone pay absurd premiums for your products and then not supply the complete package.. or you end up looking like Optimus WC lol


----------



## ruruloko

Very good, I have been an apex holder for many years, and I have 6 of them in my possession. Today I received one from 2022 and it could be stable at 6200. I got a refurbished one that I can start at 7400, and stable at 6933.

I will continue buying apex because I love their plates, but it is true that there is a design problem. All the best


----------



## Aurosonic

Hi. Which bios version would you suggest for stable memory and cpu OC? I’m on Apex, green OEM Hynix DDR5 modules under water, 12900k under water as well.


----------



## Herald

Aurosonic said:


> Hi. Which bios version would you suggest for stable memory and cpu OC? I’m on Apex, green OEM Hynix DDR5 modules under water, 12900k under water as well.


Test your slots individually first, mine seems to run 6200c32 on Samsung kits just fine (tm5 stable) on slot 2, slot 1 fails the stability even at 5600c40 :O 

Sent an RMA request to Asus, this is disgusting


----------



## Aurosonic

Herald said:


> Test your slots individually first, mine seems to run 6200c32 on Samsung kits just fine (tm5 stable) on slot 2, slot 1 fails the stability even at 5600c40 :O
> 
> Sent an RMA request to Asus, this is disgusting


I did already. Both boots at 7000 but never tried to stabilize them though. As of RMA - isn’t Intel specs guarantee 4800 onlyfor DDR5?


----------



## Herald

Aurosonic said:


> I did already. Both boots at 7000 but never tried to stabilize them though. As of RMA - isn’t Intel specs guarantee 4800 onlyfor DDR5?


Yes but the problem isnt with the cpu, so does it matter what intel guarantees? 

I paid top money for the top memory ocing board and... its probably the worst if im not mistaken. Cant even boot 1t at 4800mhz on slot A. That is just a joke.


----------



## acoustic

I've been gone on deployment for a few months - just got back and updated my Z690 TUF D4 to the latest 1304 BIOS. Back in November, the last BIOS I had tried was the 08xx BIOS, I think it may have been 0803? Regardless, it was impossible to stabilize 1:1 at 4000 on my 12700K w/ 2x16 DR 4000CL16 1.4v - I was running 3733 CL15 to get 1:1 stable at the time, and even then, it was not fully tested as I didn't have time before losing.

I completely deleted all the settings I used to use, and I'm going to start from scratch. For ****s and giggles, after the PC not running for ~4months, I left everything stock, set XMP (4000CL16-16-16-36 @ 1.4v), and gear1. Manually set SA to 1.4v, and VDDQ to 1.4v.

So far, I'm MemTestPro stable for the past 20min. These settings used to not post on the old BIOS', and when the training would randomly get me into Windows, it would pop errors as soon as I the last couple worker threads would start.

Hoping this is the new norm, and I'm not going to get wonky training on the next boot (I booted through to BIOS 3-4 times) that will make these settings pop errors. I'm going to let it go for a few hours while I do some other stuff.

The only other thing that changed, is that I mounted the LGA1700 mounting kit + backplate. Those products were not available back in November - maybe better mounting pressure on the socket contributing? I can't be sure.


----------



## asdkj1740

apex 12/2021 is said to be rev1.05, and it has 6000mhz xmp instability (gskill 6000u samsung kit) problem already fixed.
ps. this is not mine, a friend shares this info.


----------



## Herald

asdkj1740 said:


> View attachment 2553815
> 
> apex 12/2021 is said to be rev1.05, and it has 6000mhz xmp instability (gskill 6000u samsung kit) problem already fixed.
> ps. this is not mine, a friend shares this info.


How can you fix a problem when you don't even know it exists? Oh wait


----------



## asdkj1740

Herald said:


> How can you fix a problem when you don't even know it exists? Oh wait


because the guy who sent me this photo recently got a new replacement over his old rev1.0 which kept getting bsod with 6000xmp enabled.
now with this new 12/2021 y0 apex, xmp 6000 is great.


----------



## ChaosAD

asdkj1740 said:


> now with this new 12/2021 y0 apex, xmp 6000 is great.


So the part number is the same between the old (no date) and the new (with date) Apex? Because on mine, which is from early November with no date on the box, is the same as your friends.


----------



## asdkj1740

ChaosAD said:


> So the part number is the same between the old (no date) and the new (with date) Apex? Because on mine, which is from early November with no date on the box, is the same as your friends.


yes, his old one and the new replacement are the same (90MB18I0-M0EAY0).
his old one has no date printed on the bottom left corner, while the new replacement has 12/2021 printed.
he said, his old one is rev1.0 while the new one is rev1.05(printed on PCB).

the old one has no chinese (产地 中国) on the bottom right corner! just "made in china".


same cpu - 12900k, same ram kit - gskill 6000u3636e samsung, resulted in different outcomes.
now with the new apex 6000 xmp is all fine.
the old one cannot be stable at 6000xmp.


----------



## acoustic

acoustic said:


> I've been gone on deployment for a few months - just got back and updated my Z690 TUF D4 to the latest 1304 BIOS. Back in November, the last BIOS I had tried was the 08xx BIOS, I think it may have been 0803? Regardless, it was impossible to stabilize 1:1 at 4000 on my 12700K w/ 2x16 DR 4000CL16 1.4v - I was running 3733 CL15 to get 1:1 stable at the time, and even then, it was not fully tested as I didn't have time before losing.
> 
> I completely deleted all the settings I used to use, and I'm going to start from scratch. For ****s and giggles, after the PC not running for ~4months, I left everything stock, set XMP (4000CL16-16-16-36 @ 1.4v), and gear1. Manually set SA to 1.4v, and VDDQ to 1.4v.
> 
> So far, I'm MemTestPro stable for the past 20min. These settings used to not post on the old BIOS', and when the training would randomly get me into Windows, it would pop errors as soon as I the last couple worker threads would start.
> 
> Hoping this is the new norm, and I'm not going to get wonky training on the next boot (I booted through to BIOS 3-4 times) that will make these settings pop errors. I'm going to let it go for a few hours while I do some other stuff.
> 
> The only other thing that changed, is that I mounted the LGA1700 mounting kit + backplate. Those products were not available back in November - maybe better mounting pressure on the socket contributing? I can't be sure.


Well, that's unfortunate .. MemTestPro went fine to 100%, but still getting crashes in 10-15min in Halo Infinite. Change to Gear2, and it runs for 30min no problem.

Ah well.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Here is mine purchased Jan 30th Canada Newegg. I have booted just over 7000+ before. Stable @6666MHz cl36 samsung sticks. I don't know what revision my board is:


----------



## Gadfly

Murlo26 said:


> That was my thread, glad they are finally "admitting" it....progress! I am trying to get him to confirm the board they are sending back to me, as of right now they are saying they are sending me a refurb board which doesn't feel right.


They told me the same thing... FYI.


----------



## Gadfly

Aurosonic said:


> I did already. Both boots at 7000 but never tried to stabilize them though. As of RMA - isn’t Intel specs guarantee 4800 onlyfor DDR5?


You don't have the same issue if you are booting at 7k on both slots.


----------



## Murlo26

Gadfly said:


> They told me the same thing... FYI.


I am still trying to push for an actual new board. I am hoping something comes of it. I guess we will see what happens. I am now gaming on a backup 6700k/gtx980 build instead of my nice/new 12900k/3090 kingpin customer water cooled pc...at this point I am just kind of over it. 



Gadfly said:


> You don't have the same issue if you are booting at 7k on both slots.


I was going to say...doesn't sound the same...sounds more like just needs to be dialed in. But who knows.


----------



## bscool

acoustic said:


> I've been gone on deployment for a few months - just got back and updated my Z690 TUF D4 to the latest 1304 BIOS. Back in November, the last BIOS I had tried was the 08xx BIOS, I think it may have been 0803? Regardless, it was impossible to stabilize 1:1 at 4000 on my 12700K w/ 2x16 DR 4000CL16 1.4v - I was running 3733 CL15 to get 1:1 stable at the time, and even then, it was not fully tested as I didn't have time before losing.
> 
> I completely deleted all the settings I used to use, and I'm going to start from scratch. For ****s and giggles, after the PC not running for ~4months, I left everything stock, set XMP (4000CL16-16-16-36 @ 1.4v), and gear1. Manually set SA to 1.4v, and VDDQ to 1.4v.
> 
> So far, I'm MemTestPro stable for the past 20min. These settings used to not post on the old BIOS', and when the training would randomly get me into Windows, it would pop errors as soon as I the last couple worker threads would start.
> 
> Hoping this is the new norm, and I'm not going to get wonky training on the next boot (I booted through to BIOS 3-4 times) that will make these settings pop errors. I'm going to let it go for a few hours while I do some other stuff.
> 
> The only other thing that changed, is that I mounted the LGA1700 mounting kit + backplate. Those products were not available back in November - maybe better mounting pressure on the socket contributing? I can't be sure.


901 is the best for dr b die on Strix d4. Newer bios will have issues at around 4000+ if you make changes in the bios it tend to train rtls off.

But if it works for you keep using it but if down the road you have issues that is probably what it is.

Edit I see you are on Tuf. I think 707 abd 807 were still good for the TUF with DR.


----------



## acoustic

bscool said:


> 901 is the best for dr b die on Strix d4. Newer bios will have issues at around 4000+ if you make changes in the bios it tend to train rtls off.
> 
> But if it works for you keep using it but if down the road you have issues that is probably what it is.
> 
> Edit I see you are on Tuf. I think 707 abd 807 were still good for the TUF with DR.


1304 is stable at 3800, while 707 and 807 were not.

I'm considering jumping to an MSI Unify and a 6200 Hynix kit. Kind of annoyed with this mobo and playing **** **** goose with this IMC lol


----------



## bscool

acoustic said:


> 1304 is stable at 3800, while 707 and 807 were not.
> 
> I'm considering jumping to an MSI Unify and a 6200 Hynix kit. Kind of annoyed with this mobo and playing *** *** goose with this IMC lol


What did you set sa and vddq to. They need to be set manually on older bios version.

Drr5 is no better same things need be done. But that is half the fun playing with it 

I have both ddr4 and ddr5 z690 and ddr4 was easier. But maybe MSI will work better for you.


----------



## acoustic

bscool said:


> What did you set sa and vddq to. They need to be set manually on older bios version.
> 
> Drr5 is no better same things need be done. But that is half the fun playing with it
> 
> I have both ddr4 and ddr5 z690 and ddr4 was easier. But maybe MSI will work better for you.


I was in this thread extensively back near release. I've tried up to 1.45v SA @ 4000 gear1. 1.4 VDDQ is where I have the most stability; doesn't seem above 1.4v VDDQ adds stability for me.

I spent hours upon hours tweaking and sharing info on this thread/taking in info. You can't fix a ****ty IMC. You still need to manually enter voltages on this 1304 BIOS - 3800 is stable at 1.325v, though, which is significantly lower than what I remember 3733 running on 0803 or 0807.. whichever one it was.


----------



## bscool

acoustic said:


> I was in this thread extensively back near release. I've tried up to 1.45v SA @ 4000 gear1. 1.4 VDDQ is where I have the most stability; doesn't seem above 1.4v VDDQ adds stability for me.
> 
> I spent hours upon hours tweaking and sharing info on this thread/taking in info. You can't fix a ****ty IMC. You still need to manually enter voltages on this 1304 BIOS - 3800 is stable at 1.325v, though, which is significantly lower than what I remember 3733 running on 0803 or 0807.. whichever one it was.


Hopefully the IMC is better for ddr5. It will be interesting to see how it goes for you. I would think if the IMC isnt good on ddr4 it wont be that great on ddr5 but not many people have posted results tesing both.


----------



## acoustic

bscool said:


> Hopefully the IMC is better for ddr5. It will be interesting to see how it goes for you. I would think if the IMC isnt good on ddr4 it wont be that great on ddr5 but not many people have posted results tesing both.


I'd imagine since you're not running Gear1, the stress on the IMC is lower on DDR5. Frequency is higher on the DRAM, but is the IMC running at as high of a frequency? I dunno.


----------



## bscool

Strix bios 901
4266c15-16-16 DR b die

Played with the new 12900kf some more on DR b die

Edit added new y cruncher with 41 e core


----------



## acoustic

Very nice. That's a killer IMC. It's what I get for going with a 12700K lol


----------



## bscool

*ROG MAXIMUS Z690 Series Beta Bios 1403*

01. Update microcode 0x01F version

02. Improve system performance

ROG MAXIMUS Z690 HERO BETA BIOS 1403

ROG MAXIMUS Z690 FORMULA BETA BIOS 1403

ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX BETA BIOS 1403

ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME BETA BIOS 1403

ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME GLACIAL BETA BIOS 1403

Source



ASUS ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX | APEX 14


----------



## nickolp1974

bscool said:


> *ROG MAXIMUS Z690 Series Beta Bios 1403*
> 
> 01. Update microcode 0x01F version
> 
> 02. Improve system performance
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 HERO BETA BIOS 1403
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 FORMULA BETA BIOS 1403
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX BETA BIOS 1403
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME BETA BIOS 1403
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME GLACIAL BETA BIOS 1403
> 
> Source
> 
> 
> 
> ASUS ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX | APEX 14


Oooo KS ready?


----------



## Neur0Mortis

bscool said:


> *ROG MAXIMUS Z690 Series Beta Bios 1403*
> 
> 01. Update microcode 0x01F version
> 
> 02. Improve system performance
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 HERO BETA BIOS 1403
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 FORMULA BETA BIOS 1403
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX BETA BIOS 1403
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME BETA BIOS 1403
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME GLACIAL BETA BIOS 1403
> 
> Source
> 
> 
> 
> ASUS ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX | APEX 14


You are the effin' man! I've been dying for an update.


----------



## bscool

nickolp1974 said:


> Oooo KS ready?


I am pretty sure even 1304 was KS ready.


----------



## bscool

Neur0Mortis said:


> You are the effin' man! I've been dying for an update.


Not me @safedisk @shamino1978 etc


----------



## Neur0Mortis

bscool said:


> Not me @safedisk @shamino1978 etc


Fair, but I'm still choosing to thank the messenger as well. When you order pizza, do you tip the cook? :-D


----------



## Silent Scone

bscool said:


> I am pretty sure even 1304 was KS ready.


Correct. I'd recommend flashback/updating first if using an older UEFI, though


----------



## Nizzen

Does the new microcode have negative performance, or is it "benchmark safe"?


----------



## Simkin

acoustic said:


> Well, that's unfortunate .. MemTestPro went fine to 100%, but still getting crashes in 10-15min in Halo Infinite. Change to Gear2, and it runs for 30min no problem.
> 
> Ah well.


MemtestPro went fine to 400% on my 6200 CL32 1T, but gave two errors on Testmem5 Anta777 Extreme1 and could not run Cinebench R23.

So far im stable after some adjustments, but in my experience, Cinebench R23 detects unstable memory also very well.


----------



## SuperMumrik

Simkin said:


> Cinebench R23 detects unstable memory also very well.


Try ycruncher instead. Tbh, you can run CB23 with extremely unstable memory


----------



## Simkin

SuperMumrik said:


> Try ycruncher instead. Tbh, you can run CB23 with extremely unstable memory


I dont think i had one complete run on my previus G.Skill 6000 CL36 in CB23, and this kit was unstable with random bsod. 

My Teamgroup 6200 passed 400% HCI Memtest Pro but failed CB23, after adjustment and 3 passes of Anta777 Extreme1 it passed CB23. Just my experience with Cinebench  

But yes, y-cruncher im sure is a better test.


----------



## Aurosonic

Gadfly said:


> You don't have the same issue if you are booting at 7k on both slots.


I’ve binned 3 Apex mobos before getting mine. Some of them booted only 6600, and one booted only 6200. Only 1 of 4 was able to boot 7000 both slots.

so which bios do you suggest for Apex?


----------



## edkieferlp

One Motherboard, Two Faces - ASUS ROG Maximus Z690 Apex review with Teardown, RAM- & Adaptive Core-OC | igor'sLAB


Today we continue with our Z690 motherboard reviews, with the Asus Maximus Z690 Apex. Not only the naming convention has changed compared to the predecessor models, because besides DDR5, PCIe 5.0…




www.igorslab.de


----------



## Simkin

edkieferlp said:


> One Motherboard, Two Faces - ASUS ROG Maximus Z690 Apex review with Teardown, RAM- & Adaptive Core-OC | igor'sLAB
> 
> 
> Today we continue with our Z690 motherboard reviews, with the Asus Maximus Z690 Apex. Not only the naming convention has changed compared to the predecessor models, because besides DDR5, PCIe 5.0…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.igorslab.de





> Here the Z690 Apex will need a lot of luck during the purchase or a lot of patience afterwards *when it comes to the RMA, which Asus at least grants without any problems*


Oh really 

Have they even admitted or given an official statement? So far a forumpost that they removed later on. 

Pathetic.


----------



## adna

strix-f bios 1304
adata xpg lancer 6000c40 [ stock heatsink with top fan airflow ]

6400-30-37-37-28-2t [tm5-test]
sa | vdd | vddq | tx | mc = 0.9 | 1.4 | 1.4 | 1.25 | 1.25
















6600-30-39-39-28-2t [tm5-test]
sa | vdd | vddq | tx | mc = 0.9 | 1.45 | 1.45 | 1.3 | 1.25

















6666-30-39-39-28-2t [tm5,memtest pro,karhu-test]
sa | vdd | vddq | tx | mc = 0.9 | 1.47 | 1.47 | 1.3 | 1.25






























ps. 6800 can't pass tm5 with no error. need more time to tuning and check it. i try later.


----------



## Gadfly

Simkin said:


> I dont think i had one complete run on my previus G.Skill 6000 CL36 in CB23, and this kit was unstable with random bsod.
> 
> My Teamgroup 6200 passed 400% HCI Memtest Pro but failed CB23, after adjustment and 3 passes of Anta777 Extreme1 it passed CB23. Just my experience with Cinebench
> 
> But yes, y-cruncher im sure is a better test.


nice work man!!


----------



## Gadfly

Aurosonic said:


> I’ve binned 3 Apex mobos before getting mine. Some of them booted only 6600, and one booted only 6200. Only 1 of 4 was able to boot 7000 both slots.
> 
> so which bios do you suggest for Apex?


got me man, my board is straight garbage on every bios


----------



## Maksonzi

M0EAY0 (11/2021) top, M0UAY1 (01/2022) bottom


----------



## Gadfly

Maksonzi said:


> View attachment 2554014


Which is which?


----------



## dante`afk

top is 2021, bottom 2022


----------



## jomama22

Maksonzi said:


> View attachment 2554017
> 
> 
> 
> 
> M0EAY0 (11/2021) top, M0UAY1 (01/2022) bottom


Most of what you circled are just different labels of the same components. Everything that is flipped are 0ohm resistor, so direction doesn't matter. One thing you circled at the top is because the pic cropped it out.

Only thing of possible relevance is the removal of two p or n channel transistors and the possible sloppy solder work on the dimms (also, that could just be a piece of dust/debris as if the contacts were actually bridged and not of the same voltage or DQ, the would flat out not work).

The traces that are "missing" are just high spots of the top mask layer.


----------



## darth_meh

jomama22 said:


> Only thing of possible relevance is the removal of two p or n channel transistors and the possible sloppy solder work on the dimms (also, that could just be a piece of dust/debris as if the contacts were actually bridged and not of the same voltage or DQ, the would flat out not work).


That's what sticks out to me. Maybe those are filtering too much voltage to the B channel, which would explain why some boards can boot 7000MHz with one DIMM, but not two.


----------



## D-EJ915

edkieferlp said:


> One Motherboard, Two Faces - ASUS ROG Maximus Z690 Apex review with Teardown, RAM- & Adaptive Core-OC | igor'sLAB
> 
> 
> Today we continue with our Z690 motherboard reviews, with the Asus Maximus Z690 Apex. Not only the naming convention has changed compared to the predecessor models, because besides DDR5, PCIe 5.0…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.igorslab.de


huh, mine is M0AAY0


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

D-EJ915 said:


> huh, mine is M0AAY0


Going by that website, I have the first batch even though purchased Jan 30th from Newegg.ca. My Apex can do 6666MHz stable and bench 6800 no problem with Samsung ram. I guess I got lucky getting an ok board. The pcb is pretty warped though, so quality is lacking still.


----------



## Afferin

bscool said:


> *ROG MAXIMUS Z690 Series Beta Bios 1403*
> 
> 01. Update microcode 0x01F version
> 
> 02. Improve system performance
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 HERO BETA BIOS 1403
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 FORMULA BETA BIOS 1403
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX BETA BIOS 1403
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME BETA BIOS 1403
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME GLACIAL BETA BIOS 1403
> 
> Source
> 
> 
> 
> ASUS ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX | APEX 14


Yet another great BIOS. I'm now getting 6800 stable on my Z690 Formula. The timings aren't great (36-40-40-36 on my TForce 6400C40 kit) but at least it's passed 30 mins of TM5 so far!

Edit: it errored  but this is progress from my previous attempts that would immediately BSOD!

I'm also managing to run my usual 6600CL32 setup with less voltage. Not sure if it's because I didn't toy with voltage enough on previous BIOS, or if it's because of the update. Either way, this is welcomed!


----------



## D-EJ915

MrTOOSHORT said:


> Going by that website, I have the first batch even though purchased Jan 30th from Newegg.ca. My Apex can do 6666MHz stable and bench 6800 no problem with Samsung ram. I guess I got lucky getting an ok board. The pcb is pretty warped though, so quality is lacking still.
> 
> View attachment 2554053


I haven't really had any issues with mine but I haven't tried going hard on mem oc but my gskill 6400s work fine in xmp and the profiles for micron and samsung were fine too. I just think it's kinda ugly and the usb ports dying after being unplugged for like a week makes it annoying to work with.


----------



## Simkin

MrTOOSHORT said:


> Going by that website, I have the first batch even though purchased Jan 30th from Newegg.ca. My Apex can do 6666MHz stable and bench 6800 no problem with Samsung ram. I guess I got lucky getting an ok board. The pcb is pretty warped though, so quality is lacking still.


I guess there is no difference between M0AAY0 and M0EAY0, both is a lottery and high possibility ending up with a crap board.

Mine is M0EAY0 which is not first batch apparently? i have no date on the box however, bought November 4th, first release day in Norway.


----------



## Gadfly

Simkin said:


> I guess there is no difference between M0AAY0 and M0EAY0, both is a lottery and high possibility ending up with a crap board.
> 
> Mine is M0EAY0 which is not first batch apparently? i have no date on the box however, bought November 4th, first release day in Norway.


Well, something changed as they version number on the PCB changed.

As I understand it:

90MB18I0-M0AAY0 Initial run
90MB18I0-M0EAY0 (November 2021)
90MB18I0-M0UAY1 (January 2022)
From what I can tell the 11/2021 boards are the worst of the bunch.


----------



## pR1maL

Gadfly said:


> got me man, my board is straight garbage on every bios


That's because in a properly designed electrical circuit, the components all sing together in unison. In a garbage Apex, some of the components (due to QC issues or design features) can't hear each other so well, too much noise, so they have to shout at each other. The only way they can shout at each other, is by raising their voices (voltage). 

Which means that they aren't ever going to truly sing together in unison. It also means that some of choir are eventually going to grow weary of yelling at each other because they are being constantly overworked. They'll begin making little mistakes, and who knows, some might eventually even just sit down and stop working. But who cares? Asus has already sent out it's choir to post great performances for the masses. They've sufficiently paved "a version of history".


----------



## pR1maL

Maksonzi said:


> View attachment 2554017
> 
> M0EAY0 (11/2021) top, M0UAY1 (01/2022) bottom


Just went over that photo on a 48" display, I have to say it's the smoking gun photo. Different traces visible, different components visible, components missing in disparity. Sus soldiering of the mem slot as well.

Mine is just like the board in the top of that photo. Not surprising really, since mine was made in 11/21. I just went from apathetic toward this board, to pissed. I gave up trying to overclock it long ago because it just doesn't want to play, and I had settled into just using it for MSFS. 

Wouldn't it be comical if I bought one of the boards from the crap pile of boards that Asus had binned for their "Extreme Overclockers"? LOLS.


----------



## Herald

pR1maL said:


> Just went over that photo on a 48" display, I have to say it's the smoking gun photo. Different traces visible, different components visible, components missing in disparity. Sus soldiering of the mem slot as well.
> 
> Mine is just like the board in the top of that photo. Not surprising really, since mine was made in 11/21. I just went from apathetic toward this board, to pissed. I gave up trying to overclock it long ago because it just doesn't want to play, and I had settled into just using it for MSFS.
> 
> Wouldn't it be comical if I bought one of the boards from the crap pile of boards that Asus had binned for their "Extreme Overclockers"? LOLS.
> 
> View attachment 2554111


Maybe try the latest bios. Mine went from mediocre to absolute garbage tier, 1st slot cant even post at 4800 1t 

Second slot still rocking fine, benching at 6800, stable at 6600. 

I'm thinking about throwing it in the garbage where it belongs and getting a unify X.


----------



## pR1maL

Herald said:


> Maybe try the latest bios. Mine went from mediocre to absolute garbage tier, 1st slot cant even post at 4800 1t
> 
> Second slot still rocking fine, benching at 6800, stable at 6600.
> 
> I'm thinking about throwing it in the garbage where it belongs and getting a unify X.


I have it in a stable configuration now, but I think I'm going to do that as well. I thought about trying to RMA it, but sometimes I just......harbor animosity. I can't sell it to anyone in good conscience. It's already cost me the expense of trying a different ram kit (sammy vs hynix). At this point hitting it with a sledgehammer would be produce a most gratifying, calming effect within me. 😁




> 90MB18I0-M0AAY0 Initial run
> 90MB18I0-M0EAY0 (November 2021)
> 90MB18I0-M0UAY1 (January 2022)


Mine is an M0AAY0 and it has November 21 on the box. So maybe the initial run began in early Nov?


----------



## pR1maL

[QUOTE="jomama22, post: 28967554, member: 255077)

The traces that are "missing" are just high spots of the top mask layer.
[/QUOTE]

With all due respect, I believe that assertion to be false. I've looked at the image on a 48" 4k oled at full zoom. It doesn't look like a high spot to me.


----------



## Herald

pR1maL said:


> I have it in a stable configuration now, but I think I'm going to do that as well. I thought about trying to RMA it, but sometimes I just......harbor animosity. I can't sell it to anyone in good conscience. It's already cost me the expense of trying a different ram kit (sammy vs hynix). At this point hitting it with a sledgehammer would be produce a most gratifying, calming effect within me. 😁
> 
> 
> 
> Mine is an M0AAY0 and it has November 21 on the box. So maybe the initial run began in early Nov?


No need for animosity. Just stop buying the specific brand, you lose 700€ (or however much you paid for that garbage), they lose a customer for life 

Mine is M0EAY0 variant, but doesn't seem to make a difference I guess


----------



## Mappi75

Final Bios 1403 on Asus germany page:

ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX BIOS 1403
1. Update Intel Microcode
2. Update Intel ME version 16.0.15.1735
3. Improve system performance for Intel Core i9-12900KS






__





ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX | ROG Maximus | Gaming Mainboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG Deutschland


AX5400 Dual Band WiFi 6 Gaming Router, WiFi 6 802.11ax, Mobile Game Mode, ASUS AURA RGB, Lifetime Free Internet Security, Mesh WiFi support, Gear Accelerator, Gaming Port, Adaptive QoS, Port Forwarding



rog.asus.com





Edit: wondering the asus flashback button wont work - updated via bios flash.


----------



## jomama22

pR1maL said:


> [QUOTE="jomama22, post: 28967554, member: 255077)
> 
> The traces that are "missing" are just high spots of the top mask layer.


With all due respect, I believe that assertion to be false. I've looked at the image on a 48" 4k oled at full zoom. It doesn't look like a high spot to me.
[/QUOTE]
You can tell from the rest of the solder mask that it has either been touched up and/or been applied quite thick.

Also, it is doubtful the board would ever operate if those traces are completely missing unless they aren't being used. Also, traces are etched into a solid sheet of copper. It would be improbable for a trace to not be made given the process.

Lastly, blowing up an image on a tv with much lower DPI vs a 2k cellphone or 4k 32" monitor with multiple times the DPI is only going to lose you clarity.


----------



## joneffingvo

With 1403, i'm able to run 6200 XMP 2 (Corsair Hynix) without any errors, whereas before I couldn't (only could run XMP 1). Apex 11/2021 build for reference


----------



## Afferin

I think I'm in love with this BIOS. I swapped my CPU at Canada Computers today and got an SP91 chip. I'm running 6800CL34 with EASE now on my Z690 Formula.

Thank you to all the hard work you guys put into making our lives easier. <3


----------



## Nikos4Life

Hello there!

I am using AI OC with the 12900K & Extreme MB.
I am quite happy with the result but it is not 100% stable. Do you know if it is possible to change the vCore being applied while maintaining the AI Optimized settings for the cores?

Since the last BIOS the voltage names for the cores has changed…Should I change to offset the Core voltage or the Global core on this case?
Could not find this info about AI OC.

Thanks in advance


----------



## Eaton

BIOS 1403 adds 3 new options to _Extreme Tweaker\DRAM Timing Control\Memory Training Algorithms_:

EARLY DIMM DFE Training
DRAM DCA Training
Write Driver Strength Training
Don't know what they do and there are no descriptions, but they were not in 1304.


----------



## Mappi75

_Extreme Tweaker_/Advanced Memory Voltages

there are more missing entrys too all below "PIMCs Voltages > Sync all PMICs" option. (12700K).

HUB VLDO (1.8v)
HUB VDDIO (1.0v)
RAM VDD Voltage
RAM VDDQ Voltage
RAM VPP Voltage
and so on..


----------



## DungeonKeeper1

Hi, 

i have now flashed 1403. 
System runs stable as far as i see. I do not OC. System run under standard settings. (12900k, 2x16GB G Skill F5-6000U3636E16G, ASUS Z690 Formula, 1080Ti, SB XFi Titanium)
Only VDD and VDDQ is at 1,33V instead 1,30V. But this has not an reason. Only to provide max stability. I use my system for work an only a little bit playing, so i can't play with overclocking.

I hope 1403 is also stable like 0811.


----------



## vigorito

For gaming E there is no fix still on newest bios 1403 for both xmp1 and xmp2,and again bios freeze after around 40-50sec after using it and change any values,only version of bios where xmp work is 1003,to roll back from 1403 to 1003 can i just flash it with asus ez or i need to do something else (renamer file or something else)


----------



## DungeonKeeper1

I use XMP1 and no problems as far.


----------



## RobertoSampaio

Did anyone successfully roll back from 1403 to an older version?

I tried and have a catastrophic error...

I'm trying to "unbrick" my MB...

I sent a message to @shamino1978  and I'm waiting his answer.

Be care trying to do this...


----------



## SuperMumrik

RobertoSampaio said:


> Did anyone successfully roll back from 1403 to an older version?


I did. No issues
Try the bios switch?


----------



## sblantipodi

RobertoSampaio said:


> Did anyone successfully roll back from 1403 to an older version?
> 
> I tried and have a catastrophic error...
> 
> I'm trying to "unbrick" my MB...
> 
> I sent a message to @Shamino and I'm waiting his answer.
> 
> Be care trying to do this...


Can I ask why you tried to rollback to the previous firmware?
You have two BIOS, does switching to the second bios help?


----------



## RobertoSampaio

SuperMumrik said:


> I did. No issues
> Try the bios switch?


The problem I had was when I changed the bios using the bios switch button...

I turn the PC off and pressed the button... When I turn on the PC, the PC not started.

I tried everything you can imagine... But the MB not start. 
The switch bios button is not working anymore.... (it's locked in bios 1 and not change).

I tried clear bios... Retry button... Remove battery... Bios flash back button (the bios is loaded but PC not start)... I tried Everything... The switch bios button not work and PC not start...
I changed the MB and all is working... PSU, CPU, memory, vga, etc...
The MB bricked in a way I never saw before.... 
When I turn psu on the rgb leds light on... But the PC not start and the bios switch button not work...


----------



## sblantipodi

I don't like how asus implemented the bios switch, it's pretty unuseful this way.
when you flash a new bios, it udpates both bioses, so what's the sense in having two bioses?
it should have more sense if the bios update leave untouched the other bios.

in this way it's like having one bios with two different config. pretty pointless, since we have bios profiles for it.


----------



## sblantipodi

any particular reasons why you tried rolling back to the previous BIOS?


----------



## RobertoSampaio

Probably it's not a "usual and common" issue...
But happened to me... 
Im trying to understand...
The 1403 change a lot of firmwares and my 2 bios didn't like this changed and bricked.


----------



## RobertoSampaio

sblantipodi said:


> I don't like how asus implemented the bios switch, it's pretty unuseful this way.
> when you flash a new bios, it udpates both bioses, so what's the sense in having two bioses?
> it should have more sense if the bios update leave untouched the other bios.
> 
> in this way it's like having one bios with two different config. pretty pointless, since we have bios profiles for it.


When you update the bios, only one bios is updated... The other bios remains the same...
That was the problem... The 1403 updated a lot of firmwares and when I pressed the switch bios button the old bios locked and bricked the MB. I think the problem was new firmwares with the old bios...


----------



## IronAge

Thats what my superb 800$ brand new Z690 Apex looks like after having opened the Box for the first time. (bought early november) 😠


----------



## Falkentyne

RobertoSampaio said:


> The problem I had was when I changed the bios using the bios switch button...
> 
> I turn the PC off and pressed the button... When I turn on the PC, the PC not started.
> 
> I tried everything you can imagine... But the MB not start.
> The switch bios button is not working anymore.... (it's locked in bios 1 and not change).
> 
> I tried clear bios... Retry button... Remove battery... Bios flash back button (the bios is loaded but PC not start)... I tried Everything... The switch bios button not work and PC not start...
> I changed the MB and all is working... PSU, CPU, memory, vga, etc...
> The MB bricked in a way I never saw before....
> When I turn psu on the rgb leds light on... But the PC not start and the bios switch button not work...


1403 updated the management engine firmware right? Or was the EC updated?
I remember Shamino said earlier that "Bios is updating...don't power off the system." message is for the EC, while "Bios is updating management engine firmware" is self explanatory.

Can you explain everything you did, step by step and everything the motherboard did?

You flashed to 1403.
Then what? What happened right after you flashed to 1403?
What did you see? And what did you do after what you saw?
Please explain everything that you did. And each and everything the motherboard did after you completed the flash, including every single reboot and thing that happened after.

This sounds like a management engine brick, which I heard of from a couple of users when they tried to update to RKL compatible Bios on Z490 Apex, with a 10900K installed rather than a 11900K, but that was ME only because the original BIOS still worked.
If the BIOS switch button doesn't work and the case power button doesn't do anything, that's worse.
That sounds like Embedded Controller was updated and then failed in some way when it went back to the older BIOS via the onboard button. I remember there was one other user who had something like this with an unresponsive board.

This should be recoverable, but I don't know how. IIRC it involves shorting a jumper on the board then using a hardware programmer like Elmor's EVC2SX. But I think the method is different if you are trying to recover the ME vs recovering the actual EC (which is miles harder).

Elmor himself on his discord should know as I remember him helping someone recover from this once, if you can get on and ask him.


----------



## RobertoSampaio

Falkentyne said:


> 1403 updated the management engine firmware right? Or was the EC updated?
> I remember Shamino said earlier that "Bios is updating...don't power off the system." message is for the EC, while "Bios is updating management engine firmware" is self explanatory.
> 
> Can you explain everything you did, step by step and everything the motherboard did?
> 
> You flashed to 1403.
> Then what? What happened right after you flashed to 1403?
> What did you see? And what did you do after what you saw?
> Please explain everything that you did. And each and everything the motherboard did after you completed the flash, including every single reboot and thing that happened after.
> 
> This sounds like a management engine brick, which I heard of from a couple of users when they tried to update to RKL compatible Bios on Z490 Apex, with a 10900K installed rather than a 11900K, but that was ME only because the original BIOS still worked.
> If the BIOS switch button doesn't work and the case power button doesn't do anything, that's worse.
> That sounds like Embedded Controller was updated and then failed in some way when it went back to the older BIOS via the onboard button. I remember there was one other user who had something like this with an unresponsive board.
> 
> This should be recoverable, but I don't know how. IIRC it involves shorting a jumper on the board then using a hardware programmer like Elmor's EVC2SX. But I think the method is different if you are trying to recover the ME vs recovering the actual EC (which is miles harder).
> 
> Elmor himself on his discord should know as I remember him helping someone recover from this once, if you can get on and ask him.


Like we talk at telegram, could you better write here (with a decent English... Lol) what happened and alert other people for the issue?


----------



## Maksonzi

I updated to 1403! Tell me please! Where can I download ME version 16.0.15.1735 and do I need to update if I have 12900k?? In what order to update, first Intel ME or after? Or does it not matter?


----------



## Falkentyne

All from what I can tell is:

If one BIOS is 9901 and second BIOS is successfully updated to 1403, trying to switch "back" to the first BIOS (9901) "may" cause the embedded controller to fail to update the firmware, or the EC is not compatible with 9901, causing everything on the board to fail to work (power button, bios switch button etc). 

I don't know if this happens when switching between 1403 to 1304 between main and backup BIOS. But switching from 1403 (main) to 9901 (back), with either BIOS on either position (1 or 2) can brick the EC/motherboard as the firmware fails to update when 9901 tries to boot.

I do not know if this happens to Bioses newer than 9901. Better to be safe than sorry.
I do know someone with a KS chip manually flashed from 1304 to a very old BIOS with no problems besides the SP getting messed up.

Recommended to use USB Flashback only to update both Bioses to 1403, and NOT to use the bios button to switch back to the old BIOS and then try to start the system afterwards to try to run ezflash--instead use USB flashback only. Or don't use 1403 until someone finds out more information.

Roberto thinks it's safe to manually use EZflash (or USB) to flash from 1403 to older Bios, but again I'm not sure.


----------



## RobertoSampaio

Falkentyne said:


> All from what I can tell is:
> 
> If one BIOS is 9901 and second BIOS is successfully updated to 1403, trying to switch "back" to the first BIOS (9901) "may" cause the embedded controller to fail to update the firmware, or the EC is not compatible with 9901, causing everything on the board to fail to work (power button, bios switch button etc).
> 
> I don't know if this happens when switching between 1403 to 1304 between main and backup BIOS. But switching from 1403 (main) to 9901 (back), with either BIOS on either position (1 or 2) can brick the EC/motherboard as the firmware fails to update when 9901 tries to boot.
> 
> I do not know if this happens to Bioses newer than 9901. Better to be safe than sorry.
> I do know someone with a KS chip manually flashed from 1304 to a very old BIOS with no problems besides the SP getting messed up.
> 
> Recommended to use USB Flashback only to update both Bioses to 1403, and NOT to use the bios button to switch back to the old BIOS and then try to start the system afterwards to try to run ezflash--instead use USB flashback only. Or don't use 1403 until someone finds out more information.
> 
> Roberto thinks it's safe to manually use EZflash (or USB) to flash from 1403 to older Bios, but again I'm not sure.


I'm not sure it's safe... Sounds like safe, but I can't test it because my MB was bricked...

That's why it's important Asus having a test team! We can find this before the problem become a big problem...

So I would like to recommend to not update to the 1403 until we have an Asus feedback.

As soon as possible I'll post some news about this case.


----------



## Aurosonic

Falkentyne said:


> I don't know if this happens when switching between 1403 to 1304 between main and backup BIOS. But switching from 1403 (main) to 9901 (back), with either BIOS on either position (1 or 2) can brick the EC/motherboard as the firmware fails to update when 9901 tries to boot.


I’m flashed 1403 to bios1 and 1304 to bios2, both via EZ Flash, no problem switching between them for about 3 times. I’m on APEX


----------



## Falkentyne

Aurosonic said:


> I’m flashed 1403 to bios1 and 1304 to bios2, both via EZ Flash, no problem switching between them for about 3 times. I’m on APEX


9901 may be the problem then.

When you switch back, do you get a "BIOS is updating....." message? Or is it "Bios is updating Aura LED firmware" message?


----------



## Aurosonic

Falkentyne said:


> When you switch back, do you get a "BIOS is updating....." message? Or is it "Bios is updating Aura LED firmware" message?


No Aura LED update, only BIOS update


----------



## danielcascales

Good evening,
I built a new rig this week.
-An i9-12900K with Corsair H60i (replaced the SP120 with 2 ML120 Pro)
-Asus ROG Strix Z690-F Gaming Wifi
-2x16GB Kingston DDR5 6000 CL40
-Corsair RM750x PSU
-My previous 512GB Samsung 970 Pro PCIe 3.0 NVMe SSD
-My previous Gigabyte G1 Gaming GTX 1070
And I want to have all the system without fails before start trying to overclock.
I have two doubts, and you seem to have a lot experience with theese motherboards.

-Once I touch the power button, the power LED doesn’t turn on, until 5-7 seconds have passed.
If I watch Q-LEDs, I can see 2-3 red LED flashes, before the yellow, white, green LED, and then screen turns on, Windows logo, and finish booting. Aproximately 40 seconds from power button to desktop.
Never seen this behaviour on my previous builds (Z170, B85 and Z77).
It’s some kind of fault? Or all of you have this behaviour?
I search in Google something like “Z690 long time post” or “Z690-F post delay” and I can see a lot of people with similar problem, and no one answer.

-the other question. Just updated to 1403 BIOS. No problem with the flashing, but still on 16.0.15.1620 MEI firmware. I update from EZ flash and bios flashback. Same result. Any way to update to 16.0.15.1735?I send BIOS file to MEAnalyzer, and it have the new MEI and new PMC firmwares, but I can’t update. Any way to update?
Sorry for making you read so much, and thanks in advance to all that can help me with my questions.
Greetings.


----------



## catch36

Use the firmware updater here. Worked on my Apex when both bios Flashback/EZFlash would not update update ME firmware.





[FIRMWARE] Intel ME (H610/B660/H670/Z690/B760/H770/Z790)


Intel ME (H610/B660/H670/Z690/B760/H770/Z790)



rog.asus.com


----------



## RobertoSampaio

W_T_F !!!!!


----------



## Feklar

Nice April Fools prank.


----------



## dyanikoglu

RobertoSampaio said:


> W_T_F !!!!!


I hope you're aware that the video is shared on April 1st


----------



## nmkr

i have 1304 in slot 1 and 1403 in slot 2.. switched also cold, no problems.
seams yours broken during the mc downgrade?


----------



## RobertoSampaio

Yes... I think the problem is from 1304 or 1403 to an older version...


----------



## sblantipodi

there are a lot of users complaining that 1403 is less stable than 1304 but hey, they "improved system performance"


----------



## adna

strix-f bios 1403 test


----------



## danielcascales

I was doing some tests:
-Tried BIOS 0223, 1003, and come back to 1403, absolute no difference.
-Remove both RAM sticks.
Installed one in slot 1, no boot (red light, yellow light, red light, yellow light, ... and no boot).
Installed one in slot 2, boot, but with power on delay. Installed the other one in the same slot, same behaviour.
-Disconnected PSU wire to socket. Connected again. Next time boot, no delay in power LED, it lights on inmediately, but RAM testing takes a lot of time (first red light, then yellow lite like 20 or 30 seconds, then white light and finally green light, and screen turns on.
Next time boot, the delay in power LED appear again (6 seconds until light on), and RAM testing quick, less than a second.
-Changed XMP settings. With XMP1 or XMP2 6000, same delay. Tried enter manual timmings instead of XMP profile, same behaviour.
With auto (JEDEC 4800), the delay exists, but only half time, aproximately 3 seconds.
-Disconnected USB headers and USB devices, no difference.
-Disconected M.2 disc (connected on M2_1 slot), no difference.
-Disconnected PCIe graphics card, no difference.
-Take apart, clean and reseat all the slots (PCIe, DIMM and CPU), no difference.
-Test one by one different BIOS settings (VMD disable, Storage controlers disabled, ReSize BAR enabled, disable MultiCore Enhancement, hydranode fan control disabled, Fastboot disable). None of them changed the boot behaviour.

Then, have I a problem or incompatibility with RAM?
I bought two Kingston KF560C40BB-16 (DDR5-6000 CL40). Two separate RAM modules, not a 2x16GB kit (because stock lack). They appear in the QVL. I don't think the problem is they are separate modules, because the problem remains using only one.
Maybe a CPU problem? Because the IMC.
Or a mainboard problem?

I attach a boot LEDs video:


http://imgur.com/a/RHUp9VE


The first two red light flashes, the power LED is turned off, then, the power LED lights on, and boot secuence starts (red, yellow, withe, green, and BIOS).

What do you think?

Anyone with the same behaviour?

Many thanks for your answers.



danielcascales said:


> Good evening,
> I built a new rig this week.
> -An i9-12900K with Corsair H60i (replaced the SP120 with 2 ML120 Pro)
> -Asus ROG Strix Z690-F Gaming Wifi
> -2x16GB Kingston DDR5 6000 CL40
> -Corsair RM750x PSU
> -My previous 512GB Samsung 970 Pro PCIe 3.0 NVMe SSD
> -My previous Gigabyte G1 Gaming GTX 1070
> And I want to have all the system without fails before start trying to overclock.
> I have two doubts, and you seem to have a lot experience with theese motherboards.
> 
> -Once I touch the power button, the power LED doesn’t turn on, until 5-7 seconds have passed.
> If I watch Q-LEDs, I can see 2-3 red LED flashes, before the yellow, white, green LED, and then screen turns on, Windows logo, and finish booting. Aproximately 40 seconds from power button to desktop.
> Never seen this behaviour on my previous builds (Z170, B85 and Z77).
> It’s some kind of fault? Or all of you have this behaviour?
> I search in Google something like “Z690 long time post” or “Z690-F post delay” and I can see a lot of people with similar problem, and no one answer.
> 
> -the other question. Just updated to 1403 BIOS. No problem with the flashing, but still on 16.0.15.1620 MEI firmware. I update from EZ flash and bios flashback. Same result. Any way to update to 16.0.15.1735?I send BIOS file to MEAnalyzer, and it have the new MEI and new PMC firmwares, but I can’t update. Any way to update?
> Sorry for making you read so much, and thanks in advance to all that can help me with my questions.
> Greetings.


----------



## sblantipodi

I think that Asus should explain us why we have two bios on these expensive motherboards if we can brick the board by flashing one bios.

Bioses should be completely separated, updating one bios should not affect the other bios.
If this isn't the case, what's the point of having two bioses?


----------



## jomama22

danielcascales said:


> I was doing some tests:
> -Tried BIOS 0223, 1003, and come back to 1403, absolute no difference.
> -Remove both RAM sticks.
> Installed one in slot 1, no boot (red light, yellow light, red light, yellow light, ... and no boot).
> Installed one in slot 2, boot, but with power on delay. Installed the other one in the same slot, same behaviour.
> -Disconnected PSU wire to socket. Connected again. Next time boot, no delay in power LED, it lights on inmediately, but RAM testing takes a lot of time (first red light, then yellow lite like 20 or 30 seconds, then white light and finally green light, and screen turns on.
> Next time boot, the delay in power LED appear again (6 seconds until light on), and RAM testing quick, less than a second.
> -Changed XMP settings. With XMP1 or XMP2 6000, same delay. Tried enter manual timmings instead of XMP profile, same behaviour.
> With auto (JEDEC 4800), the delay exists, but only half time, aproximately 3 seconds.
> -Disconnected USB headers and USB devices, no difference.
> -Disconected M.2 disc (connected on M2_1 slot), no difference.
> -Disconnected PCIe graphics card, no difference.
> -Take apart, clean and reseat all the slots (PCIe, DIMM and CPU), no difference.
> -Test one by one different BIOS settings (VMD disable, Storage controlers disabled, ReSize BAR enabled, disable MultiCore Enhancement, hydranode fan control disabled, Fastboot disable). None of them changed the boot behaviour.
> 
> Then, have I a problem or incompatibility with RAM?
> I bought two Kingston KF560C40BB-16 (DDR5-6000 CL40). Two separate RAM modules, not a 2x16GB kit (because stock lack). They appear in the QVL. I don't think the problem is they are separate modules, because the problem remains using only one.
> Maybe a CPU problem? Because the IMC.
> Or a mainboard problem?
> 
> I attach a boot LEDs video:
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/a/RHUp9VE
> 
> 
> The first two red light flashes, the power LED is turned off, then, the power LED lights on, and boot secuence starts (red, yellow, withe, green, and BIOS).
> 
> What do you think?
> 
> Anyone with the same behaviour?
> 
> Many thanks for your answers.


Just sounds like memory training. The long sequence probably includes a few tries (you can watch this happen if you watch the debug code sequence). Different frequency ranges change the time/retrain tries it takes to go through the sequence as well (less wiggle room for acceptable training results). 

When it goes through it quickly, you seem to say it happen after you restart after not changing memory settings. That is the MRC fastboot in action (can be enabled or disabled in the memory timings section); it doesn't retrain, just applied the same results it got from the last time it trained successfully.


----------



## ikjadoon

I figured out the screenshot utility (insert USB drive ->. A small, but funny typo. From a ROG STRIX Z690-I on 1403:

"minimum duty c*ir*cle" -> "minimum duty c*y*cle"


----------



## MarkDeMark

RobertoSampaio said:


> Yes... I think the problem is from 1304 or 1403 to an older version...


Is your postcode now always looping on '00'? In that case I had a similar issue (you can read thread starting on page 105 in this forum - and Shamino's answers) had to RMA


----------



## zeezey

My z690 formula kept looping on '00' and I had to RMA it.


----------



## Lord Alzov

zeezey said:


> My z690 formula kept looping on '00' and I had to RMA it.


Try clear cmos


----------



## MarkDeMark

Lord Alzov said:


> Try clear cmos


According to Shamino when your embedded controller firmware is corrupted you won't be able to access BIOS in any way - clear it or flash it. Your doomed to RMA.


----------



## Lord Alzov

MarkDeMark said:


> According to Shamino when your embedded controller firmware is corrupted you won't be able to access BIOS in any way - clear it or flash it. Your doomed to RMA.


 On my apex was 00 loop and clear cmos repair it.


----------



## sblantipodi

Is there any sense in upgrading to new BIOS?
Does it fixes/improves something apart adding more problems?


----------



## Simkin

Don't think i ever have had any problems flashing bioses in all the years i have been doing this, what is causing a corrupt bios? Is it the flashing itself being interrupted or do the flash complete and still there is issues afterwards?


----------



## Herald

sblantipodi said:


> Is there any sense in upgrading to new BIOS?
> Does it fixes/improves something apart adding more problems?


On my apex it just did the 1st slot situation worse. Now cant boot at all in 1t, not even at 4800 🤣. 2nd slot still works fine, possibly better than before although not absolutely certain, it seems to boot at 6600 1t (no stability though)


----------



## Gadfly

I was finally able to get a 64002T profile stable, nothing special, but at least it works. 

Bios settings:
SA: Offset/auto (0.938v), MC: 1.206v VDD/VDDQ/VDDQ TX: 1.43/1.43/1.43


----------



## dante`afk

Contrast of 2 companies:

Corsair: I opted for advanced RMA for my axi1600i, they did not have anything in stock, but they kept updating me every week until they got stock. They also offered a different model until they had stock.

Asus: I opted for advanced RMA for my Z690 Apex, they do not have anything in stock, but *asked me to check with them* every 10-14 days to see if there is stock, neither are they offering a different model until they have it in stock.


On the edge to never buy an Asus product again.


----------



## Feklar

"Nothing special, but at least it works" could be the slogan for this Z690 Apex it seems.


----------



## TheNaitsyrk

Hello my dudes. Doing research whether I should exchange my Z690 Maximus Formula for the Apex or something else or basically "it doesn't matter".

Do I get better timings on Apex because of 2 slot design?

I went for Maximus Formula because of the VRM block and because of double thunderbolt and Hyper card that allows for extra NVMe. 10G net is a nice bonus. Just wanted to see expert opinions on what I should pick.


----------



## TheNaitsyrk

Afferin said:


> I think I'm in love with this BIOS. I swapped my CPU at Canada Computers today and got an SP91 chip. I'm running 6800CL34 with EASE now on my Z690 Formula.
> 
> Thank you to all the hard work you guys put into making our lives easier. <3


I guess I keep my formula.


----------



## Neur0Mortis

TheNaitsyrk said:


> I guess I keep my formula.


Asus Slogan option 2:. YMMV


----------



## MarkDeMark

Simkin said:


> Don't think i ever have had any problems flashing bioses in all the years i have been doing this, what is causing a corrupt bios? Is it the flashing itself being interrupted or do the flash complete and still there is issues afterwards?


The way I understand it is that it's not the BIOS that gets corrupted it's the EC firmware and because it loads first you're not even able to access the BIOS: I quote Shamino here: "
...The reason for the updating bios message is due to differing firmware packed in the 2 different bioses. Usually the embedded controller fw. Resetting during this time may cause a corrupted ec unable to boot. The fw is updated at boot time, so usb flashback process wont help..." And following up with the conversation "...Like I explained, if the ec fw is corrupt, then the bios being sound doesn't matter if the board cannot get to start running tge first line of bios code. If its just the bios being broken or not booting, then the flashback will work...." A lot of errors - a few at least - seem to demonstrate the post code 00 looping, but if your problem is the embedded controller firmware that's been corrupted, than you can't flash, reset, clear - you simply can't get to the BIOS and you must RMA. It happened to me, after updating a BIOS I switched back to an other older one and there it went


----------



## RobertoSampaio

MarkDeMark said:


> Is your postcode now always looping on '00'? In that case I had a similar issue (you can read thread starting on page 105 in this forum - and Shamino's answers) had to RMA


No... It's impossible to turn on the MB...


----------



## MarkDeMark

RobertoSampaio said:


> No... It's impossible to turn on the MB...


Sorry Robert - nothing else comes to mind. I am sure you've tried all the basics to reset it. That's far fetched but did you try a new MB battery


----------



## RobertoSampaio

MarkDeMark said:


> Sorry Robert - nothing else comes to mind. I am sure you've tried all the basics to reset it. That's far fetched but did you try a new MB battery


I'm waiting for Shamino instructions...
I know there is a way to bring it back to life... I don't know how yet... But I will...


----------



## MarkDeMark

RobertoSampaio said:


> I'm waiting for Shamino instructions...
> I know there is a way to bring it back to life... I don't know how yet... But I will...


When you do, let us know


----------



## RobertoSampaio

MarkDeMark said:


> When you do, let us know


For sure!


----------



## Falkentyne

MarkDeMark said:


> When you do, let us know


He has to flash the EC firmware chip.
But this requires hardware tools. I know Elmor EVC2SX tool can connect to the chip (may require simple soldering wires to it, or "possibly" to an i2c header on the motherboard) and then you can flash it using another computer. There was one other person who had to flash the EC like this on a Z490 board, and a few who had to use an onboard jumper (on Z490) to access a corrupted bios chip to force flash it.


----------



## centvalny

Testing max valid on A1 dimm slot Apex, cpu water/mem air










B1 dimm slot


----------



## sblantipodi

RobertoSampaio said:


> I'm waiting for Shamino instructions...
> I know there is a way to bring it back to life... I don't know how yet... But I will...


but is it recommended to upgrade now or it is better to wait?
is this a problem related to your motherboard only or it can happen even to other motherboards?


----------



## sblantipodi

@shamino1978 my PC is now 100% stable, I can't make it crash with stress tests (CPU and RAM tests) 
using 4x16GB SK Hynix @ 5.2GHz C36.

Sometimes it happen that the RGB on my RAM freezes and Windows remains stable and I can use the PC without problems but if I reboot the PC when this happen, it hangs on boot, and my Extreme mobo shows a "detect memory" message on the OLED disaply. 

I need to safe boot to boot normally.

Is there someone working on this problem? Is it a known problem?


----------



## MarkDeMark

Falkentyne said:


> He has to flash the EC firmware chip.
> But this requires hardware tools. I know Elmor EVC2SX tool can connect to the chip (may require simple soldering wires to it, or "possibly" to an i2c header on the motherboard) and then you can flash it using another computer. There was one other person who had to flash the EC like this on a Z490 board, and a few who had to use an onboard jumper (on Z490) to access a corrupted bios chip to force flash it.


Great - now I wish someone would have told me that instead of telling me to RMA. Thanks Shamino (just kidding ) - it's all in the past - I'll know next time.


----------



## uplink

Hey there guys,

a little update from my side, not a good one though:

Apex with 12900K & CMT32GX5M2X6200C36 [DDR5 6200 MHz CL36 2x16GB]

*1100* - works like a charm with VDD/VDDQ: 1.385v/1.4v, MC: 1.25v, VCSAA [or rather CSAO at Asus]: 1.15v
*1304* - works so so and only sometimes with VDD/VDDQ: 1.405v/1.435v, MC: 1.25v, VCSAA [or rather CSAO at Asus]: 1.15v
*1403 *- won't boot most of the time even in fail safe settings

I mean, I have a huge respect for You guys, mainly @shamino1978, but I'm about to change my 12900K for 12900KS and I'm not sure I'll even boot .

Even 1100 doesn't work with XMP I. or XMP II. out of the box, it's full manual, no XMP preset setting, but after that it's a pure disaster for Corsair . I know that Asus's aim is Team and G.Skill, but it's not really helping much.

Can You please take Corsair into consideration too?

With best regards

uplink


----------



## dante`afk

If anyone thinking of RMAing their apex 😂😂😂

From Asus support:



> We do not have the record on when was the last time the motherboard was in stock.


----------



## Gadfly

RobertoSampaio said:


> For sure!


following up a bit here. 

1.) You flashed bios 1 to the latest version, it completed and life was good.
2.) You then powered down, hit the bios switch button, powered it on, and tried to boot.
3.) Board bricked

USB flash back does not work as the board is completely powered down (no lights, etc.)?


----------



## Gadfly

dante`afk said:


> If anyone thinking of RMAing their apex 😂😂😂
> 
> From Asus support:


Getting the exact same from Asus support on my end as well. I check in with them every Monday waiting for an advanced exchange. I was told that it will most likely be beginning of May before there is any "stock".


----------



## slash621

anyone here have a 12900KS in this board (Strix Z690 wifi D4) ? I've got one on my desk and a wifi D4, but I'm afraid to plug it in without prior knowledge or support. I dont know if it'll run on 1304


----------



## RobertoSampaio

Gadfly said:


> following up a bit here.
> 
> 1.) You flashed bios 1 to the latest version, it completed and life was good.
> 2.) You then powered down, hit the bios switch button, powered it on, and tried to boot.
> 3.) Board bricked
> 
> USB flash back does not work as the board is completely powered down (no lights, etc.)?


Exactly that... When I started the system, after pressed the bios switch button, the system starts at 9901 bios and start to upgrade some firmwares. After that the MB turn off automatically (as it should do), and restart. So a other firmware update stared and the MB failed and started a fast psu turn of and turn on loop (about 4 turn on/off cycles per second)
I turn psu off by the psu power button and the turn on and turn off loop stopped.
O turned on the PSU, the MB rub leads lighted, but the MB is dead. Power button, reset button, bios switch button, and all other buttons not work.


----------



## db000

Installed 12900KS today and updated to 1403 (from 1302). No issues, same profile works perfect (6600 CL30 2T).


----------



## Murlo26

I received word that my RMA Apex will be available 4/16, but I am guessing that means at their facility. Then I am expecting at least a week for shipping as they will probably send it via horseback to try and piss me off further. 

They are still refusing to send me a new board, only refurbished. I finally let loose on them and told them how poor this experience has been. I just don't see how giving me some e-waste from someone else is acceptable for RMA on a brand new $700+ mobo...this is an enthusiast class board, supposedly top of the line and they can't fix this? 

If they refuse to give me an actual new board and I get my board back, I will post up with findings.


----------



## bscool

slash621 said:


> anyone here have a 12900KS in this board (Strix Z690 wifi D4) ? I've got one on my desk and a wifi D4, but I'm afraid to plug it in without prior knowledge or support. I dont know if it'll run on 1304


1304 has KS support.

@bigfootnz is using Strix with KS









Overclocking ADL - 12900k etc results, bins and discussion


This SP85 is a dog compared to the SP84. The SP84 can easily do 5.3Ghz all P core and 4.0Ghz all E core with a minus offset of 0.0500v in both r15 and r23. This SP85 cant even do that and is 5-8 degrees hotter with same ambient. Wow. My processor life officially sucks hard core donkey d%^k. :(...




www.overclock.net


----------



## Gadfly

RobertoSampaio said:


> Exactly that... When I started the system, after pressed the bios switch button, the system starts at 9901 bios and start to upgrade some firmwares. After that the MB turn off automatically (as it should do), and restart. So a other firmware update stared and the MB failed and started a fast psu turn of and turn on loop (about 4 turn on/off cycles per second)
> I turn psu off by the psu power button and the turn on and turn off loop stopped.
> O turned on the PSU, the MB rub leads lighted, but the MB is dead. Power button, reset button, bios switch button, and all other buttons not work.


SUUUUCK

I was hoping that the USB bios flashback would at least work.

Crazy question, but have you tried completely powering down the board, removing the CPU, and then plugging it back in (don't power up, just plug in, and leave CPU out) and try the USB flash back?

Another suggestion, have you tried leaving the board unplugged overnight, then plugging back in and try USB flash back?

Long shots, and most likely will not help as is sounds like the 9901 attempted to back write firmware and it failed; but worth a mention, just in case


----------



## Falkentyne

Gadfly said:


> SUUUUCK
> 
> I was hoping that the USB bios flashback would at least work.
> 
> Crazy question, but have you tried completely powering down the board, removing the CPU, and then plugging it back in (don't power up, just plug in, and leave CPU out) and try the USB flash back?
> 
> Another suggestion, have you tried leaving the board unplugged overnight, then plugging back in and try USB flash back?
> 
> Long shots, and most likely will not help as is sounds like the 9901 attempted to back write firmware and it failed; but worth a mention, just in case


The EC is corrupted. None of this will work.
The EC cannot re-flash itself if the board won't post. You have to hardware flash it. You can't USB flashback because the EC won't boot.


----------



## Gadfly

Falkentyne said:


> The EC is corrupted. None of this will work.
> The EC cannot re-flash itself if the board won't post. You have to hardware flash it. You can't USB flashback because the EC won't boot.


That is what I suspect as well; like I said, worth a shot.


----------



## TheNaitsyrk

Hello there again. I have returned my Formula.

Gonna buy Apex, however which revision am I aiming for? 2021, 2021 November or 2022 January?

The retailers I asked don't have the 2022 version at all, they might have 2021 November one though.


----------



## bscool

TheNaitsyrk said:


> Hello there again. I have returned my Formula.
> 
> Gonna buy Apex, however which revision am I aiming for? 2021, 2021 November or 2022 January?
> 
> The retailers I asked don't have the 2022 version at all, they might have 2021 November one though.


From what i know 2022 are the best. With the rest you just have to test the MB and each slot. No way to know other than that.


----------



## TheNaitsyrk

bscool said:


> From what i know 2022 are the best. With the rest you just have to test the MB and each slot. No way to know other than that.


Should I wait for 2022 revision and get that when I can?


----------



## bscool

TheNaitsyrk said:


> Should I wait for 2022 revision and get that when I can?


That is up to you. Some have had 2021 Apex that can do 6800 to 7000. Depends how patient or impatient you are I guess. 

z790 might be out before there are more 2022 Apex available


----------



## TheNaitsyrk

bscool said:


> That is up to you. Some have had 2021 Apex that can do 6800 to 7000. Depends how patient or impatient you are I guess.
> 
> z790 might be out before there are more 2022 Apex available


I will order once I get a refund and I'll keep replacing until I get right one via Amazon.


----------



## nickolp1974

anyone know XTU wont report correct core speed, i have it at set speed in bios, i need it to read right for comp


----------



## jomama22

RobertoSampaio said:


> I'm not sure it's safe... Sounds like safe, but I can't test it because my MB was bricked...
> 
> That's why it's important Asus having a test team! We can find this before the problem become a big problem...
> 
> So I would like to recommend to not update to the 1403 until we have an Asus feedback.
> 
> As soon as possible I'll post some news about this case.


Have to ask, did you fully boot (like all the way through to windows) 1403 after installing the bios and then try to switch bios'? Or did you flash 1403 and then just switch over to the other bios using the switch?

Reason I ask is because in the latter case, I can see there being an issue.


----------



## RobertoSampaio

jomama22 said:


> Have to ask, did you fully boot (like all the way through to windows) 1403 after installing the bios and then try to switch bios'? Or did you flash 1403 and then just switch over to the other bios using the switch?
> 
> Reason I ask is because in the latter case, I can see there being an issue.


I used 1403 some time and all was running OK...
I decided to change the BIOS to check some setting and take some notes to try in the 1403 bios... So 1403 was working fine... If i didnt press the BIOS switch button, I will not have this problem...


----------



## jomama22

RobertoSampaio said:


> I used 1403 some time and all was running OK...
> I decided to change the BIOS to check some setting and take some notes to try in the 1403 bios... So 1403 was working fine... If i didnt press the BIOS switch button, I will not have this problem...


Strange. Not sure how you are supposed to avoid that situation. You would have to switch to the other bios to flash both to the same regardless (unless ezflash allows you to flash the other bios, but I'm not sure).


----------



## Falkentyne

jomama22 said:


> Strange. Not sure how you are supposed to avoid that situation. You would have to switch to the other bios to flash both to the same regardless (unless ezflash allows you to flash the other bios, but I'm not sure).


It didn't corrupt until he actually powered on the system and got the bios is updating message twice, the first I think is LED/Aura, and the second "Bios is updating", based on when I saw this awhile ago. It was the second which failed.

This can be avoided by switching to the bios and running USB flashback to the main bios version without powering on. Then nothing gets updated except the bios chip because you don't actually boot until the current BIOS is on both chips. But obviously he wanted to check the older bios settings rather than update the backup.

I have a theory as to why he and only he crashed.
He's running an adaptive by core usage overclock. If his single core clock was unstable, then BIOS may have been flashing the EC firmware with an unstable x57 or x58 core speed, crashed and bricked the board. This would never happen if he were running a single core clock equal to the sync all cores stable clock, but that's just a guess.

The reason why no one ever gets this problem after a regular BIOS flash and then firmware updating is because the BIOS is reset to defaults after the flash is complete, and the firmware would be updated at stock speeds. 
So if that is in fact what happened, he would have had to use the clear cmos button after switching bioses but before trying to boot.

Which also means having a high single core overclock stored on a BIOS when using two different BIOS versions can be very risky business indeed.


----------



## 7empe

Just a short notice on Apex and mess with VF curve (1304 BIOS).

My VF Curve in BIOS says: 52x : 1314 mV, but while testing default VID with AC/DC_LL 0.01, this is the default for 51x, not for 52x. For 52x vid table says 1360 mV. I spent weeks on looking for the reason why playing with VF curve offsets gives ridiculous instabilities...

IMO VF curve is hardcoded in the bios with 52x being as a ratio for VF #7 to #11 (OC), but should be computed based on fused ratios which are cpu specific.
I know that at earlier BIOS versions these VF points had 53x as a ratio...


----------



## Murlo26

Well apparently my "new" apex just shipped. I should say replacement as I am sure they sent me a refurb. It wasn't supposed to ship for another 10 days so not sure what the heck happened. Hopefully I can test it out this weekend if I have time, otherwise in a week or so I will have more info. I am going to test it out of my case before I install it and put my loop back in.


----------



## jomama22

Murlo26 said:


> Well apparently my "new" apex just shipped. I should say replacement as I am sure they sent me a refurb. It wasn't supposed to ship for another 10 days so not sure what the heck happened. Hopefully I can test it out this weekend if I have time, otherwise in a week or so I will have more info. I am going to test it out of my case before I install it and put my loop back in.


May sounds terrible, but would rather take my chances with a refurb that may as well be a "binned for actual proper operation" than trying to buy a new board lol.


----------



## IronAge

7empe said:


> I know that at earlier BIOS versions these VF points had 53x as a ratio...


early 12900K Batches up to assembly week 38 have Turbo Boost 53x, with week 38 and higher they got 52x.


----------



## jomama22

IronAge said:


> early 12900K Batches up to assembly week 38 have Turbo Boost 53x, with week 39 and higher they got 52x.


Should be noted it didn't actually boost that high, was just a misnomer in the microcode of those CPU's. The VIDs we're also based on 5.2 and not 5.3.


----------



## Baasha

Guys,

I just updated my BIOS from 1101 to 1403 today and the PC won't boot! 

Why are these newer BIOS not working properly? I'm not even OC'ing my RAM - it's a Trident Z5 RGB 6000C36 kit. Running manual settings; tried XMP - nothing works. Of course, loading 'optimized defaults' lets it boot fine but I didn't build this rig to run 'default' settings.

PLEASE HELP!


----------



## jomama22

Baasha said:


> Guys,
> 
> I just updated my BIOS from 1101 to 1403 today and the PC won't boot!
> 
> Why are these newer BIOS not working properly? I'm not even OC'ing my RAM - it's a Trident Z5 RGB 6000C36 kit. Running manual settings; tried XMP - nothing works. Of course, loading 'optimized defaults' lets it boot fine but I didn't build this rig to run 'default' settings.
> 
> PLEASE HELP!


Did you manually re-enter all of your settings or are you just just the same profile? It's best to manually re-enter them after any bios update as there can be shifts in where settings are stored.


----------



## Falkentyne

Baasha said:


> Guys,
> 
> I just updated my BIOS from 1101 to 1403 today and the PC won't boot!
> 
> Why are these newer BIOS not working properly? I'm not even OC'ing my RAM - it's a Trident Z5 RGB 6000C36 kit. Running manual settings; tried XMP - nothing works. Of course, loading 'optimized defaults' lets it boot fine but I didn't build this rig to run 'default' settings.
> 
> PLEASE HELP!


Power off, flip the PSU off, wait 30 seconds, press and hold the clear CMOS button (or short the clear cmos pins with a LN2 jumper block or screwdriver) for 30 seconds, power back on, set XMP, test XMP.
If unstable, file a feedback report with Asus and go back to your 1101 bios. Don't fix what isn't broken.
All 1403 does is add official KS support, and possibly some RAM algo changes, although the KS itself still works with older bioses and slightly older microcodes (but not VERY old bioses where the voltages and clocks will be really screwy), although the x55 single core boost will not work.


----------



## sugi0lover

Baasha said:


> Guys,
> 
> I just updated my BIOS from 1101 to 1403 today and the PC won't boot!
> 
> Why are these newer BIOS not working properly? I'm not even OC'ing my RAM - it's a Trident Z5 RGB 6000C36 kit. Running manual settings; tried XMP - nothing works. Of course, loading 'optimized defaults' lets it boot fine but I didn't build this rig to run 'default' settings.
> 
> PLEASE HELP!


I had the same problem. I changed cpu svid support from disable to auto and it boots. I have had no problem with cpu svid support disabled before.


----------



## morph.

Gadfly said:


> I was finally able to get a 64002T profile stable, nothing special, but at least it works.
> 
> Bios settings:
> SA: Offset/auto (0.938v), MC: 1.206v VDD/VDDQ/VDDQ TX: 1.43/1.43/1.43
> 
> 
> View attachment 2554753


your tras looks very very tight if you relax that a bit you might get more stability and more success with other timings from a sec/tert perspective especially since the default xmp tras is 102...


----------



## Nehcknarf

I enconter a strange issue in ROG Z690 Extreme recently, I got ramdomly freeze in win11 so I updated bios to 1403 and clear cmos, when I boot up LiveDash OLED show code 00 first then show nothing and Q-CODE get 00, but I can get acess to bios and win11 after waiting about 20 mins, so I believe CPU is ok, but what's the problem maybe?


----------



## bscool

Strix d4 bios 901

Anyone else notice if you swtich CPUs and then load a cmo file it will show the SP rating for the CPU the cmo was created with?

I have a SP 96 and SP 86. Had a save cmo from 86 CPU.

Changed CPU to SP 96. Cleared CMOS and the loaded saved cmo and it showed the SP 86 and vf curves. I have noticed this before but posting about it so other can look for it to see if they notice it on any Asus MB.


----------



## jomama22

bscool said:


> Strix d4 bios 901
> 
> Anyone else notice if you swtich CPUs and then load a cmo file it will show the SP rating for the CPU the cmo was created with?
> 
> I have a SP 96 and SP 86. Had a save cmo from 86 CPU.
> 
> Changed CPU to SP 96. Cleared CMOS and the loaded saved cmo and it showed the SP 86 and vf curves. I have noticed this before but posting about it so other can look for it to see if they notice it on any Asus MB.


Yes, wrote something about it back in November.


----------



## RobertoSampaio

sblantipodi said:


> but is it recommended to upgrade now or it is better to wait?
> is this a problem related to your motherboard only or it can happen even to other motherboards?


Like @Falkentyne explained, the problem occurred because I was running an extreme OCing...

When I switched the BIOS my previous bios was set to run 5,7GHz... So The CPU failed and EC firmware update also failed.

I'm an Asus tester, so my function is to push the system to the limit and report to Asus any issue...

So If I need to brick my board to safe the user's MBs... that's my job...

I know here we discuss a lot of issues and have a "love and hate" moments with our Asus MBs...

But be sure only Asus has a team like @shamino1978 , @Falkentyne and others to help and interact in the forums helping users...

I'm sure this will make the Asus MBs better and safer !

So, for now, be care when switching BIOS.
I extremely recommend to press “clear CMOS” button every time you switch the BIOS, before turning on the PC.

Do the same before installing a new BIOS...
Clear CMOS every time you are going to do a critical update.
Keep in mind your OCing can fail any time...

A definitive solution will come soon...


----------



## sugi0lover

Opps. Wrong forum~


----------



## gilor80

Hello what the best bios for oc memory Z690 A-STRIX?

Thanks!♥


----------



## TheNaitsyrk

None of the retailers have 2022 version of Apex.

What should I do? All the versions are the 2021 November ones for Apex.

Should I give it a go?


----------



## ChaosAD

TheNaitsyrk said:


> None of the retailers have 2022 version of Apex.
> 
> What should I do? All the versions are the 2021 November ones for Apex.
> 
> Should I give it a go?


Get a Unify X


----------



## TheNaitsyrk

ChaosAD said:


> Get a Unify X


Is this really the only option as for now?


----------



## fat4l

Hi guys,
I have a Strix board not maximus so I guess I have a socket sense.

If I want a manually set voltage lets say of 1.3v, so I can compare my cpus and make sure they all get the same 1.3v, which option in the bios do I use ?

global core svid voltage or actual vrm core voltage

?

WHat's the difference?


----------



## sblantipodi

RobertoSampaio said:


> Like @Falkentyne explained, the problem occurred because I was running an extreme OCing...
> 
> When I switched the BIOS my previous bios was set to run 5,7GHz... So The CPU failed and EC firmware update also failed.
> 
> I'm an Asus tester, so my function is to push the system to the limit and report to Asus any issue...
> 
> So If I need to brick my board to safe the user's MBs... that's my job...
> 
> I know here we discuss a lot of issues and have a "love and hate" moments with our Asus MBs...
> 
> But be sure only Asus has a team like @shamino1978 , @Falkentyne and others to help and interact in the forums helping users...
> 
> I'm sure this will make the Asus MBs better and safer !
> 
> So, for now, be care when switching BIOS.
> I extremely recommend to press “clear CMOS” button every time you switch the BIOS, before turning on the PC.
> 
> Do the same before installing a new BIOS...
> Clear CMOS every time you are going to do a critical update.
> Keep in mind your OCing can fail any time...
> 
> A definitive solution will come soon...


What about that the fact that "SPD Write Disable" makes my PC hanging on boot from time to time?
Is it a problem of my Extreme only? I even changed the RAM and I still have the problem.


----------



## kpblxa

1403 BIOS looks to be less stable than 1304--- on formula had 4 sticks running with 0 issues at 5000 since it was upgraded, on 1403 collapsed within 3 hours...


----------



## Gadfly

morph. said:


> your tras looks very very tight if you relax that a bit you might get more stability and more success with other timings from a sec/tert perspective especially since the default xmp tras is 102...


Thanks for the feedback. 

I appreciate it. I will bump tRAS and tCWL to 32, see if that helps me get 6600/6800 to run stable.


----------



## Frenzi3d

[Quick test] Z690 APEX 1304 + DC RAM @DDR5-7000 CL30-40-40-28 2T + Tight Sub
SV&MC: auto | VDD/VDDQ: 1.65/1.60
Ambient Temperature: 24c


----------



## Nizzen

Frenzi3d said:


> [Quick test] Z690 APEX 1304 + DC RAM @DDR5-7000 CL30-40-40-28 2T + Tight Sub
> SV&MC: auto | VDD/VDDQ: 1.65/1.60
> Ambient Temperature: 24c
> 
> View attachment 2555339


You don't need that high VCCSA  1.05 VCCSA is more than enough.

Nice result anyway 🤟


----------



## bscool

120GB Aida64 copy? Something doesnt seem right. Never seen it that high without bclk oc.


----------



## TheNaitsyrk

Frenzi3d said:


> [Quick test] Z690 APEX 1304 + DC RAM @DDR5-7000 CL30-40-40-28 2T + Tight Sub
> SV&MC: auto | VDD/VDDQ: 1.65/1.60
> Ambient Temperature: 24c
> 
> View attachment 2555339


What version of the board do you have? Nov 2021, 2021 or Jan 2022?


----------



## D-EJ915

TheNaitsyrk said:


> Is this really the only option as for now?


The Tachyon is fine too if you like gigabyte or want on-board oc buttons (msi uses their controller thing). I haven't used the EVGA Dark but the Z590 one was pretty good however availability is bad and the price is even higher than the Apex.


----------



## Frenzi3d

TheNaitsyrk said:


> What version of the board do you have? Nov 2021, 2021 or Jan 2022?


I have a 2022 Batch however, on the label it doesn't show the date.


----------



## Mappi75

How do you know its a 2022 Batch without label/date?


----------



## sniperpowa

D-EJ915 said:


> The Tachyon is fine too if you like gigabyte or want on-board oc buttons (msi uses their controller thing). I haven't used the EVGA Dark but the Z590 one was pretty good however availability is bad and the price is even higher than the Apex.


The dark board is the best very impressive results we’ve been getting with it.


----------



## RobertoSampaio

sblantipodi said:


> What about that the fact that "SPD Write Disable" makes my PC hanging on boot from time to time?
> Is it a problem of my Extreme only? I even changed the RAM and I still have the problem.


Sorry for saying that, please do not misunderstand me.... We are victims of wanting to be in the vanguard of the technology... Or we can think we have the privilege of been part of this evolution...

The DDR5 is a new technology... And we are at the top of select group who are testing it... 

There are 2 major problems... 
1 the ddr5 manufactures are messing up the spd parameters... And the MB manufactures are trying to solve this...
2 the MB manufactures are messing in the same way because every one is trying to solve theirs our problems...

Soon this issues will be in the past... And we will have memories running are 8000MHz or higher...
But until this time arrives we are helping the MB and the Ddr5 companies to achieve this evolution...

We can complain about it or feel ourselves satisfied for been living this evolution period...

The first 3 spacex rockets exploded in the lunch... But I'm sure everybody love to work at spacex company...

I found a lot of bugs in the Asus MB and suggested a lot of solutions and improvements for the new bios updates...
So I'm happy that every day we have a better product.... This is the price of living so close to the technology and innovations...

Be sure all problems will be solved...


----------



## asdkj1740

Frenzi3d said:


> [Quick test] Z690 APEX 1304 + DC RAM @DDR5-7000 CL30-40-40-28 2T + Tight Sub
> SV&MC: auto | VDD/VDDQ: 1.65/1.60
> Ambient Temperature: 24c
> 
> View attachment 2555339


120gb/s copy...


----------



## Nizzen

asdkj1740 said:


> 120gb/s copy...


Maybe old aida?


----------



## sblantipodi

RobertoSampaio said:


> Sorry for saying that, please do not misunderstand me.... We are victims of wanting to be in the vanguard of the technology... Or we can think we have the privilege of been part of this evolution...
> 
> The DDR5 is a new technology... And we are at the top of select group who are testing it...
> 
> There are 2 major problems...
> 1 the ddr5 manufactures are messing up the spd parameters... And the MB manufactures are trying to solve this...
> 2 the MB manufactures are messing in the same way because every one is trying to solve theirs our problems...
> 
> Soon this issues will be in the past... And we will have memories running are 8000MHz or higher...
> But until this time arrives we are helping the MB and the Ddr5 companies to achieve this evolution...
> 
> We can complain about it or feel ourselves satisfied for been living this evolution period...
> 
> The first 3 spacex rockets exploded in the lunch... But I'm sure everybody love to work at spacex company...
> 
> I found a lot of bugs in the Asus MB and suggested a lot of solutions and improvements for the new bios updates...
> So I'm happy that every day we have a better product.... This is the price of living so close to the technology and innovations...
> 
> Be sure all problems will be solved...


no need to sorry, I really love your kind attitude and willings to help other people, you are a good person Roberto, no need to sorry 
I know that Asus is a good brand, I had an ancient motherboard, an X99 Deluxe that received BIOS updates for years so I trust Asus, my only concern is why I'm the only one complaining about this problem.

I don't find much on this on the net, a lot of people complaining about "hanging on boot" but no one tought that SPD Write protection might be the issue in same cases.

If no other found this problem, it is difficult for Asus to fix it 

I don't know if I'm following a red herring but all my tests says that SPD Write Protection and my boot hang problems are related.


----------



## Mappi75

!?

Installed a 12900KS bios 1403 tpm 2.0 is not available - cant reinstall Win 11 / Check Tools say this too.

already checked this:




__





ASUS Motherboards Ready for Windows 11


ASUS motherboards are Windows 11 ready with great compatibility. Users can ensure having TPM 2.0 support for Windows 11 through latest BIOS update or manual activation.




www.asus.com





Edit: 

USB Biosflash (flashbackbutton) 1403 > problem still exists
Bios > Load optimized settings > problem still exists
Bios > UEFI Windows > problem still exists
Bios > Advanced > PCH-PW Configuration > PTT > already ENABLE
sellect this option again + F10 > now TPM 2.0 active.


----------



## TheNaitsyrk

I can order Unify-X for £460 from US and wait until 14-20 April or I can get ASUS ROG Apex Z690 from 2021 Nov. For £100 more. Which one should I pull the trigger on? 

Will BIOS updates not fix Apex with time?


----------



## satinghostrider

TheNaitsyrk said:


> I can order Unify-X for £460 from US and wait until 14-20 April or I can get ASUS ROG Apex Z690 from 2021 Nov. For £100 more. Which one should I pull the trigger on?
> 
> Will BIOS updates not fix Apex with time?


If you can't wait, get the Unify-X. If you can, production 2022 Apex boards are awesome.


----------



## TheNaitsyrk

satinghostrider said:


> If you can't wait, get the Unify-X. If you can, production 2022 Apex boards are awesome.


I'm just thinking how can I get a hold of one from 2022. I asked all retailers and none have the 2022 model.

I do prefer Apex as well but getting 2021 model is a gamble.


----------



## jomama22

TheNaitsyrk said:


> I can order Unify-X for £460 from US and wait until 14-20 April or I can get ASUS ROG Apex Z690 from 2021 Nov. For £100 more. Which one should I pull the trigger on?
> 
> Will BIOS updates not fix Apex with time?


A bios can't save the defective Apex boards out there and it is a lottery (with what seems like a decently low chance) of getting a properly working board.

It's at least some consolation that they will gladly send a replacement if it will not run qvl listed kits properly.

As to what they are sending as replacements, who knows exactly yet. They won't be sending "new" boards but I genuinely wouldn't be surprised if rma's are being fulfilled with boards that haven't been refurbished in the classical sense. If I had to guess, they are probably pulling boards after production, testing for qvl compliance of upper tier kits (6400-6800) and throwing them in a pile for RMAs.

Reason I believe this is that it's doubtful there is some surface mounted components that can be changed to all of a sudden fix the issues plaguing early production boards. Could be wrong and there is just a bad batch of smds that got placed on them , but that would be hard to imagine given the scope of and quantity of those affected.

Or, worst case, they do just send back boards that still don't work properly. But I don't see this being a thing given their acceptance of rma's for not meeting the qvl.

Remember, the rma's aren't just from end users either, they come from businesses who received a return as defective. So the amount of rma's Asus has received could be very high compared to other goods they sell.

Much of this would explain the lengthy timeframe given to actually get a board in return. There is very little, if any, new Apex stock out there (2022 production runs) which leads me to this conclusion.


----------



## asdkj1740

china has been shutting down lots of highways recently, so it is not difficult to understand why there are shortages in europe and us, not to mention the skyrocketing international shipping costs.
get what you can get. 
for z790 it has been postponed to q1 2023.


----------



## alejandro.srv

Updated from 1003 to 1403, Maximus Hero Z690, got BSODs every 3 hours with XMP1. 
I712700k 
Corsair Dominator Platinum DDR5 5600

There is a pro: VR games using wired Link Quest 2 doesnt have micro stuttering on Win 10 N. 

I let the Bios configure everything, just change the XMP profile.
haven't tried XMP II, could be better?

regards,
Alex.


----------



## RobertoSampaio

sblantipodi said:


> no need to sorry, I really love your kind attitude and willings to help other people, you are a good person Roberto, no need to sorry
> I know that Asus is a good brand, I had an ancient motherboard, an X99 Deluxe that received BIOS updates for years so I trust Asus, my only concern is why I'm the only one complaining about this problem.
> 
> I don't find much on this on the net, a lot of people complaining about "hanging on boot" but no one tought that SPD Write protection might be the issue in same cases.
> 
> If no other found this problem, it is difficult for Asus to fix it
> 
> I don't know if I'm following a red herring but all my tests says that SPD Write Protection and my boot hang problems are related.


As soon I solve my brick problem I'll try to help you...
send me a PM and tell me all the problem...
If you want to write in italian its ok for me... Italian in similar to portuguese...


----------



## Frenzi3d

Mappi75 said:


> How do you know its a 2022 Batch without label/date?



90MB18I0-M0AAY0
90MB18I0-M0EAY0 (November 2021)
90MB18I0-M0UAY1 (January 2022)


----------



## Frenzi3d

Nizzen said:


> Maybe old aida?


the newest version, but I think it's a bug.


----------



## 7empe

(APEX v1304) It looks like VRM switching frequency when left on auto can change after re-training. Previously stable overclock could simply hang (without bsod) and reboot. I could reproduce this freeze by setting VRM switching frequency to manual 800 kHz. Why this is happening?

Anyone knows what's the stock default VRM sf used by Asus? Is it something like 300-400 kHz?


----------



## edkieferlp

7empe said:


> (APEX v1304) It looks like VRM switching frequency when left on auto can change after re-training. Previously stable overclock could simply hang (without bsod) and reboot. I could reproduce this freeze by setting VRM switching frequency to manual 800 kHz. Why this is happening?
> 
> Anyone knows what's the stock default VRM sf used by Asus? Is it something like 300-400 kHz?


It shows 300 with auto on my TUF AFAIK. I think it is 500 for higher end ASU mb.
My bios says 500 is max range.


----------



## 7empe

edkieferlp said:


> It shows 300 with auto on my TUF AFAIK. I think it is 500 for higher end ASU mb.
> My bios says 500 is max range.


On Apex range is 300-800. There is no indication value when on auto, so don't know. However the best for stability seems to be the lowest 300 kHz. I could just decrease vcore by 30 mV under AVX2 load just by changing from VRM switching from auto to the fixed 300 kHz.

It looks like auto can vary from boot to boot.


----------



## edkieferlp

7empe said:


> On Apex range is 300-800. There is no indication value when on auto, so don't know. However the best for stability seems to be the lowest 300 kHz. I could just decrease vcore by 30 mV under AVX2 load just by changing from VRM switching from auto to the fixed 300 kHz.
> 
> It looks like auto can vary from boot to boot.


I know I saw reports from others who tried like 800 (high settings) and they got stability issues, and went back to auto. This is a while ago when boards first came out.

Edit: Just checked my bios, when I switch from auto to manual it shows 300 in the feild. The range for TUF says 250 -500 in 50mhz steps.

Also if you follow "Actually Hardcore Overclocking " he has done a lot of VRM/LLC testing and recommends for the most part auto (low default) settings on VRM freq.






It doesn't seem to matter MB maker either though I would have to check all his vids if Apex was tested on this.


----------



## Falkentyne

7empe said:


> On Apex range is 300-800. There is no indication value when on auto, so don't know. However the best for stability seems to be the lowest 300 kHz. I could just decrease vcore by 30 mV under AVX2 load just by changing from VRM switching from auto to the fixed 300 kHz.
> 
> It looks like auto can vary from boot to boot.


The IR 35201 (ASP something) was most stable at 300 khz. I first found this out on the Z390 Aorus Master, and several other users verified this with repeated testing, at least 15mv lower vmin allowed than 500 khz. Then a few users tested that on the Z390 Apex 11 and Extreme 11 and found the same thing (Since the ASP chip is an Asus rebrand of the IR 35201).
The Z490 Extreme and Apex still use the IR 35201, although I was unable to determine at all on my Z490 Extreme if higher switching frequency was better than lower, but I did confirm 100% that on the Z490 Aorus Master (ISL 69269), that 500 was more stable than 300, when testing LLC"8" (Ultra Extreme LLC, or flat) on the Gigabyte board, with small FFT FMA3 prime95. I remembered I tried the same testing on my 10900k ES with the M12E, but it was a lot more annoying to get reliable results, probably didn't help that the ES on my 10900k was much better silicon than the retail 10900K i used on the Z490 Master.

I briefly tried checking this on Rocket Lake with a Z590 Maximus 13 Extreme, which uses the ISL 69269 VR, the same as the Z490 Aorus Master, but ran out of patience since it hated yeeting the cache whatsoever so I didn't bother, but from FAINT memory I...thought 500 khz was better than 300, but if I tested it, I didn't post it in the Z590 thread at all since I had lost interest.

Did you confirm on the Z690 Apex or Z690 Extreme that 300 khz is 100% more stable at lower vmin than 800 khz? Did you test _fixed_ manual vcore and sync all cores? You must use sync all cores and manual "actual vrm vcore" to test this, as using adaptive mode and by core usage simply creates more problems to troubleshoot. Also such testing is rather time consuming and only for the most ardent masochists among you guys.

Because if that turns out to be the case, _any_ motherboard that uses that same voltage controller should also perform the same way.
I wonder then why Buildzoid's Apex(?) testing didn't pick this up?


----------



## Manya3084

I have a Asus z690-g (matx), as it is the only Matx on the market that looks "performance" orientated.

My issue is, XMP 6200 runs perfectly fine, but if I change any memory timings, even by just 1 value, higher or lower, memtest will fail. Even if I down clock from 6200 to 5600, memtest will fail. 

I was really hoping I could at least tighten up the timings on my Corsair Dominator 6200 CL36 kit.

I know 6000+ isn't on the qvl for this board, but limited case size means this was the only choice.


----------



## Baasha

sugi0lover said:


> I had the same problem. I changed cpu svid support from disable to auto and it boots. I have had no problem with cpu svid support disabled before.


Wow, that worked! Thank you for that - thought the BIOS borked the system. Was able to reflash to 1101 without issue but tried 1403 again tonight and set the CPU SVID to 'Auto' and it worked!


----------



## 7empe

Falkentyne said:


> The IR 35201 (ASP something) was most stable at 300 khz. I first found this out on the Z390 Aorus Master, and several other users verified this with repeated testing, at least 15mv lower vmin allowed than 500 khz. Then a few users tested that on the Z390 Apex 11 and Extreme 11 and found the same thing (Since the ASP chip is an Asus rebrand of the IR 35201).
> The Z490 Extreme and Apex still use the IR 35201, although I was unable to determine at all on my Z490 Extreme if higher switching frequency was better than lower, but I did confirm 100% that on the Z490 Aorus Master (ISL 69269), that 500 was more stable than 300, when testing LLC"8" (Ultra Extreme LLC, or flat) on the Gigabyte board, with small FFT FMA3 prime95. I remembered I tried the same testing on my 10900k ES with the M12E, but it was a lot more annoying to get reliable results, probably didn't help that the ES on my 10900k was much better silicon than the retail 10900K i used on the Z490 Master.
> 
> I briefly tried checking this on Rocket Lake with a Z590 Maximus 13 Extreme, which uses the ISL 69269 VR, the same as the Z490 Aorus Master, but ran out of patience since it hated yeeting the cache whatsoever so I didn't bother, but from FAINT memory I...thought 500 khz was better than 300, but if I tested it, I didn't post it in the Z590 thread at all since I had lost interest.
> 
> Did you confirm on the Z690 Apex or Z690 Extreme that 300 khz is 100% more stable at lower vmin than 800 khz? Did you test _fixed_ manual vcore and sync all cores? You must use sync all cores and manual "actual vrm vcore" to test this, as using adaptive mode and by core usage simply creates more problems to troubleshoot. Also such testing is rather time consuming and only for the most ardent masochists among you guys.
> 
> Because if that turns out to be the case, _any_ motherboard that uses that same voltage controller should also perform the same way.
> I wonder then why Buildzoid's Apex(?) testing didn't pick this up?


I’m OC-ing mine 12900kf for months. Literally. CPU, memory etc. Manual VRM voltage, sync all cores, by core, adaptive, vf curve and so on, and so on. But sometimes, after boot I got a freeze without bsod and shutdown after few seconds. OK - it’s unstable cache or memory, i thought. Revert back to stock and left only memory OC. After some time same thing happened. OK - memory unstable, reverted to stock. Same thing again! So I started to hunt for any setting that’s on auto, because this was the only reasonable explanation for me - something is changing from boot to boot. And finally yesterday I found this sucker. 800 kHz - freeze every time in prime95 large. Every time. No matter the vcore or cpu frequency. Switched to 300 kHz - smooth, and could go down with vcore at least 30 mV (did not go lower yet) remaining stability. Reverted all my OC back with adaptive and stable at the same vcore. Switched back to 800 kHz and freeze, bsod, black out. Bsod probably due to lower vcore.

Today I’m going to test it further. Did not check anything between 300 and 800.


----------



## Nizzen

7empe said:


> I’m OC-ing mine 12900kf for months. Literally. CPU, memory etc. Manual VRM voltage, sync all cores, by core, adaptive, vf curve and so on, and so on. But sometimes, after boot I got a freeze without bsod and shutdown after few seconds. OK - it’s unstable cache or memory, i thought. Revert back to stock and left only memory OC. After some time same thing happened. OK - memory unstable, reverted to stock. Same thing again! So I started to hunt for any setting that’s on auto, because this was the only reasonable explanation for me - something is changing from boot to boot. And finally yesterday I found this sucker. 800 kHz - freeze every time in prime95 large. Every time. No matter the vcore or cpu frequency. Switched to 300 kHz - smooth, and could go down with vcore at least 30 mV (did not go lower yet) remaining stability. Reverted all my OC back with adaptive and stable at the same vcore. Switched back to 800 kHz and freeze, bsod, black out. Bsod probably due to lower vcore.
> 
> Today I’m going to test it further. Did not check anything between 300 and 800.


Need to test 300 khz after vaccation 🤓


----------



## Mappi75

12700K VRM Core Voltage: 1,225v
12900KS VRM Core Voltage: 1,35x v

Can i lower this voltage, seems pretty high. If "yes" how can i test this voltage for stabilty?
Thx!

Edit:
in win 11 taskmanager cpu 16-23 are the P-Cores?


----------



## 7empe

Mappi75 said:


> 12700K VRM Core Voltage: 1,225v
> 12900KS VRM Core Voltage: 1,35x v
> 
> Can i lower this voltage, seems pretty high. If "yes" how can i test this voltage for stabilty?
> Thx!
> 
> Edit:
> in win 11 taskmanager cpu 16-23 are the P-Cores?


Not enough data to answer.

a) what cpu frequencies for these voltages? stock?
b) are those die-sense load voltages?
c) if so, what kind of load (non-avx, avx)?
d) load line calibration level?

16-23 are e-cores.


----------



## Mappi75

a) stock 12900 KS CPU
b) voltages are shown in bios: _Actual VRM Core Voltage:_ *1,403v*
c) only bios
d) default (dont know which is used).

1,403v looks pretty high copmared to the 12700K: 1,225v (_Actual VRM Core Voltage)_


----------



## 7empe

Mappi75 said:


> a) stock 12900 KS CPU
> b) voltages are shown in bios: _Actual VRM Core Voltage:_ *1,403v*
> c) only bios
> d) default (dont know which is used).
> 
> 1,403v looks pretty high copmared to the 12700K: 1,225v (_Actual VRM Core Voltage)_


Comparing only VRM voltage does not mean anything. Probably 1,225v was a default for 5.0 Ghz on 12700K, while 1,403v is a default for 5.3-5.4? Also if an auto LLC is 4 you have a vdroop under load, so effective voltage would go down from 1.403V to something like 1.2+

Btw. I have an idle vcore of 1.520v for 5.5 GHz, so don't worry with 1.403v idle... it is nothing.


----------



## Mappi75

How can i activate TVB (Thermal Velocity Boost) on 12900KS (1403 bios)

I changed TVB in bios [auto>enable] because never 5,2+ are shown.
but its all the time max 5,2ghz below 54 degrees.

Even on idle 26 degrees no 5,3-5.5ghz is shown in cpu-z..

Did i change a second bios option?
I changed Asus Multicore to "enable" never goes up to 5,3-5,5ghz..

Edit, i think i found it:

Bios>Extreme Tweaker>Thermal Velocity Boost:

TVB Voltage Optimzations > Enable
Enhanced TVB > Enable
Overclocking TVB > Enable

is that all or did i have to change something on the cores below?


----------



## edkieferlp

Mappi75 said:


> How can i activate TVB (Thermal Velocity Boost) on 12900KS (1403 bios)
> 
> I changed TVB in bios [auto>enable] because never 5,2+ are shown.
> but its all the time max 5,2ghz below 54 degrees.
> 
> Even on idle 26 degrees no 5,3-5.5ghz is shown in cpu-z..
> 
> Did i change a second bios option?
> I changed Asus Multicore to "enable" never goes up to 5,3-5,5ghz..
> 
> Edit, i think i found it:
> 
> Bios>Extreme Tweaker>Thermal Velocity Boost:
> 
> TVB Voltage Optimzations > Enable
> Enhanced TVB > Enable
> Overclocking TVB > Enable
> 
> is that all or did i have to change something on the cores below?


maybe this will help.


https://skatterbencher.com/2021/11/04/alder-lake-overclocking-whats-new/#Intel_OverClocking_Thermal_Velocity_Boost



more detail


https://skatterbencher.com/intel-overclocking-thermal-velocity-boost/


----------



## Falkentyne

7empe said:


> I’m OC-ing mine 12900kf for months. Literally. CPU, memory etc. Manual VRM voltage, sync all cores, by core, adaptive, vf curve and so on, and so on. But sometimes, after boot I got a freeze without bsod and shutdown after few seconds. OK - it’s unstable cache or memory, i thought. Revert back to stock and left only memory OC. After some time same thing happened. OK - memory unstable, reverted to stock. Same thing again! So I started to hunt for any setting that’s on auto, because this was the only reasonable explanation for me - something is changing from boot to boot. And finally yesterday I found this sucker. 800 kHz - freeze every time in prime95 large. Every time. No matter the vcore or cpu frequency. Switched to 300 kHz - smooth, and could go down with vcore at least 30 mV (did not go lower yet) remaining stability. Reverted all my OC back with adaptive and stable at the same vcore. Switched back to 800 kHz and freeze, bsod, black out. Bsod probably due to lower vcore.
> 
> Today I’m going to test it further. Did not check anything between 300 and 800.


Looking forward to your results. Thank you.


----------



## IIDaXII

Hello everyone, I need your help, I am a new owner of a Z690 Extreme since yesterday. As soon as I activate an xmp profile, my pc does not start... I have Ram Corsair DRR5 Dominator 4x16 GB 5600 Mhz. I can't find any solution...


----------



## 7empe

Falkentyne said:


> Looking forward to your results. Thank you.


Sure, here you go.

I've disabled E-Cores for simplicity. LLC 8 (AC/DC_LL 0.01 mOhm).
Ring moved from 49x to stock 47x.
P-Cores synced at 52x.

VRM behaviour set to extreme/extreme.

For comparison I used CBR23 as a stability "zero". For sure a positive voltage offset needs to be applied for heavier AVX in e.g. y-cruncher, but I did not bother with this right now.


VRM Switching FrequencyVRM Fixed Voltage (floor)CBR23 HWINFO Average Voltage @Load (floor)CBR23 Min Oscilloscope Voltage @Load3001220 mV1217 mV1181 mV4001220 mV1217 mV1181 mV5001220 mV1217 mV1181 mV6001230 mV1225 mV1194 mV7001240 mV1234 mV1199 mV800tried up to 1260 mV (freeze)1252 mV (freeze)1221 mV (freeze)

Btw. enabling e-cores running at 42x (e-core [email protected] < p-core vid @52x) needs +30 mV for Vcore.

EDIT: enabling e-cores running at 42x: +20 mV for Vcore only if VRM SF = 300 kHz.


----------



## Nizzen

IIDaXII said:


> Hello everyone, I need your help, I am a new owner of a Z690 Extreme since yesterday. As soon as I activate an xmp profile, my pc does not start... I have Ram Corsair DRR5 Dominator 4x16 GB 5600 Mhz. I can't find any solution...


It doesn't support 4x 5600................
Buy 4x ddr5 kit, not 2x 2x16 kits


----------



## IIDaXII

Nizzen said:


> It doesn't support 4x 5600................
> Buy 4x ddr5 kit, not 2x 2x16 kits


I do not understand... I had until now a Z690 formula where the XMP profile worked well with my 4x16 GB


----------



## Nizzen

IIDaXII said:


> I do not understand... I had until now a Z690 formula where the XMP profile worked well with my 4x16 GB


It isn't official supported, bu do you have the newest extreme beta?





ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-1403.7z







drive.google.com


----------



## IIDaXII

Nizzen said:


> It isn't official supported, bu do you have the newest extreme beta?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-1403.7z
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


i have version 1403. It is the same ?


----------



## Falkentyne

7empe said:


> Sure, here you go.
> 
> I've disabled E-Cores for simplicity. LLC 8 (AC/DC_LL 0.01 mOhm).
> Ring moved from 49x to stock 47x.
> P-Cores synced at 52x.
> 
> VRM behaviour set to extreme/extreme.
> 
> For comparison I used CBR23 as a stability "zero". For sure a positive voltage offset needs to be applied for heavier AVX in e.g. y-cruncher, but I did not bother with this right now.
> 
> 
> VRM Switching FrequencyVRM Fixed Voltage (floor)CBR23 HWINFO Average Voltage @Load (floor)CBR23 Min Oscilloscope Voltage @Load3001220 mV1217 mV1181 mV4001220 mV1217 mV1181 mV5001220 mV1217 mV1181 mV6001230 mV1225 mV1194 mV7001240 mV1234 mV1199 mV800tried up to 1260 mV (freeze)1252 mV (freeze)1221 mV (freeze)
> 
> Btw. enabling e-cores running at 42x (e-core [email protected] < p-core vid @52x) needs +30 mV for Vcore.
> 
> EDIT: enabling e-cores running at 42x: +20 mV for Vcore only if VRM SF = 300 kHz.


Impressive work.
So you mean at just 600 khz, you needed to increase bios set fixed VRM voltage by +10mv (compared to 500 khz) in order to not crash/freeze?
Then it just went south from there


----------



## 7empe

Falkentyne said:


> Impressive work.
> So you mean at just 600 khz, you needed to increase bios set fixed VRM voltage by +10mv (compared to 500 khz) in order to not crash/freeze?
> Then it just went south from there


Thanks. That's correct.
Maybe it is just my Apex (11/2021). Test should be performed on a bunch of board samples to get a wider view.


----------



## Falkentyne

7empe said:


> Thanks. That's correct.
> Maybe it is just my Apex (11/2021). Test should be performed on a bunch of board samples to get a wider view.


It's not just you.


> *MasterRBT — Today at 12:16 PM*
> Can confirm 300KHz helps. My lowest for 5GHz is 1.039v. Setting 300KHz can pass R23 1.030v


And seems like 300 khz on my ES board Extreme is helping me with Stockfish with the E cores enabled at 5.1 ghz.
Went down about 15mv total, although temps aren't normalized (it was warmer yesterday). I was at 800 khz yesterday (From 700 khz) and wondering why I got a hard lock and had to increase voltage by another 5mv ..


----------



## 7empe

Falkentyne said:


> It's not just you.
> 
> 
> And seems like 300 khz on my ES board Extreme is helping me with Stockfish with the E cores enabled at 5.1 ghz.
> Went down about 15mv total, although temps aren't normalized (it was warmer yesterday). I was at 800 khz yesterday (From 700 khz) and wondering why I got a hard lock and had to increase voltage by another 5mv ..


Is my understanding correct that VRM frequency switching on auto means dynamic run-time frequency changes? That's why when on auto, there is a VRM spread spectrum enable|disable option available (that would make sense only if frequency fluctuates)?


----------



## IIDaXII

IIDaXII said:


> i have version 1403. It is the same ?


so I don't see any solution. should I wait for the next bios to hope for support?


----------



## Falkentyne

7empe said:


> Is my understanding correct that VRM frequency switching on auto means dynamic run-time frequency changes? That's why when on auto, there is a VRM spread spectrum enable|disable option available (that would make sense only if frequency fluctuates)?


I have no idea whatsoever, but I always disable the spread spectrum setting if FSW is on auto there. But I don't have the tools to test such a thing, but you sound like you've been on point.


----------



## edkieferlp

I could be wrong but I don't think VRM switching frequency is dynamic, you have power phases that are dynamic depending on settings (CPU Power Phase Control [Auto]).

Funny on TUF there is no spread spectrum setting that I can see and that has always been an option with MB I ever used.


----------



## jomama22

7empe said:


> Is my understanding correct that VRM frequency switching on auto means dynamic run-time frequency changes? That's why when on auto, there is a VRM spread spectrum enable|disable option available (that would make sense only if frequency fluctuates)?


Yes, VRM spread spectrum would have it bouncing around 100-200mhz, around the selected frequency, or so. This will not happen if it is turned off. I would doubt auto would do any dynamic switching as there isn't really any benefit to such a setting. What the actual baseline setting for auto is, I have no idea.


----------



## satinghostrider

borant said:


> I posted it before. Nothing surprising in it:
> 
> View attachment 2552984












Latency seems close to my 6800 C32 2T. I can also run 6400 1T and have the profile saved.
Jan 2022 Production Apex Board.

Gameplay with 6800C32 and 12900K on Vanguard. Much better 0.1% lows compared to my older board which could only do 6000C32 1T stable on 0811. Anything more would just crap it's pants and throw errors.


----------



## LionAlonso

edkieferlp said:


> I could be wrong but I don't think VRM switching frequency is dynamic, you have power phases that are dynamic depending on settings (CPU Power Phase Control [Auto]).
> 
> Funny on TUF there is no spread spectrum setting that I can see and that has always been an option with MB I ever used.


Have u tried if it also happens in TUF? 
better to lock it at 300?


----------



## EEE-RAY

Ok I feel like an idiot.

I bought an arctic liquid freezer II for my Apex and didn't see there are two different incompatiblity lists. They are incompatible (mounting hardware clashes with VRM heatsinks).
I also thought about an EK AIO but I asked EK and the barbs on the block interferes with the first DIMM slot.

If anyone is running an AIO with their Apex? I am trying to find something confirmed to fit nicely. I had dreams of going back into custom watercooling but at this time of my life I have too many things to juggle and I need a quick solution to sort myself out for now.


----------



## edkieferlp

LionAlonso said:


> Have u tried if it also happens in TUF?
> better to lock it at 300?


I don't think it changes, all I know it is set to auto every time I checked and the few times I enabled manual setting 300 shows up in the field so I assume 300 is the default.

I haven't had any stability issues unless I make bad changes.
I have not tried setting it to 300.


----------



## bscool

EEE-RAY said:


> Ok I feel like an idiot.
> 
> I bought an arctic liquid freezer II for my Apex and didn't see there are two different incompatiblity lists. They are incompatible (mounting hardware clashes with VRM heatsinks).
> I also thought about an EK AIO but I asked EK and the barbs on the block interferes with the first DIMM slot.
> 
> If anyone is running an AIO with their Apex? I am trying to find something confirmed to fit nicely. I had dreams of going back into custom watercooling but at this time of my life I have too many things to juggle and I need a quick solution to sort myself out for now.


I am running Apex with Arctic. No issues. Tight fit but works. Others on here have used them also on Apex, I know @Nizzen also used Arctic on Apex for a while.

IMG_20220221_095050829.jpg


----------



## Nizzen

bscool said:


> I am running Apex with Arctic. No issues. Tight fit but works. Others on here have used them also.
> 
> IMG_20220221_095050829.jpg


Same here. Used arctic 2 with no problem on apex z690. Like 0.5mm tight fit 😅


----------



## EEE-RAY

bscool said:


> I am running Apex with Arctic. No issues. Tight fit but works. Others on here have used them also on Apex, I know @Nizzen also used Arctic on Apex for a while.
> 
> IMG_20220221_095050829.jpg


oh wow! thats fantastic news

Are you using the new LGA 1700 mount or the LGA 1200 screw holes (with old mount) on the mobo? I plan on using the cooler with some phanteks T30 fans


----------



## bscool

EEE-RAY said:


> oh wow! thats fantastic news
> 
> Are you using the new LGA 1700 mount or the LGA 1200 screw holes (with old mount) on the mobo? I plan on using the cooler with some phanteks T30 fans


I am using lga 1700. With lga 1200 temps where about 15c warmer on all core loads like r23.


----------



## EEE-RAY

Ok cool. I have the LGA 1700 kit too. I am going to give it a crack tomorrow morning. Need to go to bed. Can I ask is the tight fit just due to the mounting bars hitting the top VRM heatsink? If its just that and I run into grief I can just grind the top of the bars down until they fit


----------



## bscool

EEE-RAY said:


> Ok cool. I have the LGA 1700 kit too. I am going to give it a crack tomorrow morning. Need to go to bed. Can I ask is the tight fit just due to the mounting bars hitting the top VRM heatsink? If its just that and I run into grief I can just grind the top of the bars down until they fit


Yeah and I removed the bottom cover as I had it on z690 Strix d4 before the Apex so not sure if that matters on Apex.


----------



## EEE-RAY

I think it may be the can caps on normal mobos interfere with the bottom cover? the SP caps hopefully won't hit them.


----------



## db000

Any other KS out there?? Come join me! 





y-cruncher - Pi-2.5b overclocking records @ HWBOT


Overclocking records




hwbot.org


----------



## Murlo26

Well not sure what to make of all of this. I had to leave town for work and will be back home in a few days to test the motherboard but I received my RMA board. They had originally told me that they were going to give me a NIB (new in box) motherboard as a one time courtesy. I mean, I was already kind of like *** as it shouldn't be a "big deal" to get a new board to replace another new board that never worked but whatever. I just didn't like them saying this is a courtesy and basically made it feel I should be lucky to have them give me a replacement that isn't recycled. 

It was a very strange RMA process. Before they shipped the board they opened a new RMA and never really explained why, but it seems they took the new board out of the box and RMA'd the one originally in the box with this "new board". But the original shipping info still looked good and showed it was on the way. Again, wasn't going to complain too much as I have been waiting for over a month to get my motherboard back. Well it showed up yesterday. 

Here is my original board, which apparently is the original production run from what I can tell: 









Here is the "new apex", keep in mind the pasted on serial number does not match the actual box. So from what I can tell they took a refurb board and put it in a new 2022 manufactured box. Which is useless to me as I didn't want a new board to get the extras in the box and the box itself, I wanted a non-molested board that works. Now I can' prove it's a used board, but not sure why you would take a new board and swap into another box. 










Here you can see the "new" box was obviously not new, it was taped shut by them. Now maybe this is because they wanted to test the board before it shipped which I actually agree with but overall it's very strange. 









And finally, I noticed something fairly off with the motherboard itself. Taking a picture of this was tough, especially given I was trying to travel yesterday and pack for my trip. It's hard to show the PCB is actually fairly "bent". 









Now again, I haven't tested this board yet so hopefully it works. I just really did not like the whole RMA process at all. It seemed like a complete mess and they have felt very disorganized and frankly not very straight forward with me the whole time. 

Here is how they labeled the problem as well, so obviously there is a known issue. 










More to come on this...but not a great look imo for a $700+ board which now is really $800 as I had to pay shipping to send my original one in.


----------



## Nizzen

Murlo26 said:


> Well not sure what to make of all of this. I had to leave town for work and will be back home in a few days to test the motherboard but I received my RMA board. They had originally told me that they were going to give me a NIB (new in box) motherboard as a one time courtesy. I mean, I was already kind of like *** as it shouldn't be a "big deal" to get a new board to replace another new board that never worked but whatever. I just didn't like them saying this is a courtesy and basically made it feel I should be lucky to have them give me a replacement that isn't recycled.
> 
> It was a very strange RMA process. Before they shipped the board they opened a new RMA and never really explained why, but it seems they took the new board out of the box and RMA'd the one originally in the box with this "new board". But the original shipping info still looked good and showed it was on the way. Again, wasn't going to complain too much as I have been waiting for over a month to get my motherboard back. Well it showed up yesterday.
> 
> Here is my original board, which apparently is the original production run from what I can tell:
> View attachment 2555670
> 
> 
> Here is the "new apex", keep in mind the pasted on serial number does not match the actual box. So from what I can tell they took a refurb board and put it in a new 2022 manufactured box. Which is useless to me as I didn't want a new board to get the extras in the box and the box itself, I wanted a non-molested board that works. Now I can' prove it's a used board, but not sure why you would take a new board and swap into another box.
> View attachment 2555672
> 
> 
> 
> Here you can see the "new" box was obviously not new, it was taped shut by them. Now maybe this is because they wanted to test the board before it shipped which I actually agree with but overall it's very strange.
> View attachment 2555673
> 
> 
> And finally, I noticed something fairly off with the motherboard itself. Taking a picture of this was tough, especially given I was trying to travel yesterday and pack for my trip. It's hard to show the PCB is actually fairly "bent".
> View attachment 2555674
> 
> 
> Now again, I haven't tested this board yet so hopefully it works. I just really did not like the whole RMA process at all. It seemed like a complete mess and they have felt very disorganized and frankly not very straight forward with me the whole time.
> 
> Here is how they labeled the problem as well, so obviously there is a known issue.
> 
> View attachment 2555675
> 
> 
> More to come on this...but not a great look imo for a $700+ board which now is really $800 as I had to pay shipping to send my original one in.


If this does 7400+, you can sell it for a premium LOL


----------



## jomama22

Murlo26 said:


> Well not sure what to make of all of this. I had to leave town for work and will be back home in a few days to test the motherboard but I received my RMA board. They had originally told me that they were going to give me a NIB (new in box) motherboard as a one time courtesy. I mean, I was already kind of like *** as it shouldn't be a "big deal" to get a new board to replace another new board that never worked but whatever. I just didn't like them saying this is a courtesy and basically made it feel I should be lucky to have them give me a replacement that isn't recycled.
> 
> It was a very strange RMA process. Before they shipped the board they opened a new RMA and never really explained why, but it seems they took the new board out of the box and RMA'd the one originally in the box with this "new board". But the original shipping info still looked good and showed it was on the way. Again, wasn't going to complain too much as I have been waiting for over a month to get my motherboard back. Well it showed up yesterday.
> 
> Here is my original board, which apparently is the original production run from what I can tell:
> View attachment 2555670
> 
> 
> Here is the "new apex", keep in mind the pasted on serial number does not match the actual box. So from what I can tell they took a refurb board and put it in a new 2022 manufactured box. Which is useless to me as I didn't want a new board to get the extras in the box and the box itself, I wanted a non-molested board that works. Now I can' prove it's a used board, but not sure why you would take a new board and swap into another box.
> View attachment 2555672
> 
> 
> 
> Here you can see the "new" box was obviously not new, it was taped shut by them. Now maybe this is because they wanted to test the board before it shipped which I actually agree with but overall it's very strange.
> View attachment 2555673
> 
> 
> And finally, I noticed something fairly off with the motherboard itself. Taking a picture of this was tough, especially given I was trying to travel yesterday and pack for my trip. It's hard to show the PCB is actually fairly "bent".
> View attachment 2555674
> 
> 
> Now again, I haven't tested this board yet so hopefully it works. I just really did not like the whole RMA process at all. It seemed like a complete mess and they have felt very disorganized and frankly not very straight forward with me the whole time.
> 
> Here is how they labeled the problem as well, so obviously there is a known issue.
> 
> View attachment 2555675
> 
> 
> More to come on this...but not a great look imo for a $700+ board which now is really $800 as I had to pay shipping to send my original one in.


The bending is from the VRM heatsink and genuinely shouldn't be an issue.

I imagine they are doing what I described a few days ago. They are pulling boards from new batches, testing them, and sending them to fulfill rma's. As to why just a random new box, not sure. Maybe just a box of a "failed" mb and they threw the working on in it.

Does the sn on the board match any of those on the box?

Also, PCB seems to match newer batch as shown by Igor's lab:








(Newer on bottom)


----------



## asdkj1740

Murlo26 said:


> Well not sure what to make of all of this. I had to leave town for work and will be back home in a few days to test the motherboard but I received my RMA board. They had originally told me that they were going to give me a NIB (new in box) motherboard as a one time courtesy. I mean, I was already kind of like *** as it shouldn't be a "big deal" to get a new board to replace another new board that never worked but whatever. I just didn't like them saying this is a courtesy and basically made it feel I should be lucky to have them give me a replacement that isn't recycled.
> 
> It was a very strange RMA process. Before they shipped the board they opened a new RMA and never really explained why, but it seems they took the new board out of the box and RMA'd the one originally in the box with this "new board". But the original shipping info still looked good and showed it was on the way. Again, wasn't going to complain too much as I have been waiting for over a month to get my motherboard back. Well it showed up yesterday.
> 
> Here is my original board, which apparently is the original production run from what I can tell:
> View attachment 2555670
> 
> 
> Here is the "new apex", keep in mind the pasted on serial number does not match the actual box. So from what I can tell they took a refurb board and put it in a new 2022 manufactured box. Which is useless to me as I didn't want a new board to get the extras in the box and the box itself, I wanted a non-molested board that works. Now I can' prove it's a used board, but not sure why you would take a new board and swap into another box.
> View attachment 2555672
> 
> 
> 
> Here you can see the "new" box was obviously not new, it was taped shut by them. Now maybe this is because they wanted to test the board before it shipped which I actually agree with but overall it's very strange.
> View attachment 2555673
> 
> 
> And finally, I noticed something fairly off with the motherboard itself. Taking a picture of this was tough, especially given I was trying to travel yesterday and pack for my trip. It's hard to show the PCB is actually fairly "bent".
> View attachment 2555674
> 
> 
> Now again, I haven't tested this board yet so hopefully it works. I just really did not like the whole RMA process at all. It seemed like a complete mess and they have felt very disorganized and frankly not very straight forward with me the whole time.
> 
> Here is how they labeled the problem as well, so obviously there is a known issue.
> 
> View attachment 2555675
> 
> 
> More to come on this...but not a great look imo for a $700+ board which now is really $800 as I had to pay shipping to send my original one in.


this degree of PCB bending is common.
a bit strange to me that asus still needs to pretest y1 edition manually before shipping out as rma replacement. maybe they want every rma replacement to be reconfirmed before shippemnt.


----------



## skullbringer

Murlo26 said:


> Well not sure what to make of all of this. I had to leave town for work and will be back home in a few days to test the motherboard but I received my RMA board. They had originally told me that they were going to give me a NIB (new in box) motherboard as a one time courtesy. I mean, I was already kind of like *** as it shouldn't be a "big deal" to get a new board to replace another new board that never worked but whatever. I just didn't like them saying this is a courtesy and basically made it feel I should be lucky to have them give me a replacement that isn't recycled.
> 
> It was a very strange RMA process. Before they shipped the board they opened a new RMA and never really explained why, but it seems they took the new board out of the box and RMA'd the one originally in the box with this "new board". But the original shipping info still looked good and showed it was on the way. Again, wasn't going to complain too much as I have been waiting for over a month to get my motherboard back. Well it showed up yesterday.
> 
> Here is my original board, which apparently is the original production run from what I can tell:
> View attachment 2555670
> 
> 
> Here is the "new apex", keep in mind the pasted on serial number does not match the actual box. So from what I can tell they took a refurb board and put it in a new 2022 manufactured box. Which is useless to me as I didn't want a new board to get the extras in the box and the box itself, I wanted a non-molested board that works. Now I can' prove it's a used board, but not sure why you would take a new board and swap into another box.
> View attachment 2555672
> 
> 
> 
> Here you can see the "new" box was obviously not new, it was taped shut by them. Now maybe this is because they wanted to test the board before it shipped which I actually agree with but overall it's very strange.
> View attachment 2555673
> 
> 
> And finally, I noticed something fairly off with the motherboard itself. Taking a picture of this was tough, especially given I was trying to travel yesterday and pack for my trip. It's hard to show the PCB is actually fairly "bent".
> View attachment 2555674
> 
> 
> Now again, I haven't tested this board yet so hopefully it works. I just really did not like the whole RMA process at all. It seemed like a complete mess and they have felt very disorganized and frankly not very straight forward with me the whole time.
> 
> Here is how they labeled the problem as well, so obviously there is a known issue.
> 
> View attachment 2555675
> 
> 
> More to come on this...but not a great look imo for a $700+ board which now is really $800 as I had to pay shipping to send my original one in.


bending around the socket area like this is normal for lga1700 boards. 

good to see Asus is testing the boards they send out as replacement, though I would expect as much when it's an RMA for such a high-profile product as Z690 apex. 

curious to see what your M0UAY1 can do


----------



## db000

I have the M0EAY0 (11/2021), no date on box. I'm stable 6600 2T 30-40-40-30-360-2T 1.52v with everything thrown at it. But I've yet to succeed with 6800.... reading the Igorlab. I might know why...
Oh well, I've had an order at my dealers for over a month now for a new 2022 model. Still waiting for it to arrive...


----------



## bscool

Murlo26 said:


> Well not sure what to make of all of this. I had to leave town for work and will be back home in a few days to test the motherboard but I received my RMA board. They had originally told me that they were going to give me a NIB (new in box) motherboard as a one time courtesy. I mean, I was already kind of like *** as it shouldn't be a "big deal" to get a new board to replace another new board that never worked but whatever. I just didn't like them saying this is a courtesy and basically made it feel I should be lucky to have them give me a replacement that isn't recycled.
> 
> It was a very strange RMA process. Before they shipped the board they opened a new RMA and never really explained why, but it seems they took the new board out of the box and RMA'd the one originally in the box with this "new board". But the original shipping info still looked good and showed it was on the way. Again, wasn't going to complain too much as I have been waiting for over a month to get my motherboard back. Well it showed up yesterday.
> 
> Here is my original board, which apparently is the original production run from what I can tell:
> View attachment 2555670
> 
> 
> Here is the "new apex", keep in mind the pasted on serial number does not match the actual box. So from what I can tell they took a refurb board and put it in a new 2022 manufactured box. Which is useless to me as I didn't want a new board to get the extras in the box and the box itself, I wanted a non-molested board that works. Now I can' prove it's a used board, but not sure why you would take a new board and swap into another box.
> View attachment 2555672
> 
> 
> 
> Here you can see the "new" box was obviously not new, it was taped shut by them. Now maybe this is because they wanted to test the board before it shipped which I actually agree with but overall it's very strange.
> View attachment 2555673
> 
> 
> And finally, I noticed something fairly off with the motherboard itself. Taking a picture of this was tough, especially given I was trying to travel yesterday and pack for my trip. It's hard to show the PCB is actually fairly "bent".
> View attachment 2555674
> 
> 
> Now again, I haven't tested this board yet so hopefully it works. I just really did not like the whole RMA process at all. It seemed like a complete mess and they have felt very disorganized and frankly not very straight forward with me the whole time.
> 
> Here is how they labeled the problem as well, so obviously there is a known issue.
> 
> View attachment 2555675
> 
> 
> More to come on this...but not a great look imo for a $700+ board which now is really $800 as I had to pay shipping to send my original one in.


That is how my 2022 Apex MB came, with the box taped shut with packaging tape. Works fine for me 7000c32 Karhu and y cruncher stable.


----------



## warbucks

Murlo26 said:


> Well not sure what to make of all of this. I had to leave town for work and will be back home in a few days to test the motherboard but I received my RMA board. They had originally told me that they were going to give me a NIB (new in box) motherboard as a one time courtesy. I mean, I was already kind of like *** as it shouldn't be a "big deal" to get a new board to replace another new board that never worked but whatever. I just didn't like them saying this is a courtesy and basically made it feel I should be lucky to have them give me a replacement that isn't recycled.
> 
> It was a very strange RMA process. Before they shipped the board they opened a new RMA and never really explained why, but it seems they took the new board out of the box and RMA'd the one originally in the box with this "new board". But the original shipping info still looked good and showed it was on the way. Again, wasn't going to complain too much as I have been waiting for over a month to get my motherboard back. Well it showed up yesterday.
> 
> Here is my original board, which apparently is the original production run from what I can tell:
> View attachment 2555670
> 
> 
> Here is the "new apex", keep in mind the pasted on serial number does not match the actual box. So from what I can tell they took a refurb board and put it in a new 2022 manufactured box. Which is useless to me as I didn't want a new board to get the extras in the box and the box itself, I wanted a non-molested board that works. Now I can' prove it's a used board, but not sure why you would take a new board and swap into another box.
> View attachment 2555672
> 
> 
> 
> Here you can see the "new" box was obviously not new, it was taped shut by them. Now maybe this is because they wanted to test the board before it shipped which I actually agree with but overall it's very strange.
> View attachment 2555673
> 
> 
> And finally, I noticed something fairly off with the motherboard itself. Taking a picture of this was tough, especially given I was trying to travel yesterday and pack for my trip. It's hard to show the PCB is actually fairly "bent".
> View attachment 2555674
> 
> 
> Now again, I haven't tested this board yet so hopefully it works. I just really did not like the whole RMA process at all. It seemed like a complete mess and they have felt very disorganized and frankly not very straight forward with me the whole time.
> 
> Here is how they labeled the problem as well, so obviously there is a known issue.
> 
> View attachment 2555675
> 
> 
> More to come on this...but not a great look imo for a $700+ board which now is really $800 as I had to pay shipping to send my original one in.


When you submitted your RMA request, what exactly did you put down for the reason/issue?


----------



## Murlo26

Nizzen said:


> If this does 7400+, you can sell it for a premium LOL


I mean at this point I don't care really what it looks like, so if it does really well then yay  



jomama22 said:


> The bending is from the VRM heatsink and genuinely shouldn't be an issue.
> 
> I imagine they are doing what I described a few days ago. They are pulling boards from new batches, testing them, and sending them to fulfill rma's. As to why just a random new box, not sure. Maybe just a box of a "failed" mb and they threw the working on in it.
> 
> Does the sn on the board match any of those on the box?
> 
> Also, PCB seems to match newer batch as shown by Igor's lab:
> View attachment 2555701
> 
> (Newer on bottom)


No the SN on the box doesn't match the new SN. I even peeled off a sticker and it matches the new RMA they issued before they shipped so no idea. Yea, I agree I am happy they tested it but I just am upset to see board warping on a supposedly new board but as long as it works I don't care anymore. 



asdkj1740 said:


> this degree of PCB bending is common.
> a bit strange to me that asus still needs to pretest y1 edition manually before shipping out as rma replacement. maybe they want every rma replacement to be reconfirmed before shippemnt.


This was my thought. With all the nonsense going on they wanted to make sure it was good before shipping. 



skullbringer said:


> bending around the socket area like this is normal for lga1700 boards.
> 
> good to see Asus is testing the boards they send out as replacement, though I would expect as much when it's an RMA for such a high-profile product as Z690 apex.
> 
> curious to see what your M0UAY1 can do


I don't think my last APEX showed bending like this even after I had my waterblock on it but I didn't look very close. I was just surprised it happened on a new board, guessing from their testing. As I have said, if it performs, who cares at this point. 



db000 said:


> I have the M0EAY0 (11/2021), no date on box. I'm stable 6600 2T 30-40-40-30-360-2T 1.52v with everything thrown at it. But I've yet to succeed with 6800.... reading the Igorlab. I might know why...
> Oh well, I've had an order at my dealers for over a month now for a new 2022 model. Still waiting for it to arrive...


Yea, it took a while and I can't guarantee the new board is actually a newer model, the box it shipped in shows the newer 2022 date but there is no way to confirm the SN I have is actually new from what I can tell. 



bscool said:


> That is how my 2022 Apex MB came, with the box taped shut with packaging tape. Works fine for me 7000c32 Karhu and y cruncher stable.


Well that makes me feel a bit better. I am excited to test it later this week when I get back home. 



warbucks said:


> When you submitted your RMA request, what exactly did you put down for the reason/issue?


I was in discussion with them on why I couldn't run XMP I or II on my APEX with QVL ram. I started on a 6000 CL36 samsung set which was on the QVL. I even bought a new SK hynix corsair kit which was 6200 CL32/36 (can't remember) which I thought might work. Then I spent days testing different configs, speeds, timings, voltages trying to get anything to work but my DIMM slot A (closer to CPU) would never do as well, even with one stick, as my B slot. There was a good 600mhz different in ram speeds at same voltage/timings. After all this info and testing they said to send them the board back.


----------



## Mister H

IIDaXII said:


> Hello everyone, I need your help, I am a new owner of a Z690 Extreme since yesterday. As soon as I activate an xmp profile, my pc does not start... I have Ram Corsair DRR5 Dominator 4x16 GB 5600 Mhz. I can't find any solution...


I have the same issue, I have a 4x16GB 5600MHz modules by GSkill, I have set it to XMP 2, and manually selected 5400MHz to get stability


----------



## Herald

Murlo26 said:


> I mean at this point I don't care really what it looks like, so if it does really well then yay
> 
> 
> 
> No the SN on the box doesn't match the new SN. I even peeled off a sticker and it matches the new RMA they issued before they shipped so no idea. Yea, I agree I am happy they tested it but I just am upset to see board warping on a supposedly new board but as long as it works I don't care anymore.
> 
> 
> 
> This was my thought. With all the nonsense going on they wanted to make sure it was good before shipping.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think my last APEX showed bending like this even after I had my waterblock on it but I didn't look very close. I was just surprised it happened on a new board, guessing from their testing. As I have said, if it performs, who cares at this point.
> 
> 
> 
> Yea, it took a while and I can't guarantee the new board is actually a newer model, the box it shipped in shows the newer 2022 date but there is no way to confirm the SN I have is actually new from what I can tell.
> 
> 
> 
> Well that makes me feel a bit better. I am excited to test it later this week when I get back home.
> 
> 
> 
> I was in discussion with them on why I couldn't run XMP I or II on my APEX with QVL ram. I started on a 6000 CL36 samsung set which was on the QVL. I even bought a new SK hynix corsair kit which was 6200 CL32/36 (can't remember) which I thought might work. Then I spent days testing different configs, speeds, timings, voltages trying to get anything to work but my DIMM slot A (closer to CPU) would never do as well, even with one stick, as my B slot. There was a good 600mhz different in ram speeds at same voltage/timings. After all this info and testing they said to send them the board back.


Im also writing on the asus forum, im the one that jumped the gun on the unify x. Too bored to go threw with the asus rma, its kinda terrible.


----------



## Lord Alzov

db000 said:


> Any other KS out there?? Come join me!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> y-cruncher - Pi-2.5b overclocking records @ HWBOT
> 
> 
> Overclocking records
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hwbot.org


I have best with 12900kf 5300mhz lol
Alzov`s y-cruncher - Pi-2.5b score: 57sec 973ms with a Core i9 12900KF


----------



## db000

Lord Alzov said:


> I have best with 12900kf 5300mhz lol
> Alzov`s y-cruncher - Pi-2.5b score: 57sec 973ms with a Core i9 12900KF


Really nice! I'm not doing 6600+ with 1T successfully on this board tho, I hope a 2022 batch will help me.


----------



## Lord Alzov

db000 said:


> Really nice! I'm not doing 6600+ with 1T successfully on this board tho, I hope a 2022 batch will help me.


I have 2021 batch 10/21


----------



## db000

Lord Alzov said:


> I have 2021 batch 10/21


Impressive. Mine is 11/21, funny thing I just tried again with tRRD_sg 6 -> 7. Still no success.
I can boot 6800 2T with errors, that might be ironed out. 7000 2T is a no go.
6400 C30 1T can be done, but C28 is troublesome. Waited over a month now for dealer to get a new 2022 batch, "10+ on the way"... 
















Current 6600 C30 2T


----------



## HardwareNumb3rs

I have tested 3 Apex and a Hero so far, all 2021, with bios 1304 I can go maximum at 6600, and 6400 with the 1403. 
Disabling two channel in bios or with a single stick on B2 I can do 7000+, now I'm waiting a replacement for one of the boards, I asked specifically a 2022, let's see if I have luck.
In the meantime I tested as well a TUF Z690 Plus WiFi, same thing with the bios version, with 1304 I was able to get to 6600 C32 and tight subs easy, this one was Jan 2022, not bad for a board that cost 1/3 vs the Maximums


----------



## db000

HardwareNumb3rs said:


> I have tested 3 Apex and a Hero so far, all 2021, with bios 1304 I can go maximum at 6600, and 6400 with the 1403.
> Disabling two channel in bios or with a single stick on B2 I can do 7000+, now I'm waiting a replacement for one of the boards, I asked specifically a 2022, let's see if I have luck.
> In the meantime I tested as well a TUF Z690 Plus WiFi, same thing with the bios version, with 1304 I was able to get to 6600 C32 and tight subs easy, this one was Jan 2022, not bad for a board that cost 1/3 vs the Maximums


That is interesting, when I switched to my 12900KS (from 12900K), I went from 1302 -> 1403. But couldn't for the world of me get 6600 stable like I had before. Went back on step to 1304 and it was working fine again.. confirms basically the same finding. Are you getting a Apex replaced?


----------



## Lord Alzov

db000 said:


> Impressive. Mine is 11/21, funny thing I just tried again with tRRD_sg 6 -> 7. Still no success.
> I can boot 6800 2T with errors, that might be ironed out. 7000 2T is a no go.
> 6400 C30 1T can be done, but C28 is troublesome. Waited over a month now for dealer to get a new 2022 batch, "10+ on the way"...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Current 6600 C30 2T


MSI can 6800cl 30 and windows bench 7000 CR1


----------



## Apecos

HardwareNumb3rs said:


> I have tested 3 Apex and a Hero so far, all 2021, with bios 1304 I can go maximum at 6600, and 6400 with the 1403.
> Disabling two channel in bios or with a single stick on B2 I can do 7000+, now I'm waiting a replacement for one of the boards, I asked specifically a 2022, let's see if I have luck.
> In the meantime I tested as well a TUF Z690 Plus WiFi, same thing with the bios version, with 1304 I was able to get to 6600 C32 and tight subs easy, this one was Jan 2022, not bad for a board that cost 1/3 vs the Maximums


"now I'm waiting a replacement for one of the boards" wich one hero? Can you post some results with hero?

Thanks


----------



## db000

Big disappointment, was just at my dealer after waiting a month+ for a new Apex. The batch they just got in today from Asus was the 2021/11, same I allready have 😔


----------



## HardwareNumb3rs

db000 said:


> That is interesting, when I switched to my 12900KS (from 12900K), I went from 1302 -> 1403. But couldn't for the world of me get 6600 stable like I had before. Went back on step to 1304 and it was working fine again.. confirms basically the same finding. Are you getting a Apex replaced?


New Apex arrived, was replaced by the eshop, not Asus, and I got another 2021 
Now I will try if at least I got a good 2021



Apecos said:


> "now I'm waiting a replacement for one of the boards" wich one hero? Can you post some results with hero?
> 
> Thanks


The Hero is a 2021 and can do 6600 easy with 1304 and only 6400 with 1403, but hard wall past 6600
I have the Hero for a review and I have to send it back in a week, so I won't bother with a replacement, but the Apex... I have to find a proper one, competitive OC was already hard for the CPU binning, if we add a 700 euros motherboard to the mix is becoming impossible, and I am quite shocked that an Apex can go to market with this kind of issue honestly


----------



## HardwareNumb3rs

P.s.: I tested also a Z690 TUF Plus WiFi, bios 1304, can do 6600 C32 Tight easy, so I expect at least 7000+ from the top of the line


----------



## HardwareNumb3rs

4th Apex results:

Bios 9902 and 1304
Single stick on B1: 7200 C32 TM5 Stable / 7400 Functional but errors after 1 or 2 TM5 Runs (on both sticks, Hynix)
Dual sticks or A1: 6600 is the far it goes TM5 Stable, 6800 I can boot in windows but TM5 gives error in seconds

Off she go to the store again...


----------



## acoustic

db000 said:


> Big disappointment, was just at my dealer after waiting a month+ for a new Apex. The batch they just got in today from Asus was the 2021/11, same I allready have 😔


Maybe they're already fixed? I can't understand why ASUS would send out shipments of boards they know don't work correctly.


----------



## HardwareNumb3rs

acoustic said:


> Maybe they're already fixed? I can't understand why ASUS would send out shipments of boards they know don't work correctly.


With the latest bios the 6400/6600 is doable, and out there there aren't so much good kit for sale, I guess because most of the people will do fine, still bad PR imho


----------



## acoustic

HardwareNumb3rs said:


> With the latest bios the 6400/6600 is doable, and out there there aren't so much good kit for sale, I guess because most of the people will do fine, still bad PR imho


Yeah, that's terrible.. especially for the asking price of the board. I really hope that isn't the case.


----------



## jomama22

acoustic said:


> Maybe they're already fixed? I can't understand why ASUS would send out shipments of boards they know don't work correctly.


Possible they were already is the supply channels and/or front end stores are just getting their supply from distributors as opposed from Asus direct. The US hasn't seen a single retainer with stock for well over a month and a half now. Only ones you can find are resellers.

Like any manufacturer, they weigh the cost of RMA/returns vs full on recall and proceed accordingly (unless their hand is forced). It's a scummy way to go about things but is genuinely the norm unfortunately (looking at nzxt for instance).

Remember, they haven't come out and said anything other than "If your board doesn't reach qvl, RMA it", so it's clear what stance they have taken.


----------



## acoustic

jomama22 said:


> Possible they were already is the supply channels and/or front end stores are just getting their supply from distributors as opposed from Asus direct. The US hasn't seen a single retainer with stock for well over a month and a half now. Only ones you can find are resellers.
> 
> Like any manufacturer, they weigh the cost of RMA/returns vs full on recall and proceed accordingly (unless their hand is forced). It's a scummy way to go about things but is genuinely the norm unfortunately (looking at nzxt for instance).
> 
> Remember, they haven't come out and said anything other than "If your board doesn't reach qvl, RMA it", so it's clear what stance they have taken.


Very true. I haven't seen an APEX in stock at Microcenter in ages..


----------



## SoldierRBT

acoustic said:


> Maybe they're already fixed? I can't understand why ASUS would send out shipments of boards they know don't work correctly.


To be honest I don't think 2022 retail boards exists. I've purchased a few in the last 2 months and they were all 2021. Those 2022 boards are probably ES samples.


----------



## db000

HardwareNumb3rs said:


> 4th Apex results:
> 
> Bios 9902 and 1304
> Single stick on B1: 7200 C32 TM5 Stable / 7400 Functional but errors after 1 or 2 TM5 Runs (on both sticks, Hynix)
> Dual sticks or A1: 6600 is the far it goes TM5 Stable, 6800 I can boot in windows but TM5 gives error in seconds
> 
> Off she go to the store again...


Exact the same for me, thanks for confirming these results with the new board. I didn't even bother picking a new 2021 up. Dealer now have a notice on my order, if next time is a "2022" batch


----------



## Gadfly

Lord Alzov said:


> I have 2021 batch 10/21


I'd love to know what you are doing. I know you mentioned you had figured out something to get the 21 boards to run better, but that you were still writing up the guide.


----------



## asdkj1740

__





ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI | ROG Strix | Gaming Motherboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG Global


ASUS ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI Intel LGA 1700 ATX motherboard, DDR5, PCIe 5.0, 16+1 power stages, WiFi 6E, Intel® 2.5 Gb Ethernet, four M.2 slots, USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 USB Type-C®, SATA and Aura Sync



rog.asus.com





ddr5 rog strix a


----------



## Gadfly

SoldierRBT said:


> To be honest I don't think 2022 retail boards exists. I've purchased a few in the last 2 months and they were all 2021. Those 2022 boards are probably ES samples.


Pretty sure there was at least a few runs in early 2022. There has been at least a few people with 01/2022 batches posting here (they all can't be getting hand picked ES's from Asus), but clearly Asus stopped manufacturing these boards for a while. Every major retailer has been out of stock since late Feb / Early March. 

I am hanging on my to my board with an open RMA as I waiting to see what changed on the 03/2022+ Apex's when (and If) they start showing up.


----------



## Gadfly

acoustic said:


> Maybe they're already fixed? I can't understand why ASUS would send out shipments of boards they know don't work correctly.


Money.

The thing is; I would guess that the overwhelming majority of people that buy an Apex board drop in some 5600/6000/6400 ram, Set XMP, and forget it. As long at it is stable enough to only get a few occasional crashes, most PC users / gamers will just blame the game, windows, etc. and move on.

It is only in groups like here, where the number of RMA's are going to be significant. So if they have say 500 motherboards out in the channel, and 8 out of 10 are affected by the issue (might be closer to 9 out 10 in reality), but only 2 out 10 come back on RMA, then they are just going to let them sell, and deal with the few RMA's that come in. They will most likely try to reduce costs by shipping out recycled boards that pass whatever minimum testing standards they apply (Perhaps some memory kit on the QVL set to run XMP I; etc.).

Once all the new boards start making out to shelves, and the few that noticed the issue have exchange a crap board for a slightly less crappy board it will all be forgotten. They will rebrand the board with some "Z690 Apex Darkimus Extreme Ultra Super Edition" marketing, put the price up $80 to recoup the losses on the higher numbers of early Apex returns, send a few cherry picked samples out to tech tubers and a few overclockers who post on the enthusiast forums; then watch them fly off the shelves at higher profit margins than before.

Wash, Rinse, Repeat.


----------



## LegitMaan

asdkj1740 said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI | ROG Strix | Gaming Motherboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG Global
> 
> 
> ASUS ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI Intel LGA 1700 ATX motherboard, DDR5, PCIe 5.0, 16+1 power stages, WiFi 6E, Intel® 2.5 Gb Ethernet, four M.2 slots, USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 USB Type-C®, SATA and Aura Sync
> 
> 
> 
> rog.asus.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ddr5 rog strix a


The plastic on the top heatsink appears to not be connected to the I/O shroud anymore and should be easier to remove. It looks like a fix for air cooler compatibility.


----------



## db000

Gadfly said:


> Money.
> 
> The thing is; I would guess that the overwhelming majority of people that buy an Apex board drop in some 5600/6000/6400 ram, Set XMP, and forget it. As long at it is stable enough to only get a few occasional crashes, most PC users / gamers will just blame the game, windows, etc. and move on.
> 
> It is only in groups like here, where the number of RMA's are going to be significant. So if they have say 500 motherboards out in the channel, and 8 out of 10 are affected by the issue (might be closer to 9 out 10 in reality), but only 2 out 10 come back on RMA, then they are just going to let them sell, and deal with the few RMA's that come in. They will most likely try to reduce costs by shipping out recycled boards that pass whatever minimum testing standards they apply (Perhaps some memory kit on the QVL set to run XMP I; etc.).
> 
> Once all the new boards start making out to shelves, and the few that noticed the issue have exchange a crap board for a slightly less crappy board it will all be forgotten. They will rebrand the board with some "Z690 Apex Darkimus Extreme Ultra Super Edition" marketing, put the price up $80 to recoup the losses on the higher numbers of early Apex returns, send a few cherry picked samples out to tech tubers and a few overclockers who post on the enthusiast forums; then watch them fly off the shelves at higher profit margins than before.
> 
> Wash, Rinse, Repeat.


100% and I like the rebrand name you suggested 
I really hope the 2022/01 or later version will arrive here with next batch.... sucks to be limited by the board with watercooled RAM... I'm looking for 6800/7000+ like others here


----------



## stahlhart

db000 said:


> 100% and I like the rebrand name you suggested
> I really hope the 2022/01 or later version will arrive here with next batch.... sucks to be limited by the board with watercooled RAM... I'm looking for 6800/7000+ like others here


Waiting for Z790, new DDR5 kits and RL to reevaluate that here.


----------



## bscool

Strix d4 bios 1404

4266c16 DR b die

901 is still better for me as I can run 4266c15-16-16

But with KS this is the best bios so far for DR b die.

CPU at Asus defaults for this run.


----------



## LionAlonso

bscool said:


> Strix d4 bios 1404
> 
> 4266c16 DR b die
> 
> 901 is still better for me as I can run 4266c15-16-16
> 
> But with KS this is the best bios so far for DR b die.
> 
> CPU at Asus defaults for this run.


So i guess we wont get same ddr4 bios as before.
Shame for people with the KS....
I was gonna try 1404 but seeing this...


----------



## xarot

12900KS, Asus Z690 Extreme and G.Skill 6000 CL36 2x16GB Samsungs. RAM errors with XMP, manual settings 6000 36-36-36-76-2T and VDD,VDDQ, VDDQTX 1.3 and Mem Controller voltage up to 1.3, VCCSA 1.05 - 1.15. Some boots with manual settings it can pass Prime95 non-AVX or Karhu, but usually not? I don't seem to be able to get any repeatable stability and changing the voltages seemingly doesn't help because it is very inconsistent if Prim95 workers will crash within minutes or run 2 hours without any issues. Sometimes powering the whole rig down and simply rebooting brings the stability back. Tested the other day manual settings 6000 36-36-36-76-2N 20000% Karhu stable. On next boots issues arise again.

BIOS issue or board doesn't like these RAMs? JEDEC speeds seems to be working fine.


----------



## asdkj1740

xarot said:


> 12900KS, Asus Z690 Extreme and G.Skill 6000 CL36 2x16GB Samsungs. RAM errors with XMP, manual settings 6000 36-36-36-76-2T and VDD,VDDQ, VDDQTX 1.3 and Mem Controller voltage up to 1.3, VCCSA 1.05 - 1.15. Some boots with manual settings it can pass Prime95 non-AVX or Karhu, but usually not? I don't seem to be able to get any repeatable stability and changing the voltages seemingly doesn't help because it is very inconsistent if Prim95 workers will crash within minutes or run 2 hours without any issues. Sometimes powering the whole rig down and simply rebooting brings the stability back. Tested the other day manual settings 6000 36-36-36-76-2N 20000% Karhu stable. On next boots issues arise again.
> 
> BIOS issue or board doesn't like these RAMs? JEDEC speeds seems to be working fine.


think out of the box, why it cant be the ram kit


----------



## xarot

asdkj1740 said:


> think out of the box, why it cant be the ram kit


Sure it can be that too...just seeing many Extreme owners with so many RAM issues. But yeah I get your point, I remember first DDR4 kits and my first G.Skill 3000 MHz kit never even booted with rated frequency.


----------



## Agent-A01

bscool said:


> Strix d4 bios 1404
> 
> 4266c16 DR b die
> 
> 901 is still better for me as I can run 4266c15-16-16
> 
> But with KS this is the best bios so far for DR b die.
> 
> CPU at Asus defaults for this run.


I just tried 1404 and ran into the same road block. Anything >4000 will not post period.

So I tried setting skew settings (80-48-40) and it posted instantly on first try...
I have no idea why no bios >1300 works for my setup out of the box but w/e..

I guess I'll have to check stability now.


----------



## lebkom

Not sure if this will help anyone but it seems like bios 1403 changes something with the way the voltages work
i have a z690 extreme with 12900k and gskill 6000 CL36 

On bios 1304 with everything else on default I get hundreds of errors in memtest86 with XMP1 and XMP2 (XMP1 lasts longer before errors start)
I was able to stabilize it with no errors in memtest by increasing VDD and VDDQ to 1.4. Anything lower resulted in errors in memtest.

On bios 1403 with the same settings as above I get hundreds of errors in memtest. Reducing the VDD and VDDQ resulted in less errors but still I couldn't get it stable.

I tried reducing CPU SA voltage to 0.90 instead of default setting and set VDD and VDDQ to 1.37 I finally got 0 errors in memtest, was able to run games, cinebench and AIDA64 with no issues. Anything higher than 1.37 on VDD and VDDQ resulted in errors.

As a bonus my CPU temps are around 5-8°C cooler under full load


----------



## LionAlonso

Agent-A01 said:


> I just tried 1404 and ran into the same road block. Anything >4000 will not post period.
> 
> So I tried setting skew settings (80-48-40) and it posted instantly on first try...
> I have no idea why no bios >1300 works for my setup out of the box but w/e..
> 
> I guess I'll have to check stability now.


Keep us informed plz


----------



## Agent-A01

LionAlonso said:


> Keep us informed plz


Unfortunately the amount of SA voltage I need to stabilize it seems to have increased by a good amount.

I use y-cruncher to determine my required SA voltage. Prior to 13xx bios I needed aprox 1.4 SA (bios set = 1.435) at 4133. Cannot stabilize it without increasing to >1.45.

Since I'm not sure that high of an SA is safe I elected to drop down to 4100 where I only need 1.4 set. 
So yes it's stable now but I don't know if it's worth updating to over previous versions.

YMMV. Maybe future bios will improve but at this point I'm not that hopeful. At least the RTLs train correctly now without messing with them.


----------



## bscool

Agent-A01 said:


> I just tried 1404 and ran into the same road block. Anything >4000 will not post period.
> 
> So I tried setting skew settings (80-48-40) and it posted instantly on first try...
> I have no idea why no bios >1300 works for my setup out of the box but w/e..
> 
> I guess I'll have to check stability now.


I hadnt been setting Skews and set them 80/48/40 and 4266c16 boots right up vs not setting them and it takes a few times to train them. So thanks for the reminder 

I am able to use the same sa/vddq i could on 901. Just not as tight of tCL. Still for KS it been better so far. I havent spent much time using it so not sure how if it is better or worse on CPU OC.

On bios 1304 I could run 54/42/45 and run r15, r20 and r23 I havent tested that on 1404. Been running 53/42/45 on 1404.


----------



## sblantipodi

It seems general consensus that 1403 is a crap, ok skipping it. Pretty tired to act like a beta tester since I paid big money for the bord and I don't received it for free.


----------



## Nizzen

sblantipodi said:


> It seems general consensus that 1403 is a crap, ok skipping it. Pretty tired to act like a beta tester since I paid big money for the bord and I don't received it for free.


Wait 5 years to buy hardware, when "beta test" is over


----------



## Frenzi3d

[TESTED] Gaming with no BSOD & Freeze

Z690 APEX 1304 + DC RAM @DDR5-7000 CL32-42-42-28 2T + Not very tight sub

VDD/VDDQ: 1.65/1.65 | MC/SA: 1.4/1.4


----------



## Martin778

sblantipodi said:


> It seems general consensus that 1403 is a crap, ok skipping it. Pretty tired to act like a beta tester since I paid big money for the bord and I don't received it for free.


It's so crap that EZFlash even keeps telling me that it's not a UEFI BIOS file LoL.
Been out for a while, just went through the last few pages of this thread, welp nothing new - "disappointment" is the key.


----------



## acoustic

I had no issue flashing to 1404 on TUF WIFI D4.

About to start testing again, but one thing I have noticed already .. training very consistent with cstkl1 ddr4 training profile @ 4000 100:100 gear1. Usually my RTL are all over the place every boot at 4000 (because as far as I have been able to tell, my IMC is garbage on 12700k) regardless of BIOS. I'm getting 73/73 *EVERY BOOT* after 8 reboots and 2 complete shutdowns. Very different than anything I've seen on any BIOS prior to 1404. Even 1304 did not do this.

Round 99, FIGHT .. vs this stupid IMC 

edit: VCCSA 1.33 / DRAM 1.515v set (1.52v get) hit me with 1 error at ~35% MemTestPro.

I'm trying something different and setting CPU MC and SA PLL lines to 0.930v from the standard 0.900v. I don't know what that will do but can't hurt to try before I go back to 3800CL14.

meh. 1 error at 15%. back to 3800CL14 we go!

@bscool I wish I knew why we've had such different experiences with DR B-Die on each BIOS. I could not for the life of me get 0707/0803 to work well at all, but I've had much, much, much better time with 1304 and.. we'll see about 1404. So far, it's @ 30% MemTestPro without an error, which usually I'd have one by now at 4000CL16 in gear1


----------



## edkieferlp

acoustic said:


> I had no issue flashing to 1404 on TUF WIFI D4.
> 
> About to start testing again, but one thing I have noticed already .. training very consistent with cstkl1 ddr4 training profile @ 4000 100:100 gear1. Usually my RTL are all over the place every boot at 4000 (because as far as I have been able to tell, my IMC is garbage on 12700k) regardless of BIOS. I'm getting 73/73 *EVERY BOOT* after 8 reboots and 2 complete shutdowns. Very different than anything I've seen on any BIOS prior to 1404. Even 1304 did not do this.
> 
> Round 99, FIGHT .. vs this stupid IMC
> 
> edit: VCCSA 1.33 / DRAM 1.515v set (1.52v get) hit me with 1 error at ~35% MemTestPro.
> 
> I'm trying something different and setting *CPU MC and SA PLL lines to 0.930v from the standard 0.900v*. I don't know what that will do but can't hurt to try before I go back to 3800CL14.
> 
> meh. 1 error at 15%. back to 3800CL14 we go!
> 
> @bscool I wish I knew why we've had such different experiences with DR B-Die on each BIOS. I could not for the life of me get 0707/0803 to work well at all, but I've had much, much, much better time with 1304 and.. we'll see about 1404. So far, it's @ 30% MemTestPro without an error, which usually I'd have one by now at 4000CL16 in gear1


I have seen Buildzoid setting those to 0.950-1.00 depending on which one so 0.930 may not be enough to see a change.


----------



## acoustic

I set both to 1.010 (or 1.050, I forget, it's a weird .0xxmv increment) after that fail. I also felt 0.930 may not be enough to cause a change. I'm at 70% HCI MemTestPro now w/ the same exact settings @ 4000CL16. That's further than ever..

Interesting..


----------



## bscool

acoustic said:


> I had no issue flashing to 1404 on TUF WIFI D4.
> 
> About to start testing again, but one thing I have noticed already .. training very consistent with cstkl1 ddr4 training profile @ 4000 100:100 gear1. Usually my RTL are all over the place every boot at 4000 (because as far as I have been able to tell, my IMC is garbage on 12700k) regardless of BIOS. I'm getting 73/73 *EVERY BOOT* after 8 reboots and 2 complete shutdowns. Very different than anything I've seen on any BIOS prior to 1404. Even 1304 did not do this.
> 
> Round 99, FIGHT .. vs this stupid IMC
> 
> edit: VCCSA 1.33 / DRAM 1.515v set (1.52v get) hit me with 1 error at ~35% MemTestPro.
> 
> I'm trying something different and setting CPU MC and SA PLL lines to 0.930v from the standard 0.900v. I don't know what that will do but can't hurt to try before I go back to 3800CL14.
> 
> meh. 1 error at 15%. back to 3800CL14 we go!
> 
> @bscool I wish I knew why we've had such different experiences with DR B-Die on each BIOS. I could not for the life of me get 0707/0803 to work well at all, but I've had much, much, much better time with 1304 and.. we'll see about 1404. So far, it's @ 30% MemTestPro without an error, which usually I'd have one by now at 4000CL16 in gear1


What do you set vvdq to. On strix d4 that critical to booting and getting DR stable at 3600 to 3800+. I need 1.35 to 1.4 depending on clock.


----------



## acoustic

bscool said:


> What do you set vvdq to. On strix d4 that critical to booting and getting DR stable at 3600 to 3800+


My board/chip seem most stable at 1.5v VDDQ. I've been up and down between 1.4-1.5v, I lose stability under 1.4v but different frequencies/voltage settings seem to prefer 1.4, 1.45, or 1.5. I'm currently testing this PLL voltage change that is getting me further than ever. I was using 1.5v VDDQ w/ 1.33v SA + 1.52v DRAM giving me best consistency in training @ 3800CL14 with the tight timings posted earlier on 1304.

I'm always able to post, even up to 4133 - the problem is stability. I've never been able to actually get it stable.


----------



## SoulsDeff

Guys help pls.

I have: 

_ASUS ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME_ 
_Intel i9 12900k_ 
_Noctua NT-H2 thermal paste
DDR5 2x16 GB Corsair Dominator Platinum 6200Mhz (36-39-39-76)_ 
_Cooler Master MasterCase H500P MESH ARGB_ 
_1TB+2TB SSD Samsung 980 Pro's
Corsair HX1200 (80+ Platinum)_ 
_Asus Strix 3080 Ti OC 12GB_ 

and for my build i want buy *Arctic Cooling Liquid Freezer II-360*, but in manual here Arctic's write: ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II 360 - User Manual - "my motherboard which have been confirmed to have compatibility problem". it turns out this water cooling will not fit my build?

i'm looking for good not custom AIO. I thought to buy either "*Liquid Freezer II-360*" or "*ASUS ROG STRIX LC II 360*". Asus *STRIX LC II 360* will be much worse?


----------



## bscool

SoulsDeff said:


> Guys help pls.
> 
> I have:
> 
> _ASUS ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME
> Intel i9 12900k
> Noctua NT-H2 thermal paste
> DDR5 2x16 GB Corsair Dominator Platinum 6200Mhz (36-39-39-76)
> Cooler Master MasterCase H500P MESH ARGB
> 1TB+2TB SSD Samsung 980 Pro's
> Corsair HX1200 (80+ Platinum)
> Asus Strix 3080 Ti OC 12GB_
> 
> and for my build i want buy *Arctic Cooling Liquid Freezer II-360*, but in manual here Arctic's write: ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II 360 - User Manual - "my motherboard which have been confirmed to have compatibility problem". it turns out this water cooling will not fit my build?
> 
> i'm looking for good not custom AIO. I thought to buy either "*Liquid Freezer II-360*" or "*ASUS ROG STRIX LC II 360*". Asus *STRIX LC II 360* will be much worse?


There are a few people here using the Arctic on the Extreme.

@Falkentyne and @RobertoSampaio are using it last I knew on the Extreme.

They say it isnt compatible with the z690 Apex either but I am using it without modifications. I think some peopel have issues and report it so they tag it as not compatible.


----------



## zizilatino

lebkom said:


> Not sure if this will help anyone but it seems like bios 1403 changes something with the way the voltages work
> i have a z690 extreme with 12900k and gskill 6000 CL36
> 
> On bios 1304 with everything else on default I get hundreds of errors in memtest86 with XMP1 and XMP2 (XMP1 lasts longer before errors start)
> I was able to stabilize it with no errors in memtest by increasing VDD and VDDQ to 1.4. Anything lower resulted in errors in memtest.
> 
> On bios 1403 with the same settings as above I get hundreds of errors in memtest. Reducing the VDD and VDDQ resulted in less errors but still I couldn't get it stable.
> 
> I tried reducing CPU SA voltage to 0.90 instead of default setting and set VDD and VDDQ to 1.37 I finally got 0 errors in memtest, was able to run games, cinebench and AIDA64 with no issues. Anything higher than 1.37 on VDD and VDDQ resulted in errors.
> 
> As a bonus my CPU temps are around 5-8°C cooler under full load


Did you set to Xmp1 or 2 with these settings ? "I tried reducing CPU SA voltage to 0.90 instead of default setting and set VDD and VDDQ to 1.37 I finally got 0 errors in memtest, was able to run games, cinebench and AIDA64 with no issues. Anything higher than 1.37 on VDD and VDDQ resulted in errors."


----------



## zizilatino

Also, anyone tried the Washer mode with the Z690 Extreme ?


----------



## Csavez™

This z690 apex is not the tip of my heart, I haven’t sucked so much in my life with a motherboard.
Everyone should avoid the 1403 bios, I couldn't run any of my profiles flawlessly, I put the 1304 back in and the flawless tests came.
I just made a good setting for me and the 1% low fps in the games is really good.


----------



## Falkentyne

acoustic said:


> My board/chip seem most stable at 1.5v VDDQ. I've been up and down between 1.4-1.5v, I lose stability under 1.4v but different frequencies/voltage settings seem to prefer 1.4, 1.45, or 1.5. I'm currently testing this PLL voltage change that is getting me further than ever. I was using 1.5v VDDQ w/ 1.33v SA + 1.52v DRAM giving me best consistency in training @ 3800CL14 with the tight timings posted earlier on 1304.
> 
> I'm always able to post, even up to 4133 - the problem is stability. I've never been able to actually get it stable.


Nice of you to tell us you're testing a pll voltage without telling us which voltage you're testing :/


----------



## acoustic

Falkentyne said:


> Nice of you to tell us you're testing a pll voltage without telling us which voltage you're testing :/


I mentioned it in an earlier post, and I've also been double-dipping in this thread and the Z690 DDR4 thread, and made it accidentally confusing for myself lol.

CPU MC PLL, SA PLL, and Ring PLL have been what I've touched. I can't say it's done anything. I still CTD in Halo Infinite, but I did seem to have more stability in stress-tests.

Overall, no benefit for getting 4000 Gear1 stable. Bad IMC is a bad IMC, regardless of how much sorcery I try.


----------



## xarot

lebkom said:


> Not sure if this will help anyone but it seems like bios 1403 changes something with the way the voltages work
> i have a z690 extreme with 12900k and gskill 6000 CL36
> 
> On bios 1304 with everything else on default I get hundreds of errors in memtest86 with XMP1 and XMP2 (XMP1 lasts longer before errors start)
> I was able to stabilize it with no errors in memtest by increasing VDD and VDDQ to 1.4. Anything lower resulted in errors in memtest.
> 
> On bios 1403 with the same settings as above I get hundreds of errors in memtest. Reducing the VDD and VDDQ resulted in less errors but still I couldn't get it stable.
> 
> I tried reducing CPU SA voltage to 0.90 instead of default setting and set VDD and VDDQ to 1.37 I finally got 0 errors in memtest, was able to run games, cinebench and AIDA64 with no issues. Anything higher than 1.37 on VDD and VDDQ resulted in errors.
> 
> As a bonus my CPU temps are around 5-8°C cooler under full load


Did you set VDDQTX or Memory Controller Voltage? Every time I think I am stable, next cold boot to Windows I am getting issues.


----------



## Wilco183

SoulsDeff said:


> Guys help pls.
> 
> I have:
> 
> _ASUS ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME
> Intel i9 12900k
> Noctua NT-H2 thermal paste
> DDR5 2x16 GB Corsair Dominator Platinum 6200Mhz (36-39-39-76)
> Cooler Master MasterCase H500P MESH ARGB
> 1TB+2TB SSD Samsung 980 Pro's
> Corsair HX1200 (80+ Platinum)
> Asus Strix 3080 Ti OC 12GB_
> 
> and for my build i want buy *Arctic Cooling Liquid Freezer II-360*, but in manual here Arctic's write: ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II 360 - User Manual - "my motherboard which have been confirmed to have compatibility problem". it turns out this water cooling will not fit my build?
> 
> i'm looking for good not custom AIO. I thought to buy either "*Liquid Freezer II-360*" or "*ASUS ROG STRIX LC II 360*". Asus *STRIX LC II 360* will be much worse?


ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II LGA1700 - User Manual


SoulsDeff said:


> Guys help pls.
> 
> I have:
> 
> _ASUS ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME
> Intel i9 12900k
> Noctua NT-H2 thermal paste
> DDR5 2x16 GB Corsair Dominator Platinum 6200Mhz (36-39-39-76)
> Cooler Master MasterCase H500P MESH ARGB
> 1TB+2TB SSD Samsung 980 Pro's
> Corsair HX1200 (80+ Platinum)
> Asus Strix 3080 Ti OC 12GB_
> 
> and for my build i want buy *Arctic Cooling Liquid Freezer II-360*, but in manual here Arctic's write: ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II 360 - User Manual - "my motherboard which have been confirmed to have compatibility problem". it turns out this water cooling will not fit my build?
> 
> i'm looking for good not custom AIO. I thought to buy either "*Liquid Freezer II-360*" or "*ASUS ROG STRIX LC II 360*". Asus *STRIX LC II 360* will be much worse?


Click on the link you posted. Then Rev 4 > LGA 1700 > Installation. This page shows additional mobo compatibility information, prescribed workaround, and ordering info for replacement cover. I had to do this to mount 360 on Hero board.


----------



## SoulsDeff

Wilco183 said:


> Click on the link you posted. Then Rev 4 > LGA 1700 > Installation. This page shows additional mobo compatibility information, prescribed workaround, and ordering info for replacement cover. I had to do this to mount 360 on Hero board.


Yes, I saw it. But I'm more worried that these: Screenshot mounting clips may not fit between VRM radiators here: Screenshot 

Because motherboard have a very high radiators: Screenshot

I'm plan to install "Liquid Freezer II 360 " in this orientation: Screenshot


----------



## Murlo26

Well turns out the Apex board they sent me that I questioned on being new was in fact refurbished. I was literally about to setup a test bench to try it out when they called me. So now it looks as though they are going to replace that with a new one if they can. They said worst case they will refund my money. Man, what a mess. I will see where this goes a bit more but I still might test this refurb unit. I just don't like that they sent me a new box from 2022 manufacturing when in fact it was a 2021 board, seems a bit shady. I would've preferred no box if they were shipping a refurb unit or should I say no standard product box.


----------



## Wilco183

SoulsDeff said:


> Yes, I saw it. But I'm more worried that these: Screenshot mounting clips may not fit between VRM radiators here: Screenshot
> 
> Because motherboard have a very high radiators: Screenshot
> 
> I'm plan to install "Liquid Freezer II 360 " in this orientation: Screenshot


I see...you have more stadium seating at the bottom than that of a Hero. Might not be helpful, but note mine with 1700 hardware and cover removed.


----------



## Falkentyne

SoulsDeff said:


> Yes, I saw it. But I'm more worried that these: Screenshot mounting clips may not fit between VRM radiators here: Screenshot
> 
> Because motherboard have a very high radiators: Screenshot
> 
> I'm plan to install "Liquid Freezer II 360 " in this orientation: Screenshot


That would only happen if you mounted the block upside down (VRM fan facing PCIE slots). No reason to mount it like that because the tubes would twist too much. Even top mounted (hose entry point to rad at front of case) you don't want to mount VRM fan facing PCIE slots because that's a 180 degree twist in the tubes.

But regardless a simple removal of the PCB cover under the block would fix any issues.
Just fyi I have this cooler installed right now on a Z690 Extreme. The heatsinks don't interfere. Just a tight fit is all.


----------



## lebkom

zizilatino said:


> Did you set to Xmp1 or 2 with these settings ? "I tried reducing CPU SA voltage to 0.90 instead of default setting and set VDD and VDDQ to 1.37 I finally got 0 errors in memtest, was able to run games, cinebench and AIDA64 with no issues. Anything higher than 1.37 on VDD and VDDQ resulted in errors."


I used xmp1


----------



## lebkom

xarot said:


> Did you set VDDQTX or Memory Controller Voltage? Every time I think I am stable, next cold boot to Windows I am getting issues.


Nah i left them on the default settings, have you tried unplugging PSU for 30 seconds?


----------



## Agent-A01

bscool said:


> I hadnt been setting Skews and set them 80/48/40 and 4266c16 boots right up vs not setting them and it takes a few times to train them. So thanks for the reminder
> 
> I am able to use the same sa/vddq i could on 901. Just not as tight of tCL. Still for KS it been better so far. I havent spent much time using it so not sure how if it is better or worse on CPU OC.
> 
> On bios 1304 I could run 54/42/45 and run r15, r20 and r23 I havent tested that on 1404. Been running 53/42/45 on 1404.


Glad that helps for you.

I'm not sure maybe past 1.4SA I am seeing degradation on the IMC. I know you've set 1.35 for a while and that's probably a safe value forever.


----------



## jomama22

Murlo26 said:


> Well turns out the Apex board they sent me that I questioned on being new was in fact refurbished. I was literally about to setup a test bench to try it out when they called me. So now it looks as though they are going to replace that with a new one if they can. They said worst case they will refund my money. Man, what a mess. I will see where this goes a bit more but I still might test this refurb unit. I just don't like that they sent me a new box from 2022 manufacturing when in fact it was a 2021 board, seems a bit shady. I would've preferred no box if they were shipping a refurb unit or should I say no standard product box.


Would definitely still test it. From the images, it has the same component layout as a a 2022 board.

May not be "new", but RMA centers do stock "new" boards off the factory line, not to say that yours is isn't a "fixed" board from another user.

When I contacted them, they said that the "refurb" boards have never been used previously. So take that as you will.

Yeah it's **** all around though.


----------



## xarot

lebkom said:


> Nah i left them on the default settings, have you tried unplugging PSU for 30 seconds?


I think I switched off PSU overnight. Seems like 5600 CL40 is as good as I might have gotten stable.


----------



## Mappi75

Important for EKWB cpu cooler / Apex users:

With the LGA 1700 upgrade kit










If you dont see this you may have bad temps or destroy this smd during fixing the cpu watercool block!

So i removed the parts of the black "rubber".


----------



## Mappi75

!?










Ignore?


----------



## fat4l

7empe said:


> Sure, here you go.
> 
> I've disabled E-Cores for simplicity. LLC 8 (AC/DC_LL 0.01 mOhm).
> Ring moved from 49x to stock 47x.
> P-Cores synced at 52x.
> 
> VRM behaviour set to extreme/extreme.
> 
> For comparison I used CBR23 as a stability "zero". For sure a positive voltage offset needs to be applied for heavier AVX in e.g. y-cruncher, but I did not bother with this right now.
> 
> 
> VRM Switching FrequencyVRM Fixed Voltage (floor)CBR23 HWINFO Average Voltage @Load (floor)CBR23 Min Oscilloscope Voltage @Load3001220 mV1217 mV1181 mV4001220 mV1217 mV1181 mV5001220 mV1217 mV1181 mV6001230 mV1225 mV1194 mV7001240 mV1234 mV1199 mV800tried up to 1260 mV (freeze)1252 mV (freeze)1221 mV (freeze)
> 
> Btw. enabling e-cores running at 42x (e-core [email protected] < p-core vid @52x) needs +30 mV for Vcore.
> 
> EDIT: enabling e-cores running at 42x: +20 mV for Vcore only if VRM SF = 300 kHz.


So from your testing, is 300 the best to use ? or do we go for like 500?

And vrm spread spectrum turn off right ?


----------



## Csavez™

Mappi75 said:


> Important for EKWB cpu cooler / Apex users:
> 
> With the LGA 1700 upgrade kit
> 
> View attachment 2556485
> 
> 
> If you dont see this you may have bad temps or destroy this smd during fixing the cpu watercool block!
> 
> So i removed the parts of the black "rubber".


I checked it too, it really sucks, but there is no problem with velocity2.


----------



## yahfz

I spent 3 months trying to get higher than 6200C28 on my Apex and couldn't. 3 Days ago I got my Unify-X and with the same sticks and same CPU I now have two stable profiles and both took me 3 days in total, 6600C28 1T and 6800C28 2T karhu and TM5 stable.

6600C28 1T Profile: https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/902660521889759263/964532757931917373/unknown.png
6800C28 2T Profile: https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/902660521889759263/963888277629333614/unknown.png


----------



## david12900k

7empe said:


> Thanks. That's correct.
> Maybe it is just my Apex (11/2021). Test should be performed on a bunch of board samples to get a wider view.


I also have an 11/2021. I wonder if it is like this on the 2022 models


----------



## asdkj1740

yahfz said:


> I spent 3 months trying to get higher than 6200C28 on my Apex and couldn't. 3 Days ago I got my Unify-X and with the same sticks and same CPU I now have two stable profiles and both took me 3 days in total, 6600C28 1T and 6800C28 2T karhu and TM5 stable.
> 
> 6600C28 1T Profile: https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/902660521889759263/964532757931917373/unknown.png
> 6800C28 2T Profile: https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/902660521889759263/963888277629333614/unknown.png


which apex is yours? no date or with date in 2021?


----------



## Mappi75

to the 12900KS users:

can you use Intel XTU stresstest for AVX2 without throttling ?

Even at 100% fanspeed i can run this test without throttle.

HWLabs GTR480 8x Noctua NF-A12 fans.


----------



## david12900k

Mappi75 said:


> to the 12900KS users:
> 
> can you use Intel XTU stresstest for AVX2 without throttling ?
> 
> Even at 100% fanspeed i can run this test without throttle.
> 
> HWLabs GTR480 8x Noctua NF-A12 fans.


If you are using the default v/f curve and havent touched voltages, then probably not. Intel's voltage points are extremely conservative, as in they are designed to use more power than necessary because they want to have some buffer between crashing.


----------



## yahfz

asdkj1740 said:


> which apex is yours? no date or with date in 2021?


Launch Apex, 2021.


----------



## Mappi75

Wondering because CPU-Z shows during the test 5200Mhz on all Pcores.. when does the Intel tool found a throttling?


----------



## jomama22

Mappi75 said:


> Wondering because CPU-Z shows during the test 5200Mhz on all Pcores.. when does the Intel tool found a throttling?


Use hwinfo to monitor core clocks and throttling conditions (there is a section that will tell you if you throttled and why)


----------



## 7empe

fat4l said:


> So from your testing, is 300 the best to use ? or do we go for like 500?
> 
> And vrm spread spectrum turn off right ?


IMO 300 kHz is the best. If you pick a manual VRM switching frequency, there is no spread spectrum option, because it is not relevant (no frequency fluctuations).


----------



## Csavez™

7empe said:


> IMO 300 kHz is the best. If you pick a manual VRM switching frequency, there is no spread spectrum option, because it is not relevant (no frequency fluctuations).


Hi!
It still made sense for evga dark to play with the vrm frequency, but not for asus. I went through everything too and got back to the auto setup, the tm5 extreme + cbr23 stability test is already flawless.
I ask why you use llc8? It needs more voltage for the same cpu clock, consumes more, and is therefore much warmer.

LLC6









LLC8


----------



## 7empe

Csavez™ said:


> Hi!
> It still made sense for evga dark to play with the vrm frequency, but not for asus. I went through everything too and got back to the auto setup, the tm5 extreme + cbr23 stability test is already flawless.
> I ask why you use llc8? It needs more voltage for the same cpu clock, consumes more, and is therefore much warmer.
> 
> LLC6
> View attachment 2556558
> 
> 
> LLC8
> View attachment 2556560
> View attachment 2556558
> View attachment 2556560


I use LLC4. The LLC8 was used for reading the default VID.


----------



## Csavez™

7empe said:


> I use LLC4. The LLC8 was used for reading the default VID.


I understand, this is not clear from your post, but do not force this vrm frequency thing, it will not solve the stabilization problems of asus ddr5 ram.


----------



## 7empe

Csavez™ said:


> I understand, this is not clear from your post, but do not force this vrm frequency thing, it will not solve the stabilization problems of asus ddr5 ram.


It is clear from my post - see the history of the discussion. I don't use VRM SW to stabilize DDR5. This would not have any sense. I use the lowest VRM SF to decrease vcore by 10-20 mV while maintaining stability. This is possible thanks to the minimal VRM noise - higher you go with the frequency, worse the VRM efficiency is (but better the transients are).


----------



## acoustic

7empe said:


> It is clear from my post - see the history of the discussion. I don't use VRM SW to stabilize DDR5. This would not have any sense. I use the lowest VRM SF to decrease vcore by 10-20 mV while maintaining stability. This is possible thanks to the minimal VRM noise - higher you go with the frequency, worse the VRM efficiency is.


I remember the days when you jacked switching frequency up to 700-800Khz from the start to get the VRM to behave better. Truthfully, even on my cheaper TUF D4, I have VRM SF to 300Khz and it's no different than 500Khz, except less heat. I think the switching frequency settings were more important on lower-end VRMs.. but they're all quite overbuilt on Z690.


----------



## 7empe

acoustic said:


> I remember the days when you jacked switching frequency up to 700-800Khz from the start to get the VRM to behave better. Truthfully, even on my cheaper TUF D4, I have VRM SF to 300Khz and it's no different than 500Khz, except less heat. I think the switching frequency settings were more important on lower-end VRMs.. but they're all quite overbuilt on Z690.


Can you point me when I said that regarding z690 apex? Don't recall it, sorry.
Your conclussion that VRM SF does nothing on the high-end boards is based on what?


----------



## edkieferlp

acoustic said:


> I remember the days when you jacked switching frequency up to 700-800Khz from the start to get the VRM to behave better. Truthfully, even on my cheaper TUF D4, I have VRM SF to 300Khz and it's no different than 500Khz, except less heat. I think the switching frequency settings were more important on lower-end VRMs.. but they're all quite overbuilt on Z690.


I had a P8-Z77V Pro and bumping VRM SF did help with transit voltages, but didn't need to raise it much, I think I went from 300 (or whatever was the default) to 350, that did help I remember.
I can't remember what max was but since it was not high end board it might of been 500.


----------



## 7empe

Which Intel ME version seems to work best with your Apex?

16.0.15.1545 
16.0.15.1620 
16.0.15.1735 

Thanks in advance for any input you may have.


----------



## acoustic

7empe said:


> Can you point me when I said that regarding z690 apex? Don't recall it, sorry.
> Your conclussion that VRM SF does nothing on the high-end boards is based on what?


I was agreeing with your data - altering the SF and pumping it to 800-1000Khz like we used to do on previous generations is not the way to go anymore. Your data shows that.

Thanks for the snarky response though. Completely unnecessary and I didn't say that you said *anything*. Always great being a complete dickbag for no reason, I guess.


----------



## MarkDeMark

db000 said:


> Any other KS out there?? Come join me!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> y-cruncher - Pi-2.5b overclocking records @ HWBOT
> 
> 
> Overclocking records
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hwbot.org











MarkDeMark`s y-cruncher - Pi-2.5b score: 58sec 781ms with a Core i9 12900KS


The Core i9 12900KS @ 5200MHzscores getScoreFormatted in the y-cruncher - Pi-2.5b benchmark. MarkDeMarkranks #38 worldwide and #7 in the hardware class. Find out more at HWBOT.




hwbot.org


----------



## nickolp1974

has anyone got 0070 bios for the Apex please


----------



## sugi0lover

nickolp1974 said:


> has anyone got 0070 bios for the Apex please











ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0070.CAP


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com





Avx512 enabled version, thanks to bscool








ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0070ucode15.CAP


CAP File



1drv.ms


----------



## nickolp1974

sugi0lover said:


> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0070.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Avx512 enabled version, thanks to bscool
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0070ucode15.CAP
> 
> 
> CAP File
> 
> 
> 
> 1drv.ms


thanks for that


----------



## Mappi75

nickolp1974 said:


> has anyone got 0070 bios for the Apex please


Is this a new bios with KS support or an old one? 
Thanks.


----------



## sugi0lover

Mappi75 said:


> Is this a new bios with KS support or an old one?
> Thanks.


Not sure. But build date is March 23, 2022. pretty new and I see many 12900KS users use this bios instead of 1403.


----------



## nickolp1974

sugi0lover said:


> Not sure. But build date is March 23, 2022. pretty new and I see many 12900KS users use this bios instead of 1403.


yeah works as 1403 does as far as SP etc but memory seems to work better, similar to 1304


----------



## z390e

still trying to find a seller who has the new batches of good Apex for sale, my build is blocked until I can get that board 😟 if anyone has bought one recently that didn't have to be RMA'd please share where either here or via pm


----------



## Csavez™

7empe said:


> It is clear from my post - see the history of the discussion. I don't use VRM SW to stabilize DDR5. This would not have any sense. I use the lowest VRM SF to decrease vcore by 10-20 mV while maintaining stability. This is possible thanks to the minimal VRM noise - higher you go with the frequency, worse the VRM efficiency is (but better the transients are).


I guess you didn't buy apex to run your cpu at 5ghz, because then it makes sense to poke the vrm frequency, but 5.2 and above will be few 300, at least the harder tests give me a black picture, and I'm talking about a minimum 30-minute test.
I don't even understand what matters 10-20mv for a processor of this caliber?
With 300 you only get a few degrees cooler vrm, which again doesn't matter.
And don’t get me wrong I don’t want to criticize you, I see you had a lot of work in it, you recommend 300 as if it were scripture.


----------



## Csavez™

sugi0lover said:


> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0070.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Avx512 enabled version, thanks to bscool
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0070ucode15.CAP
> 
> 
> CAP File
> 
> 
> 
> 1drv.ms


Will this work for everyone on 7000 memory? 😁


----------



## 7empe

Csavez™ said:


> I guess you didn't buy apex to run your cpu at 5ghz, because then it makes sense to poke the vrm frequency, but 5.2 and above will be few 300, at least the harder tests give me a black picture, and I'm talking about a minimum 30-minute test.
> I don't even understand what matters 10-20mv for a processor of this caliber?
> With 300 you only get a few degrees cooler vrm, which again doesn't matter.
> And don’t get me wrong I don’t want to criticize you, I see you had a lot of work in it, you recommend 300 as if it were scripture.


300 kHz works best for me. Pick the frequency that is the best for you.
10-20 mV means 4-5 C less on the CPU and longer OCTVB due to that fact.
I run 5.2 GHz all-core heavy avx with OCTVB up to 5.4 GHz all-core, 5.5 GHz 4-cores and 5.6 GHz 1-core.
LLC 4.


----------



## Nizzen

Csavez™ said:


> Will this work for everyone on 7000 memory? 😁


8000 memory 😏


----------



## Gadfly

z390e said:


> still trying to find a seller who has the new batches of good Apex for sale, my build is blocked until I can get that board 😟 if anyone has bought one recently that didn't have to be RMA'd please share where either here or via pm


Pretty sure there are none, anywhere.


----------



## Gadfly

Nizzen said:


> 8000 memory 😏


1T...


----------



## SoldierRBT

Gadfly said:


> Pretty sure there are none, anywhere.


Been looking for a 2022 Apex for months. Nothing. Considering other options atm.


----------



## 7empe

SoldierRBT said:


> Been looking for a 2022 Apex for months. Nothing. Considering other options atm.


What alternative do you consider?


----------



## SoldierRBT

7empe said:


> What alternative do you consider?


Z690 Dark or Z690 Unify-X/Z690I Unify. Anything that can do better than 6500C28 1T for daily.


----------



## 7empe

SoldierRBT said:


> Z690 Dark or Z690 Unify-X/Z690I Unify. Anything that can do better than 6500C28 1T for daily.


I'd love to put my hands on Z690 Dark and replace the Apex, but it seems impossible to get one.
I've been with Asus high-end boards for several last intel generations and I think it's high time to move forward with different brand...


----------



## borant

SoldierRBT said:


> Z690 Dark or Z690 Unify-X/Z690I Unify. Anything that can do better than 6500C28 1T for daily.





7empe said:


> I'd love to put my hands on Z690 Dark and replace the Apex, but it seems impossible to get one.
> I've been with Asus high-end boards for several last intel generations and I think it's high time to move forward with different brand...


Did anyone post any proof that EVGA can do 6600 1T or better?
I had exactly the same thought that after 30 years staying with Asus since their 1st MB I can't trust them anymore after this Z690 Minimums fiasco and lack of transparency with mitigation plans.
I got Classified for testing - it can only do 1T up to 5200. For 6800 2T it needs VDD2 1.55. The good thing is that you can got into BIOS every single time comparing to ASUS bypassing BIOS and loading OS even during BIOS update sometimes.


----------



## 7empe

borant said:


> Did anyone post any proof that EVGA can do 6600 1T or better?
> I had exactly the same thought that after 30 years staying with Asus since their 1st MB I can't trust them anymore after this Z690 Minimums fiasco and lack of transparency with mitigation plans.
> I got Classified for testing - it can only do 1T up to 5200. For 6800 2T it needs VDD2 1.55. The good thing is that you can got into BIOS every single time comparing to ASUS bypassing BIOS and loading OS even during BIOS update sometimes.


Imagine buying 13th gen (with native ddr5-5600 support) and placing it in the Z690 Apex where you won't be able to reach 6600 1T stable  It looks like we need to go for Z790 anyway...


----------



## Gadfly

I have been trying to buy a Z690 Dark as well, no luck so far. 

I am still sitting on my Apex with an open RMA waiting for Asus to get new boards back in stock for advanced replacement.


----------



## Gadfly

borant said:


> Did anyone post any proof that EVGA can do 6600 1T or better?
> I had exactly the same thought that after 30 years staying with Asus since their 1st MB I can't trust them anymore after this Z690 Minimums fiasco and lack of transparency with mitigation plans.
> I got Classified for testing - it can only do 1T up to 5200. For 6800 2T it needs VDD2 1.55. The good thing is that you can got into BIOS every single time comparing to ASUS bypassing BIOS and loading OS even during BIOS update sometimes.


There are people in this forum that are posting Apex's doing 6400, 6600, even 7000 1T, where the majority of people can't even run 6600 2T, my board will not post 1T over 6200 at all, no matter which CPU or memory kit I use. 

A few people with binned/golden Mb's posting exceptional results doesn't really translate what people can expect when they buy a retail sample of the board.


----------



## acoustic

borant said:


> Did anyone post any proof that EVGA can do 6600 1T or better?
> I had exactly the same thought that after 30 years staying with Asus since their 1st MB I can't trust them anymore after this Z690 Minimums fiasco and lack of transparency with mitigation plans.
> I got Classified for testing - it can only do 1T up to 5200. For 6800 2T it needs VDD2 1.55. The good thing is that you can got into BIOS every single time comparing to ASUS bypassing BIOS and loading OS even during BIOS update sometimes.


You're comparing a 4DIMM board against a 2DIMM. Of course the APEX is going to beat the Classified.

The DARK is a 2DIMM. That would be a fair comparison


----------



## borant

acoustic said:


> You're comparing a 4DIMM board against a 2DIMM. Of course the APEX is going to beat the Classified.
> 
> The DARK is a 2DIMM. That would be a fair comparison


I have Extreme doing everything that Apex does. 
4DIMM may limit the maximum frequency like 7200 vs 7600 which is not an issue for me since I will not be using 1.6+ voltages for daily work and benching claims are not a priority to me.
So I compare Extreme to Classified and EVGA is far below with performance aspects.


----------



## acoustic

borant said:


> I have Extreme doing everything that Apex does.
> 4DIMM may limit the maximum frequency like 7200 vs 7600 which is not an issue for me since I will not be using 1.6+ voltages for daily work and benching claims are not a priority to me.
> So I compare Extreme to Classified and EVGA is far below with performance aspects.


$1100 USD board to $620 USD board.. I mean really? Many people have had tons of issues with getting 4DIMM up to ~6800, so I'd say you are an outlier rather than the norm. I don't see how it's fair comparing these boards since one is EVGAs "mid-range" ([email protected]$600 mid-range) and the other is the ASUS Halo product board.

APEX vs DARK? I'm with you all the way on that one. Seems the availability of the DARK has been pretty spotty. Hell, availability of the APEX has been extremely low as far as I can tell.


----------



## borant

acoustic said:


> $1100 USD board to $620 USD board.. I mean really? Many people have had tons of issues with getting 4DIMM up to ~6800, so I'd say you are an outlier rather than the norm. I don't see how it's fair comparing these boards since one is EVGAs "mid-range" ([email protected]$600 mid-range) and the other is the ASUS Halo product board.
> 
> APEX vs DARK? I'm with you all the way on that one. Seems the availability of the DARK has been pretty spotty. Hell, availability of the APEX has been extremely low as far as I can tell.


Extreme is actually cheaper than Classified when paying attention to delivered value. Classified is barebone MB with a few SATA cables and thermal pads included.
The Extreme includes expensive USB DAC, USB oscilloscope, fan hub and a bunch of cables for about $300 value. Then it has OLED status display, bigger number of USB ports, Thunderbolt, Marveel 10G Ethernet etc. If you you will strip all of these down Extreme is 500 board and Classified is really overpriced for what it is.
Next is Dark price - 2DIMM extreme overclocking boards are striped down H. meaning it is suppossed to be less expensive like Apex vs Extreme. But EVGA is charging 200 more, for what value specifically? Is it just for Kingpin nickname? Vince is the great person but he is just an overclocking enthusiast lucky picking up nice nickname. The actual engineering improvements to EVGA products were made by TiN who was laid off 2 years ago.
@Nizzen where are you with your favorite question? 

P.S. Forgot to mention EVGA does not have Water In and Our sensor inputs and it cannot monitor SA voltage


----------



## D-EJ915

The EVGA boards are really expensive imo but it's a bit much to say anything the extreme includes is a value add since a lot of more inexpensive boards have the same features. It's a kitchen sink halo product for people that like to spend a lot.


----------



## jomama22

borant said:


> Extreme is actually cheaper than Classified when paying attention to delivered value. Classified is barebone MB with a few SATA cables and thermal pads included.
> The Extreme includes expensive USB DAC, USB oscilloscope, fan hub and a bunch of cables for about $300 value. Then it has OLED status display, bigger number of USB ports, Thunderbolt, Marveel 10G Ethernet etc. If you you will strip all of these down Extreme is 500 board and Classified is really overpriced for what it is.
> Next is Dark price - 2DIMM extreme overclocking boards are striped down H. meaning it is suppossed to be less expensive like Apex vs Extreme. But EVGA is charging 200 more, for what value specifically? Is it just for Kingpin nickname? Vince is the great person but he is just an overclocking enthusiast lucky picking up nice nickname. The actual engineering improvements to EVGA products were made by TiN who was laid off 2 years ago.
> @Nizzen where are you with your favorite question?
> 
> P.S. Forgot to mention EVGA does not have Water In and Our sensor inputs and it cannot monitor SA voltage


As far as I know, all 4 dimm boards are more or less trash with 1t. The fact that it can do 6600+ 2t is at the very leave comparable to most other 4 dimms, not to mention more than many many many apex user can do lol.


----------



## z390e

SoldierRBT said:


> Z690 Dark or Z690 Unify-X/Z690I Unify. Anything that can do better than 6500C28 1T for daily.


Same, but I'm only really looking at the Dark myself I just don't like MSI in general. I pretty much check the site every few hours. It's depressing. At this point we will have 790 boards before we can get a non-RMA Apex or a Dark 690.


----------



## 7empe

z390e said:


> Same, but I'm only really looking at the Dark myself I just don't like MSI in general. I pretty much check the site every few hours. It's depressing. At this point we will have 790 boards before we can get a non-RMA Apex or a Dark 690.


I don’t think the situation with Z790 is going to improve, however I don’t see any reason right now to place the order (even if it would be possible) for the Z690 Dark and get one together with Z790 paper release. Sad 

However looking at how many issues Asus had with QA at Z690 (reverse capacitors, yhh), I won't risk Asus anymore.


----------



## db000

I've not yet opened a RMA for replacement. Still hoping that a 2022 batch will surface here in Sweden. Last batch (1 week ago) was 11/2021 boards... Looks like I need to get in contact with them. Else I'm stuck on 6600 C30 2T on water until z790...


----------



## pR1maL

Gadfly said:


> send a few cherry picked samples out to tech tubers and a few overclockers who post on the enthusiast forums; then watch them fly off the shelves at higher profit margins than before.


All part of the deception.


----------



## sblantipodi

months passes, bugs are not solved, new firmware introduces more regressions than what it fixes...
is there a good manufacturer that sells finished products and that don't vanish some weeks after the release?


----------



## Wasakiqwe

Hello everyone , new here. I'm building new pc looking for good and stable motherboard under 500$
I would like it to be cool can handle 12900k +ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II - 420+ 4 of 8 gb ram c14 3200+ asus rog1000 gold.
I prefer if it doesn't have Realtek acl4080 sound card and intel 1225v
because I had not so good experience with last z590(sold) so I don't like to repeat the same thing and wasted more time.
would like to know your top recommendation? prefer if you share your experience with current z690 motherboard so real experience with with daily use.
please if you can share your thoughts.
Thanks really appreciate your help and time.


----------



## DoomDash

Hey guys, I got great news. The newest BIOS fixed XMP for me, it was basically unstable anywhere over 5400MHZ before, but now is stable at my XMP's rated 6000MHZ! Not only has been good in games so far it also passed memtest. This was a bit of a nightmare for awhile but I'm glad that ASUS fixed compatibility. I am on G.Skill Trident Z5 /strix z690 but my memories weren't originally supported because my timings initially.


----------



## LazyGamer

Wasakiqwe said:


> I prefer if it doesn't have realtek acl4080 sound card and intel 1225v.


This basically means 'no ASUS', in a thread about ASUS boards...


----------



## Wasakiqwe

I think you are right. Is better to get asus z690 hero or creator. I saw it has 10gb ethernet ?


----------



## DungeonKeeper1

Csavez™ said:


> Everyone should avoid the 1403 bios


I use 1403 since first day. Absolutly no problems. 
Runs stable as 0811, that i have previous used.
12900k, z690 Formula, 2x16GB DDR5 6000 CL36 Gskill, 1080ti, sb xfi titanium
All settings at stock.

1403 is a very good bios version.

Most problems comes with oc. I think on a 12900k system is this obsolet.


----------



## morph.

db000 said:


> I've not yet opened a RMA for replacement. Still hoping that a 2022 batch will surface here in Sweden. Last batch (1 week ago) was 11/2021 boards... Looks like I need to get in contact with them. Else I'm stuck on 6600 C30 2T on water until z790...


I've heard from an Asus rep, the Apex board is a limited production run and whatever stock is left out there is what's left allegedly... Of course, support will continue just not production as apex is for a niche market.


----------



## acoustic

morph. said:


> I've heard from an Asus rep, the Apex board is a limited production run and whatever stock is left out there is what's left allegedly... Of course, support will continue just not production as apex is for a niche market.


Eh that would be a dramatic change from what they have done every generation prior. Maybe they didn't want to fix the issues with the APEX and decided to stop production, correct all the RMAs, and wait for Z790 at this point.

I don't find that likely, though.


----------



## morph.

acoustic said:


> Eh that would be a dramatic change from what they have done every generation prior. Maybe they didn't want to fix the issues with the APEX and decided to stop production, correct all the RMAs, and wait for Z790 at this point.
> 
> I don't find that likely, though.


----------



## acoustic

morph. said:


> View attachment 2557372
> 
> View attachment 2557373


Wow. That's a big change. There was good availability for Z590 APEX.. ****, there's even a Z590 APEX new in-stock at my Microcenter right now. I have not seen a single Z690 APEX once at my store.

This has been a very unusual release, and despite what that rep says, they seem to have produced much less this generation than prior.

Hopefully this isn't the case for Z790.


----------



## IronAge

Yeah, maybe that's a good reason, Z590 Apex still sitting on the shelves of some etailers, conclusion: reduce Z690 Apex numbers, especially at this price point.

been trying to sell a left over unused Z590 Apex for weeks for a reasonable price and about to give up on it.


----------



## morph.

It's probably more so not many people spent money on the z590 platform and like myself carried on using a z490 board for 11th gen and even then not many people burned money on 11th gen cpus heh.


----------



## acoustic

IronAge said:


> Yeah, maybe that's a good reason, Z590 Apex still sitting on the shelves of some etailers, conclusion: reduce Z690 Apex numbers, especially at this price point.
> 
> been trying to sell a left over unused Z590 Apex for weeks for a reasonable price and about to give up on it.


I'm not sure one single Z590 APEX is a good reason to do so. Now that I think about it, I don't believe Z590/Rocket Lake in general sold all that well .. it wasn't exactly received with rave reviews. That could also be why Z590 APEX had decent availability.. so I guess that's a fair point. Beat me to it Morph!

Looking back, when I had my Z370/9900K and then Z490/10900K, I could have purchased a Z490 APEX, or a Z370 APEX, even late in the game. I had zero issues finding one. Hopefully Z790 sees ample production (and good boards)


----------



## IronAge

Not only Apex has been on sale, Z590 Unify-X and OC Formula been on limited sale for almost half of the initial offering here in germany.

so maybe its good news that APEX is EOP.  

i have two incoming, one new replacement from Etailer, and a refurbished one from Asus. (AFAIK both 2021 production)

very unlikely to get a 2022 unit when the production has already ended.


----------



## z390e

Im sure COVID had something to do with production numbers as well.


----------



## z390e

That hurts to read from Juan and isn't helping the ASUS brand right now. This entire Apex debacle and how it appears that rather than resolve them they are simply throwing in the towel. I realize COVID has everyone f'ed up but this Apex debacle is a major black eye IMO for Asus and after the **** I went through with my RIVBE I am starting to wonder if the head of that damned division doesn't just need to be fired FFS. This isn't the first time one of their top end boards has **** the proverbial bed. At what point does the company start caring about its customers?

For people who are waiting on RMA'd boards are they even telling you anything? Man, I'd love to hear from an ASUS rep on this board as it is possible I dont have all the info.

This seems like a bigger issue than just ASUS. I have literally been watching the EVGA site 5+ times a day for 4+ months and haven't seen a 690 Dark for sale even once.


----------



## jomama22

z390e said:


> That hurts to read from Juan and isn't helping the ASUS brand right now. This entire Apex debacle and how it appears that rather than resolve them they are simply throwing in the towel. I realize COVID has everyone f'ed up but this Apex debacle is a major black eye IMO for Asus and after the *** I went through with my RIVBE I am starting to wonder if the head of that damned division doesn't just need to be fired FFS. This isn't the first time one of their top end boards has *** the proverbial bed. At what point does the company start caring about its customers?
> 
> For people who are waiting on RMA'd boards are they even telling you anything? Man, I'd love to hear from an ASUS rep on this board as it is possible I dont have all the info.
> 
> This seems like a bigger issue than just ASUS. I have literally been watching the EVGA site 5+ times a day for 4+ months and haven't seen a 690 Dark for sale even once.


You can't get a dark unless you got in the queue, which was only open for 2 days in February. Have been very limited batches going out to those in the queue.


----------



## Gadfly

So now Asus is discontinuing the Apex entirely?


----------



## z390e

Thansk @jomama22 wasn't aware of that, I was dealing with life stuff when all this new hardware launched and by being late looks like I missed all the boats


----------



## IronAge

Gadfly said:


> So now Asus is discontinuing the Apex entirely?


no not entirely, it's been stated that they will provide future Bios/UEFI Updates.


----------



## Gadfly

z390e said:


> For people who are waiting on RMA'd boards are they even telling you anything? Man, I'd love to hear from an ASUS rep on this board as it is possible I dont have all the info.


Well, I just reached back out to Asus, and they told me that they still have no stock, and blew me off. Telling me they would have someone "manually check the stock" and email or call me in the next 24 hours. Basically the exact same conversation I have been having with Asus for the last 6 weeks. They also told me that if I send my Apex into a "repair facility" on a standard RMA that I would be offered a "comparable product" or I will have to wait "An unknown amount of time"


----------



## Gadfly

IronAge said:


> no not entirely, it's been stated that they will provide future Bios/UEFI Updates.


That is still a discontinued product.


----------



## z390e

Gadfly said:


> Well, I just reached back out to Asus, and they told me that they still have no stock, and blew me off. Telling me they would have someone "manually check the stock" and email or call me in the next 24 hours. Basically the exact same conversation I have been having with Asus for the last 6 weeks. They also told me that if I send my Apex into a "repair facility" on a standard RMA that I would be offered a "comparable product" or I will have to wait "An unknown amount of time"


To me thats awful customer service. This is a vendor defect the least they could do is provide the product you paid for at the spec they advertised. Infuriating.


----------



## SoldierRBT

IronAge said:


> no not entirely, it's been stated that they will provide future Bios/UEFI Updates.


Bios/UEFI Updates isn't gonna save defective boards..


----------



## IronAge

Gadfly said:


> They also told me that if I send my Apex into a "repair facility" on a standard RMA that I would be offered a "comparable product" or I will have to wait "An unknown amount of time"


let us all pray for replacement with Z790 Apex, just hold it back a few monthes. 
(knowing that this is not going to happen, Asus is no EVGA)
i actually know what brand i am not going to buy next time.


----------



## Groove2013

IronAge said:


> let us all pray for replacement with Z790 Apex, just hold it back a few monthes.
> (knowing that this is not going to happen, Asus is no EVGA)
> i actually know what brand i am not going to buy next time.


Lately I've seen many people that were long time Asus fans switching from Apex to Unify-X and from Strix to Edge and better experience, lower prices and 0 regrets.
What didn't work on Asus at all or only after a lot of tweaking or after several BIOS updates, worked directly on MSI, with almost no efforts.

Also on MSI Samsung DDR5 works just fine, unlike on Asus, where it's a pain in the ass.

I also wanted to switch from Asus to MSI, but I like more Asus vidual design of boards and I'm so used to Asus BIOS.


----------



## getskillplz

Hey guys!

Have a question, in a lot of screens of the asrock timing i see the FSB : DRAM Ratio is 1:34. Mine is 1:30, how can i change that and what does it do? Can it also help stablelize the oc?


----------



## edkieferlp

getskillplz said:


> Hey guys!
> 
> Have a question, in a lot of screens of the asrock timing i see the FSB : DRAM Ratio is 1:34. Mine is 1:30, how can i change that and what does it do? Can it also help stablelize the oc?











Does a FSB:DRAM ratio of 1:18 mean that my FSB/CPU is...


From reading other posts on memory speeds/overclocking I noticed that everyone else has a smaller FSB:DRAM ratio, like 1:1, 2:3, 1:2, etc. so I was wondering if I chose DRAM that is excessively fast for my cpu (so that my RAM might be throttling/reducing its clock speed to match the FSB clock...




www.overclock.net


----------



## getskillplz

edkieferlp said:


> Does a FSB:DRAM ratio of 1:18 mean that my FSB/CPU is...
> 
> 
> From reading other posts on memory speeds/overclocking I noticed that everyone else has a smaller FSB:DRAM ratio, like 1:1, 2:3, 1:2, etc. so I was wondering if I chose DRAM that is excessively fast for my cpu (so that my RAM might be throttling/reducing its clock speed to match the FSB clock...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net


Thanks alot!

Just another question. Can you guys already tell what temp is good? Or safe for a daily base?
I find alot of posts about that on the internet but everyone tells something different.


----------



## david12900k

db000 said:


> I've not yet opened a RMA for replacement. Still hoping that a 2022 batch will surface here in Sweden. Last batch (1 week ago) was 11/2021 boards... Looks like I need to get in contact with them. Else I'm stuck on 6600 C30 2T on water until z790...


This might be a really dumb question, but have you tried swapping the slots of the ram sticks? Like just swap them around


----------



## AdrianPav

Just a long time lurker here... Recently swapped over to a ROG STRIX Z690 gaming E from an old Gigabyte board. I haven't actually touched an ASUS board in almost 5 years. This Armory Crate thing they're trying to push on to people... Oh my god it's terrible. What were they thinking?! I thought AI suite was bad... Holy crap. I don't think I ever uninstalled something faster. To make things worse it needs a separate uninstaller that you need to download to totally get rid of the wretched thing. I really like ASUS hardware but seriously, they need to hire better people to develop software. This is disgusting bloatware is totally unnecessary. Patriot Viper? Really?! Why is it so hard to keep it simple and straightforward? Jeez. Sorry I just thought I'd share.


----------



## Akadaka

AdrianPav said:


> Just a long time lurker here... Recently swapped over to a ROG STRIX Z690 gaming E from an old Gigabyte board. I haven't actually touched an ASUS board in almost 5 years. This Armory Crate thing they're trying to push on to people... Oh my god it's terrible. What were they thinking?! I thought AI suite was bad... Holy crap. I don't think I ever uninstalled something faster. To make things worse it needs a separate uninstaller that you need to download to totally get rid of the wretched thing. I really like ASUS hardware but seriously, they need to hire better people to develop software. This is disgusting bloatware is totally unnecessary. Patriot Viper? Really?! Why is it so hard to keep it simple and straightforward? Jeez. Sorry I just thought I'd share.


It's not perfect but it's probably better than the competition.


----------



## Manya3084

Just got an Apex...was just sent into the shop from the Asus distributor in Australia... November 2021 build date.

Guess we'll see if it can OC my memory once I install it.

I'll tackle it tomorrow as I also have to de-lid my 12900kf and install the rockitkit copper ihs.


----------



## z390e

Sounds like a fun day @Manya3084


----------



## db000

david12900k said:


> This might be a really dumb question, but have you tried swapping the slots of the ram sticks? Like just swap them around


Not dumb, I've har four kits of 6400CL32. Dual channel wont do more then 6600.


----------



## IronAge

Two Apex i got today, one from first wave Batch (replacement from Etailer) without Year on Label and one 2021-11 Apex which i bought this week.

Next round with Asus Apex PITA incoming for 1600$.


----------



## Akadaka

Apex should be the flagship not the Extreme they should either kill off Formula & Extreme from now on takes it's place or kill off Extreme all together it made no sense that the Apex was cheaper but performed better than Asus top model.


----------



## Feklar

Apex will not be the flagship board with only two memory slots.


----------



## LazyGamer

Akadaka said:


> Apex should be the flagship not the Extreme they should either kill off Formula & Extreme from now on takes it's place or kill off Extreme all together it made no sense that the Apex was cheaper but performed better than Asus top model.


There's more to a system than just memory performance - _a lot_ more. The Apex is really just getting attention this time around because of how difficult DDR5 has been - same with the Unify-X. Even the ITX boards are doing better, or so it seems.

...and I'd even be fine with an ITX board if larger NVMe drives were cheaper so I could use fewer of them, and everything came with 10Gbit and Thunderbolt, lol.


----------



## dyanikoglu

IronAge said:


> let us all pray for replacement with Z790 Apex, just hold it back a few monthes.
> (knowing that this is not going to happen, Asus is no EVGA)
> i actually know what brand i am not going to buy next time.


A replacement will be nice. Then I can sell it without opening the box and switch to MSI. Not gonna fall into another Apex mess again with upcoming generation.


----------



## Simkin

acoustic said:


> Wow. That's a big change. There was good availability for Z590 APEX.. ****, there's even a Z590 APEX new in-stock at my Microcenter right now. I have not seen a single Z690 APEX once at my store.
> 
> This has been a very unusual release, and despite what that rep says, they seem to have produced much less this generation than prior.
> 
> Hopefully this isn't the case for Z790.


Here in Norway its still plenty of Z690 Apex in Stock, and as far as i know, its been good availability since launch.


----------



## arieldeboca

Hello. Next Monday I will receive an Asus Apex Z690 90MB18I0-M0AAY0 motherboard (I think it was the initial manufacturing batch: 2021).
This Part No, does it have problems with the XMP of the memories? These problems were solved with bios updates?.
If this batch is the one with the memory problems, I'll return the board.

Thanks for the help,


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

arieldeboca said:


> Hello. Next Monday I will receive an Asus Apex Z690 90MB18I0-M0AAY0 motherboard (I think it was the initial manufacturing batch: 2021).
> This Part No, does it have problems with the XMP of the memories? These problems were solved with bios updates?.
> If this batch is the one with the memory problems, I'll return the board.
> 
> Thanks for the help,


Could be bad. I would just test it to see if you need to send it back or not.


----------



## arielo.deboca

MrTOOSHORT said:


> Could be bad. I would just test it to see if you need to send it back or not.


Hello. Thanks for the reply. The xmp problems were not solved with the latest bios?


----------



## acoustic

arielo.deboca said:


> Hello. Thanks for the reply. The xmp problems were not solved with the latest bios?


The issues with the APEX, that people are seeking 2022 production boards to fix, were not BIOS or software related. 

Only way to tell if your APEX is good or not, is to plug it in and try it. Good luck!


----------



## Sa-Mo

acoustic said:


> The issues with the APEX, that people are seeking 2022 production boards to fix, were not BIOS or software related.
> 
> Only way to tell if your APEX is good or not, is to plug it in and try it. Good luck!


I know I already made a post about my case over at the "_Official_ Intel 24/7 DDR5 stability" thread but I didn't get an answer yet... Anyway I managed to get my Corsair Vengeance 5600CL36 (Samsung) stable at XMP 1, but I changed the freq. to 6000 MHz (also set 100:100, 1:2, CR2), left all the primary timings on default (36, 36, 36, 76) + sub. on Auto, VDD/VDDQ/IVR set to 1.375v, MC 1.25v and SA set to Offset mode and Auto. I read about these values on another forum for my exact kit, and it was also recommended to disable "PCI Express Native Power Management" so I also did that and yesterday I was playing Metro Exodus for about 3 hours just fine, also passed multiple runs of TM5 (1usmus and Extreme preset) at random times while the system was on for over 6 hours and I got no error. I'll see how it goes today.

At one point I think I even managed to boot 6400, but it wasn't stable... Got errors really fast. Probably wrong voltage settings etc.

I am also new to the whole RAM OC world...

My main question is, how to really test if my APEX is actually faulty? And what can I realistically expect from my ram kit paired with an i7 12700k and APEX, all running on air and no water cooling (max temp. while stress testing reached 65C max. on one stick, the other 63C on the settings I talked about above at 6000)? What else should I test? Should I try to get it stable at higher freq. or just try to tighten the primary timings? Any feedback would be greatly appriciated. Thanks.


----------



## D-EJ915

My (samsung) Corsair 5600c36 kit was not as good as my (samsung) Gskill 6000c36 kit but I'd not really expected it to be just based on their initial bins anyway but I had only one kit of each. I returned the Corsair kit so can't really comment on it anymore that it required 100-133 lower at the same timings.


----------



## Manya3084

So, Apex installed. Copper IHS and liquid metal applied (2 capacitors were lost during the de-lidding...but no issue applying OC)

So far for memory OCing... pretty much stuck at 6200 CL36 (XMP). These are dominator platinum Hynix sticks.


----------



## Sa-Mo

D-EJ915 said:


> My (samsung) Corsair 5600c36 kit was not as good as my (samsung) Gskill 6000c36 kit but I'd not really expected it to be just based on their initial bins anyway but I had only one kit of each. I returned the Corsair kit so can't really comment on it anymore that it required 100-133 lower at the same timings.


Thank you for the reply. I was actually lying... It's not stable at 6000CL36... I got 2 BSOD yesterday, one at shut down and one at windows login, even though I had 0 errors on tests. Firefox also randomly crashed twice, and Metro Exodus, BFV as well... Will try 100:133 and see if that makes any difference. Otherwise I really don't know what else to do. Maybe I'll flash 1403 and see if that's any better. If I can only run it stable at XMP 2 (5600CL36), should I just assume it's my APEX and return it an maybe get the MSI Unify-X? What can I expect from Unify-X really?


----------



## satinghostrider

Sa-Mo said:


> Thank you for the reply. I was actually lying... It's not stable at 6000CL36... I got 2 BSOD yesterday, one at shut down and one at windows login, even though I had 0 errors on tests. Firefox also randomly crashed twice, and Metro Exodus, BFV as well... Will try 100:133 and see if that makes any difference. Otherwise I really don't know what else to do. Maybe I'll flash 1403 and see if that's any better. If I can only run it stable at XMP 2 (5600CL36), should I just assume it's my APEX and return it an maybe get the MSI Unify-X? What can I expect from Unify-X really?


I've had the same issue as you. Only a new Apex 2022 production board rectified all my memory instabilities. Try 0811 on your current Apex. That was the only bios that could stabilise 6000 for me. Anything above 6000 was so unstable. And anything above 0811 wasn't stable flat even 6000 for me.


----------



## primoz.osolnik0

Sa-Mo said:


> Thank you for the reply. I was actually lying... It's not stable at 6000CL36... I got 2 BSOD yesterday, one at shut down and one at windows login, even though I had 0 errors on tests. Firefox also randomly crashed twice, and Metro Exodus, BFV as well... Will try 100:133 and see if that makes any difference. Otherwise I really don't know what else to do. Maybe I'll flash 1403 and see if that's any better. If I can only run it stable at XMP 2 (5600CL36), should I just assume it's my APEX and return it an maybe get the MSI Unify-X? What can I expect from Unify-X really?


Hello Samo, you have exacly the same problem I had too. I bought my Apex mid January together with I7 12700k and 2x16 Gskill 6000Mhz 36,36,36,76 kit. At that time this memory issues with Apex were still not so known and were largly relegated bios imaturity. I tried all types of settings to get my ram running ok at 6000. It was very frustrating cous it would pass memtest and like 10 hours of kurhu ram test only to than fail 5 minutes later on youtube with BSOD. It would at times run perfectly for 2 days with playing games like Forza horizon 5 and assasins creed Valhalla than on 3 day it wouldnt even boot properly. I tested the system with AIDA64 using memory test and at 6000 it failed in few minutes. Than I used one of the memory profiles in bios made for samsung memory at 6000mhz and lovered frequency by 1 step to 5866mhz and with it all runs perfectly for 4 weeks now without an issue. I was able to make it run at Command rate one with 32,33,33,52 latencies also. But anthing at 6000 wont work. So try lovering memory frekuency to 5866 and all might just work.

If I knew before buying of that I would probably just bought a Hero but now I am of course far too late to just return this one to store also going trough Asus replacement it would mean I would just have to buy another cheap board for meantime as replcament till they fugure out if they will send me mine back or other one. Asus did not make an official recall for apex and they stopped production of it. Also there is a slim chance of my cpu just not being ok to handle 6000 but I think it is more the boards fault. At least I can tighted the latencies down. I dont use the computer for benchmarking but for regular usage, gaming and photoshop.I bought apex mostly for its VRM. I doupt It would make a real world differnce goiung trough the hassle of replacing it, especially as just some placeholder b660 board is 200 eur there would be postage for apex and a big question what will i get back and also when. And surely I will not buy a 800 eur board next time....if I stay on Asus I will buy a strix and that is it.

Somo we are both from Slovenia, where did you buy your apex ?


----------



## Sa-Mo

primoz.osolnik0 said:


> Hello Samo, you have exacly the same problem I had too. I bought my Apex mid January together with I7 12700k and 2x16 Gskill 6000Mhz 36,36,36,76 kit. At that time this memory issues with Apex were still not so known and were largly relegated bios imaturity. I tried all types of settings to get my ram running ok at 6000. It was very frustrating cous it would pass memtest and like 10 hours of kurhu ram test only to than fail 5 minutes later on youtube with BSOD. It would at times run perfectly for 2 days with playing games like Forza horizon 5 and assasins creed Valhalla than on 3 day it wouldnt even boot properly. I tested the system with AIDA64 using memory test and at 6000 it failed in few minutes. Than I used one of the memory profiles in bios made for samsung memory at 6000mhz and lovered frequency by 1 step to 5866mhz and with it all runs perfectly for 4 weeks now without an issue. I was able to make it run at Command rate one with 32,33,33,52 latencies also. But anthing at 6000 wont work. So try lovering memory frekuency to 5866 and all might just work.
> 
> If I knew before buying of that I would probably just bought a Hero but now I am of course far too late to just return this one to store also going trough Asus replacement it would mean I would just have to buy another cheap board for meantime as replcament till they fugure out if they will send me mine back or other one. Asus did not make an official recall for apex and they stopped production of it. Also there is a slim chance of my cpu just not being ok to handle 6000 but I think it is more the boards fault. At least I can tighted the latencies down. I dont use the computer for benchmarking but for regular usage, gaming and photoshop.I bought apex mostly for its VRM. I doupt It would make a real world differnce goiung trough the hassle of replacing it, especially as just some placeholder b660 board is 200 eur there would be postage for apex and a big question what will i get back and also when. And surely I will not buy a 800 eur board next time....if I stay on Asus I will buy a strix and that is it.
> 
> Somo we are both from Slovenia, where did you buy your apex ?


Primož, thank you so much for all of the information. Yes, I am from Slovenia as well. I bought my board on Amazon.de and I have till 5.5.2022 to send it back. I really don't know what to do and what to decide for... I also don't really benchmark, I mainly just play games, but I thought I would be able to OC my ram at least a little bit, nothing extreme, but this has been so frustrating and dissapointing so far on Apex... I guess I should have done a little more research next time...


----------



## Sa-Mo

satinghostrider said:


> I've had the same issue as you. Only a new Apex 2022 production board rectified all my memory instabilities. Try 0811 on your current Apex. That was the only bios that could stabilise 6000 for me. Anything above 6000 was so unstable. And anything above 0811 wasn't stable flat even 6000 for me.


Thanks, might also give 0811 a try. How come that version is stable and newer ones aren't? Is your board 11/2011 as well? Is there anyone with the same kit as mine and can actually run it stable 24/7 on at least 6000 or maybe more on Apex or maybe some other z690 board? I wonder if my instability could maybe be in a way related to the SPD temp being too high (reaches 65C sometimes on stress test)?


----------



## primoz.osolnik0

Sa-Mo said:


> Thanks, might also give 0811 a try. How come that version is stable and newer ones aren't? Is your board 11/2011 as well? Is there anyone with the same kit as mine and can actually run it stable 24/7 on at least 6000 or maybe more on Apex or maybe some other z690 board?


I bought the board when this 0811 was the latest bios and it was the same for me as all others. I would say if you have an open window of return and can be without computer for that time, return it, but know that replacement probably wont be better, here on this forum there are many people who returned boards 4 times or so always getting ones back with similar resualts back, only those who get trough trubles of going directly trough asus and waiting for month or 2 got eventually a good ones. i just dont want all that truble and postage could easly came to 150 eurs even if we would need to send them far... I guess if only for gaming I would say to set it at stable setting and live with it....especially since Z790 is 6 months away now probably. Ram oc is nice to see and I have done it before but in realitly it doesnt really add a lot of performance in everday tasks we do at home.....compared to oc graphic cards or CPUs. And yes my board is 11/21 date. i bought mine at mlacom.

For a bit of lighter hearth, read this article as they tested DDR5 in games and so to see for gaming it doesnt trully metter, in your case I would do as I do...run at 5800mhz or 5866 and try to find lovest stable latencies. 









DDR5 scaling with G.Skill TridentZ5 6000 CL36 review


Recently we looked at the performance differential between DDR4 and DDR5 on Alder-Lake, Intels Gen 12th series processors. Today we review a G.Skill TridentZ5 6000 CL36 DDR5 kit and fire off frequenc... What are memory timings?




www.guru3d.com





Below is test of aida what I ran now stable for 3 or 4 weeks without issues.


----------



## Sa-Mo

primoz.osolnik0 said:


> I bought the board when this 0811 was the latest bios and it was the same for me as all others. I would say if you have an open window of return and can be without computer for that time, return it, but know that replacement probably wont be better, here on this forum there are many people who returned boards 4 times or so always getting ones back with similar resualts back, only those who get trough trubles of going directly trough asus and waiting for month or 2 got eventually a good ones. i just dont want all that truble and postage could easly came to 150 eurs even if we would need to send them far... I guess if only for gaming I would say to set it at stable setting and live with it....especially since Z790 is 6 months away now probably. Ram oc is nice to see and I have done it before but in realitly it doesnt really add a lot of performance in everday tasks we do at home.....compared to oc graphic cards or CPUs. And yes my board is 11/21 date. i bought mine at mlacom.
> 
> For a bit of lighter hearth, read this article as they tested DDR5 in games and so to see for gaming it doesnt trully metter, in your case I would do as I do...run at 5800mhz or 5866 and try to find lovest stable latencies.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DDR5 scaling with G.Skill TridentZ5 6000 CL36 review
> 
> 
> Recently we looked at the performance differential between DDR4 and DDR5 on Alder-Lake, Intels Gen 12th series processors. Today we review a G.Skill TridentZ5 6000 CL36 DDR5 kit and fire off frequenc... What are memory timings?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.guru3d.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Below is test of aida what I ran now stable for 3 or 4 weeks without issues.
> 
> View attachment 2558055


Yeah, you might be right... Since I mainly just play games, if I can get it stable at your settings I can live with it... I game at 4k60Hz anyway, so I am not really aiming to hit high framerates at lower resolution... About Z790 I'll have to really think about it.

Will flash 1403 today. Can you please share your exact BIOS settings? I also see you have a light OC on your CPU. I would really appriciate it if you can share all of the settings and also, how did you stress test it afterwards so that you were able to confirm it was actually stable? You can also PM me. Thank you.


----------



## primoz.osolnik0

Sa-Mo said:


> Yeah, you might be right... Since I mainly just play games, if I can get it stable at your settings I can live with it... I game at 4k60Hz anyway, so I am not really aiming to hit high framerates at lower resolution... About Z790 I'll have to really think about it.
> 
> Will flash 1403 today. Can you please share your exact BIOS settings? I also see you have a light OC on your CPU. I would really appriciate it if you can share all of the settings and also, how did you stress test it afterwards so that you were able to confirm it was actually stable? You can also PM me. Thank you.


I have to go to work right now but I will share settings with you....I will make a profile in bios and send it to you.


----------



## Sa-Mo

primoz.osolnik0 said:


> I have to go to work right now but I will share settings with you....I will make a profile in bios and send it to you.


I understand. Yeah, a .CMO file would be great. Thanks a lot for all the help.


----------



## Mappi75

Did someone changed to the MSI Unfiy-X ?

Thinking about it, it has got a good (qvl) list of 6800er rams which shoud run out of the box..
This board is ok for a 12900KS too ? Thanks.


----------



## Afferin

Mappi75 said:


> Did someone changed to the MSI Unfiy-X ?
> 
> Thinking about it, it has got a good (qvl) list of 6800er rams which shoud run out of the box..
> This board is ok for a 12900KS too ? Thanks.


I recently swapped from a Z690 Formula to a Unify-X. I'm going to be switching back. I get basically the same results (the Unify-X can boot at 6933 1T but is unstable whereas my Formula could do 6933 2T stable). If you have a good board already, I don't see much of a point in swapping.


----------



## Mappi75

Can run max. 32GB 6.666Mhz 30-40-40-30 12700K/12900KS
6.800Mhz never was stable..

Edit: ok for the money i can switch later to the z790 boards..


----------



## CptSpig

Sa-Mo said:


> Thank you for the reply. I was actually lying... It's not stable at 6000CL36... I got 2 BSOD yesterday, one at shut down and one at windows login, even though I had 0 errors on tests. Firefox also randomly crashed twice, and Metro Exodus, BFV as well... Will try 100:133 and see if that makes any difference. Otherwise I really don't know what else to do. Maybe I'll flash 1403 and see if that's any better. If I can only run it stable at XMP 2 (5600CL36), should I just assume it's my APEX and return it an maybe get the MSI Unify-X? What can I expect from Unify-X really?


Attached is my Apex 2021 board running the G.Skill 5600 kit stable 24/7 at 6000. I also have the X299 Apex and these are the best boards I have owned. They are extreme overclocking boards not gaming boards. I also attached my G.Skill 6400 kit running at 7000 stable.


----------



## Murlo26

CptSpig said:


> Attached is my Apex 2021 board running the G.Skill 5600 kit stable 24/7 at 6000. I also have the X299 Apex and these are the best boards I have owned. They are extreme overclocking boards not gaming boards. I also attached my G.Skill 6400 kit running at 7000 stable.


They are good if you get a board that isn't junk from the factory. I think you happened to get a board that wasn't broken. Make no mistake, there are plenty of bad boards out there. I think there are a lot of people in here that are not realizing that IMC plays a role here and are not actually testing things before RMA'ing the boards making the issue worse. That being said, there is an actual problem and many people have seen it.


----------



## SoldierRBT

CptSpig said:


> Attached is my Apex 2021 board running the G.Skill 5600 kit stable 24/7 at 6000. I also have the X299 Apex and these are the best boards I have owned. They are extreme overclocking boards not gaming boards. I also attached my G.Skill 6400 kit running at 7000 stable.


Do you have photo of 7000 TM5/Karhu stable? I can also run AIDA 7000 but stability is limited to 6666MHz on my board.


----------



## CptSpig

Murlo26 said:


> They are good if you get a board that isn't junk from the factory. I think you happened to get a board that wasn't broken. Make no mistake, there are plenty of bad boards out there. I think there are a lot of people in here that are not realizing that IMC plays a role here and are not actually testing things before RMA'ing the boards making the issue worse. That being said, there is an actual problem and many people have seen it.


I have one of the first boards made. I purchased my board, CPU and memory from the EGG. The CPU is average with SP84. I run a 5.5 OC P-cores and 3.9 E-cores with G.Skill 6400 kit running 6800 on air daily. I think that there are a lot of people plugging in memory overclocks and voltages from others they see on forums and then blame the hardware. This is no way to overclock a system and expect results. Memory overclocking is a long process changing primary, secondary and tertiary timings one at a time to eliminate errors. Overclocking the right way is a learning process and you can't take shortcuts to do it right. After all this is overclock.net not XMP.net.


----------



## CptSpig

SoldierRBT said:


> Do you have photo of 7000 TM5/Karhu stable? I can also run AIDA 7000 but stability is limited to 6666MHz on my board.


No, I used memtest86 in the bios for this OC. I like using bios memory testing so I don't corrupt the OS.


----------



## acoustic

CptSpig said:


> I have one of the first boards made. I purchased my board, CPU and memory from the EGG. The CPU is average with SP84. I run a 5.5 OC P-cores and 3.9 E-cores with G.Skill 6400 kit running 6800 on air daily. I think that there are a lot of people plugging in memory overclocks and voltages from others they see on forums and then blame the hardware. This is no way to overclock a system and expect results. Memory overclocking is a long process changing primary, secondary and tertiary timings one at a time to eliminate errors. Overclocking the right way is a learning process and you can't take shortcuts to do it right. After all this is overclock.net not XMP.net.


This comes off really pompous. There are absolutely defective boards since ASUS is accepting RMAs and even sending out boards that they are acknowledging are "updated" to correct the issue. You're not some god-tier OCer that is doing something better than others lol..


----------



## Sa-Mo

CptSpig said:


> Attached is my Apex 2021 board running the G.Skill 5600 kit stable 24/7 at 6000. I also have the X299 Apex and these are the best boards I have owned. They are extreme overclocking boards not gaming boards. I also attached my G.Skill 6400 kit running at 7000 stable.


Well, I think you should consider yourself really lucky. I'm kind of running out of ideas. I flashed 1403, tried the 3rd Samsung preset with the same timings as Primož at 5866 and I got error in AIDA64 after 2 min. Then I tried to loosen the timings and error after 10 min, then tried my XMP2 default again and it was stable for over an hour... At the moment I am on 6000 MHz, CL36 again, passed 1 hour in AIDA64 with no error, and now when doing some web browsing, and some games, I'm getting crashes again... I guess it's either XMP2 or RMA at this point... I don't know what else to try...


----------



## CptSpig

Sa-Mo said:


> Well, I think you should consider yourself really lucky. I'm kind of running out of ideas. I flashed 1403, tried the 3rd Samsung preset with the same timings as Primož at 5866 and I got error in AIDA64 after 2 min. Then I tried to loosen the timings and error after 10 min, then tried my XMP2 default again and it was stable for over an hour... At the moment I am on 6000 MHz, CL36 again, passed 1 hour in AIDA64 with no error, and now when doing some web browsing, and some games, I'm getting crashes again... I guess it's either XMP2 or RMA at this point... I don't know what else to try...


This is what I would recommend. Clear cmo's turn off the PSU for 15 seconds. Turn on the PSU and boot onto bios. F5 load optimized defaults. Save and reboot into bios. If yo have a CPU overclock set that up because it will effect your memory OC. Set AI overclock tuner to manual. Set BLCK to 100.00. Set DRAM Frequency to 6000. Set PMIC voltages to Sync all PMIC's. Set voltages to VDD, VDDQ, and VDDQX to 1.40v. Leave everything else on auto. Don't change any timings. F10 save and boot back into bios. Run Memtest 86 for one pass in the bios. If stable start to tighten you primary timings one at a time checking stability after each change. This is the only way to know what is causing a error. If you get a error star raising voltages one Mv at a time. I have found that with the Samsung memory likes VDD, VDDQ and VDDQX to be the same voltage. Also I would set the MC voltage to just above what auto is showing. Memory overclocking takes a lot of patience.


----------



## db000

acoustic said:


> ...There are absolutely defective boards since ASUS is accepting RMAs and even sending out boards that they are acknowledging are "updated" to correct the issue....


He has a point with the plugging in settings and with the problem being known, might blame the hardware to fast.
----
Me personally, I've had three kits of G.Skill 6400 and one 12900K and one 12900KS. Countless hours fiddling, my Apex sadly wont do more then 6600 2T stable. 6800 boots, 7000 won't. Atleast I'm not stuck on 6450 dual channel*, so that's good... It does "spec" 6600 OC. I wish it would do 7000 tho. Both of the last batches here in Sweden have been 2021/11, last checked with dealer this weekend. No 2022/01 in sight... 

* like Igorlab, One Motherboard, Two Faces - ASUS ROG Maximus Z690 Apex review with Teardown, RAM- & Adaptive Core-OC | Page 6 | igor'sLAB


----------



## CptSpig

acoustic said:


> This comes off really pompous. There are absolutely defective boards since ASUS is accepting RMAs and even sending out boards that they are acknowledging are "updated" to correct the issue. You're not some god-tier OCer that is doing something better than others lol..


Wow that's harsh! I never claimed to be a overclocking GOD. I am still learning as overclocking evolves with every new platform. This why a lot of overclockers will wait for the next gen and let the beta tester work out the bugs. I just enjoy the challenge.


----------



## jomama22

db000 said:


> He has a point with the plugging in settings and with the problem being known, might blame the hardware to fast.
> ----
> Me personally, I've had three kits of G.Skill 6400 and one 12900K and one 12900KS. Countless hours fiddling, my Apex sadly wont do more then 6600 2T stable. 6800 boots, 7000 won't. Atleast I'm not stuck on 6450 dual channel*, so that's good... It does "spec" 6600 OC. I wish it would do 7000 tho. Both of the last batches here in Sweden have been 2021/11, last checked with dealer this weekend. No 2022/01 in sight...
> 
> * like Igorlab, One Motherboard, Two Faces - ASUS ROG Maximus Z690 Apex review with Teardown, RAM- & Adaptive Core-OC | Page 6 | igor'sLAB


You should really be doing 6400 1t as opposed to 6600 2t is able.


----------



## Sa-Mo

CptSpig said:


> This is what I would recommend. Clear cmo's turn off the PSU for 15 seconds. Turn on the PSU and boot onto bios. F5 load optimized defaults. Save and reboot into bios. If yo have a CPU overclock set that up because it will effect your memory OC. Set AI overclock tuner to manual. Set BLCK to 100.00. Set DRAM Frequency to 6000. Set PMIC voltages to Sync all PMIC's. Set voltages to VDD, VDDQ, and VDDQX to 1.40v. Leave everything else on auto. Don't change any timings. F10 save and boot back into bios. Run Memtest 86 for one pass in the bios. If stable start to tighten you primary timings one at a time checking stability after each change. This is the only way to know what is causing a error. If you get a error star raising voltages one Mv at a time. I have found that with the Samsung memory likes VDD, VDDQ and VDDQX to be the same voltage. Also I would set the MC voltage to just above what auto is showing. Memory overclocking takes a lot of patience.


Thanks, will try tomorrow. By the way, I had no CPU OC set, I even disabled that Asus thing so all limits were enforced. So I assume the auto primary timings will be default at 40, 40, 40, 76 of I'm not mistaken? So which one of these should I start to lower first and by how much? 2 per step?


----------



## Murlo26

acoustic said:


> This comes off really pompous. There are absolutely defective boards since ASUS is accepting RMAs and even sending out boards that they are acknowledging are "updated" to correct the issue. You're not some god-tier OCer that is doing something better than others lol..


I don't know if I would go this far but I agree, that statment feels like it's not acknowledging there are problems. Now I agree that there are a lot of people on here that are not taking any time to test anything and just sending a board in because they couldn't get super timings right off the bat. I think that is further screwing up the RMA process as so many people are quick to assume that it's a board problem. I myself tested for probably dozens of hours on multiple multiple settings and couldn't get anything stable and it was my near RAM slot (SLOT A I believe) that showed significantly worse performance. 

I agree that this isn't XMP.net but people want to start with XMP. They also pay extra to have a board with stable settings out of the box. So if ASUS publishes a QVL list for XMP settings those SHOULD work out of the box. If someone wants to run XMP and be done they should be able to. Myself, I wanted to start with XMP and then tune from there but I couldn't get XMP or even close to XMP settings working no matter what voltages I did. 

So again, there are people in both camps, ones that have bad boards and ones that try settings they have seen online and think they should work. This isn't a cut/dry issue imo.


----------



## CptSpig

Sa-Mo said:


> Thanks, will try tomorrow. By the way, I had no CPU OC set, I even disabled that Asus thing so all limits were enforced. So I assume the auto primary timings will be default at 40, 40, 40, 76 of I'm not mistaken? So which one of these should I start to lower first and by how much? 2 per step?


You are correct 40, 40, 40 and 76. I would lower tCL first by 2. Second would be tRAS and then tRCD and tRP. Once those are stable you can move to secondary timings. Good luck.


----------



## Herald

yahfz said:


> I spent 3 months trying to get higher than 6200C28 on my Apex and couldn't. 3 Days ago I got my Unify-X and with the same sticks and same CPU I now have two stable profiles and both took me 3 days in total, 6600C28 1T and 6800C28 2T karhu and TM5 stable.
> 
> 6600C28 1T Profile: https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/902660521889759263/964532757931917373/unknown.png
> 6800C28 2T Profile: https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/902660521889759263/963888277629333614/unknown.png


I went as well from apex to unify x. Night and day difference, even training itself is WAY faster in the unify (oh and, yeah, xmp works...) A little bit wonky bios compared to the apex but everything else is better.

Havent even bothered to rma the apex, i think itll go straight to the garbage where it belongs. Horrible mobo.


----------



## Herald

Sa-Mo said:


> Thanks, might also give 0811 a try. How come that version is stable and newer ones aren't? Is your board 11/2011 as well? Is there anyone with the same kit as mine and can actually run it stable 24/7 on at least 6000 or maybe more on Apex or maybe some other z690 board? I wonder if my instability could maybe be in a way related to the SPD temp being too high (reaches 65C sometimes on stress test)?


If its crashing at 6000 its your apex. 0811 is the best bios for Samsung but its still terrible. Save yourself the trouble and get a unify x. Insta boots with whatever timmings you decide to throw at it.


----------



## Sa-Mo

Herald said:


> If its crashing at 6000 its your apex. 0811 is the best bios for Samsung but its still terrible. Save yourself the trouble and get a unify x. Insta boots with whatever timmings you decide to throw at it.


I actually am really close to that point really. I was actually able to boot at 6400 as well, but was even less stable. Will try what @CptSpig suggested, and also flash 0811, since 1403 didn't really make any difference compared to 1304... If only it was just some specific setting or timings and voltage that I could adjust and get it stable, but I don't have all the time in the world lol... Like I said, it's on me for not doing more research before any of this... But at the same time I have a feeling it may actually be the board, since 2022 rev. is like night and day compared to 11/2021, or at least that's what those who actually own it say.


----------



## Herald

Sa-Mo said:


> I actually am really close to that point really. I was actually able to boot at 6400 as well, but was even less stable. Will try what @CptSpig suggested, and also flash 0811, since 1403 didn't really make any difference compared to 1304... If only it was just some specific setting or timings and voltage that I could adjust and get it stable, but I don't have all the time in the world lol... Like I said, it's on me for not doing more research before any of this... But at the same time I have a feeling it may actually be the board, since 2022 rev. is like night and day compared to 11/2021, or at least that's what those who actually own it say.


Check the individual dim slots and youll have your answer. For my apex, dim b was doing 6600 1t, dim a couldnt even boot at 5200 1t.

Unify x is just, besides some bios quirks, flawless when it comes to memory. Havent checked individual slots but dont have to, im at 6200 c30-32-32-58 1t with my samsung dies at 1.4 volts. Also xmp works absolutely flawlessly, you just enable it and thats it.

Also for whatever reason gaming performance is way way higher than it was on apex with same speeds in warzone. Same spot, 6000c36 2t on both mobos, apex was doing 240 fps, unify x is being gpu bottlenecked at 300. Ive no idea why, doesn't happen in all games, but sotr and warzone have a pretty drastic difference


----------



## Sa-Mo

CptSpig said:


> This is what I would recommend. Clear cmo's turn off the PSU for 15 seconds. Turn on the PSU and boot onto bios. F5 load optimized defaults. Save and reboot into bios. If yo have a CPU overclock set that up because it will effect your memory OC. Set AI overclock tuner to manual. Set BLCK to 100.00. Set DRAM Frequency to 6000. Set PMIC voltages to Sync all PMIC's. Set voltages to VDD, VDDQ, and VDDQX to 1.40v. Leave everything else on auto. Don't change any timings. F10 save and boot back into bios. Run Memtest 86 for one pass in the bios. If stable start to tighten you primary timings one at a time checking stability after each change. This is the only way to know what is causing a error. If you get a error star raising voltages one Mv at a time. I have found that with the Samsung memory likes VDD, VDDQ and VDDQX to be the same voltage. Also I would set the MC voltage to just above what auto is showing. Memory overclocking takes a lot of patience.


At the moment I am testing this method. If I understand correctly, VDDQX = IVR? And also, for example if My MC auto was 1.119v, I can input 1.125v? What about SA voltage?

Tbh, so far I've tried 1.4, 1.405, 1.41, now testing 1.415v... MemTest86 errored out about 3 min in on 1.4, and then after changing it to 1.41, it lasted bout 50 min before it errored, right before 3rd pass was done... Since my MC was at about 1.297v on auto, I've now set it to about 1.30625v or whatever that value is... Everything else is on auto, except the DRAM freq., Ai tuner to manual and custom voltage for VDD, VDDQ, IVR and MC. Timings are all on auto.


----------



## AdrianPav

Just got a STRIX Z690 E up and running, with Gskill 5600 DDR5 running XMP II... Wondering if anyone has had similar experiences to mine. Constant freezing, not BSODs, but full system lock, completely unresponsive. First I thought it was my overzealous attempt to try win 11... Dropped that quick reinstalled win10 but the freezing persisted. Then I got a freeze in the BIOS, so I kinda knew it wasn't software related. Dropped DRAM to 4800... Still got random freezes, sometimes during startup but usually during idle or very simple tasks like reading this forum. Rebooted, Memtest ran without errors... Then I ran AIDA64, DRAM at XMP, (5600) system memory and cache failed. Lowered to 5400, AIDA seems stable now. It's been freezing intermittently about once every 2 days now. BIOS is 1403.

So I'm guessing from what I've read it's either -
1) Incompatible ram (This kit is Samsung not Hynix)
2) Lousy BIOS update (1403 seems to have stability issues for most)
3) XMP basically not working.

Any thoughts gentlemen? Flash previous BIOS? Swap to Hynix RAM kit?( Not too late, vendor's a friend willing to swap.) Thanks in advance, hoping to get the system stable at least without these annoying freezes.


----------



## CptSpig

Sa-Mo said:


> At the moment I am testing this method. If I understand correctly, VDDQX = IVR? And also, for example if My MC auto was 1.119v, I can input 1.125v? What about SA voltage?
> 
> Tbh, so far I've tried 1.4, 1.405, 1.41, now testing 1.415v... MemTest86 errored out about 3 min in on 1.4, and then after changing it to 1.41, it lasted bout 50 min before it errored, right before 3rd pass was done... Since my MC was at about 1.297v on auto, I've now set it to about 1.30652v or whatever that value is... Everything else is on auto, except the DRAM freq., Ai tuner to manual and custom voltage for VDD, VDDQ, IVR and MC. Timings are all on auto.


If you want a quick alternative to this process. I would Clear cmo's turn off the PSU for 15 seconds. Turn on the PSU and boot onto bios. F5 load optimized defaults. Go to DRAM Timing control select Memory Presets. Scroll down to Samsung 6000 and select. Set voltages to 1.41v for VDD, VDDQ and IVR VDDQ. Set MC to Auto and see what you get after saving then change. F10 save and boot into bios. Run Memtest86.


----------



## 050

Hey all, looking at possibly getting either the strix E ($470) or Maximus hero ($600) to go with a 12900KS. I have seen that the Maximus had some capacitor issues that seems resolved, and at the moment I don't have a particular need for thunderbolt but it may be nice in the future. Any advice on reasons to go for the Maximus vs the strix? The extra two power phases seem good but not absolutely game breaking but I was curious if people have noted any quirks in either board worth considering.

I am looking at this as an upgrade from a z390 prime A and 9900k that has been running at 5-5.2ghz until it suddenly shutdown and had a dram error light and wouldn't boot. I removed 2 of the 4 ram sticks and it still wouldn't boot. Cleared cmos and such, no boot. Replaced the power supply with a new rm1000x and it booted up! But, adding back the two removed ram sticks it again fails to boot with a dram light. Now the system is running on two sticks and the new PSU and running a memory test. I am tempted to justify my upgrade because I am not sure if that mobo is still 100% functional.


----------



## Sa-Mo

CptSpig said:


> If you want a quick alternative to this process. I would Clear cmo's turn off the PSU for 15 seconds. Turn on the PSU and boot onto bios. F5 load optimized defaults. Go to DRAM Timing control select Memory Presets. Scroll down to Samsung 6000 and select. Set voltages to 1.41v for VDD, VDDQ and IVR VDDQ. Set MC to Auto and see what you get after saving then change. F10 save and boot into bios. Run Memtest86.


I'm just done testing the settings you've suggested before. At 1.415V I passed the entire MemTest86 (4 passes) and 1+ hour of AIDA64 Stability test... Not sure if it's actually stable in games since I didn't try to play anything yet, but we'll see soon also while just using Firefox. So I can't really confirm this is 100% stable. Does the whole Asus MCE "Enforce all limits" affect this? Because now I didn't change that to disable, but I left it on Auto - let BIOS optimize, but my CPU does run about 5°C hotter (uses more power, but stay at the same max. turbo boost I think. The current latency result is kind of killing me lol.

I did try that profile before, but it wasn't stable, though I didn't play around with voltages or anything, just left it at whatever the profile have set. Which one should I chose? There are 3 of them for Samsung.

Also, what should the next step be now regarding that manual OC above? Tighten the primary timings? And if that produces errors, do I have to increase voltage again? I am on air though, and as you can see, my temps on stress testing can go past 60°C... And I've read some review where they stated that for air they do not recommend going over 1.4V, but I am already over it... On the screenshot you can see that my DIMM #0 spikes to about 1.455V(?). Thank you for all the help.


----------



## CptSpig

Sa-Mo said:


> Also, what should the next step be now regarding that manual OC above? Tighten the primary timings? And if that produces errors, do I have to increase voltage again? I am on air though, and as you can see, my temps on stress testing can go past 60°C... And I've read some review where they stated that for air they do not recommend going over 1.4V, but I am already over it... On the screenshot you can see that my DIMM #0 spikes to about 1.455V(?). Thank you for all the help.


Yes, start tightening primary timings. Try putting a fan directly on the memory dimms. See attached picture.


----------



## Sa-Mo

CptSpig said:


> Yes, start tightening primary timings. Try putting a fan directly on the memory dimms. See attached picture.





CptSpig said:


> Yes, start tightening primary timings. Try putting a fan directly on the memory dimms. See attached picture.


I kind of can't, LOL. I could maybe try lower the front Noctua fan a little bit more, so it will cover more of the ram.


----------



## Sa-Mo

Meh, I just got BSOD, so the testing stability was false.


----------



## CptSpig

Sa-Mo said:


> Meh, I just got BSOD, so the testing stability was false.


If your memory temperatures are above 60c you will get thermal errors. With a memory oc of 6000 my temps are 27c to max under load 46c.


----------



## Murlo26

Well now ASUS is offering me a forumula NIB to replace my RMA'd Apex that wasn't NIB as they said it would be. I told them I didn't think they were comparable boards and said really the extreme is closer but neither are truly close as no other ones have 2 dim slots. I am leaning towards taking whatever NIB board they give me and just buy a Unify X and sell the new board. 

Are the fomulas having any issues? I just don't know that I trust the z690 asus products at this point.


----------



## Sa-Mo

CptSpig said:


> If your memory temperatures are above 60c you will get thermal errors. With a memory oc of 6000 my temps are 27c to max under load 46c.


But at the point of BSOD, the temperature of ram was not even anywhere near 45C even... I actually restarted and after I logged back into windows it BSOD soon after. Now testing 6000 preset, but left voltage at preset default (1.435) and set MC voltage according to auto after F10 and reset. Also lowered it to 5866 and CR2. It passed 2 cycles already in memtest86 with max. temp at 64C at one point.


----------



## CptSpig

Sa-Mo said:


> But at the point of BSOD, the temperature of ram was not even anywhere near 45C even... I actually restarted and after I logged back into windows it BSOD soon after. Now testing 6000 preset, but left voltage at preset default (1.435) and set MC voltage according to auto after F10 and reset. Also lowered it to 5866 and CR2. It passed 2 cycles already in memtest86 with max. temp at 64C at one point.


Your temps seem high. If it passes I would try lowering your voltages.


----------



## Akadaka

Murlo26 said:


> Well now ASUS is offering me a forumula NIB to replace my RMA'd Apex that wasn't NIB as they said it would be. I told them I didn't think they were comparable boards and said really the extreme is closer but neither are truly close as no other ones have 2 dim slots. I am leaning towards taking whatever NIB board they give me and just buy a Unify X and sell the new board.
> 
> Are the fomulas having any issues? I just don't know that I trust the z690 asus products at this point.


I've had minor issues with the Formula like keyboard not being recognised when booting into Windows happened a few times & had to re-plug, monitor wasn't recognised but that only happened once i put those down to maybe early adoption issues they could mean a lot of things, Inside of Windows It's been extremely stable never had bsod or a freezing lock up.


----------



## Neur0Mortis

Sa-Mo said:


> I kind of can't, LOL. I could maybe try lower the front Noctua fan a little bit more, so it will cover more of the ram.


How much clearance do you have between the top of the RAM and the bottom of the cooler? I'm using 3x small Noctua fans and looks like they may work in your scenario. Here's the link to the fans I'm running (but thinking about bumping this up to the 40mm x 20mm ones for better static pressure.


----------



## Sa-Mo

Neur0Mortis said:


> How much clearance do you have between the top of the RAM and the bottom of the cooler? I'm using 3x small Noctua fans and looks like they may work in your scenario. Here's the link to the fans I'm running (but thinking about bumping this up to the 40mm x 20mm ones for better static pressure.


That's a nice clean build. Thanks for the suggestion, but not sure that would fit inside that little space between CPU heatsink and ram... I think there isn't even enough space on the left hand side on the ram.


----------



## stahlhart

Is 1403 worth it over 1304, if you don't have a 12900KS? Asking for a friend.


----------



## Neur0Mortis

Sa-Mo said:


> That's a nice clean build. Thanks for the suggestion, but not sure that would fit inside that little space between CPU heatsink and ram... I think there isn't even enough space on the left hand side on the ram.


What about one at the top of the RAM and one at the bottom _(not like mine, but more like using the RAM as a wind tunnel)_? That might get you what you need as well. 

Also, even without the fans, I dropped about 8-10 degrees just by swapping out the heatspreaders. Just a thought.


----------



## Mappi75

stahlhart said:


> Is 1403 worth it over 1304, if you don't have a 12900KS? Asking for a friend.


There is a 0070 Bios out there which should be like 1403 but with better ram oc.
See one of my lasts posts i asked this question too for my KS.









[OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread


which apex is yours? no date or with date in 2021? Launch Apex, 2021.




www.overclock.net


----------



## Shawnb99

How does one know they have a 2022 Apex or 2021? I've been "away" so I've missed any drama with the board.


----------



## Shawnb99

Frenzi3d said:


> 90MB18I0-M0AAY0
> 90MB18I0-M0EAY0 (November 2021)
> 90MB18I0-M0UAY1 (January 2022)


So any with the 0 are 2021 and any with 1 are 2022?

What's the issue with the 2021 model?


----------



## db000

stahlhart said:


> Is 1403 worth it over 1304, if you don't have a 12900KS? Asking for a friend.


I had problems with 6600 c30 in 1403, reverted back to 1304. I'm on a KS also.

Edit: Will try 0070


----------



## Sa-Mo

Neur0Mortis said:


> What about one at the top of the RAM and one at the bottom _(not like mine, but more like using the RAM as a wind tunnel)_? That might get you what you need as well.
> 
> Also, even without the fans, I stopped about 8-10 degrees just by swapping out the heatspreaders. Just a thought.


I could maybe put 1 on top blowing down towards GPU. I did notice that DIMM B is cooler on avg. around 3C which has CPU fan blowing right infront of it. How loud are these little fans? At what RPM are you running them?


----------



## stahlhart

Mappi75 said:


> There is a 0070 Bios out there which should be like 1403 but with better ram oc.
> See one of my lasts posts i asked this question too for my KS.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread
> 
> 
> which apex is yours? no date or with date in 2021? Launch Apex, 2021.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net





db000 said:


> I had problems with 6600 c30 in 1403, reverted back to 1304. I'm on a KS also.
> 
> Edit: Will try 0070


I should have mentioned that I have a Strix-E, not an Apex; I don't think that the 0070 BIOS was ever an option for this one.

For up to and including 1304, the only issues I am experiencing are rare instances where the keyboard goes off into la-la land and needs to be unplugged and plugged back in to restart, and the same issues several other owners are having with the Realtek ALC 4080 chip, which seems to be the go-to for pretty much every Z690 board out there. We have two here, this one and an MSI, and both have issues with lag, bass thumping when booting or rebooting, audio cutting in late on Windows sounds, etc. Online fix suggestions have helped a little, but none of the vendors seem to be at all interested in addressing the issues with driver or firmware updates, so we have discrete sound cards in both of them now. I thought that I was done with crappy onboard audio over a decade ago, but no such luck.

I know, "Apart from that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?", but both of the boards are working great otherwise.


----------



## yahfz

Herald said:


> I went as well from apex to unify x. Night and day difference, even training itself is WAY faster in the unify (oh and, yeah, xmp works...) A little bit wonky bios compared to the apex but everything else is better.
> 
> Havent even bothered to rma the apex, i think itll go straight to the garbage where it belongs. Horrible mobo.


Lol, same here. Its been sitting in its box. I don't even look at it.


----------



## Csavez™

DungeonKeeper1 said:


> I use 1403 since first day. Absolutly no problems.
> Runs stable as 0811, that i have previous used.
> 12900k, z690 Formula, 2x16GB DDR5 6000 CL36 Gskill, 1080ti, sb xfi titanium
> All settings at stock.
> 
> 1403 is a very good bios version.
> 
> Most problems comes with oc. I think on a 12900k system is this obsolet.


At 6000, every bios is good!


----------



## Mappi75

To the Apex & 12900KS users:

Which LL calibration use your bios?

At default my Apex uses sync all cores LLC 3 = CB23 89 degrees !

i saw the new 8auer video for 12900K oc and i set it to *sync by core usage* and LLC 4 and now the max temp on the KS is CB = 77 degrees !?

Is the bios 1403 not really optimized for the KS?


----------



## db000

Mappi75 said:


> To the Apex & 12900KS users:
> 
> Which LL calibration use your bios?
> 
> At default my Apex uses sync all cores LLC 3 = CB23 89 degrees !
> 
> i saw the new 8auer video for 12900K oc and i set it to *sync by core usage* and LLC 4 and now the max temp on the KS is CB = 77 degrees !?
> 
> Is the bios 1403 not really optimized for the KS?


I'm using BIOS 1304 with my 12900KS (SP99 P-cores), manual vcore 1.34, LLC6, 5.2GHz all-core (5.4GHz OCTVB+2). 4.7 ring/cache.
The profile I'm currently testing is 5.2GHz all-core (OCTVB Disabled), Auto Adaptive, LLC4, 4.3 ring/cache.


----------



## Gadfly

Quick update; I flashed Bios 0070 on my 11/21 Apex with a bad memory slot; and for the first time ever I was able to run 6600C30 2T (Which would not run without instant memory errors and instability on any other bios, to include 1304). It still isn't _entirely_ stable. I can pass 10+ back to back runs of Y-Cruncher 2.5b, and pass a 30 min of TM5 with 1usmus_v3 (heats the memory up more than the other profiles I tried), but when I run an overnight run of HCI memtest86 it will still kick out 1-2 errors before it hits 1500% coverage; no matter what I do with any voltages. so here is where I landed:

VDD/Q/TX: 1.47/1.47/1.47v
VDDQ2/MC: 1.268v
SA: 0.947v (static)

Changing voltages in any combination just made things worse. Loosening timings had no impact, even if I tried running very loose timings. I spent days messing with it and tried SA from 0.090 - 1.28v, MC from 1.1v to 1.3v, and VDD/VDDQ/TX from 1.43v (my stable 6400C30 2T voltage) all the way up to 1.6v. I also found that my board is *REALLY *touchy on the SA voltage. SA of 0.945v = lots of errors, SA of 0.950v = lots of errors, SA of 0.947v = Almost entirely stable. I found this to be absolutely whacky but that is the way it is. SA voltage is not this touchy at 6000-6400, but at 6600 even 1-2mv had a massive impact; as in would it would go from not even completing a single Y-Cruncher 1b pass, to being able to run 10 runs of 2.5b back to back and pass 30 min TM5. Before anyone asks, this behavior was repeatable with multiple CPU's and multiple memory kits; so it isn't unique to the CPU's IMC etc. It is absolutely the board.

Sadly, Though I was able to boot 6800C32 2T, I was not able to find any kind of stability with any combo of any voltages. It would run y-cruncher and pass for a few min, then just start failing randomly. Sometimes it would train and boot, sometimes it wouldn't. It would boot up and behave normally, then reboot and fault in non-paged BSOD instantly at the logon screen.

I also was able to boot 6400C30 1T for the first time ever. I didn't spend any time attempting to stabilize it, as the required VDD/VDDQ to even boot into windows was already over 1.52v, and realistically that exceeds my ability to cool them until the water blocks get here; but exciting none the less.


Just wanted to say great work on this bios @shamino1978 0070 is easily the best I have tried on my Apex to date.

Edit: Added SS, 1 error at 1300%, just like before


----------



## db000

Gadfly said:


> Quick update; I flashed Bios 0070 on my 11/21 Apex with a bad memory slot; and for the first time ever I was able to run 6600C30 2T (Which would not run without instant memory errors and instability on any other bios, to include 1304). It still isn't _entirely_ stable. I can pass 10+ back to back runs of Y-Cruncher 2.5b, and pass a 30 min of TM5 with 1usmus_v3 (heats the memory up more than the other profiles I tried), but when I run an overnight run of HCI memtest86 it will still kick out 1-2 errors before it hits 1500% coverage; no matter what I do with any voltages. so here is where I landed:
> 
> VDD/Q/TX: 1.47/1.47/1.47v
> VDDQ2/MC: 1.268v
> SA: 0.947v (static)
> 
> Changing voltages in any combination just made things worse. Loosening timings had no impact, even if I tried running very loose timings. I spent days messing with it and tried SA from 0.090 - 1.28v, MC from 1.1v to 1.3v, and VDD/VDDQ/TX from 1.43v (my stable 6400C30 2T voltage) all the way up to 1.6v. I also found that my board is *REALLY *touchy on the SA voltage. SA of 0.945v = lots of errors, SA of 0.950v = lots of errors, SA of 0.947v = Almost entirely stable. I found this to be absolutely whacky but that is the way it is. SA voltage is not this touchy at 6000-6400, but at 6600 even 1-2mv had a massive impact; as in would it would go from not even completing a single Y-Cruncher 1b pass, to being able to run 10 runs of 2.5b back to back and pass 30 min TM5. Before anyone asks, this behavior was repeatable with multiple CPU's and multiple memory kits; so it isn't unique to the CPU's IMC etc. It is absolutely the board.
> 
> Sadly, Though I was able to boot 6800C32 2T, I was not able to find any kind of stability with any combo of any voltages. It would run y-cruncher and pass for a few min, then just start failing randomly. Sometimes it would train and boot, sometimes it wouldn't. It would boot up and behave normally, then reboot and fault in non-paged BSOD instantly at the logon screen.
> 
> I also was able to boot 6400C30 1T for the first time ever. I didn't spend any time attempting to stabilize it, as the required VDD/VDDQ to even boot into windows was already over 1.52v, and realistically that exceeds my ability to cool them until the water blocks get here; but exciting none the less.
> 
> 
> Just wanted to say great work on this bios @shamino1978 0070 is easily the best I have tried on my Apex to date.
> 
> I will take some screen shots in a bit and add them to this post


Wow woow woow! After this report I'm flashing 0070 tomorrow! I really hope it can push me to 6800 
Good job @Gadfly


----------



## satinghostrider

I would like to note I'm running on 9902 bios and have no issues so far. Ram is rock stable at 6800c32.


----------



## Mappi75

Flashed 0070 loading optimized defaults & xmp and set T1 manually:








First time 1T booting in win 11 pro ws.
(no other tweaks).

Edit:
*something wrong with the boost clock its only 5,1Ghz all core instead 5,2Ghz all core on KS during CB23

yep verified - going back to 1403 gives 5,2Ghz*


----------



## elbramso

DungeonKeeper1 said:


> I use 1403 since first day. Absolutly no problems.
> Runs stable as 0811, that i have previous used.
> 12900k, z690 Formula, 2x16GB DDR5 6000 CL36 Gskill, 1080ti, sb xfi titanium
> All settings at stock.
> 
> 1403 is a very good bios version.
> 
> Most problems comes with oc. I think on a 12900k system is this obsolet.


And still this is overclock.net here^^


----------



## DannyG13

I posted here before, but I'm hoping to get something concrete this time...

I have a Strix ROG Z690 Wifi and Team Delta DDR5 6400Mhz.

The problem is I can't get to 6400 without errors in OCCT or Prime95 etc.

That to me says it's not stable yet, but the memory and the speed are in the QVL for the mobo.

How do I get this rock stable? Can I emphasise I'm not on a Maximus mobo, and I am on BIOS 1403.

Advice?

Thanks!


----------



## Gadfly

Mappi75 said:


> Flashed 0070 loading optimized defaults & xmp and set T1 manually:
> View attachment 2558613
> 
> 
> First time 1T booting in win 11 pro ws.
> (no other tweaks).
> 
> Edit:
> *something wrong with the boost clock its only 5,1Ghz all core instead 5,2Ghz all core on KS during CB23
> 
> yep verified - going back to 1403 gives 5,2Ghz*


There is nothing wrong with the boost clock in bios 0070. Do you have Intel XTU / hwinfo installed? Did you make sure that you are not thermal or current throttling? Did you verify your CPU boost power limits in the bios? Remember that if you leave everything at default the Asus core optimization is enabled and you need to verify your settings after a bios flash. 

Here is my KS, everything stock, typical scenario, etc. Bios 0070, CB R23, 5.2 all core:


----------



## Gadfly

DannyG13 said:


> I posted here before, but I'm hoping to get something concrete this time...
> 
> I have a Strix ROG Z690 Wifi and Team Delta DDR5 6400Mhz.
> 
> The problem is I can't get to 6400 without errors in OCCT or Prime95 etc.
> 
> That to me says it's not stable yet, but the memory and the speed are in the QVL for the mobo.
> 
> How do I get this rock stable? Can I emphasise I'm not on a Maximus mobo, and I am on BIOS 1403.
> 
> Advice?
> 
> Thanks!


What exactly are you doing when you try to "get it stable"?


----------



## Mappi75

@Gadfly

I removed all limits and it IS only 5,1Ghz 100% sure there are no limits my KS runs only with 5,1 Ghz with 0070 bios.
Strange..the 8auer makes a video how to oc a 12900K.

All bios i tested on the apex had already removed all limits by default - so never a manual setting was needed.

Maybe you can check cpu-z which shows me 5,1 Ghz

BTW:
i oc my ks to all core 5,4 ghz which ends in max. 87 degrees in full CB23 run.
So i would say no cooling problem here 

I try to flash the bios again.. 

Edit: still does not work...


----------



## Gadfly

Mappi75 said:


> @Gadfly
> 
> I removed all limits and it IS only 5,1Ghz 100% sure there are no limits my KS runs only with 5,1 Ghz with 0070 bios.
> Strange..the 8auer makes a video how to oc a 12900K.
> 
> All bios i tested on the apex had already removed all limits by default - so never a manual setting was needed.
> 
> Maybe you can check cpu-z which shows me 5,1 Ghz
> 
> BTW:
> i oc my ks to all core 5,4 ghz which ends in max. 87 degrees in full CB23 run.
> So i would say no cooling problem here
> 
> I try to flash the bios again..


When you flash to 0070, enter the bios and "Load optimized defaults"; save and exit. When you run CB R23, keep XTU open and watch the throttle warnings; I would bet dollars to donuts one of them is activating. If it is the current/power throttle, click each of the "unlimited" power limiters down one click, apply, then click back up to "unlimited" and apply and try again. If it boosts to 5.2 and the current limiter is no longer kicking off; then reboot back into the bios, and repeat there. Down click each of the boost/power limits down one click, save and exit, go back into the bios, and click back up to unlimited, save and exit.

Asus may have left something set incorrectly. I didn't have to do that stock, but I did have to do that to get 5.5 all core going without hitting the EDC current limit.


----------



## DannyG13

Gadfly said:


> What exactly are you doing when you try to "get it stable"?


Well in fairness it all runs and things generally work it's just it's reporting errors in tests ala OCCT and P95 etc?

Just stuck the XMP on and let it go? 

So it is technically stable at face value, but the test results indicate otherwise?


----------



## Mappi75

@Gadfly

Current/EDP Limit Throttling: YES

In XTU i had to "enable"
Intel Overclocking Thermal Velocity Boost
an "apply"

Now the 5,2Ghz works...

Have too look in the bios where i can find this option.

Is set in Bios some TVB option on enable but XTU shows still throttling even with an "enable"
now i switch it from "enable" to "disable" the the limit was removed.... !?


BUT i know what you mean i had already another problem where the bios shows someting "enabled" but it was not!

Switching "off" reboot "enable" then the option was really enabled.

Edit: did not find a working option in bios 0070
Edit2: when i set "sync all cores: 53" then all cores will run at 5,3Ghz at 79 degrees.


----------



## Gadfly

DannyG13 said:


> Well in fairness it all runs and things generally work it's just it's reporting errors in tests ala OCCT and P95 etc?
> 
> Just stuck the XMP on and let it go?
> 
> So it is technically stable at face value, but the test results indicate otherwise?


So, CPU is stock (no overclock), everything is set to default, other than memory is running XMP? Did you set XMP I or XMP II?

In HW info, What are the running voltages for the System Agent (SA) and the VDDQ 2 (MC), and VDD/VDDQ/VDDQ TX?


----------



## Gadfly

Mappi75 said:


> @Gadfly
> 
> Current/EDP Limit Throttling: YES
> 
> In XTU i had to "enable"
> Intel Overclocking Thermal Velocity Boost
> an "apply"
> 
> Now the 5,2Ghz works...
> 
> Have too look in the bios where i can find this option.
> 
> Is set in Bios some TVB option on enable but XTU shows still throttling even with an "enable"
> now i switch it from "enable" to "disable" the the limit was removed.... !?
> 
> 
> BUT i know what you mean i had already another problem where the bios shows someting "enabled" but it was not!
> 
> Switching "off" reboot "enable" then the option was really enabled.
> 
> Edit: did not find a working option in bios 0070
> Edit2: when i set "sync all cores: 53" then all cores will run at 5,3Ghz at 79 degrees.


TVB is a different animal; personally I don't use it; but I found it what is off. It is the long/short boost power limits. It shows as unlimited, but it isn't. You have to change it, save it, reboot and put it back at unlimited.


----------



## Mappi75

I set every option in the menu which contains:

Long Duration Package Power Limit
Short Duration Package Power Limit
and the others first to a lower value and then unlimited/high 
and nothing helped here...

Thanks man for your patience dont understand why i have problems..


----------



## Gadfly

Mappi75 said:


> I set every option in the menu which contains:
> 
> Long Duration Package Power Limit
> Short Duration Package Power Limit
> and the others first to a lower value and then unlimited/high
> and nothing helped here...
> 
> Thanks man for your patience dont understand why i have problems..


did you try the ICCMAX?


----------



## Mappi75

Yes changed this already but test ist again - disable/enable booting in win and run CB23 again.
I think i should go better back to 1403 bios.

Edit:
did you have another scource for getting the bios 0070 ?
Or its the same a few pages back?


----------



## Gadfly

Mappi75 said:


> Yes changed this already but test ist again - disable/enable booting in win and run CB23 again.
> I think i should go better back to 1403 bios.
> 
> Edit:
> did you have another scource for getting the bios 0070 ?
> Or its the same a few pages back?


Ok, So I was able to reproduce the issue you are having. 

Here is how I fixed it:

In the bios, go to extreme tweaker, and find the drop down for the AI core optimization and change it to "Intel defaults all limits in place" (or something to that effect). save and exit, reboot. Then go back into the bios and set it back to the default setting.

If you roll back, Personally, I'd roll back to 1304 vs 1403. I downloaded 0070 off a link on the ROG forums.


----------



## Gadfly

Welp.... 

Looks like I finally have a resolution from Asus on my Apex. They told me they still have no replacements, have no idea when (or if) they will ever have a replacement; as such they have offered to buy the motherboard back from me, and I accepted. Kudos to Asus from making things right.

So It has been fun I guess? I just powered it off, and back in the box it goes...

Now... What to buy? EVGA Dark KP (If possible)? MSI unify X? GB Tachyon?


----------



## Feklar

Unify X. Use the extra money to buy an icecream cone.


----------



## Afferin

Gadfly said:


> Welp....
> 
> Looks like I finally have a resolution from Asus on my Apex. They told me they still have no replacements, have no idea when (or if) they will ever have a replacement; as such they have offered to buy the motherboard back from me, and I accepted. Kudos to Asus from making things right.
> 
> So It has been fun I guess? I just powered it off, and back in the box it goes...
> 
> Now... What to buy? EVGA Dark KP (If possible)? MSI unify X? GB Tachyon?


Drive to Canada and I'll give you a heavily discounted Unify-X 8) I'm swapping back to my Formula because the Unify-X did not live up to the hype


----------



## D-EJ915

I think people suggest the unify-x more that it works properly than for it being special lol.


----------



## Feklar

My Unify X simply works whereas my Minimus Apex did not. I don't mind tinkering but trouble shooting constant issues is unacceptable from this tier product. The above is not a typo but how I feel about my Apex motherboard.


----------



## Mappi75

Gadfly said:


> Ok, So I was able to reproduce the issue you are having.
> 
> Here is how I fixed it:
> 
> In the bios, go to extreme tweaker, and find the drop down for the AI core optimization and change it to "Intel defaults all limits in place" (or something to that effect). save and exit, reboot. Then go back into the bios and set it back to the default setting.
> 
> If you roll back, Personally, I'd roll back to 1304 vs 1403. I downloaded 0070 off a link on the ROG forums.



Thanks for your help and your time - i changed hundreds of option - and still nothing helped here... 
So i'am going back to 1403 atm - hope asus will release a new bios in the near future..


----------



## elbramso

D-EJ915 said:


> I think people suggest the unify-x more that it works properly than for it being special lol.


My Unify-X had the same issues many Apex users where complaining about. Could boot with 1 stick in slot b up to 7000mhz where as slot a only was able to boot up to 6600mhz.
Still better than the defective apex boards though but I did expect more^^


----------



## Mappi75

BTW: the Unfiy-X z590 IS very good!

First time that i could run 32GB Skill 4400CL17 stable. And then going up to 4533Mhz without any problems.
No Apex z490/z590 could do that (checked with 4 cpus).


----------



## AdrianPav

Thought I'd share. Just replaced a 32GB (16x2) Gskill Trident 5600 kit (Samsung) with a temporary loaner 16GB (8x2) Hyper X 5600 kit (Hynix). The Gskill was hanging intermittently, the Hyper X seems to be pretty stable with XMP on a STRIX Z690 E (1403 BIOS.) 

Anyone have similar experiences? Samsung chip compatibility problems with the Z690 boards or BIOS? Not sure, maybe it was just a bad kit that needed to be RMA-ed, or do these motherboards prefer certain RAM chips?


----------



## DannyG13

Gadfly said:


> So, CPU is stock (no overclock), everything is set to default, other than memory is running XMP?


Correct.



> Did you set XMP I or XMP II?


How much of a difference does it make, and would you recommend one or the other?



> In HW info, What are the running voltages for the System Agent (SA) and the VDDQ 2 (MC), and VDD/VDDQ/VDDQ TX?


Right now I have it set to 6000, but in HW info:

SA is 1.251 (SA VID)
TX VDDQ is 1.333
VDD is 1.365
VDDQ 1.365
IMC VDD 1.314

Hope those are the correct numbers for the correct things!


----------



## Simkin

AdrianPav said:


> Thought I'd share. Just replaced a 32GB (16x2) Gskill Trident 5600 kit (Samsung) with a temporary loaner 16GB (8x2) Hyper X 5600 kit (Hynix). The Gskill was hanging intermittently, the Hyper X seems to be pretty stable with XMP on a STRIX Z690 E (1403 BIOS.)
> 
> Anyone have similar experiences? Samsung chip compatibility problems with the Z690 boards or BIOS? Not sure, maybe it was just a bad kit that needed to be RMA-ed, or do these motherboards prefer certain RAM chips?


My previous Trident 6000 samsung ic would not run xmp without bsod, restarts etc on my apex, my team group with hynix run 6200 c32 1t without any issues so far.


----------



## AdrianPav

Simkin said:


> My previous Trident 6000 samsung ic would not run xmp without bsod, restarts etc on my apex, my team group with hynix run 6200 c32 1t without any issues so far.


Hmm okay so it's not just me then. Right going ahead and getting a full Hynix 32GB kit when they're back in stock.


----------



## Nizzen

Mappi75 said:


> BTW: the Unfiy-X z590 IS very good!
> 
> First time that i could run 32GB Skill 4400CL17 stable. And then going up to 4533Mhz without any problems.
> No Apex z490/z590 could do that (checked with 4 cpus).


Gear 1?

I don't know what you are trying to say 

4700c17 was no problem with Apex z490 and 10900k.
On z590 Apex I benchmarked with 5600mhz ddr4 on air. (gear 2)


----------



## sblantipodi

just upgraded my Z690 Extreme to 1403, there is no difference with my simple OC but the RGB RAM problem that makes my PC hangs on reboot is still present.

5 months after the release and problems still there... at this point I think that the only way to solve these problems is to switch to another board manufacturer.


----------



## jomama22

sblantipodi said:


> just upgraded my Z690 Extreme to 1403, there is no difference with my simple OC but the RGB RAM problem that makes my PC hangs on reboot is still present.
> 
> 5 months after the release and problems still there... at this point I think that the only way to solve these problems is to switch to another board manufacturer.


Yeah, you know, like every person has told you on this forum for the past 6 months.

From this post on, I don't want to see you repeat the same thing over and over, ok? Buy another board and get over it already.


----------



## D-EJ915

elbramso said:


> My Unify-X had the same issues many Apex users where complaining about. Could boot with 1 stick in slot b up to 7000mhz where as slot a only was able to boot up to 6600mhz.
> Still better than the defective apex boards though but I did expect more^^


No, I mean like XMP works lol. Not expecting every cpu/memorystick/board to get crazy clocks personally.


----------



## LazyGamer

D-EJ915 said:


> No, I mean like XMP works lol. Not expecting every cpu/memorystick/board to get crazy clocks personally.


G.Skill is putting out a DDR5-6600 XMP kit...


----------



## D-EJ915

LazyGamer said:


> G.Skill is putting out a DDR5-6600 XMP kit...


So? People in here were having issues with 5200/5600 kits.


----------



## LazyGamer

D-EJ915 said:


> So? People in here were having issues with 5200/5600 kits. Not every board can run my 4800c17 ddr4 sticks either.


That's kind of the point - XMP speeds are exceeding what the best boards are capable of without in-the-weeds tuning. I don't actually think we're going to see significant improvements on Z690 / Alder Lake.


----------



## D-EJ915

LazyGamer said:


> That's kind of the point - XMP speeds are exceeding what the best boards are capable of without in-the-weeds tuning. I don't actually think we're going to see significant improvements on Z690 / Alder Lake.


I mean okay but this is their pinnacle overclocking board and neither tachyon nor unify-x have had problems since I got them day 1. I like the apex line and have had all of them except the z370 one but simping asus only gets you so far.


----------



## LazyGamer

D-EJ915 said:


> I mean okay but this is their pinnacle overclocking board and neither tachyon nor unify-x have had problems since I got them day 1.


Welcome to overclocking, I guess?

MSI is the only one that's come out of the Z690 / Alder Lake / DDR5 release relatively unscathed.


----------



## D-EJ915

LazyGamer said:


> Welcome to overclocking, I guess?
> 
> MSI is the only one that's come out of the Z690 / Alder Lake / DDR5 release relatively unscathed.


Not sure what your point is but have a nice day I guess?


----------



## sblantipodi

jomama22 said:


> Yeah, you know, like every person has told you on this forum for the past 6 months.
> 
> From this post on, I don't want to see you repeat the same thing over and over, ok? Buy another board and get over it already.


I sincerely don't care about what "you want".
I'm waiting for an official statement from Asus.

One of my friend seen my PC and wanted the same exact PC, in the mean time 
I ordered another Z690 Extreme and another 12900K, same issue on that PC too,
so we need an official statement on the problem.


----------



## Nizzen

*Test BIOS for Maximus Z690 Apex*
Test BIOS / 2022-Apr-29 / By bianbao
BIOS Ver. 0090
fix minor bugs and increase memory overclock capability.

ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0090.CAP


----------



## z390e

D-EJ915 said:


> I mean okay but this is their pinnacle overclocking board and neither tachyon nor unify-x have had problems since I got them day 1. I like the apex line and have had all of them except the z370 one but simping asus only gets you so far.


When its a working board its the top performing board it seems, looking at top benchmark scores.

Its clear they had admitted issues with multiple boards this generation especially with boards not meeting their specs such as failing to POST with XMP from RAM from the QVL or catching fire, but at least I can actually buy some of their boards. How can we know if Dark's dont have the same problem? There are what maybe 50-100 z690 Darks that are in the wild and not reviewer/streamer given?

Unify-X seems to be doing well this round as well but it sure appears like a working Apex is one of the few common denominators for the top scores I see posted on this board forum for OC'ing RAM, CPU's, GPU's or anything else.


----------



## sblantipodi

is there someone who can explain me why the default setting for the "iGPU" is disabled in BIOS?

suppose that I buy a Z690 board and that I don't have a GPU because of the shortage or for whatever reason, I can't use the PC because I can't change that setting in BIOS.

IMHO the iGPU should be ON by default.

Asus motherboard suffers from another problems that doesn't let users enter the BIOS with newer monitors like the Asus PG32UQ... The only way to enter the bios with that monitors is to use the iGPU over display port. This is another reason why the iGPU should be on by default.





__





We'll be back.






rog.asus.com





@shamino1978 can you change that default on newer BIOS please? there is really no sense in having it disabled by default.


----------



## jomama22

Nizzen said:


> *Test BIOS for Maximus Z690 Apex*
> Test BIOS / 2022-Apr-29 / By bianbao
> BIOS Ver. 0090
> fix minor bugs and increase memory overclock capability.
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0090.CAP


This is NOT a new bios...unless that guy is making changes to the bios himself









[OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread


I have found some settings that are pretty stable on my rig. Days of testing (memtest, ram test, cinebench, aida), gaming, programming with IDEs, code compiling. Stable settings: Z690 Extreme 4x16GB Samsung 4.8GHz C36,36,36,76 1.360V VDD/VDDQ/TX VDDQ 1.275V MC 1.150V SA I can't crush my PC...




www.overclock.net





Edit: so it seems he does make modifications according to his FAQ, but why the base would be of an older bios (0090 is older than 0070) I do not know.


----------



## Falkentyne

jomama22 said:


> This is NOT a new bios...unless that guy is making changes to the bios himself
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread
> 
> 
> I have found some settings that are pretty stable on my rig. Days of testing (memtest, ram test, cinebench, aida), gaming, programming with IDEs, code compiling. Stable settings: Z690 Extreme 4x16GB Samsung 4.8GHz C36,36,36,76 1.360V VDD/VDDQ/TX VDDQ 1.275V MC 1.150V SA I can't crush my PC...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Edit: so it seems he does make modifications according to his FAQ, but why the base would be of an older bios (0090 is older than 0070) I do not know.


It is a new bios. Those two files are drastically different. Just they happen to be named the same. And bianbao is an Asus employee.


----------



## jomama22

Falkentyne said:


> It is a new bios. Those two files are drastically different. Just they happen to be named the same. And bianbao is an Asus employee.


Yeah, looking more I can see that. Thanks.


----------



## joneffingvo

So far this BETA bios is probably the best to date for my Apex


----------



## Sa-Mo

I wish I could say the same. For it doesn't make a difference. I think my board is defective. Will send it back and get another, hopefully this time there's more luck on my side.


----------



## primoz.osolnik0

This 0090 bios is the first one that made my Ram work on 6200mhz. I ran aida for good 2 hours and played games on it....before 6200 wont even boot most of times or fail after 5 minutes. For me it is an improvement over older ones.


----------



## Wasakiqwe

Is it worth it to get z690 mobo with ddr5 support if I had z590 + 4*3200 c14. I'm thinking to upgrade from 10850k to 12700kf. Mainly for gaming on Qhd monitor 165hz.


----------



## Mappi75

@Wasakiqwe

I upgraded from a 10900K/11900K and used both for gaming because one time the 10900K was faster or the 11900K was faster.

Then i switched to the 12700K and the performance boost was absolutly great much higher min. fps and higer fps with my RTX 2080TI Kingpin.
It feels like you bulit a new gpu into the system.

Playing on a Asus FullHD 360Hz display. Later i switched to the 12900KS but its the same but 30 degrees higher temps with stresstests.
For gaming the 12700(K) is the best imo.

It depends on your GPU which you are using? And if you have the money..
But for FHD the boost is massive (the 3090s are only much better in higher resolutions than FHD)

BUT: you will need very fast DDR5 memory (using 6400 at 6666 CL32).
You will loose a lots of fps using slow memory (which depends on every game)


----------



## Mappi75

12900KS & Apex > tested (new) 0090 bios but the same problem like 0070 thats CB23 runs only at 5.100Mhz not 5.200Mhz all core like on bios 1403.


----------



## Alberto_It

Sorry double post


----------



## db000

Alberto_It said:


> Hello everyone! I haven't entered this forum for a few months. I own an Asus z690 Apex and a 12900k with SP99. As bios version I have *1101* release. Last Friday I ordered the following DDR5 memory* G.Skill Trident F5-6400J3239G16GX2-TZ5RS* (SK hynix Chips)
> 
> They are compatible with Z690 Apex?
> 
> Currently I have the kit G.Skill Trident F5-6000J3636F16GX2-TZ5RK and with XMP1 profile they works smooth like butter
> 
> Thanks in advance for your help


Cross post, I answered your exact same question in other thread.








*Official* Intel DDR5 OC and 24/7 daily Memory Stability...


Let it begin, boys... @cstkl1 @Nizzen @PhoenixMDA http://www.adata.com/us/ https://gskill.com/ There's this guide: MemTestHelper/DDR4 OC Guide.md at oc-guide · integralfx/MemTestHelper While it's written for DDR4, and the specific timing recommendations don't really apply...




www.overclock.net


----------



## Sa-Mo

I honestly think this may actually be the main reason or a sign that my board is faulty... It's weird to me that the DIMM B0 voltage is lower than DIMM A0 (see the picture), and they should be synced to my understanding.

What kind of confirms this is the info in the last post in this thread over at the Official ASUS ROG Forum by the user "thewebsiteisdown".


----------



## marco.is.not.80

sblantipodi said:


> is there someone who can explain me why the default setting for the "iGPU" is disabled in BIOS?
> 
> suppose that I buy a Z690 board and that I don't have a GPU because of the shortage or for whatever reason, I can't use the PC because I can't change that setting in BIOS.
> 
> IMHO the iGPU should be ON by default.
> 
> Asus motherboard suffers from another problems that doesn't let users enter the BIOS with newer monitors like the Asus PG32UQ... The only way to enter the bios with that monitors is to use the iGPU over display port. This is another reason why the iGPU should be on by default.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We'll be back.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rog.asus.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @shamino1978 can you change that default on newer BIOS please? there is really no sense in having it disabled by default.


I don't know if anyone has answered this or not but even if it was enabled how do you expect to plug a monitor into the Apex when there is no display port/DVI/vga port on the motherboard itself?


----------



## AdrianPav

Guys dunno if this helps but I'm finally past the 24 hour stable mark on a STRIX Z690 E, 12900k, DDR5 2x16 5600 running XMP without freezes or crashes. Previous behavior was that it would freeze when idle or on low intensity tasks, XMP or no XMP. Attempted many things up to this point:

1) Adjusting RAM voltage
2) Turning off ASPM
3) Changed PSU
4) Turned off XMP to see if there was a difference. (There wasn't. Still random freezes.)
5) Disabled any onboard audio.
6) Swapped RAM kit from Samsung chips to kit with Hynix chips. (Was getting errors in AIDA and OCCT on the first RAM kit.)
7) Went through Event viewer with a fine tooth comb and tried fixing every warning.
8) Flashed from 1403 BIOS to 1304.
9) Turned off global C-state in BIOS.

Past the 24 hour mark now, XMP enabled. Going to keep it running for awhile till I can confirm it's stable for 48 hours before I start doing torture tests for longer periods. I think it was a combination of things eventually that improved things up to the point where it just stopped freezing. The biggest difference had to be when I re-flashed back to 1304. Really cut down on the frequency of freezing. I'm inclined to think the BIOS needs more work from Asus. Hope this helps someone.


----------



## Sa-Mo

Sa-Mo said:


> I honestly think this may actually be the main reason or a sign that my board is faulty... It's weird to me that the DIMM B0 voltage is lower than DIMM A0 (see the picture), and they should be synced to my understanding.
> 
> What kind of confirms this is the info in the last post in this thread over at the Official ASUS ROG Forum by the user "thewebsiteisdown".


Like I wrote, the board is faulty. Just tested each DIMM slots separately. DIMM A on XMP 1, error after 8 min of running @1usmus_v3, then switched the same ram stick to DIMM B and set XMP 1 again and it passed 2 cycles of memtest86, 2x3 cycles of default @1usmus_v3 and 40 min of playing Battlefield V without any BSOD, while before on XMP 1 with both sticks in I always got BSOD while playing BFV after 5 minutes, and also while just being on desktop, or even while shutting down at times... XMP 2 was slightly better when using both sticks, but it still showed errors after a while.

I have to say that even the whole boot up and the system itself feels more responsive now. This board is going back tomorrow. Receiving a new one on Friday so let's see how that one goes, but yeah, everyone with Apex from a 11/2021 (M0EAY0) batch, I wouldn't be surprised if your board has a faulty DIMM A as well in some way...

Another interesting observation is also that while I opened MemTweakIt with DIMM A, it showed BCLK at 99.98 and I've noticed that also when I still had both sticks inside while running XMP 1, along with inconsistent VDD and VDDQ voltage between the slots. Now, while running only DIMM A, it shows BCLK at 100, and VDD, VDDQ seem more consistent.


----------



## z390e

@Sa-Mo so you bought an Apex despite knowing they have issues, exactly as numerous other users (and Igor's lab) documented and are then going to 'send it back tomorrow' to 'receive a new one on Friday'.

This is incredibly confusing to me. Are you sending the old one in for RMA or just flat out returning the one you bought and getting a refund then buying another?

I can't even find a single Apex board that will show me the batch # before I buy. Are you just throwing $ at Apex boards until you get one that isn't part of the bad batch and getting refunds for all the ones that aren't?


----------



## Sa-Mo

z390e said:


> @Sa-Mo so you bought an Apex despite knowing they have issues, exactly as numerous other users (and Igor's lab) documented and are then going to 'send it back tomorrow' to 'receive a new one on Friday'.
> 
> This is incredibly confusing to me. Are you sending the old one in for RMA or just flat out returning the one you bought and getting a refund then buying another?
> 
> I can't even find a single Apex board that will show me the batch # before I buy. Are you just throwing $ at Apex boards until you get one that isn't part of the bad batch and getting refunds for all the ones that aren't?


No, the one that's going back tomorrow is the first one I ever bought and was trying to get it to work all this time, but to no avail... The 2nd one is coming by the end of this week. If this one is also faulty, then I'll send it back as well and then wait a month or so until things become more clear if 2022 batch is even possible to get. If by some miracle the 2nd one will be 2022, I would actually be surprised, but in a way I doubt it. We will see.

EDIT: FYI, when I bought the first one I had no idea it was this bad. At the same time we have people here who claim that their 11/2011 board is working "completely fine". I will get a refund for the 1st one of course. And like you said, there is no way of knowing about the batch...


----------



## bastian

I've been out of the loop. Is 1403 still the latest we have for Z690 Extreme?


----------



## sblantipodi

bastian said:


> I've been out of the loop. Is 1403 still the latest we have for Z690 Extreme?


yes, on my Extreme nothing changed since 1304, 
it broke nothing, it fixed nothing.


----------



## d5aqoep

Anyone with Asus Z690 board have problems booting off Ventoy bootable USB when you press F8 and select Ventoy? It just doesn’t work for me on Z690 ProArt Wifi as well as B660 Tuf Wifi. But same USB works at my friend’s Gigabyte and MSI motherboards. But Asus boards throws me into Bios screen when I attempt to boot from Ventoy UsB.


----------



## Csavez™

Nizzen said:


> *Test BIOS for Maximus Z690 Apex*
> Test BIOS / 2022-Apr-29 / By bianbao
> BIOS Ver. 0090
> fix minor bugs and increase memory overclock capability.
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0090.CAP


This is not good for me either, I went back to 1304, another 6 hours of my life for asus.


----------



## Manya3084

I cut my losses, got a Unify-x. Without even trying I got 6600mt with the stock timings of my 36-39-39-76 Corsair Dominator memory.

Also gained an extra 100mhz from my previous all core and boost clocks (5.3ghz all P-core/5.6ghz boost/4.2ghz E-Cores. 4.4ghz ring bus)


----------



## elbramso

As my Z690 apex board is better than most of the faulty ones I'll pretty much keep it until Z790 shows up.
I'll not buy an Asus board for at least one generation after Z690 anyways...


----------



## Manya3084

Well, here's what I managed with the Unify-x...
￼


----------



## Herald

z390e said:


> @Sa-Mo so you bought an Apex despite knowing they have issues, exactly as numerous other users (and Igor's lab) documented and are then going to 'send it back tomorrow' to 'receive a new one on Friday'.
> 
> This is incredibly confusing to me. Are you sending the old one in for RMA or just flat out returning the one you bought and getting a refund then buying another?
> 
> I can't even find a single Apex board that will show me the batch # before I buy. Are you just throwing $ at Apex boards until you get one that isn't part of the bad batch and getting refunds for all the ones that aren't?


I don't get what your point is. You think its his fault for trying to get a working board and not asus fault for selling absolutely horrible crap as top of the line ocing mobos?

And dont even get me started on their support... One of the worst companies i ever had the displeasure of working with.


----------



## Nizzen

Manya3084 said:


> Well, here's what I managed with the Unify-x...
> ￼


Looks below average 
Under 7000mhz is utter garbage for people here


----------



## Herald

Nizzen said:


> Looks below average
> Under 7000mhz is utter garbage for people here


Most people complaining about the apex cant even get 6000, what are you talking about? Mine only boots at 4800 1t...


----------



## criznit

I know this might be early, but has anyone tried out the new ddr5 6600 kits from g.skill?


----------



## z390e

Herald said:


> I don't get what your point is. You think its his fault for trying to get a working board and not asus fault for selling absolutely horrible crap as top of the line ocing mobos?


I was trying to understand his process to obtain an Apex, which has been incredibly difficult and I have posted about on here 5+ times. We are both trying to obtain Apex boards that can meet the QVR because its the best board out there for 690 _when it is correctly working_. 

The rest of your post is you pretending I said something but not quoting me, because I never said that.


----------



## z390e

Herald said:


> Most people complaining about the apex cant even get 6000, what are you talking about? Mine only boots at 4800 1t...


Its well documented there are boards with QC issues that cannot work without an RMA. Obviously people should have RMA'd those boards instead of saving them to beat their heads against the wall trying to get to work (when they never will). There are numerous posts in this exact thread where people are telling bad Apex board owners to stop wasting time on trying to get them to work, they never will. They need an RMA. It is a manufacturing defect. The igor's lab article does a good job summarizing this. 









One Motherboard, Two Faces - ASUS ROG Maximus Z690 Apex review with Teardown, RAM- & Adaptive Core-OC | Page 7 | igor'sLAB


Today we continue with our Z690 motherboard reviews, with the Asus Maximus Z690 Apex. Not only the naming convention has changed compared to the predecessor models, because besides DDR5, PCIe 5.0…




www.igorslab.de





It also shows however that there are plenty of good boards out there that don't have this issue. The variation of working boards among the various batches as Igor's lab documents is EXACTLY why I asked @Sa-Mo his process. If it takes throwing money at the board until you can get a good one (but they give you refunds) then I wanted to know that. Its good to understand what it will take to get something working that you are thinking of trying.


----------



## Manya3084

Lol, i only just started. It's a big improvement from the 6200mt the kit was to begin with. I mean, the apex couldn't even OC the ram at all


----------



## acoustic

Nizzen said:


> Looks below average
> Under 7000mhz is utter garbage for people here


why you trolling so hard nizzen lmao


----------



## criznit

I know this is an ASUS board, but I'm starting to have issues on my MSI unify X board. At first I thought this was just a diablo 2 res issue, but now I'm getting BSOD event 41 errors even at XMP 

Nvm! Apparently this is an NVIDIA issue with battle.net.


----------



## Sa-Mo

So, received the 2nd board today from Amazon. They sold me a returned product as new. The board has a serial number from exactly the same production day as the 1st one. That is C03, board number 00204, while the 1st one was C03, board number 00408 (the serial number between RAM slot and CPU). This board is also going back and I won't even bother testing it.

Honestly, I am done. I wasted more than 1 month of my life for this, not to mention all the stress. All I wanted is a product that is supposed to work as intended. Yes, I understand that XMP isn't always guaranteed to work, but come on. If the ram kit is on the QVL list it should work, period, at least on XMP profile 1 and not throw BSOD about 5 min. of playing a game. I would understand this, if raising my voltage a little bit would make it work, but it didn't. No matter what I did, no matter what timings I chose, or whatever voltage I've set, there was no progress. In the end I figured out that DIMM A is faulty (testing each stick in each slot separately). So, to everyone expecting that the BIOS will change or fix anything in the future, don't kid yourself. This is a hardware defect and ASUS is trying to cover it up.

I always rooted for ASUS, but this? I'm speachless. First Hero burning up, now defective Apex boards in terms of ram slots... If only they would admit the fault and exchange all the boards, but no, they can't because they have no new stock. Maybe and I guess only for those who are really persistent enough through RMA process, while they have to wait a couple of months to achieve that, through what I've heard and read, a horrible and "generic answers" type of support, back and forth.

Now I can wait a month and buy it again, just to risk of getting back exactly the same board I am going to return now, or just call it a day and buy MSI MEG Unify-X. At least most people on here who switched to it from Apex are so far saying only good things about it.

I guess rant over.


----------



## Sa-Mo

criznit said:


> I know this is an ASUS board, but I'm starting to have issues on my MSI unify X board. At first I thought this was just a diablo 2 res issue, but now I'm getting BSOD event 41 errors even at XMP


Are you kidding me? And right after I wrote that people are only saying good things about Unify-X... XD


----------



## acoustic

Sa-Mo said:


> So, received the 2nd borad today from Amazon. They sold me a returned product as new. The board has a serial number from exactly the same production day as the 1st one. That is C03, board number 00204, while the 1st one was C03, board number 00408 (the serial number between RAM slot and CPU). This board is also going back and I won't even bother testing it.
> 
> Honestly, I am done. I waisted more than 1 month of my life for this, not to mention all the stress. All I wanted is a product that is supposed to work as intended. Yes, I understand that XMP isn't always guaranted to work, but come on. If the ram kit is on the QVL list it should work, period, at least on XMP profile 1 and not throw BSOD about 5 min. of playing a game. I would understand this, if raising my voltage a little bit would make it work, but it didn't. No matter what I did, no matter what timings I chose, or whatever voltage I've set, there was no progress. In the end I figured out that DIMM A is faulty (testing each stick in each slot seperately). So, to everyone expecting that the BIOS will change or fix anything in the future, don't kid yourself. This is a hardware defect and ASUS is trying to cover it up.
> 
> I always rooted for ASUS, but this? Speachless. First Hero burning up, now defective Apex boards in terms of ram slots... If only they would admit the fault and exchange all the boards, but no, they can't because they have no new stock. Maybe and I guess only for those who are really persistant through RMA process, while they have to wait a couple of months to achive that, through what I've heard and read, a horrible and "generic answers" type of support, back and forth.
> 
> Now I can wait a month and buy it again, just to risk of getting back exactly the same board I am going to return now, or just call it a day and buy MSI MEG Unify-X. At least most people on here who switched to it from Apex are so far saying only good things about it.
> 
> I guess rant over.


Why do you believe they sold you a returned product as new? Because of the production date? I wouldn't say that's a 100% sure-fire way of telling the board was previously returned. The board could have just been the lucky one in the warehouse that didn't get grabbed.

I would test it anyway really quick on a piece of cardboard or something, rather than going through the entire rig assembly. You never know. If not, then go grab another brand - I wouldn't blame you.


----------



## criznit

Sa-Mo said:


> Are you kidding me? And right after I wrote that people are only saying good things about Unify-X... XD


See my update lol This wasn't an MSI issue, it was a Nvidia issue. False alarm, sorry about that.


----------



## Sa-Mo

acoustic said:


> Why do you believe they sold you a returned product as new? Because of the production date? I wouldn't say that's a 100% sure-fire way of telling the board was previously returned. The board could have just been the lucky one in the warehouse that didn't get grabbed.
> 
> I would test it anyway really quick on a piece of cardboard or something, rather than going through the entire rig assembly. You never know. If not, then go grab another brand - I wouldn't blame you.


Because of obvious dust particles on the protective film on the back of the board, and scratches on the main ASUS logo on the board, and little scratches on the screws of the M.2 slot. I think that's a reason enough. There is even a sticker on the front of the box that has a date of 20.04.2022 (probably taped on by Amazon when it went through the return process).


----------



## Sa-Mo

Sorry for another post, but just saw that there is some kind of gray dirt over the DIMM A slot?? Didn't someone on here already post a similar photo? Or is my mind playing tricks on me?

EDIT: found it.


----------



## Sa-Mo

criznit said:


> See my update lol This wasn't an MSI issue, it was a Nvidia issue. False alarm, sorry about that.


Ok, good to know  I was about to give up entirely, haha...


----------



## jomama22

z390e said:


> Its well documented there are boards with QC issues that cannot work without an RMA. Obviously people should have RMA'd those boards instead of saving them to beat their heads against the wall trying to get to work (when they never will). There are numerous posts in this exact thread where people are telling bad Apex board owners to stop wasting time on trying to get them to work, they never will. They need an RMA. It is a manufacturing defect. The igor's lab article does a good job summarizing this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One Motherboard, Two Faces - ASUS ROG Maximus Z690 Apex review with Teardown, RAM- & Adaptive Core-OC | Page 7 | igor'sLAB
> 
> 
> Today we continue with our Z690 motherboard reviews, with the Asus Maximus Z690 Apex. Not only the naming convention has changed compared to the predecessor models, because besides DDR5, PCIe 5.0…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.igorslab.de
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It also shows however that there are plenty of good boards out there that don't have this issue. The variation of working boards among the various batches as Igor's lab documents is EXACTLY why I asked @Sa-Mo his process. If it takes throwing money at the board until you can get a good one (but they give you refunds) then I wanted to know that. Its good to understand what it will take to get something working that you are thinking of trying.


In the US, you can't even get an RMA as they have 0 stock and have had 0 stock for ages. Only 2 people have gotten a board back from RMA and their boards were with Asus for 1-3 months. There has been 0 new stock in stores (Amazon, Newegg, etc.) since February.

I genuinely think they aren't producing any more boards (which a well known Asus rep stated as much) so getting a working sample is going to be near impossible at this point (at least in the US). Don't know how well rma's are going elsewhere.


----------



## Nizzen

acoustic said:


> why you trolling so hard nizzen lmao


Because of OFF Topic... He is posting Unify-x results here in
*[OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread *

Make a MSI thread, instead of posting MSI results in a Asus thread. This is MY oppinion


----------



## CptSpig

Manya3084 said:


> Well, here's what I managed with the Unify-x...
> ￼





Herald said:


> Most people complaining about the apex cant even get 6000, what are you talking about? Mine only boots at 4800 1t...


Here is what the Apex does at 6800 and 7000 with SP 84 12900K and 2021 board from the EGG. Oh and the memory is on air.


----------



## acoustic

Nizzen said:


> Because of OFF Topic... He is posting Unify-x results here in
> *[OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread *
> 
> Make a MSI thread, instead of posting MSI results in a Asus thread. This is MY oppinion


Isn't it relevant if they're showing the differences between what their APEX was capable of vs what the other board is doing, no?


----------



## Nizzen

acoustic said:


> Isn't it relevant if they're showing the differences between what their APEX was capable of vs what the other board is doing, no?


I didn't see any apex result in that post. Then I guess it's irrellevant, no?


----------



## SoldierRBT

CptSpig said:


> Here is what the Apex does at 6800 and 7000 with SP 84 12900K and 2021 board from the EGG. Oh and the memory is on air.


Show us TM5/Karhu at 7000C30  that's where the 2021 Apex struggles. 2022 Apex doesn't have any issues at those speeds.


----------



## CptSpig

SoldierRBT said:


> Show us TM5/Karhu at 7000C30  that's where the 2021 Apex struggles. 2022 Apex doesn't have any issues at those speeds.


It passed memtest86 in the bios. I use this so I don't corrupt the OS when tunning memory.


----------



## Herald

CptSpig said:


> Here is what the Apex does at 6800 and 7000 with SP 84 12900K and 2021 board from the EGG. Oh and the memory is on air.


Are you trolling or is this for real? If apex can do 6800 and 7000 then great, let's swap our apexes. Ill even pay you 100€ for the trouble and youll still be getting 6800 and 7000 speeds. Win win


----------



## CptSpig

Herald said:


> Are you trolling or is this for real? If apex can do 6800 and 7000 then great, let's swap our apexes. Ill even pay you 100€ for the trouble and youll still be getting 6800 and 7000 speeds. Win win


Trolling are you kidding me.....pic's of both my Apex boards X299 and Z690. Send me your board and I will overclock the crap out of it!


----------



## Murlo26

Well, I am still waiting for ASUS to get back to me on my Apex status as they have been transferring me around forever. I am going to push for a refund at this point as I finally just bought a z690 kingpin  They are in stock finally, or they were 20 minutes ago. I am probably going to have to redo a ton of crap to make this work but whatever, I feel I can trust this board more and it will match my 3090 kingpin


----------



## Herald

CptSpig said:


> Trolling are you kidding me.....pic's of both my Apex boards X299 and Z690. Send me your board and I will overclock the crap out of it!


Im sure you will, tell that to ASUS so they stop RMAing perfectly good motherboards, lol


----------



## Herald

Murlo26 said:


> Well, I am still waiting for ASUS to get back to me on my Apex status as they have been transferring me around forever. I am going to push for a refund at this point as I finally just bought a z690 kingpin  They are in stock finally, or they were 20 minutes ago. I am probably going to have to redo a ton of crap to make this work but whatever, I feel I can trust this board more and it will match my 3090 kingpin


Don't, your apex is fine, its you that's the problem, cptsig can overclock the crap out of your apex .

Obviously sarcasm...but yeah.


----------



## Murlo26

Herald said:


> Don't, your apex is fine, its you that's the problem, cptsig can overclock the crap out of your apex .
> 
> Obviously sarcasm...but yeah.


Lol, maybe so, but I guess I will take the easy way out and buy a product that works out of the box. The dark was actually what I wanted originally but I was getting sick of waiting and I wish I would've waited originally for it. Time to correct that mistake. I guess next motherboard I am going to have to do more research before I buy but I haven't seen anyone complain about the kingpin board yet aside from the price.


----------



## SoldierRBT

CptSpig said:


> It passed memtest86 in the bios. I use this so I don't corrupt the OS when tunning memory.


 Show me this at 7000C30. On air btw


----------



## Manya3084

CptSpig said:


> Here is what the Apex does at 6800 and 7000 with SP 84 12900K and 2021 board from the EGG. Oh and the memory is on air.


Very good. Well Igor's lab couldn't go over 6666mt with the kit I have so I guess I got lucky. Wish my Apex was able to hit those numbers 😢


----------



## CptSpig

SoldierRBT said:


> Show me this at 7000C30. On air btw
> View attachment 2559452


Here you go!


----------



## acoustic

Nizzen said:


> I didn't see any apex result in that post. Then I guess it's irrellevant, no?


He posted earlier saying he was stuck at 6200. Come on now ..



CptSpig said:


> Here you go!


Low Priority Threads tends to mess with the test and make things pass that normally would not. Had it happen to me before when I got lazy during testing once or twice  not saying you have instability but it's worth noting. Glad to see you're moving away from memtest86 -- I've had MT86 pass clean but then TM5 Anta ABSOLUT+Extreme1 give me errors pretty quickly.


----------



## CptSpig

acoustic said:


> Low Priority Threads tends to mess with the test and make things pass that normally would not. Had it happen to me before when I got lazy during testing once or twice  not saying you have instability but it's worth noting. Glad to see you're moving away from memtest86 -- I've had MT86 pass clean but then TM5 Anta ABSOLUT+Extreme1 give me errors pretty quickly.


Memtest86 in the "bios" does a great job when tunning memory. Once done I use different stress test to insure overall stability.


----------



## z390e

Murlo26 said:


> I finally just bought a z690 kingpin  They are in stock finally, or they were 20 minutes ago.


ty for this post, grabbed one myself


----------



## acoustic

CptSpig said:


> Memtest86 in the "bios" does a great job when tunning memory. Once done I use different stress test to insure overall stability.


Can't say I agree on MemTest86, but if it works for you, then sweet. I think TM5, MemTestPro, and Y-Cruncher are all much better stability tests, though I do get the appeal of MT86 not being run in the OS.


----------



## satinghostrider

SoldierRBT said:


> Show us TM5/Karhu at 7000C30  that's where the 2021 Apex struggles. 2022 Apex doesn't have any issues at those speeds.


Don't need to go that far. My 2021 board had an error fest anything past 6000mhz. Tried literally every bios, 4 sets of RAM kits and lived practically in the bios just trying to make things work. 2022 board, same exact settings same exact other parts with SP84 CPU, can do 6800C32 rock stable. Able to even boot 7400 no problem. Memory training is much faster on my 2022 Apex as well and don't have any issue with reboot stability.


----------



## Murlo26

z390e said:


> ty for this post, grabbed one myself


You are welcome! I am hoping this makes me forget my Apex nightmare.


----------



## dante`afk

after a month of back and forth asus offered to "buy back" my apex 

It seems they are not producing any apex anymore.


----------



## Akadaka

dante`afk said:


> after a month of back and forth asus offered to "buy back" my apex
> 
> It seems they are not producing any apex anymore.


What board are you going to go with now?


----------



## Feklar

dante`afk said:


> after a month of back and forth asus offered to "buy back" my apex
> 
> It seems they are not producing any apex anymore.


Same here. They called me last week with the offer. I sent it back a few days ago. It's a shame really but not surprising since Z790 will be coming next.


----------



## Herald

satinghostrider said:


> Don't need to go that far. My 2021 board had an error fest anything past 6000mhz. Tried literally every bios, 4 sets of RAM kits and lived practically in the bios just trying to make things work. 2022 board, same exact settings same exact other parts with SP84 CPU, can do 6800C32 rock stable. Able to even boot 7400 no problem. Memory training is much faster on my 2022 Apex as well and don't have any issue with reboot stability.


According to some users here its not the mobo, its user error. Maybe you didnt know how to overlcock your old apex but you know how to overclock your new apex

Happened to me as well, i am pretty good at overclocking the b1 slot of my apex but pretty terrible at overclocking the a1 slot. It's definitely not the motherboard though 😂


----------



## satinghostrider

Herald said:


> According to some users here its not the mobo, its user error. Maybe you didnt know how to overlcock your old apex but you know how to overclock your new apex
> 
> Happened to me as well, i am pretty good at overclocking the b1 slot of my apex but pretty terrible at overclocking the a1 slot. It's definitely not the motherboard though 😂


I used the same settings on the same kits and it worked flawlessly on the new 2022 board. Down to every single timing for the memory. I mean maybe God showed me the way when I tried to move to Unify-X. 😂


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

z390e said:


> ty for this post, grabbed one myself





Murlo26 said:


> You are welcome! I am hoping this makes me forget my Apex nightmare.


Funny a few days ago on ebay, there was one for sale for just under $3000 buy it now. Hate to be that guy who bought it. There is still some for sale on EVGA ebay store and their site itself. My Apex does 6666MHz with Corsair Doms Samsung sticks, so I think my board is ok maybe. Although that Dark Z690 looks great and I am tempted.


----------



## Sa-Mo

Herald said:


> According to some users here its not the mobo, its user error. Maybe you didnt know how to overlcock your old apex but you know how to overclock your new apex
> 
> Happened to me as well, i am pretty good at overclocking the b1 slot of my apex but pretty terrible at overclocking the a1 slot. It's definitely not the motherboard though 😂


So true. Of course always blame the user first, but come on 😆 A1 Slot on most 11/2021 Apex boards are f***ing broken. There is just something wrong with the voltage supply to that DIMM. Both of my boards are on their way back and waiting for a refund. Still thinking on what to try next, but will most likely end up getting Unify-X (sorry for mentioning, I know this is Strix/Mininus/Disappointinus official thread 😛😅).


----------



## Herald

satinghostrider said:


> I used the same settings on the same kits and it worked flawlessly on the new 2022 board. Down to every single timing for the memory. I mean maybe God showed me the way when I tried to move to Unify-X. 😂


Yeah, me 2, moved to unify x and suddenly i became a god tier overclocker. Was pretty noob when i had the apex 😊
Definitely not the mobo though


----------



## Herald

Sa-Mo said:


> So true. Of course always blame the user first, but come on 😆 A1 Slot on most 11/2021 Apex boards are f***ing broken. There is just something wrong with the voltage supply to that DIMM. Both of my boards are on their way back and waiting for a refund. Still thinking on what to try next, but will most likely end up getting Unify-X (sorry for mentioning, I know this is Strix/Mininus/Disappointinus official thread 😛😅).


If you have a Samsung kit get the uniseX. Can run 6600 on stock primaries or 6000c30-32 1T like im running now with 1.4 vdimm

And unlike the zenith minimus(sorry meant the apex maximus) XMP works flawlessly.


----------



## z390e

Herald said:


> Yeah, me 2, moved to unify x and suddenly i became a god tier overclocker. Was pretty noob when i had the apex 😊
> Definitely not the mobo though


You keep posting this and I've been watching this thread and have never once seen someone say that. Are you maybe confusing here with reddit, or can you link one of these comments? All I've seen is your amazingly evident frustration with ASUS as a vendor who had a known and acknowledged manufacturing defect with their boards. 

You keep saying no one is calling out the boards but I've seen repeated other posters saying things like:



roooo said:


> Please do yourself a favour and don't waste precious time with a bugged early Apex (2021/11) as many of us did, me included. Suspect the board first, then your IMC.


----------



## z390e

satinghostrider said:


> I used the same settings on the same kits and it worked flawlessly on the new 2022 board. Down to every single timing for the memory. I mean maybe God showed me the way when I tried to move to Unify-X. 😂


Again this post is confusing when we know the Apex has a manufacturing defect specifically regarding RAM. Either your board is working and you can POST with RAM from the QVR or it is the bad batch which cannot. As @roooo posted in my quote from him above, don't waste time even trying to 'figure anything out'. Its a basic lottery right now to buy (or have bought) a good Apex and the only indicator with any reliability seems to be the batch #'s documented by Igor's. 









One Motherboard, Two Faces - ASUS ROG Maximus Z690 Apex review with Teardown, RAM- & Adaptive Core-OC | Page 6 | igor'sLAB


Today we continue with our Z690 motherboard reviews, with the Asus Maximus Z690 Apex. Not only the naming convention has changed compared to the predecessor models, because besides DDR5, PCIe 5.0…




www.igorslab.de





This is why I and others were constantly trying to figure out if people had recently gotten good batches and/or where they got them from so we could increase our chances of tracking down this board, in a good working model. People who claim "Everyone said it was the overclocker not the board" aren't wrong, but they got the exact tech support with their issue they paid for. It would be great if you (or others) could call out the people by name who said that misinfo instead of painting the entire forum with this same broad brush when we weren't the ones who said it.


----------



## acoustic

z390e said:


> You keep posting this and I've been watching this thread and have never once seen someone say that. Are you maybe confusing here with reddit, or can you link one of these comments? All I've seen is your amazingly evident frustration with ASUS as a vendor who had a known and acknowledged manufacturing defect with their boards.
> 
> You keep saying no one is calling out the boards but I've seen repeated other posters saying things like:


CptSig did make comments earlier in the thread that insinuated it was user-error and/or people just "don't know how to OC anymore." It is what it is. I'm sure there are some users returning boards without testing, as well as others trying to plug other people's numbers in without knowing how to tweak themselves.

Most of the people I've seen posting results with other boards have been people who posted in this thread earlier on detailing their struggles with an APEX.

I do agree though, seems like it's a dead horse at this point. We know there are numerous defective APEX boards in the wild failing XMP and/or have extremely strange DIMM behavior, that ASUS has already shut down production for the APEX, and that they seem to be offering refunds rather than replacements for RMAs.

While I understand customer frustration, just seems like the point has been made. If you have a board not capable of running certain memory speeds, you likely have a defective board. RMA for refund and grab something else.


----------



## Nizzen

Herald said:


> According to some users here its not the mobo, its user error. Maybe you didnt know how to overlcock your old apex but you know how to overclock your new apex
> 
> Happened to me as well, i am pretty good at overclocking the b1 slot of my apex but pretty terrible at overclocking the a1 slot. It's definitely not the motherboard though 😂


Did someone actual say that is's user error? Pleace link


----------



## Herald

Nizzen said:


> Did someone actual say that is's user error? Pleace link


Yes, cptsig a page ago said he can oc the crap out of my mobo. Which means the mobo is fine, right?


----------



## Sa-Mo

Herald said:


> If you have a Samsung kit get the uniseX. Can run 6600 on stock primaries or 6000c30-32 1T like im running now with 1.4 vdimm
> 
> And unlike the zenith minimus(sorry meant the apex maximus) XMP works flawlessly.


I mean, I would hope so, unless my IMC really is that bad 😬


----------



## Nizzen

Herald said:


> Yes, cptsig a page ago said he can oc the crap out of my mobo. Which means the mobo is fine, right?


Link?


----------



## Herald

Nizzen said:


> Link?


Check page 260, from the very top.


----------



## Herald

Sa-Mo said:


> I mean, I would hope so, unless my IMC really is that bad 😬


Nah, I also thought my IMC was the problem until I read other people having issues with apex. So I bit the bullet and got the unisex.Everything is fine now, the actual dim sticks are now the limiting factor


----------



## Sa-Mo

The only thing that "hurts" me when it comes to Apex board is, not the fact that it has a defect, but the fact that ASUS is just turning a blind eye to this whole situation and is trying to just sweep it under the rug, in hopes everything will be forgotten once Z790 hits the shelves... And stopping the production because of a reason that "Apex is not really that popular ASUS motherboard anyway"... Of course it's not, everyone is sending theirs back, besides few lucky souls who actually have a working *M0AEY0 *board. I'm sure *M0AAY0 *doesn't have these issues, just like the ones that were made in December or from this year onwards, so logically these people won't say bad things about it or "complain". It's all on ASUS in the end and the way they are handling this is not fair.


----------



## CptSpig

Nizzen said:


> Link?


I did say that I would OC the crap out of his Apex! That does not mean user error. He accused me of trolling so I responded. Someone else wanted my 7000 memory OC screen shot to show stability so I posted a screen with memtest pro at 500%. This all in response to people saying their Unified X boards are a GOD send on this thread. Either show us your fantastic XMP overclocks or start your own thread.


----------



## Herald

Sa-Mo said:


> The only thing that "hurts" me when it comes to Apex board is, not the fact that it has a defect, but the fact that ASUS is just turning a blind eye to this whole situation and is trying to just sweep it under the rug, in hopes everything will be forgotten once Z790 hits the shelves... And stopping the production because of a reason that "Apex is not really that popular ASUS motherboard anyway"... Of course it's not, everyone is sending theirs back, besides few lucky souls who actually have a working *M0AEY0 *board. I'm sure *M0AAY0 *doesn't have these issues, just like the ones that were made in December or from this year onwards, so logically these people won't say bad things about it or "complain". It's all on ASUS in the end and the way they are handling this is not fair.


Vote with your wallet. Im not buying another asus again, and you should probably do the same.


----------



## Herald

CptSpig said:


> I did say that I would OC the crap out of his Apex! That does not mean user error.


Yes it does.



CptSpig said:


> Either show us your fantastic XMP overclocks or start your own thread.


Im running 6000c30-32-32 1T on samsung dies. Don't know and don't care if it's fantastic, the point is, it works. My apex (and several others) doesn't. Not even on XMP. Heck, mine doesn't even boot at anything above 4800 on 1T. So yeah, the uniseX is godsend.


A working apex might be better than the unify x, but who cares when its just luck of the draw to actually get one?


----------



## CptSpig

Sa-Mo said:


> The only thing that "hurts" me when it comes to Apex board is, not the fact that it has a defect, but the fact that ASUS is just turning a blind eye to this whole situation and is trying to just sweep it under the rug, in hopes everything will be forgotten once Z790 hits the shelves... And stopping the production because of a reason that "Apex is not really that popular ASUS motherboard anyway"... Of course it's not, everyone is sending theirs back, besides few lucky souls who actually have a working *M0AEY0 *board. I'm sure *M0AAY0 *doesn't have these issues, just like the ones that were made in December or from this year onwards, so logically these people won't say bad things about it or "complain". It's all on ASUS in the end and the way they are handling this is not fair.


Asus only makes limited runs of the Apex boards. That's what they did with my X299 Apex because they are designed for extreme overclocking with LN2 or chilled water. My board is a December 2021 board from the EGG. I am sure there are some defected boards after all this is a new platform! I guess I just got lucky with my Apex.


----------



## Sa-Mo

Herald said:


> A working apex might be better than the unify x, but who cares when its just luck of the draw to actually get one?


Exactly how I feel and think. To actually get a working one that is. I don't want to risk again, because it will be a returned board anyway, and I don't want to accept something like that when I actually paid a full price for it and it was advertised as a "new" board. That's just shady business and that is on Amazon.



CptSpig said:


> Asus only makes limited runs of the Apex boards. That's what they did with my X299 Apex because they are designed for extreme overclocking with LN2 or chilled water. My board is a December 2021 board from the EGG. I am sure there are some defected boards after all this is a new platform! I guess I just got lucky with my Apex.


If so, then ok. I didn't know about that. I am new to the whole Apex version of ASUS boards anyway. Too bad, but it is what it is. This for sure will leave a bitter taste in my mouth for the time to come.


----------



## CptSpig

Herald said:


> A working apex might be better than the unify x, but who cares when its just luck of the draw to actually get one?


I totally understand where you are coming from. I think a lot of people purchased the Apex for the wrong reason. The Apex is not a XMP set it and forget it gaming board. From the ASUS website.

"ROG Maximus Z690 Apex is the premiere choice for those who seek a combination of raw speed and cutting-edge tech like DDR5 memory, PCIe 5.0, and truckloads of power delivery for the most performant 12th Gen Intel Core processors available. Its streamlined layout is engineered for ultra-low latency and maximal bandwidth, to empower users to discover the limits of performance and define new world records."

Bottom line I hope you find a board that works for your needs. Good Luck!


----------



## Sa-Mo

CptSpig said:


> I totally understand where you are coming from. I think a lot of people purchased the Apex for the wrong reason. The Apex is not a XMP set it and forget it gaming board. From the ASUS website.
> 
> "ROG Maximus Z690 Apex is the premiere choice for those who seek a combination of raw speed and cutting-edge tech like DDR5 memory, PCIe 5.0, and truckloads of power delivery for the most performant 12th Gen Intel Core processors available. Its streamlined layout is engineered for ultra-low latency and maximal bandwidth, to empower users to discover the limits of performance and define new world records."
> 
> Bottom line I hope you find a board that works for your needs. Good Luck!


When I purchased Apex I kind of "knew" about the so called issues with it, but I never imagined it being this bad. I thought to myself, oh, well, some can't run it past 6600?? Well ok, I will be a happy camper even if I only manage to achieve perhaps only 6200, but no.... Couldn't even run XMP1 with 2 sticks. I could deal with not being able to achieve 6400+, but to not even being able to run XMP1 with adjusted voltages with primary XMP timings, I don't know. But yeah, whatever, I'm moving on.

Thanks, I really hope.


----------



## jomama22

There is a reason Asus is offering full refunds/buybacks for RMAs now. That says enough about the whole ordeal. Costs them less to buy it back then to spend man hours essentially binning boards to properly operate at xmp. Would genuinely be interesting to see how many boards they had to go through per RMA.

My guess is they were aware of the issues rather early on after the first few main batches went to retail. They then started a more rigorous QA process after production and found that a low % of boards actually performed as claimed (merely meeting xmp expectations). Did this QA for a bit but realized they were making near 0 to very very low margins and pulled the cord on production.

If this is true, it's most likely a layout issue that assumed certain production capabilities could be met but it just wasn't possible in large scale operations. Variations in copper layer inductance and capacitance near critical areas would be my guess.


----------



## acoustic

jomama22 said:


> There is a reason Asus is offering full refunds/buybacks for RMAs now. That says enough about the whole ordeal. Costs them less to buy it back then to spend man hours essentially binning boards to properly operate at xmp. Would genuinely be interesting to see how many boards they had to go through per RMA.
> 
> My guess is they were aware of the issues rather early on after the first few main batches went to retail. They then started a more rigorous QA process after production and found that a low % of boards actually performed as claimed (merely meeting xmp expectations). Did this QA for a bit but realized they were making near 0 to very very low margins and pulled the cord on production.
> 
> If this is true, it's most likely a layout issue that assumed certain production capabilities could be met but it just wasn't possible in large scale operations. Variations in copper layer inductance and capacitance near critical areas would be my guess.


Hopefully they've figured out whatever they needed to figure out so we can avoid this for Z790.


----------



## ChaosAD

acoustic said:


> Hopefully they've figured out whatever they needed to figure out so we can avoid this for Z790.


Avoid or not for the next gen, Asus is on my black list, since they didn't officially recalled all the problematic Z690 with either a replacement or money return. Treating loyal costumers, who believe in your products and that's the reason they spend 700 euros for a mobo, like this is a big no from me. You can call me naive, but I still wait for an official announcement regarding the issue.


----------



## Murlo26

Yea I am frustrated they haven't admitted the problem and offered buybacks. I spent $70 extra dollars for a $700+ mobo to ship it back for RMA just to get another clunker. I will not be buying another asus mobo for a while, which sucks as I am most familiar with their bios but this for sure soured my stance on them.


----------



## jomama22

Murlo26 said:


> Yea I am frustrated they haven't admitted the problem and offered buybacks. I spent $70 extra dollars for a $700+ mobo to ship it back for RMA just to get another clunker. I will not be buying another asus mobo for a while, which sucks as I am most familiar with their bios but this for sure soured my stance on them.


Did you ever actually test the board they sent you or no?


----------



## satinghostrider

z390e said:


> Again this post is confusing when we know the Apex has a manufacturing defect specifically regarding RAM. Either your board is working and you can POST with RAM from the QVR or it is the bad batch which cannot. As @roooo posted in my quote from him above, don't waste time even trying to 'figure anything out'. Its a basic lottery right now to buy (or have bought) a good Apex and the only indicator with any reliability seems to be the batch #'s documented by Igor's.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One Motherboard, Two Faces - ASUS ROG Maximus Z690 Apex review with Teardown, RAM- & Adaptive Core-OC | Page 6 | igor'sLAB
> 
> 
> Today we continue with our Z690 motherboard reviews, with the Asus Maximus Z690 Apex. Not only the naming convention has changed compared to the predecessor models, because besides DDR5, PCIe 5.0…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.igorslab.de
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is why I and others were constantly trying to figure out if people had recently gotten good batches and/or where they got them from so we could increase our chances of tracking down this board, in a good working model. People who claim "Everyone said it was the overclocker not the board" aren't wrong, but they got the exact tech support with their issue they paid for. It would be great if you (or others) could call out the people by name who said that misinfo instead of painting the entire forum with this same broad brush when we weren't the ones who said it.


What is confusing about my post? The new 2022 production board works with no issues on all other exact previous parts from my November 2021 production board. I used the exact same memory setting on both boards and 2022 passes TM5 1usmus without a hitch. I could not even make it past 1 minute on my 2021 November board.

People can say what they want about user error or don't know how to overclock since they aren't the ones with the faulty board. I've spent endless nights in bios with 4 kits I had to buy to try from 5600-6000Mhz at that time. Only 5600Mhz could run XMP and 6000Mhz was a mixed bag on XMP. Manual tweaking my 5600 kit got me stable on 0811 to 6000Mhz C32 1T which I used for a while before RMAing my board late last year.

New 2022 production board I loaded up with 9902 at that time and got a friend to try it whose far more knowledgeable than me when comes to ram overclocking not after trying all the settings that used to fail on my 2021 production board and every setting passed TM5 1usmus with the new one. For the first time, I could game without any crash to desktop and I could reboot without odd reboot instabilities. To add, every kit I had in possession worked with XMP1 before I got it manually tweaked. So I knew that the earlier board had some issues with ram.

Till today, since February, I've been running 6800C32 with 0 stability issues. I even run TM5 for the fun randomly and I simply have not had an occasion where it would randomly fail.


----------



## Akadaka

ChaosAD said:


> Avoid or not for the next gen, Asus is on my black list, since they didn't officially recalled all the problematic Z690 with either a replacement or money return. Treating loyal costumers, who believe in your products and that's the reason they spend 700 euros for a mobo, like this is a big no from me. You can call me naive, but I still wait for an official announcement regarding the issue.


People say that but when they realize how bad the competitors Z790 boards are they always will come back to Asus.


----------



## satinghostrider

Akadaka said:


> People say that but when they realize how bad the competitors Z790 board are they always will come back to Asus.


I do not think Asus will repeat this episode again. At the same time, I think most competitors would have figured out the issues with their boards and improved it for Z790. 14th Gen is where this 12th Gen mess could potentially happen again for not just Asus, but everyone. Given how Alderlake was rushed, I think people have to be cautious for 14th Gen being a new platform again. 

I still would choose Asus again because I think apart from the hardware issues Z690 early batches for some models were plagued with, BIOS is one area where constant work is being done rapidly and it is something which I find very important because there is good support on forums like this. The only time I'd blacklist a brand is on consistent failures on each replacement. Then that becomes unacceptable.


----------



## z390e

I'm going to respond one last time to this thread because it seems two of you want to belabor the points.



satinghostrider said:


> What is confusing about my post? The new 2022 production board works with no issues on all other exact previous parts from my November 2021 production board. I used the exact same memory setting on both boards and 2022 passes TM5 1usmus without a hitch. I could not even make it past 1 minute on my 2021 November board.
> 
> People can say what they want about user error or don't know how to overclock since they aren't the ones with the faulty board.


That's because the 2022 board doesn't have the manufacturing defect the 2021 batch did. Please quote the people who said it was user error. The quote function exists on this site for a reason.



Murlo26 said:


> Yea I am frustrated they haven't admitted the problem and offered buybacks.


What are you talking about? There are multiple users in this thread who got buybacks. Here is @Gadfly stating this in this very thread on 4/28



Gadfly said:


> Looks like I finally have a resolution from Asus on my Apex. They told me they still have no replacements, have no idea when (or if) they will ever have a replacement; as such they have offered to buy the motherboard back from me, and I accepted. Kudos to Asus from making things right.


Despite the vast majority of us knowing there are bad or good boards (being its a thread about said boards), people still implied @CptSpig was trolling.



Herald said:


> Are you trolling or is this for real? If apex can do 6800 and 7000 then great, let's swap our apexes. Ill even pay you 100€ for the trouble and youll still be getting 6800 and 7000 speeds. Win win


He wasn't trolling. His non-defect Apex can totally put up those scores, and he proved it with his posts and screenshots. He probably didn't think anyone would be holding on to a known bad Apex still instead of RMA'ing it. What would be the point?

That was after he attacked _me_ for asking @Sa-Mo his process to get his Apex (he got two bad ones unfortunately). Ironically, the whole reason I asked him and others this is because as a consumer I wanted to empower myself before spending hundreds of dollars, when there are known issues with the boards. This very thread is what empowered me with that knowledge so its odd to hear others in this thread pleading ignorance! I know from posts on here like I quoted @roooo saying about there being no point in even wasting a minute on a bad Apex, because its a manufacturing defect!

After that it was another complaint, quoting no one.



Herald said:


> Most people complaining about the apex cant even get 6000, what are you talking about? Mine only boots at 4800 1t...


Again, every user in this thread can see the since deleted post from the ROG forums where they acknowledge the defect. Its still up on the Igor's lab article. This is why @Gadfly got a buyback. This is why your board is trash and @CptSpig has one that can hit scores you can't.











For me, I was following this thread because I wanted to buy an Apex, and was making sure that I didn't waste my money buying a bad one. Why are you still in the thread? Are you hoping something is going to be revealed that will make the issue with your board not a manufacturer defect? What possible evidence do you have that contradicts the mountains of evidence I've linked here showing that this a board defect?


----------



## satinghostrider

z390e said:


> I'm going to respond one last time to this thread because it seems two of you want to belabor the points.
> 
> 
> 
> That's because the 2022 board doesn't have the manufacturing defect the 2021 batch did. Please quote the people who said it was user error. The quote function exists on this site for a reason.
> 
> 
> 
> What are you talking about? There are multiple users in this thread who got buybacks. Here is @Gadfly stating this in this very thread on 4/28
> 
> 
> 
> Despite the vast majority of us knowing there are bad or good boards (being its a thread about said boards), people still implied @CptSpig was trolling.
> 
> 
> 
> He wasn't trolling. His non-defect Apex can totally put up those scores, and he proved it with his posts and screenshots. He probably didn't think anyone would be holding on to a known bad Apex still instead of RMA'ing it. What would be the point?
> 
> That was after he attacked _me_ for asking @Sa-Mo his process to get his Apex (he got two bad ones unfortunately). Ironically, the whole reason I asked him and others this is because as a consumer I wanted to empower myself before spending hundreds of dollars, when there are known issues with the boards. This very thread is what empowered me with that knowledge so its odd to hear others in this thread pleading ignorance! I know from posts on here like I quoted @roooo saying about there being no point in even wasting a minute on a bad Apex, because its a manufacturing defect!
> 
> After that it was another complaint, quoting no one.
> 
> 
> 
> Again, every user in this thread can see the since deleted post from the ROG forums where they acknowledge the defect. Its still up on the Igor's lab article. This is why @Gadfly got a buyback. This is why your board is trash and @CptSpig has one that can hit scores you can't.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For me, I was following this thread because I wanted to buy an Apex, and was making sure that I didn't waste my money buying a bad one. Why are you still in the thread? Are you hoping something is going to be revealed that will make the issue with your board not a manufacturer defect? What possible evidence do you have that contradicts the mountains of evidence I've linked here that this a board defect, and not a single person in this thread has been quoted saying otherwise that I have seen.


I never said there was nothing wrong with 2021 boards. It is a FACT some batches with no consistent pattern affected quite a fair bit of users me included. At the time I was going through this ordeal, there was also a handful of us that could not have a stable frequency from 6000Mhz and up. The only boards 2021 that I've seen that WORK are pre-production units and the new 2022 production boards. And a dime in a dozen 2021 December production boards.

I don't need to quote anyone you can do a search yourself and see people who have blamed users for using XMP on an Apex board. I personally don't use it. Though it should and ought to have worked. Furthermore, 2022 production boards could run every DDR5 kit I had at XMP. So clearly something was wrong with it. Those same kits failed XMP on my 2021 board. Those who said nothing wrong with their boards must be the lucky few or are running pre-production boards or lucky December 2021 production boards cause manually tweaking mine for 3 months using every possible bios did not work for me, be it XMP or manual tuning.


----------



## Herald

z390e said:


> I'm going to respond one last time to this thread because it seems two of you want to belabor the points.
> 
> 
> 
> That's because the 2022 board doesn't have the manufacturing defect the 2021 batch did. Please quote the people who said it was user error. The quote function exists on this site for a reason.
> 
> 
> 
> What are you talking about? There are multiple users in this thread who got buybacks. Here is @Gadfly stating this in this very thread on 4/28
> 
> 
> 
> Despite the vast majority of us knowing there are bad or good boards (being its a thread about said boards), people still implied @CptSpig was trolling.
> 
> 
> 
> He wasn't trolling. His non-defect Apex can totally put up those scores, and he proved it with his posts and screenshots. He probably didn't think anyone would be holding on to a known bad Apex still instead of RMA'ing it. What would be the point?
> 
> That was after he attacked _me_ for asking @Sa-Mo his process to get his Apex (he got two bad ones unfortunately). Ironically, the whole reason I asked him and others this is because as a consumer I wanted to empower myself before spending hundreds of dollars, when there are known issues with the boards. This very thread is what empowered me with that knowledge so its odd to hear others in this thread pleading ignorance! I know from posts on here like I quoted @roooo saying about there being no point in even wasting a minute on a bad Apex, because its a manufacturing defect!
> 
> After that it was another complaint, quoting no one.
> 
> 
> 
> Again, every user in this thread can see the since deleted post from the ROG forums where they acknowledge the defect. Its still up on the Igor's lab article. This is why @Gadfly got a buyback. This is why your board is trash and @CptSpig has one that can hit scores you can't.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For me, I was following this thread because I wanted to buy an Apex, and was making sure that I didn't waste my money buying a bad one. Why are you still in the thread? Are you hoping something is going to be revealed that will make the issue with your board not a manufacturer defect? What possible evidence do you have that contradicts the mountains of evidence I've linked here showing that this a board defect?


I know his apex can do 7000. I also know that "apex in general" cannot do 7000,since there is a bunch of them that can't even do 6000. That was my point, that generalising based on his apex is silly. 

And no, im not RMAing it. Im throwing it to the garbage where it belongs unless asus puts up a statement and recalls them. They have the most expensive motherboards by far (compare the hero to the aorus master for example) yet one of them catches fire (lol) and the other one fails at the thing it's supposed to be good at.


----------



## IronAge

my second so called verified by Asus 2021-11 Apex will not even post and shows post code 00, this Gen Apex is really PITA for too many.


----------



## Sa-Mo

The slogan they have "For those who dare" is really ironic... At least for those of us who had a faulty 11/2011 batch. If only I knew all of what I know now before I even ordered the 1st board. Would have saved myself a lot of unneeded stress.


----------



## IronAge

thanks to Asus i am finally done with early adopting, never lost that much money with a new gen before.


----------



## Herald

Sa-Mo said:


> The slogan they have "For those who dare" is really ironic... At least for those of us who had a faulty 11/2011 batch. If only I knew all of what I know now before I even ordered the 1st board. Would have saved myself a lot of unneeded stress.


Theres going to be a new slogan for the z790. For those who doubledare.


----------



## Murlo26

jomama22 said:


> Did you ever actually test the board they sent you or no?


I did not as they got in touch with me shortly after saying they were going to send me an actual new in box apex, that was weeks ago at this point. I still have it sitting here. It is probably one of the "good ones" but I don't want a used board that is bent for $700+ dollars. I just want my money back now.


z390e said:


> What are you talking about? There are multiple users in this thread who got buybacks. Here is @Gadfly stating this in this very thread on 4/28


I am talking about my situation, they have NOT offered me one yet. They have strung me along and it's days in between their responses. I understand others have gotten buy backs. I am saying that should be the normal. They should send out a press release, admit the problem and tell everyone if they are having problems they can either get a substitute board or their money back. They should not make it this difficult to do.


----------



## jomama22

Murlo26 said:


> I did not as they got in touch with me shortly after saying they were going to send me an actual new in box apex, that was weeks ago at this point. I still have it sitting here. It is probably one of the "good ones" but I don't want a used board that is bent for $700+ dollars. I just want my money back now.
> 
> 
> I am talking about my situation, they have NOT offered me one yet. They have strung me along and it's days in between their responses. I understand others have gotten buy backs. I am saying that should be the normal. They should send out a press release, admit the problem and tell everyone if they are having problems they can either get a substitute board or their money back. They should not make it this difficult to do.


May as well just try it. Maybe it will change your mind about keeping it. The bend you showed us is completely normal and occurs whether it's new or not and is no different that the PCB bend you get after installing a cooler anyway. Personally, would much rather have a known working sample that's been tested then the crapshoot a new board may give you. You're one of the few to actually get an RMA back so may as well take advantage of it.

And as explained to you before, RMA isn't "used", they have a pile they get off the production line.

It's rare in and of itself to get a "new" warranty replacement for just about anything.


----------



## Murlo26

jomama22 said:


> May as well just try it. Maybe it will change your mind about keeping it. The bend you showed us is completely normal and occurs whether it's new or not and is no different that the PCB bend you get after installing a cooler anyway. Personally, would much rather have a known working sample that's been tested then the crapshoot a new board may give you. You're one of the few to actually get an RMA back so may as well take advantage of it.
> 
> And as explained to you before, RMA isn't "used", they have a pile they get off the production line.
> 
> It's rare in and of itself to get a "new" warranty replacement for just about anything.


I would have already tested it but they kept stringing me along saying that they were going to send another one. They originally said they were sending me a New In Box board and that was not the case. And in the meantime the z690 kingpin came available and I bought one. I am guessing you are right about the board working, it probably is a "good one" but honestly with the nonsense on all of this I am ready to move on. The BIOS updates seem to have stalled as well as there hasn't been an official one for a while now on their website and the kingpin board hasn't had any issues I am aware of as of now. 

I will send this board back when they allow assuming I can get a refund and then maybe someone else can try it and get a possible working one. 

I also don't think my original pictures show the bend very well, it is more than I have seen on a mobo before. Maybe a slight bend is normal but this seems a bit extreme and just annoys me as it's an expensive mobo and I shouldn't have to deal with it. Maybe I am just looking to be annoyed as this whole process has been annoying. Frankly, I am just ready to move on to something else and don't feel like spending anymore time with ASUS on this board. Even if mine "works" it still might not be perfect or what the APEX should be. I just want whatever I put back into my PC to work so I don't have to monkey around with it anymore and I can actually work on OC'ing things. 

ASUS hasn't necessarily "screwed me" on this, they replaced my board (although it took a long time) with one that is supposedly working. But the amount of emails, chats, phone calls through all of this is in the dozens. I can't properly convey the amount of crap I have gone through on this and they keep saying they will get back to me on everything and I don't want to deal with it anymore. Hopefully this makes sense.


----------



## Feklar

Herald said:


> Theres going to be a new slogan for the z790. For those who doubledare.


More like "For those willing to take a risk" would be a better slogan.


----------



## JKurz

Wonding why people complain about the Asus Maximus extreme and Apex.

If you guys want a real overclocking board.

Why not get the EVGA Kingpin Dark Z690?

Never hear about quality issues with that board? That board blows everything out of the water when talking OCing. Except you don't get the carnival lights.


----------



## Nizzen

Cant't buy it here in Europe yet. 

Evga MB: when it's in stock, we are already playing with next generation Apex.

Thank god I have Apex z690 that does 7400+ memory 👌


----------



## Mappi75

@Nizzen can you please post your settings and voltages 

I will give a last try to push over 6666mhz which is my max atm.

Edit: can boot with 7000mhz (not optimzed) into windows but 100% not stable.


----------



## chibi

Does z690-i Strix ITX board have issues mentioned? Or am I okay with that board to pair with 12900k?


----------



## Alberto_It

JKurz said:


> Wonding why people complain about the Asus Maximus extreme and Apex.
> 
> If you guys want a real overclocking board.
> 
> Why not get the EVGA Kingpin Dark Z690?
> 
> Never hear about quality issues with that board? That board blows everything out of the water when talking OCing. Except you don't get the carnival lights.


Because Evga Z690 motherboards are not available in Europe


----------



## Nizzen

Mappi75 said:


> @Nizzen can you please post your settings and voltages
> 
> I will give a last try to push over 6666mhz which is my max atm.
> 
> Edit: can boot with 7000mhz (not optimzed) into windows but 100% not stable.


Dell green 4800 on Supercool computer water blocks.


----------



## Mappi75

Which RAM Kit did you use? G.Skill 6400 ?
Wow the voltages!? Did you watercool them?

Edit: max voltage i tested was 1,52v for ram.


----------



## Nizzen

Mappi75 said:


> Which RAM Kit did you use? G.Skill 6400 ?
> Wow the voltages!? Did you watercool them?


Info is in the post 😘

Dell green 4800 watercooled.


----------



## Mappi75

Wow, amazing performance of these stick!


----------



## Thunderhasi

Hey there,

maybe someone could help me here

I got an Asus Rog Maximus Extreme, Gskill DDR5-6000 (F5-6000U3636E16G) RAM, i9 12900k and an EVGA RTX 3080 TI.
1. The RAM does not work @6000 MHz. Neither XMP1 or XMP2 are working without errors
2. My Microphone got static noise. Even if its not connected. I tested it with Discord, Teamspeak, Teams and Skype. As soon as i use the onboard mic, i got static noise. Even if i unplug the Microphone, the static noise is still there. Also the volume of the Microphone always starts low and get higher by the time.
If i use the noise canceling from the software or from the asus software on the highest setting, the noise is gone, but i sound terrible.
When i lower the Micvolume to 30 %, the noise is also gone, but iam not hearable.
If i use an external soundcard, everything works fine.
3. My Wifi connection drops right after booting the PC. After a short while it reconnects and then drops again. Then i have to manually reconnect
4. Sometimes my USB-Ports are resetting and i can't use them for some seconds

I got the newest BIOS (i tested all BIOS that where released. I always got errors on XMP1 or XMP2, sometimes i got more errors, sometimes less, depending on the BIOS).
I tested Windows 10 and Windows 11
I tested all available drivers including the newest one
I even tested another Microphone (even its stupid, because the internal soundcard is making the noise)
I sent it to an RMA with an detailed error description and the only answer i got was, that the boards works within specs. So i got a high end mainboard, that can't handle my RAM, and the Microphone slot also doesn't work fine, but thats within specs.

Does anyone have a tip for me, how i could get this board working or how to get the ASUS support, to get me some working Hardware? I can't even talk about it directly with the ASUS support, because i bought the board via reseller.

Maybe you got some tips here? When i call ASUS support directly, they just say, that they can't help me, because i have to do talk to the reseller. The reseller is like "asus said, all is fine, so we can't do anything for you". But the problems still exist.

This was my first ASUS Board and atm it looks like, its my last one, because it just doesn't work :/


----------



## IronAge

@Thunderhasi

if memory that has been listed on the QVL does not work with your mobo you are qualified for an exchange.

you have to penetrate them, threaten them with reports on social meda and forums, just do not give up and/or contact the seller.



Nizzen said:


> Cant't buy it here in Europe yet.
> 
> Evga MB: when it's in stock, we are already playing with next generation Apex.
> 
> Thank god I have Apex z690 that does 7400+ memory 👌



actually you can buy Z690 DARK as of now, but it is not a cheapo.









EVGA z690 Dark K | NGP | N, 121-al-e699-kr, LGA 1700 Intel z690 Hauptplatine | eBay


Entdecken Sie EVGA z690 Dark K | NGP | N, 121-al-e699-kr, LGA 1700 Intel z690 Hauptplatine in der großen Auswahl bei eBay. Kostenlose Lieferung für viele Artikel!



www.ebay.de


----------



## Mappi75

@satinghostrider

i got near the same timings like you but my max ist 6.666mhz.
(now i take 1:1 your settings exept the frequency)

Cant you run tCKE "6" not lower? I'am using tCKE "4"
Or works this faster for you?

Wondering i reach only 55ns and you got 50ns with 134Mhz higher frequency !?

Or is running at 6666Mhz suboptimal should i switch to 6600 Mhz ?


----------



## Nizzen

Mappi75 said:


> @satinghostrider
> 
> i got near the same timings like you but my max ist 6.666mhz.
> (now i take 1:1 your settings exept the frequency)
> 
> Cant you run tCKE "6" not lower? I'am using tCKE "4"
> Or works this faster for you?
> 
> Wondering i reach only 55ns and you got 50ns with 134Mhz higher frequency !?
> 
> Or is running at 6666Mhz suboptimal should i switch to 6600 Mhz ?


NS in Aida is much about OS too. Close background tasks can reduse NS by alot. Example: Open my Aqua computer software makes atleast 4-5 ns extra alone.


----------



## jomama22

Nizzen said:


> NS in Aida is much about OS too. Close background tasks can reduse NS by alot. Example: Open my Aqua computer software makes atleast 4-5 ns extra alone.


You can also just run it in safe mode for those that don't want to clean up windows (disable system services, delete/uninstall MS crap, etc)


----------



## Nizzen

jomama22 said:


> You can also just run it in safe mode for those that don't want to clean up windows (disable system services, delete/uninstall MS crap, etc)


I use "ThisIsWin11" to easy uncheck services and apps that I don't need. "Stripping windows for noobs"


----------



## DBCooper1

Thunderhasi said:


> Hey there,
> 
> maybe someone could help me here
> 
> I got an Asus Rog Maximus Extreme, Gskill DDR5-6000 (F5-6000U3636E16G) RAM, i9 12900k and an EVGA RTX 3080 TI.
> 1. The RAM does not work @6000 MHz. Neither XMP1 or XMP2 are working without errors
> 2. My Microphone got static noise. Even if its not connected. I tested it with Discord, Teamspeak, Teams and Skype. As soon as i use the onboard mic, i got static noise. Even if i unplug the Microphone, the static noise is still there. Also the volume of the Microphone always starts low and get higher by the time.
> If i use the noise canceling from the software or from the asus software on the highest setting, the noise is gone, but i sound terrible.
> When i lower the Micvolume to 30 %, the noise is also gone, but iam not hearable.
> If i use an external soundcard, everything works fine.
> 3. My Wifi connection drops right after booting the PC. After a short while it reconnects and then drops again. Then i have to manually reconnect
> 4. Sometimes my USB-Ports are resetting and i can't use them for some seconds
> 
> I got the newest BIOS (i tested all BIOS that where released. I always got errors on XMP1 or XMP2, sometimes i got more errors, sometimes less, depending on the BIOS).
> I tested Windows 10 and Windows 11
> I tested all available drivers including the newest one
> I even tested another Microphone (even its stupid, because the internal soundcard is making the noise)
> I sent it to an RMA with an detailed error description and the only answer i got was, that the boards works within specs. So i got a high end mainboard, that can't handle my RAM, and the Microphone slot also doesn't work fine, but thats within specs.
> 
> Does anyone have a tip for me, how i could get this board working or how to get the ASUS support, to get me some working Hardware? I can't even talk about it directly with the ASUS support, because i bought the board via reseller.
> 
> Maybe you got some tips here? When i call ASUS support directly, they just say, that they can't help me, because i have to do talk to the reseller. The reseller is like "asus said, all is fine, so we can't do anything for you". But the problems still exist.
> 
> This was my first ASUS Board and atm it looks like, its my last one, because it just doesn't work :/


I have the same Samsung DDR5 kit as you but on a cheaper 4-dimm Prime Z-690-A motherboard. I'm a rookie at memory overclocking, but have not been able to get over 6000 Mhz in dram frequency stable at all. I know my board is rated for 6000 Mhz, I can boot up to 6400 Mhz, but get errors in testmem/memtest above 6000 Mhz regardless of voltage. The stable settings I use now are in the link and voltages used below. I also have 2 small fans blowing on the memory as they get quite hot.

1.39v VDD
1.39v VDDQ
1.39v IVRTX VDDQ
PMIC- Sync all PMIC's
XMP-1


http://imgur.com/aHhOZXy


----------



## acoustic

I can't wait for the day that AIDA is not used anymore for comparing mem scores/latency. Such a worthless, easily manipulated bench that has too many variables. Intel MLC seems to be more consistent run-to-run from what I've seen


----------



## sblantipodi

Thunderhasi said:


> Hey there,
> 
> maybe someone could help me here
> 
> I got an Asus Rog Maximus Extreme, Gskill DDR5-6000 (F5-6000U3636E16G) RAM, i9 12900k and an EVGA RTX 3080 TI.
> 1. The RAM does not work @6000 MHz. Neither XMP1 or XMP2 are working without errors
> 2. My Microphone got static noise. Even if its not connected. I tested it with Discord, Teamspeak, Teams and Skype. As soon as i use the onboard mic, i got static noise. Even if i unplug the Microphone, the static noise is still there. Also the volume of the Microphone always starts low and get higher by the time.
> If i use the noise canceling from the software or from the asus software on the highest setting, the noise is gone, but i sound terrible.
> When i lower the Micvolume to 30 %, the noise is also gone, but iam not hearable.
> If i use an external soundcard, everything works fine.
> 3. My Wifi connection drops right after booting the PC. After a short while it reconnects and then drops again. Then i have to manually reconnect
> 4. Sometimes my USB-Ports are resetting and i can't use them for some seconds
> 
> I got the newest BIOS (i tested all BIOS that where released. I always got errors on XMP1 or XMP2, sometimes i got more errors, sometimes less, depending on the BIOS).
> I tested Windows 10 and Windows 11
> I tested all available drivers including the newest one
> I even tested another Microphone (even its stupid, because the internal soundcard is making the noise)
> I sent it to an RMA with an detailed error description and the only answer i got was, that the boards works within specs. So i got a high end mainboard, that can't handle my RAM, and the Microphone slot also doesn't work fine, but thats within specs.
> 
> Does anyone have a tip for me, how i could get this board working or how to get the ASUS support, to get me some working Hardware? I can't even talk about it directly with the ASUS support, because i bought the board via reseller.
> 
> Maybe you got some tips here? When i call ASUS support directly, they just say, that they can't help me, because i have to do talk to the reseller. The reseller is like "asus said, all is fine, so we can't do anything for you". But the problems still exist.
> 
> This was my first ASUS Board and atm it looks like, its my last one, because it just doesn't work :/


I have tried Micron sticks, Samsung sticks, SK Hynix sticks.
Micron and Samsung is crap on this platform.

SK Hynix are 5x easyer to make get them stable.
6GHz should be pretty easy with 2 sticks of Hynix. 
You only need to play with IMC voltage and VDD/VDDQ voltage.

but be sure that your CPU is stable before playing with RAM.


----------



## DBCooper1

sblantipodi said:


> I have tried Micron sticks, Samsung sticks, SK Hynix sticks.
> Micron and Samsung is crap on this platform.
> 
> SK Hynix are 5x easyer to make get them stable.
> 6GHz should be pretty easy with 2 sticks of Hynix.
> You only need to play with IMC voltage and VDD/VDDQ voltage.
> 
> but be sure that your CPU is stable before playing with RAM.


I think its pretty silly that this guy cant get xmp on an over $1,000 board, and he's not the only one I hear about this with asus Z690 boards. From what I hear, yes I guess Hynix is the DDR5 ram that everyone should of got from the get go. But not a lot of people buy numerous ram sets in order to get the perfect one. I think they expect atleast xmp to work either on a 2 dimm or 4 dimm board.


----------



## Nizzen

acoustic said:


> I can't wait for the day that AIDA is not used anymore for comparing mem scores/latency. Such a worthless, easily manipulated bench that has too many variables. Intel MLC seems to be more consistent run-to-run from what I've seen


It's a nice and fast tool for testing memorysettings on the same computer. 

Comparing aida results with different versions, different os, bclk overclocking, many background services etc, makes less sense. 
Use it as a tool, nothing else


----------



## Thunderhasi

Thanks for the Answers.

@sblantipodi Everything works fine @4800 mhz. so i think, CPU is stable

And yes, i think a 1.000 € Board should work with at least with XMP. I bought this board, because i want to start overclocking in the future. I wouldn't be mad, if this doesen't work. But that the basics are not working sucks.
And also my Micproblems. I don't pay for a soundcard, that iam unable to use.

I wrote the reseller again and also i wrote a mail to asus (instead of phoning). And if this still wont fix anything, i will ask a lawyer to get this done for me. This just cost time again, and i hate it, but better then having this garbage lying around -.-

But thanks, i really thought that maybe i should just accept it. But now i will try to get an functional board


----------



## Sa-Mo

Thunderhasi said:


> Thanks for the Answers.
> 
> @sblantipodi Everything works fine @4800 mhz. so i think, CPU is stable
> 
> And yes, i think a 1.000 € Board should work with at least with XMP. I bought this board, because i want to start overclocking in the future. I wouldn't be mad, if this doesen't work. But that the basics are not working sucks.
> And also my Micproblems. I don't pay for a soundcard, that iam unable to use.
> 
> I wrote the reseller again and also i wrote a mail to asus (instead of phoning). And if this still wont fix anything, i will ask a lawyer to get this done for me. This just cost time again, and i hate it, but better then having this garbage lying around -.-
> 
> But thanks, i really thought that maybe i should just accept it. But now i will try to get an functional board


For that money I think you have all the right to be mad and ASUS should replace the board or offer you your money back. I think ASUS produced so many broken boards this generation that now they are just trying to avoid as many RMA's as possible... IMO that's not how you treat your loyal customers. The only reason any company exist is because of us, the consumers. Just shameful.


----------



## sblantipodi

if you read my previous posts you know how mad I was with Asus "not beeing clear on some situations" but we can't ask Asus to fix something that can't be fixed by Asus.

I agree that Extreme board does not worth the money since it adds nothing to the mix apart some LEDs and a display but you can't expect to have a "guaranteed overclock" just because you spent a lot of money on a motherboard.

Don't forget that the base clock is really low on this platform, 6GHz on RAM is a crazy high OC.
Lower your expectations and try to understand what XMP is.

XMP stands for eXtreme Memory Profile and no one can guarantee you that it will work out of the box.

This is much more true with alder lake.


----------



## Sa-Mo

sblantipodi said:


> if you read my previous posts you know how mad I was with Asus "not beeing clear on some situations" but we can't ask Asus to fix something that can't be fixed by Asus.
> 
> I agree that Extreme board does not worth the money since it adds nothing to the mix apart some LEDs and a display but you can't expect to have a "guaranteed overclock" just because you spent a lot of money on a motherboard.
> 
> Don't forget that the base clock is really low on this platform, 6GHz on RAM is a crazy high OC.
> Lower your expectations and try to understand what XMP is.
> 
> XMP stands for eXtreme Memory Profile and no one can guarantee you that it will work out of the box.
> 
> This is much more true with alder lake.


I think most understand that, but not to go in circles here, there are actually faulty ASUS motherboards out there that can't do XMP due to mechanical fault on it, not due to weak a IMC etc. I mean, there are some user out there who got a board from a different brand after they had issues with their ASUS board, on which they could easily OC RAM past 6GHz with the same CPU and RAM kit they used prior to that.


----------



## busaj52

I just did my bios update (1403). Decided to give XMP1 a shot. Still broke. Pc is literally rock solid without XMP enabled. I'd hate to have a bad MB over ram but based on what I've seen throughout this thread I'd say board. BIOS at default settings.

Z690 APEX MFD (2021-11)
12900K
G.SKILL Z5 6000 CL36
(2) 1T WD_BLACK SN850
(2) DIMM.2 1T WD_BLACK SN850
THOR 1200W
STRIX 3090 OC


----------



## Herald

busaj52 said:


> I just did my bios update (1403). Decided to give XMP1 a shot. Still broke. Pc is literally rock solid without XMP enabled. I'd hate to have a bad MB over ram but based on what I've seen throughout this thread I'd say board. BIOS at default settings.
> 
> Z690 APEX MFD (2021-11)
> 12900K
> G.SKILL Z5 6000 CL36
> (2) 1T WD_BLACK SN850
> (2) DIMM.2 1T WD_BLACK SN850
> THOR 1200W
> STRIX 3090 OC


Even a good apex kinda sucks with samsung kits. The only reason to go Apex is if you have hynix - and you think you are lucky enough to get one of the good boards. 

Im running 6000c30-32-32 1T on a unisex board with the same kit you have, and trust me it was godawfully easy to get that result.


----------



## Thunderhasi

sblantipodi said:


> if you read my previous posts you know how mad I was with Asus "not beeing clear on some situations" but we can't ask Asus to fix something that can't be fixed by Asus.
> 
> I agree that Extreme board does not worth the money since it adds nothing to the mix apart some LEDs and a display but you can't expect to have a "guaranteed overclock" just because you spent a lot of money on a motherboard.
> 
> Don't forget that the base clock is really low on this platform, 6GHz on RAM is a crazy high OC.
> Lower your expectations and try to understand what XMP is.
> 
> XMP stands for eXtreme Memory Profile and no one can guarantee you that it will work out of the box.
> 
> This is much more true with alder lake.


Like i wrote, i wouldn't be mad, if OC wont work. And ok, i lower my expectation about XMP.
Should i also lower my expectation regarding "Two-Way AI Noise Cancelation" thats "helping ensure crystal-clear communication" and "ROG SupremeFX audio technology delivers an exceptional 113 dB signal-to-noise ratio on the line-in connection to provide best-ever recording quality."? Because it looks like, crystal-clear means, that static sounds are hearable all the time.
And what about the fact, that i need to wait for at least 5 Minuets, before my wifi connection becomes stable? Oh btw, the wifi router stands around 1 m away.

If this static sounds and the bad wifi is really something, i should have expected with an 1.000 € Mainboard, then please tell me, because then, i will never do this error again to buy a Board, that costs more then 200.


----------



## Shawnb99

Thunderhasi said:


> Should i also lower my expectation regarding "Two-Way AI Noise Cancelation" thats "helping ensure crystal-clear communication" and "ROG SupremeFX audio technology delivers an exceptional 113 dB signal-to-noise ratio on the line-in connection to provide best-ever recording quality."? Because it looks like, crystal-clear means, that static sounds are hearable all the time


You should always lower your expectations for onboard sound and that also should never be a reason to spend extra.


----------



## sblantipodi

Thunderhasi said:


> Like i wrote, i wouldn't be mad, if OC wont work. And ok, i lower my expectation about XMP.
> Should i also lower my expectation regarding "Two-Way AI Noise Cancelation" thats "helping ensure crystal-clear communication" and "ROG SupremeFX audio technology delivers an exceptional 113 dB signal-to-noise ratio on the line-in connection to provide best-ever recording quality."? Because it looks like, crystal-clear means, that static sounds are hearable all the time.
> And what about the fact, that i need to wait for at least 5 Minuets, before my wifi connection becomes stable? Oh btw, the wifi router stands around 1 m away.
> 
> If this static sounds and the bad wifi is really something, i should have expected with an 1.000 € Mainboard, then please tell me, because then, i will never do this error again to buy a Board, that costs more then 200.


Asus just teached you that spending all that money on a board have no sense.
I have an Extreme, it costs almost 2 times more than an Hero.

My Hero works much better than the Extreme with 4 sticks, this is the only difference I can notice between the two boards.


----------



## Akadaka

sblantipodi said:


> Asus just teached you that spending all that money on a board have no sense.
> I have an Extreme, it costs almost 2 times more than an Hero.
> 
> My Hero works much better than the Extreme with 4 sticks, this is the only difference I can notice between the two boards.


Yeah the Extreme made no sense at that price the Hero/Formula/Apex are already not cheap boards.


----------



## dyanikoglu

It's funny people are still considering buying an ASUS board after the sh*tshow going for weeks here.


----------



## 7empe

dyanikoglu said:


> It's funny people are still considering buying an ASUS board after the sh*tshow going for weeks here.


Lesson learned. No more ASUS board in the nearest future.


----------



## dante`afk

acoustic said:


> I can't wait for the day that AIDA is not used anymore for comparing mem scores/latency. Such a worthless, easily manipulated bench that has too many variables. Intel MLC seems to be more consistent run-to-run from what I've seen


if you (we) stop visiting forums like this, we'll just be happy with what we have and stop comparing ourselves with others' results.



---------

after 1 month back and forth asus offered to buy my apex back as they seemingly stopped producing it any longer. This would mean I would go for the unify X but I'm not really willing to put any time and effort into learning a new board to achieve at first the same CPU OC and secondly go from 6400 cl28 to possibly 6600+ or higher.

will probably just wait for next gen, or send it back, get 350$ back as the unify x is merely about 450$ compared to what I paid for the apex 800$ almost and live with moderate OC until next gen.

One is clear, I won't buy asus ever again.


----------



## sblantipodi

After 5 months, my Extreme continue to freeze at boot even at stock clocks using 4 sticks of SK Hynix...

Stock CPU, stock frequency for RAM (4000MT/s C40)

I want a refund, where did you asked for a refund guys?
I think that it's time that Asus gives my money back.


----------



## Sa-Mo

sblantipodi said:


> After 5 months, my Extreme continue to freeze at boot even at stock clocks using 4 sticks of SK Hynix...
> 
> Stock CPU, stock frequency for RAM (4000MT/s C40)
> 
> I want a refund, where did you asked for a refund guys?
> I think that it's time that Asus gives my money back.


I'm pretty sure everyone went through the RMA process, with a lot of back and forth communication with their support (1 - 2 months I assume) and if they can't get you a replacement, they will offer you your money back. I think...


----------



## marti69

hi guys any test or beta bios for z690 formula ?


----------



## DannyG13

Ok a little puzzled - on a Z690 Wifi ROG Strix F and I can run my Team Delta 6400 @ 6400 just fine @ 16GB rock solid in prime etc but when I add another 16GB prime reports worker errors.

How do I resolve that, what is the issue here?


----------



## Neur0Mortis

Akadaka said:


> Yeah the Extreme made no sense at that price the Hero/Formula/Apex are already not cheap boards.


That happiest I've been in the last month is when Microcenter said "yeah, it's only a few days out of the return window, you can have the money back for your Extreme." lol


----------



## DannyG13

Ok I'll try again - I've learned the memory controller on my 12900K probably lost the silicon lottery and is struggling with 32GB @ 6400. 16 is fine, but 32 is a struggle to pass the stress tests etc.

Which settings in the bios (asus ROG Strix Wifi f gaming) can I change to 'strengthen' the memory controller? And what should I change it to, give or take?


----------



## jomama22

DannyG13 said:


> Ok I'll try again - I've learned the memory controller on my 12900K probably lost the silicon lottery and is struggling with 32GB @ 6400. 16 is fine, but 32 is a struggle to pass the stress tests etc.
> 
> Which settings in the bios (asus ROG Strix Wifi f gaming) can I change to 'strengthen' the memory controller? And what should I change it to, give or take?


It's not an Imc issue, it a motherboard issue fyi.


----------



## Nizzen

jomama22 said:


> It's not an Imc issue, it a motherboard issue fyi.


Or heat?


----------



## Nizzen

Apex 1503 beta:





__





ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-1503.7z







drive.google.com





Hero:




__





ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-ASUS-1503.7z







drive.google.com





Formula:




__





ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-FORMULA-ASUS-1503.7z







drive.google.com





Extreme:





__





ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-1503.7z







drive.google.com


----------



## DannyG13

jomama22 said:


> It's not an Imc issue, it a motherboard issue fyi.


Can you expand on this please?


----------



## DannyG13

Nizzen said:


> Or heat?


If it was heat, I'd have the same problem with one stick of RAM?


----------



## Nizzen

DannyG13 said:


> If it was heat, I'd have the same problem with one stick of RAM?


Coolerr with one, most likely. Check hwinfo temp with full load. If over 60c, use a fan over dimms. 65-67c some dimms start to throw errors


----------



## 7empe

Nizzen said:


> Apex 1503 beta:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-1503.7z
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hero:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-ASUS-1503.7z
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Formula:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-FORMULA-ASUS-1503.7z
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Extreme:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-1503.7z
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


Any hint what has changed? Anyone? I bet a changelog, if any, is something like "performance and stability improvements" (sic!)


----------



## Nizzen

7empe said:


> Any hint what has changed? Anyone? I bet a changelog, if any, is something like "performance and stability improvements" (sic!)


Full copy/paste: Enjoy 

ROG MAXIMUS Z690 Series Beta Bios 1503

01. Improve system performance.

ROG MAXIMUS Z690 HERO BETA BIOS 1503





ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-ASUS-1503.7z







drive.google.com





ROG MAXIMUS Z690 HERO EVA BETA BIOS 1503





ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-EVA-ASUS-1503.7z







drive.google.com





ROG MAXIMUS Z690 FORMULA BETA BIOS 1503





ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-FORMULA-ASUS-1503.7z







drive.google.com





ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX BETA BIOS 1503





ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-1503.7z







drive.google.com





ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME BETA BIOS 1503





ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-1503.7z







drive.google.com





ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME GLACIAL BETA BIOS 1503





ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-GLACIAL-ASUS-1503.7z







drive.google.com


----------



## Mappi75

Bios 1503 on Apex:

1) strange behavior during loading xmp > F10 = board restarts 3 times (!?) then windows 11 pro starts.

2) this 1503 beta bios works well with my 12900KS because in CB23 all cores runs at 5,2Ghz (all core),
which doesn't work with bios 0070 & 0090 (both running max. 5,1Ghz because some cpu limites were enabled > BUT all were disabled).

1503 CB23: 28.998 pts
1503 CB23: 2.136 pts

1403 CB23: 28.261 pts
1403 CB23: 2.087 pts

still not reaching u/Seby9123 points:
CB23: 29.164 pts
CB23: 2.162 pts

1503 tested only with xmp 6400Mhz CL32 & Asus Armory Crate installed
1403 tested with 6666Mhz CL32 optimized settings

(both with no undervolting of the cpu which gives more points)

Game benchmark:
Borderlands 3 - 1403: 143,xx FPS > 6.666Mhz CL32 optimized (never got this in the past over 144+ fps)
Borderlands 3 - 1503: 147,69 FPS > 6.400Mhz xmp only

Edit: 
first time ever with 1503 that i can boot with T1 !! 6.666Mhz 32-40-40-28-T1
(still testing)


----------



## Akadaka

Mappi75 said:


> 1503 on Apex little strange behavior during loading xmp -> board restarts 3 times then win 11 starts.
> 
> First Beta which works for me with 12900KS in CB23 with all core 5,2ghz !
> Only 1403 gives 5,2ghz all core.
> 
> 0070 & 09xx bios runs every time with max 5,1 Ghz all core.


Seems like the BIOS's keep getting worse not better.


----------



## SoldierRBT

Akadaka said:


> Seems like the BIOS's keep getting worse not better.


I'd try 1503 tonight. So far newest BIOS (1403, 0070, 0090) doesn't work well for 1T. I believe they are improving 2T. People with retail Apex should aim for 1T stable for daily on 1304 bios.


----------



## Falkentyne

Mappi75 said:


> 1503 on Apex:
> strange behavior during loading xmp > F10 = board restarts 3 times (!?) then win 11 starts.
> 
> First beta bios which works for me with my 12900KS in CB23 with all core 5,2ghz !
> Only 1403 gives 5,2ghz all core.


What you just said doesn't make sense.
You just claimed the same thing twice then you contradicted yourself in the same sentence.
Are you talking about all auto settings?
Fixed voltage? Fixed multiplier ratio? CPU unstable at 5.2 ghz or something?
According to this post, you claim both 1403 and 1503 give "5.2 ghz all core" then you act like only 1503 gives 5.2 ghz all core.
What exact settings are you talking about?


----------



## Mappi75

@Falkentyne

Sorry, i will edit my post.


----------



## DannyG13

Nizzen said:


> Coolerr with one, most likely. Check hwinfo temp with full load. If over 60c, use a fan over dimms. 65-67c some dimms start to throw errors


I'm definitely testing this, thanks. One thing I will say is I do have a case fan blowing right over them... 3 intake at the front, the top one blowing on them.

But I want to see what temp it gets to on its own then compare to dual.

Thanks for this advice, we'll see if it's bang on.


----------



## DannyG13

Nizzen said:


> Coolerr with one, most likely. Check hwinfo temp with full load. If over 60c, use a fan over dimms. 65-67c some dimms start to throw errors


You were partially right, with just one in it didn't go over 47C, but two went up to 58C and 56C. Not piping hot but enough to notice. Will try again but with active cooling on them now...


----------



## DannyG13

Nizzen said:


> Coolerr with one, most likely. Check hwinfo temp with full load. If over 60c, use a fan over dimms. 65-67c some dimms start to throw errors


Ok with full cooling on the temps stayed sub 49C with both dims in but the errors were still there. Definitely not a temperature issue on the sims.

I ran Prime large FFTs to stress the memory controller and RAM and got those errors with XMP. It's fine with the single stick.

So... suggestions folks?

Thanks!


----------



## El Rizzo

Does anyone here know of a way to manually set Vref on the Asus ROG Strix Z690-A WIFI D4? Or alternatively, disable Vref training on reboots? I have the problem that my system is consistently stable on coldboots (tested daily with y-cruncher, tm5, Karhu and OCCT over a 2-3 week period), but as soon as I do 1-2 reboots I can't even get through 2 runs of y-cruncher without errors anymore and the system becomes unstable. Vdimm is at 1.50V (1.55 didn't help either), VDDQ at 1.40V (more doesn't improve the situation) and 1.35V SA and manually fixed ODTs, running 2x16GB Samsung B-dies at 4100Mhz 15 16 16 36 and tight secondary and tertiary timings, BIOS version is 0812 since it got me the best results so far.


----------



## 7empe

DannyG13 said:


> Ok with full cooling on the temps stayed sub 49C with both dims in but the errors were still there. Definitely not a temperature issue on the sims.
> 
> I ran Prime large FFTs to stress the memory controller and RAM and got those errors with XMP. It's fine with the single stick.
> 
> So... suggestions folks?
> 
> Thanks!


Increase IMC voltage?


----------



## 7empe

El Rizzo said:


> Does anyone here know of a way to manually set Vref on the Asus ROG Strix Z690-A WIFI D4? Or alternatively, disable Vref training on reboots? I have the problem that my system is consistently stable on coldboots (tested daily with y-cruncher, tm5, Karhu and OCCT over a 2-3 week period), but as soon as I do 1-2 reboots I can't even get through 2 runs of y-cruncher without errors anymore and the system becomes unstable. Vdimm is at 1.50V (1.55 didn't help either), VDDQ at 1.40V (more doesn't improve the situation) and 1.35V SA and manually fixed ODTs, running 2x16GB Samsung B-dies at 4100Mhz 15 16 16 36 and tight secondary and tertiary timings, BIOS version is 0812 since it got me the best results so far.


What makes you think it's the Vref? Do you retrain with every reboot?


----------



## El Rizzo

7empe said:


> What makes you think it's the Vref? Do you retrain with every reboot?


I've talked to Cstkl1 about this (on a Discord server we both are part of) and he confirmed that Vref gets retrained on every reboot and that he and another user had similar issues on Rocketlake due to this and that is the same way on Alderlake. Also since I've manually set ODTs, other RAM relevant voltages (Vdimm, VDDQ, VCCSA) and most timings and also did timing comparisons after reboot to see if anything changed there (compared with OCtool), there aren't any other factors I can think of that could be the culprit + what Cstkl said.


----------



## 7empe

El Rizzo said:


> I've talked to Cstkl1 about this (on a Discord server we both are part of) and he confirmed that Vref gets retrained on every reboot and that he and another user had similar issues on Rocketlake due to this and that is the same way on Alderlake. Also since I've manually set ODTs, other RAM relevant voltages (Vdimm, VDDQ, VCCSA) and most timings and also did timing comparisons after reboot to see if anything changed there (compared with OCtool), there aren't any other factors I can think of that could be the culprit + what Cstkl said.


Allright. Please let me know how to set fix Vref on ADL, because I have similar y-cruncher instabilities as you have described.


----------



## DannyG13

7empe said:


> Increase IMC voltage?


It defaults on this board at 1.403, and increasing or decreasing doesn't seem to help much.

I'm very confused at this point.


----------



## Simkin

SoldierRBT said:


> I'd try 1503 tonight. So far newest BIOS (1403, 0070, 0090) doesn't work well for 1T. I believe they are improving 2T. People with retail Apex should aim for 1T stable for daily on 1304 bios.


6200 c32 1T has been working well for me now for quite a while on my Apex, worked well on 1304 and now 1403.


----------



## 7empe

Simkin said:


> 6200 c32 1T has been working well for me now for quite a while on my Apex, worked well on 1304 and now 1403.


Yes, 1403 works fine with my 6400 c28 1T too.

Still waiting on some feedback regarding 1503 potential improvements around 6800+ and 2T.


----------



## bscool

z690 Apex 2022

Gskill 6400

TLDR I cannot offer much feedback on CPU OC, for memory 1503 works well for me.

I have been running 1503 and using a new CPU. The memory 7000c32 OC that worked on 3 other 12900kf/ks with older bioses works fine and is stable but manual CPU oc has issues. So not sure if it is the CPU or the bios. Booting and benching 7400c32 GB3 works on 1503.

Using AI OC no issues with stability. Could be I just need to figure out this CPUs voltages so not saying it is the bios. This new CPU also requires less vdd than my 3 other CPU or certain memory timings and frequencies wont even boot.

Edit Leaving subtimings on auto 7400 maxes out trefi but other frequencies do not. Anyone else notice this?


----------



## bscool

z690 Apex 2022

12900k Arctic 420 AIO

Gskill 6400

GB3 run @7400c32 CPU OC is using AI OC. Obviously this is not Karhu stable but I did play some CSGO.

All voltgaes auto except vdd/vddq 1.62v






ASUS System Product Name - Geekbench Browser


Benchmark results for an ASUS System Product Name with an Intel Core i9-12900K processor.



browser.geekbench.com


----------



## bscool

I notice on z690 Apex bios 1530 vddq tx cannot be set. Anyone else notice this? I use to set it to match vdd.

Been away from ddr5 so maybe I am missing something.

Edit went back to 1304 and I can manually set vvdd tx. 

So for me manually setting vddq tx is not working on new bios 1503.


----------



## Gking62

bscool said:


> I notice on z690 Apex bios 1530 vddq tx cannot be set. Anyone else notice this? I use to set it to match vdd.
> 
> Been away from ddr5 so maybe I am missing something.
> 
> Edit went back to 1304 and I can manually set vvdd tx.
> 
> So for me manually setting vddq tx is not working on new bios 1503.


 this is a bigtime observation, glad I haven't updated yet from 1403 thanks for posting


----------



## bscool

Gking62 said:


> this is a bigtime observation, glad I haven't updated yet from 1403 thanks for posting


I wouldnt take what I found as gospel. Hopefully other test and can confirm.


----------



## Gking62

bscool said:


> I wouldnt take what I found as gospel. Hopefully other test and can confirm.


absolutely


----------



## Mappi75

deleted


----------



## Tibby67

Tried 1503 on the Extreme gSKILL 6400mHZ BSOD. first time ever no over clocks.. back to 1403...


----------



## Kaltenbrunner

It's not that I could not afford a Strix, but it would cost almost as much as the CPU I ordered. And then if I go to resell it, the average buyer doesn't know it's worth more, and I'll be almost giving it away like my current mobo.

If only the non k chips were clocked faster, I'd get a non k 12700 and good H670 or B660 board, and be fine.

I'll probably get the Asus TUF DDR4, too bad they barely go on sale tho.


----------



## Mappi75

bios 1503:

CB23 & games are running faster (than ever before) BUT i cant run my 1403 memory setting in 1503 tm5 stable.

This is my stable 1403 setup (tCKE was 4 now testing 6):








Memory oc is not better with 1503 cant reach 6.800 Mhz stable (6.666Mhz is still max)

Still testing tCKE 6

options which i'am setting higher (if tCKE will not works):
tWR / tRDWR_dg / tRDWR_dd / tWRRD_sg / tWRRD_dg

Edit:
tCKE 4 was the problem here > tCKE 6 works now with TM5 (1usmus 20 cycle).


----------



## Pitrek211

Hi guys,
I have a small question. I got an apex motherboard with gskill 6400 cl32 like a month ago and it worked without any issue until now. I could run any xmp profile i wanted without any crashing in the games, but now it crashes from time to time and I know it's due to the memory. What can be the cause of this sudden unstability? I didn't change anything and it just stopped being stable.


----------



## IronAge

maybe memory timings getting trained in a different way.

try something: power off and disconnect power supply from the wall or use PSU switch, press Power on Button multiple times.

put power supply back, and see if it runs stable atfter the first Post/OS Boot.

and always remember: Z690 Apex is a diva.


----------



## Pitrek211

IronAge said:


> maybe memory timings getting trained in a different way.
> 
> try something: power off and disconnect power supply from the wall or use PSU switch, press Power on Button multiple times.
> 
> put power supply back, and see if it runs stable atfter the first Post/OS Boot.
> 
> and always remember: Z690 Apex is a diva.


I was already doing the whole power off with the psu disconnected for like 30s. Now i'm trying to change various voltages etc and we'll see. Man I was happy that i didn't need to go down this rabbit hole to make it work until yesterday haha.


----------



## Ichirou

Pitrek211 said:


> Hi guys,
> I have a small question. I got an apex motherboard with gskill 6400 cl32 like a month ago and it worked without any issue until now. I could run any xmp profile i wanted without any crashing in the games, but now it crashes from time to time and I know it's due to the memory. What can be the cause of this sudden unstability? I didn't change anything and it just stopped being stable.


Run sfc /scannow in CMD to see whether or not any system files got corrupted. If so, then it's because of unstable RAM.


----------



## IronAge

i would not try repairing windows component store with unstable memory settings, thats what actually happens when you run sfc /scannow.


----------



## Pitrek211

I ran sfc /scannow and it showed no errors. I cleared the cmos, applied the xmp 2 profile and increased the imc voltage from 1.1 to 1.2V and it passed the memtest. However I had one crash after playing warzone. I'll need to see how often will it crash with these settings.


----------



## sblantipodi

Nizzen said:


> Apex 1503 beta:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-1503.7z
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hero:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-ASUS-1503.7z
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Formula:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-FORMULA-ASUS-1503.7z
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Extreme:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-1503.7z
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


what is the changelog of this BIOS?
do they fix something or they just create a new BIOS to convince people that they are working on something?

new BIOS, like new software needs a detailed changelog, no changelog, means nothing interesting or worse nothing that users should know about.


----------



## sblantipodi

Falkentyne said:


> What you just said doesn't make sense.
> You just claimed the same thing twice then you contradicted yourself in the same sentence.
> Are you talking about all auto settings?
> Fixed voltage? Fixed multiplier ratio? CPU unstable at 5.2 ghz or something?
> According to this post, you claim both 1403 and 1503 give "5.2 ghz all core" then you act like only 1503 gives 5.2 ghz all core.
> What exact settings are you talking about?


is there someone working on 4 sticks problems or this boards are for gamers only?
I bought an extreme to work with containers and I needs loads of RAM, am I out of lack?

are you interested in OCers only?

is there any luck in having a working system with 4 sticks even a JEDEC frequency?



We'll be back.


----------



## Alberto_It

Hi to everyone, someone can help me to adjust my Oc profile? I have an Aio cooler so I can't claim your scores in CB23

Thanks in advance









My bios and latest score









Spoiler: Bios settings 



[2022/01/01 18:01:11]
Ai Overclock Tuner [XMP I]
XMP [DDR5-6000 36-36-36-76-1.30V-1.30V]
BCLK Frequency [100.0000]
PCIE Frequency [100.0000]
Intel(R) Adaptive Boost Technology [Auto]
ASUS MultiCore Enhancement [Auto – Lets BIOS Optimize]
SVID Behavior [Auto]
BCLK Frequency : DRAM Frequency Ratio [Auto]
Memory Controller : DRAM Frequency Ratio [Auto]
DRAM Frequency [DDR5-6000MHz]
Performance Core Ratio [By Core Usage]
1-Core Ratio Limit [54]
2-Core Ratio Limit [54]
3-Core Ratio Limit [54]
4-Core Ratio Limit [53]
5-Core Ratio Limit [53]
6-Core Ratio Limit [52]
7-Core Ratio Limit [52]
8-Core Ratio Limit [52]
Performance Core0 Specific Ratio Limit [Auto]
Performance Core0 specific Adaptive Voltage [Auto]
Performance Core1 Specific Ratio Limit [Auto]
Performance Core1 specific Adaptive Voltage [Auto]
Performance Core2 Specific Ratio Limit [Auto]
Performance Core2 specific Adaptive Voltage [Auto]
Performance Core3 Specific Ratio Limit [Auto]
Performance Core3 specific Adaptive Voltage [Auto]
Performance Core4 Specific Ratio Limit [Auto]
Performance Core4 specific Adaptive Voltage [Auto]
Performance Core5 Specific Ratio Limit [Auto]
Performance Core5 specific Adaptive Voltage [Auto]
*Performance Core6 Specific Ratio Limit [Auto]
Performance Core6 specific Adaptive Voltage [Auto]
*Performance Core7 Specific Ratio Limit [Auto]
Performance Core7 specific Adaptive Voltage [Auto]
Efficient Core Ratio [By Core Usage]
Efficient 1-Core Ratio Limit [42]
Efficient 2-Core Ratio Limit [42]
Efficient 3-Core Ratio Limit [42]
Efficient 4-Core Ratio Limit [42]
Efficient 5-Core Ratio Limit [42]
Efficient 6-Core Ratio Limit [41]
Efficient 7-Core Ratio Limit [41]
Efficient 8-Core Ratio Limit [41]
Efficient Core Group0 Specific Ratio Limit [Auto]
Efficient Core Group0 specific Adaptive Voltage [Auto]
Efficient Core Group1 Specific Ratio Limit [Auto]
Efficient Core Group1 specific Adaptive Voltage [Auto]
CPU SVID Support [Auto]
AVX2 [Auto]
AVX512 [Auto]
AVX2 Ratio Offset to per-core Ratio Limit [Auto]
AVX512 Ratio Offset to per-core Ratio Limit [Auto]
AVX2 Voltage Guardband Scale Factor [Auto]
AVX512 Voltage Guardband Scale Factor [Auto]
Maximus Tweak [Auto]
DRAM CAS# Latency [36]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Delay [36]
DRAM RAS# PRE Time [36]
DRAM RAS# ACT Time [76]
DRAM Command Rate [Auto]
DRAM RAS# to RAS# Delay L [Auto]
DRAM RAS# to RAS# Delay S [Auto]
DRAM REF Cycle Time [Auto]
DRAM REF Cycle Time 2 [Auto]
DRAM REF Cycle Time Same Bank [Auto]
DRAM Refresh Interval [Auto]
DRAM WRITE Recovery Time [Auto]
DRAM READ to PRE Time [Auto]
DRAM FOUR ACT WIN Time [Auto]
DRAM WRITE to READ Delay [Auto]
DRAM WRITE to READ Delay L [Auto]
DRAM WRITE to READ Delay S [Auto]
DRAM CKE Minimum Pulse Width [Auto]
DRAM Write Latency [Auto]
Ctl0 dqvrefup [Auto]
Ctl0 dqvrefdn [Auto]
Ctl0 dqodtvrefup [Auto]
Ctl0 dqodtvrefdn [Auto]
Ctl1 cmdvrefup [Auto]
Ctl1 ctlvrefup [Auto]
Ctl1 clkvrefup [Auto]
Ctl1 ckecsvrefup [Auto]
Ctl2 cmdvrefdn [Auto]
Ctl2 ctlvrefdn [Auto]
Ctl2 clkvrefdn [Auto]
ODT_READ_DURATION [Auto]
ODT_READ_DELAY [Auto]
ODT_WRITE_DURATION [Auto]
ODT_WRITE_DELAY [Auto]
DQ RTT WR [Auto]
DQ RTT NOM RD [Auto]
DQ RTT NOM WR [Auto]
DQ RTT PARK [Auto]
DQ RTT PARK DQS [Auto]
GroupA CA ODT [Auto]
GroupA CS ODT [Auto]
GroupA CK ODT [Auto]
GroupB CA ODT [Auto]
GroupB CS ODT [Auto]
GroupB CK ODT [Auto]
Pull-up Output Driver Impedance [Auto]
Pull-Down Output Driver Impedance [Auto]
DQ RTT WR [Auto]
DQ RTT NOM RD [Auto]
DQ RTT NOM WR [Auto]
DQ RTT PARK [Auto]
DQ RTT PARK DQS [Auto]
GroupA CA ODT [Auto]
GroupA CS ODT [Auto]
GroupA CK ODT [Auto]
GroupB CA ODT [Auto]
GroupB CS ODT [Auto]
GroupB CK ODT [Auto]
Pull-up Output Driver Impedance [Auto]
Pull-Down Output Driver Impedance [Auto]
Round Trip Latency Init Value MC0 CHA [Auto]
Round Trip Latency Max Value MC0 CHA [Auto]
Round Trip Latency Offset Value Mode Sign MC0 CHA [-]
Round Trip Latency Offset Value MC0 CHA [Auto]
Round Trip Latency Init Value MC0 CHB [Auto]
Round Trip Latency Max Value MC0 CHB [Auto]
Round Trip Latency Offset Value Mode Sign MC0 CHB [-]
Round Trip Latency Offset Value MC0 CHB [Auto]
Round Trip Latency Init Value MC1 CHA [Auto]
Round Trip Latency Max Value MC1 CHA [Auto]
Round Trip Latency Offset Value Mode Sign MC1 CHA [-]
Round Trip Latency Offset Value MC1 CHA [Auto]
Round Trip Latency Init Value MC1 CHB [Auto]
Round Trip Latency Max Value MC1 CHB [Auto]
Round Trip Latency Offset Value Mode Sign MC1 CHB [-]
Round Trip Latency Offset Value MC1 CHB [Auto]
Round Trip Latency MC0 CHA R0 [Auto]
Round Trip Latency MC0 CHA R1 [Auto]
Round Trip Latency MC0 CHA R2 [Auto]
Round Trip Latency MC0 CHA R3 [Auto]
Round Trip Latency MC0 CHA R4 [Auto]
Round Trip Latency MC0 CHA R5 [Auto]
Round Trip Latency MC0 CHA R6 [Auto]
Round Trip Latency MC0 CHA R7 [Auto]
Round Trip Latency MC0 CHB R0 [Auto]
Round Trip Latency MC0 CHB R1 [Auto]
Round Trip Latency MC0 CHB R2 [Auto]
Round Trip Latency MC0 CHB R3 [Auto]
Round Trip Latency MC0 CHB R4 [Auto]
Round Trip Latency MC0 CHB R5 [Auto]
Round Trip Latency MC0 CHB R6 [Auto]
Round Trip Latency MC0 CHB R7 [Auto]
Round Trip Latency MC1 CHA R0 [Auto]
Round Trip Latency MC1 CHA R1 [Auto]
Round Trip Latency MC1 CHA R2 [Auto]
Round Trip Latency MC1 CHA R3 [Auto]
Round Trip Latency MC1 CHA R4 [Auto]
Round Trip Latency MC1 CHA R5 [Auto]
Round Trip Latency MC1 CHA R6 [Auto]
Round Trip Latency MC1 CHA R7 [Auto]
Round Trip Latency MC1 CHB R0 [Auto]
Round Trip Latency MC1 CHB R1 [Auto]
Round Trip Latency MC1 CHB R2 [Auto]
Round Trip Latency MC1 CHB R3 [Auto]
Round Trip Latency MC1 CHB R4 [Auto]
Round Trip Latency MC1 CHB R5 [Auto]
Round Trip Latency MC1 CHB R6 [Auto]
Round Trip Latency MC1 CHB R7 [Auto]
Early Command Training [Auto]
SenseAmp Offset Training [Auto]
Early ReadMPR Timing Centering 2D [Auto]
Read MPR Training [Auto]
Receive Enable Training [Auto]
Jedec Write Leveling [Auto]
Early Write Time Centering 2D [Auto]
Early Read Time Centering 2D [Auto]
Write Timing Centering 1D [Auto]
Write Voltage Centering 1D [Auto]
Read Timing Centering 1D [Auto]
Read Timing Centering with JR [Auto]
Dimm ODT Training* [Auto]
Max RTT_WR [ODT Off]
DIMM RON Training* [Auto]
Write Drive Strength/Equalization 2D* [Auto]
Write Slew Rate Training* [Auto]
Read ODT Training* [Auto]
Comp Optimization Training [Auto]
Read Equalization Training* [Auto]
Read Amplifier Training* [Auto]
Write Timing Centering 2D [Auto]
Read Timing Centering 2D [Auto]
Command Voltage Centering [Auto]
Early Command Voltage Centering [Auto]
Write Voltage Centering 2D [Auto]
Read Voltage Centering 2D [Auto]
Late Command Training [Auto]
Round Trip Latency [Auto]
Turn Around Timing Training [Auto]
CMD CTL CLK Slew Rate [Auto]
CMD/CTL DS & E 2D [Auto]
Read Voltage Centering 1D [Auto]
TxDqTCO Comp Training* [Auto]
ClkTCO Comp Training* [Auto]
TxDqsTCO Comp Training* [Auto]
VccDLL Bypass Training [Auto]
CMD/CTL Drive Strength Up/Dn 2D [Auto]
DIMM CA ODT Training [Auto]
PanicVttDnLp Training* [Auto]
Read Vref Decap Training* [Auto]
Vddq Training [Auto]
Duty Cycle Correction Training [Auto]
Rank Margin Tool Per Bit [Auto]
DIMM DFE Training [Auto]
Tx Dqs Dcc Training [Auto]
Rank Margin Tool [Auto]
Memory Test [Auto]
DIMM SPD Alias Test [Auto]
Receive Enable Centering 1D [Auto]
Retrain Margin Check [Auto]
Write Drive Strength Up/Dn independently [Auto]
Margin Check Limit [Disabled]
tRDRD_sg_Training [Auto]
tRDRD_sg_Runtime [Auto]
tRDRD_dg_Training [Auto]
tRDRD_dg_Runtime [Auto]
tRDWR_sg [Auto]
tRDWR_dg [Auto]
tWRWR_sg [Auto]
tWRWR_dg [Auto]
tWRRD_sg [Auto]
tWRRD_dg [Auto]
tRDRD_dr [Auto]
tRDRD_dd [Auto]
tRDWR_dr [Auto]
tRDWR_dd [Auto]
tWRWR_dr [Auto]
tWRWR_dd [Auto]
tWRRD_dr [Auto]
tWRRD_dd [Auto]
tRPRE [Auto]
tWPRE [Auto]
tWRPRE [Auto]
tPRPDEN [Auto]
tRDPDEN [Auto]
tWRPDEN [Auto]
tCPDED [Auto]
tREFIX9 [Auto]
Ref Interval [Auto]
tXPDLL [Auto]
tXP [Auto]
tPPD [Auto]
tCCD_L_tDLLK [Auto]
MRC Fast Boot [Enabled]
MCH Full Check [Auto]
Mem Over Clock Fail Count [Auto]
Training Profile [Auto]
RxDfe [Auto]
Mrc Training Loop Count [Auto]
DRAM CLK Period [Auto]
Dll_bwsel [Auto]
Controller 0, Channel 0 Control [Enabled]
Controller 0, Channel 1 Control [Enabled]
Controller 1, Channel 0 Control [Enabled]
Controller 1, Channel 1 Control [Enabled]
MC_Vref0 [Auto]
MC_Vref1 [Auto]
MC_Vref2 [Auto]
Dynamic Memory Boost [Disabled]
Realtime Memory Frequency [Disabled]
SA GV [Disabled]
Voltage Monitor [Die Sense]
VRM Initialization Check [Disabled]
CPU Input Voltage Load-line Calibration [Auto]
CPU Load-line Calibration [Level 1]
Synch ACDC Loadline with VRM Loadline [Disabled]
CPU Current Capability [Auto]
CPU Current Reporting [Auto]
Core Voltage Suspension [Auto]
CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Auto]
VRM Spread Spectrum [Auto]
CPU Power Duty Control [Auto]
CPU Power Phase Control [Auto]
CPU Power Thermal Control [125]
CPU Core/Cache Boot Voltage [Auto]
CPU Input Boot Voltage [Auto]
PLL Termination Boot Voltage [Auto]
CPU Standby Boot Voltage [Auto]
Memory Controller Boot Voltage [Auto]
CPU Core Auto Voltage Cap [Auto]
CPU Input Auto Voltage Cap [Auto]
Memory Controller Auto Voltage Cap [Auto]
Maximum CPU Core Temperature [Auto]
Package Temperature Threshold [90]
Regulate Frequency by above Threshold [Enabled]
IVR Transmitter VDDQ ICCMAX [Auto]
Unlimited ICCMAX [Auto]
CPU Core/Cache Current Limit Max. [Auto]
Long Duration Package Power Limit [Auto]
Package Power Time Window [Auto]
Short Duration Package Power Limit [Auto]
IA AC Load Line [0.60]
IA DC Load Line [1.76]
IA CEP Enable [Auto]
SA CEP Enable [Auto]
IA SoC Iccmax Reactive Protector [Auto]
Inverse Temperature Dependency Throttle [Auto]
IA VR Voltage Limit [1500]
TVB Voltage Optimizations [Enabled]
Enhanced TVB [Enabled]
Overclocking TVB [+2Boost Profile]
Offset Mode Sign 1 [+]
V/F Point 1 Offset [Auto]
Offset Mode Sign 2 [+]
V/F Point 2 Offset [Auto]
Offset Mode Sign 3 [+]
V/F Point 3 Offset [Auto]
Offset Mode Sign 4 [+]
V/F Point 4 Offset [Auto]
Offset Mode Sign 5 [+]
V/F Point 5 Offset [Auto]
Offset Mode Sign 6 [-]
V/F Point 6 Offset [Auto]
Offset Mode Sign 7 [+]
V/F Point 7 Offset [0.03600]
Offset Mode Sign 8 [+]
V/F Point 8 Offset [Auto]
Offset Mode Sign 9 [+]
V/F Point 9 Offset [Auto]
Offset Mode Sign 10 [+]
V/F Point 10 Offset [Auto]
Offset Mode Sign 11 [+]
V/F Point 11 Offset [0.14600]
Initial BCLK Frequency [Auto]
Runtime BCLK OC [Auto]
BCLK Amplitude [Auto]
BCLK Slew Rate [Auto]
BCLK Spread Spectrum [Auto]
Initial PCIE Frequency [Auto]
PCIE/DMI Amplitude [Auto]
PCIE/DMI Slew Rate [Auto]
PCIE/DMI Spread Spectrum [Auto]
Cold Boot PCIE Frequency [Auto]
Realtime Memory Timing [Enabled]
SPD Write Disable [TRUE]
PVD Ratio Threshold [Auto]
Banding Ratio [Auto]
SA PLL Frequency Override [Auto]
BCLK TSC HW Fixup [Enabled]
Core Ratio Extension Mode [Disabled]
FLL OC mode [Auto]
Core PLL Voltage [Auto]
GT PLL Voltage [Auto]
Ring PLL Voltage [Auto]
System Agent PLL Voltage [Auto]
Memory Controller PLL Voltage [Auto]
CPU 1.8V Small Rail [Auto]
PLL Termination Voltage [Auto]
CPU Standby Voltage [Auto]
PCH 1.05V Voltage [Auto]
PCH 0.82V Voltage [Auto]
CPU Input Voltage Reset Voltage [Auto]
Eventual CPU Input Voltage [Auto]
Eventual Memory Controller Voltage [Auto]
Package Temperature Threshold [90]
Regulate Frequency by above Threshold [Enabled]
Cooler Efficiency Customize [Keep Training]
Cooler Re-evaluation Algorithm [Normal]
Optimism Scale [100]
Ring Down Bin [Auto]
Min. CPU Cache Ratio [Auto]
Max. CPU Cache Ratio [Auto]
BCLK Aware Adaptive Voltage [Enabled]
CPU Core/Cache Voltage [Adaptive Mode]

Offset Mode Sign [+]
Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core Voltage [1.45600]
Offset Voltage [Auto]
CPU L2 Voltage [Auto]
CPU System Agent Voltage [Auto]
CPU Input Voltage [Auto]
High DRAM Voltage Mode [Auto]
DRAM VDD Voltage [1.30000]
DRAM VDDQ Voltage [1.30000]
IVR Transmitter VDDQ Voltage [Auto]
Memory Controller Voltage [Auto]
PMIC Voltages [Sync All PMICs]
SPD HUB VLDO (1.8V) [Auto]
SPD HUB VDDIO (1.0V) [Auto]
DRAM VDD Voltage [1.30000]
DRAM VDDQ Voltage [1.30000]
DRAM VPP Voltage [Auto]
DRAM VDD Switching Frequency [Auto]
DRAM VDDQ Switching Frequency [Auto]
DRAM VPP Switching Frequency [Auto]
DRAM Current Capability [Auto]
PCI Express Native Power Management [Enabled]
Native ASPM [Disabled]
DMI Link ASPM Control [Disabled]
ASPM [Auto]
L1 Substates [Disabled]
DMI ASPM [Disabled]
DMI Gen3 ASPM [Disabled]
PEG - ASPM [Disabled]
PCI Express Clock Gating [Enabled]
Hardware Prefetcher [Enabled]
Adjacent Cache Line Prefetch [Enabled]
Intel (VMX) Virtualization Technology [Disabled]
Per P-Core Control [Disabled]
Per E-Core Control [Disabled]
Active Performance Cores [All]
Active Efficient Cores [All]
Hyper-Threading [Enabled]
Hyper-Threading of Core 0 [Enabled]
Hyper-Threading of Core 1 [Enabled]
Hyper-Threading of Core 2 [Enabled]
Hyper-Threading of Core 3 [Enabled]
Hyper-Threading of Core 4 [Enabled]
Hyper-Threading of Core 5 [Enabled]
Hyper-Threading of Core 6 [Enabled]
Hyper-Threading of Core 7 [Enabled]
Total Memory Encryption [Disabled]
Legacy Game Compatibility Mode [Disabled]
Boot performance mode [Auto]
Intel(R) SpeedStep(tm) [Enabled]
Intel(R) Speed Shift Technology [Enabled]
Intel(R) Turbo Boost Max Technology 3.0 [Enabled]
Turbo Mode [Enabled]
Acoustic Noise Mitigation [Disabled]
CPU C-states [Enabled]
Enhanced C-states [Enabled]
Package C State Limit [C8]
Thermal Monitor [Enabled]
Dual Tau Boost [Disabled]
VT-d [Disabled]
Memory Remap [Enabled]
Enable VMD controller [Enabled]
Map PCIE Storage under VMD [Disabled]
Map SATA Controller under VMD [Disabled]
M.2_1 Link Speed [Auto]
PCIEX16_1 Link Speed [Auto]
PCIEX16_2 Link Speed [Auto]
PCIEX1(G3) Link Speed [Auto]
PCIEX4(G3) Link Speed [Auto]
M.2_2 Link Speed [Auto]
DIMM.2_1 Link Speed [Auto]
DIMM.2_2 Link Speed [Auto]
SATA Controller(s) [Enabled]
Aggressive LPM Support [Disabled]
SMART Self Test [None]
SATA6G_1 [Enabled]
SATA6G_1 Hot Plug [Disabled]
SATA6G_2 [Enabled]
SATA6G_2 Hot Plug [Disabled]
SATA6G_3 [Enabled]
SATA6G_3 Hot Plug [Disabled]
SATA6G_4 [Enabled]
SATA6G_4 Hot Plug [Disabled]
PTT [Enable]
PCIE Tunneling over USB4 [Enabled]
Discrete Thunderbolt(TM) Support [Disabled]
Security Device Support [Enable]
SHA256 PCR Bank [Enabled]
Pending operation [None]
Platform Hierarchy [Enabled]
Storage Hierarchy [Enabled]
Endorsement Hierarchy [Enabled]
Physical Presence Spec Version [1.3]
TPM 2.0 UEFI Spec Version [TCG_2]
Disable Block Sid [Disabled]
Above 4G Decoding [Enabled]
Re-Size BAR Support [Enabled]
SR-IOV Support [Disabled]
Legacy USB Support [Enabled]
XHCI Hand-off [Enabled]
TOSHIBA [Auto]
LAN_U32G2_1 [Enabled]
U32G1_E5 [Enabled]
U32G1_E6 [Enabled]
U32G1_E7 [Enabled]
U32G1_E8 [Enabled]
U32G2X2_C3 [Enabled]
U32G2_5 [Enabled]
U32G2_6 [Enabled]
U32G2_7 [Enabled]
U32G2_P8 [Enabled]
U32G2X2_9 [Enabled]
U32G1_E1 [Enabled]
U32G1_E2 [Enabled]
U32G1_E3 [Enabled]
U32G1_E4 [Enabled]
Network Stack [Disabled]
Device [N/A]
Restore AC Power Loss [Power Off]
Max Power Saving [Disabled]
ErP Ready [Disabled]
Power On By PCI-E [Disabled]
Power On By RTC [Disabled]
PCIE Gen5 Redriver Driving [Disabled]
USB Audio [Enabled]
Intel LAN [Enabled]
USB power delivery in Soft Off state (S5) [Enabled]
Wi-Fi Controller [Enabled]
Bluetooth Controller [Enabled]
When system is in working state [All On]
Q-Code LED Function [POST Code Only]
When system is in sleep, hibernate or soft off states [All On]
M.2_2 Configuration [Auto]
ASMedia USB 3.2 Controller_U32G1_E12 [Enabled]
ASMedia USB 3.2 Controller_U32G1_E34 [Enabled]
GNA Device [Disabled]
ASMedia Storage Controller [Enabled]
Windows Hot-plug Notification [Disabled]
ASPM Support [Disabled]
CPU Temperature [Monitor]
CPU Package Temperature [Monitor]
MotherBoard Temperature [Monitor]
VRM Temperature [Monitor]
Chipset Temperature [Monitor]
T_Sensor Temperature [Monitor]
DIMM.2 Sensor 1 Temperature [Monitor]
DIMM.2 Sensor 2 Temperature [Monitor]
Water In T Sensor Temperature [Monitor]
Water Out T Sensor Temperature [Monitor]
DIMM A1 Temperature [Monitor]
DIMM B1 Temperature [Monitor]
CPU Fan Speed [Monitor]
CPU Optional Fan Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
Water Pump+ Speed [Monitor]
AIO Pump Speed [Monitor]
Flow Rate [Monitor]
CPU Core Voltage [Monitor]
12V Voltage [Monitor]
5V Voltage [Monitor]
3.3V Voltage [Monitor]
Memory Controller Voltage [Monitor]
CPU Core Current [Monitor]
AI Cooling [Disabled]
HYDRANODE Fan Association [Enabled]
CPU Fan Q-Fan Control [Auto Detect]
CPU Fan Profile [Standard]
CPU Fan Step Up [Level 0]
CPU Fan Step Down [Level 0]
CPU Fan Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [Auto Detect]
Chassis Fan 1 Profile [Standard]
Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Chassis Fan 1 Step Up [Level 0]
Chassis Fan 1 Step Down [Level 0]
Chassis Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [Auto Detect]
Chassis Fan 2 Profile [Standard]
Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Chassis Fan 2 Step Up [Level 0]
Chassis Fan 2 Step Down [Level 0]
Chassis Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [Auto Detect]
Chassis Fan 3 Profile [Standard]
Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Chassis Fan 3 Step Up [Level 0]
Chassis Fan 3 Step Down [Level 0]
Chassis Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Water Pump+ Q-Fan Control [Auto Detect]
Water Pump+ Profile [Full Speed]
AIO Pump Q-Fan Control [Auto Detect]
AIO Pump Profile [Full Speed]
CPU Temperature LED Switch [Enabled]
Launch CSM [Disabled]
OS Type [Other OS]
Secure Boot Mode [Custom]
Fast Boot [Enabled]
Next Boot after AC Power Loss [Fast Boot]
Boot Logo Display [Auto]
POST Delay Time [3 sec]
Bootup NumLock State [On]
Wait For 'F1' If Error [Enabled]
Option ROM Messages [Force BIOS]
Interrupt 19 Capture [Disabled]
AMI Native NVMe Driver Support [Enabled]
Setup Mode [Advanced Mode]
Boot Sector (MBR/GPT) Recovery Policy [Local User Control]
Next Boot Recovery Action [Skip]
BIOS Image Rollback Support [Enabled]
Publish HII Resources [Disabled]
Flexkey [Reset]
Setup Animator [Disabled]
Load from Profile [1]
Profile Name [5.6 xmp 6000]
Save to Profile [1]
DIMM Slot Number [DIMM_A1]
Download & Install ARMOURY CRATE app [Disabled]
Download & Install MyASUS service & app [Disabled]


----------



## Nizzen

Wall of text 
Please use Spoiler


----------



## Alberto_It

Nizzen said:


> Wall of text
> Please use Spoiler


Thanks, How to do it?


----------



## Nizzen

Alberto_It said:


> Thanks, How to do it?


----------



## Alberto_It

Nizzen said:


> View attachment 2560722


Done thanks


----------



## sblantipodi

Alberto_It said:


> Hi to everyone, someone can help me to adjust my Oc profile? I have an Aio cooler so I can't claim your scores in CB23
> 
> Thanks in advance
> View attachment 2560715
> 
> 
> My bios and latest score
> View attachment 2560715
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Bios settings
> 
> 
> 
> [2022/01/01 18:01:11]
> Ai Overclock Tuner [XMP I]
> XMP [DDR5-6000 36-36-36-76-1.30V-1.30V]
> BCLK Frequency [100.0000]
> PCIE Frequency [100.0000]
> Intel(R) Adaptive Boost Technology [Auto]
> ASUS MultiCore Enhancement [Auto – Lets BIOS Optimize]
> SVID Behavior [Auto]
> BCLK Frequency : DRAM Frequency Ratio [Auto]
> Memory Controller : DRAM Frequency Ratio [Auto]
> DRAM Frequency [DDR5-6000MHz]
> Performance Core Ratio [By Core Usage]
> 1-Core Ratio Limit [54]
> 2-Core Ratio Limit [54]
> 3-Core Ratio Limit [54]
> 4-Core Ratio Limit [53]
> 5-Core Ratio Limit [53]
> 6-Core Ratio Limit [52]
> 7-Core Ratio Limit [52]
> 8-Core Ratio Limit [52]
> Performance Core0 Specific Ratio Limit [Auto]
> Performance Core0 specific Adaptive Voltage [Auto]
> Performance Core1 Specific Ratio Limit [Auto]
> Performance Core1 specific Adaptive Voltage [Auto]
> Performance Core2 Specific Ratio Limit [Auto]
> Performance Core2 specific Adaptive Voltage [Auto]
> Performance Core3 Specific Ratio Limit [Auto]
> Performance Core3 specific Adaptive Voltage [Auto]
> Performance Core4 Specific Ratio Limit [Auto]
> Performance Core4 specific Adaptive Voltage [Auto]
> Performance Core5 Specific Ratio Limit [Auto]
> Performance Core5 specific Adaptive Voltage [Auto]
> *Performance Core6 Specific Ratio Limit [Auto]
> Performance Core6 specific Adaptive Voltage [Auto]
> *Performance Core7 Specific Ratio Limit [Auto]
> Performance Core7 specific Adaptive Voltage [Auto]
> Efficient Core Ratio [By Core Usage]
> Efficient 1-Core Ratio Limit [42]
> Efficient 2-Core Ratio Limit [42]
> Efficient 3-Core Ratio Limit [42]
> Efficient 4-Core Ratio Limit [42]
> Efficient 5-Core Ratio Limit [42]
> Efficient 6-Core Ratio Limit [41]
> Efficient 7-Core Ratio Limit [41]
> Efficient 8-Core Ratio Limit [41]
> Efficient Core Group0 Specific Ratio Limit [Auto]
> Efficient Core Group0 specific Adaptive Voltage [Auto]
> Efficient Core Group1 Specific Ratio Limit [Auto]
> Efficient Core Group1 specific Adaptive Voltage [Auto]
> CPU SVID Support [Auto]
> AVX2 [Auto]
> AVX512 [Auto]
> AVX2 Ratio Offset to per-core Ratio Limit [Auto]
> AVX512 Ratio Offset to per-core Ratio Limit [Auto]
> AVX2 Voltage Guardband Scale Factor [Auto]
> AVX512 Voltage Guardband Scale Factor [Auto]
> Maximus Tweak [Auto]
> DRAM CAS# Latency [36]
> DRAM RAS# to CAS# Delay [36]
> DRAM RAS# PRE Time [36]
> DRAM RAS# ACT Time [76]
> DRAM Command Rate [Auto]
> DRAM RAS# to RAS# Delay L [Auto]
> DRAM RAS# to RAS# Delay S [Auto]
> DRAM REF Cycle Time [Auto]
> DRAM REF Cycle Time 2 [Auto]
> DRAM REF Cycle Time Same Bank [Auto]
> DRAM Refresh Interval [Auto]
> DRAM WRITE Recovery Time [Auto]
> DRAM READ to PRE Time [Auto]
> DRAM FOUR ACT WIN Time [Auto]
> DRAM WRITE to READ Delay [Auto]
> DRAM WRITE to READ Delay L [Auto]
> DRAM WRITE to READ Delay S [Auto]
> DRAM CKE Minimum Pulse Width [Auto]
> DRAM Write Latency [Auto]
> Ctl0 dqvrefup [Auto]
> Ctl0 dqvrefdn [Auto]
> Ctl0 dqodtvrefup [Auto]
> Ctl0 dqodtvrefdn [Auto]
> Ctl1 cmdvrefup [Auto]
> Ctl1 ctlvrefup [Auto]
> Ctl1 clkvrefup [Auto]
> Ctl1 ckecsvrefup [Auto]
> Ctl2 cmdvrefdn [Auto]
> Ctl2 ctlvrefdn [Auto]
> Ctl2 clkvrefdn [Auto]
> ODT_READ_DURATION [Auto]
> ODT_READ_DELAY [Auto]
> ODT_WRITE_DURATION [Auto]
> ODT_WRITE_DELAY [Auto]
> DQ RTT WR [Auto]
> DQ RTT NOM RD [Auto]
> DQ RTT NOM WR [Auto]
> DQ RTT PARK [Auto]
> DQ RTT PARK DQS [Auto]
> GroupA CA ODT [Auto]
> GroupA CS ODT [Auto]
> GroupA CK ODT [Auto]
> GroupB CA ODT [Auto]
> GroupB CS ODT [Auto]
> GroupB CK ODT [Auto]
> Pull-up Output Driver Impedance [Auto]
> Pull-Down Output Driver Impedance [Auto]
> DQ RTT WR [Auto]
> DQ RTT NOM RD [Auto]
> DQ RTT NOM WR [Auto]
> DQ RTT PARK [Auto]
> DQ RTT PARK DQS [Auto]
> GroupA CA ODT [Auto]
> GroupA CS ODT [Auto]
> GroupA CK ODT [Auto]
> GroupB CA ODT [Auto]
> GroupB CS ODT [Auto]
> GroupB CK ODT [Auto]
> Pull-up Output Driver Impedance [Auto]
> Pull-Down Output Driver Impedance [Auto]
> Round Trip Latency Init Value MC0 CHA [Auto]
> Round Trip Latency Max Value MC0 CHA [Auto]
> Round Trip Latency Offset Value Mode Sign MC0 CHA [-]
> Round Trip Latency Offset Value MC0 CHA [Auto]
> Round Trip Latency Init Value MC0 CHB [Auto]
> Round Trip Latency Max Value MC0 CHB [Auto]
> Round Trip Latency Offset Value Mode Sign MC0 CHB [-]
> Round Trip Latency Offset Value MC0 CHB [Auto]
> Round Trip Latency Init Value MC1 CHA [Auto]
> Round Trip Latency Max Value MC1 CHA [Auto]
> Round Trip Latency Offset Value Mode Sign MC1 CHA [-]
> Round Trip Latency Offset Value MC1 CHA [Auto]
> Round Trip Latency Init Value MC1 CHB [Auto]
> Round Trip Latency Max Value MC1 CHB [Auto]
> Round Trip Latency Offset Value Mode Sign MC1 CHB [-]
> Round Trip Latency Offset Value MC1 CHB [Auto]
> Round Trip Latency MC0 CHA R0 [Auto]
> Round Trip Latency MC0 CHA R1 [Auto]
> Round Trip Latency MC0 CHA R2 [Auto]
> Round Trip Latency MC0 CHA R3 [Auto]
> Round Trip Latency MC0 CHA R4 [Auto]
> Round Trip Latency MC0 CHA R5 [Auto]
> Round Trip Latency MC0 CHA R6 [Auto]
> Round Trip Latency MC0 CHA R7 [Auto]
> Round Trip Latency MC0 CHB R0 [Auto]
> Round Trip Latency MC0 CHB R1 [Auto]
> Round Trip Latency MC0 CHB R2 [Auto]
> Round Trip Latency MC0 CHB R3 [Auto]
> Round Trip Latency MC0 CHB R4 [Auto]
> Round Trip Latency MC0 CHB R5 [Auto]
> Round Trip Latency MC0 CHB R6 [Auto]
> Round Trip Latency MC0 CHB R7 [Auto]
> Round Trip Latency MC1 CHA R0 [Auto]
> Round Trip Latency MC1 CHA R1 [Auto]
> Round Trip Latency MC1 CHA R2 [Auto]
> Round Trip Latency MC1 CHA R3 [Auto]
> Round Trip Latency MC1 CHA R4 [Auto]
> Round Trip Latency MC1 CHA R5 [Auto]
> Round Trip Latency MC1 CHA R6 [Auto]
> Round Trip Latency MC1 CHA R7 [Auto]
> Round Trip Latency MC1 CHB R0 [Auto]
> Round Trip Latency MC1 CHB R1 [Auto]
> Round Trip Latency MC1 CHB R2 [Auto]
> Round Trip Latency MC1 CHB R3 [Auto]
> Round Trip Latency MC1 CHB R4 [Auto]
> Round Trip Latency MC1 CHB R5 [Auto]
> Round Trip Latency MC1 CHB R6 [Auto]
> Round Trip Latency MC1 CHB R7 [Auto]
> Early Command Training [Auto]
> SenseAmp Offset Training [Auto]
> Early ReadMPR Timing Centering 2D [Auto]
> Read MPR Training [Auto]
> Receive Enable Training [Auto]
> Jedec Write Leveling [Auto]
> Early Write Time Centering 2D [Auto]
> Early Read Time Centering 2D [Auto]
> Write Timing Centering 1D [Auto]
> Write Voltage Centering 1D [Auto]
> Read Timing Centering 1D [Auto]
> Read Timing Centering with JR [Auto]
> Dimm ODT Training* [Auto]
> Max RTT_WR [ODT Off]
> DIMM RON Training* [Auto]
> Write Drive Strength/Equalization 2D* [Auto]
> Write Slew Rate Training* [Auto]
> Read ODT Training* [Auto]
> Comp Optimization Training [Auto]
> Read Equalization Training* [Auto]
> Read Amplifier Training* [Auto]
> Write Timing Centering 2D [Auto]
> Read Timing Centering 2D [Auto]
> Command Voltage Centering [Auto]
> Early Command Voltage Centering [Auto]
> Write Voltage Centering 2D [Auto]
> Read Voltage Centering 2D [Auto]
> Late Command Training [Auto]
> Round Trip Latency [Auto]
> Turn Around Timing Training [Auto]
> CMD CTL CLK Slew Rate [Auto]
> CMD/CTL DS & E 2D [Auto]
> Read Voltage Centering 1D [Auto]
> TxDqTCO Comp Training* [Auto]
> ClkTCO Comp Training* [Auto]
> TxDqsTCO Comp Training* [Auto]
> VccDLL Bypass Training [Auto]
> CMD/CTL Drive Strength Up/Dn 2D [Auto]
> DIMM CA ODT Training [Auto]
> PanicVttDnLp Training* [Auto]
> Read Vref Decap Training* [Auto]
> Vddq Training [Auto]
> Duty Cycle Correction Training [Auto]
> Rank Margin Tool Per Bit [Auto]
> DIMM DFE Training [Auto]
> Tx Dqs Dcc Training [Auto]
> Rank Margin Tool [Auto]
> Memory Test [Auto]
> DIMM SPD Alias Test [Auto]
> Receive Enable Centering 1D [Auto]
> Retrain Margin Check [Auto]
> Write Drive Strength Up/Dn independently [Auto]
> Margin Check Limit [Disabled]
> tRDRD_sg_Training [Auto]
> tRDRD_sg_Runtime [Auto]
> tRDRD_dg_Training [Auto]
> tRDRD_dg_Runtime [Auto]
> tRDWR_sg [Auto]
> tRDWR_dg [Auto]
> tWRWR_sg [Auto]
> tWRWR_dg [Auto]
> tWRRD_sg [Auto]
> tWRRD_dg [Auto]
> tRDRD_dr [Auto]
> tRDRD_dd [Auto]
> tRDWR_dr [Auto]
> tRDWR_dd [Auto]
> tWRWR_dr [Auto]
> tWRWR_dd [Auto]
> tWRRD_dr [Auto]
> tWRRD_dd [Auto]
> tRPRE [Auto]
> tWPRE [Auto]
> tWRPRE [Auto]
> tPRPDEN [Auto]
> tRDPDEN [Auto]
> tWRPDEN [Auto]
> tCPDED [Auto]
> tREFIX9 [Auto]
> Ref Interval [Auto]
> tXPDLL [Auto]
> tXP [Auto]
> tPPD [Auto]
> tCCD_L_tDLLK [Auto]
> MRC Fast Boot [Enabled]
> MCH Full Check [Auto]
> Mem Over Clock Fail Count [Auto]
> Training Profile [Auto]
> RxDfe [Auto]
> Mrc Training Loop Count [Auto]
> DRAM CLK Period [Auto]
> Dll_bwsel [Auto]
> Controller 0, Channel 0 Control [Enabled]
> Controller 0, Channel 1 Control [Enabled]
> Controller 1, Channel 0 Control [Enabled]
> Controller 1, Channel 1 Control [Enabled]
> MC_Vref0 [Auto]
> MC_Vref1 [Auto]
> MC_Vref2 [Auto]
> Dynamic Memory Boost [Disabled]
> Realtime Memory Frequency [Disabled]
> SA GV [Disabled]
> Voltage Monitor [Die Sense]
> VRM Initialization Check [Disabled]
> CPU Input Voltage Load-line Calibration [Auto]
> CPU Load-line Calibration [Level 1]
> Synch ACDC Loadline with VRM Loadline [Disabled]
> CPU Current Capability [Auto]
> CPU Current Reporting [Auto]
> Core Voltage Suspension [Auto]
> CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Auto]
> VRM Spread Spectrum [Auto]
> CPU Power Duty Control [Auto]
> CPU Power Phase Control [Auto]
> CPU Power Thermal Control [125]
> CPU Core/Cache Boot Voltage [Auto]
> CPU Input Boot Voltage [Auto]
> PLL Termination Boot Voltage [Auto]
> CPU Standby Boot Voltage [Auto]
> Memory Controller Boot Voltage [Auto]
> CPU Core Auto Voltage Cap [Auto]
> CPU Input Auto Voltage Cap [Auto]
> Memory Controller Auto Voltage Cap [Auto]
> Maximum CPU Core Temperature [Auto]
> Package Temperature Threshold [90]
> Regulate Frequency by above Threshold [Enabled]
> IVR Transmitter VDDQ ICCMAX [Auto]
> Unlimited ICCMAX [Auto]
> CPU Core/Cache Current Limit Max. [Auto]
> Long Duration Package Power Limit [Auto]
> Package Power Time Window [Auto]
> Short Duration Package Power Limit [Auto]
> IA AC Load Line [0.60]
> IA DC Load Line [1.76]
> IA CEP Enable [Auto]
> SA CEP Enable [Auto]
> IA SoC Iccmax Reactive Protector [Auto]
> Inverse Temperature Dependency Throttle [Auto]
> IA VR Voltage Limit [1500]
> TVB Voltage Optimizations [Enabled]
> Enhanced TVB [Enabled]
> Overclocking TVB [+2Boost Profile]
> Offset Mode Sign 1 [+]
> V/F Point 1 Offset [Auto]
> Offset Mode Sign 2 [+]
> V/F Point 2 Offset [Auto]
> Offset Mode Sign 3 [+]
> V/F Point 3 Offset [Auto]
> Offset Mode Sign 4 [+]
> V/F Point 4 Offset [Auto]
> Offset Mode Sign 5 [+]
> V/F Point 5 Offset [Auto]
> Offset Mode Sign 6 [-]
> V/F Point 6 Offset [Auto]
> Offset Mode Sign 7 [+]
> V/F Point 7 Offset [0.03600]
> Offset Mode Sign 8 [+]
> V/F Point 8 Offset [Auto]
> Offset Mode Sign 9 [+]
> V/F Point 9 Offset [Auto]
> Offset Mode Sign 10 [+]
> V/F Point 10 Offset [Auto]
> Offset Mode Sign 11 [+]
> V/F Point 11 Offset [0.14600]
> Initial BCLK Frequency [Auto]
> Runtime BCLK OC [Auto]
> BCLK Amplitude [Auto]
> BCLK Slew Rate [Auto]
> BCLK Spread Spectrum [Auto]
> Initial PCIE Frequency [Auto]
> PCIE/DMI Amplitude [Auto]
> PCIE/DMI Slew Rate [Auto]
> PCIE/DMI Spread Spectrum [Auto]
> Cold Boot PCIE Frequency [Auto]
> Realtime Memory Timing [Enabled]
> SPD Write Disable [TRUE]
> PVD Ratio Threshold [Auto]
> Banding Ratio [Auto]
> SA PLL Frequency Override [Auto]
> BCLK TSC HW Fixup [Enabled]
> Core Ratio Extension Mode [Disabled]
> FLL OC mode [Auto]
> Core PLL Voltage [Auto]
> GT PLL Voltage [Auto]
> Ring PLL Voltage [Auto]
> System Agent PLL Voltage [Auto]
> Memory Controller PLL Voltage [Auto]
> CPU 1.8V Small Rail [Auto]
> PLL Termination Voltage [Auto]
> CPU Standby Voltage [Auto]
> PCH 1.05V Voltage [Auto]
> PCH 0.82V Voltage [Auto]
> CPU Input Voltage Reset Voltage [Auto]
> Eventual CPU Input Voltage [Auto]
> Eventual Memory Controller Voltage [Auto]
> Package Temperature Threshold [90]
> Regulate Frequency by above Threshold [Enabled]
> Cooler Efficiency Customize [Keep Training]
> Cooler Re-evaluation Algorithm [Normal]
> Optimism Scale [100]
> Ring Down Bin [Auto]
> Min. CPU Cache Ratio [Auto]
> Max. CPU Cache Ratio [Auto]
> BCLK Aware Adaptive Voltage [Enabled]
> CPU Core/Cache Voltage [Adaptive Mode]
> 
> Offset Mode Sign [+]
> Additional Turbo Mode CPU Core Voltage [1.45600]
> Offset Voltage [Auto]
> CPU L2 Voltage [Auto]
> CPU System Agent Voltage [Auto]
> CPU Input Voltage [Auto]
> High DRAM Voltage Mode [Auto]
> DRAM VDD Voltage [1.30000]
> DRAM VDDQ Voltage [1.30000]
> IVR Transmitter VDDQ Voltage [Auto]
> Memory Controller Voltage [Auto]
> PMIC Voltages [Sync All PMICs]
> SPD HUB VLDO (1.8V) [Auto]
> SPD HUB VDDIO (1.0V) [Auto]
> DRAM VDD Voltage [1.30000]
> DRAM VDDQ Voltage [1.30000]
> DRAM VPP Voltage [Auto]
> DRAM VDD Switching Frequency [Auto]
> DRAM VDDQ Switching Frequency [Auto]
> DRAM VPP Switching Frequency [Auto]
> DRAM Current Capability [Auto]
> PCI Express Native Power Management [Enabled]
> Native ASPM [Disabled]
> DMI Link ASPM Control [Disabled]
> ASPM [Auto]
> L1 Substates [Disabled]
> DMI ASPM [Disabled]
> DMI Gen3 ASPM [Disabled]
> PEG - ASPM [Disabled]
> PCI Express Clock Gating [Enabled]
> Hardware Prefetcher [Enabled]
> Adjacent Cache Line Prefetch [Enabled]
> Intel (VMX) Virtualization Technology [Disabled]
> Per P-Core Control [Disabled]
> Per E-Core Control [Disabled]
> Active Performance Cores [All]
> Active Efficient Cores [All]
> Hyper-Threading [Enabled]
> Hyper-Threading of Core 0 [Enabled]
> Hyper-Threading of Core 1 [Enabled]
> Hyper-Threading of Core 2 [Enabled]
> Hyper-Threading of Core 3 [Enabled]
> Hyper-Threading of Core 4 [Enabled]
> Hyper-Threading of Core 5 [Enabled]
> Hyper-Threading of Core 6 [Enabled]
> Hyper-Threading of Core 7 [Enabled]
> Total Memory Encryption [Disabled]
> Legacy Game Compatibility Mode [Disabled]
> Boot performance mode [Auto]
> Intel(R) SpeedStep(tm) [Enabled]
> Intel(R) Speed Shift Technology [Enabled]
> Intel(R) Turbo Boost Max Technology 3.0 [Enabled]
> Turbo Mode [Enabled]
> Acoustic Noise Mitigation [Disabled]
> CPU C-states [Enabled]
> Enhanced C-states [Enabled]
> Package C State Limit [C8]
> Thermal Monitor [Enabled]
> Dual Tau Boost [Disabled]
> VT-d [Disabled]
> Memory Remap [Enabled]
> Enable VMD controller [Enabled]
> Map PCIE Storage under VMD [Disabled]
> Map SATA Controller under VMD [Disabled]
> M.2_1 Link Speed [Auto]
> PCIEX16_1 Link Speed [Auto]
> PCIEX16_2 Link Speed [Auto]
> PCIEX1(G3) Link Speed [Auto]
> PCIEX4(G3) Link Speed [Auto]
> M.2_2 Link Speed [Auto]
> DIMM.2_1 Link Speed [Auto]
> DIMM.2_2 Link Speed [Auto]
> SATA Controller(s) [Enabled]
> Aggressive LPM Support [Disabled]
> SMART Self Test [None]
> SATA6G_1 [Enabled]
> SATA6G_1 Hot Plug [Disabled]
> SATA6G_2 [Enabled]
> SATA6G_2 Hot Plug [Disabled]
> SATA6G_3 [Enabled]
> SATA6G_3 Hot Plug [Disabled]
> SATA6G_4 [Enabled]
> SATA6G_4 Hot Plug [Disabled]
> PTT [Enable]
> PCIE Tunneling over USB4 [Enabled]
> Discrete Thunderbolt(TM) Support [Disabled]
> Security Device Support [Enable]
> SHA256 PCR Bank [Enabled]
> Pending operation [None]
> Platform Hierarchy [Enabled]
> Storage Hierarchy [Enabled]
> Endorsement Hierarchy [Enabled]
> Physical Presence Spec Version [1.3]
> TPM 2.0 UEFI Spec Version [TCG_2]
> Disable Block Sid [Disabled]
> Above 4G Decoding [Enabled]
> Re-Size BAR Support [Enabled]
> SR-IOV Support [Disabled]
> Legacy USB Support [Enabled]
> XHCI Hand-off [Enabled]
> TOSHIBA [Auto]
> LAN_U32G2_1 [Enabled]
> U32G1_E5 [Enabled]
> U32G1_E6 [Enabled]
> U32G1_E7 [Enabled]
> U32G1_E8 [Enabled]
> U32G2X2_C3 [Enabled]
> U32G2_5 [Enabled]
> U32G2_6 [Enabled]
> U32G2_7 [Enabled]
> U32G2_P8 [Enabled]
> U32G2X2_9 [Enabled]
> U32G1_E1 [Enabled]
> U32G1_E2 [Enabled]
> U32G1_E3 [Enabled]
> U32G1_E4 [Enabled]
> Network Stack [Disabled]
> Device [N/A]
> Restore AC Power Loss [Power Off]
> Max Power Saving [Disabled]
> ErP Ready [Disabled]
> Power On By PCI-E [Disabled]
> Power On By RTC [Disabled]
> PCIE Gen5 Redriver Driving [Disabled]
> USB Audio [Enabled]
> Intel LAN [Enabled]
> USB power delivery in Soft Off state (S5) [Enabled]
> Wi-Fi Controller [Enabled]
> Bluetooth Controller [Enabled]
> When system is in working state [All On]
> Q-Code LED Function [POST Code Only]
> When system is in sleep, hibernate or soft off states [All On]
> M.2_2 Configuration [Auto]
> ASMedia USB 3.2 Controller_U32G1_E12 [Enabled]
> ASMedia USB 3.2 Controller_U32G1_E34 [Enabled]
> GNA Device [Disabled]
> ASMedia Storage Controller [Enabled]
> Windows Hot-plug Notification [Disabled]
> ASPM Support [Disabled]
> CPU Temperature [Monitor]
> CPU Package Temperature [Monitor]
> MotherBoard Temperature [Monitor]
> VRM Temperature [Monitor]
> Chipset Temperature [Monitor]
> T_Sensor Temperature [Monitor]
> DIMM.2 Sensor 1 Temperature [Monitor]
> DIMM.2 Sensor 2 Temperature [Monitor]
> Water In T Sensor Temperature [Monitor]
> Water Out T Sensor Temperature [Monitor]
> DIMM A1 Temperature [Monitor]
> DIMM B1 Temperature [Monitor]
> CPU Fan Speed [Monitor]
> CPU Optional Fan Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
> Water Pump+ Speed [Monitor]
> AIO Pump Speed [Monitor]
> Flow Rate [Monitor]
> CPU Core Voltage [Monitor]
> 12V Voltage [Monitor]
> 5V Voltage [Monitor]
> 3.3V Voltage [Monitor]
> Memory Controller Voltage [Monitor]
> CPU Core Current [Monitor]
> AI Cooling [Disabled]
> HYDRANODE Fan Association [Enabled]
> CPU Fan Q-Fan Control [Auto Detect]
> CPU Fan Profile [Standard]
> CPU Fan Step Up [Level 0]
> CPU Fan Step Down [Level 0]
> CPU Fan Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [Auto Detect]
> Chassis Fan 1 Profile [Standard]
> Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Chassis Fan 1 Step Up [Level 0]
> Chassis Fan 1 Step Down [Level 0]
> Chassis Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [Auto Detect]
> Chassis Fan 2 Profile [Standard]
> Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Chassis Fan 2 Step Up [Level 0]
> Chassis Fan 2 Step Down [Level 0]
> Chassis Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [Auto Detect]
> Chassis Fan 3 Profile [Standard]
> Chassis Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Chassis Fan 3 Step Up [Level 0]
> Chassis Fan 3 Step Down [Level 0]
> Chassis Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Water Pump+ Q-Fan Control [Auto Detect]
> Water Pump+ Profile [Full Speed]
> AIO Pump Q-Fan Control [Auto Detect]
> AIO Pump Profile [Full Speed]
> CPU Temperature LED Switch [Enabled]
> Launch CSM [Disabled]
> OS Type [Other OS]
> Secure Boot Mode [Custom]
> Fast Boot [Enabled]
> Next Boot after AC Power Loss [Fast Boot]
> Boot Logo Display [Auto]
> POST Delay Time [3 sec]
> Bootup NumLock State [On]
> Wait For 'F1' If Error [Enabled]
> Option ROM Messages [Force BIOS]
> Interrupt 19 Capture [Disabled]
> AMI Native NVMe Driver Support [Enabled]
> Setup Mode [Advanced Mode]
> Boot Sector (MBR/GPT) Recovery Policy [Local User Control]
> Next Boot Recovery Action [Skip]
> BIOS Image Rollback Support [Enabled]
> Publish HII Resources [Disabled]
> Flexkey [Reset]
> Setup Animator [Disabled]
> Load from Profile [1]
> Profile Name [5.6 xmp 6000]
> Save to Profile [1]
> DIMM Slot Number [DIMM_A1]
> Download & Install ARMOURY CRATE app [Disabled]
> Download & Install MyASUS service & app [Disabled]


what is your ambient temp?
don't you throttle at that voltage?


----------



## Kaltenbrunner

what are the direct competitors to the z690 ddr4 strix ?


----------



## bscool

Kaltenbrunner said:


> what are the direct competitors to the z690 ddr4 strix ?


MSI Edge


----------



## Alberto_It

sblantipodi said:


> what is your ambient temp?
> don't you throttle at that voltage?


21
No


----------



## Kaltenbrunner

bscool said:


> MSI Edge


thanks and I guess the Tomahawk is vs the TUF. I've had good luck with MSI over the years. Looks like I'll sell my old system, and get new ram and cooler too.


----------



## Ichirou

Kaltenbrunner said:


> thanks and I guess the Tomahawk is vs the TUF. I've had good luck with MSI over the years. Looks like I'll sell my old system, and get new ram and cooler too.


I've bought and used both the ASUS Strix _and_ the MSI Edge. They're practically equivalent, with the exception of the ASUS providing an SP score reading, and the MSI providing more transparent settings. I eventually stayed with the MSI Edge, even more so now after finding out first-hand that it has insane quad DIMM compatibility.


----------



## 7empe

It's been a while since the Apex bios v1503 is available. Anyone had a chance to compare it with v1403? Any real benefits or new issues?


----------



## sblantipodi

7empe said:


> It's been a while since the Apex bios v1503 is available. Anyone had a chance to compare it with v1403? Any real benefits or new issues?


no changelog means nothing interesting. 
most of their changelogs are cut and paste from previous:
1) improved performance
2) improved stability


----------



## 7empe

sblantipodi said:


> no changelog means nothing interesting.
> most of their changelogs are cut and paste from previous:
> 1) improved performance
> 2) improved stability


Sad but true.


----------



## bscool

7empe said:


> It's been a while since the Apex bios v1503 is available. Anyone had a chance to compare it with v1403? Any real benefits or new issues?


I have been using it and it has been working for me. I had some issues at first with vddq tx I couldnt set it but it works now so not sure the deal.

Here is AVX enabled 1503 u code 15 if someone wants. 

Been using it without issues 2022 Apex 7000c32 Karhu stable, y cruncher and daily use.









ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-1503u15.CAP


CAP File



1drv.ms


----------



## morph.

sblantipodi said:


> is there someone working on 4 sticks problems or this boards are for gamers only?
> I bought an extreme to work with containers and I needs loads of RAM, am I out of lack?
> 
> are you interested in OCers only?
> 
> is there any luck in having a working system with 4 sticks even a JEDEC frequency?
> 
> 
> 
> We'll be back.


how much ram do you actually need?

RAM cap has increased per dimm with ddr5 vs ddr4...Instead of running 4x16 you can run 2x32 now...ie:








G.SKILL Announces DDR5-6000 CL30 64GB (32GBx2) Memory Kit - G.SKILL International Enterprise Co., Ltd.


30 March 2022 – G.SKILL International Enterprise Co., Ltd., the world’s leading manufacturer of extreme performance memory and gaming peripherals, is delighted to announce the launch of a high-capacity, ultra-low-latency DDR5-6000 CL30 64GB 32GBx2 overclocked performance memory kit under the...




www.gskill.com


----------



## DannyG13

7empe said:


> Increase IMC voltage?


In the end I've increased VDD, QT, and TX all to 1.4 and the thing is now seemingly happy at 6200MHz. I cannot seem to quite get to 6400 but 6200 is OK.


----------



## sniperpowa

can you tell if an apex is a 2022 from the serial number?


----------



## db000

sniperpowa said:


> can you tell if an apex is a 2022 from the serial number?


It says it on the box, on the serialnumber sticker. Date:
If no date, its 2021. You also have 2021-11.


----------



## sniperpowa

db000 said:


> It says it on the box, on the serialnumber sticker. Date:
> If no date, its 2021. You also have 2021-11.


 I was asking cause I rma my apex and they sending me a different board I have only the serial number of replacement.


----------



## satinghostrider

sniperpowa said:


> can you tell if an apex is a 2022 from the serial number?


Just look at the box. It will show the manufacturing date for 2022 models. My 2021 model didn't have such an indication.

From serial number, I don't know there isn't a pattern you can deduce as such.


----------



## sblantipodi

Asus said me that I need to ask my reseller to ask for an RMA. They don't manage the RMA with customers for the first two years.

Welcome to Asus. Let's see how long it will take all of this.

I bought the PC five months ago, I lost a lot of money on it trying to buy different parts to make it work, now let's see how much months I need to wait for an RMA.


----------



## Shawnb99

sblantipodi said:


> Asus said me that I need to ask my reseller to ask for an RMA. They don't manage the RMA with customers for the first two years.


That’s total BS I RMA’d my Extreme with them a month after I bought it


----------



## Alberto_It

Shawnb99 said:


> That’s total BS I RMA’d my Extreme with them a month after I bought it


In Italy the procedure is this


----------



## Shawnb99

Alberto_It said:


> In Italy the procedure is this


That makes sense then. Nothing is ever simple in Italy


----------



## IronAge

Shawnb99 said:


> That makes sense then. Nothing is ever simple in Italy


Can't compare Europe with US.

ASUS has customer = POS  treatment policy, in germany it is the same.

direct RMA with Asus for PC parts only when the seller has been nuked or after two years.

i will not even get any info from Asus about the status of my pending RMA, since it has been the seller who sent in my 2nd Z690 Apex.


----------



## Simkin

Maybe a bit off-topic,

But is anyone experience that game crashes/quits to desktop without getting bsod on Z690 builds?

I suspect its a Z690/12900K "thing" or maybe Windows 11 as my 3090 Founders Edition worked without any issues on my previous 5960X/Windows 10 build.

CS:GO or Fortnite does not crash to desktop, i can however suddenly just stare at the desktop, but these games is still running so i can just press the icon at the taskbar and im inside the game again, its like the windows button on my keyboard its beeing pressed.

BF4 however can suddenly freeze for a few seconds and im back at to desktop, no bsod or any error message.

Today it crashed after a few minutes on Operation Firestorm, i tried again and played for 30-40minutes so its very random.

Event viewer states 0xc0000005



Spoiler: Event viewer






> Faulting application name: bf4.exe, version: 1.8.2.48475, time stamp: 0x58ab1cc0
> Faulting module name: bf4.exe, version: 1.8.2.48475, time stamp: 0x58ab1cc0
> Exception code: 0xc0000005
> Fault offset: 0x00000000008cc28f
> Faulting process id: 0x413c
> Faulting application start time: 0x01d86de2c2964fba
> Faulting application path: C:\Program Files (x86)\Origin Games\Battlefield 4\bf4.exe
> Faulting module path: C:\Program Files (x86)\Origin Games\Battlefield 4\bf4.exe
> Report Id: 33e63401-ada4-43e2-80e2-2564a4a656f2
> Faulting package full name:
> Faulting package-relative application ID


: 



> Faulting application name: bf4.exe, version: 1.8.2.48475, time stamp: 0x58ab1cc0
> Faulting module name: nvwgf2umx.dll, version: 30.0.15.1277, time stamp: 0x6272de84
> Exception code: 0xc0000005
> Fault offset: 0x0000000000b89076
> Faulting process id: 0x6798
> Faulting application start time: 0x01d86ddddc654275
> Faulting application path: C:\Program Files (x86)\Origin Games\Battlefield 4\bf4.exe
> Faulting module path: C:\Windows\System32\DriverStore\FileRepository\nv_ dispig.inf_amd64_d5d5b9f929f4cb65\nvwgf2umx.dll
> Report Id: f01329b4-2797-469e-8598-08076b93c54f
> Faulting package full name:
> Faulting package-relative application ID:


----------



## sblantipodi

Simkin said:


> Maybe a bit off-topic,
> 
> But is anyone experience that game crashes/quits to desktop without getting bsod on Z690 builds?
> 
> I suspect its a Z690/12900K "thing" or maybe Windows 11 as my 3090 Founders Edition worked without any issues on my previous 5960X/Windows 10 build.
> 
> CS:GO or Fortnite does not crash to desktop, i can however suddenly just stare at the desktop, but these games is still running so i can just press the icon at the taskbar and im inside the game again, its like the windows button on my keyboard its beeing pressed.
> 
> BF4 however can suddenly freeze for a few seconds and im back at to desktop, no bsod or anything.
> 
> Today it crashed after a few minutes on Operation Firestorm, i tried again and played for 30-40minutes.
> 
> Event viewer states 0xc0000005
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Event viewer
> 
> 
> 
> :


your OC isn't stable, this happens when OC isn't stable.


----------



## Simkin

sblantipodi said:


> your OC isn't stable, this happens when OC isn't stable.


Thanks for your reply. Im running AI OC with a slight undervolt, i can try to raise the volts a little.
Can it also be my RAM? im running 6200 C32 1T (Team Group Hynix sticks) its however stable in memtest.


----------



## IronAge

can be ram, Battlefield has always been very RAM OC sensitive, can crash after 1-1.5 hours as well due too memory.

easy try: 5600-6000 2T and see if it is still crashing.


----------



## 7empe

Simkin said:


> Maybe a bit off-topic,
> 
> But is anyone experience that game crashes/quits to desktop without getting bsod on Z690 builds?
> 
> I suspect its a Z690/12900K "thing" or maybe Windows 11 as my 3090 Founders Edition worked without any issues on my previous 5960X/Windows 10 build.
> 
> CS:GO or Fortnite does not crash to desktop, i can however suddenly just stare at the desktop, but these games is still running so i can just press the icon at the taskbar and im inside the game again, its like the windows button on my keyboard its beeing pressed.
> 
> BF4 however can suddenly freeze for a few seconds and im back at to desktop, no bsod or any error message.
> 
> Today it crashed after a few minutes on Operation Firestorm, i tried again and played for 30-40minutes so its very random.
> 
> Event viewer states 0xc0000005
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Event viewer
> 
> 
> 
> :


If memtest is stable, then it is CPU OC unstable. Assuming that E-cores are stable at the frequency you're on then increase vcore. If on adaptive, increase it. This was the reason in my case. I had to push adaptive voltage +20 mV higher even if I could pass y-cruncher and similar stress tests before.


----------



## 7empe

IronAge said:


> can be ram, Battlefield has always been very RAM OC sensitive, can crash atfer 1-1.5 hours as well due too memory.
> 
> easy try: 5600-6000 2T and see if it is still crashing.


That's also true. Therefore, chasing for the instability reason is a nightmare  Also even if stable at lower RAM frequency, setting it higher can expose instabilities due to higher push on the ring and the cores...


----------



## Simkin

Have raised vcore a bit now, if i still get crashes gonna try 2T on my ram.


----------



## SuperMumrik

Simkin said:


> Have raised vcore a bit now, if i still get crashes gonna try 2T on my ram.


CTD's tends to be related to "to low" system agent voltage.


----------



## Nizzen

SuperMumrik said:


> CTD's tends to be related to "to low" system agent voltage.


In Battlefield 2042 it's related to too low v-core too. DX error is memory error.


----------



## 7empe

SuperMumrik said:


> CTD's tends to be related to "to low" system agent voltage.


I would rephrase it as "can", not "tend"


----------



## 7empe

Nizzen said:


> In Battlefield 2042 it's related to too low v-core too. DX error is memory error.


True. DX error can be also MC voltage too low (which is a memory error of some sort...).


----------



## SuperMumrik

Nizzen said:


> In Battlefield 2042 it's related to too low v-core too. DX error is memory error.


My bad. I assumed it was the same as bf1/bfv since the where very sensitive to low SA.


----------



## 7empe

Simkin said:


> Have raised vcore a bit now, if i still get crashes gonna try 2T on my ram.


Again, if 1T is stable in memtests I would not blame it for CTD at all. It's CPU. Vcore, SA, ring.


----------



## 7empe

SuperMumrik said:


> My bad. I assumed it was the same as bf1/bfv since the where very sensitive to low SA.


Forgot to mention that with 12th gen DX errors can be also caused by too low vcore if e-cores are failing. Failing e-core gives same symptoms as failing memory. Easiest remedy is to step back the e-cores ratio instead of pushing more vcore.


----------



## superino091

sblantipodi said:


> Asus said me that I need to ask my reseller to ask for an RMA. They don't manage the RMA with customers for the first two years.
> 
> Welcome to Asus. Let's see how long it will take all of this.
> 
> I bought the PC five months ago, I lost a lot of money on it trying to buy different parts to make it work, now let's see how much months I need to wait for an RMA.


No they're just smart, they can handle RMa too.
Here is what is written on the Asus website.
If the consumer intends to take advantage of the remedies provided for by the Legal Guarantee and decides to request them directly from the Manufacturer (i.e. ASUS) and not from the seller, he must contact customer service at 0697.626662 or refer to the information on the official ASUS website which can be found at following address / link: Supporto ufficiale | ASUS Italia.
with my apex i had to contact the dealer but when i wrote what the asus service regulation said i was immediately approved RMA.
Asus legal

No sono solo furbi, possono gestire RMa anche loro.
Ecco cosa c'è scritto nel sito Asus.
Qualora il consumatore intenda usufruire dei rimedi previsti dalla Garanzia Legale e decida di richiedere gli stessi direttamente al Produttore (i.e. ASUS) e non al venditore dovrà contattare il servizio clienti al numero 0697.626662 o fare riferimento alle informazioni riportate sul sito ufficiale di ASUS e rinvenibili al seguente indirizzo/link: Supporto ufficiale | ASUS Italia.
con la mia apex dovevo contattare il rivenditore ma quando ho scritto cosa diceva il regolamento dell'assistenza asus mi è stata subito aprovata RMA.


----------



## sblantipodi

superino091 said:


> No they're just smart, they can handle RMa too.
> Here is what is written on the Asus website.
> If the consumer intends to take advantage of the remedies provided for by the Legal Guarantee and decides to request them directly from the Manufacturer (i.e. ASUS) and not from the seller, he must contact customer service at 0697.626662 or refer to the information on the official ASUS website which can be found at following address / link: Supporto ufficiale | ASUS Italia.
> with my apex i had to contact the dealer but when i wrote what the asus service regulation said i was immediately approved RMA.
> Asus legal
> 
> No sono solo furbi, possono gestire RMa anche loro.
> Ecco cosa c'è scritto nel sito Asus.
> Qualora il consumatore intenda usufruire dei rimedi previsti dalla Garanzia Legale e decida di richiedere gli stessi direttamente al Produttore (i.e. ASUS) e non al venditore dovrà contattare il servizio clienti al numero 0697.626662 o fare riferimento alle informazioni riportate sul sito ufficiale di ASUS e rinvenibili al seguente indirizzo/link: Supporto ufficiale | ASUS Italia.
> con la mia apex dovevo contattare il rivenditore ma quando ho scritto cosa diceva il regolamento dell'assistenza asus mi è stata subito aprovata RMA.


interesting, but is it faster to RMA this way? do they accept what other reputable brands call "express rma"?
you pay for the new board and they send you a new board, you return back the defective one and they refund the money.

all good brands does this, does Asus do this?


----------



## bscool

Simkin said:


> Thanks for your reply. Im running AI OC with a slight undervolt, i can try to raise the volts a little.
> Can it also be my RAM? im running 6200 C32 1T (Team Group Hynix sticks) its however stable in memtest.


I have had issues trying to use AI OC and CSGO. From what I can tell it is that it is trying to boost too high(55 on some cores). If I set static clocks (53 all core) and static voltages no issues.

The newer bioses seem to do better but I know on older bioses on Strix d4 CSGO would CTD often trying to use AI OC. Never bothered trying to figure out the issue as running static clocks and voltages fixed it and what I normally run anyway.


----------



## sblantipodi

what about the new 1503 BIOS?
will we see it in the official site or it's just a temporary beta?


----------



## satinghostrider

7empe said:


> Forgot to mention that with 12th gen DX errors can be also caused by too low vcore if e-cores are failing. Failing e-core gives same symptoms as failing memory. Easiest remedy is to step back the e-cores ratio instead of pushing more vcore.


This is exactly what was failing when I was gaming in Vanguard. Almost always crashing in Da Haus consistently. I switched E-cores to stock and it stopped crashing to CTD. I found that at such high frequencies running a higher LLC made e-cores more stable but you still will crash to desktop after a while. What really fixed it for me is increasing the L2 voltage to manual 1.15V and all my CTDs completely stopped. It's been a month and no everything is grand. 

E-cores is alot more finicky getting stable past 4.1Ghz and Cinebench repeated runs don't catch this. My e-core is SP 69.


----------



## 7empe

satinghostrider said:


> This is exactly what was failing when I was gaming in Vanguard. Almost always crashing in Da Haus consistently. I switched E-cores to stock and it stopped crashing to CTD. I found that at such high frequencies running a higher LLC made e-cores more stable but you still will crash to desktop after a while. What really fixed it for me is increasing the L2 voltage to manual 1.15V and all my CTDs completely stopped. It's been a month and no everything is grand.
> 
> E-cores is alot more finicky getting stable past 4.1Ghz and Cinebench repeated runs don't catch this. My e-core is SP 69.


That's correct. My e-core SP is 72 and running them at 4.2 GHz is possible but tricky. For the long time I was looking for the CTD reason in RAM settings. While I'am at adaptive voltage and OCTVB to be able to run p-cores (SP 97) as follows:










Adaptive voltage: 1.46V
Adaptive offset: +0.015V
SVID Behavior: trained
LLC: 5
AC_LL: 0.20

it was not so obvious that while keeping 8-active cores while playing at e.g. 53x the vcore demands for p-cores were fullfilled by too low for e-cores at 42x in the same time. They lack only 10 mV. Difference in voltage between stability and instability was so small that even y-cruncher and LinX were stable before, but gaming (especially bf2042) gave me DX errors and strange drops in frame times in general in multiple games. I thought it is PCH that can't keep up with PCIe data, so I played with SA voltage a bit. But finally everything was caused by the e-cores & vcore. Even sporadic Karhu errors went away.


----------



## 7empe

sblantipodi said:


> what about the new 1503 BIOS?
> will we see it in the official site or it's just a temporary beta?


I would not bother with it if you're stable at the previous one.


----------



## satinghostrider

7empe said:


> That's correct. My e-core SP is 72 and running them at 4.2 GHz is possible but tricky. For the long time I was looking for the CTD reason in RAM settings. While I'am at adaptive voltage and OCTVB to be able to run p-cores (SP 97) as follows:
> 
> View attachment 2561741
> 
> 
> Adaptive voltage: 1.46V
> Adaptive offset: +0.015V
> SVID Behavior: trained
> LLC: 5
> AC_LL: 0.20
> 
> it was not so obvious that while keeping 8-active cores while playing at e.g. 53x the vcore demands for p-cores were fullfilled by too low for e-cores at 42x in the same time. They lack only 10 mV. Difference in voltage between stability and instability was so small that even y-cruncher and LinX were stable before, but gaming (especially bf2042) gave me DX errors and strange drops in frame times in general in multiple games. I thought it is PCH that can't keep up with PCIe data, so I played with SA voltage a bit. But finally everything was caused by the e-cores & vcore. Even sporadic Karhu errors went away.


Finally someone else who games and figured out the E-Core instabilities in some games. It's peculiar that the only game title that does this for me is Vanguard. None of the other games have done this but then again Vanguard uses my E-cores quite extensively compared to other games so it's natural that this would show any form instabilities from the onset during gaming. I also thought for a moment could be my ring cache but setting it to stock also had the same problem. I might bump up my ring to 4.3 now to see if it checks out. Currently at 4.2. I also find LLC5 works best for E-core stability. Was earlier on 3 and 4 but LLC5 took longer for instabilities to set in for E-cores. Finally fixed it with L2 voltage to 1.15V manual in bios.


----------



## 7empe

bscool said:


> I have had issues trying to use AI OC and CSGO. From what I can tell it is that it is trying to boost too high(55 on some cores). If I set static clocks (53 all core) and static voltages no issues.
> 
> The newer bioses seem to do better but I know on older bioses on Strix d4 CSGO would CTD often trying to use AI OC. Never bothered trying to figure out the issue as running static clocks and voltages fixed it and what I normally run anyway.


Yes, that instability is caused by the interpolated voltages being too low between the VF points CPU is touching. Adaptive voltage too low, or LLC too low that causes bad vcore transient response while switching the frequencies. It may be that AC_LL was too low too, if on auto, it is taken from the AI OC cooler score. Cooler score vary from boot to boot and I had multiple times cooler scores like 197 and other time 168. I just fixed AC_LL to 0.20 for LLC=5 and it corresponds to the cooler score of 182 in my case.


----------



## sblantipodi

7empe said:


> I would not bother with it if you're stable at the previous one.


I'm not stable, after trying 4 different kits of RAM I found that the Corsair Dominator 6200MHZ C36 with Hinyx chips can be runned at 5.2GHz (4x16GB sticks) stable in every stress test never failing a single test for days.

the "only" big problem I have is that from time to time the RGB on the RAM stops working, when this happen, if I reboot the PC it hangs on detecting memory during post.
I noticed that this happens more often if I leave the PC in idle for a long period but it's very annoying.

I tried setting all stocks, reducing the RAM frequency to 3.6 or 4.0GHz but nothing change.


----------



## 7empe

satinghostrider said:


> Finally someone else who games and figured out the E-Core instabilities in some games. It's peculiar that the only game title that does this for me is Vanguard. None of the other games have done this but then again Vanguard uses my E-cores quite extensively compared to other games so it's natural that this would show any form of long term instabilities. I also thought for a moment could be my ring cache but setting it to stock also had the same problem. I might bump up my ring to 4.3 now to see if it checks out. Currently at 4.2.


It seems that we both went the same investigation path 
I had no significant issues in Warzone though. Only BF2042 and BFV (but not so often as in 2042). Sometimes Apex was choppy (not smooth) as it used to be. I keep the ring at 42, but I know it is doable to run it 43. But I don't want to be at the border.


----------



## 7empe

sblantipodi said:


> I'm not stable, after trying 4 different kits of RAM I found that the Corsair Dominator 6200MHZ C36 with Hinyx chips can be runned at 5.2GHz (4x16GB sticks) stable in every stress test never failing a single test for days.
> 
> the "only" big problem I have is that from time to time the RGB on the RAM stops working, when this happen, if I reboot the PC it hangs on detecting memory during post.
> I noticed that this happens more often if I leave the PC in idle for a long period but it's very annoying.
> 
> I tried setting all stocks, reducing the RAM frequency to 3.6 or 4.0GHz but nothing change.


That's sick man. Sounds like board/traces issues...
Did you try different CPU?


----------



## satinghostrider

7empe said:


> It seems that we both went the same investigation path
> I had no significant issues in Warzone though. Only BF2042 and BFV (but not so often as in 2042). Sometimes Apex was choppy (not smooth) as it used to be. I keep the ring at 42, but I know it is doable to run it 43. But I don't want to be at the border.


I might just keep mine at 4.2 then. Thanks for reconfirming in kind.


----------



## sblantipodi

7empe said:


> That's sick man. Sounds like board/traces issues...
> Did you try different CPU?


I tried the same CPU on a hero, and it works well.


----------



## sblantipodi

7empe said:


> That's sick man. Sounds like board/traces issues...
> Did you try different CPU?


But do you think that swapping my extreme for another extreme could solve the problem?
what can cause a behaviour like this ? never seen a behaviour like this...

should I open an RMA and remain weeks without the monbo waiting for a new mobo that can present the same issues?


----------



## 7empe

sblantipodi said:


> But do you think that swapping my extreme for another extreme could solve the problem?
> what can cause a behaviour like this ? never seen a behaviour like this...
> 
> should I open an RMA and remain weeks without the monbo waiting for a new mobo that can present the same issues?


I believe that Apex and Extreme share the same production problems. Some boards can achieve much better results, other much worse. This is not a production variance, but technological process change at one point. Extreme may be affected by this in the similar manner as Apex is. Obviously, you won't reach the same clock speeds as with 2-dimm board, but other Extreme sample (newer production date) may improve around-XMP experience. If RMA not possible (long wait times etc.) then Z790 is just around the corner....


----------



## Bluerain

Bios 1503 (Hero) is not good for me, memory controller voltage needs to be higher than 1403 to be stable and anything above 6400mhz is not stable regardless of voltage.

Interestingly P-Core P0 VID changed from 1.491 to 1.490 and some cores that was 1.479 now says 1.478.


----------



## Nizzen

satinghostrider said:


> Finally someone else who games and figured out the E-Core instabilities in some games. It's peculiar that the only game title that does this for me is Vanguard. None of the other games have done this but then again Vanguard uses my E-cores quite extensively compared to other games so it's natural that this would show any form instabilities from the onset during gaming. I also thought for a moment could be my ring cache but setting it to stock also had the same problem. I might bump up my ring to 4.3 now to see if it checks out. Currently at 4.2. I also find LLC5 works best for E-core stability. Was earlier on 3 and 4 but LLC5 took longer for instabilities to set in for E-cores. Finally fixed it with L2 voltage to 1.15V manual in bios.


Doesn't everyone disable e-cores for gaming?


----------



## Simkin

7empe said:


> Yes, that instability is caused by the interpolated voltages being too low between the VF points CPU is touching. Adaptive voltage too low, or LLC too low that causes bad vcore transient response while switching the frequencies. It may be that AC_LL was too low too, if on auto, it is taken from the AI OC cooler score. Cooler score vary from boot to boot and I had multiple times cooler scores like 197 and other time 168. I just fixed AC_LL to 0.20 for LLC=5 and it corresponds to the cooler score of 182 in my case.


Im running AI OC with a 0.015mV undervolt (rasied it from 0.025mV yesterday), i have set the Cooler Score to 150 (manual) to get the boost down, (cooler score is 170-180 on auto/training

In CSGO and Battlefield 4 my P-cores is at 5.1Ghz and E-cores at 4.1Ghz
In Fortnite P-cores at 5.1Ghz but E-cores is lower at 3.8Ghz.

For me 5.1Ghz is enough in heavy use/gaming, thats why i lowered my cooler score, but it might mess up something regarding to volts?


----------



## satinghostrider

Nizzen said:


> Doesn't everyone disable e-cores for gaming?


Not every game benefits from disabling e-cores. I thought Vanguard used it quite extensively until I updated Hitman 3 last night with the new DLSS and RT features. My E-cores were utilised much more than I've ever seen in any game and my CPU hit 220W. Even Vanguard max I've seen was 190W. GPU hit 460W. Probably the most demanding game for me to date. I'll try to get some logs tonight to show this.


----------



## 7empe

Simkin said:


> Im running AI OC with a 0.015mV undervolt (rasied it from 0.025mV yesterday), i have set the Cooler Score to 150 (manual) to get the boost down, (cooler score is 170-180 on auto/training
> 
> In CSGO and Battlefield 4 my P-cores is at 5.1Ghz and E-cores at 4.1Ghz
> In Fortnite P-cores at 5.1Ghz but E-cores is lower at 3.8Ghz.
> 
> For me 5.1Ghz is enough in heavy use/gaming, thats why i lowered my cooler score, but it might mess up something regarding to volts?


If you're using AI OC then cooler score not only influence the AC_LL but also boost frequency of p-cores and e-cores. You can see this on the bios window where you set the cooler score. Therefore, if I were you, I would leave cooler score on auto to benefit from the higher boost clocks but set the AC_LL manually to avoid fluctuations that may lead to instabilities. If you have AC/DC_LL on auto and LLC 4, then I think you should try setting AC_LL to 0.30. This is quite good value for coolers that really scores around 170-180. If unstable, give it 0.32, if stable try 0.28. The AC_LL is a temperature compensator and influence on the amount of vdroop on the vcore.


----------



## 7empe

satinghostrider said:


> Not every game benefits from disabling e-cores. I thought Vanguard used it quite extensively until I updated Hitman 3 last night with the new DLSS and RT features. My E-cores were utilised much more than I've ever seen in any game and my CPU hit 220W. Even Vanguard max I've seen was 190W. GPU hit 460W. Probably the most demanding game for me to date. I'll try to get some logs tonight to show this.


With e-cores enabled I see no difference or only a positive difference. Some time ago I posted here the benchmarks on how much BF2042 benefits from the e-cores. Similar situation is with BFV. All the Total Wars boost with e-cores significantly. Apex Legends - no difference (light load on 4-6 cores only). Not mentioning the Fire Strike 

In general, not like with the older generations, due to better IPC in 12th gen., the ring speed limited by having e-cores enabled does not hit performance so much. I mean, the difference in gaming (FPS, latency) between cache running at 42x and 49x has no real-life impact. Latency difference visible in e.g. AIDA is 2-3 ns at most. Time scale between frametimes on CPU and GPU side is 0.001s vs the memory latency 0.000000001s


----------



## satinghostrider

7empe said:


> With e-cores enabled I see no difference or only a positive difference. Some time ago I posted here the benchmarks on how much BF2042 benefits from the e-cores. Similar situation is with BFV. All the Total Wars boost with e-cores significantly. Apex Legends - no difference (light load on 4-6 cores only). Not mentioning the Fire Strike
> 
> In general, not like with the older generations, due to better IPC in 12th gen., the ring speed limited by having e-cores enabled does not hit performance so much. I mean, the difference in gaming (FPS, latency) between cache running at 42x and 49x has no real-life impact. Latency difference visible in e.g. AIDA is 2-3 ns at most. Time scale between frametimes on CPU and GPU side is 0.001s vs the memory latency 0.000000001s


Wait till you try Hitman 3 with the DLSS/RT patch and see how much more usage your E-cores consume. I mean it is kind of pointless to disable E-cores just for gaming. Hardwareunboxed themselves did a test and only a handful of games performed marginally better with E-cores disabled. For memory benches, yes it makes a difference but this does not translate into a viable difference for demanding game titles. Older games, yes. Newer games, depending on which titles, stands to gain more from leaving E-cores just enabled as I feel new games moving forward are going to really utilise whatever cores it can use. Every game engine reacts differently. You just have to test it out and see which works better for you. For me, I prefer keeping it on.


----------



## asdkj1740

shut up please, asus apex passed 10ghz already.
go buy unify x.




(seriously: dont buy unify x if you just dont like what apex does)


----------



## 7empe

asdkj1740 said:


> shut up please, asus apex passed 10ghz already.
> go buy unify x.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (seriously: dont buy unify x if you just dont like what apex does)


I bet it is a handmade board sample


----------



## Nizzen

7empe said:


> I believe that Apex and Extreme share the same production problems. Some boards can achieve much better results, other much worse. This is not a production variance, but technological process change at one point. Extreme may be affected by this in the similar manner as Apex is. Obviously, you won't reach the same clock speeds as with 2-dimm board, but other Extreme sample (newer production date) may improve around-XMP experience. If RMA not possible (long wait times etc.) then Z790 is just around the corner....


Main "problem" was about impedances of pcb.


satinghostrider said:


> Not every game benefits from disabling e-cores. I thought Vanguard used it quite extensively until I updated Hitman 3 last night with the new DLSS and RT features. My E-cores were utilised much more than I've ever seen in any game and my CPU hit 220W. Even Vanguard max I've seen was 190W. GPU hit 460W. Probably the most demanding game for me to date. I'll try to get some logs tonight to show this.


The question is: Do you get higher fps with e-cores on, or loose with e-cores off? 

In games I tried, it's a mixed bag. Some better and some is same.


----------



## asdkj1740

7empe said:


> I bet it is a handmade board sample


stopppppppppppppppppppp.
you guys have pushed shamino away... lets be nice for the sake of z790 coming up.


----------



## satinghostrider

Nizzen said:


> Main "problem" was about impedances of pcb.
> 
> The question is: Do you get higher fps with e-cores on, or loose with e-cores off?
> 
> In games I tried, it's a mixed bag. Some better and some is same.


Ermmm I never said I got higher FPS with E-cores on. I said there was more utilisation of the E-cores on the games I played. That simply being the case, I chose to leave them on since games can make use of it.

The disabling of E-cores for higher ring speed and perhaps another 100Mhz for P-Core don't seem to be a discernibly difference to me either at 1440p in terms of FPS. Truth be told, at over 200fps, the difference of either scenarios is not something that's gonna materially affect your gameplay experience.


----------



## Shawnb99

asdkj1740 said:


> stopppppppppppppppppppp.
> you guys have pushed shamino away... lets be nice for the sake of z790 coming up.


So what just bend over so ASUS can do it again?

No thanks.


----------



## El Rizzo

7empe said:


> Allright. Please let me know how to set fix Vref on ADL, because I have similar y-cruncher instabilities as you have described.


To give you an update, I've managed to fix my reboot issues in a way. I redid both my CPU OC and RAM OC from the ground up and I guess somewhere along the line something got messed up before which got fixed by redoing it from the start. I'm currently on 1404 and had to reduce my RAM Clock from 4100 to 4000 for the moment, I'll see if I can get 4100 stable again at some future point, but for now I'm just happy it is stable even after numerous reboots at 4000. This might not be the solution you (and myself) were hoping for, but at least it got me a stable system even after reboots so I hope this might help you as well.


----------



## 7empe

asdkj1740 said:


> stopppppppppppppppppppp.
> you guys have pushed shamino away... lets be nice for the sake of z790 coming up.


I was not offensive in any of my comments to make shamino go away from this forum. Do not expect me expressing only positive comments if the reality is different. I spend my own hard earn money to get the top quality parts and if the deviation from the quality is unacceptable then lets be honest about it. I was always positively suprised about asus staff helping out the community here and there, but it is not cool when kind support disappears while some quality hiccups appear.


----------



## Lokes

Hey guys, not even sure, if this is the right place to ask but, are is any ETA regarding the release of the stable version of 1503 for the Asus Z690 Maximus Hero? Thank you very much in advance


----------



## superino091

asdkj1740 said:


> stopppppppppppppppppppp.
> you guys have pushed shamino away... lets be nice for the sake of z790 coming up.


I think we have been used more. (alpha beta tester)
I also think it was Asus who told shamino to post in the forum.
There is certainly no act of love on Shanino's part to help us paying users


----------



## Shawnb99

Yeah let’s be nice after ASUS gouged us on pricing then made us jump through hoops to RMA a known issue.

I’m sure being nice will show ASUS the error of thief ways and they won’t try this again 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
That’ll happen the day it rains sugarplums and gumdrops


----------



## SoldierRBT

asdkj1740 said:


> stopppppppppppppppppppp.
> you guys have pushed shamino away... lets be nice for the sake of z790 coming up.


You got it wrong. The Z690 agenda is done. There's no reason to come back specially when ASUS decided to discontinued the only board on their z690 lineup that's worth getting.

People having issues with their Apex/Extreme boards, you need to take care of yourself. I'd advice to RMA the board and push full refund or sell the board at a loss and try another vendor.


----------



## Simkin

7empe said:


> If you're using AI OC then cooler score not only influence the AC_LL but also boost frequency of p-cores and e-cores. You can see this on the bios window where you set the cooler score. Therefore, if I were you, I would leave cooler score on auto to benefit from the higher boost clocks but set the AC_LL manually to avoid fluctuations that may lead to instabilities. If you have AC/DC_LL on auto and LLC 4, then I think you should try setting AC_LL to 0.30. This is quite good value for coolers that really scores around 170-180. If unstable, give it 0.32, if stable try 0.28. The AC_LL is a temperature compensator and influence on the amount of vdroop on the vcore.


Where in BIOS do i find the AC_LL? Is it IA AC Load Line?

My LLC is on auto, it says its on 4 now.


----------



## IronAge

Got back my Post Code 00 Apex after about 2 1/2 weeks Asus says it has no issues, yeah right.😠 (way to short for a repair/ fix, so i already guessed it).

asus is just too disabled to get the grips with this ****ed up Apex Generation.

this is the first time i am close to rage after over 30 years of buying pc parts from them.

if they don't get me a refund for both crippled Apex i will never buy from them again.


----------



## D-EJ915

asdkj1740 said:


> stopppppppppppppppppppp.
> you guys have pushed shamino away... lets be nice for the sake of z790 coming up.


I mean he stopped posting because he's working on the next board lineup not because he got his feeling hurt lol.


----------



## 7empe

Simkin said:


> Where in BIOS do i find the AC_LL? Is it IA AC Load Line?
> 
> My LLC is on auto, it says its on 4 now.


That's correct.


----------



## jeiselramos

IronAge said:


> Got back my Post Code 00 Apex after about 2 1/2 weeks Asus says it has no issues, yeah right. (way to short for a repair/ fix, so i already guessed it).
> 
> asus is just too disabled to get the grips with this ****ed up Apex Generation.
> 
> this is the first time i am close to rage after over 30 years of buying pc parts from them.
> 
> if they don't get me a refund for both crippled Apex i will never buy from them again.


Same for me. After 2 weeks they send me the same board which is completely broken (6133 max stable)
Now the same configuration is running 6600C30 on the UX


----------



## Simkin

7empe said:


> That's correct.


Think i need to have my cooler set at 150, on auto i have 5.2Ghz all core heavy load (up from 5.1 all core with cooler set on 150), while fine in gaming its too much heat in stresstest like Cinebench for my AIO cooler.

So, I have set it back to 150, LLC is on auto (4) and i have set AC_LL on 0.30

Might do it on my CTD issue ..?


----------



## sblantipodi

asdkj1740 said:


> stopppppppppppppppppppp.
> you guys have pushed shamino away... lets be nice for the sake of z790 coming up.


Shamino is not here to help because he loves us, and this seems completely normal to me.
Shamino is an Asus employee, it's here to get beta testers for free while they pay full money for their boards.

Now Asus abandoned the Z690 platform since they are moving to Z790.
The funny thing is that they abandoned Z690 before making it work.

Apart all the problems we are facing here, there are features that was promised and never implemented.

Asus SPD write protection defaults to enable even If Corsair asked to change that default.
In an RGB era this somewhat proves that they knows that this setting creates problems on Asus boards.

DDR5 adds a writable user profile for XMP, this profile is writable from iCue on Msi, asrock, gigabyte but not on Asus boards.

They simply released a non finished product and after six months is still unfinished.

I may seem rude, but I think that what I'm saying is pretty reasonable from what we are seeing here.


----------



## centvalny

sblantipodi said:


> no changelog means nothing interesting.
> most of their changelogs are cut and paste from previous:
> 1) improved performance
> 2) improved stability


I can help you to properly overclock your ram with apex


----------



## sblantipodi

centvalny said:


> I can help you to properly overclock your ram with apex


thank you but I don't have problems related to the OC.
I have the same problem even at 3.6GHz or 4GHz at JEDEC settings.


----------



## Shawnb99

Time to put ignore to good use


----------



## sxmans

can anyone confirm that there are no problems with Formula? as it was written Apex had with XMP and RAM slot
Formula, can it reach 6400? with what RAM?
thanks!


----------



## Kampers

Can anyone help me with OC my setup:



Asus ROG Maximus Z690 Hero
12900K
Corsair Dominator DDR5, 6200 MHz, CL36-39-39-76 2x16gb XMP
Strix 3090 OC
Corsair HX 1000i
Corsair 7000x RGB
Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut 1g
Custom loop
2x Corsair Hydro X Series XR5 420mm Radiator
Corsair Hydro X XD5 RGB Pump/Reservoir Combo Black
Corsair Hydro X Series XG7 RGB 30-SERIES STRIX
Corsair CPU Water Block XC8 RGB PRO JTC
11x Corsair SP 120 og 140mm RGB Elite Fans

Now P core 7x5.2 1x 5.1 E core 8x 41 1.21V


----------



## Alberto_It

Kampers said:


> Can anyone help me with OC my setup:
> 
> 
> 
> Asus ROG Maximus Z690 Hero
> 12900K
> Corsair Dominator DDR5, 6200 MHz, CL36-39-39-76 2x16gb XMP
> Strix 3090 OC
> Corsair HX 1000i
> Corsair 7000x RGB
> Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut 1g
> Custom loop
> 2x Corsair Hydro X Series XR5 420mm Radiator
> Corsair Hydro X XD5 RGB Pump/Reservoir Combo Black
> Corsair Hydro X Series XG7 RGB 30-SERIES STRIX
> Corsair CPU Water Block XC8 RGB PRO JTC
> 11x Corsair SP 120 og 140mm RGB Elite Fans
> 
> Now P core 7x5.2 1x 5.1 E core 8x 41 1.21V
> 
> View attachment 2562159
> 
> View attachment 2562162


Take a look on @RobertoSampaio guide









ASUS MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME & i9-12900K GUIDE - Load...


Disclaimer ! These settings and methods are outside Intel's specifications, just like any other overclocking method. ---------------------------------------------------- For Z790/13900K click here Introduction: In a world increasingly concerned with natural resources, the watchword is...




www.overclock.net


----------



## axiumone

sblantipodi said:


> Asus said me that I need to ask my reseller to ask for an RMA. They don't manage the RMA with customers for the first two years.
> 
> Welcome to Asus. Let's see how long it will take all of this.
> 
> I bought the PC five months ago, I lost a lot of money on it trying to buy different parts to make it work, now let's see how much months I need to wait for an RMA.


BTW, I have the same exact issue running 4x16GB with my Formula. Regardless if it's 3600-6000 ram speeds. The system is completely stable and can pass 48 hours of memtest without a single issue. When trying to restart the system, it will hang on 'Memory Detect'. I then have to do a full shutdown and start, at which point the system will boot loop a few times and throw a message that system couldnt boot correctly. I have to enter the bios, change nothing, exit, and then the system will boot normally. 

I've had Asus replace the board with a brand new board (because of a different issue, the network chip was faulty), but the new board has exactly the same ram issues. So, I don't think RMA will help in this case. I have not tried a different CPU.


----------



## 7empe

axiumone said:


> BTW, I have the same exact issue running 4x16GB with my Formula. Regardless if it's 3600-6000 ram speeds. The system is completely stable and can pass 48 hours of memtest without a single issue. When trying to restart the system, it will hang on 'Memory Detect'. I then have to do a full shutdown and start, at which point the system will boot loop a few times and throw a message that system couldnt boot correctly. I have to enter the bios, change nothing, exit, and then the system will boot normally.
> 
> I've had Asus replace the board with a brand new board (because of a different issue, the network chip was faulty), but the new board has exactly the same ram issues. So, I don't think RMA will help in this case. I have not tried a different CPU.


Sounds like a training issue. Maybe related to temperature. Is a cold boot (e.g. after the night) without issues? I would try increasing VCCSA and/or IMC VDD a bit. Something like VCCSA 1.25V and IMC 1.25V.


----------



## axiumone

Thanks, it’s not a temp or voltage issue, it’s a platform/bios issue. I’ve tried a variety of vccsa and imc voltages.

It’s definitely training related. Restart always fails. Clean shutdown and instant start again will always work.


----------



## sxmans

axiumone said:


> I've had Asus replace the board with a brand new board (because of a different issue, the network chip was faulty), but the new board has exactly the same ram issues. So, I don't think RMA will help in this case. I have not tried a different CPU.


how long ago did you replace the motherboard? And what RAM do you use?

LE: what is the difference between these types of RAM? G.SKILL F5-6400J3239G16GX2 TZ5*S* TZ5*K* TZ5*RS* TZ5*RK*
Thanks for any tips


----------



## sblantipodi

axiumone said:


> BTW, I have the same exact issue running 4x16GB with my Formula. Regardless if it's 3600-6000 ram speeds. The system is completely stable and can pass 48 hours of memtest without a single issue. When trying to restart the system, it will hang on 'Memory Detect'. I then have to do a full shutdown and start, at which point the system will boot loop a few times and throw a message that system couldnt boot correctly. I have to enter the bios, change nothing, exit, and then the system will boot normally.
> 
> I've had Asus replace the board with a brand new board (because of a different issue, the network chip was faulty), but the new board has exactly the same ram issues. So, I don't think RMA will help in this case. I have not tried a different CPU.


please report your problem in this thread:





[SPD Write Protection = FALSE] and my Z690 Extreme hangs on boot. - Page 3


Hi all. I'm using a Z690 Extreme mobo with 4 sticks of 6200MHz SK Hinyx downclocked at 5.2GHz for stability reasons. Using corsair iCue to drive the RGB on my RAM sticks. I can stress test my PC with every possible software for days and there is no errors and no crash but if disable the...



rog.asus.com





asus said that they are looking on it but if I'm the only one reporting it will be quickly forgotten.

PS: I don't know if we are talking about the same problem but all my reboot problems are solved by enabling SPD Write Protection,
doing this disables the abilities of iCue to control the RGB on the RAM but solves the haging problem.

I'm obviously not glad to have such expensive RAM and not beeing able to control RGB on them so it's not a fix but a bad workaround.


----------



## akgis

Bios 1503 for hero atlest have not yet appeared on Asus Official site.

On a stability point should I wait?


----------



## Nizzen

akgis said:


> Bios 1503 for hero atlest have not yet appeared on Asus Official site.
> 
> On a stability point should I wait?


Allways use the latest beta


----------



## akgis

satinghostrider said:


> Not every game benefits from disabling e-cores. I thought Vanguard used it quite extensively until I updated Hitman 3 last night with the new DLSS and RT features. My E-cores were utilised much more than I've ever seen in any game and my CPU hit 220W. Even Vanguard max I've seen was 190W. GPU hit 460W. Probably the most demanding game for me to date. I'll try to get some logs tonight to show this.


Death Stranding at 144hz 4k makes heavy use of all cores cause it uses AVX2 extensivly I think, I get no FPS diferente if I disable the e-cores because the p-cores do more work but from disabling e-cores I get more wattage/heat from CPU.

On FH5 I see no diference at all, FH5 makes some use of the e-cores but not much.

I like the e-cores I can trow all kinds of **** in the background browser/spotify or netflix/discord/qbitorrent/obs/citrix/gamebar on the background without noticable impacting the foreground game running. Hell I somtimes have FH5 with CS:GO/valorant running to swap between queues


----------



## sblantipodi

akgis said:


> Death Stranding at 144hz 4k makes heavy use of all cores cause it uses AVX2 extensivly I think, I get no FPS diferente if I disable the e-cores because the p-cores do more work but from disabling e-cores I get more wattage/heat from CPU.
> 
> On FH5 I see no diference at all, FH5 makes some use of the e-cores but not much.
> 
> I like the e-cores I can trow all kinds of **** in the background browser/spotify or netflix/discord/qbitorrent/obs/citrix/gamebar on the background without noticable impacting the foreground game running. Hell I somtimes have FH5 with CS:GO/valorant running to swap between queues


No games uses avx2 extensively, that instructions simply doesn't fit things that games does extensively.


----------



## sblantipodi

akgis said:


> Bios 1503 for hero atlest have not yet appeared on Asus Official site.
> 
> On a stability point should I wait?


That bios isn't appeared on the official site yet,
this is true for all the mobos.


----------



## akgis

Nizzen said:


> Allways use the latest beta


is it a beta?, where does it say its a beta? Aren't beta bios supposed to start by 0 (Zero)


----------



## Nizzen

akgis said:


> is it a beta?, where does it say its a beta? Aren't beta bios supposed to start by 0 (Zero)


00 is most of the time "test" bioses special for "overclockers"


----------



## akgis

isnt what Beta means in software, test?


----------



## akgis

sblantipodi said:


> No games uses avx2 extensively, that instructions simply doesn't fit things that games does extensively.


not sure if its AVX2 or not, but the requirments says it needs a AVX cpu, only reason to put all cores even the e-cores to work on a 12900k


----------



## sblantipodi

akgis said:


> not sure if its AVX2 or not, but the requirments says it needs a AVX cpu, only reason to put all cores even the e-cores to work on a 12900k


AVX and AVX2 are different beasts.


----------



## owikh84

ROG MAXIMUS Z690 Series Beta Bios 1505

01. Improve system performance.

ROG MAXIMUS Z690 HERO BETA BIOS 1505





ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-ASUS-1505.7z







drive.google.com





ROG MAXIMUS Z690 HERO EVA BETA BIOS 1505





ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-EVA-ASUS-1505.7z







drive.google.com





ROG MAXIMUS Z690 FORMULA BETA BIOS 1505





ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-FORMULA-ASUS-1505.7z







drive.google.com





ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX BETA BIOS 1505





ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-1505.7z







drive.google.com





ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME BETA BIOS 1505





ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-1505.7z







drive.google.com





ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME GLACIAL BETA BIOS 1505





ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-GLACIAL-ASUS-1505.7z







drive.google.com


----------



## sblantipodi

Lol, I like to predict the changelog.


----------



## affxct

Hi guys, anyone have a rough idea of which Apex BIOSs support AVX-512? Finally managed to find one at a decent price that should be arriving in a week or two. Also, I believe there's a cardinal rule where you can't flick the BIOS switch between different microcode revisions, that's only with regards to 1403 and 1505 right?


----------



## Mappi75

Short test to 1505 bios (Apex) - first bios contact was very slow when you use the arrow keys for moving in the menus.
After saving and rebooting the bios control was fast as usual.

Still no chance to get higher than 6.666Mhz CL32 for my ram.


----------



## TSportM

Hello

any improvements over 1503 ?


----------



## IronAge

Mappi75 said:


> Still no chance to get higher than 6.666Mhz CL32 for my ram.


Take sub 1403 Bios if you want a chance to get higher than 6666, best chance with 0086 for Hynix IC AFAIK, or get different Apex.


----------



## IIDaXII

Hi there,
I recently own an I9 12900ks.
I noticed that during my cinebench R23 tests, my frequencies vary between 5.1and 5.0... Is this normal?
I just tried with the latest bios 1505 and it didn't change anything.
In the bios of my Z690 Extreme, I just activated the xmp1 and the 'asus enchanced'.
Thanks a lot for your help.


----------



## TSportM

IIDaXII said:


> Hi there,
> I recently own an I9 12900ks.
> I noticed that during my cinebench R23 tests, my frequencies vary between 5.1and 5.0... Is this normal?
> I just tried with the latest bios 1505 and it didn't change anything.
> In the bios of my Z690 Extreme, I just activated the xmp1 and the 'asus enchanced'.
> Thanks a lot for your help.


What kind of oc are you applying if any ?

cheers


----------



## Akadaka

IIDaXII said:


> Hi there,
> I recently own an I9 12900ks.
> I noticed that during my cinebench R23 tests, my frequencies vary between 5.1and 5.0... Is this normal?
> I just tried with the latest bios 1505 and it didn't change anything.
> In the bios of my Z690 Extreme, I just activated the xmp1 and the 'asus enchanced'.
> Thanks a lot for your help.


Yes that's normal at 100% load, only 1 core will run at 5.5ghz that's how turbo boost works.


----------



## Tibby67

Akadaka said:


> Yes that's normal at 100% load, only 1 core will run at 5.5ghz that's how turbo boost works.


Wrong two Cores boost at 5.5 Ghz


----------



## IIDaXII

I thought all P Cores would stabilize at 5.2


----------



## bscool

IIDaXII said:


> I thought all P Cores would stabilize at 5.2


ON KS they should do 52 all core. How are temps are you throttling?

If you run r23 with HWinfo open you can see what is going on. Like my screenshot but I didnt have it open while running


----------



## IIDaXII

I checked the temperatures on Intel XTU, and I have no throtlling alert. on the other hand I have an alert on current limit


----------



## bscool

IIDaXII said:


> I checked the temperatures on Intel XTU, and I have no throtlling alert. on the other hand I have an alert on current limit


Did you try a different bios version? It is a setting or that bios. Maybe try clearing cmos and reloaing defaults.

I dont have my KS running now to check but I am pretty sure it ran 52 all core with defaults. i usually manually OC so I didnt pay much attention to what it runs with setting clocks manually.

Actually had CPUz run saved of 12900ks with CPU defaults and shows 52 all core. Intel Core i9 12900KS @ 5201.25 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR


----------



## bscool

Mappi75 said:


> Short test to 1505 bios (Apex) - first bios contact was very slow when you use the arrow keys for moving in the menus.
> After saving and rebooting the bios control was fast as usual.
> 
> Still no chance to get higher than 6.666Mhz CL32 for my ram.


It is probably the MB. I just tried 1505 on 2022 Apex and 7000c30 works fine so far. Havent run any long term stress and memory test just start messing with it and loaded previously used memory timings and tuning now.

Do you have a 2021 Apex and have you ever been able to run over 6666 on any bios?

Edit I notice the KB takes a while to start working when booting into Windows. Still setting things in bios but never notice this issue before.

Might be related to making memory changes in bios/trainings as reboots KB is normal.


----------



## Afferin

I'm kind of enjoying 1505 on my Z690 Formula. It may not be great for achieving 7200CL28 on 2x16 sticks or whatever, but on 1304 I was unable to get 6200+ to even get past 50% coverage on Karhu with 4x16 sticks. On 1505, I'm getting close! Maybe with this BIOS I'll even hit 6400 on 4x16 8)


----------



## trihy

Sorry to post here. Buy any beta bios for b660m plus wifi d4?

I'm experiencing the extreme low voltages drops at idle which is causing freezes at stock voltage. Been waiting forever for an Asus fix.


----------



## Mappi75

IIDaXII said:


> I thought all P Cores would stabilize at 5.2


They should on KS BUT Bios version: 0070 & 0090 limited my KS to 5,1Ghz instead 5,2Ghz (i tried everything in the Bios).
Cooling was never the Problem for me custom loop with 188 points.. (HWLabs GTR480 + 8 Noctua NF-A12).

I have to check 1505 bios if it runs at full 5,2Ghz with CB23..

Edit: bios 1505 runs all core 5,2Ghz


----------



## IIDaXII

In peak temperature, I go up to 101 C (C23). I set the maximum temperature to 115 C in the bios. Intel XTU does not tell me temperature throttling.
Maybe my H150i elite capellix is not enough...


----------



## dyanikoglu

All asus board changelogs be like, iMpRoVe sYsTeM pErFoRmAnCe


----------



## 7empe

dyanikoglu said:


> All asus board changelogs be like, iMpRoVe sYsTeM pErFoRmAnCe


Regular asus customer buys Apex and DDR5 for the office work purpose. No more details needed.
(sarcasm)


----------



## Alex_Mok

Guys help pls. I have ASUS Z690 EXTREME.

BIOS Version 1403
I install Firmware PD FW update tool (Version 005)
I install all drivers (Intel Thunderbolt latest driver installed too)
On BIOS settings i set Onboard Devices Configurations -> USB Power delivery in Soft off state -> [Enabled]
ErP Ready -> [Disabled]
Optional 6-pin power connector on motherboard (next to 24-pin connector) - connected
PSU Corsair HX1200 (80+ Platinum) 1200 watt
Windows 11 Pro

i have problems:

*1.* my mini OLED display on M.2_1 radiator very often show artifacts:









*2.* When i turn OFF my PC (but don't turn off the power PSU) all my USB-A ports don't work and don't charge my gadgets (iPhone 12 Pro Max, iPad Pro 12.9, Logitech G Pro Superlight etc...). Three USB-C ports (which are located on the rear side of the motherboard) work, but when PC off: charge is very-very slow (in the tech specs of this motherboard it is declared 27w standart charging, but in my opinion there is not even ~10W)

and my this USB-C Thunderbolt port:









when PC off - if I connect through Thunderbolt my iPhone \ iPad - all gadgets nonstop every 2-3 seconds indacated charge\no charge icon (as if charging falls off every 2-3 seconds ).

When PC on: all USB-A ports works fine, and Thunderbolt port deliver charge without interruption (all work fine).

*P.S.* I want to make that I can charge my gadgets when my PC is turned off. I don’t need quick charging at 60W, but I would like to get the standard declared ~20-27W. Right now my phone gets +4% charge per ~45 minutes. It is too long... And i don't know why my Thunderbolt 4 port behaves strangely when the PC is turned off.

My motherboard defective? Or this software \ firmware problems?


----------



## SoldierRBT

sniperpowa said:


> I was asking cause I rma my apex and they sending me a different board I have only the serial number of replacement.


Any updates on this? Thanks


----------



## sblantipodi

sblantipodi said:


> please report your problem in this thread:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [SPD Write Protection = FALSE] and my Z690 Extreme hangs on boot. - Page 3
> 
> 
> Hi all. I'm using a Z690 Extreme mobo with 4 sticks of 6200MHz SK Hinyx downclocked at 5.2GHz for stability reasons. Using corsair iCue to drive the RGB on my RAM sticks. I can stress test my PC with every possible software for days and there is no errors and no crash but if disable the...
> 
> 
> 
> rog.asus.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> asus said that they are looking on it but if I'm the only one reporting it will be quickly forgotten.
> 
> PS: I don't know if we are talking about the same problem but all my reboot problems are solved by enabling SPD Write Protection,
> doing this disables the abilities of iCue to control the RGB on the RAM but solves the haging problem.
> 
> I'm obviously not glad to have such expensive RAM and not beeing able to control RGB on them so it's not a fix but a bad workaround.


still no fix for this problem in 1505. so disappointing...


----------



## TSportM

Alex_Mok said:


> Guys help pls. I have ASUS Z690 EXTREME.
> 
> BIOS Version 1403
> I install Firmware PD FW update tool (Version 005)
> I install all drivers (Intel Thunderbolt latest driver installed too)
> On BIOS settings i set Onboard Devices Configurations -> USB Power delivery in Soft off state -> [Enabled]
> ErP Ready -> [Disabled]
> Optional 6-pin power connector on motherboard (next to 24-pin connector) - connected
> PSU Corsair HX1200 (80+ Platinum) 1200 watt
> Windows 11 Pro
> 
> i have problems:
> 
> *1.* my mini OLED display on M.2_1 radiator very often show artifacts:
> View attachment 2562538
> 
> 
> *2.* When i turn OFF my PC (but don't turn off the power PSU) all my USB-A ports don't work and don't charge my gadgets (iPhone 12 Pro Max, iPad Pro 12.9, Logitech G Pro Superlight etc...). Three USB-C ports (which are located on the rear side of the motherboard) work, but when PC off: charge is very-very slow (in the tech specs of this motherboard it is declared 27w standart charging, but in my opinion there is not even ~10W)
> 
> and my this USB-C Thunderbolt port:
> View attachment 2562540
> 
> 
> when PC off - if I connect through Thunderbolt my iPhone \ iPad - all gadgets nonstop every 2-3 seconds indacated charge\no charge icon (as if charging falls off every 2-3 seconds ).
> 
> When PC on: all USB-A ports works fine, and Thunderbolt port deliver charge without interruption (all work fine).
> 
> *P.S.* I want to make that I can charge my gadgets when my PC is turned off. I don’t need quick charging at 60W, but I would like to get the standard declared ~20-27W. Right now my phone gets +4% charge per ~45 minutes. It is too long... And i don't know why my Thunderbolt 4 port behaves strangely when the PC is turned off.
> 
> My motherboard defective? Or this software \ firmware problems?



alot ppl complain about that issue on the oled, if you benchmark or play for few hours it behaves like that, if you use armory crate and go to the animatrix and fiddle with that oled panel it will come back alive (or restart the pc).

Like a i said on the Rog boards there is a topic on that, Asus did not acknowledge this issue, i have not taken alot of time fiding the problem or fix.

cheers


----------



## nickolp1974

whats the general consensus with regards RMA on the Apex. I can bench just above 7200 but its far from stable, 6600 CR2 is about the limit for stabillity on dell greens. Purchased the board in nov 21, its a M0EAY0. just not sure whats considered acceptable????


----------



## 7empe

nickolp1974 said:


> whats the general consensus with regards RMA on the Apex. I can bench just above 7200 but its far from stable, 6600 CR2 is about the limit for stabillity on dell greens. Purchased the board in nov 21, its a M0EAY0. just not sure whats considered acceptable????


Have same board production date and M0EAY0 too.
6666 CL 30 stable.
6800 CL 30 stable, but hard to get proper training.
6933 CL 32 benchable.
7000 CL 32 benchable.
7200 CL 32 bootable.

Consider your board as a regular-quality board. RMA goes with boards that can't even do the XMP with 6000-6200 range.


----------



## nickolp1974

7empe said:


> Have same board production date and M0EAY0 too.
> 6666 CL 30 stable.
> 6800 CL 30 stable, but hard to get proper training.
> 6933 CL 32 benchable.
> 7000 CL 32 benchable.
> 7200 CL 32 bootable.
> 
> Consider your board as a regular-quality board. RMA goes with boards that can't even do the XMP with 6000-6200 range.


thank you appreciate the info. As some are getting 7k+ stable thought i'd ask, my KS is one speed bin up from the regular K so not bad just probably need to spend more time, may also try some different dimms


----------



## y2kse

IIDaXII said:


> In peak temperature, I go up to 101 C (C23). I set the maximum temperature to 115 C in the bios. Intel XTU does not tell me temperature throttling.
> Maybe my H150i elite capellix is not enough...


I have a 12900KS on a Z690 HERO cooled by a H150i Elite Capellix. On BIOS Optimized Defaults, P-cores ran 4.9 to 5.0 all-core due to temperature and power limit throttling. With PL1 and PL2 limits at unlimited, ICCMax to 511.75A, and adjusted AC_LL, DC_LL and LLC values, P-cores run at a temperature-throttled 5.1 all-core. In games, it will run 5.2 all core.


----------



## chibi

There's two Apex boards near me. I called the store and they confirmed the white label bottom left does not have a manufacturer date indication. Do I take the risk?

Have 12900KS + Fury 6000 ram on hand.


----------



## satinghostrider

chibi said:


> There's two Apex boards near me. I called the store and they confirmed the white label bottom left does not have a manufacturer date indication. Do I take the risk?
> 
> Have 12900KS + Fury 6000 ram on hand.


Nope it probably 2021. While this might not be an Apex, it should look like this to confirm a 2022 production board.


----------



## chibi

What's best bios for z690i strix itx for oc?


----------



## Nizzen




----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Clean👍


----------



## Alex_Mok

TSportM said:


> alot ppl complain about that issue on the oled, if you benchmark or play for few hours it behaves like that, if you use armory crate and go to the animatrix and fiddle with that oled panel it will come back alive (or restart the pc).
> 
> Like a i said on the Rog boards there is a topic on that, Asus did not acknowledge this issue, i have not taken alot of time fiding the problem or fix.
> 
> cheers


Yes, I noticed that when I restart PC, the mini OLED display starts working correctly for a while. And I also saw some messages from other users that they have the same situation. Perhaps this is a problem with an Armoury Crate or incorrect BIOS version. I hope ASUS fix this with a new firmware in future.

But I'm wondering about my second question - with USB-A and USB-C Thunderbolt ports. Does this situation indicate a malfunction of the motherboard? Or maybe problem with firmware too? Could one of the owners of this board check how he is doing? I would be very grateful. 

Or maybe there are some additional settings due to which this situation occurs? Maybe i need to set something in the settings BIOS \ Windows?


----------



## Alberto_It

Version 1505
2022/06/02 11.22 MBytes
ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME BIOS 1505
"1. Improve DRAM stability



https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/BIOS/ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-1505.zip



Versione 1505
2022/06/02 10.9 MBytes
ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX BIOS 1505
"1. Improve DRAM stability



https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/BIOS/ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-1505.zip




Versione 1505
2022/06/02 11.12 MBytes
ROG MAXIMUS Z690 HERO BIOS 1505
"1. Improve DRAM stability



https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/BIOS/ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-ASUS-1505.zip



Version 1505
2022/06/02 10.91 MBytes
ROG MAXIMUS Z690 FORMULA BIOS 1505
"1. Improve DRAM stability



https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/BIOS/ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-FORMULA-ASUS-1505.zip


----------



## IronAge

chibi said:


> There's two Apex boards near me. I called the store and they confirmed the white label bottom left does not have a manufacturer date indication. Do I take the risk?
> 
> Have 12900KS + Fury 6000 ram on hand.


my advice; do not buy, boards are from the first Batch, even before 2021-11, RAM OC capability will be very likely bad.

Memory QVL for non K and Pentium lists DIMM kits up to DDR5-6800, for 12900K/KF it lists only kits up to DDR5-6400. 

Asus has QVL like that to decrease the number of upcoming RMAs.

you know what Linus Torvalds once said to NV, .... want to shout out the same towards ASUS. (F*ck U)


----------



## Alberto_It

Alberto_It said:


> Version 1505
> 2022/06/02 11.22 MBytes
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME BIOS 1505
> "1. Improve DRAM stability
> 
> 
> 
> https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/BIOS/ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-1505.zip
> 
> 
> 
> Versione 1505
> 2022/06/02 10.9 MBytes
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX BIOS 1505
> "1. Improve DRAM stability
> 
> 
> 
> https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/BIOS/ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-1505.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Versione 1505
> 2022/06/02 11.12 MBytes
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 HERO BIOS 1505
> "1. Improve DRAM stability
> 
> 
> 
> https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/BIOS/ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-ASUS-1505.zip
> 
> 
> 
> Version 1505
> 2022/06/02 10.91 MBytes
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 FORMULA BIOS 1505
> "1. Improve DRAM stability
> 
> 
> 
> https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/BIOS/ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-FORMULA-ASUS-1505.zip


Added Z690 Formula


----------



## chibi

Alberto_It said:


> Added Z690 Formula


Hi Albert, any new bios for z690 i strix itx?


----------



## TSportM

Alex_Mok said:


> Yes, I noticed that when I restart PC, the mini OLED display starts working correctly for a while. And I also saw some messages from other users that they have the same situation. Perhaps this is a problem with an Armoury Crate or incorrect BIOS version. I hope ASUS fix this with a new firmware in future.
> 
> But I'm wondering about my second question - with USB-A and USB-C Thunderbolt ports. Does this situation indicate a malfunction of the motherboard? Or maybe problem with firmware too? Could one of the owners of this board check how he is doing? I would be very grateful.
> 
> Or maybe there are some additional settings due to which this situation occurs? Maybe i need to set something in the settings BIOS \ Windows?


Dont have that problem, sometimes really cant say when the usb ports shut down like 1ms after doing something like shutting down a game but i narrow it down to windoes 11, as windows 10 nothing like that happens, but its not the same issue your reporting, cant help as i dont experience that issue 

cheers


----------



## TSportM

Alberto_It said:


> Added Z690 Formula


Hello

does this bios any diferente from 1505 beta posted here?

cheers


----------



## Alberto_It

chibi said:


> Hi Albert, any new bios for z690 i strix itx?


I have checked now, but it is currently not available. Probably the next few days


----------



## Alberto_It

TSportM said:


> Hello
> 
> does this bios any diferente from 1505 beta posted here?
> 
> cheers


I don't know, but it is on Asus website as stable release


----------



## Eaton

TSportM said:


> Hello
> 
> does this bios any diferente from 1505 beta posted here?
> 
> cheers


No, the final and beta files are the exact same.


----------



## Nizzen

Newest OC test bios:


*Test BIOS for Maximus Z690 Apex*
By Bianbao (in house Asus overclocker)
BIOS Ver. 0061
fix minor bugs and increase memory overclock capability.
fix ivr vddq voltage can’t set issue.

ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0061.CAP
文件分享


----------



## TSportM

Eaton said:


> No, the final and beta files are the exact same.


yes the files are the same i kown, but my question is if any final changes

cheers


----------



## TSportM

Nizzen said:


> Newest OC test bios:
> 
> 
> *Test BIOS for Maximus Z690 Apex*
> By Bianbao (in house Asus overclocker)
> BIOS Ver. 0061
> fix minor bugs and increase memory overclock capability.
> fix ivr vddq voltage can’t set issue.
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0061.CAP
> 文件分享



any chance for the extreme ?


----------



## Nizzen

TSportM said:


> any chance for the extreme ?


Extreme isn't for very high memory OC 
I


----------



## Afferin

Nizzen said:


> Extreme isn't for very high memory OC
> I


How about for the Z690 Formula? 8) I'd love to be able to hit 6800 on 4x16 hehe


----------



## Gking62

Alberto_It said:


> I don't know, but it is on Asus website as stable release


Alberto, thanks for posting these 1505s, however the Z690 Extreme page is still showing 1403. On another note, I'm just looking for XMP stability on my Extreme, bought some G.Skill 6600 awhile back and it couldn't boot at XMP settings no matter what voltage bump I set it at.


----------



## Mappi75

Here its offical:




__





ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX | ROG Maximus | Gaming Mainboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG Deutschland


AX5400 Dual Band WiFi 6 Gaming Router, WiFi 6 802.11ax, Mobile Game Mode, ASUS AURA RGB, Lifetime Free Internet Security, Mesh WiFi support, Gear Accelerator, Gaming Port, Adaptive QoS, Port Forwarding



rog.asus.com


----------



## SoldierRBT

Nizzen said:


> Extreme isn't for very high memory OC
> I


It is, just not retail boards


----------



## Nizzen

SoldierRBT said:


> It is, just not retail boards
> View attachment 2562710


ES everything with Safedisk 
6600 isn't very high. Even some Formula can do that


----------



## TSportM

Eaton said:


> No, the final and beta files are the exact same.


But something is diferent i get bsod on it vs the 1505 on the same settings testing r23


----------



## Mappi75

Switched from 1505 beta to 1505 final wondering a little bit because final bios Windows 11 pro workstation feels much smoother in mouse movement
and in reaction time from moving windows or programs on the screen > using a 360Hz FullHD screen.

The only difference: on final i'am using only xmp profile (6400Mhz) and on beta my 1000% stable setup 6666Mhz CL32 (optimized subtimings).

BTW: i had the same experience with my threadripper 3970X system from Win 10 to Win 11
but its only visible on a 360Hz display on a samsung 32:9 120Hz display its not visible.


----------



## bscool

I checked the hash on 1505 bios for Apex posted here a week ago to final on Asus website and they are exactly the same.


----------



## TSportM

bscool said:


> I checked the hash on 1505 bios for Apex posted here a week ago to final on Asus website and they are exactly the same.



yea but after installing 1505 beta crashes on R23 and R15 goes away  - exact same settings via profile or manual aplied

cheers


----------



## sblantipodi

Mappi75 said:


> Switched from 1505 beta to 1505 final wondering a little bit because final bios Windows 11 pro workstation feels much smoother in mouse movement
> and in reaction time from moving windows or programs on the screen > using a 360Hz FullHD screen.
> 
> The only difference: on final i'am using only xmp profile (6400Mhz) and on beta my 1000% stable setup 6666Mhz CL32 (optimized subtimings).
> 
> BTW: i had the same experience with my threadripper 3970X system from Win 10 to Win 11
> but its only visible on a 360Hz display on a samsung 32:9 120Hz display its not visible.


Beta and stable are same identical file.
Your 1000% stable setup isn't 1001% stable


----------



## FreeSpeechIsKnowledge

sblantipodi said:


> Beta and stable are same identical file.
> Your 1000% stable setup isn't 1001% stable


Might be that his cpu voltages aren't perfectly aligned via his settings or automatic settings applied via the motherboard which ever. One thing I've noticed is that if you use asrock timing configurator and you don't see your voltage controllers' names and or voltages correct 100% of the time you're not actually stable cpu wise 100% and it could be as little as having the voltages out of alignment a tiny bit.

I found that to be interesting upon seeing the behavior and helpful really when you think about it. I've seen quite a few people posting here with their asrock timing configurators showing this behavior.

Might not be his issue though.


----------



## Alberto_It

Gking62 said:


> Alberto, thanks for posting these 1505s, however the Z690 Extreme page is still showing 1403. On another note, I'm just looking for XMP stability on my Extreme, bought some G.Skill 6600 awhile back and it couldn't boot at XMP settings no matter what voltage bump I set it at.


I found them on official Italian Asus's website . Servers are likely to be upgrading on the Global site





__





ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME | ROG Maximus | Gaming Motherboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG Global


AX5400 Dual Band WiFi 6 Gaming Router, WiFi 6 802.11ax, Mobile Game Mode, ASUS AURA RGB, Lifetime Free Internet Security, Mesh WiFi support, Gear Accelerator, Gaming Port, Adaptive QoS, Port Forwarding



rog.asus.com


----------



## primoz.osolnik0

Hello I am on Apex board and wonder which bios is actually better for memory stability....latest test one 0061 or official 1505 version ?


----------



## Nizzen

primoz.osolnik0 said:


> Hello I am on Apex board and wonder which bios is actually better for memory stability....latest test one 0061 or official 1505 version ?


Try, and repport back 

There was no problem getting memory stable on the last 15 bioses 😆


----------



## TSportM

Iam using TG contact frame, maybe i need to fidle a litle bit more with it, but its strange i did alot of hours of testing and the issue remains 1505 beta no problems 1505 oficial crashes using the suit of tests i say on post


----------



## bscool

TSportM said:


> Iam using TG contact frame, maybe i need to fidle a litle bit more with it, but its strange i did alot of hours of testing and the issue remains 1505 beta no problems 1505 oficial crashes using the suit of tests i say on post


It could be something with the vvdq tx(ivr vddq) not working all the time. i noticed this happens at times on a couple of the latest bioses.

@Nizzen posetd a bios that is suppose to fix this. I would try it and if that doesnt fix it probably the new frame you put on. Apex has 2 bioses so simple to switch to the other and try a different bios.









[OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread


Version 1505 2022/06/02 11.22 MBytes ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME BIOS 1505 "1. Improve DRAM stability https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/BIOS/ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-1505.zip Versione 1505 2022/06/02 10.9 MBytes ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX BIOS 1505 "1. Improve DRAM stability...




www.overclock.net


----------



## TSportM

bscool said:


> It could be something with the vvdq tx(ivr vddq) not working all the time. i noticed this happens at times on a couple of the latest bioses.
> 
> @Nizzen posetd a bios that is suppose to fix this. I would try it and if that doesnt fix it probably the new frame you put on. Apex has 2 bioses so simple to switch to the other and try a different bios.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread
> 
> 
> Version 1505 2022/06/02 11.22 MBytes ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME BIOS 1505 "1. Improve DRAM stability https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/BIOS/ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-1505.zip Versione 1505 2022/06/02 10.9 MBytes ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX BIOS 1505 "1. Improve DRAM stability...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net



Hello i dont have the Apex board, i have the Extreme, maybe upping the values on does settings will help


----------



## bscool

TSportM said:


> Hello i dont have the Apex board, i have the Extreme, maybe upping the values on does settings will help


Oh yeah i guess I dont know if it had the same bug with vvdq.


----------



## B77W

1505 working very stable compared to 1403. Well done!


----------



## sblantipodi

Edit: I was wrong.


----------



## sblantipodi

sblantipodi said:


> I confirm that the new BIOS 1505 is way better than the previous ones on my 4x16GB SK Hynix on Z690 Extreme.
> 
> With previous BIOS I was struggling stabilizing
> 5.2GHz @ C36-39-39-76
> and now I can easily achieve
> 5.4GHz @ C32-36-36-76
> 
> not a big jump in performance but hey, a big jump for "just a BIOS upgrade" using 4 sticks...
> 
> unfortunantly, this problem:
> 
> 
> We'll be back.
> 
> 
> 
> remains.


PS: I was joking more extensive tests failed, reverting to the old settings xD


----------



## Afferin

sblantipodi said:


> I confirm that the new BIOS 1505 is way better than the previous ones on my 4x16GB SK Hynix on Z690 Extreme.
> 
> With previous BIOS I was struggling stabilizing
> 5.2GHz @ C36-39-39-76
> and now I can easily achieve
> 5.4GHz @ C32-36-36-76
> 
> not a big jump in performance but hey, a big jump for "just a BIOS upgrade" using 4 sticks...
> 
> unfortunantly, this problem:
> 
> 
> We'll be back.
> 
> 
> 
> remains.


Whew this makes me feel better about my results! Part of me hoped that I'd get something like 7000CL30 stable on 4x16, but I'm known to have unrealistic dreams. 

What voltages are you running on those?


----------



## centvalny

bscool said:


> It could be something with the vvdq tx(ivr vddq) not working all the time. i noticed this happens at times on a couple of the latest bioses.
> 
> @Nizzen posetd a bios that is suppose to fix this. I would try it and if that doesnt fix it probably the new frame you put on. Apex has 2 bioses so simple to switch to the other and try a different bios.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread
> 
> 
> Version 1505 2022/06/02 11.22 MBytes ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME BIOS 1505 "1. Improve DRAM stability https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/BIOS/ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-1505.zip Versione 1505 2022/06/02 10.9 MBytes ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX BIOS 1505 "1. Improve DRAM stability...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net











ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0061.CAP


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com


----------



## sblantipodi

Afferin said:


> Whew this makes me feel better about my results! Part of me hoped that I'd get something like 7000CL30 stable on 4x16, but I'm known to have unrealistic dreams.
> 
> What voltages are you running on those?


I'm running 1.30V on VDD/VDDQ, 1.25V MC, 1.150v SA.
I need stability over performance and this platform is not stable at all but hey, you broke a world record I think.


----------



## Afferin

sblantipodi said:


> I'm running 1.30V on VDD/VDDQ, 1.25V MC, 1.150v SA.
> I need stability over performance and this platform is not stable at all but hey, you broke a world record I think.


This is why I've been labelling my twitch stream as "WORLD FAMOUS DDR5 OVERCLOCKER SUCKS AT GAMING" 8)

But real talk, I think you could achieve some better performance while maintaining stability. I could help ya out if you decide to switch it up :0


----------



## sblantipodi

Afferin said:


> This is why I've been labelling my twitch stream as "WORLD FAMOUS DDR5 OVERCLOCKER SUCKS AT GAMING" 8)
> 
> But real talk, I think you could achieve some better performance while maintaining stability. I could help ya out if you decide to switch it up :0


Thank you very much, I appreciate it but I'm not a good overclocker and my system doesn't seems so lucky.
All I ask now is being able to use my PC without problems but that is another story.


----------



## welldone

Hello guys!

Where can I find newer bios for my TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS D4? Beta or any newer than 1404. I can't use all 4 slots ddr4 at now :/


----------



## bscool

Edit I see you have none wifi


----------



## Falkentyne

TSportM said:


> But something is diferent i get bsod on it vs the 1505 on the same settings testing r23


Final and Beta for _Extreme_ are 100% the same. File compare shows 0 bytes different.
If you're talking about the Apex test BIOS, obviously that's going to be different.


----------



## sniperpowa

SoldierRBT said:


> Any updates on this? Thanks


Yeah new board is worse lol


----------



## TSportM

Falkentyne said:


> Final and Beta for _Extreme_ are 100% the same. File compare shows 0 bytes different.
> If you're talking about the Apex test BIOS, obviously that's going to be different.


iam not talking about bios from apex, i allready no the bios the same, but get problems with official one.

nonetheless i fidlle with TG frame, and temps are lower and better oc on the memory, using igorslab tips on setting it up

cheers


----------



## SuperMumrik

centvalny said:


> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0061.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2562837


Waiting for @bscool to upload a ucode 15 edition of this one 😅😅


Spoiler: .....



Tnx mate


----------



## bscool

SuperMumrik said:


> Waiting for @bscool to upload a ucode 15 edition of this one 😅😅
> 
> 
> Spoiler: .....
> 
> 
> 
> Tnx mate


This should work.

Try it, I dont have Apex connected right now to try ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0061u15.CAP

Let me know if it doesnt work.

Edit tested it and it works for me. 7000c30 havent tested much just loaded old bios settings from 1505.


----------



## SuperMumrik

bscool said:


> Let me know if it doesnt work.


I'll test it when I get sober 🤫


----------



## affxct

bscool said:


> This should work.
> 
> Try it, I dont have Apex connected right now to try ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0061u15.CAP
> 
> Let me know if it doesnt work.
> 
> Edit tested it and it works for me. 7000c30 havent tested much just loaded old bios settings from 1505.


Ignore this, my brain error'd.


----------



## jay.insley

Well I purchased a ASUS ROG Strix Z690-F motherboard in late Feb, i also picked up some G.Skill Trident Z5 RGB Series DDR5 6000 (PC5-48000) CL40-40-40-96 1.35V Dual Channel Desktop Memory Model F5-6000J4040F16GA2-TZ5RS. Basically DIMM_A2 (none of the A channels worked) However the B1 and B2 slots work fine. The issue i was getting is Amber LED at post during boot if anything was in DIMM bank A. I hopped a Bios update would fix it but i gave up today and RMA's my board. What a pain.


----------



## SuperMumrik

bscool said:


> Let me know if it doesnt work.


Tnx mate, works like a charm! AVX512 enabled and quick training like the 1304u15 I used before. Just loaded my tight 7000c30 profile without any issues, but I will try to stabilize 7200 later 😎


----------



## Wasakiqwe

I bought 12900k new for good price.
Now still digging for 2 days. I like Asus bios more than msi. Which Asus z690 is stable with ram, usb and ethernet all working well.


----------



## tubs2x4

Deleted


----------



## dyanikoglu

Is AVX512 enabled bios have any performance difference compared to normal one?


----------



## SuperMumrik

dyanikoglu said:


> Is AVX512 enabled bios have any performance difference compared to normal one?


Not unless you do an AVX512 task (kida rare tbh)


----------



## Martin778

I can't update my BIOS, every time I download a file from ASUS's site, use the renamer, EZ flash tells me it's not a proper BIOS file?! What am I missing? Same story with 14xx and 15xx BIOS'es, can't update to any version. Now stuck at 1102.

+
I can update from 1102 to 0061 but not to any official ones. Weird.


----------



## B77W

I have to retract my previous comment. This bios has still not addressed stability issues even at 4800mhz. I will open a chargeback dispute with my bank. I do not want to waste time on RMA. I just want my damn money back! I will no longer buy Asus motherboards after going through 5 Z690 asus motherboards so far. Shame on Asus!


----------



## tubs2x4

ykeyre said:


> I have to retract my previous comment. This bios has still not addressed stability issues even at 4800mhz. I will open a chargeback dispute with my bank. I do not want to waste time on RMA. I just want my damn money back! I will no longer buy Asus motherboards after going through 5 Z690 asus motherboards so far. Shame on Asus!


5 times? geesh that horrible luck.

edit: i just put the 1403 bios back on and seems normal again. changed load line and seen a change like it should.


----------



## bscool

Martin778 said:


> I can't update my BIOS, every time I download a file from ASUS's site, use the renamer, EZ flash tells me it's not a proper BIOS file?! What am I missing? Same story with 14xx and 15xx BIOS'es, can't update to any version. Now stuck at 1102.
> 
> +
> I can update from 1102 to 0061 but not to any official ones. Weird.


What about if you dont rename it unless using Flashback, to use EZ flash I just use the file like it is.

The only time I use renamer is when using Flashback. 

Edit just tested it using renamer and it EZ flash still works for me(z690 Apex). Maybe try clear csmo, not sure but I have had the issue in the past on other MBs and clearing cmos fixed it.


----------



## bscool

ykeyre said:


> I have to retract my previous comment. This bios has still not addressed stability issues even at 4800mhz. I will open a chargeback dispute with my bank. I do not want to waste time on RMA. I just want my damn money back! I will no longer buy Asus motherboards after going through 5 Z690 asus motherboards so far. Shame on Asus!


What motherboard. It would be helpful to know. I looked at your past posts and dont see what model. Might help others to know.


----------



## Wasakiqwe

ykeyre said:


> I have to retract my previous comment. This bios has still not addressed stability issues even at 4800mhz. I will open a chargeback dispute with my bank. I do not want to waste time on RMA. I just want my damn money back! I will no longer buy Asus motherboards after going through 5 Z690 asus motherboards so far. Shame on Asus!


Which Asus z690 mobo failed you? 
I'm ordering msi z690 pro tomorrow. Heard nothing but great things about it.


----------



## B77W

bscool said:


> What motherboard. It would be helpful to know. I looked at your past posts and dont see what model. Might help others to know.


2xZ690 Hero
2xZ690 APEX
1xZ690-F Wifi D5

Troubleshooting with 2x 12900K and 1x 1290KS and 4 kits of DDR5 ALL of which can be found on company QVL.


----------



## bscool

ykeyre said:


> 2xZ690 Hero
> 2xZ690 APEX
> 1xZ690-F Wifi D5
> 
> Troubleshooting with 2x 12900K and 1x 1290KS and 4 kits of DDR5 ALL of which can be found on company QVL.


If you go with another manufacure you should post back with what works. Hard to believe that many boards are all bad. I would think it might be something like PSU if that many have issues. But who knows anything is possible.

What MB are you going to try next? I hear good things about MSI.


----------



## B77W

Wasakiqwe said:


> Which Asus z690 mobo failed you?
> I'm ordering msi z690 pro tomorrow. Heard nothing but great things about it.


2xZ690 Hero= Fire hazard on first batch returned. The replacement was DOA.
2xZ690 APEX= Both November 2021 batches are unable to boot on even 4800hz DRAM SPD.
1xZ690-F Wifi D5= January 2022 batch XMP I and II not working on 4 QVL listed RAM kits. Same counts for above mobos.


----------



## B77W

bscool said:


> If you go with another manufacure you should post back with what works. Hard to believe that many boards are all bad. I would think it might be something like PSU if that many have issues. But who knows anything is possible.
> 
> What MB are you going to try next? I hear good things about MSI.


I literally maxed out my credit card with as many parts as possible. Tried 3 different 1200Watt PSU and their respective factory cables. Tried on 1 testbench and 2 different cases with 3 different 980 Pro M.2. and 4 different GPUs. I have exhausted every possible avenue and changed every single variable, one at a time. My friend's MSI MPG Z690 Carbon Wifi D5 is able to run all of my DDR5 kits at XMP. Currently testing Z690 Unify which arrived today and is doing perfectly fine with XMP 1&2. So far so good. Ordered an extra Asrock Z690 arriving tomorrow too.


----------



## xarot

I've been pulling my hair with Asus Z690 Extreme and 6000 MT/s RAM. 

G.Skill 6000 CL36 kit (Samsung) I though I got stable by fine-tuning the voltages and memory controller voltage. 6000 % Karhu stable, reboot, bam 7 % and error. Stable consistently at 5600 CL36. Returned the kit.

But the new Kingston 6000 CL40 (Hynix) is basically the same. Even XMP can work on a cold boot, but if I restart the PC then errors after some time start popping up in Karhu.

Is the Asus Z690 Extreme really so garbage with RAM? Running 1505 BIOS. 12900KS SP97 CPU.

Especially it looks like the results are not consistent between boots which sounds like possibly a BIOS issue. Of course the mileage may vary with cold boots, but I can boot just fine each time? Kinda reminds me of the horrors with the Asus Striker II Extreme (790i Ultra)...  Especially troubleshooting this crap takes two boots: one boot where everything is stable and after running that successfully needs a reboot in between and then same stress testing will fail.


----------



## B77W

xarot said:


> I've been pulling my hair with Asus Z690 Extreme and 6000 MT/s RAM.
> 
> G.Skill 6000 CL36 kit (Samsung) I though I got stable by fine-tuning the voltages and memory controller voltage. 6000 % Karhu stable, reboot, bam 7 % and error. Stable consistently at 5600 CL36. Returned the kit.
> 
> But the new Kingston 6000 CL40 (Hynix) is basically the same. Even XMP can work on a cold boot, but if I restart the PC then errors after some time start popping up in Karhu.
> 
> Is the Asus Z690 Extreme really so garbage with RAM? Running 1505 BIOS. 12900KS SP97 CPU.
> 
> Especially it looks like the results are not consistent between boots which sounds like possibly a BIOS issue. Of course the mileage may vary with cold boots, but I can boot just fine each time? Kinda reminds me of the horrors with the Asus Striker II Extreme (790i Ultra)...  Especially troubleshooting this crap takes two boots: one boot where everything is stable and after running that successfully needs a reboot in between and then same stress testing will fail.


All Asus Z690 motherboards are garbage. At least it didn't set my house on fire. That's the only good thing I can mention!


----------



## sblantipodi

ykeyre said:


> I have to retract my previous comment. This bios has still not addressed stability issues even at 4800mhz. I will open a chargeback dispute with my bank. I do not want to waste time on RMA. I just want my damn money back! I will no longer buy Asus motherboards after going through 5 Z690 asus motherboards so far. Shame on Asus!


what is your problem exactly? 
you can't be stable at 4.8GHz with 4 sticks?
what kind of sticks are you using?
Samsung sticks are a complete no go for 4 sticks.


----------



## sblantipodi

xarot said:


> 6000 % Karhu stable, reboot, bam 7 % and error.
> 
> But the new Kingston 6000 CL40 (Hynix) is basically the same. Even XMP can work on a cold boot, but if I restart the PC then errors after some time start popping up in Karhu.
> 
> Is the Asus Z690 Extreme really so garbage with RAM? Running 1505 BIOS. 12900KS SP97 CPU.
> 
> Especially it looks like the results are not consistent between boots which sounds like possibly a BIOS issue. Of course the mileage may vary with cold boots, but I can boot just fine each time? Kinda reminds me of the horrors with the Asus Striker II Extreme (790i Ultra)...  Especially troubleshooting this crap takes two boots: one boot where everything is stable and after running that successfully needs a reboot in between and then same stress testing will fail.


I have the exact same behaviour on my Extreme, you can pass karhu for hours in one boot, reboot and fail in the first 10 minutes.


----------



## B77W

sblantipodi said:


> what is your problem exactly?
> you can't be stable at 4.8GHz with 4 sticks?
> what kind of sticks are you using?
> Samsung sticks are a complete no go for 4 sticks.


Z690 Apex has 2 slots for ram. Cannot post on 4800Mhz regardless of Bios revision.


----------



## trihy

Since it's the Asus bashing time.

Want more?

Leave cpu vcore at stock. Monitor vcore with hwinfo or the soft of your choice.

You will see drops to 0.100-0.300v. All way out of specs. Causing random freezes at idle. And this affects all series 600 Asus boards.

No wonder why you are having different results with the same config. It's a miracle this boards post/boot.


----------



## stahlhart

Not sure why, but 1505 shot my CPU temps through the roof -- probably going to roll back to 1304.


----------



## stahlhart

Ah, so that's how BIOS Flashback works.


----------



## Wasakiqwe

I saw post talking about this ram ,usb and ssd issues. If cpu doesn't touch socket very well it will effect everything in motherboard. So try to remove any washer mod under cpu cooler as he recommended.


----------



## Nizzen

ykeyre said:


> Z690 Apex has 2 slots for ram. Cannot post on 4800Mhz regardless of Bios revision.


Using the same cpu in 5 motherboards?


----------



## xarot

sblantipodi said:


> I have the exact same behaviour on my Extreme, you can pass karhu for hours in one boot, reboot and fail in the first 10 minutes.


Thanks. Good to hear I am not alone. It sounds like Extreme is for very low speed RAM and above 5600 is based on luck? That's my observation with two 6000 MT/s kits. Basically I can't try to OC because I can't get any consistent results, or even that 6000 MT/s stable. I guess my best bet is to only try 5200~5600 MT/s for RAM speed but decrease the timings as low as I can.

I tried the Hynix kit now because it looks like many people had issues with the G.Skill 6000 C36 kit especially on any Asus boards. But still the same...The Extreme is not so Extreme as it's used to be?

Maybe someone will figure this out at some time if there's some voltage between restarts issue causing this, but it might be already too late before new boards start rolling out. I think I read something about disabling C-states fixing some issues, but can't remember where...

For now the Kingston Fury 6000 MT/s C40 kit has been stable between a few reboots/restarts at 5600 CL36.


----------



## sblantipodi

xarot said:


> Thanks. Good to hear I am not alone. It sounds like Extreme is for very low speed RAM and above 5600 is based on luck? That's my observation with two 6000 MT/s kits. Basically I can't try to OC because I can't get any consistent results, or even that 6000 MT/s stable. I guess my best bet is to only try 5200~5600 MT/s for RAM speed but decrease the timings as low as I can.
> 
> I tried the Hynix kit now because it looks like many people had issues with the G.Skill 6000 C36 kit especially on any Asus boards. But still the same...The Extreme is not so Extreme as it's used to be?
> 
> Maybe someone will figure this out at some time if there's some voltage between restarts issue causing this, but it might be already too late before new boards start rolling out. I think I read something about disabling C-states fixing some issues, but can't remember where...
> 
> For now the Kingston Fury 6000 MT/s C40 kit has been stable between a few reboots/restarts at 5600 CL36.


Every one here have the same problem but many doesn't understood it yet 
This happen even on other boards, not only the Extreme. I think that this can be related to the fact that there is an error correction inside the DDR5 sticks making "more difficult" to detect errors.

Never played too much with two sticks since I have four sticks (I need 64GB at least but pointing in using 128GB when available).

Extreme is surely not the best board for RAM OC since it's a 4 sticks board.

5200/5600 on 2 sticks only is not that good, I can achieve 5200 at C32-39-39-102 really stable on 4 sticks.

I think that if you need more MHz you need to play with your IMC voltage, SA and timings.
But it requires a lot of time and it doens't worth the time sincerely. If you really can't achieve anything better, don't loose your mind, it changes a little, enjoy the system if it's stable at lower frequencies.


----------



## sblantipodi

I have a question for the Maximus users and the Extreme and Hero in particular.

My current Extreme/Hero motherboards supports up to 22110 SSD on the PCIe5 slot.

It seems that newer PCIe5 SSDs will be 25110...








It Looks Like PCIe 5.0 NVMe SSDs Require Bigger M.2 Slots


Forget 2280, the 25110 form factor could become the new normal when PCIe 5.0 drives hit the market.




www.pcmag.com





Will my Extreme / Hero motherboards fits SSDs that wide?
I'm not sure that Extreme can handle such a wide ssd since the PCIe5 slot seems to be "small".


----------



## IronAge

xarot said:


> I've been pulling my hair with Asus Z690 Extreme and 6000 MT/s RAM.


Same here with Extreme, m8 bought one early, got it replaced, same  with the replacement.

at that time higher binned DDR5 was really hard to get @ etailers.

he bought memory for like 2.5 Grand from Ebay, first Micron, then Samsung, no Hynix Kits around at that time.

none of the 6000+ Kits do more than 5600 gamestable. (he does not like to memtest, so he plays until BSOD).

he settled with running his 6000 Samsung Kits with XMP timings at 5600. (which worked after some Bios Updates)

when i am going to sell my superfluous DDR5 kits i will lose like one grand alone, selling two barely used Apex, another 400-500$ minus.

thats why i am saying "F*ck u Asus" again. 

knowing that a few chosen people got a Apex that work as all of them should do does not make things better for me.


----------



## TSportM

sblantipodi said:


> I have a question for the Maximus users and the Extreme and Hero in particular.
> 
> My current Extreme/Hero motherboards supports up to 22110 SSD on the PCIe5 slot.
> 
> It seems that newer PCIe5 SSDs will be 25110...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It Looks Like PCIe 5.0 NVMe SSDs Require Bigger M.2 Slots
> 
> 
> Forget 2280, the 25110 form factor could become the new normal when PCIe 5.0 drives hit the market.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.pcmag.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Will my Extreme / Hero motherboards fits SSDs that wide?
> I'm not sure that Extreme can handle such a wide ssd since the PCIe5 slot seems to be "small".


hello iam testing a apacer AS2280f5 and no problems 

cheers


----------



## xarot

sblantipodi said:


> Every one here have the same problem but many doesn't understood it yet
> This happen even on other boards, not only the Extreme. I think that this can be related to the fact that there is an error correction inside the DDR5 sticks making "more difficult" to detect errors.
> 
> Never played too much with two sticks since I have four sticks (I need 64GB at least but pointing in using 128GB when available).
> 
> Extreme is surely not the best board for RAM OC since it's a 4 sticks board.
> 
> 5200/5600 on 2 sticks only is not that good, I can achieve 5200 at C32-39-39-102 really stable on 4 sticks.
> 
> I think that if you need more MHz you need to play with your IMC voltage, SA and timings.
> But it requires a lot of time and it doens't worth the time sincerely. If you really can't achieve anything better, don't loose your mind, it changes a little, enjoy the system if it's stable at lower frequencies.


I've tried to play around quite a bit with MC, SA & memory voltages but none seems to give more or less stability at 6000 MT/s. Especially with MC voltage it feels like if you set it even a little too high it also brings instability in some cases.


----------



## sblantipodi

TSportM said:


> hello iam testing a apacer AS2280f5 and no problems
> 
> cheers


On what board? 
Is the apacer a 25110 drive?


----------



## TSportM

IronAge said:


> Same here with Extreme, m8 bought one early, got it replaced, same  with the replacement.
> 
> at that time higher binned DDR5 was really hard to get @ etailers.
> 
> he bought memory for like 2.5 Grand from Ebay, first Micron, then Samsung, no Hynix Kits around at that time.
> 
> none of the 6000+ Kits do more than 5600 gamestable. (he does not like to memtest, so he plays until BSOD).
> 
> he settled with running his 6000 Samsung Kits with XMP timings at 5600. (which worked after some Bios Updates)
> 
> when i am going to sell my superfluous DDR5 kits i will lose like one grand alone, selling two barely used Apex, another 400-500$ minus.
> 
> thats why i am saying "F*ck u Asus" again.
> 
> knowing that a few chosen people got a Apex that work as all of them should do does not make things better for me.



Hello,

On my extreme i was having problems, but bios 1505 and with the suggesting from Igor (igorslab) on the TG contact frame iam stable on 6000 on tighter timmings 

tightning just like the video:
video

igorslab

Problems on the memory went way... and my cpu waterblock now does full contact and ever better temps, 
before (tight like Der8aur show on his video)









to this (igorslab)









thing is on the stock ILM system had a few stabilty issues (worse temps) but did not test with bios 1505 on stock ILM system.

my board is from december 2021

cheers


----------



## TSportM

sblantipodi said:


> On what board?
> Is the apacer a 25110 drive?


same as you (i think) Maximus extreme

cheers


----------



## sblantipodi

TSportM said:


> same as you (i think) Maximus extreme
> 
> cheers


Thank you but is apacer a 25110 drive?


----------



## TSportM

sblantipodi said:


> Thank you but is apacer a 25110 drive?


its tinny bit wider but it fits,

You can see the zadak its same PCB from what iam aware


----------



## B77W

Nizzen said:


> Using the same cpu in 5 motherboards?


No. I have a whole tray of 12th gen cpus from i5 to i9. Tried 14 of them so far. Same instability. But hey, At least I got SP99 12900KS.


----------



## B77W

trihy said:


> Since it's the Asus bashing time.
> 
> Want more?
> 
> Leave cpu vcore at stock. Monitor vcore with hwinfo or the soft of your choice.
> 
> You will see drops to 0.100-0.300v. All way out of specs. Causing random freezes at idle. And this affects all series 600 Asus boards.
> 
> No wonder why you are having different results with the same config. It's a miracle this boards post/boot.


 Currently testing Z690 Unify and Unify-X. Running XMP with zero errors. No more stutters or random freezes at idle. MSI Z690 mobos are booting consistently stable too, unlike Asus.
Can you imagine a computer that just works of the box with XMP?No tinkering with voltages or anything. Take note Asus!

I will report back if the results change.


----------



## sblantipodi

ykeyre said:


> No. I have a whole tray of 12th gen cpus from i5 to i9. Tried 14 of them so far. Same instability. But hey, At least I got SP99 12900KS.


If you know me you know how much I complain about not beeing able to stabilize my system after months, but with all that mobos, all that cpus and all that RAM kits it means only one thing.
you are doing something wrong, try to understand what 

don't ignore the RGB software, they causes a lot of problems,





I'm still experiencing a freeze/hang when using Corsair iCue along with my Asus Extreme.
Corsair says that the coulprit is the asus boards, if I enable SPD Write Protection in BIOS the problem vanish, 
but in this way I am not able to control the RGB on my RAM.


----------



## B77W

sblantipodi said:


> If you know me you know how much I complain about not beeing able to stabilize my system after months, but with all that mobos, all that cpus and all that RAM kits it means only one thing.
> you are doing something wrong, try to understand what


Please educate me on what I might be doing wrong. Like Apple, Asus will say "you are not holding it the right way" with the iPhone 4 antenna debacle.🤣😂


----------



## sblantipodi

ykeyre said:


> Please educate me on what I might be doing wrong. Like Apple, Asus will say "you are not holding it the right way" with the iPhone 4 antenna debacle.🤣😂


I edited the previous post, please uninstall all the RGB software you are running and retry.


----------



## B77W

sblantipodi said:


> If you know me you know how much I complain about not beeing able to stabilize my system after months, but with all that mobos, all that cpus and all that RAM kits it means only one thing.
> you are doing something wrong, try to understand what
> 
> don't ignore the RGB software, they causes a lot of problems,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm still experiencing a freeze/hang when using Corsair iCue along with my Asus Extreme.
> Corsair says that the coulprit is the asus boards, if I enable SPD Write Protection in BIOS the problem vanish,
> but in this way I am not able to control the RGB on my RAM.


I used Noctua NH-D15 with no RGB. Got 2 testbeds with them and fresh windows install. Still same instability.


----------



## diyw

Updated from 1304 to 1505 on my Z690-E and I am now unstable with all defaults (system freezes shortly after Windows loads). EZ flash utility will not let me flash back to any version prior to 1505. I have tried reformatting 2 USB drives as FAT32 and only put 1304 or 1403 on them to use the flashback tool and it fails immediately. Are we locked into 1505 now? I thought the flashback tool was supposed to allow us to go back to any version.

Edit: When I try to use the EZ flash utility in the BIOS it tells me none of my files are "proper BIOS" files. I used the renamer tool for all of them.
Edit 2: Was able to flashback to 1304 with a different USB flash drive. Not sure what the difference was, they both were FAT32, they both only had 1 partition. I'm stable again.


----------



## TSportM

sblantipodi said:


> If you know me you know how much I complain about not beeing able to stabilize my system after months, but with all that mobos, all that cpus and all that RAM kits it means only one thing.
> you are doing something wrong, try to understand what
> 
> don't ignore the RGB software, they causes a lot of problems,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm still experiencing a freeze/hang when using Corsair iCue along with my Asus Extreme.
> Corsair says that the coulprit is the asus boards, if I enable SPD Write Protection in BIOS the problem vanish,
> but in this way I am not able to control the RGB on my RAM.


i have that patriot crap, Universal Holtek RGB DRAM, should i unnistall ?, only use aura and icue for the ram am fan control, dont have any problems with SPD write protection on the rams

cheers


----------



## Nizzen

ykeyre said:


> Currently testing Z690 Unify and Unify-X. Running XMP with zero errors. No more stutters or random freezes at idle. MSI Z690 mobos are booting consistently stable too, unlike Asus.
> Can you imagine a computer that just works of the box with XMP?No tinkering with voltages or anything. Take note Asus!
> 
> I will report back if the results change.


I don't know what XMP is, but please post 7000+ memory OC


----------



## sblantipodi

TSportM said:


> i have that patriot crap, Universal Holtek RGB DRAM, should i unnistall ?, only use aura and icue for the ram am fan control, dont have any problems with SPD write protection on the rams
> 
> cheers


You have problem with RAM so SPD protection can be one of the culprit on Asus boards.
Just uninstall the RGB trash, enable SPD write protection and recheck.

If you are not able to achieve such a small frequency on two sticks with all that replacements it must be something wrong in "your routine". 
You "only needs" to find what is wrong in your setup.


----------



## TSportM

sblantipodi said:


> You have problem with RAM so SPD protection can be one of the culprit on Asus boards.
> Just uninstall the RGB trash, enable SPD write protection and recheck.
> 
> If you are not able to achieve such a small frequency on two sticks with all that replacements it must be something wrong in "your routine".
> You "only needs" to find what is wrong in your setup.


You must be talking to the other user….

i dont have any problems, just dont like crap that i dont use and this case that can cause a issue.

my issue on ram oc got fixed when reajusting the Thermal grizzly frame following igorslab tips.

another thing on the ssd you asked you Will have no problems on extreme With this type of 5.0 ssd at least if they ate like zadak and apacer.

cheers


----------



## tubs2x4

how many have just simply removed the cpu clamp and used cooler to keep cpu in place? that should get rid of all bending or . i mean if you dont take your cpu out or cooler off constantly i cant see that being a problem or is it?


----------



## trihy

ykeyre said:


> Currently testing Z690 Unify and Unify-X. Running XMP with zero errors. No more stutters or random freezes at idle. MSI Z690 mobos are booting consistently stable too, unlike Asus.
> Can you imagine a computer that just works of the box with XMP?No tinkering with voltages or anything. Take note Asus!
> 
> I will report back if the results change.


Too much stability for us.

We are living the Asus tuf life. He boot when he wants. Too much pc for you today? No problem, random freeze.

Like to rock the neiborghood with your PC music connected to big speakers? Here you have an idle random freeze with a beeeeeeeeee sound. Now your neighbors know you are an Asus guy.


----------



## lolhaxz

trihy said:


> Since it's the Asus bashing time.
> 
> Want more?
> 
> Leave cpu vcore at stock. Monitor vcore with hwinfo or the soft of your choice.
> 
> You will see drops to 0.100-0.300v. All way out of specs. Causing random freezes at idle. And this affects all series 600 Asus boards.
> 
> No wonder why you are having different results with the same config. It's a miracle this boards post/boot.


I note this happening on Z690-A Strix D4 (low idle voltage, ie 0.1-0.3v)

Symptom is that PC will freeze (ie, no BSOD, no reboot) randomly - especially if it's been idling for some time... literally from original bios right through to latest.

Doesn't seem to matter what I change with respect to power manage, C-States etc.. it still does it... even setting windows to performance power profile.

On my DDR5 Extreme the CPU idle voltage never goes below 0.719v or there abouts (whatever the V/F table says i guess) and doesn't suffer this issue.

Kind of impressive how incompetent their bios engineers are.


----------



## Ichirou

I tested both the ASUS Strix and the MSI Edge, and stuck with the Edge. Just my two cents


----------



## TSportM

tubs2x4 said:


> how many have just simply removed the cpu clamp and used cooler to keep cpu in place? that should get rid of all bending or . i mean if you dont take your cpu out or cooler off constantly i cant see that being a problem or is it?


Yes that is a solution +\ -, but bare in mind when tou remove the cooler the cpu is gona be attached to the cooler, overall its more likely to damage the pins on the board with installation

cheers


----------



## satinghostrider

Just setup a KS for a customer.

Was pleasantly shocked with the recent KS I got.
Realised both sets I have is Vietnam CPUs.
SP97 (BIOS : Official 1505)
P-Core : 106
E-Core : 82

Hard Lesson : Staff did washer mod for 2022 Glacial. Memory XMP kept boot cycling.
Removed the washer and all back to normal.


----------



## Tibby67

satinghostrider said:


> View attachment 2563120
> 
> Just setup a KS for a customer.
> 
> Was pleasantly shocked with the recent KS I got.
> Realised both sets I have is Vietnam CPUs.
> SP97 (BIOS : Official 1505)
> P-Core : 106
> E-Core : 82
> 
> Hard Lesson : Staff did washer mod for 2022 Glacial. Memory XMP kept boot cycling.
> Removed the washer and all back to normal.


Yeah just checked mine.. P-Core: 109 
E-Core: 88


----------



## satinghostrider

Tibby67 said:


> Yeah just checked mine.. P-Core: 109
> E-Core: 88


Congratulations! Highest I've seen thus far. Vietnam?


----------



## Tibby67

satinghostrider said:


> Congratulations! Highest I've seen thus far. Vietnam?


Australia....


----------



## satinghostrider

Tibby67 said:


> Australia....


As in made in china or made in Vietnam?


----------



## Alex_Mok

Maybe someone can say me where this may be problem?

My Build:

*Intel i9-12900k (OEM)
Arctic Liquid Freezer II 360 RGB (with LGA1700 brackets) 
Noctua NT-H2 
Asus Strix 3080 Ti 12GB 
ASUS ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME 
SSD Samsung 980 Pro 
DDR5 2x16 GB Corsair Dominator Platinum 6200Mhz (36-39-39-76) 
Corsair HX1200 (80+ Platinum 1200W)
Windows 11 Pro*

When i test my PC:

*Processor work in stock (not overclocked)
My DDR5 work on XMP profile 6200 mhz*

But i have...

*OCCT error:*
_(In OCCT when I test, I usually choose: data set "Large", Mode "Normal", load "Variable", Instructions "SSE")_



























*TestMem5 error:*








*AIDA64 benchmark:*








But in daily work and games (CoD Warzone, Apex Legends, PUBG, CSGO) for a month of using the PC, I did not see any problems. I have never had a BSOD \ freezes etc...

On the official site ASUS my motherboard supported QVL list my model DDR5:








Problem with CPU \ Motherboard \ or DDR5?


----------



## B77W

Alex_Mok said:


> Maybe someone can say me where this may be problem?


Stop buying Asus, that fixed my problem! I have Z690 Unify and Unify-X, all of them working out of the box with XMP working. OC to 6600 CL40 also working.


----------



## sblantipodi

B77W said:


> Stop buying Asus, that fixed my problem! I have Z690 Unify and Unify-X, all of them working out of the box with XMP working. OC to 6600 CL40 also working.











Leaving Asus for MSI after 22 years.


Hi all, I buy Asus boards since the Asus CUSL2 in the 2000 (Pentium III mobo). Every time I buy an Asus board there are some issues that are never solved and that are clearly related to design issues. Asus simply ignore these issues and pretends nothing has happened. I'm not talking about OC...




www.overclock.net


----------



## trihy

lolhaxz said:


> I note this happening on Z690-A Strix D4 (low idle voltage, ie 0.1-0.3v)
> 
> Symptom is that PC will freeze (ie, no BSOD, no reboot) randomly - especially if it's been idling for some time... literally from original bios right through to latest.
> 
> Doesn't seem to matter what I change with respect to power manage, C-States etc.. it still does it... even setting windows to performance power profile.
> 
> On my DDR5 Extreme the CPU idle voltage never goes below 0.719v or there abouts (whatever the V/F table says i guess) and doesn't suffer this issue.
> 
> Kind of impressive how incompetent their bios engineers are.


I hope it's just bios. If they made something wrong at hw level, it will be the worst series ever.

And it's almost impossible they still didn't noticed this.

Same here, more time at idle, more chances of freeze. Screen freeze without bsod is related to cpu. And with those voltage drops, no wonder this is happening.

Let's see if it gets fixed or not.


----------



## bscool

If you are on Strix d4 and KS try out the latest bios 1504.

Best for mem OC I have seen yet(edit I mean with KS on my MB and mem setup). Just got some ILM replacement frames to test and put one on my Strix d4 and can boot and bench 4266c15-15-15.

Didnt touch anything other than v dim. Left sa/vddq on auto. Still testing but I am impressed so far with this bios.

I was concerned about the frame effecting memory OC but so far so good.

CPU is at defaults.


----------



## satinghostrider

bscool said:


> If you are on Strix d4 and KS try out the latest bios 1504.
> 
> Best for mem OC I have seen yet. Just got some ILM replacement frames to test and put one on my Strix d4 and can boot and bench 4266c15-15-15.
> 
> Didnt touch anything other than v dim. Left sa/vddq on auto. Still testing but I am impressed so far with this bios.
> 
> I was concerned about the frame effecting memory OC but so far so good.
> 
> CPU is at defaults.


Did you notice any temp difference with your CPU? Curious about this...
And how much did you tighten the frame down?


----------



## bscool

satinghostrider said:


> Did you notice any temp difference with your CPU? Curious about this...
> And how much did you tighten the frame down?


I didnt bother to test for temps as in the past I tested with washer method and saw no difference.

I was mainly doing it so I can use less liquid metal as I could see a dip/concave in the IHS. Plus doing it more to play, never can waste enough money on this stuff 

I have always used LM on the IHS and CPU block. Probably makes only a small difference but the thing I like is I never have to clean and repaste. It always stays "wet" and I just add a drop or two when I switch coolers or cpus.


----------



## bscool

satinghostrider said:


> Did you notice any temp difference with your CPU? Curious about this...
> And how much did you tighten the frame down?


Sorry fogot to reply about how much I tightened. I just got each one just barely/finger tight.

Just gripping the long straight part of the tool between thumb and forefinger. Tightening in an x pattern.

Gonna do Apex next and see how ddr5 mem OC is with a frame.


----------



## trihy

The frames use this kind of screws with springs?









Don't think you can have long term stability without springs.


----------



## TSportM

trihy said:


> The frames use this kind of screws with springs?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Don't think you can have long term stability without springs.


on TG frame you use the stock screws, think on thermalright is the same

(if that is what you talking)

cheers


----------



## Nawak

Salut à tous, j'ai cru lire ici qu'il était déconseillé d'utiliser 4 dimm Samsung (j'ai 4 Gskill 16Go en 6000 cl36).
Pouvez-vous me dire plus?
Je vois qu'avec le dernier bios je peux enfin booter sur XMP 1 en 2 dimm, actuellement je teste pour voir la stabilité.
Je vais chez RMA 2 sticks qui ont échoué ce week-end, d'où ma question.
Mon MB est un héros et j'attends le cadre de contact CPU.

@sblantipodi


----------



## Ichirou

Nawak said:


> Hi all, I thought I read here that it was not recommended to use 4 Samsung dimm (I have 4 Gskill 16Gb in 6000 cl36).
> Can you tell me more?
> I see that with the latest bios I can finally boot on XMP 1 in 2 dimm, currently I am testing to see the stability.
> I'm going to RMA 2 sticks that failed this weekend, hence my question.
> My MB is an hero and I'm waiting CPU contact frame.


Yes; pretty much every single motherboard now is Daisy Chain, so four DIMMs have the absolute worst compatibility.
If you need very high capacity, use 2x32 GB instead.

The only exception may be with 4x16 GB Micron B-die on DDR4 Gear 1. That would actually be faster than DDR5 for very high capacity.


----------



## Nawak

Ichirou said:


> Yes; pretty much every single motherboard now is Daisy Chain, so four DIMMs have the absolute worst compatibility.
> 
> If you need very high capacity, use 2x32 GB instead.
> 
> The only exception may be with 4x16 GB Micron B-die on DDR4 Gear 1. That would actually be faster than DDR5 for very high capacity.


Until then I was running with a cl36 and 5400Mhz, not necessarily great but at least it worked (bios 1003).
Since two sticks failed, I upgraded to 1505.
Unfortunately I've had the configuration since it came out, and I've waited a long time to get the ram, I won't be able to go back.
I will live with it


----------



## FreeSpeechIsKnowledge

I have a good question after watching this forum for a while now and having been silent collecting my thoughts if you will. Why are my Intel MLC times off compared to others even though I'm stable as can be considering I have an Apex nightmare motherboard?

Here are my results / settings for more of an in-depth descript.

12900k Water-cooled with EK's newest 1700 series cooler SP 97 Score
3090 MSI Suprim-X flashed with the 500 watt kingpin bios Watercooled all same loop
4 Radiators that consist of 3 480 EK rads one is XE and 2 PE and 1 360 EK PE Rad
EK Dual pump reservoir and new EK cooling liquid, system freshly flushed and cleaned
Apex
T-Force 6400 16GB x 2 kit
1600 watt AX1600i PSU
Big Corsair glass full size case, 11 fans total inside case including the two memory fans
2 M2 drives 1TB for Windows 11 and 2TB for my games

Temps voltages and BIOS settings are as follows " see attached "

Edit: Added memory timings as well


----------



## affxct

With 0061 for some reason I couldn't adjust SA or VDD2 as it'd result in instant unusability. On 0086 it's feeling a lot better. Will hopefully be able to stabilize something on here.


----------



## satinghostrider

Thermalright Frame + 12900KS on Extreme Z690 Glacial (2022 Production).


----------



## bscool

Anyone on Apex


affxct said:


> With 0061 for some reason I couldn't adjust SA or VDD2 as it'd result in instant unusability. On 0086 it's feeling a lot better. Will hopefully be able to stabilize something on here.


I had issue with modded 0061 on Apex. I thought it was the ILM frame I put on. Switched to bios 1304 and can pass Karhu 7000c30 like always.

Maybe frame plays a little role because I thought I had ran Karthu on 0061 before but maybe that was before switching u codes. too many bioses to remember


----------



## affxct

bscool said:


> Anyone on Apex
> 
> I had issue with modded 0061 on Apex. I thought it was the ILM frame I put on. Switched to bios 1304 and can pass Karhu 7000c30 like always.
> 
> Maybe frame plays a little role I could have thought I had ran Karthu on 0061 before but maybe that was before switching u codes. too many bioses to remember


The ILM frame might've been it tbh. What's the thing with ucodes though? Could 18 actually affect RAM OCing?


----------



## bscool

affxct said:


> The ILM frame might've been it tbh. What's the thing with ucodes though? Could 18 actually affect RAM OCing?


If it is the frame how come switching to 1304 on other bios is stable?

I have modded 1304 with u code 15 and unmodded with 17/18 and both pass Karhu now with the frame.

I will have to test unmodded 0061 and see if it is stable for me.


----------



## bscool

The u code thing is kind of confusing because mmtools will show 17 and once flashed show 18 in bios or Aida/Hwifo. No idea how that works.


----------



## affxct

bscool said:


> If it is the frame how come switching to 1304 on other bios is stable?
> 
> I have modded 1304 with u code 15 and unmodded with 17/18 and both pass Karhu now with the frame.
> 
> I will have to test unmodded 0061 and see if it is stable for me.


Mmmm that is true. Kinda interesting. But by this point 0061 is unusable IMO. That's just my experience though. Can't pass a single one of the y-cruncher RAM tests. Literally bashed my head against a wall for like 6 hours and I couldn't even find the correct SA for my XMP. With that said, 1304 wasn't much better for me.


----------



## affxct

bscool said:


> The u code thing is kind of confusing because mmtools will show 17 and once flashed show 18 in bios or Aida/Hwifo. No idea how that works.


I actually got confused by that when I modded my own 0086. Eventually I realised Rev 17 was 0x18 and 1A was for SLI, after comparing some pre-modded files to a few from the Asus site.


----------



## satinghostrider

bscool said:


> If it is the frame how come switching to 1304 on other bios is stable?
> 
> I have modded 1304 with u code 15 and unmodded with 17/18 and both pass Karhu now with the frame.
> 
> I will have to test unmodded 0061 and see if it is stable for me.


I do not think if you are stable with other bioses but unstable with 0061 means it has anything to do with the frame.
Fact is some microcodes requires re-tuning of the voltages to get it stable again. And some combos of microcodes with bios versions may not work well given that modded bios are using older microcodes to work with AVX-512. I think your frame is fine and your tightening of the frame is optimal. When it is too tight, running XMP at anything higher than 4800Mhz will constantly fail during training memory. I feel if you do not have this issues, then it is bios related. Not that I XMP, but you can XMP to test and check if your memory can train because from my experience, mounting pressure can cause even XMP to fail during training and it will just go back into the BIOS and be stuck at 4000Mhz.


----------



## bscool

satinghostrider said:


> I do not think if you are stable with other bioses but unstable with 0061 means it has anything to do with the frame.
> Fact is some microcodes requires re-tuning of the voltages to get it stable again. And some combos of microcodes with bios versions may not work well given that modded bios are using older microcodes to work with AVX-512. I think your frame is fine and your tightening of the frame is optimal. When it is too tight, running XMP at anything higher than 5200Mhz will constantly fail during training memory. I feel if you do not have this issues, then it is bios related. Not that I XMP, but you can XMP to test and check if your memory can train because from my experience, mounting pressure can cause even XMP to fail during training and it will just go back into the BIOS and be stuck at 4000Mhz.


Yeah it is not the frame. I just tested 0061 unmodded and it ran karhu for 10 min plus no issues. 

Now I loaded up 0061 with u code 15 and it errors within 5 min or less so changing the u code messes with it.

I have changed u code on most of the older bios and never had an issue. 

Biod 0061 uses ucode 1f which is different so that may be part of it. Other bioses used 17/18 u code from what I remember.


----------



## affxct

bscool said:


> Yeah it is not the frame. I just tested 0061 unmodded and it ran karhu for 10 min plus no issues.
> 
> Now I loaded up 0061 with u code 15 and it errors within 5 min or less so changing the u code messes with it.
> 
> I have changed u code on most of the older bios and never had an issue.
> 
> Biod 0061 uses ucode 1f which is different so that may be part of it. Other bioses used 17/18 u code from what I remember.


I just checked a version of 0061 and it uses 17? I'm quite confused XD.


----------



## bscool

affxct said:


> I just checked a version of 0061 and it uses 17? I'm quite confused XD.


They show up different in mmtools vs bios/hwinfo. It is confusing. 

So i dont know. But here is both unmoded in mmtools and once flashed.

Good catch i didnt even notice that.


----------



## affxct

bscool said:


> They show up different in mmtools vs bios/hwinfo. It is confusing.
> 
> So i dont know. But here is both unmoded in mmtools and once flashed.
> 
> Good catch i didnt even notice that.


Flashing normal 0061 now. Wondering what it'll bring.


----------



## sugi0lover

affxct said:


> Flashing normal 0061 now. Wondering what it'll bring.


I used 0061 and it requires 0.015v higher vdd for my stable 7200 cl30 setup.


----------



## bscool

sugi0lover said:


> I used 0061 and it requires 0.015v higher vdd for my stable 7200 cl30 setup.


Is that with u code 15 or unmodded?


----------



## sugi0lover

bscool said:


> Is that with u code 15 or unmodded?


Both 😊


----------



## SuperMumrik

From my initial testing I can't see anything fundamentally wrong with 0061u15. SA voltage adjustment does work and y-cruncher did not fail and ram test still running =)


----------



## satinghostrider

SuperMumrik said:


> View attachment 2563296
> 
> From my initial testing I can't see anything fundamentally wrong with 0061u15. SA voltage adjustment does work and y-cruncher did not fail and ram test still running =)


If you're tuned on 0061u15 with your kit, then suspect that those having issues will need to rework their voltages from other bios versions.


----------



## bscool

satinghostrider said:


> If you're tuned on 0061u15 with your kit, then suspect that those having issues will need to rework their voltages from other bios versions.


I am still wondering if for me it isnt related to the frame. I am seeing weird issues I never before. Still not sure what the deal is but that is the only thing I have changed.

Removed and replace block and tested different cpus. About ready to just take it off. Doesnt seem worth it for me.

I mean it is stable as far as booting and benching it is just Karhu giving errors when it wouldnt before.

Do you have your system up and going with the frame?

I guess if I take the frame off and all is well I know that was the cause.

Edit I think some of the reason I am having issues on my Apex is I am using an Arctic block and the way it is designed the block cant be tightened more like you can on custom loop and block which I am using on my z690 Strix d4 setup with frame. No issues on that with the frame and mem OC.


----------



## SuperMumrik

satinghostrider said:


> If you're tuned on 0061u15 with your kit, then suspect that those having issues will need to rework their voltages from other bios versions.


I just loaded an old profile. However, I have the habit of running some overhead on my voltages for good measures.


----------



## satinghostrider

bscool said:


> I am still wondering if for me it isnt related to the frame. I am seeing weird issues I never before. Still not sure what the deal is but that is the only thing I have changed.
> 
> Removed and replace block and tested different cpus. About ready to just take it off. Doesnt seem worth it for me.
> 
> I mean it is stable as far as booting and benching it is just Karhu giving errors when it wouldnt before.
> 
> Do you have your system up and going with the frame?
> 
> I guess if I take the frame off and all is well I know that was the cause.


I'd try to use a proven bios for memory clocking. I'm on 9902 but mine is a 12900k and have no issues running 6800c32.

The glacial setup is not up yet for through testing but with the frame I can xmp the 6400c32 kit and memory training is quick. I was constantly not able to xmp anything past 4800 with the 1mm washer mod. With the frame, I could so I know it's something related to mounting pressure.

Why don't you try another bios and retune your voltages and see if that works? I'd use a non-modded bios to isolate any issues first. And do a clean power reset. Remove power plug, press clr CMOS 30s, wait for 5 mins then power it back on. Then re-input all your previous memory settings. If it still fails try tuning the voltages to see if you can pass. That's all I can think of. Don't try loading the old CMO profile. Just do it manually again and adjust voltages if necessary.


----------



## SuperMumrik

sugi0lover said:


> I used 0061 and it requires 0.015v higher vdd for my stable 7200 cl30 setup.


This! Upon further "inspection" it seems like this bios need higher vdd for some reason as stated by @sugi0lover. Kahru failed within 15min when I removed the overhead voltage I use (about 10-15mV give or take)

Edit: My personal favourite is the 1304u15


----------



## FreeSpeechIsKnowledge

satinghostrider said:


> I'd try to use a proven bios for memory clocking. I'm on 9902 but mine is a 12900k and have no issues running 6800c32.
> 
> The glacial setup is not up yet for through testing but with the frame I can xmp the 6400c32 kit and memory training is quick. I was constantly not able to xmp anything past 4800 with the 1mm washer mod. With the frame, I could so I know it's something related to mounting pressure.
> 
> Why don't you try another bios and retune your voltages and see if that works? I'd use a non-modded bios to isolate any issues first. And do a clean power reset. Remove power plug, press clr CMOS 30s, wait for 5 mins then power it back on. Then re-input all your previous memory settings. If it still fails try tuning the voltages to see if you can pass. That's all I can think of. Don't try loading the old CMO profile. Just do it manually again and adjust voltages if necessary.



What do your Intel mlc times look like? I'm trying to figure out why mine seem to be slower then others on here who post there's. I'm karhu 10k+ stable.


----------



## satinghostrider

FreeSpeechIsKnowledge said:


> What do your Intel mlc times look like? I'm trying to figure out why mine seem to be slower then others on here who post there's. I'm karhu 10k+ stable.


I didn't really use that but AIDA64 showed as 49.7ns for latency.


----------



## grifers

Why there are no new bios versions for the TUF Gaming z690 D4 Non-Wifi, this board is completely neglected by ASUS, very bad in this regard. The WIFI version has the 1504 BIOS as the most recent and all drivers are updated on the ASUS WEB, while the NON-Wifi version has a BIOS from april and drivers from last year. Why?, there is only 20 euros difference from one to the other, they belong to the same range.


----------



## trihy

Still many boards didnt receive any 15xx bios.

You can copy the actual link for the 14xx bios and replace the with 1501, 1502, you may get lucky if the bios is available but they didnt update the web.


----------



## trihy

By looking at the designs, I tend to think the washer mod (not 1mm but something like 0.8) could be more stable for long term use than a frame. Anyone made some test about it?


----------



## s1rrah

Wow. Just spent a good while reading through this thread. Maybe I've just been lucky or the problems I've read about have yet to appear but I've built/tested a few (lost count lol) 12th gen rigs in the past couple months, a 12900K Z690 TUF D4 using DDR4000CL16, a 12900K Z690-A Gaming D4 using DDR4-4000CL16 and both a 12700KF and 12900K using a Z690-E Strix with DDR5-6000CL36; all systems updated to whatever bios it is that came before the one that said "Improvements for 12900KS" since I wasn't using a KS chip in any of them. Every one of them has booted first time around and tested fine with XMP settings and super basic overclocks. 

I used either a Corsair H150i or H115i for each and have had generally fine temps across all test configs. One 12700K build that uses a H150i is still using the 1200 Corsair stand offs but I used four of the washers that ship with the H150i to shorten the thread length of the 1200 stand offs a bit; hopefully, I'll get the proper 1700 standoffs in soon as I'd prefer to use those. 

Currently, I have my personal 12700K/Z690-E Strix rig using the proper 1700 stand offs with a H115i XT PRO and another 12700K/Z690 TUF D4 rig using a H150i Capellix Pro and the old 1200 standoffs but with washers to shorten the thread length at top. The temps on both are fine but the one with the 1700 stand offs and H115i is a good -5 degree cooler at load than is the H150i cooled chip. Not sure which of the two 12700KF's is best and don't really care as a basic OC is fine all pcores at 5100 and all ecores at 4000.

Also have a 12900K but decided it's simply not worth it for me and the 12700KF is way more ideal considering my needs. But I've had no issues with any of the Asus boards so far, having tested 4 different boards along the way...


----------



## affxct

Ok guys, something really really weird happened. I flashed BIOS 0090 on my Apex's 2nd BIOS chip. I did a dumb run of stock/XMP just to see if I could maybe get it working and somehow I managed to get it Linpack (relatively) stable. I decided to flash 0090 onto my primary chip and run identical settings.

I do the test again and find it error on the first calculation. So then you say that surely it was just not stable. I flip to my secondary chip and it's passing again without issue. Before you say I messed up a setting, I took pictures with my phone to make sure I matched the BIOSs setting for setting. Not sure what to think XD. 

Thoughts?

Update:
Drained power and cleared CMOS for around 15 seconds after first switching back to the primary chip. It seems to be behaving correctly now. Passing the same test for the third time now. Looks like this is the BIOS revision my board likes. Funnily enough it's the revision that the dude who shipped my board back to Amazon last used.


----------



## FreeSpeechIsKnowledge

affxct said:


> Ok guys, something really really weird happened. I flashed BIOS 0090 on my Apex's 2nd BIOS chip. I did a dumb run of stock/XMP just to see if I could maybe get it working and somehow I managed to get it Linpack (relatively) stable. I decided to flash 0090 onto my primary chip and run identical settings.
> 
> I do the test again and find it error on the first calculation. So then you say that surely it was just not stable. I flip to my secondary chip and it's passing again without issue. Before you say I messed up a setting, I took pictures with my phone to make sure I matched the BIOSs setting for setting. Not sure what to think XD.
> 
> Thoughts?



I'm not sure. Sounds very odd. I see you have the Apex. Perhaps there's something wrong with your motherboard I see a lot, of issues with these motherboards on here and on the internet all over the place.. Is odd behavior. 

Can you run karhu memory test to at least 9k?


----------



## affxct

FreeSpeechIsKnowledge said:


> I'm not sure. Sounds very odd. I see you have the Apex. Perhaps there's something wrong with your motherboard I see a lot, of issues with these motherboards on here and on the internet all over the place.. Is odd behavior.
> 
> Can you run karhu memory test to at least 9k?


It was my bad. I didn't clear the CMOS while on the primary before flashing the new BIOS. Funnily enough, all I had to do was drain, clear, reload the exact same settings, and upon boot it was finally testing exactly as it did on the secondary BIOS chip (as it should have). Relieved to finally have found a BIOS revision that does my XMP at auto as it should be stable enough to go for 6666 CR1 now.


----------



## FreeSpeechIsKnowledge

affxct said:


> It was my bad. I didn't clear the CMOS while on the primary before flashing the new BIOS. Funnily enough, all I had to do was drain, clear, reload the exact same settings, and upon boot it was finally testing exactly as it did on the secondary BIOS chip (as it should have). Relieved to finally have found a BIOS revision that does my XMP at auto as it should be stable enough to go for 6666 CR1 now.


Yeah it's odd that this motherboard needs to have that done once instability is present from a bad memory setting for instance as well. 

I have a weird latency issue I've noticed that I asked about some pages back and no one seems to have an explanation for that issue. I still need to dig into it more but, to busy with work right now to investigate more yet.

I can run karhu to 10k and memtest completes fine as well on extreme. Temperatures are under control, voltages etc. I posted about it three or four pages back..

Well, glad you figured it out mate 👍


----------



## affxct

FreeSpeechIsKnowledge said:


> Yeah it's odd that this motherboard needs to have that done once instability is present from a bad memory setting for instance as well.
> 
> I have a weird latency issue I've noticed that I asked about some pages back and no one seems to have an explanation for that issue. I still need to dig into it more but, to busy with work right now to investigate more yet.
> 
> I can run karhu to 10k and memtest completes fine as well on extreme. Temperatures are under control, voltages etc. I posted about it three or four pages back..
> 
> Well, glad you figured it out mate 👍


When you say weird latency issue? Funnily enough I've seen that occur before, but on my friend's Z690 Strix-A with D4.


----------



## FreeSpeechIsKnowledge

affxct said:


> When you say weird latency issue? Funnily enough I've seen that occur before, but on my friend's Z690 Strix-A with D4.



It's weird. Everything's fine, games run great all night when I run them after, booting up. If I run Intel latency checker you can see the latencies are double if not more then that, what they should be. 

Fresh windows install as well. Checked file system etc. If I let it sit there all day and fire up benchmate to run y cruncher it will take a few minutes to ready up and runs like 20 seconds longer then it does at a fresh boot.

If I open battlenet to play warzone after letting it sit there as well battlenet says it fell asleep and takes forever to load up. Same with discord etc. Reboot and everything application wise minus my latency in Intel's app, is perfect again.


----------



## affxct

FreeSpeechIsKnowledge said:


> It's weird. Everything's fine, games run great all night when I run them after, booting up. If I run Intel latency checker you can see the latencies are double if not more then that, what they should be.
> 
> Fresh windows install as well. Checked file system etc. If I let it sit there all day and fire up benchmate to run y cruncher it will take a few minutes to ready up and runs like 20 seconds longer then it does at a fresh boot.
> 
> If I open battlenet to play warzone after letting it sit there as well battlenet says it fell asleep and takes forever to load up. Same with discord etc. Reboot and everything application wise minus my latency in Intel's app, is perfect again.


Okay woah. I thought you were about to say you had 5-10ns higher in Aida than what your OC should achieve. Double in MLC and the latency after letting your setup idle; there definitely has to be something weird happening to your memory subsystem. Out of curiosity, if you run Aida/MLC, do your L1-L3 caches also get affected in the same way that your DRAM does?


----------



## 7empe

affxct said:


> It was my bad. I didn't clear the CMOS while on the primary before flashing the new BIOS. Funnily enough, all I had to do was drain, clear, reload the exact same settings, and upon boot it was finally testing exactly as it did on the secondary BIOS chip (as it should have). Relieved to finally have found a BIOS revision that does my XMP at auto as it should be stable enough to go for 6666 CR1 now.


Not necessarly true, especially regarding y-cruncher/Linpack stability. I believe issue will re-appear after you do the full memory retraining. Got the same. Stable for days until I performed a clean boot with retraining.


----------



## TSportM

hello 

whats the best way to trigger the memory retrainning ?

i found in my case a few problems have to fiddle alot with the thermal grizzly frame, dunno if the thermalright is the same, but memory behaves diferent after every time i change the pressure of the frame, also could be pressure from the block side (ekwb velocity2 for 1700) but i use the torque wrench from them with 0,6nm, does any one have da TG frame? any inputs?

cheers


----------



## FreeSpeechIsKnowledge

affxct said:


> Okay woah. I thought you were about to say you had 5-10ns higher in Aida than what your OC should achieve. Double in MLC and the latency after letting your setup idle; there definitely has to be something weird happening to your memory subsystem. Out of curiosity, if you run Aida/MLC, do your L1-L3 caches also get affected in the same way that your DRAM does?


Good question. I'll check when I get home today from work.


----------



## Nizzen

TSportM said:


> hello
> 
> whats the best way to trigger the memory retrainning ?
> 
> i found in my case a few problems have to fiddle alot with the thermal grizzly frame, dunno if the thermalright is the same, but memory behaves diferent after every time i change the pressure of the frame, also could be pressure from the block side (ekwb velocity2 for 1700) but i use the torque wrench from them with 0,6nm, does any one have da TG frame? any inputs?
> 
> cheers


On Apex I use "retry button" side by side with the Flex Key. Disable fastboot for full training. When trained, go into bios before load windows. Enable fastboot, to make the MB not train the memory every boot. This can result in unstable memory settings.


----------



## FreeSpeechIsKnowledge

Nizzen said:


> On Apex I use "retry button" side by side with the Flex Key. Disable fastboot for full training. When trained, go into bios before load windows. Enable fastboot, to make the MB not train the memory every boot. This can result in unstable memory settings.



I tried enabling / disabling the training options you talked about and my system became unstable the other day. Set them back to auto and back to normal again. I'm on the newest bios so maybe things have changed now or something. I can run fast boot disabled fine though or enabled.


----------



## Mappi75

Oops... 1505/Apex/12900KS bios here, still cant get over 6.666mhz BUT then i realized that even xmp 6400 does not run tm5 stable (which never was a problem in the past)! 

Then i have to go back to 1403 ? Or is there any other bios beta option? Thanks.

Edit: i can check 1503 Bios again.. will 9902 support the ks ?


----------



## db000

@Mappi75 I'm having trouble aswell with 1505 6400CL32/XMP and OC, 6600 not passing. 0061 also not good for me. The only BIOSes I'm having great success with is 1302 BETA and/or 1304. 6600 CL30-38-38-28-2T-360 1.57v 1.52v (WC). I can pass multiple Karhu 10k%+,back to back with reboots, TM5 Extreme aswell. But BF2042 is giving me CTD(Even with SA bumped 1.0-1.05-1.10-1.15-1.20. 1.15v SA seems to work the best, can play a few games before CTD, can't do that with 1.00v. LLC bumped and CPU is stable otherwise. Karhu favors 1.00v. My apex is 2021 "no date". Bumping MC one tick helps also in BF2042.

Im giving up on the Apex now until Z790.... Picking up a Unify-X today...  Will give updates on the Unify-X in the DDR5 thread.


----------



## Mappi75

Thanks for your post, because i reach 6.666mhz its not worth (for me) switching to the unfiy-x because its not that all unify-x users reach 7000+.
So i will waiting for the new z790 lineup for spending any cents to z690.. i will waiting for your experience with the unfix-x.

BTW: i own 2xz590 unfix-x which outperformes my Apex z490/z590 never could run stable my ddr4 4400CL17 Kit. On the unify-x they run at 4533Mhz flawlessly.
(i know other guys can reach on there apex much more than 4533Mhz).
But i will keep my 10900KS with SP100 and SP110


----------



## s1rrah

I'm getting a Z690 Hero from local MicroCenter this weekend; they have 23 in stock. Is there a particular production date I should look out for? 

As I posted above, I've used 5 different Asus Z690's over the past couple of months and every single one has worked just fine with DDR4 and DDR5 configurations and without washer/frame mods of any kind (though I think I'll try the washer option once I settle on a keeper-build). 

Currently using a Z690-E w/ DDR5 6000CL36 and a 12700K CPU; also benched this same MB with a 12900K. I'm only trying the Hero board for better M.2 options and so I won't have to look at the offensive heatpipe over the M.2_1 slot on the Z690-E which I've left unoccupied so as not to gimp the primary GPU slot.

On the Hero, I'm assuming any 2022 build should be fine to test?

Thanks...


----------



## affxct

FreeSpeechIsKnowledge said:


> I tried enabling / disabling the training options you talked about and my system became unstable the other day. Set them back to auto and back to normal again. I'm on the newest bios so maybe things have changed now or something. I can run fast boot disabled fine though or enabled.


I found Fast Boot Disabled, and all those training options tweaked, to actually make my training way worse. Like way way worse. I was so confused tbh.


----------



## affxct

7empe said:


> Not necessarly true, especially regarding y-cruncher/Linpack stability. I believe issue will re-appear after you do the full memory retraining. Got the same. Stable for days until I performed a clean boot with retraining.


The thing is, it was totally stable on the secondary BIOS chip the first time, and was stable again when I flicked back to the secondary BIOS for the second time. The third time I attempted it (on the primary) it was after a power drain and a CMOS clear. I wasn't expecting it to work, but it the primary seemed to be behaving like the secondary all the way down to the feel of the system. Fast Boot was Enabled so training shouldn't break anyway (it achieved stability while training through Fast Boot).

Basically what I did:
1. CMOS clear and flashed 0090 on secondary BIOS.
2. Tried to YOLO XMP at auto SA/VDD2 just to see if this BIOS could do it - passed 30 runs of IBT V2 4GB.
3. Switched to primary chip (no CMOS clear), punched in identical settings and booted, to find my LAN driver didn't load and the system didn't feel as stable (I can sort of tell if SA is borked).
4. IBT V2 error'd on initial calculation so I assumed it was phantom stability and it wouldn't actually hold.
5. Switched back to secondary BIOS because I had a theory - identical settings passed 30 runs again on secondary. Now I'm f***ing confused.
6. I powered down, flicked back to primary on the EC first. I then flicked the PSU off, drained power, and then did a 15 second CMOS clear. 
7. I booted, re-loaded the exact same profile, and proceeded to attempt 30 runs again. Primary was behaving exactly like the secondary. 

Thinking back to it now, it makes sense that clearing CMOS doesn't really affect both chips. Even with my Z490 Master, you could clear CMOS, and then boot straight to Windows on the other chip. Clearing CMOS on one chip doesn't reset the other. So basically whatever electrical information was being stored in the charge was borking the stability on the primary chip. With regards to training, via Fast Boot and being XMP, this shouldn't really see any variation with regards to training at all, but I I've found there's a weird relationship between SA and VDD2. I'm fairly confident it's going to be stable on XMP now. Going to be moving onto OCing now.


----------



## affxct

So here's the weirdest thing; 0090 seems to report as only having the patch data for '1A' but it literally doesn't have Rev 17 or Rev 15. This was the direct CAP file so it wasn't like this due to any mods at all. 0086, 9902 and 1101 seem to all have 1A and Rev 17, so I assumed 1A was related to SLI. When you head to BIOS on 0090, even with only patch data 1A, it reports as Microcode 18. I can't really make sense of it.


----------



## Mappi75

Which test program should i use for lowering VDDQ TX 1,45v voltage?
Or is this bound to the VDD & VDDQ voltages?
Or is there a "law" like the difference should not more than -0,20mV ?
Thanks.


----------



## affxct

Mappi75 said:


> Which test program should i use for lowering VDDQ TX 1,45v voltage?
> Or is this bound to the VDD & VDDQ voltages?
> Or is there a "law" like the difference should not more than -0,2v ?
> Thanks.


I've found that BIOSs 0061 and 0086 both allow you to lower it. I actually haven't really encountered a BIOS as of yet that wouldn't boot with it slightly lowered. You can have it pretty much as low as you want it, but after 50mV it gets a bit rough. If you're not on an Apex I'm not sure if it can be lowered in BIOS. Possibly via something like TurboV. You don't need to lower it though, unless you're trying to do 1.5-1.6V on memory or something


----------



## asdkj1740

Mappi75 said:


> Thanks for your post, because i reach 6.666mhz its not worth (for me) switching to the unfiy-x because its not that all unify-x users reach 7000+.
> So i will waiting for the new z790 lineup for spending any cents to z690.. i will waiting for your experience with the unfix-x.
> 
> BTW: i own 2xz590 unfix-x which outperformes my Apex z490/z590 never could run stable my ddr4 4400CL17 Kit. On the unify-x they run at 4533Mhz flawlessly.
> (i know other guys can reach on there apex much more than 4533Mhz).
> But i will keep my 10900KS with SP100 and SP110


"all unify-x users reach 7000+"
objection, hearsay, lack of foundation.


----------



## Mappi75

i read posts from unify-x users which reach 6666mhz too like me - so no improvement.
Ok, then i will revoke my statement.

but to be clear what i wrote:
*"its not*_ that all unify-x users reach 7000+" _per se

So spending near €600,- for reaching 6800Mhz  No thanks.


----------



## bscool

s1rrah said:


> I'm getting a Z690 Hero from local MicroCenter this weekend; they have 23 in stock. Is there a particular production date I should look out for?
> 
> As I posted above, I've used 5 different Asus Z690's over the past couple of months and every single one has worked just fine with DDR4 and DDR5 configurations and without washer/frame mods of any kind (though I think I'll try the washer option once I settle on a keeper-build).
> 
> Currently using a Z690-E w/ DDR5 6000CL36 and a 12700K CPU; also benched this same MB with a 12900K. I'm only trying the Hero board for better M.2 options and so I won't have to look at the offensive heatpipe over the M.2_1 slot on the Z690-E which I've left unoccupied so as not to gimp the primary GPU slot.
> 
> On the Hero, I'm assuming any 2022 build should be fine to test?
> 
> Thanks...


Many of the people doing washer mods or having trouble getting memory stable are trying to run 52-53+ all core and OC to 6400 to 6600(Got bad 2021 Apex or trying to run 4x16) plus and pass 10,000% Karhu and y cruncher, r23 loops etc. Just running XMP and defaults in bios it will work for most but even at stock run y cruncher or loop r23 and I bet you see 85 to 90c+ unless you have very good cooling.

For Heros they should all be fine as from what i know they did a recall. Just google z690 Hero bad capacitor and look if your board has it if you are worried. It will show pics and what to look for. I havent heard of any 2022 Heros in the US, if there are I have not seen anyone post about them. I did see somoene in another country post photos of a few different z690 MB having 2022 models which will have th date on the box where the model, serial # is.


----------



## FreeSpeechIsKnowledge

bscool said:


> Many of the people doing washer mods or having trouble getting memory stable are trying to run 52-53+ all core and OC to 6400 to 6600(Got bad 2021 Apex or trying to run 4x16) plus and pass Karhu and y cruncher. Just running XMP and defaults in bios it will work for most but even at stock run y cruncher and I bet you see 85 to 90c+ unless you have very good cooling.
> 
> For Heros they should all be fine as from what i know they did a recall. Just google z690 Hero bad compacitor and look if you board has it if you are worried. It will show pics and what to look for. I havent heard of any 2022 Heros in the US, if there are I have not seen anyone post about them. I did see somoene in another country post photos of a few different z690 MB having 2022 models which will have th date on the box where the model, serial # is.



Yeah even my cooling borders but, I need to delid still and I bet I drop 10c like some because of my cooling being so massive. My GPU dropped 10 Celsius with my new rad I added the 480 xe CPU stayed about same maybe dropped 4c tops. You can only do so much without delidding.


----------



## s1rrah

bscool said:


> Just running XMP and defaults in bios it will work for most but even at stock run y cruncher or loop r23 and I bet you see 85 to 90c+ unless you have very good cooling.


You are correct, sensei. I ran R23 full test last night and the hottest core hit 90C (24C ambient). I can live with that just fine but once the dust settles on my 12th gen explorations, I will certainly begin working to drop those R23 temps a bit.

I tested thusly:

*Asus Z690-E 
12700KF* - manually set all pcores to 5100 and all ecores to 4000 - left volts and everything else to auto
*DDR5-6000 CL36* - manual settings (XMP disabled)
*Corsair H115i XT Pro *(PUSH/PULL as top-of-case intake)

I'm just now getting around to learning about the washer/frame hack and I believe I will try the washer mod first and order a frame once I read about which works the best.


----------



## Wilco183

bscool said:


> Many of the people doing washer mods or having trouble getting memory stable are trying to run 52-53+ all core and OC to 6400 to 6600(Got bad 2021 Apex or trying to run 4x16) plus and pass 10,000% Karhu and y cruncher, r23 loops etc. Just running XMP and defaults in bios it will work for most but even at stock run y cruncher or loop r23 and I bet you see 85 to 90c+ unless you have very good cooling.
> 
> For Heros they should all be fine as from what i know they did a recall. Just google z690 Hero bad capacitor and look if your board has it if you are worried. It will show pics and what to look for. I havent heard of any 2022 Heros in the US, if there are I have not seen anyone post about them. I did see somoene in another country post photos of a few different z690 MB having 2022 models which will have th date on the box where the model, serial # is.


Reordered and received Hero back in Feb the day Newegg started reselling (2022-01, ...MVAAYO). Sent first Hero back still sealed ... luckily I read about the issue the day it arrived. No issues with the board, but should have sent combo chip back as well the first time. Probably would have gotten better than SP82(91/65) the second time around.


----------



## Mappi75

Switched back from 1505 to 1503 because xmp profile was the first time ever(!)
tm5 (1umus_v3 20 cycles) unstable.
My old apex worked since from day 1 with xmp profile out-of-the-box.

(i did carefully clear cmos before updating via usb stick a new bios unplug power,
pressing clear cmos again waiting 5 minutes..)

With 1503 xmp is running stable again an my 6.666Mhz setup:








For me 1503 IS the best bios because it gains more points in CB23 and games like B3 too
(compared to all previous bios versions).

With 1403 i could run tCKE 4 stable and in 1503 i have to use tCKE 6
because hci memtest pro v7 found an error.

But this doesn't matter because the performance improvement in 1503 for my 12900KS,
bring me more performance than running my ram at 6800 Mhz (which never worked stable for me).

Wondering why in 1505 xmp profile wont work properly first time ever.. 

Edit: i tested 6600Mhz not 6666Mhz


----------



## satinghostrider

Mappi75 said:


> Oops... 1505/Apex/12900KS bios here, still cant get over 6.666mhz BUT then i realized that even xmp 6400 does not run tm5 stable (which never was a problem in the past)!
> 
> Then i have to go back to 1403 ? Or is there any other bios beta option? Thanks.
> 
> Edit: i can check 1503 Bios again.. will 9902 support the ks ?


Glacial Z690 1505 working perfectly stable with 6400C32 Kit. Rock stable after multiple reboots, shutdowns and all very consistent.
2022 Feb production Z690 Glacial Board.
Even my personal Apex 2022 board XMPs with 0 issues. But I am running 6800C32 tuned daily.
I can't say the same for 2021 boards. It was an utter nightmare for me.


----------



## Mappi75

Someting strange is going on - today a tm5 run 20 cycles was unstable -> testing now higher voltages..


----------



## sblantipodi

is it normal that when I first boot the system the two digit display on my Extreme shows "A0",
and then when I reboot it shows "00"?


----------



## satinghostrider

sblantipodi said:


> is it normal that when I first boot the system the two digit display on my Extreme shows "A0",
> and then when I reboot it shows "00"?


Disable Fast-Startup in windows and see if it goes away.


----------



## sblantipodi

satinghostrider said:


> Disable Fast-Startup in windows and see if it goes away.


that is the first thing I do as soon as I install Windows.


----------



## satinghostrider

sblantipodi said:


> that is the first thing I do as soon as I install Windows.


I think your board is cursed.


----------



## tubs2x4

Deleted


----------



## Mappi75

Looks my 6400Mhz G.Skill Kit needs -now- more voltage to run tm5 stable.
So i have to raise the Voltage from 1,45v to 1,46v.. (for 6666Mhz)

Its not a bios 1505/1503 problem (what i thought first)

Came back later, 1505 makes more problems to get stable then 1503.


----------



## Spicedaddy

I have a 12900k/Z690 Hero/G.Skill 2x16GB DDR5-5600CL36 (samsung) system that was 100% stable with BIOS 1304. (everything stock with XMP2 setting)

I skipped 1403 and upgraded to 1505 this week. So far I've had a crash to desktop in Flight Simulator and another app I use crashed yesterday. I just tried TM5 and got an error quickly.

Probably going back to 1304, doing some more testing now. Looks like 1505 is a regression for ram.


----------



## kmellz

Well new bios in my strix d4 seems to be kicking ass, could boot up at 4200mhz, did crash when trying to start a benchmark though.
Couldn't even boot with that before! Gonna see if it can be stabilized, or possibly some lower timings. Promising for raptor lake at least I guess.


----------



## Simkin

Spicedaddy said:


> I have a 12900k/Z690 Hero/G.Skill 2x16GB DDR5-5600CL36 (samsung) system that was 100% stable with BIOS 1304. (everything stock with XMP2 setting)
> 
> I skipped 1403 and upgraded to 1505 this week. So far I've had a crash to desktop in Flight Simulator and another app I use crashed yesterday. I just tried TM5 and got an error quickly.
> 
> Probably going back to 1304, doing some more testing now. Looks like 1505 is a regression for ram.


1505 works fine here.


----------



## Mappi75

Got this error:








Edit: i will try a higher tWR which was "3"


----------



## sblantipodi

satinghostrider said:


> I think your board is cursed.


it could be or it's simply Asus that sells unfinished untested products


----------



## trihy

There are 16xx bios for some boards, but it says improved ram stability, so probably the same than 15xx.


----------



## affxct

Small update. Board can boot 7000C32 on this 0090 BIOS... Like this is crazy. It did crash fairly quick though. 6933C32 1.55/1.5 seemed to be holding but I'm not going to attempt to stabilize it. Going to try and vet 6800C32 at 1.5/1.47.


----------



## tubs2x4

deleted


----------



## sugi0lover

trihy said:


> There are 16xx bios for some boards, but it says improved ram stability, so probably the same than 15xx.


Can you give us the link? Thanks!


----------



## Alberto_It

sugi0lover said:


> Can you give us the link? Thanks!


Smells like a fake


----------



## trihy

Saw it for this one:







TUF GAMING B660M-PLUS WIFI｜Motherboards｜ASUS Global


Intel® B660 (LGA 1700) mATX motherboard, 10+1 DrMOS Power stages , PCIe 5.0 support, DDR5 6000(OC), Dual PCIe 4.0 M.2 Slots with Heatsinks, Intel® Wi-Fi 6, Realtek 2.5Gb Ethernet, Rear USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 Type-C®, Front USB 3.2 Gen 1 Type-C®, Aura Sync, Two-way AI Noise Cancelation




www.asus.com





1601 beta, but looks like 15xx ones. Maybe 16xx are the 15xx for b660 boards. I though it was for the z690 plus. So it shouldnt mean anything for 690 users.


----------



## asdkj1740

just heard a guy saying his m14e with 16g*4 xmp failed to boot. he asked for rma and asus has granted him rma.
it seems asus now would accept all rma cases without questions.


----------



## TSportM

sblantipodi said:


> is it normal that when I first boot the system the two digit display on my Extreme shows "A0",
> and then when I reboot it shows "00"?


The 00 is when the Pc is waking (turning on) from a C-state, if you turn c states off it Will not show again.
But to use TVB you need to have it on.

One thing is i never figured out Wish c state has to be on to tvb to work 100% ( i ThinQ its c8 but not shure) if you have all enable(auto ir enable when you restart or shutdown the systemthat Code will come up

Cheers


----------



## Mappi75

bscool said:


> It is probably the MB. I just tried 1505 on 2022 Apex and 7000c30 works fine so far. Havent run any long term stress and memory test just start messing with it and loaded previously used memory timings and tuning now.
> 
> Do you have a 2021 Apex and have you ever been able to run over 6666 on any bios?
> 
> Edit I notice the KB takes a while to start working when booting into Windows. Still setting things in bios but never notice this issue before.
> 
> Might be related to making memory changes in bios/trainings as reboots KB is normal.


Sorry i missed your post - got an old Apex Board with no date on the box.
Never could run stable over 6666Mhz -> booting yes no problems.
Its the Board sadly. But i the end i could be happy to run 6666mhz.

But at the moment something is wrong xmp wont run tm5 stable and my 6666 setting needs more voltage,
never got problems in the past something got bader mem or imc... but it seems it not only a voltage problem so i need to tweak my ram settings less agressive.

Edit: sfc /scannow found some errors..

Can the sfc found errors cause the memory errors? Or are the errors the result of unstable memory?


----------



## affxct

Mappi75 said:


> Sorry i missed your post - got an old Apex Board with no date on the box.
> Never could run stable over 6666Mhz -> booting yes no problems.
> Its the Board sadly. But i the end i could be happy to run 6666mhz.
> 
> But at the moment something is wrong xmp wont run tm5 stable and my 6666 setting needs more voltage,
> never got problems in the past something got bader mem or imc... but it seems it not only a voltage problem so i need to tweak my ram settings less agressive.
> 
> Edit: sfc /scannow found some errors..
> 
> Can the sfc found errors cause the memory errors? Or are the errors the result of unstable memory?


Think more along the lines of; your memory profile was destabilized either by reboot or because of a bad BIOS, and that resulted in OS corruption.


----------



## J_Lab4645

B77W said:


> Z690 Apex has 2 slots for ram. Cannot post on 4800Mhz regardless of Bios revision.


Had this problem too on my 2021 Apex. After clearing cmos and all bios settings at default. No XMP enabled. Couldn't get into Windows. Check your SA Voltage. Apex (Auto) setting for default 4800mhz ddr5 was under .90 and wouldn't work. Set SA to .98 and try again.


----------



## affxct

Guys how difficult would it be to stabilize 8000Mbps? Just out of curiosity.


----------



## Ichirou

affxct said:


> Guys how difficult would it be to stabilize 8000Mbps? Just out of curiosity.


Pretty much next to impossible without a binned Apex (or competitor top end) for sponsored overclockers by the very motherboard companies themselves, and also a binned 12900K/KF/KS. And you'd need LN2, obviously.


----------



## affxct

I began attempting an OC around 22 hours ago. After the mission that was getting XMP to be stable, I decided to drop my fear and just go for it. Thankfully the board seems to be training consistently (relatively speaking). I worked through the early morning mainly collecting test data, and through the Saturday afternoon to now, I was able to lock in settings that had potential to pass. Honestly, I'm unbelievably happy. 

Maximus Z690 Apex M0EAY0
12900K SP 79 (87 P, 65 E)
Adata XPG Caster RGB 6400 40-40-40 1.4V

6600 34-42-42-28-2T (tXP 4, tPPD 0) + secondaries
DRAM VDD/Q: 1.45
TX VDDQ: 1.45
VDD2: 1.3125
VCCSA: 1.125


----------



## sblantipodi

TSportM said:


> The 00 is when the Pc is waking (turning on) from a C-state, if you turn c states off it Will not show again.
> But to use TVB you need to have it on.
> 
> One thing is i never figured out Wish c state has to be on to tvb to work 100% ( i ThinQ its c8 but not shure) if you have all enable(auto ir enable when you restart or shutdown the systemthat Code will come up
> 
> Cheers


I have CSTATES disabled and OCTVB+2 enabled that rocks well, still have the 00 code on reboot.


----------



## Alberto_It

sblantipodi said:


> I have CSTATES disabled and OCTVB+2 enabled that rocks well, still have the 00 code on reboot.


If you want that OCTVB +2 works you must have CSTATES enabled. If you have 00 code, check your psu, gpu or your MB need Rma

Edit: Try to change motherboard'battery


----------



## asdkj1740

affxct said:


> Guys how difficult would it be to stabilize 8000Mbps? Just out of curiosity.


you mean mhz?
difficult to be cooled with current gskill trident z5 design i guess, even mobo and cpu imc both are good enough to go.
the current best "es" xmp spec is like 7200mhz 1.45v, so we need the next generation of the next generation ic to get 1.45v 8000mhz possible first, or built-in active cooling.


----------



## Wasakiqwe

Today game crashes 4 times and got white light error. I don't know how to fix it. 
12900k, Asus z690 strix, asus tuf rtx3080 oc. Anyone who knows how to fix this?


----------



## affxct

asdkj1740 said:


> you mean mhz?
> difficult to be cooled with current gskill trident z5 design i guess, even mobo and cpu imc both are good enough to go.
> the current best "es" xmp spec is like 7200mhz 1.45v, so we need the next generation of the next generation ic to get 1.45v 8000mhz possible first, or built-in active cooling.


It's technically never been MHz XD. It'd be D5 4000MHz/8000Mbps. Some people say MT/s, but that term doesn't really mean anything.


----------



## FreeSpeechIsKnowledge

affxct said:


> Okay woah. I thought you were about to say you had 5-10ns higher in Aida than what your OC should achieve. Double in MLC and the latency after letting your setup idle; there definitely has to be something weird happening to your memory subsystem. Out of curiosity, if you run Aida/MLC, do your L1-L3 caches also get affected in the same way that your DRAM does?



It was Asus armory crate. Uninstalled it and it stopped.


----------



## affxct

FreeSpeechIsKnowledge said:


> It was Asus armory crate. Uninstalled it and it stopped.


No way 🤣. Yeah I always avoid bloatware. Useless freakin' app IMO.


----------



## FreeSpeechIsKnowledge

affxct said:


> No way 🤣. Yeah I always avoid bloatware. Useless freakin' app IMO.



I was using it for the fan control / RGB control. There goes that idea lol.


----------



## TSportM

sblantipodi said:


> I have CSTATES disabled and OCTVB+2 enabled that rocks well, still have the 00 code on reboot.



yea my bad that code is related to other things i confused it, if somehow you failed memory trainning it will also place that code on some restarts, it also can show up when you have some weird usb device or a bad fited fan header.

but bare in mind that code 00 can be nothing of does stated above Qcode 00 means correctly completed boot process (asus description is not used) if dont have any problem what so ever, so it depends on what you experiencing.

to get OCTVB to work you need C states enable like stated.


But please bare in mind this explanation from @Falkentyne



Falkentyne said:


> The only PLL for system agent is the PLL Trim SA voltage (default 0.900v). don't change this. Most people who messed with PLL Trim for system agent had nothing but VERY bad results for it.
> The regular system agent is the one you should change--the one in the normal menu not in tweaker's paradise.
> 
> A few people found very minor stability P core improvement by changing Core PLL Trim to 1.002v (or both core+ring pll trim to 1.002v), from the stock default of 0.90v. But this doesn't help ring+cache OC at all like "PLL Termination" does.
> 
> PLL Termination Voltage (Tweaker's paradise) which IS NOT THE SAME THING as the pll "trim" settings has been known to help stabilize E core + Cache clocks slightly (Kingfaris10 found this out on his DDR4 Z690 board, it helped stabilize a higher cache ratio), and it helped me avoid BSOD's in stockfish at x41 ring x38 cache (both at 5.1 ghz and 5.2 ghz), but on DDR5 boards, this is linked to CPU Standby voltage, so both must be changed at the same time (tweaker's paradise version _AND_ Boot voltage in Digi+VRM), *otherwise you will have "00" after a system reset.* I'm using 1.20v PLL Termination Voltage + CPU Standby voltage. I have no idea if it helps with E cores disabled though.



cheers


----------



## TSportM

Wasakiqwe said:


> Today game crashes 4 times and got white light error. I don't know how to fix it.
> 12900k, Asus z690 strix, asus tuf rtx3080 oc. Anyone who knows how to fix this?


You have to be more specific….

What game?
What settings are using to overclock if any?
Etc etc


----------



## Mappi75

What a joke...runed 10-15 times tm5 100% stable (25 cycles) at 6666Mhz and now i got an error 
Would like to throw my apex out of the window..but cant afford a new msi board.


----------



## affxct

Mappi75 said:


> What a joke...runed 10-15 times tm5 100% stable (25 cycles) at 6666Mhz and now i got an error
> Would like to throw my apex out of the window..but cant afford a new msi board.


My board is also not reboot stable. My 6600C34 destabilized, and my XMP also does. I need to re-do it every day or two.


----------



## Mappi75

Could be the problem the amory crate software?

now tm5 show a error again and at the same time i got an amory crate memory error screen !


----------



## affxct

Mappi75 said:


> Coulb be the problem the amory crate software?
> 
> now tm5 show a error again and at the same time i got an amory crate memory error screen !


I don't use Armoury Crate XD. Bloatware²


----------



## ChaosAD

Mappi75 said:


> What a joke...runed 10-15 times tm5 100% stable (25 cycles) at 6666Mhz and now i got an error
> Would like to throw my apex out of the window..but cant afford a new msi board.


At least you can get it somehow stable at 6666, maybe at 6600 you wont have any issues, mine is stable only at 6200, now that is a real joke. Unify X is in the house today.


----------



## FreeSpeechIsKnowledge

affxct said:


> I don't use Armoury Crate XD. Bloatware²


At the OP not you affxct. You've heard this story already lol..
After about fifteen minutes sitting idle it creates havoc on my system latency wise. I had to uninstall it to resolve the issues.


----------



## affxct

ChaosAD said:


> At least you can get it somehow stable at 6666, maybe at 6600 you wont have any issues, mine is stable only at 6200, now that is a real joke. Unify X is in the house today.


I think 6200 reboot stable is the cap for 2021 boards. I was kinda hoping this wouldn't be the case, because I've pretty much downgraded from my Taichi :/.


----------



## FreeSpeechIsKnowledge

affxct said:


> I think 6200 reboot stable is the cap for 2021 boards. I was kinda hoping this wouldn't be the case, because I've pretty much downgraded from my Taichi :/.


Mine's at 6800 now. My first Apex was max 5800 max stable. The refurb is way better. They failed us this time around QA wise. It was all over the map quality wise. They just won't admit it because it's saving them a lot of money by not admitting it is all. I personally as a manager, would have fired everyone involved, made them make new jordans whatev.


----------



## affxct

FreeSpeechIsKnowledge said:


> Mine's at 6800 now. My first Apex was max 5800 max stable. The refurb is way better. They failed us this time around QA wise. It was all over the map quality wise. They just won't admit it because it's saving them a lot of money by not admitting it is all. I personally as a manager, would have fired everyone involved.


5800!? That's insane. Do you mean like that's the best it could do, or you needed to go that low for daily reboot stability? 

Also, what was the max you could boot?


----------



## FreeSpeechIsKnowledge

affxct said:


> 5800!? That's insane. Do you mean like that's the best it could do, or you needed to go that low for daily reboot stability?
> 
> Also, what was the max you could boot?



Yep Max it would do 100% stable was 5800 last board. I think Max boot was 6200. Now Max boot is 7200 but not stable at all. 7000 is closer to stable, and obviously 6800 is 100% stable. I'd say this one 6900 is really really close to 100% but not quite. 6800 is locked in.


----------



## affxct

FreeSpeechIsKnowledge said:


> Yep Max it would do 100% stable was 5800 last board. I think Max boot was 6200. Now Max boot is 7200 but not stable at all. 7000 is closer to stable, and obviously 6800 is 100% stable. I'd say this one 6900 is really really close to 100% but not quite. 6800 is locked in.


I can boot 7000, I can probably get 6800 stable, and I got 6600 stable already. But upon a cold boot a day later it was unstable along with my XMP. My XMPs are also variably stable between BIOS revisions and with varying amount VCCSA.


----------



## sblantipodi

Most problems comes from the RGB on the RAM and the SPD write protection you disable to allow software to control the RGB on the ram.

Try to believe.


----------



## affxct

sblantipodi said:


> Most problems comes from the RGB on the RAM and the SPD write protection you disable to allow software to control the RGB on the ram.
> 
> Try to believe.


I've never disabled SPD Write Protection. Not really sure why you'd want to tbh.


----------



## TSportM

affxct said:


> I've never disabled SPD Write Protection. Not really sure why you'd want to tbh.


Depends, corsair for example needs it off if you want to control rgb, but also its a hit and miss some users report problems some dont.

——-

@*sblantipodi *please read my last response to you regarding code 00 as wy its showing to you on reboots you add fixed value to the refered ppl’s on both sides it will fixe that and give you more stability just like the user indicated.

cheers


----------



## mkimbro

Ok guys... Your assistances is needed. 
I have purchase two ROG Maximus Z690 APEX's motherboards. Have not opened them yet. I can only keep one of these to try out with my new purchase of the i9-12900KS, 64GB G.Skill Trident Z5 RGB 5600Mhz-F5-5600J3036D32GX2-TZ5RK Memory, Plus - EVGA EVGA 10G-P5-3897-KL; RTX 3080 FTW3 Ultra Video card.

One is - Part No.- 90MB1810- M0UAY0; Manufacture date of 2021-11 Purchased from Newegg; from a Australia Company
Two is - Part No.- 90MB1810- M0EAY0; Manufacture date of 2021-11 Purchased from Newegg; from a USA Company

If your only getting to keeping one to do you build which one would you pick. Or do you think it doesn't matter because of the Manufacture date....

I have watch a you tube video from PCDIY and I want to set it up as he has explains.... 




I just want a stable, and performing system. This doesn't mean High Overclocks, just super stable. as PCDIY explains in settings...

I was trying for a January 2022 Manufacturing date, but didn't make it.....

I would like your "Personal humble expert option" if you have one..... Thank You!


----------



## affxct

mkimbro said:


> Ok guys... Your assistances is needed.
> I have purchase two ROG Maximus Z690 APEX's motherboards. Have not opened them yet. I can only keep one of these to try out with my new purchase of the i9-12900KS, 64GB G.Skill Trident Z5 RGB 5600Mhz-F5-5600J3036D32GX2-TZ5RK Memory, Plus - EVGA EVGA 10G-P5-3897-KL; RTX 3080 FTW3 Ultra Video card.
> 
> One is - Part No.- 90MB1810- M0UAY0; Manufacture date of 2021-11 Purchased from Newegg; from a Australia Company
> Two is - Part No.- 90MB1810- M0EAY0; Manufacture date of 2021-11 Purchased from Newegg; from a USA Company
> 
> If your only getting to keeping one to do you build which one would you pick. Or do you think it doesn't matter because of the Manufacture date....
> 
> I have watch a you tube video from PCDIY and I want to set it up as he has explains....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I just want a stable, and performing system. This doesn't mean High Overclocks, just super stable. as PCDIY explains in settings...
> 
> I was trying for a January 2022 Manufacturing date, but didn't make it.....
> 
> I would like your "Personal humble expert option" if you have one..... Thank You!


Whichever has the more defined etching on the PCB around the "OPTIMEM" logo.


----------



## affxct

Guys, after you've done a washer mod, is the retention arm usually harder to push down? I'm a bit dumb, I didn't think to unscrew the ILM before testing my board to check. The arm was quite difficult to push down (a lot harder than on my last two boards). Kinda beginning to wonder now.


----------



## satinghostrider

affxct said:


> Guys, after you've done a washer mod, is the retention arm usually harder to push down? I'm a bit dumb, I didn't think to unscrew the ILM before testing my board to check. The arm was quite difficult to push down (a lot harder than on my last two boards). Kinda beginning to wonder now.


From my experience, 2022 boards don't seem to work well with washer mod. I had issues XMPing a Glacial Z690 2022 board. Once I removed it, it was okay. So I did the Thermalright Frame bracket, and everything works well. 6400C32 Kit XMP1 stable. No need for any manual tuning to get XMP to work.


----------



## affxct

satinghostrider said:


> From my experience, 2022 boards don't seem to work well with washer mod. I had issues XMPing a Glacial Z690 2022 board. Once I removed it, it was okay. So I did the Thermalright Frame bracket, and everything works well. 6400C32 Kit XMP1 stable. No need for any manual tuning to get XMP to work.


I have a 2021 Apex, but I'm on the same wavelength as you. I initially tested the mod on my old Z690-F and it went horribly. This is the first Z690 board that I'm not the 1st owner of. It was dumb of me, but I was too excited to test the board to unscrew the ILM. I probably should go check, but I don't really feel well right now and I don't want to be unscrewing stuff around my socket.


----------



## satinghostrider

affxct said:


> I have a 2021 Apex, but I'm on the same wavelength as you. I initially tested the mod on my old Z690-F and it went horribly. This is the first Z690 board that I'm not the 1st owner of. It was dumb of me, but I was too excited to test the board to unscrew the ILM. I probably should go check, but I don't really feel well right now and I don't want to be unscrewing stuff around my socket.


The Thermalright Frame bracket works incredibly well. Fits perfectly as well.
Just unhook your ILM open it both sides and unscrew 4 screws then place the frame bracket over and screw back the same screws.
Then finger tighten in a cross way. Stop when there is resistance for all 4 then just abit more on each side with your fingers and you are done.

I got mine from here if you are interested. Pretty cheap as well. Not sure if it ships to you but you can try to see if it does.

Thermalright Lga17xx-bcf Red/gray/black Intel 12th Cpu Bending Corrector Frame Cpu Fixed Backplane - Fans & Cooling - AliExpress


----------



## affxct

satinghostrider said:


> The Thermalright Frame bracket works incredibly well. Fits perfectly as well.
> Just unhook your ILM open it both sides and unscrew 4 screws then place the frame bracket over and screw back the same screws.
> Then finger tighten in a cross way. Stop when there is resistance for all 4 then just abit more on each side with your fingers and you are done.
> 
> I got mine from here if you are interested. Pretty cheap as well. Not sure if it ships to you but you can try to see if it does.
> 
> Thermalright Lga17xx-bcf Red/gray/black Intel 12th Cpu Bending Corrector Frame Cpu Fixed Backplane - Fans & Cooling - AliExpress


I've considered grabbing it, but shipping is going to end up being the same/more than the frame itself unfortunately. Might see if there's a different way I can acquire one.

I'm mainly just worried about memory training to be honest. I downgraded to an SP 79 so I'm not even running an OC at the moment because of how terrible the silicon is. I just have a suspicion that my board has a washer mod on it 🤣🤣


----------



## satinghostrider

affxct said:


> I've considered grabbing it, but shipping is going to end up being the same/more than the frame itself unfortunately. Might see if there's a different way I can acquire one.
> 
> I'm mainly just worried about memory training to be honest. I downgraded to an SP 79 so I'm not even running an OC at the moment because of how terrible the silicon is. I just have a suspicion that my board has a washer mod on it 🤣🤣


I would remove the washer mod and try it if you really do have a washer mod. Just make sure you have a backplate.
I notice that 2022 boards ILM spring tension feels not as tight as my 2021 Apex for example. 
My silicon is not great either at SP84 but it runs well at 5.2/4.2/4.3 with good temps. OCTVB gets me 5.2-5.4 in game.


----------



## affxct

satinghostrider said:


> I would remove the washer mod and try it if you really do have a washer mod. Just make sure you have a backplate.
> I notice that 2022 boards ILM spring tension feels not as tight as my 2021 Apex for example.
> My silicon is not great either at SP84 but it runs well at 5.2/4.2/4.3 with good temps. OCTVB gets me 5.2-5.4 in game.


I'm on an AIO so unfortunately 5.2 is not going to happen. For 5.2/4.0/4.2 IBT V2 stable, I needed 1.25 (socket sense) load volts on my SP 96 with my 360 and case fans maxed out. That maxed out at around 85c. I had an SP 81 before that and it wasn't terribly different from this SP 79.

Between 96 and 79/81 on a 360 with good intake fans, I've tested there to be around 200MHz on the P-cores and maybe a little bit of cache between them. Basically both bad chips are good for around 1.3V set and 50-70mV of AVX droop. 

The Taichi and the Apex have really solid VRMs which make those values possible. On my old Z690-F it literally required 50mV extra (1.35 set). I think the Apex does even better than the Taichi (unsurprisingly) because of all the extra filtering caps.


----------



## affxct

i9-12900K SP 79 (87P/65E) + MZ690A M0EAY0 + XPG Caster 6400C40 1.4V H16M

6200 30-37-37-28-1T w/secondaries
DRAM VDD: 1.45V
DRAM VDDQ: 1.45V
TX VDDQ: 1.45V
VCCSA: Auto
VDD2: Auto

The AIDA result is just the RAM OC paired with a conservative P-core only tune I tested the other day. I'm really hoping this one won't destabilize like my 6600 did. Also on 1304 now so I think it should be a bit more reliable now.


----------



## affxct

Update:
Booted up cold after around +-10 hours and Karhu failed early. I do want to make this clear; I'm not trying to bash the Apex or the BIOS, or anything like that. I'm just really curious as to what's up with this. The Z690-F I had also had reboot instability, but eventually I found a 6400 profile on my old Samsung kit that actually rebooted good after a week of use.

On my Taichi with another kit, I managed to fix it by messing with VDD2 (allowing the board to set its own value). For my Apex idk. I've followed all the usual steps. I think my XMP is reboot stable on 1304 though, so now I'm quite confused.


----------



## TSportM

hello

Is there any gains from changing the BCLK amplitude from 800mv to higher values ?

cheers


----------



## killer01ws6

satinghostrider said:


> I think your frame is fine and your tightening of the frame is optimal. When it is too tight, running XMP at anything higher than 4800Mhz will constantly fail during training memory. I feel if you do not have this issues, then it is bios related. Not that I XMP, but you can XMP to test and check if your memory can train because from my experience, mounting pressure can cause even XMP to fail during training and it will just go back into the BIOS and be stuck at 4000Mhz.


thank you for this tid bit of info.. I am waiting on parts to finish my Hero/12700K build and decided I wanted a frame from all of the reading and vids I see. nice to know what to look for!


----------



## affxct

Made some slight adjustments. Unlike on previous BIOSs, it actually seemed to restabilize after loosening it out very slightly.

6200 30-38-38-32-1T w/secondaries
DRAM VDD: 1.45
DRAM VDDQ: 1.45
TX VDDQ: 1.45
VCCSA: Auto
VDD2: Auto

I managed 8000% Karhu again with the slightly looser tRCD, tRP and tRAS/tRC (not sure if tRAS/tRC even exist on Hynix). I left the computer off at the wall socket for 2 hours and ran Karhu up to 4000% (bored). I'm not sure if this will destabilize in a few days.


----------



## lolhaxz

affxct said:


> Update:
> Booted up cold after around +-10 hours and Karhu failed early. I do want to make this clear; I'm not trying to bash the Apex or the BIOS, or anything like that. I'm just really curious as to what's up with this. The Z690-F I had also had reboot instability, but eventually I found a 6400 profile on my old Samsung kit that actually rebooted good after a week of use.
> 
> On my Taichi with another kit, I managed to fix it by messing with VDD2 (allowing the board to set its own value). For my Apex idk. I've followed all the usual steps. I think my XMP is reboot stable on 1304 though, so now I'm quite confused.


What you are experiencing here is the ASUS effect...

When you say you think it's more stable on XYZ bios, nope, most likely still the ASUS effect - very seldom a new bios has any real impact... SOME DO - but it's generally 1-2 bios's for the entire generation.

Turn on MCH fullcheck etc - make it re-train every reboot and test 5-6 consecutive reboots/cold power cycles if you want to know if its semi-stable. If it won't boot with MCH fullcheck etc enabled, then welcome to your problem.


----------



## Mappi75

With my 6666Mhz setup i get around 55ns in Aida64 sometime lower like 53,x ns
Should i try to search a lower setup which works with T1 ?

(my setup now)








Would this be faster in games? With 6400-T1 and lower timings?


----------



## affxct

lolhaxz said:


> What you are experiencing here is the ASUS effect...
> 
> When you say you think it's more stable on XYZ bios, nope, most likely still the ASUS effect - very seldom a new bios has any real impact... SOME DO - but it's generally 1-2 bios's for the entire generation.
> 
> Turn on MCH fullcheck etc - make it re-train every reboot and test 5-6 consecutive reboots/cold power cycles if you want to know if its semi-stable. If it won't boot with MCH fullcheck etc enabled, then welcome to your problem.


I've always kept MCH on. Thing is, BZ and others have achieved cold boot stability with it disabled. I think there has to be more to it. My initial Strix Z690-F from way back was literally unusable on the first BIOS and on 0803. Others were reporting CTDs and failing memory tests, my CPU IMC and the board and RAM straight up couldn't work together until 0811. 1003 is where I was finally able to achieve some cold boot stability because the BIOS adjusted how automatic VDD2 calculations were handled.

On my Taichi I also experienced reboot stability just as with the Z690-F and this Apex. As mentioned, it was just easier to overcome by taking difference steps to setting the VDD2 rail. From my testing, it almost seems as though on Asus, once you've achieved a set of settings that can run stuff like Karhu/TM5/IBT V2/y-cruncher with automatic SA and VDD2, that's when you know you're close to a rocksolid OC. It's almost as though having to adjust VDD2 especially, indicates a deeper instability.

Thus far the one consistency I've observed between the Z690-F, Taichi, and Apex, is that manual VDD2 settings that aren't trained by the board always result in inconsistent signal training. Every single time. 

Thus far I've tested three 12900Ks (upgraded my initial to an SP 96 and then downgraded again), as well as two 11900Ks (friends' chips). It seems as though RKL and ADL both just have really inconsistent and buggy signal training.


----------



## Baasha

Guys, what is the verdict on the 1505 BIOS for the Asus Z690 Maximus Extreme? Worth updating from 1403? My system works great and so I want to be cautious before updating and screwing something up.

Is the 1505 BIOS stable? Does it OC better? Would like some feedback.

Thanks in advance.


----------



## sblantipodi

Baasha said:


> Guys, what is the verdict on the 1505 BIOS for the Asus Z690 Maximus Extreme? Worth updating from 1403? My system works great and so I want to be cautious before updating and screwing something up.
> 
> Is the 1505 BIOS stable? Does it OC better? Would like some feedback.
> 
> Thanks in advance.


same thing, these BIOS are all the same, they fix nothing, they improve nothing.
most differences found by users are just "different sessions of tests"


----------



## Afferin

Baasha said:


> Guys, what is the verdict on the 1505 BIOS for the Asus Z690 Maximus Extreme? Worth updating from 1403? My system works great and so I want to be cautious before updating and screwing something up.
> 
> Is the 1505 BIOS stable? Does it OC better? Would like some feedback.
> 
> Thanks in advance.


6200C32 on 4x16 did not train on 1403. It does on 1505. YMMV.


----------



## affxct

I tried to make these as small as possible. So I previously posted about how I adjusted my (1.45V) 6200 30-37-37-28-1T -> 38-38-32 and achieved a good Karhu result after 2 hours of full power drain. A few hours went by and I decided to play GR: Breakpoint. GR: Breakpoint tends to catch RAM/IMC instability pretty quick. To my dismay I crashed within a minute. I promptly decided to re-test, and I curiously made it all the way to Karhu 8000%. I then decided to drop my 1080 Ti's OC very slightly and I was able to play Breakpoint for around 2-3 hours straight that morning, and after a re-train due to sleep mode no less.

Furthermore, I managed to boot up for two days in a row with no crashes or weird instability and played Forza 7 for around 3 hours yesterday evening. I played House of Ashes while streaming as well. PC has worked flawlessly for a few days now so I almost dare say this Apex is daily'ing this without any issues.

I would love to say I've figured it out but I really can't. All I can say is that you need to test every BIOS revision, and that the one that boots the highest doesn't always mean it's the best. I can't currently boot 6933C32 on 1304, but it runs XMP and my 6200CR1 daily'able. It's a trade-off, but a worthwhile one I believe.

Some interesting data I have is that 32-38-38-32 at 1.45V ran less stable than 30-38-38-32. It's almost as though running a conservative CL that isn't applicable to the training due to the voltage applied, causes more instability. Same thing I noticed with 6600C34 being that I got it stable at a full 50mV less than what I was testing. This is hairpin stuff though. I hope this gives some of you guys hope. This was an Amazon-returned M0EAY0 and I'm using a trash bin SP 79 and a meh kit of Adata Hynix. By all accounts, this was a lost cause.


----------



## Spicedaddy

Baasha said:


> Guys, what is the verdict on the 1505 BIOS for the Asus Z690 Maximus Extreme? Worth updating from 1403? My system works great and so I want to be cautious before updating and screwing something up.
> 
> Is the 1505 BIOS stable? Does it OC better? Would like some feedback.
> 
> Thanks in advance.


I was on 1304 with zero problems and had 2 different apps crash to desktop after upgrading to 1505. Went back to 1304 and no more problems. Using G.Skill 2x16GB DDR5-5600CL36 (Samsung) with XMPII.

Other users reported similar issues on the ROG forums. Most say it's fine, so YMMV depending on your hardware.


----------



## Baasha

Thanks for the feedback on the latest BIOS guys. Arrgh wish I never "upgraded" from my Z490 rig - had it dialed in perfectly with the 10900K. Sigh...


----------



## affxct

Baasha said:


> Thanks for the feedback on the latest BIOS guys. Arrgh wish I never "upgraded" from my Z490 rig - had it dialed in perfectly with the 10900K. Sigh...


D5 has been fun tbh


----------



## TSportM

Ditched my corsair and bought me some Tforce 6400

6800 36-38-38-54-2T 
DRAM VDD: 1.48
DRAM VDDQ: 1.48
TX VDDQ: 1.48
VCCSA: 1.25
VDD2: Auto 

no more memory problems for it fixed all the crap i was having on reboots and cold boot.


----------



## IronAge

that is a very colorful system. 🍭


----------



## kairi_zeroblade

my eyes hurt..


----------



## Shawnb99

RGB cables?


----------



## Nizzen

‐-----------
On topic from this line pleace


----------



## Csavez™

The gskill 6400 memoria kit is broken, it constantly made a mistake, even in xmp, I went through every option, but nothing, I sent it back for warranty.









But in the meantime I also sent the cpu to delid and it got brutally good. (-10 °C)

Covered.










Original Inteles soldering, "nice" big inclusion in one corner of the chip. )










It could be easily driven back because there was air in the solder.




















After scraping off most of the solder (brighter surface), the inclusion part was nicely separated from the rest (matte darker gray). (Where the edge of the chip is golden, it is not even soldered.)










Residual solder removed with solvent (with Quick Silver).










Both surfaces are polished.










Application of liquid metal and heat-resistant black silicone adhesive.










Put together in the Relid template.









Before:









After:









****ty 4800 micron! (5333 stable end) 70euro  The cpu is on 5300/4200 now.


----------



## affxct

TSportM said:


> Ditched my corsair and bought me some Tforce 6400
> 
> 6800 36-38-38-54-2T
> DRAM VDD: 1.48
> DRAM VDDQ: 1.48
> TX VDDQ: 1.48
> VCCSA: 1.25
> VDD2: Auto
> 
> no more memory problems for it fixed all the crap i was having on reboots and cold boot.


I'm almost certain auto VDD2 has contributed. Like I'm convinced it's a thing by this point. I've observed it on too many different pieces of hardware.


----------



## IronAge

Mappi75 said:


> With my 6666Mhz setup i get around 55ns in Aida64 sometime lower like 53,x ns
> Should i try to search a lower setup which works with T1 ?
> 
> (my setup now)
> View attachment 2563976
> 
> 
> Would this be faster in games? With 6400-T1 and lower timings?


had to decrease TREFI, increase voltages, and when doing longer Memtest Runs i have to install a fan over the DIMMs for 6666 1N with a G7400.


----------



## TSportM

affxct said:


> I'm almost certain auto VDD2 has contributed. Like I'm convinced it's a thing by this point. I've observed it on too many different pieces of hardware.


maybe, it did jump from 1.300 manual with this kit to 1350 on auto, iam satisfied with it does boot and gives no crashes with does settings at 7000 but gives errors on tests


----------



## sblantipodi

TSportM said:


> Ditched my corsair and bought me some Tforce 6400
> 
> 6800 36-38-38-54-2T
> DRAM VDD: 1.48
> DRAM VDDQ: 1.48
> TX VDDQ: 1.48
> VCCSA: 1.25
> VDD2: Auto
> 
> no more memory problems for it fixed all the crap i was having on reboots and cold boot.


can you control the RGB on that memory with some software?
if yes, do you need to disable SPD Write protection in BIOS to control the LED on the RAM as with the Corsair sticks?


----------



## TSportM

sblantipodi said:


> can you control the RGB on that memory with some software?
> if yes, do you need to disable SPD Write protection in BIOS to control the LED on the RAM as with the Corsair sticks?


like i told you in previous posts, that thing of disabling speed write is a thing on corsair becouse of corsair ICUE, it does not work with manufactures standard RGB aura sync etc, you dont need speed write enable on on this modules becouse its compatible in this case aura Synch (and all the other brands of manufactures), and bare in mind that speed write is a security feature, i did not have any problems what so ever with it on or off like you have when using my corsair dominators platinum RGB, when its off for corsair dominators it will use the hardware lightning profile, if you choose a specific profile in icue for hardware lightning it will save that and then turn off speed write it will use that stored profile on the mudules.

but to be clear, the Tforce modules do not need speed write enable, you can use the RGB software from ASUS or any open source RGB to control it.

cheers


----------



## Nawak

Hi all, I do believe this z690 hero has killed my z5 6000 trident (error 53 before post on 3 of my 4 sticks, with 1505 or 1003fw).
I'm planning to RMA it and part with it as soon as possible, tired of paying for a lame motherboard that doesn't deliver the performance you paid for...

Which motherboard would you recommend?
The number of usb ports and the thunderbolt ports are crucial for me.
From what I've read, I'd have to switch to Aorus? Are the 4 rams sticks also problematic with Aorus?


----------



## TSportM

Nawak said:


> Hi all, I do believe this z690 hero has killed my z5 6000 trident (error 53 before post on 3 of my 4 sticks, with 1505 or 1003fw).
> I'm planning to RMA it and part with it as soon as possible, tired of paying for a lame motherboard that doesn't deliver the performance you paid for...
> 
> Which motherboard would you recommend?
> The number of usb ports and the thunderbolt ports are crucial for me.
> From what I've read, I'd have to switch to Aorus? Are the 4 rams sticks also problematic with Aorus?


what makes you belive that the MB killed your ram ?
4 sticks are problematic on all motherboards not z690 or this generation in special.

the Msi and gigabyte boards on that Price range will have similar Io to your hero,

My recomendation on statement of performance:

EVGA Z690 classified
OR
EVGA Z690 dark Kingpin


----------



## Nawak

TSportM said:


> what makes you belive that the MB killed your ram ?
> 4 sticks are problematic on all motherboards not z690 or this generation in special.
> 
> the Msi and gigabyte boards on that Price range will have similar Io to your hero,
> 
> My recomendation on statement of performance:
> 
> EVGA Z690 classified
> OR
> EVGA Z690 dark Kingpin


When I try to start, I get a 53 error on 3 of my 4 rams sticks, impossible to post.
One stick seems to work, but with the other 3 I can't do anything 
I don't dare to use my PC anymore.
I have tried two versions of bios, all ram slots, same result.
If you have an idea, don't hesitate.


----------



## TSportM

Nawak said:


> When I try to start, I get a 53 error on 3 of my 4 rams sticks, impossible to post.
> One stick seems to work, but with the other 3 I can't do anything
> I don't dare to use my PC anymore.
> I have tried two versions of bios, all ram slots, same result.
> If you have an idea, don't hesitate.



have you tried all the sticks individualy ?

have you tried 2 placed in the correct manner ? (pic below)


----------



## Nawak

TSportM said:


> have you tried all the sticks individualy ?
> 
> have you tried 2 placed in the correct manner ? (pic below)


Yes, I tested them individually and placed them in the 2/4 slots as shown in the picture.
I only have one stick left which allows me to post.


----------



## Afferin

Nawak said:


> Yes, I tested them individually and placed them in the 2/4 slots as shown in the picture.
> I only have one stick left which allows me to post.


Tbh I don't think it's the board, I've known quite a few people with the early revision 6000 GSkill kits that have had the kits die on them -- each with different motherboards.

That being said, if you're interested in consistent performance... The Unify-X and EVGA boards appear to be king? If you want a 4 DIMM board, I personally have used 2 Z690 Formulas and both have been excellent to me.


----------



## Nawak

Afferin said:


> Tbh I don't think it's the board, I've known quite a few people with the early revision 6000 GSkill kits that have had the kits die on them -- each with different motherboards.
> 
> That being said, if you're interested in consistent performance... The Unify-X and EVGA boards appear to be king? If you want a 4 DIMM board, I personally have used 2 Z690 Formulas and both have been excellent to me.


Do you think the two rams kits could have died within two weeks of each other?
My kits are gskill 6000 cl36.


----------



## Afferin

Nawak said:


> Do you think the two rams kits could have died within two weeks of each other?
> My kits are gskill 6000 cl36.


It's very possible, but I won't pretend to know something when I don't know for sure. If you have the money, I don't see the harm in buying a new mobo anyway because now that there's enough test results on each board, you can make a more informed decision for your purchase. However, I will say that one of my close friends bought two GSkill 6000 kits from me and both kits ended up dying. He now uses my old Corsair Dominator 6200 kit on the same board and has had no issues. YMMV.


----------



## Nawak

Afferin said:


> It's very possible, but I won't pretend to know something when I don't know for sure. If you have the money, I don't see the harm in buying a new mobo anyway because now that there's enough test results on each board, you can make a more informed decision for your purchase. However, I will say that one of my close friends bought two GSkill 6000 kits from me and both kits ended up dying. He now uses my old Corsair Dominator 6200 kit on the same board and has had no issues. YMMV.


I understand.
The problem is that the manufacturer doesn't offer us a refund when the RMA is done, so it's like reselling all the ram kits (same for the MB), to buy something else.
The EVGA Z690 holds the XMP frequencies with 4 dimms?
I'm going to lose a lot of money, but on the other hand an unreliable machine that you can't rely on is not possible.


----------



## Afferin

Nawak said:


> I understand.
> The problem is that the manufacturer doesn't offer us a refund when the RMA is done, so it's like reselling all the ram kits (same for the MB), to buy something else.
> The EVGA Z690 holds the XMP frequencies with 4 dimms?
> I'm going to lose a lot of money, but on the other hand an unreliable machine that you can't rely on is not possible.


I don't know about the used market where you live, but I am very fortunate to live in an area where lots of people like to buy used parts. I hope for your sake you are able to sell them! As for the EVGA boards, I've never used them so I can't comment from experience, but many people have posted absolutely phenomenal results on those boards! 4 DIMMs I am unsure. The only people I know running 4 DIMMs are all using the Z690 Formula (2 other people besides me lol)

EDIT: I forgot about the godly results on the Z690 Extreme with 4x16: *Official* Intel DDR5 OC and 24/7 daily Memory Stability...


----------



## adna

Strix-f bios 1505 test
still at 6666. 
6800 can't pass tm5 with no error.

a-data lacer 6000c40 2x16g
sa | vdd | vddq | tx | mc
0.9 | 1.47 | 1.47 | 1.3 | 1.25


----------



## TSportM

adna said:


> Strix-f bios 1505 test
> still at 6666.
> 6800 can't pass tm5 with no error.
> 
> a-data lacer 6000c40 2x16g
> sa | vdd | vddq | tx | mc
> 0.9 | 1.47 | 1.47 | 1.3 | 1.25
> View attachment 2564420



try raising MC to 1.350 and SA to 1.250 and test, then start taking out to see where you loose stability 


cheers


----------



## Shawnb99

TSportM said:


> what makes you belive that the MB killed your ram ?
> 4 sticks are problematic on all motherboards not z690 or this generation in special.
> 
> the Msi and gigabyte boards on that Price range will have similar Io to your hero,
> 
> My recomendation on statement of performance:
> 
> EVGA Z690 classified
> OR
> EVGA Z690 dark Kingpin


FYI Dark only has two memory slots


----------



## TSportM

Shawnb99 said:


> FYI Dark only has two memory slots


Yes i kown that...

the note was performance only the last choice (max performance is the way to go)


----------



## affxct

Nawak said:


> Yes, I tested them individually and placed them in the 2/4 slots as shown in the picture.
> I only have one stick left which allows me to post.


Bad news for you. The board didn't kill your RAM. Z5 sticks just tend to die in general. My first kit was unable to train XMP, and the second kit just rolled over the one day while memory training.


----------



## killer01ws6

affxct said:


> Bad news for you. The board didn't kill your RAM. Z5 sticks just tend to die in general. My first kit was unable to train XMP, and the second kit just rolled over the one day while memory training.


Well that sucks to know... are the S5s any better? I have not opened my Z5s yet, was going to seat them this weekend and box test before starting my build..


----------



## affxct

killer01ws6 said:


> Well that sucks to know... are the S5s any better? I have not opened my Z5s yet, was going to seat them this weekend and box test before starting my build..


Honestly I have no clue. All I know is that I'm never purchasing from G.Skill ever again. I mean why should we? OEM Hynix, Klevv Hynix, Adata, Patriot, Teamgroup and Corsair all exist.


----------



## akgis

My 6000 kit died too on a hero aswell one day they could not run XMP even me going back to old bios where I knew they somewhat worked, my shop managed to upgrade me to 6400 cause I gave the argument they are a diferent chip manufacturer Hynix instead of Samsung, and payed the difference.


----------



## Nawak

affxct said:


> Bad news for you. The board didn't kill your RAM. Z5 sticks just tend to die in general. My first kit was unable to train XMP, and the second kit just rolled over the one day while memory training.


That's what I thought when I went back to different threads.
My two kits lasted about 5 months, I think I can count myself lucky.
I never really looked into the XMP though, as I use 4 sticks it seemed normal that I couldn't run it.
I found it very surprising that my two kits failed me about 10 days apart.
On the other hand sometimes the PC took a long time to post, easily justifiable by dodgy ram.

Without pushing the tensions, I ran with a cl35 and 5600MHz, it was quite bad but my goal is not at all the hof (fortunately =D)



akgis said:


> My 6000 kit died too on a hero aswell one day they could not run XMP even me going back to old bios where I knew they somewhat worked, my shop managed to upgrade me to 6400 cause I gave the argument they are a diferent chip manufacturer Hynix instead of Samsung, and payed the difference.


What luck you had, I'm currently trying to negotiate this with the same arguments, G-skill doesn't want to hear anything and the dialogue seems to be complicated also with my two ram vendors...
I'll end up explaining that I don't want a ram with wider timing as a last resort, but This will not change anything :/


----------



## affxct

Nawak said:


> That's what I thought when I went back to different threads.
> My two kits lasted about 5 months, I think I can count myself lucky.
> I never really looked into the XMP though, as I use 4 sticks it seemed normal that I couldn't run it.
> I found it very surprising that my two kits failed me about 10 days apart.
> On the other hand sometimes the PC took a long time to post, easily justifiable by dodgy ram.
> 
> Without pushing the tensions, I ran with a cl35 and 5600MHz, it was quite bad but my goal is not at all the hof (fortunately =D)
> 
> 
> What luck you had, I'm currently trying to negotiate this with the same arguments, G-skill doesn't want to hear anything and the dialogue seems to be complicated also with my two ram vendors...
> I'll end up explaining that I don't want a ram with wider timing as a last resort, but This will not change anything :/


Just take whatever they're willing to give you and sell them sealed. Purchase some Klevv Hynix and slap a fan on then. Easy 7000Mbps.


----------



## Nawak

affxct said:


> Just take whatever they're willing to give you and sell them sealed. Purchase some Klevv Hynix and slap a fan on then. Easy 7000Mbps.


What type of fan are you talking about?
I'm in custom WC but I don't plan to open the ram to put them in the loop, however I'm very interested if you know of a silent system to ventilate the rams (my fans run between 600 and 800rpm, silence is very important to me).
What do you think of the G-skill 6400 cl 32 (hynix) rams? I see that the 6600 also exists but the price would make me go for the 6400.

Do you think that with 4 rams Hynix I could reach xmp on my hero ?
I'm not counting OC, I'm too bad for that...


----------



## affxct

Nawak said:


> What type of fan are you talking about?
> I'm in custom WC but I don't plan to open the ram to put them in the loop, however I'm very interested if you know of a silent system to ventilate the rams (my fans run between 600 and 800rpm, silence is very important to me).
> What do you think of the G-skill 6400 cl 32 (hynix) rams? I see that the 6600 also exists but the price would make me go for the 6400.
> 
> Do you think that with 4 rams Hynix I could reach xmp on my hero ?
> I'm not counting OC, I'm too bad for that...


If you get heatsink-less DIMMs you won't have to open them up or void warranty XD.


----------



## Nawak

affxct said:


> If you get heatsink-less DIMMs you won't have to open them up or void warranty XD.


Yes, but you were talking about a system with a fan?
Were you thinking of a case fan?


----------



## affxct

Nawak said:


> Yes, but you were talking about a system with a fan?


Oh, no I just mean if you aren't using liquid for the RAM sticks then you should point a fan at then or get a RAM cooler (they're not that easy to find so that's why I said fan). Technically we should all use RAM coolers irrespective of whether our DIMMs have fancy heatsinks or not, but when the sticks are bare it's especially effective.


----------



## killer01ws6

affxct said:


> Honestly I have no clue. All I know is that I'm never purchasing from G.Skill ever again. I mean why should we? OEM Hynix, Klevv Hynix, Adata, Patriot, Teamgroup and Corsair all exist.


I am sending them back to the Egg now, while it is not a hassle, later it would be.
went with CMT32GX5M2X6200C36 Corsair kit.

These are a Hynix kit, which from everything I see, does better than the Samsungs


----------



## affxct

killer01ws6 said:


> I am sending them back to the Egg now, while it is not a hassle, later it would be.
> went with CMT32GX5M2X6200C36 Corsair kit.
> 
> These are a Hynix kit, which from everything I see, does better than the Samsungs


Those are great from what I've heard.


----------



## Afferin

killer01ws6 said:


> I am sending them back to the Egg now, while it is not a hassle, later it would be.
> went with CMT32GX5M2X6200C36 Corsair kit.
> 
> These are a Hynix kit, which from everything I see, does better than the Samsungs


I've used 4 separate kits of this model and I've had a pretty good experience with all but one of them. Solid choice! Hope to see some baller OCs from you!


----------



## killer01ws6

affxct said:


> Those are great from what I've heard.


Thank you for the help!


----------



## killer01ws6

Afferin said:


> I've used 4 separate kits of this model and I've had a pretty good experience with all but one of them. Solid choice! Hope to see some baller OCs from you!


That even further makes me feel good about the swap.. awesome community and help.. Thank you.


----------



## affxct

killer01ws6 said:


> Thank you for the help!


Anytime


----------



## affxct

TSportM said:


> have you tried all the sticks individualy ?
> 
> have you tried 2 placed in the correct manner ? (pic below)


His sticks are dead bro, trust me.



adna said:


> Strix-f bios 1505 test
> still at 6666.
> 6800 can't pass tm5 with no error.
> 
> a-data lacer 6000c40 2x16g
> sa | vdd | vddq | tx | mc
> 0.9 | 1.47 | 1.47 | 1.3 | 1.25
> View attachment 2564420


Wait, ANPEC PMICs with Hynix? Odd.


----------



## TSportM

just arrive my thermalright frame, iam using the thermal grizzly one but after 15 atempts its ok but not 100% optimal it moves alot and the tightening thing is a hit and miss, think the thermalright one is alot more solid and does not move arround alot, what is the tightining required ? 0 force (just barely to screws dont move) or a litle squeeze at the end ?

cheers


----------



## killer01ws6

TSportM said:


> just arrive my thermalright frame, iam using the thermal grizzly one but after 15 atempts its ok but not 100% optimal it moves alot and the tightening thing is a hit and miss, think the thermalright one is alot more solid and does not move arround alot, what is the tightining required ? 0 force (just barely to screws dont move) or a litle squeeze at the end ?
> 
> cheers


it is supposed to be finger tight alternating, then a 90* or 1/4 turn final seat


----------



## affxct

So it seems that after *clearing CMOS* while doing some testing, the XMP and OC I had stable have both destabilized on my primary BIOS chip. I kinda knew it was a bad idea but I couldn't really help myself. Yeah I dunno by this point. I guess that's that for me.


----------



## toncij

Anyone here having a strange issue with G.Skill Z5s?

I have a kit oh Hynix 1.4V 6400 CL32 2x16GB. It's stable on my Apex with or without a bump in voltages.

Or not.

Actually, the only pattern I've noticed going through 4 boards and 3 memory kits (all identical) is: Z5 kits work flawlessly until they heat up to mid 50s Celsius.

I've tested multiple times in an open bench: keeping them cool at about mid 40s is all green all night and day long. Even a few days with zero errors.
*BUT* If I let them heat up to mid 50s, meaning without an active 140mm Noctua blowing to them, I get all red in Memtest. Of course, first issues were classic chrome tab snaps and game crashes, tool crashes etc, then Memtest proved there are errors.

GSkill claims their kits should be fine up to 80ish Celsius. However, 3 kits I've tested, brand new, all exhibit same behaviour: get to mid 50s, spew errors. Kept at mid 40s, all dandy.

Is this... normal? Why is GSkill claiming it should be fine while it's obviously the heat.

Came to my mind that maybe the board is having issues with slots being warm, but that is such a wild idea... makes zero sense.


----------



## bigfootnz

toncij said:


> Anyone here having a strange issue with G.Skill Z5s?
> 
> I have a kit oh Hynix 1.4V 6400 CL32 2x16GB. It's stable on my Apex with or without a bump in voltages.
> 
> Or not.
> 
> Actually, the only pattern I've noticed going through 4 boards and 3 memory kits (all identical) is: Z5 kits work flawlessly until they heat up to mid 50s Celsius.
> 
> I've tested multiple times in an open bench: keeping them cool at about mid 40s is all green all night and day long. Even a few days with zero errors.
> *BUT* If I let them heat up to mid 50s, meaning without an active 140mm Noctua blowing to them, I get all red in Memtest. Of course, first issues were classic chrome tab snaps and game crashes, tool crashes etc, then Memtest proved there are errors.
> 
> GSkill claims their kits should be fine up to 80ish Celsius. However, 3 kits I've tested, brand new, all exhibit same behaviour: get to mid 50s, spew errors. Kept at mid 40s, all dandy.
> 
> Is this... normal? Why is GSkill claiming it should be fine while it's obviously the heat.
> 
> Came to my mind that maybe the board is having issues with slots being warm, but that is such a wild idea... makes zero sense.


In my opinion this is normal with DDR5, as they are really temperature dependent. 
See this my post which is regard to tWRWRsg which is really temperature dependent.









*Official* Intel DDR5 OC and 24/7 daily Memory Stability...


Had some free time since I had to take some time off work for personal issues, spent the night fine tuning my terts. Probably as tight as can be given my current hardware. I'm pretty pleased with this, shall hold me till the next hynix die comes along or all the way till MTL. Ignore time for YC...




www.overclock.net





GSkill is claiming up to 80C but they are not saying with which timings, just like every manufacturer they are just cherry picking what suits them best.


----------



## killer01ws6

Quick Q for you memory OC masters.
I have started my box testing and have done a lot of the included memtest passes, I did my stock board bios, all stock and with XMP enabled, the updated to 1505 repeated same process.. I noticed last night when I enable XMP I as expected, see more heat during the testing, but noticed it still shows RAM info: PC5-4800 DDR5 4806MHZ 40-40-40-77 no matter if I have defaults or XMP and in BIOs it show my Memory as DDR5-6200 36-39-39-76, which is what I expect it to be.. I am saving and exit, restarting between changes, so am I doing something wrong or this is just what it shows.


----------



## bscool

killer01ws6 said:


> Quick Q for you memory OC masters.
> I have started my box testing and have done a lot of the included memtest passes, I did my stock board bios, all stock and with XMP enabled, the updated to 1505 repeated same process.. I noticed last night when I enable XMP I as expected, see more heat during the testing, but noticed it still shows RAM info: PC5-4800 DDR5 4806MHZ 40-40-40-77 no matter if I have defaults or XMP and in BIOs it show my Memory as DDR5-6200 36-39-39-76, which is what I expect it to be.. I am saving and exit, restarting between changes, so am I doing something wrong or this is just what it shows.


What software are you using to read the memory clocks and timings? I like Asrock timing config or memtweakit.

Z690 Bios and Tools You can download them from there.


----------



## affxct

killer01ws6 said:


> Quick Q for you memory OC masters.
> I have started my box testing and have done a lot of the included memtest passes, I did my stock board bios, all stock and with XMP enabled, the updated to 1505 repeated same process.. I noticed last night when I enable XMP I as expected, see more heat during the testing, but noticed it still shows RAM info: PC5-4800 DDR5 4806MHZ 40-40-40-77 no matter if I have defaults or XMP and in BIOs it show my Memory as DDR5-6200 36-39-39-76, which is what I expect it to be.. I am saving and exit, restarting between changes, so am I doing something wrong or this is just what it shows.


Your first problem is using 1505 tbh.


----------



## killer01ws6

bscool said:


> What software are you using to read the memory clocks and timings? I like Asrock timing config or memtweakit.
> 
> Z690 Bios and Tools You can download them from there.


I am all test box and bios right now, no OS or anything I am using the memtest in BIOs.. I wanted to kick it hard many times as I have the frame on and know incorrect mounting pressure can cause memory issues also. I am OCD, can't help it ha


----------



## bscool

killer01ws6 said:


> I am all test box and bios right now, no OS or anything I am using the memtest in BIOs.. I wanted to kick it hard many times as I have the frame on and know incorrect mounting pressure can cause memory issues also. I am OCD, can't help it ha


Oh yeah the bios memtest will not show the set memory clocks and timings. Also not a very good test but better than nothing.


----------



## killer01ws6

affxct said:


> Your first problem is using 1505 tbh.


I have to admit, I wondered if it was reading right in 1304 and I did not notice difference until 1505, both versions XMP draws more heat than all stock settings, so I know it is doing something, tests seems to take less time to run also on XMP.. just odd to me no display change in the test.


----------



## killer01ws6

bscool said:


> Oh yeah the bios memtest will not show the set memory clocks and timings. Also not a very good test but better than nothing.


Ahhh ha ha.. okay.. so I have done about all I can on the box, time to take it apart and build in the case..

Thanks guys


----------



## affxct

killer01ws6 said:


> Ahhh ha ha.. okay.. so I have done about all I can on the box, time to take it apart and build in the case..
> 
> Thanks guys


Ohhhhhhhhh I just realized that. AFAIK yeah that's correct, it's basically reading you your ICs' JEDEC settings. I thought you had booted to OS already. With that being said, 1304 is still way better.


----------



## Maj0

anyone is having a current beta bios for z690 apex - 1505 sucks hard - dont want to roll back


----------



## affxct

Maj0 said:


> anyone is having a current beta bios for z690 apex - 1505 sucks hard - dont want to roll back


Back to 1304, sir.


----------



## Nizzen

Maj0 said:


> anyone is having a current beta bios for z690 apex - 1505 sucks hard - dont want to roll back


If you have 12900ks and love ddr5 OC:






Test BIOS | bianbao.dev







bianbao.dev


----------



## sblantipodi

affxct said:


> Back to 1304, sir.


I imagine Asus engineers laughing out loud reading these comments.
They changed nothing but the version number on new bioses and users complains about one bios Being more stable than the other xD

I'm pretty sure that the changes are so minor that most of the instabilities are users fault.
You have an unstable oc, when you upgraded to 1505 you runned a test and it was unlucky, then you downgraded to 1304 and you runned a test that was lucky.

Ends of the story.


----------



## affxct

sblantipodi said:


> I imagine Asus engineers laughing out loud reading these comments.
> They changed nothing but the version number on new bioses and users complains about one bios Being more stable than the other xD
> 
> I'm pretty sure that the changes are so minor that most of the instabilities are users fault.
> You have an unstable oc, when you upgraded to 1505 you runned a test and it was unlucky, then you downgraded to 1304 and you runned a test that was lucky.
> 
> Ends of the story.


I think the tweaks are minor, but in some cases the variance in stability is probably large. I can deduce how bad a BIOS is for my board by measuring how long it takes XMP to error with fully auto settings. The better the BIOS, the better it supports horrible settings.

I know you're not happy with your board and that's totally okay. If you feel as though you didn't get your money's worth out of the Extreme, I don't blame you for it at all. But do you really think the Asus engineers are looking at our conversations on OCN laughing at our struggles? 

I just don't think people are all that evil. If anything, Asus is aware they screwed up, and corporate and the engineers are probably on edge trying to bury it and make sure it doesn't happen on Z790. I predict the Z790 Apex to support DDR5-7200 out of the box and be clockable up to DDR5-8400 for benchmarks such as y-cruncher on the XOC end.


----------



## FreeSpeechIsKnowledge

affxct said:


> I think the tweaks are minor, but in some cases the variance in stability is probably large. I can deduce how bad a BIOS is for my board by measuring how long it takes XMP to error with fully auto settings. The better the BIOS, the better it supports horrible settings.
> 
> I know you're not happy with your board and that's totally okay. If you feel as though you didn't get your money's worth out of the Extreme, I don't blame you for it at all. But do you really think the Asus engineers are looking at our conversations on OCN laughing at our struggles?
> 
> I just don't think people are all that evil. If anything, Asus is aware they screwed up, and corporate and the engineers are probably on edge trying to bury it and make sure it doesn't happen on Z790. I predict the Z790 Apex to support DDR5-7200 out of the box and be clockable up to DDR5-8400 for benchmarks such as y-cruncher on the XOC end.



My apex works fine. Whatever hardware issue was wrong with my first one is not present on the second one. Whatever it was it was a hardware issue they have never admitted or talked about, that I'm aware of anyway. They wouldn't tell me anything but a hardware issue that's not resolvable.


----------



## affxct

FreeSpeechIsKnowledge said:


> My apex works fine. Whatever hardware issue was wrong with my first one is not present on the second one. Whatever it was it was a hardware issue they have never admitted or talked about, that I'm aware of anyway. They wouldn't tell me anything but a hardware issue that's not resolvable.


My current Apex is clear CMOS stable at 6133-CR1. It's probably just a manufacturing issue with the DIMMs or the traces tbh.


----------



## toncij

Now I wonder, if people can run 6400 kits up to 6800, guess 6000 kits of 2x32 could be ran at 6400...


----------



## TSportM

Video from GN on the TG contact frame - method





the igors lab method 








German Engineered Bend Aids for Intels LGA1700 – Thermal Grizzly CPU Contact Frame and Alphacool Apex Backplate Thermal Testing | Review | Page 2 | igor'sLAB


The LGA1700 socket, which Intel introduced for the 12th generation of their Core CPUs last November, is known to have one or two problems with bending hardware. For context, I recommend our other two…




www.igorslab.de





for me the igors lab method (showed in is video) worked best, the cooler pressure also take part on the pressure, specialy its a custom watercooler (block)

cheers


----------



## sblantipodi

Contact frames helps if the CPU is brand new, but what about if the CPU is already bent?


----------



## IronAge

bscool said:


> Oh yeah the bios memtest will not show the set memory clocks and timings. Also not a very good test but better than nothing.


Estimated ~5$ per Pro licence was just too much for Asus for a ~750$ motherboard. 

Try not to give too much to your customers, they could be satisfied and no need to buy again.  

Only the Pro version features DDR5/DDR4/EPP/XMP SPD reporting.

Probably some remember DFI Lanparty NF-4D which got memtest like how many, yeah 17 years ago.


----------



## ChaosAD

Asus still refuse to confirm the issue with the Apex motherboard, that is a production issue and you want them to pay extra money on top of that? What are you guys smoking? Do you think you are some kind of special costumer for paying 700 euros for a mobo? Cmon wake up


----------



## TSportM

sblantipodi said:


> Contact frames helps if the CPU is brand new, but what about if the CPU is already bent?


used it on my previous 12900K no problems and temps improved, using it on the KS same deal cant compare as i did not use the KS with the stock ILM, but on the K that was used on the stock ILM did the diference 


cheers


----------



## sblantipodi

TSportM said:


> used it on my previous 12900K no problems and temps improved, using it on the KS same deal cant compare as i did not use the KS with the stock ILM, but on the K that was used on the stock ILM did the diference
> cheers


is it known if raptor will suffer from the same issue? is there some comments on this from INtel?


----------



## IronAge

ChaosAD said:


> Asus still refuse to confirm the issue with the Apex motherboard, that is a production issue and you want them to pay extra money on top of that? What are you guys smoking? Do you think you are some kind of special costumer for paying 700 euros for a mobo? Cmon wake up


get ready for next rip-off.

for the highest CPU Turbo Boost Ratio with Raptor Lake a motherboard with Z790 chipset will be most likely required, not to speak of next Gen DDR5.

I mean most retail Apex will not even run DDR5-6600 without hassle.  

i consider msyself lucky that i have been able to do 6666 1N with only B1 equipped with ONE of my two 2021-11 Apex.


----------



## Nizzen

IronAge said:


> get ready for next rip-off.
> 
> for the highest CPU Turbo Boost Ratio with Raptor Lake a motherboard with Z790 chipset will be most likely required, not to speak of next Gen DDR5.
> 
> I mean most retail Apex will not even run DDR5-6600 without hassle.
> 
> i consider msyself lucky that i have been able to do 6666 1N with only B1 equipped with ONE of my two 2021-11 Apex.


Unify-x and Apex sux 
Both shows many people can't do 7k....


----------



## IronAge

There is a reason that Asus has introduced a QVL limit of DDR5-6400 for 12900K/KS/KF, that is no coincidence.

frankly said i have never been that indignant about the warranty policy of a company in the PC business before.

i have bought two G7400 in order to try 6800, but both boards will not even post @ DDR5-6800, no matter which DIMM slot i equipped.

trying to sell one mint condition Apex without retail box (got lost during RMA, accessories been put in storage by the reseller) for less than 450$. 

NO ****IN way - nobody wants it.  😠


----------



## IronAge

Nizzen said:


> Unify-x and Apex sux
> Both shows many people can't do 7k....


yeah, you gotto be one of the overclocking super-heroes that received an Apex that actually can achieve >= DDR5-7000 ?!

i will be glad to sell you my retail Apex for let's say 400$, then you can showcase your "skills" with this Apex.


----------



## TSportM

sblantipodi said:


> is it known if raptor will suffer from the same issue? is there some comments on this from INtel?


Dont see them changing the ILM, they can use some kind of force spreader on the back like the alphacool bending corretor, but really dont belive they will change the ILM in any way what so ever, its the same socket 1700/1800 the only diference (maybe) is that 13 gen will use the other 100 pins 

alphacool 1700 corretor frame:


----------



## TSportM

IronAge said:


> yeah, you gotto be one of the overclocking super-heroes that received an Apex that actually can achieve >= DDR5-7000 ?!
> 
> i will be glad to sell you my retail Apex for let's say 400$, then you can showcase your "skills" with this Apex.


i can do 7000 on my extreme it will show erros sometimes on memory stress but no crashes, i belive that with the right set of bios it will improve, Asus just need to get there act......

now intel is pulling some **** on the voltage controller for the new Z790, and Z690 will be bahhh, hope tjhis will not kill the Z690 users


----------



## Martin778

ChaosAD said:


> Asus still refuse to confirm the issue with the Apex motherboard, that is a production issue and you want them to pay extra money on top of that? What are you guys smoking? Do you think you are some kind of special costumer for paying 700 euros for a mobo? Cmon wake up


Haha, at least they don't burn out CPU's the same way ASUS X99 boards dit....yet  ASUS is shady company in that regard.
Mine is already randomly crashing apps after running well for quite some time. Wondering if it's another DDR5 kit about to die from XMP...first the 6000 C36 Sammys gave up.

+
Really, screw modern platforms all together...with lots of difficulties finally managed to update to BIOS 1505, enabled XMP II and didn't touch anyhting else.
Started a game - IRQL_NOT_LESS_OR_EQUAL but 30 minuts of Cinebench R20 is not a problem, max temp peaked at 82*C. No errors in Memtest either.
Same trash as X570...again - wouldn't even run for a year without getting wonky performance.
I still have an antique X99 setup and besides ASUS boards notorious for killing CPU's - zero issues of the Z690. OC'ed and rock stable.


----------



## Nizzen

IronAge said:


> yeah, you gotto be one of the overclocking super-heroes that received an Apex that actually can achieve >= DDR5-7000 ?!
> 
> i will be glad to sell you my retail Apex for let's say 400$, then you can showcase your "skills" with this Apex.


Why so toxic?
I just said both unify x and apex users has problems with 7k  Looks to be very true.

I never talked about skills...

There is no doubt some have more skills than others. Just look at sugi0lover . He's coming with great results every hw season


----------



## affxct

IronAge said:


> yeah, you gotto be one of the overclocking super-heroes that received an Apex that actually can achieve >= DDR5-7000 ?!
> 
> i will be glad to sell you my retail Apex for let's say 400$, then you can showcase your "skills" with this Apex.


Let's all just calm down. It's not that serious.


----------



## affxct

Martin778 said:


> Haha, at least they don't burn out CPU's the same way ASUS X99 boards dit....yet  ASUS is shady company in that regard.
> Mine is already randomly crashing apps after running well for quite some time. Wondering if it's another DDR5 kit about to die from XMP...first the 6000 C36 Sammys gave up.
> 
> +
> Really, screw modern platforms all together...with lots of difficulties finally managed to update to BIOS 1505, enabled XMP II and didn't touch anyhting else.
> Started a game - IRQL_NOT_LESS_OR_EQUAL but 30 minuts of Cinebench R20 is not a problem, max temp peaked at 82*C. No errors in Memtest either.
> Same trash as X570...again - wouldn't even run for a year without getting wonky performance.
> I still have an antique X99 setup and besides ASUS boards notorious for killing CPU's - zero issues of the Z690. OC'ed and rock stable.


I noticed that my Z5 sticks with ANPEC PMICs, and the ANPEC PMIC on one of my Adata Lancer DIMMs would occasionally output 1.8V on VDD or VDDQ. I think this occasional misregulation is what's been killing DIMMs. Hynix sticks usually have Richteck PMICs, and I've honestly found them to be far more reliable.


----------



## IronAge

Nizzen said:


> I never talked about skills...
> 
> There is no doubt some have more skills than others. Just look at sugi0lover . He's coming with great results every hw season


your posts with your not so subtle winky smileys imply everyone who can't reach higher than average OC on these boards has limited abilities, bad IMC/insufficient cooling, whatsoever.

there are people who know how to push CPU & memory, have adequate cooling, CPUs with good IMC and still are hold back by a crappy Asus retail motherboard for 750$ 
or even more.


----------



## Nizzen

IronAge said:


> your posts with your not so subtle winky smileys imply everyone who can't reach higher than average OC on these boards has limited abilities, bad IMC/insufficient cooling, whatsoever.
> 
> there are people who know how to push CPU & memory, have adequate cooling, CPUs with good IMC and still are hold back by a crappy Asus retail motherboard for 750$
> or even more.


I don't imply. I overclock. No reason to be toxic. 
Love from Norway


----------



## TSportM

What asus should do is invest on making a strong bios for this top tier boards, launching alot of bios with minor fixes or none does not help.

i would go evga next time even if i have to import the board


----------



## FreeSpeechIsKnowledge

TSportM said:


> What asus should do is invest on making a strong bios for this top tier boards, launching alot of bios with minor fixes or none does not help.
> 
> i would go evga next time even if i have to import the board



I've said this as well. It's the only solution.


----------



## Groove2013

TSportM said:


> Video from GN on the TG contact frame - method
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the igors lab method
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> German Engineered Bend Aids for Intels LGA1700 – Thermal Grizzly CPU Contact Frame and Alphacool Apex Backplate Thermal Testing | Review | Page 2 | igor'sLAB
> 
> 
> The LGA1700 socket, which Intel introduced for the 12th generation of their Core CPUs last November, is known to have one or two problems with bending hardware. For context, I recommend our other two…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.igorslab.de
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> for me the igors lab method (showed in is video) worked best, the cooler pressure also take part on the pressure, specialy its a custom watercooler (block)
> 
> cheers


I have simply removed the retaining mechanism and the CPU is pressed down only by the waterblock itself and no RAM problems and no bents )))


----------



## IronAge

Nizzen said:


> I don't imply. I overclock. No reason to be toxic.
> Love from Norway


thats not toxic at all, it is more like an appopriate and yet still polite reaction to your little awkward provocations towards buyers of at best mediocre retail boards.


----------



## Herald

Nizzen said:


> Unify-x and Apex sux
> Both shows many people can't do 7k....


Not even a contest. My apex only boots 4800 1t and is stable at 5200 2T. Unisex does 6000c30 1t with no issues, sammy dies on air.


----------



## Herald

IronAge said:


> thats not toxic at all, it is more like an appopriate and yet still polite reaction to your little awkward provocations towards buyers of at best mediocre retail boards.


Apex 11 2020 isnt mediocre. Gigabyte boards are mediocre. Apex is borderline trash.

And the only thing worse than their mobos is their support. Sent mine for RMA, perfectly describing the problem. They returned it back as perfectly fine. Basically the tested whether or not it boots in xmp and that was it 😂


----------



## affxct

Okay so; having a really good IMC actually makes a freakin' HUGE difference to memory training and max achievable 1T/2T results on my M0EAY0 Apex, and it seems as though sometimes you need to decrease tCL, and some of the tertiaries to improve stability. With my Apex, it's moreso that training and stability is better, not necessarily that I can suddenly boot 7000Mbps+ (I still cannot).


----------



## affxct

Herald said:


> Not even a contest. My apex only boots 4800 1t and is stable at 5200 2T. Unisex does 6000c30 1t with no issues, sammy dies on air.


Heeeeeeeeeh what.


----------



## primoz.osolnik0

What...ok that is really bad. I also have a november 2021 Apex and Gskill 6000 cl36 samsung ram. 6000mhz frequency doesn work stable, and it is just on that veird line where it can work for a week before bsod. I could run aida test or kurhu for 10 hours and it would not found an error. that borderline unstability drove me crazy for 3 months as I basicly didnt know what was wrong until whole apex ram thing blew up. Now since late april I am stable at 5800 without issue. At least I am able to tighten other stuff so running at CR1 5800mhz 32,34,34,53.


----------



## Herald

primoz.osolnik0 said:


> What...ok that is really bad. I also have a november 2021 Apex and Gskill 6000 cl36 samsung ram. 6000mhz frequency doesn work stable, and it is just on that veird line where it can work for a week before bsod. I could run aida test or kurhu for 10 hours and it would not found an error. that borderline unstability drove me crazy for 3 months as I basicly didnt know what was wrong until whole apex ram thing blew up. Now since late april I am stable at 5800 without issue. At least I am able to tighten other stuff so running at CR1 5800mhz 32,34,34,53.


Buy a unisex. Xmp will work, even ocing them will work with no hassle whatsoever. Im running 6000c30 1t with the same kit


----------



## primoz.osolnik0

I am not bujing another board...no one will buy apex after its issues especially in my country when everyone is suspicious why new tech is being sold. At that settings it is working actually better than xmp would. I wouldnt see difference anyway...if I will buy another board it will be Z790...which is 3 or 4 months away now anyway.


----------



## dyanikoglu

Make sure you don't buy Asus lol, the thread is mostly abandoned after the recent sh*tshow.


----------



## TraumatikOC

Dont know if Extreme owners are also having the 6000+mhz ddr5 problems but.... I have the Asus z690 extreme and i went thru 2 12900k sp79 sp83 and also 12900ks sp83 and now 12900ks sp93. I thought this sp93 was going to work (have better imc then my last 3 12900) but was unstable also in Division 2, crashing constantly at 6000. All processors at 5800mhz seemed stable tho and also memtests were good. In bios i tried all kinds of voltages for memory and system agent, including the ones in the alder lake OC pdf i found in another forum. 
I also have Teamgroup 6200 cl38 2x16 and it would do the same as this Gskill 6000 cl36 2x16. Yes they were in A2 B2 slots. My cpu is cooled by arctic freezer 420 with their backplate and i dont overtighten the bolts. I really need to dig out the box and see manu date of it, the z690 extreme. Just wondering if it / these have same problem as the apex boards.


----------



## Martin778

Is Unisex some kind of funny name for Unify-X?  Shame that EVGA still managed to shoot themselves in the foot again (their feet must be like swiss cheese by now) by not bothering with releasing stuff in the EU or only releasing it in the EU after the plaform is near EOL or being surpassed by a new model / gen.


----------



## affxct

Dll_bwsel 25 is actually low-key crucial

That combined with all the other training measures, and Maximus Tweak Mode II

When you raise VDD2, you need to raise VCCSA, and when you raise VCCSA you need to raise VDD2 (on Asus). Once you reach a VDD2 value that is fairly high but stable, you should be fine. I find that OCs that require suspiciously low VDD2 and SA tend to be reboot unstable.


----------



## IronAge

Martin778 said:


> Shame that EVGA still managed to shoot themselves in the foot again (their feet must be like swiss cheese by now) by not bothering with releasing stuff in the EU or only releasing it in the EU after the plaform is near EOL or being surpassed by a new model / gen.


so true, in the USA EVGA offers the Dark Kingpin with a 130$ rebate for 699,99$ now.

it is still not cheap but it would be still worth it for having fun with memory oc unlike with 95% of the retail Apex.

a guy from germany had to go through 12-13 Apex to find ONE retail sample that works as he expected, considering the high price.


----------



## affxct

Good morning guys. 

I would just like to say that after checking the Taichi page out of curiosity, I got to thinking about BIOSs and realised that we might get a new one eventually. I think the next BIOS is going to be a banger. I can feel it in my bones. 🤭


----------



## affxct

IronAge said:


> so true, in the USA EVGA offers the Dark Kingpin with a 130$ rebate for 699,99$ now.
> 
> it is still not cheap but it would be still worth it for having fun with memory oc unlike with 95% of the retail Apex.
> 
> a guy from germany had to go through 12-13 Apex to find ONE retail sample that works as he expected, considering the high price.


I thought about ordering it because the discount actually covers shipping and customs to my country. I eventually realised that this platform is dead, it still costs more than my Apex cost me by a full $300, and above all else, how would one go about installing a RAM cooler when the DIMMs are horizontal. I mean I don't even think my AIO tubes will be maneuverable. I never really understood it. Does flipping the CPU socket actually help or do they just do it to make it look extreme? Genuine question.


----------



## Herald

IronAge said:


> a guy from germany had to go through 12-13 Apex to find ONE retail sample that works as he expected, considering the high price.


Well, according to Asus, since there is no official announcement about the "issue", logic dictates that there is no actual problem. So all of the 12-13 Apex that he went through work as expected, according to Asus. They just made a terrible motherboard, thats all  

If I still don't get my money back after trying for the 2nd time, my mobo goes to Steve from gnexus


----------



## affxct

I just wanted to ask, have any of you guys tried out bianbao's 0070, 0086 and 0090 test BIOSs? Wondering if they're worth a shot or if 1304 is more consistent.


----------



## affxct

Herald said:


> Well, according to Asus, since there is no official announcement about the "issue", logic dictates that there is no actual problem. So all of the 12-13 Apex that he went through work as expected, according to Asus. They just made a terrible motherboard, thats all
> 
> If I still don't get my money back after trying for the 2nd time, my mobo goes to Steve from gnexus


He won't know what to test for, he'd need to pass it through to BZ for a collab, and BZ will basically compare it to his own one. Asus might try to shun him again like they did before, but perhaps GN can get on Asus for it. It's tough to know how it'll play out. Tbh an Apex is not cheap. I'm not sure if I'd bother donating it. Just find your minimum frequency and 1T it with CAS 28 or 30. Then tighten up the tertiaries like crazy.


----------



## Shawnb99

affxct said:


> He won't know what to test for, he'd need to pass it through to BZ for a collab, and BZ will basically compare it to his own one. Asus might try to shun him again like they did before, but perhaps GN can get on Asus for it. It's tough to know how it'll play out. Tbh an Apex is not cheap. I'm not sure if I'd bother donating it. Just find your minimum frequency and 1T it with CAS 28 or 30. Then tighten up the tertiaries like crazy.


Donating it might be our only option. All I’ve done is keep marking mine down and no one will even touch it, even at $500. 
I have a Extreme I’m stuck with as well and might as well use that for the 10Gbe, the Apex is just a expensive paper weight. 
So really other then donating it, what other options do we have?


----------



## affxct

Shawnb99 said:


> Donating it might be our only option. All I’ve done is keep marking mine down and no one will even touch it, even at $500.
> I have a Extreme I’m stuck with as well and might as well use that for the 10Gbe, the Apex is just a expensive paper weight.
> So really other then donating it, what other options do we have?


Come on now. Ok let's start from the top, what does your current board max data rate seem to be and what ICs do you have?


----------



## Herald

affxct said:


> He won't know what to test for, he'd need to pass it through to BZ for a collab, and BZ will basically compare it to his own one. Asus might try to shun him again like they did before, but perhaps GN can get on Asus for it. It's tough to know how it'll play out. Tbh an Apex is not cheap. I'm not sure if I'd bother donating it. Just find your minimum frequency and 1T it with CAS 28 or 30. Then tighten up the tertiaries like crazy.


My maximum 1t frequency is...4800mhz  

I have a unify X now, im not bothering with that piece of garbage anymore. I don't mind donating to gnexus.


----------



## affxct

Herald said:


> My maximum 1t frequency is...4800mhz
> 
> I have a unify X now, im not bothering with that piece of garbage anymore. I don't mind donating to gnexus.


Are you absolutely sure? That is so insane to me. Like goodness. I picked up one of these throw-away Apex's from Amazon UK for dirt cheap and someone's last attempt was test BIOS 0090. I currently have it doing 6400C30 1T. I'm no OC expert, and I'm sure he wouldn't have minded this sort of a result. I just struggle to believe that it does merely 4800. ASUS needs to RMA that, like that's pathetic. That's genuinely faulty. I'm really sorry about that man.


----------



## Herald

affxct said:


> I just wanted to ask, have any of you guys tried out bianbao's 0070, 0086 and 0090 test BIOSs? Wondering if they're worth a shot or if 1304 is more consistent.


With a 0806 bios I could boot 6000 1T, but of course no stability whatsover. With the 1304 I can only boot at 4800 1t , although its stable. Doesn't make much of a difference to be honest, ive tested every bios, the mobo is absolute trash.

With the unisex I haven't even bothered bios updating, I have the one it shipped with. It runs like a charm, no reason to even bother with it, 6000 c30-34-34 at 1t, instaboots and fully stable.


----------



## Herald

affxct said:


> Are you absolutely sure? That is so insane to me. Like goodness. I picked up one of these throw-away Apex's from Amazon UK for dirt cheap and someone's last attempt was test BIOS 0090. I currently have it doing 6400C30 1T. I'm no OC expert, and I'm sure he wouldn't have minded this sort of a result. I just struggle to believe that it does merely 4800. ASUS needs to RMA that, like that's pathetic. That's genuinely faulty. I'm really sorry about that man.


Yeah, i've done everything humanly possible. Slot B works absolutely fine, boots at 6600, probably it can even stabilise up there. Slot A just doesn't give a damn, it's just either not booting or bsoding / crashing.


----------



## affxct

Herald said:


> With a 0806 bios I could boot 6000 1T, but of course no stability whatsover. With the 1304 I can only boot at 4800 1t , although its stable. Doesn't make much of a difference to be honest, ive tested every bios, the mobo is absolute trash.
> 
> With the unisex I haven't even bothered bios updating, I have the one it shipped with. It runs like a charm, no reason to even bother with it, 6000 c30-34-34 at 1t, instaboots and fully stable.


I assume Samsung ICs?


----------



## Herald

affxct said:


> I assume Samsung ICs?


Yeap


----------



## affxct

Herald said:


> Yeah, i've done everything humanly possible. Slot B works absolutely fine, boots at 6600, probably it can even stabilise up there. Slot A just doesn't give a damn, it's just either not booting or bsoding / crashing.


Yeah I'm not going to press you. I assume you tried everything anyone else would've. Damn that's weird. Actually kinda scary. I probably wouldn't have gambled on purchasing mine if I had known some samples could get this bad. Out of curiosity have you tried Hynix ICs on it?


----------



## Shawnb99

affxct said:


> Come on now. Ok let's start from the top, what does your current board max data rate seem to be and what ICs do you have?


I have no idea on any of this. I just know I have an Apex I can’t sell for lack of trying. I’m too stupid to understand half of what you said or how to even test any of that.


----------



## Herald

affxct said:


> Yeah I'm not going to press you. I assume you tried everything anyone else would've. Damn that's weird. Actually kinda scary. I probably wouldn't have gambled on purchasing mine if I had known some samples could get this bad. Out of curiosity have you tried Hynix ICs on it?


Haven't tried hynix cause I thought it's my IMC that's the problem so I saw no point in trying different dimms. When I realized it's the apex thats complete ****, I bought a unisex and never looked back.

Regarding slot A,I was testing it for weeks, every possible combination, fully laxed timings and active cooling just to get it to stabilise at 6000. Nope, nothing worked.


----------



## affxct

@Herald @Shawnb99

So basically I've tested every tier possible. I've owned the Strix Z690-F, ASRock Taichi, and finally the Apex. I've used four i9s. 12900K SP 81, 96, 79 and a KF 84 that I currently own (golden IMC somehow as well). Kits I've used are a 5600C36 Z5 Samsung, 6000C36 Z5 Samsung, 6000C40 Adata Samsung, second 6000C40 Adata Samsung, and finally 6400C40 Adata Hynix.

The first Z5 kit couldn't train XMP on three different CPUs, one was my SP 81 i9 and the others were my friend's and the one belonging to the PC store. The Samsung kit on the Z690-F required much higher SA than on the Taichi, and the values either board picked for VDD2 were vastly different. The Samsungs on The Z690-F scaled remarkably well with tRAS and tRC, somehow skying both allowed me to hit 6400 reboot stable. The Adata kit on the Taichi behaved totally differently because it seems as though Asus did the traces much more differently and SA and VDD2 work out to be either far higher or lower than the other vendors.

With my Apex; XMP is only stable on the odd occasion with a fresh BIOS flash, but the values are way too wrong to be reboot stable. 6133 28-37-37-28 1T was a shot in the dark I took and I managed to get it stable with my first batch of settings that I no joke made up in under 60 seconds and the same settings re-passed 10K Karhu after a CMOS clear with a new chip. What I can deduce is that every board has a happy data rate and if you try to get to close to the edge the borderline for stability becomes thinner and thinner to the point where every setting matters and a clear CMOS will break stability. It could very well be that the Apex was simply never optimized for Samsung sticks.

My Z690-F initially couldn't run my first kit at JEDEC. It would crash at 4800 and my PC was basically unusable until BIOS 0811 that somehow allowed me to run 5600 40-40-40-40 @ 1.1VDD/Q. It might be worth getting a Hynix kit or a different CPU sample via a trade. Where I live the enthusiast community is kinda small so I trade i9s as often as I see them available just to see if a good IMC comes along. This new one that I have can do 6400 1T whereas the old IMC could not.

I obviously can't tell you guys what to do with your money, but what I can say is that it might be worth checking if Hynix and one of the test BIOSs don't perhaps help your boards out and you can attempt a sale. Try to sell them on platforms where buyers won't be asking questions like "can this do 6800C30 1T!?" With that said I do believe both of you and I really hope there's a not so bad outcome. If either of you lived in South Africa you'd have easily secured $450 sales XD.


----------



## Herald

affxct said:


> @Herald @Shawnb99
> I obviously can't tell you guys what to do with your money, but what I can say is that it might be worth checking if Hynix and one of the test BIOSs don't perhaps help your boards out and you can attempt a sale. Try to sell them on platforms where buyers won't be asking questions like "can this do 6800C30 1T!?" With that said I do believe both of you and I really hope there's a not so bad outcome. If either of you lived in South Africa you'd have easily secured $450 sales XD.


Im not willing to sell this piece of junk to anyone honestly, unless they really know what they are getting. And yes, I imagine that hynix might end up working, but that's not a solution. What if tomorrow hynix makes new dies (or even sammy) that don't play with apex? We are back to square one. And since im going to keep my mobo for the next 2 years just swapping for a 13900k and a higher binned kit,, I don't think I can do that with the apex.

The outrageous part is that my kit is in the QVL, and it can't even stabilise XMP on it. Never had that before with any other motherboard...


----------



## affxct

Herald said:


> Im not willing to sell this piece of junk to anyone honestly, unless they really know what they are getting. And yes, I imagine that hynix might end up working, but that's not a solution. What if tomorrow hynix makes new dies (or even sammy) that don't play with apex? We are back to square one. And since im going to keep my mobo for the next 2 years just swapping for a 13900k and a higher binned kit,, I don't think I can do that with the apex.
> 
> The outrageous part is that my kit is in the QVL, and it can't even stabilise XMP on it. Never had that before with any other motherboard...


Asus should straight up refund you. This is one area where I feel for NA/EU/Asia guys. We have distributors here who have easy channels with vendors. In your case you could've just told the retailer you were pissed off and the distro would've given you credit or a new board within a week. This is the only moral route IMO. You're not asking them for 7000C30. 4800 is just not good enough.


----------



## affxct

So between late Feb and a few weeks ago when I owned the Z690 Taichi, I had basically stopped coming to OCN because my old Adata kit and my Taichi had a pretty hard limit. That and I never thought I'd own an Asus board again. During that time I really still wanted an Apex. I ended up reading through like 20 pages and damn. I've literally been so oblivious to all the crap that went on haha. It's actually kinda unreal how I missed all this and just went and bought a returned one .


----------



## killer01ws6

affxct said:


> So between late Feb and a few weeks ago when I owned the Z690 Taichi, I had basically stopped coming to OCN because my old Adata kit and my Taichi had a pretty hard limit. That and I never thought I'd own an Asus board again. During that time I really still wanted an Apex. I ended up reading through like 20 pages and damn. I've literally been so oblivious to all the crap that went on haha. It's actually kinda unreal how I missed all this and just went and bought a returned one .


🤣


----------



## z390e

affxct said:


> So between late Feb and a few weeks ago when I owned the Z690 Taichi, I had basically stopped coming to OCN because my old Adata kit and my Taichi had a pretty hard limit. That and I never thought I'd own an Asus board again. During that time I really still wanted an Apex. I ended up reading through like 20 pages and damn. I've literally been so oblivious to all the crap that went on haha. It's actually kinda unreal how I missed all this and just went and bought a returned one .


On the flipside, this thread empowered me to NOT throw away my $ on a defective batch Apex and I got a Dark instead, which I love. I still would have preferred an Apex but I really appreciated this thread and OCN enlightening me as a consumer. I do wish the first page had a big summary about these current board issues though, not everyone had a few days to go through the thread the whole way like I did.


----------



## TSportM

ASUS hope you guys are in the works of a ROCK bios (not solid) but at least better then latest bios that are just minor changes, please get your act toghether.

iam also a litle bit disapointed on my Extreme, it should give alot more, and i dont have half the problems alot ppl mention here, if asus does not get a semi band fix via firmwares/bios iam going EVGA for Z790

cheers


----------



## FreeSpeechIsKnowledge

affxct said:


> @Herald @Shawnb99
> 
> So basically I've tested every tier possible. I've owned the Strix Z690-F, ASRock Taichi, and finally the Apex. I've used four i9s. 12900K SP 81, 96, 79 and a KF 84 that I currently own (golden IMC somehow as well). Kits I've used are a 5600C36 Z5 Samsung, 6000C36 Z5 Samsung, 6000C40 Adata Samsung, second 6000C40 Adata Samsung, and finally 6400C40 Adata Hynix.
> 
> The first Z5 kit couldn't train XMP on three different CPUs, one was my SP 81 i9 and the others were my friend's and the one belonging to the PC store. The Samsung kit on the Z690-F required much higher SA than on the Taichi, and the values either board picked for VDD2 were vastly different. The Samsungs on The Z690-F scaled remarkably well with tRAS and tRC, somehow skying both allowed me to hit 6400 reboot stable. The Adata kit on the Taichi behaved totally differently because it seems as though Asus did the traces much more differently and SA and VDD2 work out to be either far higher or lower than the other vendors.
> 
> With my Apex; XMP is only stable on the odd occasion with a fresh BIOS flash, but the values are way too wrong to be reboot stable. 6133 28-37-37-28 1T was a shot in the dark I took and I managed to get it stable with my first batch of settings that I no joke made up in under 60 seconds and the same settings re-passed 10K Karhu after a CMOS clear with a new chip. What I can deduce is that every board has a happy data rate and if you try to get to close to the edge the borderline for stability becomes thinner and thinner to the point where every setting matters and a clear CMOS will break stability. It could very well be that the Apex was simply never optimized for Samsung sticks.
> 
> My Z690-F initially couldn't run my first kit at JEDEC. It would crash at 4800 and my PC was basically unusable until BIOS 0811 that somehow allowed me to run 5600 40-40-40-40 @ 1.1VDD/Q. It might be worth getting a Hynix kit or a different CPU sample via a trade. Where I live the enthusiast community is kinda small so I trade i9s as often as I see them available just to see if a good IMC comes along. This new one that I have can do 6400 1T whereas the old IMC could not.
> 
> I obviously can't tell you guys what to do with your money, but what I can say is that it might be worth checking if Hynix and one of the test BIOSs don't perhaps help your boards out and you can attempt a sale. Try to sell them on platforms where buyers won't be asking questions like "can this do 6800C30 1T!?" With that said I do believe both of you and I really hope there's a not so bad outcome. If either of you lived in South Africa you'd have easily secured $450 sales XD.



My first one was just as bad and when Asus tested it they instantly said sorry it's faulty and can't be fixed, here's another one. I'm running Team group 6400MHz and even tried two other kits with the first board to no avail. It's their boards are bad if their slots are that bad compared to each other difference wise speed wise.



z390e said:


> On the flipside, this thread empowered me to NOT throw away my $ on a defective batch Apex and I got a Dark instead, which I love. I still would have preferred an Apex but I really appreciated this thread and OCN enlightening me as a consumer. I do wish the first page had a big summary about these current board issues though, not everyone had a few days to go through the thread the whole way like I did.


This site had certain people running damage control for a while.


----------



## affxct

FreeSpeechIsKnowledge said:


> My first one was just as bad and when Asus tested it they instantly said sorry it's faulty and can't be fixed, here's another one. I'm running Team group 6400MHz and even tried two other kits with the first board to no avail. It's their boards are bad if their slots are that bad compared to each other difference wise speed wise.
> 
> 
> 
> This site had certain people running damage control for a while.


My board is not great but i guess 6133C28 1T and 6400C30 1T aren't slow. I realise now that I made a mistake buying an open box one and I'm lucky to not have been punished for it.


----------



## dyanikoglu

TSportM said:


> ASUS hope you guys are in the works of a ROCK bios (not solid) but at least better then latest bios that are just minor changes, please get your act toghether.
> 
> iam also a litle bit disapointed on my Extreme, it should give alot more, and i dont have half the problems alot ppl mention here, if asus does not get a semi band fix via firmwares/bios iam going EVGA for Z790
> 
> cheers


I'd not expect much from this point.


----------



## trihy

Raptor lake bios should arrive soon. So at least another bios is coming.


----------



## affxct

trihy said:


> Raptor lake bios should arrive soon. So at least another bios is coming.


Interesting point. I wonder what it'll change tbh.


----------



## FreeSpeechIsKnowledge

affxct said:


> Interesting point. I wonder what it'll change tbh.


Improved memory performance. 
System compatibility.

🤣


----------



## trihy

Lol.

Well, maybe they have other bios branches. Who knows.

Also not sure how confident was Asus on 15xx bios. Many boards didn't get any 15xx release.


----------



## 7empe

The funny thing is that raptor lake is (unofficially) already supported by z690 apex and 1505 bios (maybe earlier versions too).


----------



## D-EJ915

Shawnb99 said:


> Donating it might be our only option. All I’ve done is keep marking mine down and no one will even touch it, even at $500.
> I have a Extreme I’m stuck with as well and might as well use that for the 10Gbe, the Apex is just a expensive paper weight.
> So really other then donating it, what other options do we have?


I sold my apex in april on ebay for 460. (winner didn't pay for the first auction, the 2nd auction the winner didn't either so I did 2nd chance for 460 lol)


----------



## mikasalo500

2022 Extreme works very well. I am very surprised. Very stable for work and gaming so far...


----------



## TraumatikOC

Can i ask what ram w/ specs and tweaks you did ? I cant get my Gskill 6000mhz cl36 and Teamgroup 6200 cl38 stable at 6000 and 6200 , tried diff voltages and recommended settings from ROG z690 oc pdf posted elsewhere.


----------



## mikasalo500

TraumatikOC said:


> Can i ask what ram w/ specs and tweaks you did ? I cant get my Gskill 6000mhz cl36 and Teamgroup 6200 cl38 stable at 6000 and 6200 , tried diff voltages and recommended settings from ROG z690 oc pdf posted elsewhere.


I have the Corsair Vengeance 32GB Kit 6200 36-39-39-76. do you also have the extreme?


----------



## TraumatikOC

Yep i do, the first one i got from the UK and it or the teamgroup nuked my teamgroup ram ( had the memory error code , forget which one ) but i found out that some asus boards or the memory makers was setting the memory voltage too high in a xmp profile which caused this. Now im on my 2nd Extreme from microcenter , i had 2 12900k sp 79 sp 83 and then a 12900ks sp 86 and now 12900ks sp 93....... All of them error out in memtest in uefi if set at 6000 and 6200 for teamgroup, only stable at 5800. I was trying to figure out if the Extremes were having same problem as the Apex with memory ( how they were built ) at higher speeds.


----------



## mikasalo500

TraumatikOC said:


> Yep i do, the first one i got from the UK and it or the teamgroup nuked my teamgroup ram ( had the memory error code , forget which one ) but i found out that some asus boards or the memory makers was setting the memory voltage too high in a xmp profile which caused this. Now im on my 2nd Extreme from microcenter , i had 2 12900k sp 79 sp 83 and then a 12900ks sp 86 and now 12900ks sp 93....... All of them error out in memtest in uefi if set at 6000 and 6200 for teamgroup, only stable at 5800. I was trying to figure out if the Extremes were having same problem as the Apex with memory ( how they were built ) at higher speeds.


I also had the teamgroup and actually broke twice with error code 55. With the first version of Extreme from 2021 I only managed 5800. with version from 11/2021 6400c30 went and now with version 2022 I could also boot with 7000 and was stable in Windows. I haven't tested more yet. Corsair 6600c32 coming tomorrow...


----------



## FreeSpeechIsKnowledge

mikasalo500 said:


> I also had the teamgroup and actually broke twice with error code 55. With the first version of Extreme from 2021 I only managed 5800. with version from 11/2021 6400c30 went and now with version 2022 I could also boot with 7000 and was stable in Windows. I haven't tested more yet. Corsair 6600c32 coming tomorrow...



There are no 2022 models left. They stopped making them after what 50 maybe tops. Even my replacement that is just okay is a 2021. I'm running 6800. They ripped off a ton of customers and it can't be hidden. It's criminal IMO.


----------



## mikasalo500

FreeSpeechIsKnowledge said:


> There are no 2022 models left. They stopped making them after what 50 maybe tops. Even my replacement that is just okay is a 2021. I'm running 6800. They ripped off a ton of customers and it can't be hidden. It's criminal IMO.



then I was lucky to get one. Ordered directly from Asus. What Asus did there is not right at all, that's true...


----------



## TraumatikOC

mikasalo500 said:


> I also had the teamgroup and actually broke twice with error code 55. With the first version of Extreme from 2021 I only managed 5800. with version from 11/2021 6400c30 went and now with version 2022 I could also boot with 7000 and was stable in Windows. I haven't tested more yet. Corsair 6600c32 coming tomorrow...


OK , no dates on box . Serial number warranty valid to 2024-11-09 , Part number 90mb18h0-m0aay0 , serial number starts with mamcfm00.......
If anybody has any clues ?


----------



## db000

TraumatikOC said:


> OK , no dates on box . Serial number warranty valid to 2024-11-09 , Part number 90mb18h0-m0aay0 , serial number starts with mamcfm00.......
> If anybody has any clues ?


Put it on the shelf and buy a Unify-X. That's what I did  
Mine was an Apex, but... ye.... I had no date on my Apex, early 2021 (pre 11-2021).


----------



## TraumatikOC

db000 said:


> Put it on the shelf and buy a Unify-X. That's what I did
> Mine was an Apex, but... ye.... I had no date on my Apex, early 2021 (pre 11-2021).


Use to buy Asus since 3xxx series except for when i got a ryzen 5950x asus was draggin feet on extreme went with gigabyte xtreme, worked great and slight easy small OC got me 30k+ in CB23. Now i came back and seeing heros , apex , and possibly extremes having problems....


----------



## TSportM

7empe said:


> The funny thing is that raptor lake is (unofficially) already supported by z690 apex and 1505 bios (maybe earlier versions too).


there is a 13900k sample using the extreme on a 15** bios and it works and boost’s but With lower clocks


----------



## Nawak

affxct said:


> His sticks are dead bro, trust me.
> 
> 
> Wait, ANPEC PMICs with Hynix? Odd.


My sticks were well dead.
I listened to your advice, ordered 4x16 Trident Z5 6400 (so Hynix) and plan to zipe a fan right in front of it, attached to one of the pull fans on my upper rad.
Ugly, yes, but effective I think.
I don't turn on any LEDs (except for temperature or pressure alarms) and I don't look at the inside of the PC, so the aesthetic aspect doesn't matter to me 

I don't plan to OC (4 dimm...), but this fan can't hurt, it will run at 750rpm and it will be better than nothing.

Thanks for your advice !


----------



## affxct

Nawak said:


> My sticks were well dead.
> I listened to your advice, ordered 4x16 Trident Z5 6400 (so Hynix) and plan to zipe a fan right in front of it, attached to one of the pull fans on my upper rad.
> Ugly, yes, but effective I think.
> I don't turn on any LEDs (except for temperature or pressure alarms) and I don't look at the inside of the PC, so the aesthetic aspect doesn't matter to me
> 
> I don't plan to OC (4 dimm...), but this fan can't hurt, it will run at 750rpm and it will be better than nothing.
> 
> Thanks for your advice !


6400 across 4 DIMMs is going to be hard. Do you own the Z690 Formula?


----------



## Nawak

affxct said:


> 6400 across 4 DIMMs is going to be hard. Do you own the Z690 Formula?


In all honesty if I reach 6000 cl32 it will be very good, it is clear that I will not reach 6400, but the hynix chips will still work better than Samsung, well I hope so.
I got some money back when I switched to rma, but not enough to change my motherboard without a lot of expense.
I have a z690 hero.


----------



## TSportM

Asrock released the new bios 



https://www.tomshardware.com/news/asrock-raptor-lake-support-for-600-series



Asus maybe will have it out days after the cpu is availabe…..


----------



## Nizzen

TSportM said:


> Asrock released the new bios
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.tomshardware.com/news/asrock-raptor-lake-support-for-600-series
> 
> 
> 
> Asus maybe will have it out days after the cpu is availabe…..


Asus supports Raptor Lake on current bios 

Not very uncommon. I used 11700k, 2 months before official release on Apex z490.


----------



## TSportM

Nizzen said:


> Asus supports Raptor Lake on current bios
> 
> Not very uncommon. I used 11700k, 2 months before official release on Apex z490.


Asrock also supports raptor lake along time before this official bios release….


----------



## affxct

Nawak said:


> In all honesty if I reach 6000 cl32 it will be very good, it is clear that I will not reach 6400, but the hynix chips will still work better than Samsung, well I hope so.
> I got some money back when I switched to rma, but not enough to change my motherboard without a lot of expense.
> I have a z690 hero.


Oh ok. The Hero I hear is actually very good as well. I think it'll be fine tbh.


----------



## yyy

@shamino1978 i have a z690m-plus d4 can you provide me with the latest bios?


----------



## Martin778

I'm still getting IRQL BSOD's in idle, no clue what causes this whatsoever...reinstalled drivers etc. updated BIOS, only running XMP II - nope. Still BSODing.
I feel like an idiot for buying an ASUS product after having so many problems with their previous boards. I will go mad if this is another RAM kit dying from XMP.


----------



## sugi0lover

Martin778 said:


> I'm still getting IRQL BSOD's in idle, no clue what causes this whatsoever...reinstalled drivers etc. updated BIOS, only running XMP II - nope. Still BSODing.
> I feel like an idiot for buying an ASUS product after having so many problems with their previous boards. I will go mad if this is another RAM kit dying from XMP.
> View attachment 2565701


Have you tried this?








[OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread


I have a Asus z690-g (matx), as it is the only Matx on the market that looks "performance" orientated. My issue is, XMP 6200 runs perfectly fine, but if I change any memory timings, even by just 1 value, higher or lower, memtest will fail. Even if I down clock from 6200 to 5600, memtest will...




www.overclock.net


----------



## snakeeyes111

Lol got same with new Unify Bios and my Samsung Ram. TM5 Karhu and ycruncher stable. But in Idle after 4h or 6 or 1h it crash ^^.


----------



## Herald

Martin778 said:


> I'm still getting IRQL BSOD's in idle, no clue what causes this whatsoever...reinstalled drivers etc. updated BIOS, only running XMP II - nope. Still BSODing.
> I feel like an idiot for buying an ASUS product after having so many problems with their previous boards. I will go mad if this is another RAM kit dying from XMP.
> View attachment 2565701


Just try running stock no xmp 4800 sped for a couple of days and see if the problem persists.


----------



## lordkahless

I have an Apex that is the 2021 model. The best I can get out of the ram is I have the Dominator 6200 36-39-39-76_, _once I set XMP I have to drop the speed down to 6000 instead of 6200. Then it works stable. Should I do an RMA, or live with it as it's not as bad as some others, or consider it a loss and get a Unify X if that is a better option.


----------



## FreeSpeechIsKnowledge

lordkahless said:


> I have an Apex that is the 2021 model. The best I can get out of the ram is I have the Dominator 6200 36-39-39-76_, _once I set XMP I have to drop the speed down to 6000 instead of 6200. Then it works stable. Should I do an RMA, or live with it as it's not as bad as some others, or consider it a loss and get a Unify X if that is a better option.



Rma and get your money back if possible.


----------



## lordkahless

I got approved for an RMA I just did the Asus chat. But no guarantee they will just send it back saying it runs 6000 just fine, non-issue for us or they send me another 2021 model? I guess if I do spin the wheel and see what I get what should I get in the meantime? Is the Unify X the best board out there right now? I have been on Asus over 15 years and don't know anything about MSI.


----------



## Nizzen

lordkahless said:


> I got approved for an RMA I just did the Asus chat. But no guarantee they will just send it back saying it runs 6000 just fine, non-issue for us or they send me another 2021 model? I guess if I do spin the wheel and see what I get what should I get in the meantime? Is the Unify X the best board out there right now? I have been on Asus over 15 years and don't know anything about MSI.


Evga kingpin z690 looks to be the strongest, or 2022 Apex 😇

@Carillo result














__





Redirect Notice






images.app.goo.gl


----------



## lordkahless

Are the new Apex's that retailers are selling the 2022 model?


----------



## affxct

lordkahless said:


> Are the new Apex's that retailers are selling the 2022 model?


They're unobtainable. Just purchase a Unify-X or a Dark. The Unify-X is kinda cheap on Newegg. The Unify-X has its own drawbacks though, and you also aren't guaranteed a sick sample. The Dark is basically guaranteed 6800-6933 1T.


----------



## affxct

I tested out 300KHz SF with both power stage settings on Extreme. Suffered a system hang (no BSOD) for the first time ever with this board while testing Karhu (like 2.5hrs in). It's never happened prior so using common sense, it has to be the SF adjustment as that was the last CPU setting I had changed. This could just be my particular Apex sample, but I just wanted to mention it nonetheless. Same with the ILM mod, it doesn't work out for everyone.


----------



## D-EJ915

lordkahless said:


> Are the new Apex's that retailers are selling the 2022 model?


Possibly, JJ confirmed that it's EOL/EOS and no longer available the other day on the ROG live stream.


----------



## Simkin

Anyone else have inconsistent/slow speed with USB 3.x flash drives here?

My Samsung T5 (External SSD) connected directly to motherboard (Apex) with USB-C is running full speed.

My Kingston HyperX 256GB sticks is rather troublesome. Can start off with 230 MB/s, but then it just goes down and down in speed and often ends up at 60MB/s, and seems to pause for a few seconds constantly before the speed changes. Sometimes (rare) it can run full speed without any decrease in speed (testing with large UHD BluRay rips)

Have tried connected the sticks directly on the motherboard, and USB header on my case.

On my HTPC with Ryzen 7 5700G / Asrock B550M (Windows 10) i have no issues with the sticks. My previous Intel X99/5960X did not have any issues with the same sticks either.

Running Windows 11 Pro


----------



## Martin778

Herald said:


> Just try running stock no xmp 4800 sped for a couple of days and see if the problem persists.


...but I get no memory errors at XMP either. This is so incredibely situational (1-2 a week at XMP?) that it might take weeks to pinpoint at JEDEC speeds. Last time when my Sammy kit died it would crash / error all the time at 4800.

What is the current opinion on the Tachyon and Unify-X? Better than the Apex? Z690 DARK is unobtainium in Europe.


----------



## bl4ckdot

Martin778 said:


> ...but I get no memory errors at XMP either. This is so incredibely situational (1-2 a week at XMP?) that it might take weeks to pinpoint at JEDEC speeds. Last time when my Sammy kit died it would crash / error all the time at 4800.
> 
> What is the current opinion on the Tachyon and Unify-X? Better than the Apex? Z690 DARK is unobtainium in Europe.


Just buy the Dark on EVGA's ebay store, its pretty easy to do so. I know a fair numbers of french that did that


----------



## Martin778

That will be like €1100 with tax and shipping, not worth it anymore I think. Euro is also very weak against dollar atm.


----------



## Ichirou

Why even bother changing the board at this point in time? Just go with Z790/Z890 once it's out. They'll have better DDR5 support than current gen offerings.
If budget is a concern, just go with a Unify-X.


----------



## Martin778

Because I'm facing stability issues that I cannot pinpoint, that is my main problem at the moment. Apex went way up in price since launch so financially it shouldn't be a big hit.


----------



## sblantipodi

It's funny to see Asus users recommending other boards on an Asus thread.



Martin778 said:


> That will be like €1100 with tax and shipping, not worth it anymore I think. Euro is also very weak against dollar atm.


1€ = 1.02$ currently
I have never seen euro worth less than dollar since its release.


----------



## killer01ws6

sblantipodi said:


> It's funny to see Asus users recommending other boards on an Asus thread.


I have to admit it is a bit funny and sad at the same time, I do feel for the APEX board folks that got a product not what they expected nor easily if at all replaced, I know the HERO folks with the backwards caps did not help the word on the street either, but I have to say I really love my Hero build, to be the little brother in the line this rig is fast coming from a well OCed 8086K Code build.
Just wish everyone could have had similar results.


----------



## TSportM

sblantipodi said:


> It's funny to see Asus users recommending other boards on an Asus thread.
> 
> 
> 
> 1€ = 1.02$ currently
> I have never seen euro worth less than dollar since its release.


I dont think asus users are recommending other brands.

what we are doing is recommendig other solutions, for a specific problem or not, i dont have any problem whith my extreme from 2021/11, just see the other topics problems are arround on other brands, it can Happen, you have a problem with rgb i dont and other users dont have it, this does not mean thats ok… it is what it is.

cheers


----------



## dyanikoglu

The thread is mostly abandoned by Asus, what did you expect? Recommend everyone to join the trainwreck?


----------



## TSportM

*ASUS ROG Maximus Z690 APEX Achieves DDR5-10552 Memory Overclock World Record*









ASUS ROG Maximus Z690 APEX Achieves DDR5-10552 Memory Overclock World Record


Following MSI and Gigabyte, ASUS has now broken the DDR5 memory overclocking world record with its top ROG Maximus Z690 APEX motherboard.




wccftech.com


----------



## Ichirou

1) ASUS gives up and abandons the Apex; stays completely quiet about it and shuts off all consumers from RMA and support
2) Apex wins a world record, suddenly ASUS cares enough to publicize it on Twitter and gloat about it


----------



## lolhaxz

Notice how all the clowns that would normally jump on anyone that didn't own a Apex (in the other threads) and belittle them all seem to be MIA of late... conveniently after the worst of them for some reason were all given free boards/CPU's at launch this time around (evidently to do the "tweaking" guides)

ASUS has been a trainwreck for years on anything even resembling mid-range.


----------



## sblantipodi

TSportM said:


> I dont think asus users are recommending other brands.
> 
> what we are doing is recommendig other solutions, for a specific problem or not, i dont have any problem whith my extreme from 2021/11, just see the other topics problems are arround on other brands, it can Happen, you have a problem with rgb i dont and other users dont have it, this does not mean thats ok… it is what it is.
> 
> cheers


I have a problem with Asus boards since X99 with boards full of design flaws...
usb ports that stops working, ethernet card disconnecting from the network, ring cache that can't be overclocked, bloatware that doesn't work at all,
wake on lan that doesn't wake the PC and now PC that hangs if you use iCue software and a customer service that is pointless.

I think that it's enough to say that Asus losts its path.


----------



## Martin778

Ichirou said:


> 1) ASUS gives up and abandons the Apex; stays completely quiet about it and shuts off all consumers from RMA and support
> 2) Apex wins a world record, suddenly ASUS cares enough to publicize it on Twitter and gloat about it


ASUS has a track record of very scummy tactics, same thing happened with X99.
XMP is somehow unstable anymore or the memory (again) or the board is broken. Memory has forced airflow so that can't be an issue.


----------



## Ichirou

Martin778 said:


> ASUS has a track record of very scummy tactics, same thing happened with X99.
> XMP is somehow unstable anymore or the memory (again) or the board is broken. Memory has forced airflow so that can't be an issue.
> 
> View attachment 2566253


Reflash BIOS.


----------



## Martin778

Already done. RAM kit is Dominator Platinum 6200 C36 (Hynix) 2x16GB.

+
Tachyon's last BIOS is from march, doesn't bode well for support, either.


----------



## TSportM

sblantipodi said:


> I have a problem with Asus boards since X99 with boards full of design flaws...
> usb ports that stops working, ethernet card disconnecting from the network, ring cache that can't be overclocked, bloatware that doesn't work at all,
> wake on lan that doesn't wake the PC and now PC that hangs if you use iCue software and a customer service that is pointless.
> 
> I think that it's enough to say that Asus losts its path.


Like i said, asus, msi, asrock, have problems

i had a rampage v and had few of does issues on x99
hav x299 from aorus and rampage extreme encore and both had few issues here in there.

its up to the consumer after x99 i bought Asus again and other brands, saying it again the consumer has to make the decision to buy Brand A or B based on multiple experiences you have multiple topics on this board with legit complains it Will make no sense if you buy an Asus board next…… bare that in mind.

cheers


----------



## Martin778

ASUS X99 series didn't have 'issues', it was *critically flawed* because it was destroying processors.


----------



## xarot

sblantipodi said:


> I have a problem with Asus boards since X99 with boards full of design flaws...
> usb ports that stops working, ethernet card disconnecting from the network, ring cache that can't be overclocked, bloatware that doesn't work at all,
> wake on lan that doesn't wake the PC and now PC that hangs if you use iCue software and a customer service that is pointless.
> 
> I think that it's enough to say that Asus losts its path.


I've had mostly Asus "HEDT" boards after LGA775 days, some of the boards are good and some are not. But in case there are some issues they'll often never fix them. Also good to note never to buy any Asus limited edition stuffs, because they often have hardware design flaws they'll never bother to fix. 

For example Rampage IV Extreme had some hardware powerup issues on some boards (mobo wouldn't power up at all), Rampage IV Black Edition had some BIOS related shutdowns from beginning they then managed to fix after I reported it. Rampage V Extreme had USB issues they never fixed, then their next board Rampage V Edition 10 was again pretty good. Then again when released the Rampage VI Extreme had serious freezing issues with 7980XE, and the Asus rep on ROG forum was kind of mocking me when I reported issues, but when more people started to chime in, they bothered to fix (even provided me with a beta BIOS to verify) it and now that board is very solid.

Last time I contacted Asus through their support site about their Asus Dominus Extreme missing the option to enable TPM2.0 for Windows 11, the support person told me that their 1800€ board didn't support Windows 11. And the board was still sold at Amazon at the time. Then I told this on our local forum and I think our top OCer in our country mentioned it somewhere supposedly to Shamino and then they released a new BIOS. Not to mention the CPU 00 issue with most of the Dominus boards at the time due to a hardware issue, but I got lucky.

Now I also have some of their newer mainstream boards like Maximus XI Formula, Maximus XII Extreme and Maximus Z690 Extreme (which has these memory issues). Actually haven't bothered to swap this X299 setup to anything newer because it just works.

So my point and experience with Asus "high-end" ROG stuffs over about 13 year timeline is

1) Never buy their limited edition stuff
2) In case of issues it may be better to ditch the product and switch to something else because they never fix them or find a workaround yourself
3) If you are really lucky and it is a BIOS issue you need to get in contact with the cool guys at Asus who can actually fix something


----------



## bastian

ASUS announces Z690 motherboard support for Intel 13th Gen Core "Raptor Lake" CPUs - VideoCardz.com


ASUS Announces 600 Series Motherboards Support The Next Gen Intel Processors ASUS today announced BIOS support and updates readying a range of motherboards for a new wave of Intel CPUs. ASUS provides convenient tools to update the BIOS — BIOS Flashback and EZ Flash. The design of BIOS Flashback...




videocardz.com


----------



## Alberto_It

"1.Update Microcode for next generation Intel Processors.

Before running the USB BIOS Flashback tool, please rename the BIOS file (MZ690A.CAP) using BIOSRenamer."



https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/BIOS/ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-1601.zip





https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/BIOS/ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-ASUS-1601.zip





https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/BIOS/ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-FORMULA-ASUS-1601.zip





https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/BIOS/ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-1601.zip




The bios of the other motherboards coming for the next few hours


----------



## Spicedaddy

Hopefully 1601 isn't based on 1505. I'll be waiting a few weeks before I upgrade from 1304.


----------



## Simkin

Martin778 said:


> ASUS X99 series didn't have 'issues', it was *critically flawed* because it was destroying processors.


My 5960X lived well for 6 years with a 4.6Ghz OC on my Sabertooth X99


----------



## Nizzen

Simkin said:


> My 5960X lived well for 6 years with a 4.6Ghz OC on my Sabertooth X99


I killed 6950x 10 core but 6900k lived. 6900k is still alive. A family member has it with Rampage ex 10 edition. 5950x is too still alive with Rampage extreme with a friend of mine. Looked random of cpu's wich died...


----------



## tubs2x4

Simkin said:


> My 5960X lived well for 6 years with a 4.6Ghz OC on my Sabertooth X99


5820k from 2015 still running on asus x99 pro board also. Bound to be some issues along the way on a few boards on how many boards get made.


----------



## welldone

Hello Guys!

I need to replace ram, becasue I'cant go stable with 4x8 config (Viper Steel 4400cl19 b-die).
Which 2x16 KIT will be enough to do ~4000mhz cl16 or similar?

Best!


----------



## TSportM

any one tried the new bios 1601 on the extreme ?


----------



## Ichirou

welldone said:


> Hello Guys!
> 
> I need to replace ram, becasue I'cant go stable with 4x8 config (Viper Steel 4400cl19 b-die).
> Which 2x16 KIT will be enough to do ~4000mhz cl16 or similar?
> 
> Best!


Just run the kit at 4,000 MHz instead. It’s not that the kit isn’t stable, it’s that the DDR4 IMC is too weak to run at 4,400 MHz Gear 1.


----------



## welldone

Ichirou said:


> Just run the kit at 4,000 MHz instead. It’s not that the kit isn’t stable, it’s that the DDR4 IMC is too weak to run at 4,400 MHz Gear 1.


Well, I'm trying to run at 4000mhz, not 4400  Even at CL19 MemTest fail... Here are my current settings:


----------



## Ichirou

welldone said:


> Well, I'm trying to run at 4000mhz, not 4400  Even at CL19 MemTest fail... Here are my current settings:
> View attachment 2566283


You have a 12600K. It has a weak IMC that can probably only run stable at 3,600-3,800 max in Gear 1.

It’s not the RAM’s fault. The CPU is too weak for the memory.


----------



## Nizzen

welldone said:


> Well, I'm trying to run at 4000mhz, not 4400  Even at CL19 MemTest fail... Here are my current settings:
> View attachment 2566283


First make shure the memory is cooled enough. 4x dimms tend to be very hot. Direct fan over them is a must have.


----------



## welldone

OK, so I'm changing now to 2 x 16GB and will try to OC @ 3800 max until next gen i7 
What You think about this goods?


https://www.corsair.com/us/en/Categories/Products/Memory/VENGEANCE-RGB-RT-Black/p/CMN32GX4M2Z4600C18


----------



## Muut

welldone said:


> OK, so I'm changing now to 2 x 16GB and will try to OC @ 3800 max until next gen i7
> What You think about this goods?
> 
> 
> https://www.corsair.com/us/en/Categories/Products/Memory/VENGEANCE-RGB-RT-Black/p/CMN32GX4M2Z4600C18


I would go for B-die gear 1. Here is what I got with the same board as yours.
G.Skill 2x16Gb 3200 CL14 DDR4

Dram voltage : 1.58v
SA : 1.35v
VDDQ IVFR : 1.4v









If you decide to go with Hynix DJR (or Rev E), I'm not sure what those Corsair are, I couldn't go above 4800 cl19 on the Asus Board in single rank DJR.

I know it's not my IMC because I had no issue benching 5500 cl20 with my MSI A pro. Of course, it's easier with single rank, but the Asus wasn't really good in GEAR 2 for me whatever the IC.










(Even did 6200 cl24 on 1 Dimm on the A Pro)


----------



## Martin778

Nizzen said:


> I killed 6950x 10 core but 6900k lived. 6900k is still alive. A family member has it with Rampage ex 10 edition. 5950x is too still alive with Rampage extreme with a friend of mine. Looked random of cpu's wich died...


Because the problem itself was random, it could run fine for years but eventually overvolt the CPU to oblivion...if it decided to do so, like a killswitch but it did not always engage.
Have seen at least 3 killed CPU's on ASUS X99 boards here and lost a new 6950X myself on X99 Deluxe.
AFAIK the E10 has the lowest chance of this happening, X99A/X99 Deluxe the highest.

+
Back to Z690 - no errors when running 4800MHz JEDEC. So somehow ASUS managed to bork 6200 C36 support as it did run well for me on beta BIOS some time ago. I think they lowered IVR/controller from 1.4 to 1.2V~ for XMP and which causes this.


----------



## Raphie

yes, same issue here. I’m on 6800 1.45vdd 1.42vddq higher makes no sense as you can’t keep them below 49c in a closed case, under full load, even with a fan. 


toncij said:


> Anyone here having a strange issue with G.Skill Z5s?
> 
> I have a kit oh Hynix 1.4V 6400 CL32 2x16GB. It's stable on my Apex with or without a bump in voltages.
> 
> Or not.
> 
> Actually, the only pattern I've noticed going through 4 boards and 3 memory kits (all identical) is: Z5 kits work flawlessly until they heat up to mid 50s Celsius.
> 
> I've tested multiple times in an open bench: keeping them cool at about mid 40s is all green all night and day long. Even a few days with zero errors.
> *BUT* If I let them heat up to mid 50s, meaning without an active 140mm Noctua blowing to them, I get all red in Memtest. Of course, first issues were classic chrome tab snaps and game crashes, tool crashes etc, then Memtest proved there are errors.
> 
> GSkill claims their kits should be fine up to 80ish Celsius. However, 3 kits I've tested, brand new, all exhibit same behaviour: get to mid 50s, spew errors. Kept at mid 40s, all dandy.
> 
> Is this... normal? Why is GSkill claiming it should be fine while it's obviously the heat.
> 
> Came to my mind that maybe the board is having issues with slots being warm, but that is such a wild idea... makes zero sense.


----------



## dyanikoglu

At this point, we're lucky if Asus provides proper support on z690 apex for raptor lake, lol.


----------



## TraumatikOC

Raphie said:


> yes, same issue here. I’m on 6800 1.45vdd 1.42vddq higher makes no sense as you can’t keep them below 49c in a closed case, under full load, even with a fan.


Same issue but with Gskill 6000 cl36 and also Teamgroup 6200 cl38 in xmp1 xmp2 and also tried asus memory presets. Have a fan blowing on them and still like you said start seeing errors in memtest when hits over 50c. Now if i set to 5800 on both sets not seeing errors. Thought i had same problem as old Apexs had since its Gskill and TG. So far went thru 2 12900k and 2 12900ks.


----------



## Nizzen

dyanikoglu said:


> At this point, we're lucky if Asus provides proper support on z690 apex for raptor lake, lol.





https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/BIOS/ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-1601.zip


😉


----------



## dyanikoglu

Nizzen said:


> https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/BIOS/ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-1601.zip
> 
> 
> 😉


I said "proper". Just wait for the parade when the actual CPUs are on market, there will be tons of issues with OC.


----------



## Nizzen

dyanikoglu said:


> I said "proper". Just wait for the parade when the actual CPUs are on market, there will be tons of issues with OC.


I'm waiting 😎🤟

Use MB's with "no" problems instead.... 🤪


----------



## TSportM

new bios boost performane, had no issues had to bump the MC voltage from 1.3 to 1.320

600 points on R23 

it also bumps the voltage on max load (same settings)

cheers


----------



## CptSpig

lordkahless said:


> Are the new Apex's that retailers are selling the 2022 model?





affxct said:


> They're unobtainable. Just purchase a Unify-X or a Dark. The Unify-X is kinda cheap on Newegg. The Unify-X has its own drawbacks though, and you also aren't guaranteed a sick sample. The Dark is basically guaranteed 6800-6933 1T.


Seven in stock at the Asus store on Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/ASUS-ROG-Z690-motherboard-front-panel/dp/B09K8P12GN


----------



## affxct

CptSpig said:


> Seven in stock at the Asus store on Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/ASUS-ROG-Z690-motherboard-front-panel/dp/B09K8P12GN


I don't know if there's any guarantee of an M0UAY1. Besides that the Dark at $700 is the better buy anyway.


----------



## trihy

We need to do a hex compare. Changelog sometimes says almost nothing but bios file has a lot of differences.

idle CPU voltage still goes to super low values?


----------



## Simkin

S


affxct said:


> I don't know if there's any guarantee of an M0UAY1. Besides that the Dark at $700 is the better buy anyway.


At this point, better wait for Z790.


----------



## bscool

welldone said:


> OK, so I'm changing now to 2 x 16GB and will try to OC @ 3800 max until next gen i7
> What You think about this goods?
> 
> 
> https://www.corsair.com/us/en/Categories/Products/Memory/VENGEANCE-RGB-RT-Black/p/CMN32GX4M2Z4600C18


I wouldnt buy those. I would go for gskill 4000c16-16-16 kit 2x16.

Simple way to test with the kit you have is just run 2x8(a2 and b2) to see if you can do 4000c15 to 4133c16 gear 1 and you will have an idea of how the 2x16 will run.

If even with 2x8 you can only do say 3800 you know with 2x16 you will be lucky to hit 3800.

You can use this list to check for b die if you would rather buy other bins [Übersicht] - Die ultimative HARDWARELUXX Samsung 8Gb B-Die Liste - alle Hersteller (04.06.22)


----------



## Bluerain

1601 is the best bios yet on my hero.


----------



## Simkin

Bluerain said:


> 1601 is the best bios yet on my hero.


What's better from 1505?


----------



## TSportM

Simkin said:


> What's better from 1505?



On the extreme it boosts performance, like i said......

the voltages or higher for exemple running R23, (same setttings on 1505) but overall all scores on benchmarks are higher, for me the only thing a need to change was 1.3 to 1.320 on the MC for the memory to pass stability tests as before with my settings on the signature (also have tighter timmings), overall its a stable bios and better then the 2 previous ones.

cheers


----------



## TraumatikOC

As of 1 hour ago i flashed 1601 then hard cleared bios, loaded optimised defaults, rebooted, then only set XMP1 for my TG 6200 cl38 2x16 in a2b2 slots. It went into windows 11 and played an hour of Division2 without crashes unlike before i would get either win blue screens or Div2 freezes / crashes to desktop.
Also seeing 5.5ghz on 2 cores in HWinfo latest at 1.447v core vid (before i would see 1.5xx V.
So far its better for me. (for now , hopefully stable).


----------



## affxct

TraumatikOC said:


> As of 1 hour ago i flashed 1601 then hard cleared bios, loaded optimised defaults, rebooted, then only set XMP1 for my TG 6200 cl38 2x16 in a2b2 slots. It went into windows 11 and played an hour of Division2 without crashes unlike before i would get either win blue screens or Div2 freezes / crashes to desktop.
> Also seeing 5.5ghz on 2 cores in HWinfo latest at 1.447v core vid (before i would see 1.5xx V.
> So far its better for me. (for now , hopefully stable).


Mmm which BIOS were you last on? 1304?


----------



## TraumatikOC

affxct said:


> Mmm which BIOS were you last on? 1304?


1505 last one, and each one posted on Asus z690 extreme support page. Never tried bios from other pages / sites.


----------



## killer01ws6

TSportM said:


> On the extreme it boosts performance, like i said......
> 
> the voltages or higher for exemple running R23, (same setttings on 1505) but overall all scores on benchmarks are higher, for me the only thing a need to change was 1.3 to 1.320 on the MC for the memory to pass stability tests as before with my settings on the signature (also have tighter timmings), overall its a stable bios and better then the 2 previous ones.
> 
> cheers


Odd, it only lists change as 1.Update Microcode for next generation Intel Processors.


----------



## killer01ws6

Bluerain said:


> 1601 is the best bios yet on my hero.


What changes are you seeing, what issues where you having to say this one is better?


----------



## affxct

TraumatikOC said:


> 1505 last one, and each one posted on Asus z690 extreme support page. Never tried bios from other pages / sites.


A lot of the test BIOSs suck anyway tbh. 1304 has been the best thus far for me.


----------



## FreeSpeechIsKnowledge

killer01ws6 said:


> Odd, it only lists change as 1.Update Microcode for next generation Intel Processors.



Just flashed it coming from 1503 bios, not seeing any difference besides for the fact that default settings loaded gives a slight boost to cpu clock from 4.9 to 5.0 in aida.
Everything seems to be the same performance wise from 1503 to 1601. Set my settings manually, from the previous BIOS mentioned and everything's the same here. The change log is correct for a change, nothing's changed performance wise.

It even has the same lame memory profiles that don't work properly.


----------



## TSportM

killer01ws6 said:


> Odd, it only lists change as 1.Update Microcode for next generation Intel Processors.


Has to be something diferent, some tunning, only thing diferent for me is more voltage in full load on r23, and o have to bump MC voltage from 1.3 to 1.320 or else i get errors on some stress tests, but o get a bump in performance on all benchs.

my overclock is the same no changes…. Best bios For me so far.

cheers


----------



## Nizzen

killer01ws6 said:


> Odd, it only lists change as 1.Update Microcode for next generation Intel Processors.


Odd? 
Did you ever see a full page of changelog for any MB bios of any brand ever?


----------



## TraumatikOC

Spoke too soon , Division 2 and Outriders were ctd after playing for a while. So i cleared bios, then tried xmp1 then xmp2 then asus preset hynix 6200 profile, then asus preset hynix 6000 profile. All give errors in Memtest in bios (usually around test 7). Then i set xmp1 and changed voltages to what the OC pdf guide shows for hynix ... VDD 1.3 VDDQ 1.25 TXVDDQ 1.25 MC VDD 1.25 SA 1.25 and still get memtest errors at 6000 / 6200. Made sure it was on gear mode 2.
Also tried high voltage VDD 1.45 VDDQ 1.44
If anyone can help it would be appreciated. Teamgroup 6200 cl38 2x16 in a2b2 slots.


----------



## TSportM

TraumatikOC said:


> Spoke too soon , Division 2 and Outriders were ctd after playing for a while. So i cleared bios, then tried xmp1 then xmp2 then asus preset hynix 6200 profile, then asus preset hynix 6000 profile. All give errors in Memtest in bios (usually around test 7). Then i set xmp1 and changed voltages to what the OC pdf guide shows for hynix ... VDD 1.3 VDDQ 1.25 TXVDDQ 1.25 MC VDD 1.25 SA 1.25 and still get memtest errors at 6000 / 6200. Made sure it was on gear mode 2.
> Also tried high voltage VDD 1.45 VDDQ 1.44
> If anyone can help it would be appreciated. Teamgroup 6200 cl38 2x16 in a2b2 slots.


i think you should fidle with MC voltage start at 1.350 and come down until it shows problems

cheers


----------



## TraumatikOC

TSportM said:


> i think you should fidle with MC voltage start at 1.350 and come down until it shows problems
> 
> cheers


Will try tomorrow. Really think its this board, i tried 2 12900k and now 2 12900ks , same problem with all of them.
Thanks again


----------



## trihy

Best part of bios updates is when people actually think asus fixed something. It last about a day, at best.


----------



## tarunagg

Please do give it a reading and sorry for any wrong words or spellings i am soo tired and frustrated too...since last 3 days trying to figure out whats wrong with the system

My System Specs are:
ASUS MAXIMUS HERO Z690
I9-12900K
4 x Gskill Trident Z5 RGB Series 6000Mhz (64 GB total)
GPU: MSI Supreme 3080
PSU: EVGA 1300GT

Storage:
Corsair MP600 M.2. NVME 1TB Main windows
Samsung 980 Pro M.2. 2TB
Samsung 970 EVO M.2. 256GB (Removed for testing)
2x4TB WD Black
1x8TB WD Gold

Case: Lian Li Dynamic XL ROG
Fans: Lian Li SL UNI 120 Fans 3 Bottom, 3 Side, 3 top, 1 Back with 2 Controller


When i finished assembling everything At first all leds were on so as system but there was no display Q-LED Code was 98 and Motherboard LED color GREEN.

It took me a lot of time, hit and trials etc then i removed 2 Rams and it booted into BIOS.
Somehow i was able to install Windows and and installed other 2 rams also but in bios as soon as i selected Profile XMP 1. Save and exit ... then again it was stuck in endless loop, not booting ?

Did CMOS reset still nothing. removed GPU, RAM again dont know what else and again some how it booted again.. i can see the diplay boot logo.
Had updated bios to latest saved and exit and same again no display...

Again had to remove RAM's still nothing then did CMOS reset again while only 1 Ram was inserted power off for few min then on again it booted working fine and ram settings was 4000 Again i tried but this time 5600Mhz Ram speed still same thing .

i am not able to figure out what is wrong in the system it boots and sometimes it does not its random
and when it wont boot i have to remove GPU. RAMS, try with single RAM clear CMOS remove all USB cables then there is a chance it may boot but still not a guarantee


Today while installing windows too got these errors BSOD

System Service Exception
IRQL_not_less_or_equal
Critical Process Died

Error Codes in Motherboard Q-LED, 98 , d7, 94, A2 and 54 too when Ram speed was selected 6000.

UPDATE: 3rd Day

Okay so There is a inbuilt tool in windows memory to test
i ran it and when all 4 RAMS were there it has given hardware error at starting itself at starting

So i removed all 4 RAM
then in Board slot A2 i insterted only single RAM and tested one by one all were fine system also booted in few min and no error in memory diagnostic tool

it means its board issue then?
Because when i removed RAM from A2 and insterted in A1 again there was no display Qled codes were showing different codes and even after i removed ram from A1 and inserted back in A2 not booting unless i did CMOS clear. POwer off for few min, remove GPU and then install back again

Now i am running Dual Rams in A2 and B2 but did AIDA test and AIDA shows i am running Quad Channel

*Should i get new board?*


----------



## Nizzen

tarunagg said:


> Please do give it a reading and sorry for any wrong words or spellings i am soo tired and frustrated too...since last 3 days trying to figure out whats wrong with the system
> 
> My System Specs are:
> ASUS MAXIMUS HERO Z690
> I9-12900K
> 4 x Gskill Trident Z5 RGB Series 6000Mhz (64 GB total)
> GPU: MSI Supreme 3080
> PSU: EVGA 1300GT
> 
> Storage:
> Corsair MP600 M.2. NVME 1TB Main windows
> Samsung 980 Pro M.2. 2TB
> Samsung 970 EVO M.2. 256GB (Removed for testing)
> 2x4TB WD Black
> 1x8TB WD Gold
> 
> Case: Lian Li Dynamic XL ROG
> Fans: Lian Li SL UNI 120 Fans 3 Bottom, 3 Side, 3 top, 1 Back with 2 Controller
> 
> 
> When i finished assembling everything At first all leds were on so as system but there was no display Q-LED Code was 98 and Motherboard LED color GREEN.
> 
> It took me a lot of time, hit and trials etc then i removed 2 Rams and it booted into BIOS.
> Somehow i was able to install Windows and and installed other 2 rams also but in bios as soon as i selected Profile XMP 1. Save and exit ... then again it was stuck in endless loop, not booting ?
> 
> Did CMOS reset still nothing. removed GPU, RAM again dont know what else and again some how it booted again.. i can see the diplay boot logo.
> Had updated bios to latest saved and exit and same again no display...
> 
> Again had to remove RAM's still nothing then did CMOS reset again while only 1 Ram was inserted power off for few min then on again it booted working fine and ram settings was 4000 Again i tried but this time 5600Mhz Ram speed still same thing .
> 
> i am not able to figure out what is wrong in the system it boots and sometimes it does not its random
> and when it wont boot i have to remove GPU. RAMS, try with single RAM clear CMOS remove all USB cables then there is a chance it may boot but still not a guarantee
> 
> 
> Today while installing windows too got these errors BSOD
> 
> System Service Exception
> IRQL_not_less_or_equal
> Critical Process Died
> 
> Error Codes in Motherboard Q-LED, 98 , d7, 94, A2 and 54 too when Ram speed was selected 6000.
> 
> UPDATE: 3rd Day
> 
> Okay so There is a inbuilt tool in windows memory to test
> i ran it and when all 4 RAMS were there it has given hardware error at starting itself at starting
> 
> So i removed all 4 RAM
> then in Board slot A2 i insterted only single RAM and tested one by one all were fine system also booted in few min and no error in memory diagnostic tool
> 
> it means its board issue then?
> Because when i removed RAM from A2 and insterted in A1 again there was no display Qled codes were showing different codes and even after i removed ram from A1 and inserted back in A2 not booting unless i did CMOS clear. POwer off for few min, remove GPU and then install back again
> 
> Now i am running Dual Rams in A2 and B2 but did AIDA test and AIDA shows i am running Quad Channel
> 
> *Should i get new board?*


Buy 2x32 GB hynix kit. This wil solve most problems.
New 6000c30 2x32GB is a good start. Over 5200mhz with 4 dimms is HARD

Ps: DDR5 is 2 channels per dimm. So 2x dimm looks like quad channel.


----------



## TSportM

trihy said:


> Best part of bios updates is when people actually think asus fixed something. It last about a day, at best.


on my part i dunno if they fixed any thing, i do need 1320v vs 1300 (before) other then that the bios is better face the other 2 before (performance wise), for me no problems in crashes, CTD, BSOD etc 

But i agree everyone´s milage may vary....


cheers


----------



## TSportM

tarunagg said:


> Please do give it a reading and sorry for any wrong words or spellings i am soo tired and frustrated too...since last 3 days trying to figure out whats wrong with the system
> 
> My System Specs are:
> ASUS MAXIMUS HERO Z690
> I9-12900K
> 4 x Gskill Trident Z5 RGB Series 6000Mhz (64 GB total)
> GPU: MSI Supreme 3080
> PSU: EVGA 1300GT
> 
> Storage:
> Corsair MP600 M.2. NVME 1TB Main windows
> Samsung 980 Pro M.2. 2TB
> Samsung 970 EVO M.2. 256GB (Removed for testing)
> 2x4TB WD Black
> 1x8TB WD Gold
> 
> Case: Lian Li Dynamic XL ROG
> Fans: Lian Li SL UNI 120 Fans 3 Bottom, 3 Side, 3 top, 1 Back with 2 Controller
> 
> 
> When i finished assembling everything At first all leds were on so as system but there was no display Q-LED Code was 98 and Motherboard LED color GREEN.
> 
> It took me a lot of time, hit and trials etc then i removed 2 Rams and it booted into BIOS.
> Somehow i was able to install Windows and and installed other 2 rams also but in bios as soon as i selected Profile XMP 1. Save and exit ... then again it was stuck in endless loop, not booting ?
> 
> Did CMOS reset still nothing. removed GPU, RAM again dont know what else and again some how it booted again.. i can see the diplay boot logo.
> Had updated bios to latest saved and exit and same again no display...
> 
> Again had to remove RAM's still nothing then did CMOS reset again while only 1 Ram was inserted power off for few min then on again it booted working fine and ram settings was 4000 Again i tried but this time 5600Mhz Ram speed still same thing .
> 
> i am not able to figure out what is wrong in the system it boots and sometimes it does not its random
> and when it wont boot i have to remove GPU. RAMS, try with single RAM clear CMOS remove all USB cables then there is a chance it may boot but still not a guarantee
> 
> 
> Today while installing windows too got these errors BSOD
> 
> System Service Exception
> IRQL_not_less_or_equal
> Critical Process Died
> 
> Error Codes in Motherboard Q-LED, 98 , d7, 94, A2 and 54 too when Ram speed was selected 6000.
> 
> UPDATE: 3rd Day
> 
> Okay so There is a inbuilt tool in windows memory to test
> i ran it and when all 4 RAMS were there it has given hardware error at starting itself at starting
> 
> So i removed all 4 RAM
> then in Board slot A2 i insterted only single RAM and tested one by one all were fine system also booted in few min and no error in memory diagnostic tool
> 
> it means its board issue then?
> Because when i removed RAM from A2 and insterted in A1 again there was no display Qled codes were showing different codes and even after i removed ram from A1 and inserted back in A2 not booting unless i did CMOS clear. POwer off for few min, remove GPU and then install back again
> 
> Now i am running Dual Rams in A2 and B2 but did AIDA test and AIDA shows i am running Quad Channel
> 
> *Should i get new board?*



4 sticks are not ideal on any system .....

do some testing:

appy XMPII

generic images below, apply does voltages and test, gradual decresse the MC voltage until you get problems again


----------



## tarunagg

Nizzen said:


> Buy 2x32 GB hynix kit. This wil solve most problems.
> New 6000c30 2x32GB is a good start. Over 5200mhz with 4 dimms is HARD
> 
> Ps: DDR5 is 2 channels per dimm. So 2x dimm looks like quad channel.


Okay thanks for your reply it's the memory settings issue then not board.


----------



## tarunagg

TSportM said:


> 4 sticks are not ideal on any system .....
> 
> do some testing:
> 
> appy XMPII
> 
> generic images below, apply does voltages and test, gradual decresse the MC voltage until you get problems again


Okay.. didn't knew this that 4 ram can cause issues
But one thing I dint understand
If system won't boot means no display no bios nothing
Then why it's soo hard to get it working again like i have to remove rams and insert one in different slots .. or clear cmos , power off for few min then it might give you display like there is no guarantee... Which will fix this issue that by doing this you will get display for sure


----------



## bscool

tarunagg said:


> Okay thanks for your reply it's the memory settings issue then not board.


What is the exact model of your memory. Samsung is probably harder running 4x16 than Hynix, I have seen a couple people get 4x16 with Hynix working at higher clocks.

BZ Also did a couple of vids on 4x16 6000

Edit it sounds weird that you cannot get the MB to boot with a single stick in some slots. Does not sounds right.

To start I would see if I could get a2 and b2 stable at say 6000 XMP.

If that works and the other 2 slots wont work at an speed it is probabaly defective MB.


----------



## tarunagg

bscool said:


> What is the exact model of your memory. Samsung is probably harder running 4x16 than Hynix, I have seen a couple people get 4x16 with Hynix working at higher clocks.
> 
> BZ Also did a couple of vids on 4x16 6000
> 
> Edit it sounds weird that you cannot get the MB to boot with a single stick in some slots. Does not sounds right.
> 
> To start I would see if I could get a2 and b2 stable at say 6000 XMP.
> 
> If that works and the other 2 slots wont work at an speed it is probabaly defective MB.


SInce yesterday i am running 6000 Mhz A2 and B2 32 GB total no issues till now..

G.Skill TRIDENT Z5 RGB 32GB (16GBX2)
F5-6000U4040E16GX2-TZ5RK 
and
F5-6000J4040F16GX2-TZ5RK


----------



## bscool

tarunagg said:


> SInce yesterday i am running 6000 Mhz A2 and B2 32 GB total no issues till now..
> 
> G.Skill TRIDENT Z5 RGB 32GB (16GBX2)
> F5-6000U4040E16GX2-TZ5RK
> and
> F5-6000J4040F16GX2-TZ5RK


Hmm one thing I see is they have difference XMP so that alone could cause issues. One kits has tras of 76 and another 96.

Also different dram voltages on each kit(1.3 vs 1.35) so you would need to go in and set voltgaes manually also to make sure everything is correct.

Might be able to be solved manually setting timings and voltages. But probably the easiest solution is like others said going 2x32.


----------



## tarunagg

bscool said:


> Hmm one thing I see is they have difference XMP so that alone could cause issues. One kits has tras of 76 and another 96.
> 
> Also different dram voltages on each kit(1.3 vs 1.35) so you would need to go in and set voltgaes manually also to make sure everything is correct.
> 
> Might be able to be solved manually setting timings and voltages. But probably the easiest solution is like others said going 2x32.


yes i am trying to contact from where i bought it and will revert these then will buy
2x32GB sticks


----------



## tarunagg

this is exactly the same issue i have atleast now i can RIP lol


----------



## acoustic

Tested out the new 1601 BIOS on 12700K and ASUS Z690 TUF D4. I've been bouncing between BIOS trying different ones.. most recently have been running 0807 as I feel the last few BIOS releases have introduced strange oddities/loss of performance. I have tested them all with the same settings - 53x3/51x8, E-Cores disabled, 48x Ring, 3800 15-15-15-28 @ 1.45v vdimm

1601 is completely unstable at the same voltages that ever other BIOS works with. I added 0.0200mv, and still had a CLOCK_WATCHDOG_TIMEOUT error, along with a complete reboot at one point. Super strange!

I'll likely go back to 0807 for 24/7 use. I have weird issues with 1304/1404/1504 where my Y-Cruncher benches will intermittently give me 100s completion times. Normally, I see 81-83sec completion with those BIOS when they don't bug out (everything looks completely normal, which is the even stranger part - clock speeds read as they should). 0807 gives me 78sec completion.


----------



## EviLBoy

I have the same issue.
The issues with all these bios also concern other brands of motherboard?


----------



## trihy

Kind of. 

MSI boards seems to be a little ahead. Latest changelog for their bios are at least more optimistic.

- Fine-tuned memory compatibility.


----------



## Alberto_It

acoustic said:


> Tested out the new 1601 BIOS on 12700K and ASUS Z690 TUF D4. I've been bouncing between BIOS trying different ones.. most recently have been running 0807 as I feel the last few BIOS releases have introduced strange oddities/loss of performance. I have tested them all with the same settings - 53x3/51x8, E-Cores disabled, 48x Ring, 3800 15-15-15-28 @ 1.45v vdimm
> 
> 1601 is completely unstable at the same voltages that ever other BIOS works with. I added 0.0200mv, and still had a CLOCK_WATCHDOG_TIMEOUT error, along with a complete reboot at one point. Super strange!
> 
> I'll likely go back to 0807 for 24/7 use. I have weird issues with 1304/1404/1504 where my Y-Cruncher benches will intermittently give me 100s completion times. Normally, I see 81-83sec completion with those BIOS when they don't bug out (everything looks completely normal, which is the even stranger part - clock speeds read as they should). 0807 gives me 78sec completion.


Each new Bios introduces some change, it is difficult to maintain the same settings and voltages. Try to review yours because there are users who are doing well with the 1601









[OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread


What's better from 1505? On the extreme it boosts performance, like i said...... the voltages or higher for exemple running R23, (same setttings on 1505) but overall all scores on benchmarks are higher, for me the only thing a need to change was 1.3 to 1.320 on the MC for the memory to pass...




www.overclock.net


----------



## tarunagg

Which is the stable bios for maximus z690 hero ?


----------



## Nizzen

tarunagg said:


> Which is the stable bios for maximus z690 hero ?


Always try the latest first. 10 people can have 10 different results, so there is no right answer. 
Difference in hardware and software plays a role.


----------



## MED2U

HELP PLEASE

I can only get up and running with DDR5 in A1 and A2
anything in B1 or B2 wont post, cant even get to bios

Running Z690 Maximus Hero I9-12000k
Corsair RGB 5200Mhz 32gb stick (i got 4, so 128gb if using all 4 slots)

Bios - tried last 3 versions - currently on the new 1601

32gb stick installed in A1 and A2 (64gb) - bios xmp1 - everything works and is stable
Using A2 and B2 - wont post just cycles 
Using B1 and B2 or just B1 or B2 - wont post just cycles
Using A1, A2, B1, B2 (128gb) - wont post just cycles

All sticks RGB's light up in all slots - but only can POST from A1 and A2

I had previously RMA'd motherboard and it was returned to me with a nice note saying no issues found

I have tried G.Skill 16gb ram and Kingston fury - same results, can only post from A1 or A2

I also removed CPU and checked every pin with magnifying lens and can find nothing bent or misaligned

Any ideas? I am up and running but only dual channel as its on A1 and A2

Thanks


----------



## tarunagg

MED2U said:


> HELP PLEASE
> 
> I can only get up and running with DDR5 in A1 and A2
> anything in B1 or B2 wont post, cant even get to bios
> 
> Running Z690 Maximus Hero I9-12000k
> Corsair RGB 5200Mhz 32gb stick (i got 4, so 128gb if using all 4 slots)
> 
> Bios - tried last 3 versions - currently on the new 1601
> 
> 32gb stick installed in A1 and A2 (64gb) - bios xmp1 - everything works and is stable
> Using A2 and B2 - wont post just cycles
> Using B1 and B2 or just B1 or B2 - wont post just cycles
> Using A1, A2, B1, B2 (128gb) - wont post just cycles
> 
> All sticks RGB's light up in all slots - but only can POST from A1 and A2
> 
> I had previously RMA'd motherboard and it was returned to me with a nice note saying no issues found
> 
> I have tried G.Skill 16gb ram and Kingston fury - same results, can only post from A1 or A2
> 
> I also removed CPU and checked every pin with magnifying lens and can find nothing bent or misaligned
> 
> Any ideas? I am up and running but only dual channel as its on A1 and A2
> 
> Thanks


Welcome to the CLUB...you are in same situation as mine lol

Clear CMOS
Power of system from main socket too
Then Use only A2 and B2 Slot it will work only 2 Rams other then two.. issues









[OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread


What's better from 1505? On the extreme it boosts performance, like i said...... the voltages or higher for exemple running R23, (same setttings on 1505) but overall all scores on benchmarks are higher, for me the only thing a need to change was 1.3 to 1.320 on the MC for the memory to pass...




www.overclock.net


----------



## MED2U

tarunagg said:


> Welcome to the CLUB...you are in same situation as mine lol
> 
> Clear CMOS
> Power of system from main socket too
> Then Use only A2 and B2 Slot it will work only 2 Rams other then two.. issues
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread
> 
> 
> What's better from 1505? On the extreme it boosts performance, like i said...... the voltages or higher for exemple running R23, (same setttings on 1505) but overall all scores on benchmarks are higher, for me the only thing a need to change was 1.3 to 1.320 on the MC for the memory to pass...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net



I can not get it to post with A2 and B2

Only way I can get as far as bios is using A1 and A2

Tried, power, cmos, adjusting voltages - same result

The stick in B2 lights up, but it will not goto bios - goes in loops 00, 7F, 12, 28, 4C (long time), 31(long time), 2E, 34 (long time), 6b, 4a, 79 (long time), 36,35,7a - then back to 00 and cycle repeats over and over

I I use only A1 and A2 - it posts and boot up ok


----------



## tarunagg

MED2U said:


> I can not get it to post with A2 and B2
> 
> Only way I can get as far as bios is using A1 and A2
> 
> Tried, power, cmos, adjusting voltages - same result
> 
> The stick in B2 lights up, but it will not goto bios - goes in loops 00, 7F, 12, 28, 4C (long time), 31(long time), 2E, 34 (long time), 6b, 4a, 79 (long time), 36,35,7a - then back to 00 and cycle repeats over and over
> 
> I I use only A1 and A2 - it posts and boot up ok


use single stick
in B2 check


----------



## Martin778

No BSODs yet on the latest BIOS on the APEX. Going to run normal memtest overnight.


----------



## MED2U

tarunagg said:


> use single stick
> in B2 check


1 stick in B2 - same loop and wont post
1 stick in B1 - stop with POST 55

Putting both sticks back in A1 and A2 - everything ok

I can only think its the motherboard, but I already RMA's it once and they returned it saying no problems found.


----------



## TraumatikOC

MED2U said:


> 1 stick in B2 - same loop and wont post
> 1 stick in B1 - stop with POST 55
> 
> Putting both sticks back in A1 and A2 - everything ok
> 
> I can only think its the motherboard, but I already RMA's it once and they returned it saying no problems found.


If you can, 1 stick in A2, get latest bios and place on usb , put in mobo port for bios flashback(whatever its called). Flash it, then after done flashing power down, pull psu power cable , hold power button on case for 30 seconds, then hold clr cmos button in for 30 seconds, then plug pwr cable in and switch psu on , then boot into bios set all settings except xmp profiles , save bios in any profile and just name it basenoxmp (or whatever you want so you know its the base no xmp set). then save and reboot to bios. Pwr down and add 1 stick to B2 then pwr up and see if works.

PS did you check the asus site to see if your ram is on QVL (qualified vendor list).


----------



## bscool

MED2U said:


> HELP PLEASE
> 
> I can only get up and running with DDR5 in A1 and A2
> anything in B1 or B2 wont post, cant even get to bios
> 
> Running Z690 Maximus Hero I9-12000k
> Corsair RGB 5200Mhz 32gb stick (i got 4, so 128gb if using all 4 slots)
> 
> Bios - tried last 3 versions - currently on the new 1601
> 
> 32gb stick installed in A1 and A2 (64gb) - bios xmp1 - everything works and is stable
> Using A2 and B2 - wont post just cycles
> Using B1 and B2 or just B1 or B2 - wont post just cycles
> Using A1, A2, B1, B2 (128gb) - wont post just cycles
> 
> All sticks RGB's light up in all slots - but only can POST from A1 and A2
> 
> I had previously RMA'd motherboard and it was returned to me with a nice note saying no issues found
> 
> I have tried G.Skill 16gb ram and Kingston fury - same results, can only post from A1 or A2
> 
> I also removed CPU and checked every pin with magnifying lens and can find nothing bent or misaligned
> 
> Any ideas? I am up and running but only dual channel as its on A1 and A2
> 
> Thanks


I would guess CPU, I have seen a couple people have this issue.

I guess to know for sure buy cheapest 12th gen and try. I think g7400 is under $100.

Think about it, if it is not the mb and not the memory the only thing left is cpu/memory controller.


----------



## trihy

Tell me you have an Asus board without telling me you have an Asus board...










Bios 16xx. Bug still there. Good luck having a stable PC with boards that applies 0.300v to the CPU when minimum working voltage for alder lake is 0.700v.


----------



## Nizzen

trihy said:


> Tell me you have an Asus board without telling me you have an Asus board...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bios 16xx. Bug still there. Good luck having a stable PC with boards that applies 0.300v to the CPU when minimum working voltage for alder lake is 0.700v.


Using the newest hwinfo beta?


----------



## trihy

Nizzen said:


> Using the newest hwinfo beta?


Hi. Im using 7.26.4800. But you can try any hwinfo, all report the same. Also you can try other monitoring software that report real vcore.This could be one of the reason of random freeze at idle.


----------



## tubs2x4

trihy said:


> Tell me you have an Asus board without telling me you have an Asus board...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bios 16xx. Bug still there. Good luck having a stable PC with boards that applies 0.300v to the CPU when minimum working voltage for alder lake is 0.700v.


my asus board shows vcore low like that at idle but vids show 0.742 min around there at idle i still use 1403 bios


----------



## tarunagg

What are the Normal CPU temp 12900K default clocks Hero z690? Room temp is around 30'c hot and humid new delhi lol
in hwinfo full load its showing 83 CPU package
using Z73 AIO


----------



## TSportM

tarunagg said:


> What are the Normal CPU temp 12900K default clocks Hero z690? Room temp is around 30'c hot and humid new delhi lol
> in hwinfo full load its showing 83 CPU package
> using Z73 AIO


That depends alot…… 

your conditions are not ideal….

also depends if you are using the preaplied thermal past, or using a better (and the form you aplied it) this regarding the bending issue how the cooler is contacting the ihs. Depends on alot of factors on the 12 gen

cheers


----------



## Mappi75

Updated bios 1503 to 1601 = tm5 "hell of errors / most test are red"

Going back to 1503 still the best bios for my 12900KS.
(z690 Apex / 32GB 6.666Mhz 32-40-40-28-2T)


----------



## Wasakiqwe

Quick question should I get new asus Z690 hero as replacement of Auros master which was good but received damaged?


----------



## tarunagg

TSportM said:


> That depends alot……
> 
> your conditions are not ideal….
> 
> also depends if you are using the preaplied thermal past, or using a better (and the form you aplied it) this regarding the bending issue how the cooler is contacting the ihs. Depends on alot of factors on the 12 gen
> 
> cheers


yea man i used just now AIDA 64 EXTREME for CPU AND FPU stress test and it was 100+ started throttling.. something is wrong then will use better paste i have it but didnt used thought the inbuild NZXT is better


----------



## trihy

tubs2x4 said:


> my asus board shows vcore low like that at idle but vids show 0.742 min around there at idle i still use 1403 bios
> View attachment 2566537


Hi. VID is what the CPU is asking for. Vcore is what the board is suplying to the cpu. The CPU ask for 0.700 (0.740 in your case) and board supplies 0.300, 0.200 (0.382 in your case) complete nonsense and out of specs. A miracle CPUs survives to this.

Nobody knows if this is a bios or a hardware problem. But affects all asus 600 boards.


----------



## edkieferlp

trihy said:


> Hi. VID is what the CPU is asking for. Vcore is what the board is suplying to the cpu. The CPU ask for 0.700 (0.742 in your case) and board supplies 0.300, 0.200 (0.382 in your case) complete nonsense and out of specs. A miracle CPUs survives to this.
> 
> Nobody knows if this is a bios or a board hardware problem. But affects all asus 600 boards.


But wouldn't that depend on how Vcore is measured as that can change depending on MB, socket sense Vcore or die sense, even here depends on how AC_ll and DC_ll are setup.

Edit: My lowest Vcore in bios shows V-core= 0.240v with no issues also running P 50,50,49,49,48,47/ E 38/ Ring 40.
Was also running P 51,51,51,49,48,48/ E 38/Ring 40
This is on bios 0.707.


----------



## sblantipodi

trihy said:


> Tell me you have an Asus board without telling me you have an Asus board...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bios 16xx. Bug still there. Good luck having a stable PC with boards that applies 0.300v to the CPU when minimum working voltage for alder lake is 0.700v.


new BIOS, same [email protected]


----------



## tubs2x4

trihy said:


> Hi. VID is what the CPU is asking for. Vcore is what the board is suplying to the cpu. The CPU ask for 0.700 (0.740 in your case) and board supplies 0.300, 0.200 (0.382 in your case) complete nonsense and out of specs. A miracle CPUs survives to this.
> 
> Nobody knows if this is a bios or a hardware problem. But affects all asus 600 boards.


Oh ok. Well if they need 0.7 min I don’t know how they are working like this then haha but I do not have freeze ups in win11 at all. So maybe just a software report issue? But then again if I set manual vcore in bios it shows exactly what I set in hwinfo though. Ah who knows. As long as the ***** runs! Has idle freeze up’s an issue for lots of asus board users?


----------



## trihy

Probably they have tolerance for low voltage for a few sec, but freezes at idle sooner or later will happen. Apply an offset of 0.005 undervolt and freezes will happen frequently. There is no way a cpu doesnt support 0.005 undervolt. Something is wrong about this boards.

I know most users are fine cause "it works". But the same said for x99, till boards started killing CPUs.

That value is way out of specs, if its software, hardware, bios, I dont know.


----------



## acoustic

It's a software reading. It's not likely accurate. There's no chance you'd have any stability even idling in Windows at 0.200v. My vCore reads as low as 0.130v at times during idle .. there are no freezes or crashes, because the VRM is not really supplying such a low voltage.

Too much weight being put into software readings.


----------



## TSportM

Mappi75 said:


> Updated bios 1503 to 1601 = tm5 "hell of errors / most test are red"
> 
> Going back to 1503 still the best bios for my 12900KS.
> (z690 Apex / 32GB 6.666Mhz 32-40-40-28-2T)



Does somebody actualy reads this thread....

in my case i had up MC from 1.3 to 1.320 for memory benchmark stability, over performance improved on this bios 
voltages overall are also a notch higher on full load using previous settings from other bios versions.


nontheless, users milage may vary, all need to bare in mind the diferent overclock aproaches from user to A to B, my board is from 2021/ November only had issues with it on corsair Samsung modules, changing to Hynix, 0 problems on OC aspects from cpu to memory.

cheers


----------



## lordkahless

Has anyone tried the Gskill 5600cl28 ram? How would that compare to say 6000cl36


----------



## TraumatikOC

lordkahless said:


> Has anyone tried the Gskill 5600cl28 ram? How would that compare to say 6000cl36


Check out buildzoids newer video about timings , actuallyhardcore youtube , he tested ram timings , showing cl40 with lower subtimings outperform lower cl with higher subtimings. Basically dont assume that lower primaries will be better. just a FYI.


----------



## Nizzen

lordkahless said:


> Has anyone tried the Gskill 5600cl28 ram? How would that compare to say 6000cl36


You try, and repport back 
Try 6000c30 too


----------



## Nizzen

TraumatikOC said:


> Check out buildzoids newer video about timings , actuallyhardcore youtube , he tested ram timings , showing cl40 with lower subtimings outperform lower cl with higher subtimings. Basically dont assume that lower primaries will be better. just a FYI.


That's not an answer to his question


----------



## RighteousOne

trihy said:


> Hi. VID is what the CPU is asking for. Vcore is what the board is suplying to the cpu. The CPU ask for 0.700 (0.740 in your case) and board supplies 0.300, 0.200 (0.382 in your case) complete nonsense and out of specs. A miracle CPUs survives to this.
> 
> Nobody knows if this is a bios or a hardware problem. But affects all asus 600 boards.


My Asus TUF gaming z690 mobo doesn't have this problem. What is asked for by VID is what is given by Vcore.


----------



## RighteousOne

Mappi75 said:


> Updated bios 1503 to 1601 = tm5 "hell of errors / most test are red"
> 
> Going back to 1503 still the best bios for my 12900KS.
> (z690 Apex / 32GB 6.666Mhz 32-40-40-28-2T)


Upgraded from 1504 to 1601 two days ago on my new z690 motherboard. I started having random resets for no apparent reason with no load or cpu stress of any sort. Just web browsing. Reverted to 1503 and all is good so far.


----------



## TraumatikOC

Nizzen said:


> That's not an answer to his question


I Dont know exactly since it really cant be answered unless more data is presented. BUT this give insight to the question


----------



## Simkin

MSI Afterburner reports my CPU usage on my 12900K to only 1-2%, this is both in BF4 and Fortnite. (task manager says much higher)

I assume this is a bug. Last update on Afterburner is 4.6.4 march last year, is this program discontinued?


----------



## Spiriva

Simkin said:


> MSI Afterburner reports my CPU usage on my 12900K to only 1-2%, this is both in BF4 and Fortnite. (task manager says much higher)
> 
> I assume this is a bug. Last update on Afterburner is 4.6.4 march last year, is this program discontinued?











MSI AB / RTSS development news thread


Both affect hybrid mode only.




forums.guru3d.com





4.6.5 beta 1


----------



## Simkin

Spiriva said:


> MSI AB / RTSS development news thread
> 
> 
> Both affect hybrid mode only.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> forums.guru3d.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4.6.5 beta 1


Thanks dude!


----------



## sblantipodi

With new 1601 bios my Extreme is way slower in booting windows. The post took longer.

It take longer in "loading VGA bios" and at detecting HDD.

No improvements, only drawbacks here xD


----------



## Simkin

sblantipodi said:


> With new 1601 bios my Extreme is way slower in booting windows. The post took longer.
> 
> It take longer in "loading VGA bios" and at detecting HDD.
> 
> No improvements, only drawbacks here xD


My Apex is slower booting windows than a Intel 486 machine 

Asus better get their sh..it straight with Z790.


----------



## Nizzen

Simkin said:


> My Apex is slower booting windows than a Intel 486 machine
> 
> Asus better get their sh..it straight with Z790.


Memorysettings:
Enable fastboot?
Disable full check


----------



## RighteousOne

Simkin said:


> My Apex is slower booting windows than a Intel 486 machine
> 
> Asus better get their sh..it straight with Z790.


1503 or 1601 bios?


----------



## Simkin

RighteousOne said:


> 1503 or 1601 bios?


Every bios since i bought it in november,


----------



## Simkin

Nizzen said:


> Memorysettings:
> Enable fastboot?
> Disable full check


Not sure, let me check 

Fastboot enabled
Full check was on auto, disabled it now, and it seemed to improve boot time.

Thanks for that


----------



## Nizzen

Simkin said:


> Not sure, let me check
> 
> Fastboot enabled
> Full check was on auto, disabled it now, and it seemed to improve boot time.
> 
> Thanks for that


And ofcourse disable bluetooth, integrated sound etc in bios, if you don't use it


----------



## Simkin

Nizzen said:


> And ofcourse disable bluetooth, integrated sound etc in bios, if you don't use it


Sound is disabled in bios, using dedicated Sound Card. Bluetooth is not disabled in bios, not using it, maybe disabled it also.


----------



## tubs2x4

People buy dedicated sound cards? Thought only had to do in the isa slot motherboard days haha. 
sound that much better with a sound card over todays motherboards or what’s the diff?


----------



## trihy

RighteousOne said:


> My Asus TUF gaming z690 mobo doesn't have this problem. What is asked for by VID is what is given by Vcore.


As you see, other users with faulty boards are happy cause "it works"

Great to see they made at least one working per spec board.


----------



## sblantipodi

Simkin said:


> Not sure, let me check
> 
> Fastboot enabled
> Full check was on auto, disabled it now, and it seemed to improve boot time.
> 
> Thanks for that


Are you talking about the 
MCH Full Check?

Thanks


----------



## affxct

trihy said:


> As you see, other users with faulty boards are happy cause "it works"
> 
> Great to see they made at least one working per spec board.


I've tested under-volting at stock with the Auto and the 'Trained' SVID on a Z690-F and on an Apex - different i9 samples as well. Despite those ultra low sensor-reported droops, I've never experienced any crashes at idle. Crashes at idle have happened due to IMC or uncore instability due to data channel errors, which are commonly the culprit when dealing with M0EAY0 boards.

I say this is the nicest way possible, but I think you're identifying the wrong root cause. If your undervolt passes a stress test then it should be fine, the Vcore readout isn't necessarily accurate. You'd be better off using an oscilloscope. If you're crashing at idle, look no further than data channel errors. They're almost always the issue.


----------



## Nizzen

tubs2x4 said:


> People buy dedicated sound cards? Thought only had to do in the isa slot motherboard days haha.
> sound that much better with a sound card over todays motherboards or what’s the diff?


Usb dac/amp baby 😘

☺


----------



## TSportM

sblantipodi said:


> new BIOS, same [email protected]





trihy said:


> As you see, other users with faulty boards are happy cause "it works"
> 
> Great to see they made at least one working per spec board.



Please post a TXT of your settings


----------



## Simkin

tubs2x4 said:


> People buy dedicated sound cards? Thought only had to do in the isa slot motherboard days haha.
> sound that much better with a sound card over todays motherboards or what’s the diff?


Yes.









Sound Blaster AE-9: Sound Card Review | Sound Blaster AE-9


Creative, a name synonymous with PC audio. Well today is no different as we look at their top of the line soundcard the Sound Blaster AE-9.




extremehw.net


----------



## Simkin

sblantipodi said:


> Are you talking about the
> MCH Full Check?
> 
> Thanks


Yes, boot time much faster now.


----------



## acoustic

trihy said:


> As you see, other users with faulty boards are happy cause "it works"
> 
> Great to see they made at least one working per spec board.


Again, so much faith in a software reading.


----------



## Mappi75

Use SB AE9 too with Sennheiser HME 27 headset - no problems here.


----------



## sblantipodi

hi guys, what's your experience with RAID0 this days?

I was a RAID0 guy on the hard disk hera.

Does it have sense today with SSDs?
I would like to create a RAID0 just to double my disk space.

is it safe to do RAID0 currently ?
is RAID0 volumes reliable and stable this days?


----------



## sblantipodi

do the IOPS performance degrade on Z690 when RAID0 like happened on X570?


----------



## Nizzen

sblantipodi said:


> do the IOPS performance degrade on Z690 when RAID0 like happened on X570?


Iops allways "degrade" a bit in raid-0 due to higher latency.
4k random read @ QD=1


----------



## DragDay7

trihy said:


> Tell me you have an Asus board without telling me you have an Asus board...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bios 16xx. Bug still there. Good luck having a stable PC with boards that applies 0.300v to the CPU when minimum working voltage for alder lake is 0.700v.


Hey @trihy,

Can you elaborate on that?

I'm having issue with PC freezing once a day the most when using default bios settings. Lets say if my PC froze in the morning then it wouldn't for the rest of the day. First time it stopped freezing after disabling PCIE NPM or enabling Native ASPM. Also bios started to freeze once per few seconds after 1505 update and downgrade doesn't help.

Then I saw your previous posts about vcore being too low (page 277 here) and I'd like to know more about that. I've spoken with Intel - according to 12th gen cpu datasheets (1 of 2, page 176) - vcore can get even closer to 0v (0-1.6v). I've enabled PCIE NPM, set adaptive voltage +0.05v and it stopped freezing, but hwinfo reported vcore as low as 0.222v anyway. Then I tried +0.025v and it was still fine. Today I ran +0.001v without an issue. Now I'm trying to run -0.001v to see if it makes any difference (lowest vcore atm 0.204v). Maybe - in my case - cpu voltage set to auto is the reason why something fails. I think it's not cpu voltage, at least not vcore - let me explain.

Asus doesn't give a fk about my issue, so I asked Intel for help. I got in touch with few people, then one agreed to connect remotely and dig into my pc to do some diagnostics. It took 4 hours phone call, btw. those guys were amazing - full commitment, support, "don't worry Simon we got this" - nothing like Asus.

After a while we decided I'd turn on bios default settings so he could log performance, voltages and stuff. I also ran TM5 test to show him it's fine... and it spilled errors - I was shocked - that never happend before. I've done it before with or without XMP and it never reported any error. I tried today for half a day and I couldn't get any error again. Perhaps this is exact reason why PC freezes? Memory errors triggered by some weird voltage regulations and it eventually snaps to full freeze.

Then there's that thread on rog forum about B660 acting weird if voltage offset is set and I knew I saw that nick somewhere xD

Anyone feel free to tell me I'm wrong. I'm struggling with this since march and I've been standing on my head to solve this, I could use help in here.

Also hello everyone, have a great time!


----------



## Baasha

Simkin said:


> Yes, boot time much faster now.


Which tab/setting is the "MCH Check" setting under? I too noticed slower boot times in Z690 when compared to my old Z490 rig. 

Also, I'm using Tos-Link cable for my DAC/AMP so can I turn off 'integrated/on-board sound' (dumb question...)?


----------



## DragDay7

Baasha said:


> Which tab/setting is the "MCH Check" setting under? I too noticed slower boot times in Z690 when compared to my old Z490 rig.


AI Tweaker -> DRAM Timing Control, but don't get your hopes high. Asus Z690 post time is terrible and Asus can't handle it.


----------



## affxct

Anyone tried out BIOS 0082 for the Apex?


----------



## bscool

Anyone try new 0082 Apex bios and FGR mode? Just saw it and thought I would post it.









ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0082.CAP


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com













What different in Fine Granularity Refresh mode? | bianbao.dev







bianbao.dev


----------



## affxct

bscool said:


> Anyone try new 0082 Apex bios and FGR mode? Just saw it and thought I would post it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0082.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What different in Fine Granularity Refresh mode? | bianbao.dev
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bianbao.dev


Not entirely sure what FGR does. I tried it, but I'm not entirely sure stability was affected.


----------



## affxct

@bscool 
I realize now that FGR was that tRFC/tREFI thing that 7empe mentioning a while back. I guess with FGR Disabled and tRFC1 tightened, you get better performance?


----------



## bscool

affxct said:


> @bscool
> I realize now that FGR was that tRFC/tREFI thing that 7empe mentioning a while back. I guess with FGR Disabled and tRFC1 tightened, you get better performance?


Are you referring to this post? _Official_ Intel DDR5 OC and 24/7 daily Memory Stability...

I looked thru his other recent posts and didnt see anything but maybe I missed it.

Edit found it *Official* Intel DDR5 OC and 24/7 daily Memory Stability...


----------



## affxct

bscool said:


> Are you referring to this post? _Official_ Intel DDR5 OC and 24/7 daily Memory Stability...
> 
> I looked thru his other recent posts and didnt see anything but maybe I missed it.


No he had a different one. Might've been deleted.


----------



## bscool

affxct said:


> No he had a different one. Might've been deleted.


Yeah I found it and edited the above post with a lnk.


----------



## affxct

Guys the support pages on the ASUS site seems to be missing?


----------



## Wilco183

affxct said:


> Guys the support pages on the ASUS site seems to be missing?


For downloads and such? Just pulled bios 1505 for Hero from Asus support ...Apex was opening also.


----------



## Alberto_It

Wilco183 said:


> For downloads and such? Just pulled bios 1505 for Hero from Asus support ...Apex was opening also.


It's missing from my country


----------



## sblantipodi

affxct said:


> Guys the support pages on the ASUS site seems to be missing?


The Asus support is missing not only the support page.


----------



## Nizzen

sblantipodi said:


> The Asus support is missing not only the support page.


Atleast you are here to hold up the toxic level 😆


----------



## sblantipodi

Nizzen said:


> Atleast you are here to hold up the toxic level 😆


Sure, you would miss me instead.


----------



## TSportM

sblantipodi said:


> Sure, you would miss me instead.


At this point everybody is aware you are fed up with asus, move on……

Cheers


----------



## Gking62

Do the boards yet support 64G (2x32G) kits such as these?

*F5-6000J3040G32GX2-TZ5RK*


----------



## Nizzen

Gking62 said:


> Do the boards yet support 64G (2x32G) kits such as these?
> 
> *F5-6000J3040G32GX2-TZ5RK*


Yes.
Dell 2x32 hynix and Team 2x32 6000c30 too are good options.


----------



## Csavez™

The 6600 memory does not work in the apex, even with the factory xmp setting, it fails.
*However, 6400 works fine.*


----------



## satinghostrider

Csavez™ said:


> The 6600 memory does not work in the apex, even with the factory xmp setting, it fails.
> *However, 6400 works fine.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2566832
> View attachment 2566832


What year is your Apex? 2021 or 2022?


----------



## Csavez™

satinghostrider said:


> What year is your Apex? 2021 or 2022?


21.
I bought it when it was released, it didn't have a year on it yet.


----------



## satinghostrider

Csavez™ said:


> 21.
> I bought it when it was released, it didn't have a year on it yet.


Honestly, 2021 Apex boards doing 6400 stable is already very lucky. I think you may need to manually tune yours for 6600. My 2021 board doesn't do anything more than 6000 stable.


----------



## Csavez™

satinghostrider said:


> Honestly, 2021 Apex boards doing 6400 stable is already very lucky. I think you may need to manually tune yours for 6600. My 2021 board doesn't do anything more than 6000 stable.


It's funny that you have to pull the apex backwards!👈


----------



## roooo

Wilco183 said:


> For downloads and such? Just pulled bios 1505 for Hero from Asus support ...Apex was opening also.


Care to share a link, please? I have the same issue - the board's page 






ROG MAXIMUS Z690 HERO | ROG MAXIMUS Z690 HERO | Gaming Motherboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG Global


Designed for the broadest range of the demanding fans, ROG Maximus Z690 Hero features 20+1 power stages, DDR5, five M.2 support, USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 front-panel connector, dual Thunderbolt™ 4, PCIe 5.0 and onboard WiFi 6E.



rog.asus.com





only shows categories Features, Tech Specs, Awards and Gallery but not Support where I used to be able to D/L BIOS, manuals etc. When I select the 'global' support tab and enter my board, I'm redirected to the above page. Can anyone check please? This is with Firefox 102.


Thanks.


----------



## affxct

roooo said:


> Care to share a link, please? I have the same issue - the board's page
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 HERO | ROG MAXIMUS Z690 HERO | Gaming Motherboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG Global
> 
> 
> Designed for the broadest range of the demanding fans, ROG Maximus Z690 Hero features 20+1 power stages, DDR5, five M.2 support, USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 front-panel connector, dual Thunderbolt™ 4, PCIe 5.0 and onboard WiFi 6E.
> 
> 
> 
> rog.asus.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> only shows categories Features, Tech Specs, Awards and Gallery but not Support where I used to be able to D/L BIOS, manuals etc. When I select the 'global' support tab and enter my board, I'm redirected to the above page. Can anyone check please? This is with Firefox 102.
> 
> 
> Thanks.


New tab (asus.com) 

This is the South African one that I somehow accessed. I'm kinda reluctant to link it because I'm beginning to wonder if ASUS removed the page deliberately or not. I just don't know why they'd change the site layout.


----------



## roooo

Interesting - thanks, this one is working and looks like the one I originally accessed via my bookmarks.


----------



## TraumatikOC

roooo said:


> Care to share a link, please? I have the same issue - the board's page
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 HERO | ROG MAXIMUS Z690 HERO | Gaming Motherboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG Global
> 
> 
> Designed for the broadest range of the demanding fans, ROG Maximus Z690 Hero features 20+1 power stages, DDR5, five M.2 support, USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 front-panel connector, dual Thunderbolt™ 4, PCIe 5.0 and onboard WiFi 6E.
> 
> 
> 
> rog.asus.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> only shows categories Features, Tech Specs, Awards and Gallery but not Support where I used to be able to D/L BIOS, manuals etc. When I select the 'global' support tab and enter my board, I'm redirected to the above page. Can anyone check please? This is with Firefox 102.
> 
> 
> Thanks.


I have received 2 emails from asus stating that the sites are being migrated, This is probably why we arent able to access/see "support" sections.


----------



## lordkahless

If you just type into Google the name of your motherboard, like for me, Z690 Apex support, the first link in Google is the US support page with the downloads.


----------



## neurokirurgi

ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX - Support direct link

for the Hero, just replace the word in the URL


----------



## Alberto_It

Csavez™ said:


> The 6600 memory does not work in the apex, even with the factory xmp setting, it fails.
> *However, 6400 works fine.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2566832
> View attachment 2566832


Can you share your BIOS profile?


----------



## mikasalo500

2022 Extreme has been working stably for 1 week now on 7000...games and working with no issues so far. It's unbelievable but the 2022 boards really work better. I bought it directly from Asus on Ebay and got a 2022. I'm very happy with it because I really wanted an extreme, because it looks so sexy  my 2021 Apex was only stable at 6400, now i have sold it...


----------



## TraumatikOC

mikasalo500 said:


> 2022 Extreme has been working stably for 1 week now on 7000...games and working with no issues so far. It's unbelievable but the 2022 boards really work better. I bought it directly from Asus on Ebay and got a 2022. I'm very happy with it because I really wanted an extreme, because it looks so sexy  my 2021 Apex was only stable at 6400, now i have sold it...


Gratz , did you take pics of the 2021 n 2022 mobo to compare like they did for the apex's ? i was having troubles getting 6000+ on teamgroup and gskill kits


----------



## Ichirou

It's not new news at this point. The memory slots on 2021 boards are just worse. No way to fix it with a BIOS update since it's the actual physical slots themselves, not software.

Better off just waiting for Z790 board offerings at this point in time.


----------



## mikasalo500

TraumatikOC said:


> Gratz , did you take pics of the 2021 n 2022 mobo to compare like they did for the apex's ? i was having troubles getting 6000+ on teamgroup and gskill kits


No, unfortunately not, I totally forgot about that. But my 2021 Extreme was just as bad. Could a maximum of 6200....


----------



## mikasalo500

Ichirou said:


> It's not new news at this point. The memory slots on 2021 boards are just worse. No way to fix it with a BIOS update since it's the actual physical slots themselves, not software.
> 
> Better off just waiting for Z790 board offerings at this point in time.


I didn't say it was news, did I? I just wrote that it also works great on a 2022 Extreme. In case anyone has a chance to get one, and I wrote about where I bought it...


----------



## Csavez™

Alberto_It said:


> Can you share your BIOS profile?


6400 cl28 stabil


----------



## Nizzen

Ichirou said:


> It's not new news at this point. The memory slots on 2021 boards are just worse. No way to fix it with a BIOS update since it's the actual physical slots themselves, not software.
> 
> Better off just waiting for Z790 board offerings at this point in time.


*difference in impedance in the pcb on the MB is the problem.


----------



## TraumatikOC

Ichirou said:


> It's not new news at this point. The memory slots on 2021 boards are just worse. No way to fix it with a BIOS update since it's the actual physical slots themselves, not software.
> 
> Better off just waiting for Z790 board offerings at this point in time.


Is it definate just the Apex , or Apex Extreme ( all boards ) ? If extreme also , how do i check if 2021 or 2022. I asked before but no answer. If mine is 2021 ill will contact asus and see what they say


----------



## Ichirou

TraumatikOC said:


> Is it definate just the Apex , or Apex Extreme ( all boards ) ? If extreme also , how do i check if 2021 or 2022. I asked before but no answer. If mine is 2021 ill will contact asus and see what they say


Can you overclock above 6,400 MHz? If not, then you're screwed. If so, then you're fine.
If you don't even need to, then it doesn't apply to you.


----------



## TraumatikOC

Ichirou said:


> Can you overclock above 6,400 MHz? If not, then you're screwed. If so, then you're fine.
> If you don't even need to, then it doesn't apply to you.


NO, i wrote about trying to get 6000 gskill cl36 2x16 and 6200 Teamgroup cl38 2x16 in a2b2 slots, would only pass memtest at 5800.


----------



## Ichirou

TraumatikOC said:


> NO, i wrote about trying to get 6000 gskill cl36 2x16 and 6200 Teamgroup cl38 2x16 in a2b2 slots, would only pass memtest at 5800.


You might want to look into RMAing that then, if you even can. But ASUS has largely abandoned Z690.


----------



## affxct

Nizzen said:


> *difference in impedance in the pcb on the MB is the problem.


Yep that's the one.


----------



## Netarangi

Bios 1504. Anyone else have issues where the video just won't load on reboot? Everything seems like it's working but it just won't load video. Can ctrl alt delete when posting and it'll reboot and show video.

Everything's stable


----------



## affxct

Progenix - For All Your Computing Needs 

Guys for some reason this site's ASUS product links take you to a magical version of the site.


----------



## Nizzen

affxct said:


> Progenix - For All Your Computing Needs
> 
> Guys for some reason this site's ASUS product links take you to a magical version of the site.


Looks like a online computerstore from the 90's


----------



## affxct

Nizzen said:


> Looks like a online computerstore from the 90's


ASUS links work though.


----------



## Nizzen

affxct said:


> ASUS links work though.


Normal asus support not working?
Works here...






ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX | ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX | Gaming Motherboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG Global


AX5400 Dual Band WiFi 6 Gaming Router, WiFi 6 802.11ax, Mobile Game Mode, ASUS AURA RGB, Lifetime Free Internet Security, Mesh WiFi support, Gear Accelerator, Gaming Port, Adaptive QoS, Port Forwarding



rog.asus.com


----------



## affxct

Nizzen said:


> Normal asus support not working?
> Works here...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX | ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX | Gaming Motherboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG Global
> 
> 
> AX5400 Dual Band WiFi 6 Gaming Router, WiFi 6 802.11ax, Mobile Game Mode, ASUS AURA RGB, Lifetime Free Internet Security, Mesh WiFi support, Gear Accelerator, Gaming Port, Adaptive QoS, Port Forwarding
> 
> 
> 
> rog.asus.com


It wasn't working for a lot of people on bookmarked pages and even via Google for a few days. It took either using a VPN to get different search results or getting directed to some weird barebones version of the ASUS site and it was getting really f***ing annoying to be dead honest. I thought it was kinda dope that every link on this site worked. Not even sure why I attempted it tbh.

Edit: I initially tested just Googling the site to see if it'd work (after finding the links from Progenix) but it did not. However, I just Googled it again on my phone, and it seems like multiple versions of the site are finally working for viewing the support page again. But yeah, that was a legit issue.

I needed (not wanted) to grab some BIOS links for a few different boards, and a friend of mine messaged me the other day looking for Intel Managament Engine and all of that ****. Yeah, surprisingly fuc**ing annoying, especially when you consider this is literally a multi-billion Dollar corporation. They fuc**d us with the boards as is, the least they could do is not have their site go AWOL for days on end, right? 🤣


----------



## Alberto_It

Csavez™ said:


> 6400 cl28 stabil


Thanks very much, is too much asking you for the Txt file of bios profile? 😳


----------



## Nizzen

affxct said:


> It wasn't working for a lot of people on bookmarked pages and even via Google for a few days. It took either using a VPN to get different search results or getting directed to some weird barebones version of the ASUS site and it was getting really f***ing annoying to be dead honest. I thought it was kinda dope that every link on this site worked. Not even sure why I attempted it tbh.
> 
> Edit: I initially tested just Googling the site to see if it'd work (after finding the links from Progenix) but it did not. However, I just Googled it again on my phone, and it seems like multiple versions of the site are finally working for viewing the support page again. But yeah, that was a legit issue.
> 
> I needed (not wanted) to grab some BIOS links for a few different boards, and a friend of mine messaged me the other day looking for Intel Managament Engine and all of that ****. Yeah, surprisingly fuc**ing annoying, especially when you consider this is literally a multi-billion Dollar corporation. They fuc**d us with the boards as is, the least they could do is not have their site go AWOL for days on end, right? 🤣


Station-drivers.net
All drivers just allways newer/updated. You never need to go to asus.com again


----------



## Simkin

Nizzen said:


> Station-drivers.net
> All drivers just allways newer/updated. You never need to go to asus.com again


At ROG forum there is also updated drivers for ASUS boards, Chipset, ME, IO, MEI, Network etc.






[INDEX] All My Firmware/Drivers/Software Threads


All My Firmware/Drivers/Software Threads



rog.asus.com


----------



## affxct

Nizzen said:


> Station-drivers.net
> All drivers just allways newer/updated. You never need to go to asus.com again


Thank you, will keep it in mind for future use.


----------



## HyperC

Anyone else having issues with 1601 BIOS my VID voltage is .155mv lower than Vcore at idle even worse at load. Using LLC 5 was perfect before


----------



## sblantipodi

I have a Z690 Extreme with 1601 BIOS
and my brother have a
Z690 Hero with 1601 BIOS.

Voltages on my Z690 Extreme doesn't changed between 1504 and 1601,
voltages on Z690 Hero is crazy higher on 1601 when compared to previous BIOS.

with an offset of -0.05V my brothers 12900K goes up to 240W with Cinebench at stock settings now.

I think that Z690 is the worst lineup Asus ever made (and they are not that good on previous generations too).


----------



## FreeSpeechIsKnowledge

HyperC said:


> Anyone else having issues with 1601 BIOS my VID voltage is .155mv lower than Vcore at idle even worse at load. Using LLC 5 was perfect before


I had to retune my voltages as well I noticed.


----------



## Nizzen

FreeSpeechIsKnowledge said:


> I had to retune my voltages as well I noticed.


Not strange. You are the little brother to sblantipodi 😆


----------



## affxct

HyperC said:


> Anyone else having issues with 1601 BIOS my VID voltage is .155mv lower than Vcore at idle even worse at load. Using LLC 5 was perfect before


Not trying to be funny, but neither my CPU OC nor my daily RAM OC changed in terms of voltage requirements. When I re-tested both I adjusted Vcore up by 0.005V for a buffer, and VDD2 down by 25mV out of curiosity. I also tightened some tertiaries, but reduced tREFI from 192000 to 130560 for better reliability. Otherwise 1601 seems to run totally fine on my Apex. Better than a lot of other BIOSs I've tested tbh. Not sure if it's better or worse than 1304. I'm using 0082 now though.


----------



## Wilco183

sblantipodi said:


> I have a Z690 Extreme with 1601 BIOS
> and my brother have a
> Z690 Hero with 1601 BIOS.
> 
> Voltages on my Z690 Extreme doesn't changed between 1504 and 1601,
> voltages on Z690 Hero is crazy higher on 1601 when compared to previous BIOS.
> 
> with an offset of -0.05V my brothers 12900K goes up to 240W with Cinebench at stock settings now.
> 
> I think that Z690 is the worst lineup Asus ever made (and they are not that good on previous generations too).


For the Hero, did 1601 enable any ram XMP socket support for 1,2,4 by chance? I'd like to buy a second kit to fill those annoying dimm gaps. In the meantime, I'm sometimes having to switch over to ddr 4 Dark Hero/5950X to get my ROGon...and a little Armoury Crate on the side.


----------



## Csavez™

Alberto_It said:


> Thanks very much, is too much asking you for the Txt file of bios profile? 😳


A little tighter.


----------



## FreeSpeechIsKnowledge

Nizzen said:


> Not strange. You are the little brother to sblantipodi 😆



There you go adding nothing again. Good job man. 



affxct said:


> Not trying to be funny, but neither my CPU OC nor my daily RAM OC changed in terms of voltage requirements. When I re-tested both I adjusted Vcore up by 0.005V for a buffer, and VDD2 down by 25mV out of curiosity. I also tightened some tertiaries, but reduced tREFI from 192000 to 130560 for better reliability. Otherwise 1601 seems to run totally fine on my Apex. Better than a lot of other BIOSs I've tested tbh. Not sure if it's better or worse than 1304. I'm using 0082 now though.


Run's fine here as well. Just had to adjust things a little is all.


----------



## sblantipodi

Wilco183 said:


> For the Hero, did 1601 enable any ram XMP socket support for 1,2,4 by chance? I'd like to buy a second kit to fill those annoying dimm gaps. In the meantime, I'm sometimes having to switch over to ddr 4 Dark Hero/5950X to get my ROGon...and a little Armoury Crate on the side.
> View attachment 2567003


XMP is no way possible on 4 sticks, it requires tuning and often a reduction in MT/s.

Never tried XMP on two sticks on his hero.


----------



## Alberto_It

Csavez™ said:


> A little tighter.
> View attachment 2567006


Thanks very much 💯🔝


----------



## Baasha

How could Asus screwup Z690 so badly? The Z490 was rock solid and OC'd so well. I have my Z690 system stable but I haven't updated the BIOS in many months - don't want to ruin my settings again. Last time I updated it I had to retune my mem OC and it corrupted the OS (!!). Thankfully I reflashed and was back up in ~ 10 mins but still.


----------



## sblantipodi

I suggest the use of the macrium reflect software for Asus users. It's a must have in case you have an Asus board.


----------



## Herald

Asus replaced my Apex with a new model, if anyone is interested pm me, I have no use for it anymore, got the unisex


----------



## affxct

Herald said:


> Asus replaced my Apex with a new model, if anyone is interested pm me, I have no use for it anymore, got the unisex


That's awesome news!


----------



## pykue8

pat-Geek said:


> Thank you Shamino for your effort. I'm disappointed that my Z690 HERO doesn't get the SLI support but I understand this comes from NVidia proprietary stuff, not from Asus. I don't plan to keep using NVidia moving forward. I will sell my RTX GPUs and move over to Intel ARC for my next GPU upgrades. From now on I will avoid any products related to NVidia's proprietary tech such as G-Sync Ultimate and Reflex monitors and of course GeForce cards. My next builds will remain full Intel and I hope you guys will also offer ROG branded Intel cards at some point in the future.



Dear, 
Did you succeed with SLI on the z690 Hero motherboard? I really need to enable SLI but I don't know how.
Thanks


----------



## pykue8

shamino1978 said:


> the boards that support sli finally with official sli key
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-1101.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-1101.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-GLACIAL-ASUS-1101.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (should be similar to what i posted just now)
> 
> 
> These ones that dont support sli:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PRIME-Z690M-PLUS-D4-ASUS-1011.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PRIME-Z690-P-WIFI-D4-ASUS-1011.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PRIME-Z690-P-D4-ASUS-1011.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-D4-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-WIFI-D4-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-WIFI-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-I-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-G-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-F-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-E-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-FORMULA-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ProArt-Z690-CREATOR-WIFI-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PRIME-Z690-A-ASUS-1003.CAP
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


Dear Shamino,

Any news about SLI on the z690 Hero motherboard? Before testing this we made a custom watercooler of 3 working days I'm desperate now
Thanks


----------



## dyanikoglu

Don' expect any replies from Shamino anymore


----------



## sblantipodi

dyanikoglu said:


> Don' expect any replies from Shamino anymore


learn it and buy an MSI next time.


----------



## affxct

So it turns out that 6600 is doable on 6 layers. I wonder if all my first Z690-F needed was Hynix. 6800 is probably doable with effort. Failed around the 100% mark for Karhu. This board booted 6400C30 on 4x16, but it seems quite hard to get anything dialed in so I decided to sell the extra kit I have.

Before I get slaughtered, it could totally be that this sample is just a really good one. The ARGB 1 header is unfortunately dead, but I told my friend I might like to forego RMA because there's a good chance the replacement board won't do 6600-6800 or 6000+ on 4x16. Weird series of boards. For $200 trade valuation, I'm super happy.

Another thing, is this 12900K is my friend's original one, so it might have an insanely good IMC. Can't really be sure what to thank, but this combo makes my Adata Hynix look way better than it did on the Apex. His identical seems to not be able to boot 6800 properly as it insta-BSODs.


----------



## tubs2x4

So basically testmem5 and karhu are the two main mem testing programs that will find instability the best?


----------



## affxct

tubs2x4 said:


> So basically testmem5 and karhu are the two main mem testing programs that will find instability the best?


Tbh you could be stable and then not stable. D5 OCs are weird. Sometimes I think I know what I'm doing, then later I realise my methods no longer work.


----------



## tubs2x4

affxct said:


> Tbh you could be stable and then not stable. D5 OCs are weird. Sometimes I think I know what I'm doing, then later I realise my methods no longer work.


Ok.


----------



## sblantipodi

tubs2x4 said:


> So basically testmem5 and karhu are the two main mem testing programs that will find instability the best?


I don't agree. a full scan of memtest86 from the bios is what works best for me


----------



## tubs2x4

sblantipodi said:


> I don't agree. a full scan of memtest86 from the bios is what works best for me


Ok.


----------



## Martin778

Nope, XMP is still broken for me, Forza Horizon 5 crashes frequently with "memory at address x cannot be read" error.

btw, does Micron have new DDR5 chips? QVL on the Apex says:


----------



## affxct

Martin778 said:


> Nope, XMP is still broken for me, Forza Horizon 5 crashes frequently with "memory at address x cannot be read" error.
> 
> btw, does Micron have new DDR5 chips? QVL on the Apex says:
> View attachment 2567385


The Apex QVL is fake.


----------



## Martin778

Has ASUS fallen so low as to fake a QVL?
I think I will have to hold on until Z790/13900k arrives as no one is buying a used Apex


----------



## affxct

Martin778 said:


> Has ASUS fallen so low as to fake a QVL?
> I think I will have to hold on until Z790/13900k arrives as no one is buying a used Apex


I got lucky that someone needed an Apex for a high-end build.


----------



## Martin778

I see that you have a Strix Z690-F, is it much better than the Apex?

If I recall correctly ASUS did the same s..t with the X299 Apex, it was mediocre and launch and quicky the later revisions of the Extreme replaced it and it was kinda 'forgotten'.


----------



## Nizzen

Martin778 said:


> I see that you have a Strix Z690-F, is it much better than the Apex?
> 
> If I recall correctly ASUS did the same s..t with the X299 Apex, it was mediocre and launch and quicky the later revisions of the Extreme replaced it and it was kinda 'forgotten'.


I'm using x299 Apex from launch. Still one of the best x299 boards. Needs active cooling on vrm to play rendering on 4700mhz+ all core  Running memory ;125GB/s read and sub 50ns memory. Apex x299 never was medicore  Ok, maybe vrm cooling


----------



## affxct

Martin778 said:


> I see that you have a Strix Z690-F, is it much better than the Apex?
> 
> If I recall correctly ASUS did the same s..t with the X299 Apex, it was mediocre and launch and quicky the later revisions of the Extreme replaced it and it was kinda 'forgotten'.


Unfortunately this Strix-F is in-fact better than the Apex. 6600 is cold boot stable. 6800 is doable, will just need to mess around. This board (sample) just likely has a better PCB. My first Strix-F could do 6400 reboot stable with Samsung. It had really poor Vcore regulation though.


----------



## dyanikoglu

affxct said:


> The Apex QVL is fake.


The whole Asus z690 line is a lie.


----------



## affxct

dyanikoglu said:


> The whole Asus z690 line is a lie.


The truth is, ASUS just messed up with their first batch of boards, and the Apex/Extreme aren't really XOC boards. The real XOC boards (Aqua OC, Tachyon, Dark KP) have 10-12 PCB layers. The Unify-X comes with a freakin' external controller for adjusting voltage and stand-offs for makeshift test bench setups. The Apex doesn't even have a backplate (not that it matters, it just kinda blows and backplates help a little with DIMM cooling because it helps to cool the PCB slightly).


----------



## Martin778

Let's say that in 'theory' Apex SHOULD be an XOC board but something went wrong with ASUS's R&D dept or they just didn't bother, in the past the Apexes were the go-to XOC offerings.
Extreme is more of a feature-rich high end product rather than an otherwise pretty bare Apex.


----------



## Nizzen

affxct said:


> The truth is, ASUS just messed up with their first batch of boards, and the Apex/Extreme aren't really XOC boards. The real XOC boards (Aqua OC, Tachyon, Dark KP) have 10-12 PCB layers. The Unify-X comes with a freakin' external controller for adjusting voltage and stand-offs for makeshift test bench setups. The Apex doesn't even have a backplate (not that it matters, it just kinda blows and backplates help a little with DIMM cooling because it helps to cool the PCB slightly).


Haven't seen many Aqua OC, Tachyon or msi x boards that are better than good Apex boards. Aqua OC is as limited as good Apex, so I guess my good Apex is worth more than Aqua OC who is costing 1500+ $ 😆 🤓

New season soon, so can't wait to see better results than this season.


----------



## affxct

Nizzen said:


> Haven't seen many Aqua OC, Tachyon or msi x boards that are better than good Apex boards. Aqua OC is as limited as good Apex, so I guess my good Apex is worth more than Aqua OC who is costing 1500+ $ 😆 🤓
> 
> New season soon, so can't wait to see better results than this season.


Perhaps, but consistency of samples is where it counts. If a top tier OCer can get sampled a 1/5 world class Dark KP or Apex, why bother buying a Unify-X or a Tachyon, given that they have undersized VRMs in comparison and it's always nice to have better voltage regulation like with the super duper input filtering caps on the Apex. If you check out the Aqua forum, no one has bad results or reboot training inconsistencies, and it's essentially standard to be running 7000+.

That's not to say that users with good Apexs can't do those numbers too, but if so few Apex users can then perhaps the Apex just isn't a good board on average? That's kinda just how I look at it. But no, I do not necessarily believe the Unify is an XOC board either. The Unify is a nice gateway board for newbie OCers. Would've been a good sample for me as well as I clearly have no idea how to OC RAM, judging by how much retrain inconsistency I had on my Apex.

The Apex is what it is I guess. Whatever people plan to do after this gen with regards to OCing or avoiding Asus is up to them. I loved D5 OCing, but I'm kinda sick of it. Decided to quit OCing as a result which might strike some members of this forum as kinda laughable. I managed to get a really easy 6600 and I might push for 6800 on the -F. Can't really believe how well it's doing but yeah; strange generation and strange technical behavior. I fear for all those individuals who avoided D5 thinking everything will be perfect with Zen 4 and Raptor/Meteor Lake.

As I've said before, I'm curious to see how all the vendors fix up their custom MRCs and their PCBs to allow reliable training at 8000+. Not being sarcastic, I would genuinly just laugh about it if they truly just screwed up their first go at it. Still wish I had tested the Taichi before selling it. Such a sick board.

Edit:
It's alright to be a fan of Asus. There's also no sin in owning a good sample and enjoying it, however you may have come by said sample. The fact of the matter is that owning a top 5% Apex that does 7200Mbps stable and up to 11000Mbps with LN2, doesn't mean it's a good XOC board. All that that means is you happen to own or have been given a sample that is capable of XOC numbers. On the contrary, if nearly every Tachyon does 6933, every single Dark KP does 7000+ 1T, and literally every single Aqua OC user is at 7000 or even 7200-7333 stable, then how can we regard the Apex as a true best in class offering? 

It has 8 PCB layers - it's almost as though Asus didn't really even try to max it out. It feels like they just gave us the cheapest thing they could that would fit the Apex monacre. Even the Unify-X, a beginner OCer board, can do 6800-7000 with relative ease. Anyone who can get 6600 on a meh Asus sample can do 7000-7200 on a Unify-X, that I'm fairly positive of as it looks as though people don't even have to really try. They just type in random VDD2 and TX VDDQ numbers with some arbitrarily high SA and that **** just goes at 6800. It boggles my fu***ng mind.


----------



## Herald

affxct said:


> They just type in random VDD2 and TX VDDQ numbers with some arbitrarily high SA and that **** just goes at 6800. It boggles my fu***ng mind.


That's exactly my experience with the unify x. Got samsung dies so no 6800 for me, but I randomly put 6000 c30 - 34 -34 -34 1t with some tight tertiaries and it just worked.


----------



## affxct

Herald said:


> That's exactly my experience with the unify x. Got samsung dies so no 6800 for me, but I randomly put 6000 c30 - 34 -34 -34 1t with some tight tertiaries and it just worked.


Your board is a weird one. 6000 not running is indicative of a faulty board IMO.


----------



## TraumatikOC

affxct said:


> Perhaps, but consistency of samples is where it counts. screwed up their first go at it. Still wish I had tested the Taichi before selling it. Such a sick board.


Dont know if this pic was in this thread but , Yea QC was bad in 2021, APEX new vs 2021, note the ram slots with solder flashing on outsides , diff components and removed components.
This is why i was trying to see if Extreme had same probs.


----------



## affxct

@TraumatikOC 

My 2021 Apex looked ok and still performed meh. 6933 bootable, 6133 reboot stable. 6200-6600 and even 6400 1T could be nailed, but they'd inevitably just fail after a few days and CS would CTD at 6400 1T even.


----------



## sblantipodi

TraumatikOC said:


> Dont know if this pic was in this thread but , Yea QC was bad in 2021, APEX new vs 2021, note the ram slots with solder flashing on outsides , diff components and removed components.
> This is why i was trying to see if Extreme had same probs.
> View attachment 2567471


never more an asus product.


----------



## Martin778

TraumatikOC said:


> Dont know if this pic was in this thread but , Yea QC was bad in 2021, APEX new vs 2021, note the ram slots with solder flashing on outsides , diff components and removed components.
> This is why i was trying to see if Extreme had same probs.


I don't see that many changes to be honest.bottom parts are both 0 ohm links, not sure about the inductor value.


----------



## TraumatikOC

affxct said:


> @TraumatikOC
> 
> My 2021 Apex looked ok and still performed meh. 6933 bootable, 6133 reboot stable. 6200-6600 and even 6400 1T could be nailed, but they'd inevitably just fail after a few days and CS would CTD at 6400 1T even.


Shut my comp off last nite, this morning turned on , no vid to monitor , had 99 and 00 post codes, had to clear cmos and reenter bios settings. Played all day yesterday with no problems. On 1601 bios, and on 6200 TG xmp2 settings with higher vdd vddq volts.
Buggy as heck and no word from Asus. Tempted to see if microcenter will help, but its 3 hrs away.


----------



## Martin778

I have 6200 Corairs, it will always POST at XMP speeds but crash in weird ways when gaming.


----------



## toncij

99% of issues went away for me when I've reduced the default SA voltage of 1.25V to 0.95V or 0.925V (depends on the kit). With SA at that voltage I can run 2x16GB 6400, 2x16GB 6600 and 2x32GB 6000 at XMPs fully stable on Apex.


----------



## affxct

toncij said:


> 99% of issues went away for me when I've reduced the default SA voltage of 1.25V to 0.95V or 0.925V (depends on the kit). With SA at that voltage I can run 2x16GB 6400, 2x16GB 6600 and 2x32GB 6000 at XMPs fully stable on Apex.


If your board can do 6600, then it's a decent Apex. The issue isn't related to any one or combination of voltage rails. Theoretically, a high data rate can be stabilized on any Apex, but you will have reboot instability irrespective of what you get to pass a memory test. Everyone above who's having issues at 6200 will likely suffer no issues with a manually tuned 6133 1T profile, and if that doesn't work they'll have to go down to 6000 and so on and so forth. 

My Z690-F took around 1 minute to dial in settings that ran 6400 32-39-39 tuned down to the last tertiary (at my 1.4V XMP voltage rated for 40-40-40). The reason it took me a minute is because practically the data rate is so doable that there's no way to mess up VDD2 or uncore unless I type in dufus settings.

For 6600 it took me a bit more effort to determine where to put my VDD2 and SA, but eventually those along with the timings and DRAM voltages allowed for IBT V2 and TM5 to pass, and pass the data channel test upon reboot. Curiously, when I enable fast boot, I lose data channel stability at 6600. When I leave it disabled, the data channel terminations train properly and the PCB carries the signal well. I'm not an engineer and that's a very loose explanation, but it's certainly what is happening at a technical level - in a nutshell.


----------



## toncij

affxct said:


> If your board can do 6600, then it's a decent Apex. The issue isn't related to any one or combination of voltage rails. Theoretically, a high data rate can be stabilized on any Apex, but you will have reboot instability irrespective of what you get to pass a memory test. Everyone above who's having issues at 6200 will likely suffer no issues with a manually tuned 6133 1T profile, and if that doesn't work they'll have to go down to 6000 and so on and so forth.
> 
> My Z690-F took around 1 minute to dial in settings that ran 6400 32-39-39 tuned down to the last tertiary (at my 1.4V XMP voltage rated for 40-40-40). The reason it took me a minute is because practically the data rate is so doable that there's no way to mess up VDD2 or uncore unless I type in dufus settings.
> 
> For 6600 it took me a bit more effort to determine where to put my VDD2 and SA, but eventually those along with the timings and DRAM voltages allowed for IBT V2 and TM5 to pass, and pass the data channel test upon reboot. Curiously, when I enable fast boot, I lose data channel stability at 6600. When I leave it disabled, the data channel terminations train properly and the PCB carries the signal well. I'm not an engineer and that's a very loose explanation, but it's certainly what is happening at a technical level - in a nutshell.


I've tested 3 diff. Apex boards (albeit same edition of 2021) and all 3 were unstable with default SA of 1.25 for any of the 6400 and 6600 kits I've tested. The moment I've reduced it, both kits worked, Corsair 6600 and G.Skill 6400, and now G.Skill 6000 2x32 also works flawlessly.
🤷‍♂️


----------



## affxct

toncij said:


> I've tested 3 diff. Apex boards (albeit same edition of 2021) and all 3 were unstable with default SA of 1.25 for any of the 6400 and 6600 kits I've tested. The moment I've reduced it, both kits worked, Corsair 6600 and G.Skill 6400, and now G.Skill 6000 2x32 also works flawlessly.
> 🤷‍♂️


The reason why I'm saying what I'm saying is because most of the users on OCN are tweakers who test everything. Myself and other have tested every conceivable value you can think of, as well as combinations. There is no consistency between re-trains due to the PCB impedance. The only way to get consistency is by dropping the data rate down speed bin by speed bin.


----------



## tubs2x4

With 6200 mhz 4 dimm - midrange motherboard asus prime-a it’s been working good for me on xmp1 so far for nearly month. Which sets 1.3v mc and 1.25 sa. Ram volt at 1.35v. No qvl for 6200 only 6000
I have tried buildzoid timings for ddr5 and still works. Fingers crossed. Ha.


----------



## affxct

tubs2x4 said:


> With 6200 mhz 4 dimm - midrange motherboard asus prime-a it’s been working good for me on xmp1 so far for nearly month. Which sets 1.3v mc and 1.25 sa. Ram volt at 1.35v


Prime-A is fine, 6 layers all the same. Will probably do 2x16 6400+.


----------



## welldone

welldone said:


> Hello Guys!
> 
> I need to replace ram, becasue I'cant go stable with 4x8 config (Viper Steel 4400cl19 b-die).
> Which 2x16 KIT will be enough to do ~4000mhz cl16 or similar?
> 
> Best!





Ichirou said:


> You have a 12600K. It has a weak IMC that can probably only run stable at 3,600-3,800 max in Gear 1.
> 
> It’s not the RAM’s fault. The CPU is too weak for the memory.





bscool said:


> Simple way to test with the kit you have is just run 2x8(a2 and b2) to see if you can do 4000c15 to 4133c16 gear 1 and you will have an idea of how the 2x16 will run.


Guys!

I bought 2x16 new ram Corsair Vengeance 2x16, 3600MHz, CL18 , change CPU from i5 12600k to i7 12700KF and... now is worst, than before with 4x8 Viper 4400 
It only work well with 3700 with the same vol 1,35v. Nothing more. I can't even touch the timmings! Stock is like 18, 22, 22, 42, 64 and is unstable even on cl 17 with 1,45v.
Maybe I should try to rise other voltage settings?

Best!


----------



## Martin778

I'm afraid you replaced a Patriot Viper kit with B-Dies and now got a 2x16GB kit of "godknowswhat" (Hynix C-Die at best, I think) that just doesn't want to OC.
Have you tried that 3600C18 kit with the 12600K?


----------



## Ichirou

welldone said:


> Guys!
> 
> I bought 2x16 new ram Corsair Vengeance 2x16, 3600MHz, CL18 , change CPU from i5 12600k to i7 12700KF and... now is worst, than before with 4x8 Viper 4400
> It only work well with 3700 with the same vol 1,35v. Nothing more. I can't even touch the timmings! Stock is like 18, 22, 22, 42, 64 and is unstable even on cl 17 with 1,45v.
> Maybe I should try to rise other voltage settings?
> 
> Best!


You changed the RAM kit as well; it's no longer comparable. You'll have to overclock the kit again.


----------



## welldone

No no, first I change RAM and than CPU. And I still got Viper's. But I want 2x16 RGB with 3800-4000 with cl16.
I don't know why is so difficult..



Martin778 said:


> I'm afraid you replaced a Patriot Viper kit with B-Dies and now got a 2x16GB kit of "godknowswhat" (Hynix C-Die at best, I think) that just doesn't want to OC.
> Have you tried that 3600C18 kit with the 12600K?


Corsairs are B-Dies as well.


----------



## bscool

welldone said:


> No no, first I change RAM and than CPU. And I still got Viper's. But I want 2x16 RGB with 3800-4000 with cl16.
> I don't know why is so difficult..
> 
> 
> Corsairs are B-Dies as well.


If they are b die it might be you need to find a good bios for them. I know some bioses work better with SR and some with DR at least on the z690 Strix d4 and I would guess it is similar on the Tuf.

Does CPU z SPD tab show Samsung? Looking at [Übersicht] - Die ultimative HARDWARELUXX Samsung 8Gb B-Die Liste - alle Hersteller (04.06.22)
It does show they make 3600c18 Samsung CMR32GX4M2F3600C18 

But if you are saying the 12600k could run them higher with same memory and same bios then no idea.


----------



## mkimbro

Installed a new system....
I'm getting a Debug "d6" error...

I purchased this motherboard through Newegg. The company is First Blood out of Australia. My main questions is, how were they able to sell me a product from Australia, When I live the United States??
I submitted a request with ASUS for support, got a response back, saying I have no support for it, because its was not purchase in the Untied States or Canada.... I have to go back the seller.

So far the seller has had me do an Bios Update to 1601, didn't work, then they had me go back to Bios 1003 and take one of the memory cards out, still get the "D6". 
Looking at other forums I believe this is a video issue?
I have installed a EVGA RTX 3080 WTF3, EVGA RTX 2080, EVGA GTX 1080Ti. I have installed all of these video cards in another computer and the work fine.......

I have installed Parts as Follow:
ASUS ROG MAximus Z690 APEX - Ser# MAMCFMxxxxxxxxW Part# 90MB18I0-M0UAY0
Intel Core i9-12900KS
G.SKILL Trident Z5 RGB Series 64GB F5-5600J3036D32GX2-TZ5RK - Memory
EVGA RTX 3080 FTW3 Video Card
NZXT Kraken Z Series Z63 280mm - RL-KRZ63-01 AIO Cooler
Seagate FireCuda 530 M.2 2280 1TB PCIe Gen4 x4 NVMe 1.4 3D TLC (SSD) ZP1000GM3A013
Thermaltake Toughpower Grand RGB 1200w - PS-TPG-1200F1FAPU-1

Has any one run into this issue? Help would greatly be appreciated....


----------



## Gardiff

welldone said:


> No no, first I change RAM and than CPU. And I still got Viper's. But I want 2x16 RGB with 3800-4000 with cl16.
> I don't know why is so difficult..
> 
> 
> Corsairs are B-Dies as well.



Hope this helps


----------



## TSportM

TR frame review / installation


----------



## TSportM

mkimbro said:


> Installed a new system....
> I'm getting a Debug "d6" error...
> 
> I purchased this motherboard through Newegg. The company is First Blood out of Australia. My main questions is, how were they able to sell me a product from Australia, When I live the United States??
> I submitted a request with ASUS for support, got a response back, saying I have no support for it, because its was not purchase in the Untied States or Canada.... I have to go back the seller.
> 
> So far the seller has had me do an Bios Update to 1601, didn't work, then they had me go back to Bios 1003 and take one of the memory cards out, still get the "D6".
> Looking at other forums I believe this is a video issue?
> I have installed a EVGA RTX 3080 WTF3, EVGA RTX 2080, EVGA GTX 1080Ti. I have installed all of these video cards in another computer and the work fine.......
> 
> I have installed Parts as Follow:
> ASUS ROG MAximus Z690 APEX - Ser# MAMCFMxxxxxxxxW Part# 90MB18I0-M0UAY0
> Intel Core i9-12900KS
> G.SKILL Trident Z5 RGB Series 64GB F5-5600J3036D32GX2-TZ5RK - Memory
> EVGA RTX 3080 FTW3 Video Card
> NZXT Kraken Z Series Z63 280mm - RL-KRZ63-01 AIO Cooler
> Seagate FireCuda 530 M.2 2280 1TB PCIe Gen4 x4 NVMe 1.4 3D TLC (SSD) ZP1000GM3A013
> Thermaltake Toughpower Grand RGB 1200w - PS-TPG-1200F1FAPU-1
> 
> Has any one run into this issue? Help would greatly be appreciated....



if you think this is a video issue try booting from onboard graphics, and see if it does boot


cheers


----------



## CptSpig

TSportM said:


> TR frame review / installation


I have this frame it works very well and easy to install.


----------



## TSportM

CptSpig said:


> I have this frame it works very well and easy to install.
> 
> View attachment 2567776


i also have one, did not install it yet iam using the thermal grizzly one, from my experience had to fiddle alot with it to get good or OK , in my case barely tightening it (igor lab method)

cheers


----------



## tubs2x4

Deleted


----------



## Netarangi

I want to downgrade bios on my Gaming TUF Z690 d4 as I've heard earlier ones are better for dram OC. I have 1504.

Is there much point downgrading?


----------



## tubs2x4

Martin778 said:


> I have 6200 Corairs, it will always POST at XMP speeds but crash in weird ways when gaming.


Turn up the mem voltage more to like 1.35v Make sure run xmp1


----------



## Tigra456

Asus Z690-F Strix, 12700K, BIOS 1601

Gskill 6400 C32 XMP1 Testmem5 Anta777 Extreme stable with 0,95 SA, 1.40 Transmitter and 1.30 Mem-Controller.

Returned the Dimms because they heat up to 79 degree while Testmem5.

Use now the Corsair 6600 C32 Dominator RGB.
With XMP1 @6400 only 59 degree max…

Some one got some informations for me what are „safe“ Volltages ? Transmitter, SA, Mem-Controller ?


----------



## affxct

Tigra456 said:


> Asus Z690-F Strix, 12700K, BIOS 1601
> 
> Gskill 6400 C32 XMP1 Testmem5 Anta777 Extreme stable with 0,95 SA, 1.40 Transmitter and 1.30 Mem-Controller.
> 
> Returned the Dimms because they heat up to 79 degree while Testmem5.
> 
> Use now the Corsair 6600 C32 Dominator RGB.
> With XMP1 @6400 only 59 degree max…
> 
> Some one got some informations for me what are „safe“ Volltages ? Transmitter, SA, Mem-Controller ?


IMC VDD is basically unlimited, TX VDDQ up to 1.5V is ok, and memory voltages up to like 1.55 are relatively ok, but Hynix datasheets say 1.5V. SA up to 1.35V is fine, but you'll never require it.


----------



## Tigra456

Okay thanks


----------



## Gking62

So, my system has been thus far rock solid, built late last year, '21 board obviously but today I noticed in my HWiNFO64 Pro that only one bank of ram was showing (DDR5 DIMM #1), I thought it was a bit odd, perhaps due to a recent update but why would that be, so I checked in windows props and then saw only 16.0G installed, *** ? any ideas what happened? I'm on 1505 bios atm, should I try a reflash to that or flash 1601?

Update: ok so I flashed to 1601, was putting it off but that went well so anyhow then afterwards swapped DIMMs, and now HWiNFO64 Pro shows DDR DIMM #3 as only bank showing, so the DIMM previously in #1, now in #3 must be the good stick, never had this happen, ever. I'm in the market for new ram, thoguh my rig was built for gaming and the GSkill 5600 I was running was just fine, passed everything I threw at it but anyhow I didn't really intend to do it this way.

On another note, is anyone here running Kingston 2x32 kit, it's on the Asus QVL...



https://a.co/d/d28Ovfs


----------



## Martin778

Buy a Corsair or any other brand for DDR5. G.Skill completely dropped the ball with the Trident Z5.
Bad, flimsy heatsink, runs very hot and I had a kit of 6000C36 randomly die on me too.


----------



## Nizzen

Martin778 said:


> Buy a Corsair or any other brand for DDR5. G.Skill completely dropped the ball with the Trident Z5.
> Bad, flimsy heatsink, runs very hot and I had a kit of 6000C36 randomly die on me too.


Aircooled overclocked Hynix DDR5? Is that legal?


----------



## Martin778

Boy I have an ASUS board - it won't even run XMP stable let alone overclocked.


----------



## Gking62

Martin778 said:


> Buy a Corsair or any other brand for DDR5. G.Skill completely dropped the ball with the Trident Z5.
> Bad, flimsy heatsink, runs very hot and I had a kit of 6000C36 randomly die on me too.


yeah I feel ya brother, I picked up the Kingston KF556C40BBK2-64 (Hynix ) 2x32 5600 CL40 set to carry me for a few months or more hopefully.


----------



## Martin778

Lowering VCCSA to 0.95 + XMP1 doesn't do anything either. No problem for the first run, then it starts effing off somehow.
At this point I just couldn't be bothered anymore, 4800 C40 JEDEC it is
TFW your €600 board doesn't even run XMP, yet the manufacturer's QVL shows even faster kits


----------



## FreeSpeechIsKnowledge

Martin778 said:


> View attachment 2567907
> 
> 
> Lowering VCCSA to 0.95 + XMP1 doesn't do anything either. No problem for the first run, then it starts effing off somehow.
> At this point I just couldn't be bothered anymore, 4800 C40 JEDEC it is
> TFW your €600 board doesn't even run XMP, yet the manufacturer's QVL shows even faster kits



Have you tried clearing your cmos before re-enabling xmp? If not do it.


----------



## Martin778

Yes, no diff.


----------



## Nizzen

Martin778 said:


> Yes, no diff.


Fastboot disabled?


----------



## sblantipodi

Nizzen said:


> Fastboot disabled?


Fastboot disabled does not solve errors you get during a Windows stress test, no point in loosing time with this.


----------



## Nizzen

sblantipodi said:


> Fastboot disabled does not solve errors you get during a Windows stress test, no point in loosing time with this.


So training doesn't matter?

This fixed a early samsung xmp for me with 2021 board:

XMP 6000 Skew control/odts
ODT 40/240/240/48/48 - Do for both channels under Dram Timing Frequency>Skews -> samsung 6000

Hide contents
skew control/odts/
rtt WR 48
rtt Nom rd 34
rtt nom wr 34
rtt park 34
rtt parkdqs 34

rtt ca group A 240
rtt cs group A 0
rtt ck group A 0

rtt ca group B 40
rtt cs group B 40
rtt ck group B 40

Ron odt up/down: 34/34

skew control/comp control:

DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL0_dqvrefup 159
DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL0_dqvrefdn 94
DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL0_dqodtvrefup 128
DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL0_dqodtvrefdn 99

DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL1_cmdvrefup 145
DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL1_ctlvrefup 118
DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL1_clkvrefup 128
DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL1_ckecsvrefup 0
DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL2_cmdvrefdn 92
DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL2_ctlvrefdn 103
DDRPHY_COMP_CR_DDRCRCOMPCTL2_clkvrefdn 92

VCCSA 1.1v, mc voltage 1.25v
, vdd/vddq 1.35v


----------



## FreeSpeechIsKnowledge

Martin778 said:


> Yes, no diff.


Sounds like your motherboard is bad if you have genuinely, tried everything suggested by everyone including me who has experience with trouble shooting these motherboards and getting through the inherent issues.

I'd get a different motherboard at this point. RMA this one, whatever. Get a different one somehow and retry. My first one was bad, and my replacement is fine. Up to you how to proceed but I would get it swapped out at this point.

If you can't run XMP your motherboard is bad.


----------



## Martin778

Pretty much impossible to get RMA'd I'm afraid, if they'll test it with 4800 C40 JEDEC stuf, then it will just work.


----------



## FreeSpeechIsKnowledge

Martin778 said:


> Pretty much impossible to get RMA'd I'm afraid, if they'll test it with 4800 C40 JEDEC stuff.


What's your xmp rated at?

It's guaranteed to run at xmp man not 4800.


----------



## Martin778

I almost forgot I have another ASUS LGA1700 board, a B660i Strix that I bought for my media server with 12700k (need a high single core perf for audio upsampling)...and it runs with the cheapest Micron 4800 C40's, tested up to 1100% normal MemtestPro.
I will have to check f I can squeeze these corsairs on it but I'm afraid the cooler would be too large. The Strix is also much newer than the Apex, I bought it about a month or two ago.
My kit are Doms Platinum 6200 CL36, Hynix.


----------



## Wasakiqwe

I tried Auros z690 master and asus z690 hero.
Master is better. I had low temperatures on pch only 33 c with no ethernet issue unlike Asus Z690 hero high pch temp. 60c and ethernet is not working properly.
Sadly 2 weeks passed so I can't return it.


----------



## Herald

sblantipodi said:


> Fastboot disabled does not solve errors you get during a Windows stress test, no point in loosing time with this.


There is a very easy method to fix the apex memory issues. After months of testing with a 2021 board i figured out there is only one method that works 100% of the time. Buying a unify x solves all of your problems 😂


----------



## Nizzen

Herald said:


> There is a very easy method to fix the apex memory issues. After months of testing with a 2021 board i figured out there is only one method that works 100% of the time. Buying a unify x solves all of your problems 😂


No, because not every unify x can do 7000mhz+. 
Buy Kingpin looks like a very good solution IF you can get one


----------



## Herald

Nizzen said:


> No, because not every unify x can do 7000mhz+.
> Buy Kingpin looks like a very good solution IF you can get one


The issue with apex isnt not being able to do 7000mhz+. Its not being able to even do 6000. Heck, mine only booted at 4800 in 1t 😂


----------



## Nizzen

Herald said:


> The issue with apex isnt not being able to do 7000mhz+. Its not being able to even do 6000. Heck, mine only booted at 4800 in 1t 😂


We know the story....


----------



## Tigra456

Some tips for me to get the 6600 c32 Dominator stable with my 12700K / Z690-F ?

They work with XMP1 6600 se to 6400 - 
0,95 SA, 
1,4 Transmitter,
1,30 Mem Controller 
Testmem5 Anta777 stable.

But with the same voltages get up from 6400 to 6600 doesn’t work… now i try to find the right voltage to fix it…


----------



## CptSpig

FreeSpeechIsKnowledge said:


> Sounds like your motherboard is bad if you have genuinely, tried everything suggested by everyone including me who has experience with trouble shooting these motherboards and getting through the inherent issues.
> 
> I'd get a different motherboard at this point. RMA this one, whatever. Get a different one somehow and retry. My first one was bad, and my replacement is fine. Up to you how to proceed but I would get it swapped out at this point.
> 
> If you can't run XMP your motherboard is bad.





FreeSpeechIsKnowledge said:


> What's your xmp rated at?
> 
> It's guaranteed to run at xmp man not 4800.


Not true, there are no guarantee's with XMP it is a memory overclock. Intel only guarantee's 4800 with DDR5 memory. XMP overclocks F.B., memory and drives to many things can go wrong. Best to take the time for a good manual overclock IMHO.


----------



## FreeSpeechIsKnowledge

CptSpig said:


> Not true, there are no guarantee's with XMP it is a memory overclock. Intel only guarantee's 4800 with DDR5 memory. XMP overclocks F.B., memory and drives to many things can go wrong. Best to take the time for a good manual overclock IMHO.
> View attachment 2567968


Asus guarantees the xmp if on the qvl list.


----------



## CptSpig

FreeSpeechIsKnowledge said:


> Asus guarantees the xmp if on the qvl list.


I don't see any guarantees on the list. Quite the opposite. This only means it was tested on a system. Once you overclock your CPU for example it changes the XMP.


----------



## lordkahless

When I had called Asus support regarding my Apex they told me if it doesn't run any ram on their QVL list it's eligible for an RMA.


----------



## xarot

I wonder if the CPU bowing issue has anything to do with stability when running DDR5-6000 and above.


----------



## Tejc

Hi, I'm new one here in forum and I need help for undervolting 12700K. My motherboard is ASUS ROG MAXIMUS Z690 HERO with 1505 BIOS. I just want some simple first step to do in BIOS to get some idea where to start.

Down below is my Cinebench R23 result and some informations.










Tnx for help in advance, Matej


----------



## FreeSpeechIsKnowledge

CptSpig said:


> I don't see any guarantees on the list. Quite the opposite. This only means it was tested on a system. Once you overclock your CPU for example it changes the XMP.
> View attachment 2567975


Yep, that's what asus said when this whole fiasco started bub. Doesn't run xmp return it. I'm sure you saw the post and every person who had the issue returned it without hassle. Not really an argument to be honest. Pretty cut and dry man.



lordkahless said:


> When I had called Asus support regarding my Apex they told me if it doesn't run any ram on their QVL list it's eligible for an RMA.


Point proven moving on Captain, let's help each other not cause issues.

Dudes motherboard doesn't run XMP which is on their QVL it can be returned and likely has hardware issues that are not repairable.

XMP I is set to super loose timings which enables everyone to run it, if it doesn't run there's other motherboard issues that're going on, not anything else.


----------



## Nizzen

xarot said:


> I wonder if the CPU bowing issue has anything to do with stability when running DDR5-6000 and above.


Not likely.


----------



## bahl33ted

I have an Asus Z690-E Gaming motherboard and 2 sets of G.Skill F5-6000J3636F16GA2-TZ5RK (4 sticks 6000Mhz). They run just fine as long as I load the defaults in the BIOS but no matter what settings I go with XMP1, 2, manual config, etc... The system will boot loop until it goes back to bios safe mode. I gather at this point it was a design flaw either in the memory or the motherboard that prevents XMP from working as they claim on their websites. Asus has not responded to me for a week now. So should I...

1. Send the memory back and get a single set of 4 sticks 16GB of someone else like Crucial Dominator?
2. Send the memory back and get a pair of 32GB?
3. Send the motherboard back and get something else like the Gigabyte Z60 Aorus Master?

Any suggestions would be helpful. I've spent a lot of money to have a nice computer and Asus is just pissing me off.


----------



## Herald

CptSpig said:


> Not true, there are no guarantee's with XMP it is a memory overclock. Intel only guarantee's 4800 with DDR5 memory. XMP overclocks F.B., memory and drives to many things can go wrong. Best to take the time for a good manual overclock IMHO.
> View attachment 2567968


Thats not how it works though. Not at all. Intel guarantees that its imc will work at minimum 1200mhz (which coresponds to ddr5 4800mhz). But that has nothing to do with the motherboard.

The qvl on the mobo guarantees that the motherboard will work at those speeds, provided of course your cpus imc can also achieve those speeds. So when you have a cpu with an imc that can run 6000 mhz ddr (like for example my cpu) but it doesnt do so on the apex, it's the apex that's the issue


----------



## bscool

bahl33ted said:


> I have an Asus Z690-E Gaming motherboard and 2 sets of G.Skill F5-6000J3636F16GA2-TZ5RK (4 sticks 6000Mhz). They run just fine as long as I load the defaults in the BIOS but no matter what settings I go with XMP1, 2, manual config, etc... The system will boot loop until it goes back to bios safe mode. I gather at this point it was a design flaw either in the memory or the motherboard that prevents XMP from working as they claim on their websites. Asus has not responded to me for a week now. So should I...
> 
> 1. Send the memory back and get a single set of 4 sticks 16GB of someone else like Crucial Dominator?
> 2. Send the memory back and get a pair of 32GB?
> 3. Send the motherboard back and get something else like the Gigabyte Z60 Aorus Master?
> 
> Any suggestions would be helpful. I've spent a lot of money to have a nice computer and Asus is just pissing me off.


4x16 is only 4400 on the QVL on Asus site for your MB and Gskill only shows 5600 2x32 for your MB RAM Configurator - G.SKILL International Enterprise Co., Ltd.,

Z690 is Daisy chain and will work easier with 2 vs 4 sticks.


----------



## bahl33ted

bscool said:


> 4x16 is only 4400 on the QVL on Asus site for your MB and Gskill only shows 5600 2x32 for your MB RAM Configurator - G.SKILL International Enterprise Co., Ltd.,
> 
> Z690 is Daisy chain and will work easier with 2 vs 4 sticks.


So XMP is a pile of BS? I mean my i7-7700K was overclocked to 5Ghz and I ran that memory faster than the XMP profile. What happened to overclocking? I even touch one of the settings on this board and it boot loops to safe mode. I'm just asking what board and ram should I get for my i9-12900K ?


----------



## bscool

bahl33ted said:


> So XMP is a pile of BS? I mean my i7-7700K was overclocked to 5Ghz and I ran that memory faster than the XMP profile. What happened to overclocking? I even touch one of the settings on this board and it boot loops to safe mode. I'm just asking what board and ram should I get for my i9-12900K ?


XMP for your memory kit is only for 2x16. Look at the QVL list for you MB ROG STRIX Z690-E GAMING WIFI | ROG Strix | Gaming Motherboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG Global.

Your MB should work with 2x32 if you need 64gb at 5600. DDR5 Desktop Gaming PC Memory - Kingston FURY Beast - Kingston Shop US – Kingston Technology That kit is on the QVL for your MB.


----------



## Gking62

bscool said:


> https://rog.asus.com/motherboards/rog-strix/rog-strix-z690-e-gaming-wifi-model/helpdesk_qvl_memory/
> Your MB should work with 2x32 if you need 64gb at 5600. DDR5 Desktop Gaming PC Memory - Kingston FURY Beast - Kingston Shop US – Kingston Technology That kit is on the QVL for your MB.


I purchased this very kit for my Z690 Extreme yesterday, will have on Wed.


----------



## bahl33ted

Thank you for your advice. You suggest the KF556C40BBK2-64. Would the KF556C40BBAK2-64 work also? It appears to be the exact same specs just adding ARGB onto them... Just wonder if Asus would test it if they're the same.


----------



## bscool

bahl33ted said:


> Thank you for your advice. You suggest the KF556C40BBK2-64. Would the KF556C40BBAK2-64 work also? It appears to be the exact same specs just adding ARGB onto them... Just wonder if Asus would test it if they're the same.


Yeah they should be the same just different heat spreader and rgb.

You could also try enable XMP on the 4x16 kit you have and changing memory clock to 5600 and see if it works if you havent tried that yet. Probably wont work but couldnt hurt to try.


----------



## bahl33ted

bscool said:


> Yeah they should be the same just different heat spreader and rgb.
> 
> You could also try enable XMP on the 4x16 kit you have and changing memory clock to 5600 and see if it works if you havent tried that yet. Probably wont work but couldnt hurt to try.


I did manage to get the 4x16 running at 4800 with 1.4v. I wonder if I can mess with any of the CPU settings now or if it will boot loop again. Anyway, I will try 5600 and tinker with the CPU also. Still trying to decide if I want to swap to Gigabyte Aorus Master and/or Kingston Fury ram.


----------



## bscool

bahl33ted said:


> I did manage to get the 4x16 running at 4800 with 1.4v. I wonder if I can mess with any of the CPU settings now or if it will boot loop again. Anyway, I will try 5600 and tinker with the CPU also. Still trying to decide if I want to swap to Gigabyte Aorus Master and/or Kingston Fury ram.


It probably need more vdd and vddq voltage. Here are a couple of videos with some voltages using 4x16 to give you an idea of what you might need to set. The timings are for Hynix and I am guessing your memory is Samsung so the subtimings wont work but voltages should be similar.

I would not get a Gigabyte z690 MB just my 2 cents. If you wanted to switch from Asus I would go MSI but you still will have trouble with 4x16 no matter what manufacture you go with on ddr5 and higher clocks.


----------



## Netarangi

Tejc said:


> Hi, I'm new one here in forum and I need help for undervolting 12700K. My motherboard is ASUS ROG MAXIMUS Z690 HERO with 1505 BIOS. I just want some simple first step to do in BIOS to get some idea where to start.
> 
> Down below is my Cinebench R23 result and some informations.
> 
> View attachment 2567980
> 
> 
> Tnx for help in advance, Matej


Sync all cores 49
E cores 38
Vcore 1.33

Test cinebench and post result


----------



## bahl33ted

Does anyone else have issues with CPU-Z SPD not showing anything? I run it as admin and I've uninstalled and reinstalled. SPD on v2.01 is just blank.


----------



## edkieferlp

bahl33ted said:


> Does anyone else have issues with CPU-Z SPD not showing anything? I run it as admin and I've uninstalled and reinstalled. SPD on v2.01 is just blank.


Make sure you set the right slot if you're not populating all 4. The Upper left corner is a dropdown, try different slots.

PS: That would be slot2/4 on Z690 or even any dual channel Intel.

Edit: I see from your above posts you're on DDR5, that "shouldn't" matter but I have no experience with it.
I also see you have 4 sticks so I don't know, see what others say.

That would be pretty big bug on CPU-Z that I haven't heard.
I always use the portable version, been using that for like 20yrs.


----------



## CptSpig

Herald said:


> Thats not how it works though. Not at all. Intel guarantees that its imc will work at minimum 1200mhz (which coresponds to ddr5 4800mhz). But that has nothing to do with the motherboard.
> 
> The qvl on the mobo guarantees that the motherboard will work at those speeds, provided of course your cpus imc can also achieve those speeds. So when you have a cpu with an imc that can run 6000 mhz ddr (like for example my cpu) but it doesnt do so on the apex, it's the apex that's the issue


Herald you totally missed the point. What I posted above is from Intel's website. What is exactly what you posted. There are no guarantees when you overclock. The QVL list takes one CPU one board and one memory kit. Do you really think that will apply to multiple systems with the same build? If you think you have a bad board you need to test the memory slots separately. I don't think ASUS is going to take your word that my board will not run XMP and send you a new board. They will have you run some tests to determine if your board has problems. I Know you guys had bad experiences with your APEX boards. This does not mean that every time someone has a problem it's the board. Walk them through how to test the board, CPU and memory to determine the problem.


----------



## affxct

Tigra456 said:


> Some tips for me to get the 6600 c32 Dominator stable with my 12700K / Z690-F ?
> 
> They work with XMP1 6600 se to 6400 -
> 0,95 SA,
> 1,4 Transmitter,
> 1,30 Mem Controller
> Testmem5 Anta777 stable.
> 
> But with the same voltages get up from 6400 to 6600 doesn’t work… now i try to find the right voltage to fix it…


I guess my Z690-F really is just a good sample. It kinda boggles my mind.


----------



## affxct

xarot said:


> I wonder if the CPU bowing issue has anything to do with stability when running DDR5-6000 and above.


The mounting pressure from the ILM is high in order to avoid issues with VDD2 hitting the pins. It's actually the very reason we can do high data rates. If you lessen the pressure on certain sets of hardware, your training will actually break.


----------



## xarot

affxct said:


> The mounting pressure from the ILM is high in order to avoid issues with VDD2 hitting the pins. It's actually the very reason we can do high data rates. If you lessen the pressure on certain sets of hardware, your training will actually break.


Uneven pressure could also induce problems sometimes but you may be right. Coming from LGA3647 hehe.


----------



## sblantipodi

bahl33ted said:


> Does anyone else have issues with CPU-Z SPD not showing anything? I run it as admin and I've uninstalled and reinstalled. SPD on v2.01 is just blank.


Does this happen always or does it happen only sometimes?
if it happens only sometimes, have you tried rebooting the PC when this happen?
does the PC reboots correctly?


----------



## Maximization

just got done, still more water blocks and stuff waiting for delivery, but working nice, Strix z690-E


----------



## FreeSpeechIsKnowledge

CptSpig said:


> Herald you totally missed the point. What I posted above is from Intel's website. What is exactly what you posted. There are no guarantees when you overclock. The QVL list takes one CPU one board and one memory kit. Do you really think that will apply to multiple systems with the same build? If you think you have a bad board you need to test the memory slots separately. I don't think ASUS is going to take your word that my board will not run XMP and send you a new board. They will have you run some tests to determine if your board has problems. I Know you guys had bad experiences with your APEX boards. This does not mean that every time someone has a problem it's the board. Walk them through how to test the board, CPU and memory to determine the problem.



It means every time, it's the board yes


----------



## affxct

Need some advice guys. I ended up getting an LF II 420, but it's been quite a crappy experience thus far. Initially mounted it and it trained my memory settings totally fine, except, I would soon find out that there was zero mounting pressure, as my CPU idle temp began to rocket towards 90c.

Next I tried changing out from MX-5 to a hefty amount of MX-4 and mounting it better (I guess), and temps under load still sucked, although there seemed to be mounting pressure now as idle temps were fine.

Thereafter I decided to remove the PCB cover and it ended up making things worse. Now my memory couldn't train at my manual OC. I tried re-mounting it a fourth time after re-seating the CPU and checking for bent pins (none). The fourth re-mount resulted in JEDEC with a DIMM in A2 not even being able to train (yes I tested both in B2 to conclude that I didnt somehow break a DIMM).

The fourth re-seat was the most careful one I had done. I literally checked everything. The only thing I can think of is perhaps the backplate isn't even enough (not sure how one would go about getting that thing 100% even).

I'm on a Strix Z690-F per my signature, but I guess this applies to anyone with a ROG board who has had a good time mounting this thing. Any advice guys? It was a nightmare getting it mounted to my 5000D as is, and then this just kinda added the cherry on top. Really wish I had kept the SR36 Pro right about now.


----------



## bscool

affxct said:


> Need some advice guys. I ended up getting an LF II 420, but it's been quite a crappy experience thus far. Initially mounted it and it trained my memory settings totally fine, except, I would soon find out that there was zero mounting pressure, as my CPU idle temp began to rocket towards 90c.
> 
> Next I tried changing out from MX-5 to a hefty amount of MX-4 and mounting it better (I guess), and temps under load still sucked, although there seemed to be mounting pressure now as idle temps were fine.
> 
> Thereafter I decided to remove the PCB cover and it ended up making things worse. Now my memory couldn't train at my manual OC. I tried re-mounting it a fourth time after re-seating the CPU and checking for bent pins (none). The fourth re-mount resulted in JEDEC with a DIMM in A2 not even being able to train (yes I tested both in B2 to conclude that I didnt somehow break a DIMM).
> 
> The fourth re-seat was the most careful one I had done. I literally checked everything. The only thing I can think of is perhaps the backplate isn't even enough (not sure how one would go about getting that thing 100% even).
> 
> I'm on a Strix Z690-F per my signature, but I guess this applies to anyone with a ROG board who has had a good time mounting this thing. Any advice guys? It was a nightmare getting it mounted to my 5000D as is, and then this just kinda added the cherry on top. Really wish I had kept the SR36 Pro right about now.


Are you using the lga1700 mount/backplate and shorter stand offs?

I have used the same cooler on Z690 Apex and Strix d4 and it give great temps. Temps were higher by about 15c though using lga1200 mount.

Edit also according to Arctic you need to remove cover ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II LGA1700 - User Manual I removed mine and left it off.

Also removing the cpu makes installing the backplate easier as to bottom out the standoffs with the cpu installed it makes it harder to get them fully tightened.

The Arctic works well but the install is kind of jank compared to other blocks and EK AIO I have used in the past.


----------



## Wilco183

affxct said:


> Need some advice guys. I ended up getting an LF II 420, but it's been quite a crappy experience thus far. Initially mounted it and it trained my memory settings totally fine, except, I would soon find out that there was zero mounting pressure, as my CPU idle temp began to rocket towards 90c.
> 
> Next I tried changing out from MX-5 to a hefty amount of MX-4 and mounting it better (I guess), and temps under load still sucked, although there seemed to be mounting pressure now as idle temps were fine.
> 
> Thereafter I decided to remove the PCB cover and it ended up making things worse. Now my memory couldn't train at my manual OC. I tried re-mounting it a fourth time after re-seating the CPU and checking for bent pins (none). The fourth re-mount resulted in JEDEC with a DIMM in A2 not even being able to train (yes I tested both in B2 to conclude that I didnt somehow break a DIMM).
> 
> The fourth re-seat was the most careful one I had done. I literally checked everything. The only thing I can think of is perhaps the backplate isn't even enough (not sure how one would go about getting that thing 100% even).
> 
> I'm on a Strix Z690-F per my signature, but I guess this applies to anyone with a ROG board who has had a good time mounting this thing. Any advice guys? It was a nightmare getting it mounted to my 5000D as is, and then this just kinda added the cherry on top. Really wish I had kept the SR36 Pro right about now.


I'm using a Hero board currently mounted with an Alf2 360. Unlike the flexibility of my Z73 and Ryujin 2 backplates the Artic backplate is solid of course and in my case of having a bow in the mobo, a pain to get even.

Idle and ram were no issue, but higher than expected temps under stress. What I noticed was that despite focused cross tightening, the 2 rubber o-rings that touch the back of board closest to IO shield had a small gap compared to the other two. So what does "even" even look like. I decided to do trial and error by loosening and tightening screws in different combinations...no repaste or removal, just applied pressure when doing so. Rinse/repeat until I got the desired result. 5 times to many I think.


----------



## bscool

Wilco183 said:


> I'm using a Hero board currently mounted with an Alf2 360. Unlike the flexibility of my Z73 and Ryujin 2 backplates the Artic backplate is solid of course and in my case of having a bow in the mobo, a pain to get even.
> 
> Idle and ram were no issue, but higher than expected temps under stress. What I noticed was that despite focused cross tightening, the 2 rubber o-rings that touch the back of board closest to IO shield had a small gap compared to the other two. So what does "even" even look like. I decided to do trial and error by loosening and tightening screws in different combinations...no repaste or removal, just applied pressure when doing so. Rinse/repeat until I got the desired result. 5 times to many I think.


Did you remove CPU when installing backplate? For me that helps some as with CPU installed it causes MB to bow more than without cpu installed so I could tighten stand off easier. I still needed to use a socket to tighten them fully. Not a very good design compared to other setup I have used.

Also the hexagon shape and sharp edges of the stand off want to cut into MB PCB(even with plastic washer still janky). Where other standoff from other companies are larger and round where they contact the MB so much "safer" for the MB.

Example eks stand off https://www.ekwb.com/shop/media/cat.../e/k/ek_aio_line_lga1700_upgrade_kit_set.jpeg

vs Arctic https://support.arctic.de/products/lf2-420r6/Packaging_Content/Packaging_Content_en.jpg


----------



## affxct

bscool said:


> Are you using the lga1700 mount/backplate and shorter stand offs?
> 
> I have used the same cooler on Z690 Apex and Strix d4 and it give great temps. Temps were higher by about 15c though using lga1200 mount.
> 
> Edit also according to Arctic you need to remove cover ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II LGA1700 - User Manual I removed mine and left it off.
> 
> Also removing the cpu makes installing the backplate easier as to bottom out the standoffs with the cpu installed it makes it harder to get them fully tightened.
> 
> The Arctic works well but the install is kind of jank compared to other blocks and EK AIO I have used in the past.


1700s and 1700 holes. I can't recall 100% if the CPU was mounted, but you may be onto something. I do appreciate the suggestion and I'll give it a go later when I've recharged mentally. I've been using this relatively thin M3 washer to keep the stand-offs from digging in. I don't know how much thicker they are than Arctic's, but I've used them before with my old H150i Elite LCD. I'm not sure if the 0.6-0.7mm is causing the issue.


----------



## affxct

Wilco183 said:


> I'm using a Hero board currently mounted with an Alf2 360. Unlike the flexibility of my Z73 and Ryujin 2 backplates the Artic backplate is solid of course and in my case of having a bow in the mobo, a pain to get even.
> 
> Idle and ram were no issue, but higher than expected temps under stress. What I noticed was that despite focused cross tightening, the 2 rubber o-rings that touch the back of board closest to IO shield had a small gap compared to the other two. So what does "even" even look like. I decided to do trial and error by loosening and tightening screws in different combinations...no repaste or removal, just applied pressure when doing so. Rinse/repeat until I got the desired result. 5 times to many I think.


That sounds like quite a nightmare tbh. I did try loosening and re-tightening before I pulled it off and went and re-seated the CPU and everything before the fourth re-mount. I noticed that my cooler seems to land flush on the stand-offs, almost as though screwing is just meant to hold it there and not actually assist in mounting pressure at all. I did use the O-rings of course. Honestly not sure what this is.


----------



## Herald

CptSpig said:


> Herald you totally missed the point. What I posted above is from Intel's website. What is exactly what you posted. There are no guarantees when you overclock. The QVL list takes one CPU one board and one memory kit. Do you really think that will apply to multiple systems with the same build? If you think you have a bad board you need to test the memory slots separately. I don't think ASUS is going to take your word that my board will not run XMP and send you a new board. They will have you run some tests to determine if your board has problems. I Know you guys had bad experiences with your APEX boards. This does not mean that every time someone has a problem it's the board. Walk them through how to test the board, CPU and memory to determine the problem.


Well I don't agree that there are no guarantees when you overclock. Sure there is no guarantee that your IMC can run 1500mhz in Gear 2, but if it does - then any combination of motherboard and ram in QVL should be able to do that in any board - guaranteed. If they don't, then the motherboards QVL is false or your motherboard is faulty. The only thing you are overclocking when you are pushing ram is your IMC.

The situation is so horrible right now that I have a brand new apex motherboard that I can't sell without testing it first, cause "tested" by asus doesn't inspire much confidence anymore. Imagine if I put up an ad for sale saying "tested by asus, works great". People would laugh me out of the door most likely


----------



## affxct

xarot said:


> Uneven pressure could also induce problems sometimes but you may be right. Coming from LGA3647 hehe.


Been having some gnarly issues mounting an Arctic LF II, so I think you might be onto something. Only AIO thus far that's behaved this way though.


----------



## affxct

Ended up having to remove the board to perfectly balance the amount each stand-off hole was protruding. I decided to use the sticker washers instead of my likely slightly thicker metal washers and I tightened the stand-offs as tight as possible without digging into the board. I used MX-2 this time to mount (mainly because I thought it wasn't gonna work). Yeah somehow re-balancing the stand-offs and using MX-2 resulted in 0 training issues at 6600 and temps at idle and under load are around 8c better than my last AIO. I don't know at all. Weird weird weird.


----------



## Gking62

noticed today that all GSkill 2x32 kits are now on the Z690 Maximus Extreme QVL though out of stock everywhere....


----------



## Wilco183

affxct said:


> Ended up having to remove the board to perfectly balance the amount each stand-off hole was protruding. I decided to use the sticker washers instead of my likely slightly thicker metal washers and I tightened the stand-offs as tight as possible without digging into the board. I used MX-2 this time to mount (mainly because I thought it wasn't gonna work). Yeah somehow re-balancing the stand-offs and using MX-2 resulted in 0 training issues at 6600 and temps at idle and under load are around 8c better than my last AIO. I don't know at all. Weird weird weird.


Great to hear your success. My last experience was definitely an outlier issue compared with the couple dozen other times mounting the Alf on current Hero and previous gen or X570 boards. I know how to put it on right - the first time, but this was strange. I'd passed my previous 360 off to a co-worker while slowly building a custom loop. Couldn't pass on buying another for $80 from Amazon Warehouse. It was brand new in a retaped box and all I can rationalize is that I had to pay some kind of karma tax for getting it so cheap lol.


----------



## killer01ws6

Tejc said:


> Hi, I'm new one here in forum and I need help for undervolting 12700K. My motherboard is ASUS ROG MAXIMUS Z690 HERO with 1505 BIOS. I just want some simple first step to do in BIOS to get some idea where to start.
> 
> Down below is my Cinebench R23 result and some informations.
> 
> View attachment 2567980
> 
> 
> Tnx for help in advance, Matej


Things of note, I am using a CPU Frame, that will buy me a few degrees C lower
I am using AiOC and with a OC of 41%, I had a rock solid 50% AiOC, but when I tried to do Undervolting, it would crash at almost any attempt,
I had to establish my Undervolt first then tun AiOC back on and max with zero issues is 41% OC.
With above said settings I get a max 88C in Cinebench R23 any a score of 23080 this is all just reference for you.
In the Bios find
Voltage mode: Adaptive+offset set it to Adaptive, from Auto
Cpu core voltage offset: - (minus), set it to - Minus
Cpu core voltage offset: 0.025 to start, test with C R23, 3D Mark Port Royal and one of your favorite games, if all is stable bump it to 0.050 try again if it passes keep bumping up in small steps until it does not pass, if 0.050 failed try between 0.025 and 0.050 and keep turning to your CPU/Board sweet spot.. Mine was 0.034


----------



## Herald

killer01ws6 said:


> Things of note, I am using a CPU Frame, that will buy me a few degrees C lower
> I am using AiOC and with a OC of 41%, I had a rock solid 50% AiOC, but when I tried to do Undervolting, it would crash at almost any attempt,
> I had to establish my Undervolt first then tun AiOC back on and max with zero issues is 41% OC.
> With above said settings I get a max 88C in Cinebench R23 any a score of 23080 this is all just reference for you.
> In the Bios find
> Voltage mode: Adaptive+offset set it to Adaptive, from Auto
> Cpu core voltage offset: - (minus), set it to - Minus
> Cpu core voltage offset: 0.025 to start, test with C R23, 3D Mark Port Royal and one of your favorite games, if all is stable bump it to 0.050 try again if it passes keep bumping up in small steps until it does not pass, if 0.050 failed try between 0.025 and 0.050 and keep turning to your CPU/Board sweet spot.. Mine was 0.034
> View attachment 2568167


Those temps are pretty high. What's your ambient?


----------



## killer01ws6

Herald said:


> Those temps are pretty high. What's your ambient?


Those are not high for multi Cinebench full runs, but my ambient is 72*/ 22C
My idle is 32C normal gaming 45C 4K all candy on


----------



## Gking62

Well received my Kingston KF556C40BBK2-64 (2x32GB) kit today, a day late but anyhow installed, system self configured for XMP2 @1.25v on VDD, VDDQ, MC VDD and TX VDDQ, VCCSA read 1.25v on auto, up from approx 1.13v with my 5600 32G GSkill kit, passed MemTest 5x5, running very well, will run it through further tests in the coming days.


----------



## Maximization

z690-e does was the aqua z690 OC could not..(with this kit)


----------



## affxct

Maximization said:


> z690-e does was the aqua z690 OC could not..(with this kit)
> 
> View attachment 2568280


Your Aqua OC couldn't do 6200 38-38-38?


----------



## Maximization

not with these sticks, this is just XMP 

It could not do XMP settings even, it was wonky. I did not have time to do any overclocking sadly; did not get that far. thanks to microsoft for moving win 11 pro license to new mb.


----------



## affxct

Maximization said:


> not with these sticks, this is just XMP
> 
> It could not do XMP settings even, it was wonky. I did not have time to do any overclocking sadly; did not get that far. thanks to microsoft for moving win 11 pro license to new mb.


That's odd. My Taichi was able to run a 6400 XMP kit without issue while I was busy with something (also pre-tested the IMC before daily'ing it for that week).


----------



## Herald

killer01ws6 said:


> Those are not high for multi Cinebench full runs, but my ambient is 72*/ 22C
> My idle is 32C normal gaming 45C 4K all candy on


I hit 91c at 280w with the same cooler on a 12900k, that's why i asked. At 180w it's around 65c


----------



## Tibby67

Herald said:


> I hit 91c at 280w with the same cooler on a 12900k, that's why i asked. At 180w it's around 65c


12900k 30 to 35 C idle.. gaming 40 to 50c 4k No overclock dont need it...


----------



## Nizzen

ROG MAXIMUS Z690 Series Beta Bios 1701
01. Improve system performance.

ROG MAXIMUS Z690 HERO BETA BIOS 1701
https://drive.google.com/.../1rq7GH10vktNBi7_d.../view...
ROG MAXIMUS Z690 HERO EVA BETA BIOS 1701
https://drive.google.com/.../1CUZMZDtV49K18oN1gCP.../view...
ROG MAXIMUS Z690 FORMULA BETA BIOS 1701
https://drive.google.com/.../15p7NCepa.../view...
ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX BETA BIOS 1701
https://drive.google.com/.../17VK2X7ljnpA44VBZOdi.../view...
ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME BETA BIOS 1701
https://drive.google.com/.../18jAPxKveUXJSqIblCsr.../view...
ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME GLACIAL BETA BIOS 1701
https://drive.google.com/.../1WmvU3RxJjaoOR.../view...


----------



## Maximization

i did not have enough time with board to find out. after a certain update i could not get power back on to board. i assume there was a setting missing that i did not get to.



affxct said:


> That's odd. My Taichi was able to run a 6400 XMP kit without issue while I was busy with something (also pre-tested the IMC before daily'ing it for that week).


----------



## affxct

Maximization said:


> i did not have enough time with board to find out. after a certain update i could not get power back on to board. i assume there was a setting missing that i did not get to.


I didn't really have to adjust anything for some reason.


----------



## Martin778

Nizzen said:


> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 Series Beta Bios 1701
> 01. Improve system performance.
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 HERO BETA BIOS 1701
> https://drive.google.com/.../1rq7GH10vktNBi7_d.../view...
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 HERO EVA BETA BIOS 1701
> https://drive.google.com/.../1CUZMZDtV49K18oN1gCP.../view...
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 FORMULA BETA BIOS 1701
> https://drive.google.com/.../15p7NCepa.../view...
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX BETA BIOS 1701
> https://drive.google.com/.../17VK2X7ljnpA44VBZOdi.../view...
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME BETA BIOS 1701
> https://drive.google.com/.../18jAPxKveUXJSqIblCsr.../view...
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME GLACIAL BETA BIOS 1701
> https://drive.google.com/.../1WmvU3RxJjaoOR.../view...


----------



## affxct

Martin778 said:


>


No way, jolly good meme.


----------



## killer01ws6

Herald said:


> I hit 91c at 280w with the same cooler on a 12900k, that's why i asked. At 180w it's around 65c


Ahh,
yeah that shot I put up for him was just that one section, but when looking at my core temps I have P5 and P7 that run 8C or so above all the other cores. My CPU temp on the board and sensors is way 10C less than the package. I have thought about reapplying my Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut Extreme, but since the undervolt I am not close to any issues while gaming and I don't keep running beaching so all good for now.


----------



## Tejc

killer01ws6 said:


> Things of note, I am using a CPU Frame, that will buy me a few degrees C lower
> I am using AiOC and with a OC of 41%, I had a rock solid 50% AiOC, but when I tried to do Undervolting, it would crash at almost any attempt,
> I had to establish my Undervolt first then tun AiOC back on and max with zero issues is 41% OC.
> With above said settings I get a max 88C in Cinebench R23 any a score of 23080 this is all just reference for you.
> In the Bios find
> Voltage mode: Adaptive+offset set it to Adaptive, from Auto
> Cpu core voltage offset: - (minus), set it to - Minus
> Cpu core voltage offset: 0.025 to start, test with C R23, 3D Mark Port Royal and one of your favorite games, if all is stable bump it to 0.050 try again if it passes keep bumping up in small steps until it does not pass, if 0.050 failed try between 0.025 and 0.050 and keep turning to your CPU/Board sweet spot.. Mine was 0.034
> View attachment 2568167


Hi, tnx for some hints, but im little lost for all those informations in BIOS menu, so i just paste some pictures of BIOS and i hope anyone can help me and pinpoint where to put those numbers for start to undervolt CPU only. Will that be Global Core SVID Voltage, Cache SVID Voltage, CPU L2 Voltage CPU System Agent Voltage,.... maybe someone explain what those Voltages mean?

Tnx a lot for help.


Matej


----------



## Martin778

TM5 is such a janky piece of software, it ran in 'compatibility' mode for 1.5h without errors with the latest BIOS and at 6200 C36 but it would immediately fail when ran as admin with some kind of init error.
Tried the built in memtest86 in the BIOS, passed but shows JEDEC timings, even though in Windows XMP is clearly enabled.


----------



## Gking62

Martin778 said:


> Tried the built in memtest86 in the BIOS, passed but shows JEDEC timings, even though in Windows XMP is clearly enabled.


I think that's just Memtest86 and nothing else, I see the same.


----------



## edkieferlp

Tejc said:


> Hi, tnx for some hints, but im little lost for all those informations in BIOS menu, so i just paste some pictures of BIOS and i hope anyone can help me and pinpoint where to put those numbers for start to undervolt CPU only. Will that be Global Core SVID Voltage, Cache SVID Voltage, CPU L2 Voltage CPU System Agent Voltage,.... maybe someone explain what those Voltages mean?
> 
> Tnx a lot for help.
> 
> 
> Matej
> View attachment 2568334
> View attachment 2568335
> View attachment 2568336
> View attachment 2568337


I am no expert with Z690 but simple way would be set the global core SVID to adaptive mode, then set the +/- sign to "-" and in the next offset field put something like 0.050.
save bios, this would give you a negative 50mv on your core voltage.

More advanced way would be to set LLC=3, DC_LL= 1.1 and AC_LL = 0.30 and check voltages during load tests compared to stock, then you can tweak the V/F points for specific freq.

I recommend running a baseline test so you know what your single-threaded voltage and your all-core voltage. CPU-Z is good for that, fast easy test that doesn't interfere with HWinfo64 (CB2x can have issues trying to record temps/voltage during load test..

Once you have a baseline then you can see how your settings changes voltages and of course check for stability.
You might want to read these if you hadn't yet, they are more advanced than simple offset but give you a wide range of features. Just don't change to much at one time till you get familiar with the system.









ASUS MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME & i9-12900K GUIDE - Load...


Disclaimer ! These settings and methods are outside Intel's specifications, just like any other overclocking method. ---------------------------------------------------- For Z790/13900K click here Introduction: In a world increasingly concerned with natural resources, the watchword is...




www.overclock.net


----------



## Martin778

Strange that TM5 only runs at E-Cores.


----------



## bscool

Martin778 said:


> View attachment 2568351
> 
> Strange that TM5 only runs at E-Cores.


It is a known issue you have to disable e cores on tm5.

Maybe you can assign p core to use it but I have never done that. I prefer Karhu even if it cost a $10 it finds errors faster most of the time compared to other memtest.

But I would still use mulitple things like Karhu, TM5(or memtest pro) and y cruncher to verify mem oc stability.


----------



## bscool

Link to runmemtestpro _Official_ Intel DDR5 OC and 24/7 daily Memory Stability...


----------



## edkieferlp

Martin778 said:


> View attachment 2568351
> 
> Strange that TM5 only runs at E-Cores.


set affinity to just P cores, then in the cfg file change the line core=0 to core=16 for 12700 and 12900k.

At least that worked for me as I only have 4 E cores on 12600k.

PS: 12600k would be core =12


----------



## sugi0lover

This app is simple and useful when you need to assign P cores and E cores. 
It remembers your setting for each app, so you just need to assign it once.
It can't assign specific cores though.










This is my translation fyi.

















GitHub - iodes/CoreDirector: Process Manager for Intel® Hybrid Technology


Process Manager for Intel® Hybrid Technology. Contribute to iodes/CoreDirector development by creating an account on GitHub.




github.com


----------



## IronAge

Gking62 said:


> I think that's just Memtest86 and nothing else, I see the same.


Actually that's Asus fault, they did not want to pay for the Memtest Pro Edition licence, which unlike the free Edition displays XMP settings.



MemTest86 - Compare Editions


----------



## 7empe

Anyone with first impressions of 1701 for Apex? 
Any invisible "performance improvements"?


----------



## Martin778

No, XMP 6200 CL36 still broken as it was. Errors in HCI Memtest.


----------



## Nizzen

7empe said:


> Anyone with first impressions of 1701 for Apex?
> Any invisible "performance improvements"?


well... I can't even get 6800mhz stable LOL
not the best start  (from loading an old profile, made in another bios) Impossible to get stable.....



Edit: Trying low and a bit loose as a start.


----------



## Tejc

edkieferlp said:


> I am no expert with Z690 but simple way would be set the global core SVID to adaptive mode, then set the +/- sign to "-" and in the next offset field put something like 0.050.
> save bios, this would give you a negative 50mv on your core voltage.
> 
> More advanced way would be to set LLC=3, DC_LL= 1.1 and AC_LL = 0.30 and check voltages during load tests compared to stock, then you can tweak the V/F points for specific freq.
> 
> I recommend running a baseline test so you know what your single-threaded voltage and your all-core voltage. CPU-Z is good for that, fast easy test that doesn't interfere with HWinfo64 (CB2x can have issues trying to record temps/voltage during load test..
> 
> Once you have a baseline then you can see how your settings changes voltages and of course check for stability.
> You might want to read these if you hadn't yet, they are more advanced than simple offset but give you a wide range of features. Just don't change to much at one time till you get familiar with the system.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ASUS MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME & i9-12900K GUIDE - Load...
> 
> 
> Disclaimer ! These settings and methods are outside Intel's specifications, just like any other overclocking method. ---------------------------------------------------- For Z790/13900K click here Introduction: In a world increasingly concerned with natural resources, the watchword is...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net


Hi
I did some basic changes and below are results. Please comment. Stock 80 °C, Undervolt -0.100 V 70 °C.

Stock:
BIOS settings:

















C23 results:










Undervolt -0.100 V

BIOS settings:
















C23 results:


----------



## tubs2x4

Tejc said:


> Hi
> I did some basic changes and below are results. Please comment. Stock 80 °C, Undervolt -0.100 V 70 °C.
> 
> Stock:
> BIOS settings:
> View attachment 2568414
> View attachment 2568415
> 
> 
> 
> C23 results:
> View attachment 2568416
> 
> 
> 
> Undervolt -0.100 V
> 
> BIOS settings:
> View attachment 2568417
> View attachment 2568418
> 
> 
> C23 results:
> View attachment 2568419


Do you have your cores manually set p and e core clocks or are those auto? You just adjusted voltage?
Score seems good for a 12700k but temps with all auto seems high at 80c for cb23. If your concerned about it I would see how therma paste pattern is maybe not making good contact.


----------



## SuperMumrik

Nizzen said:


> well... I can't even get 6800mhz stable LOL


While I have not tested this specific bios. I`ve been struggeling with memory oc regression while using those "newer" FGR bioses. It can very well be a user error, but I have rolled back to "1304" every time.

I hope Raptor Lake gets a bios based of 1304


----------



## 7empe

Nizzen said:


> well... I can't even get 6800mhz stable LOL
> not the best start  (from loading an old profile, made in another bios) Impossible to get stable.....
> 
> 
> 
> Edit: Trying low and a bit loose as a start.
> 
> View attachment 2568411


Thanks.
Just loaded 1701 from 1505 and can't do 6800 CL30 either... Nor 6600/6666 CL30 works as it used to before. It looks like 6400 CL28 is stable though...
Very disappointed.


----------



## FreeSpeechIsKnowledge

7empe said:


> Thanks.
> Just loaded 1701 from 1505 and can't do 6800 CL30 either... Nor 6600/6666 CL30 works as it used to before. It looks like 6400 CL28 is stable though...
> Very disappointed.


I'm running at 6800 right now on 1701. Have to test stability though I suppose. I'll give it a go real quick while drinking my coffee.


----------



## Nizzen

7empe said:


> Thanks.
> Just loaded 1701 from 1505 and can't do 6800 CL30 either... Nor 6600/6666 CL30 works as it used to before. It looks like 6400 CL28 is stable though...
> Very disappointed.


I had to load defalts, and put in values manual again. Loading cmo file didn't work well.


----------



## Tejc

tubs2x4 said:


> Do you have your cores manually set p and e core clocks or are those auto? You just adjusted voltage?
> Score seems good for a 12700k but temps with all auto seems high at 80c for cb23. If your concerned about it I would see how therma paste pattern is maybe not making good contact.


Hi, all auto and 80c is Stock default settings in BIOS, 70c when i manually undervolted. Thermal paste application is 5 dots, manual from Noctua and im using NH-D15S with 2 fans.

Best regard, Matej


----------



## edkieferlp

Tejc said:


> Hi
> I did some basic changes and below are results. Please comment. Stock 80 °C, Undervolt -0.100 V 70 °C.
> 
> Stock:
> BIOS settings:
> View attachment 2568414
> View attachment 2568415
> 
> 
> 
> C23 results:
> View attachment 2568416
> 
> 
> 
> Undervolt -0.100 V
> 
> BIOS settings:
> View attachment 2568417
> View attachment 2568418
> 
> 
> C23 results:
> View attachment 2568419


Ok, Just to go over your settings, did you try the 0.100 offset with ASUS MCE set to auto, that would give higher power limit then disabled, I forget the Intel spec on 12700k but it will show in HWinfo64. I think it is around 190w or so, I know 12900k is 241 and 12600k is 155w.

Now on the offset of 0.100 just make sure it is stable for you as CB 23 is not really a stability test, I would see if you can pass Y-cruncher (2.5b) a few times. Just know temps will be few deg higher than CB 23 but your fine temp wise.

What cooler are you using?


----------



## Nizzen

7empe said:


> Thanks.
> Just loaded 1701 from 1505 and can't do 6800 CL30 either... Nor 6600/6666 CL30 works as it used to before. It looks like 6400 CL28 is stable though...
> Very disappointed.


***


----------



## 7empe

Nizzen said:


> ***
> View attachment 2568443


Should have stop the test at 30' mark. Would be solid stable.


----------



## Tejc

edkieferlp said:


> Ok, Just to go over your settings, did you try the 0.100 offset with ASUS MCE set to auto, that would give higher power limit then disabled, I forget the Intel spec on 12700k but it will show in HWinfo64. I think it is around 190w or so, I know 12900k is 241 and 12600k is 155w.
> 
> Now on the offset of 0.100 just make sure it is stable for you as CB 23 is not really a stability test, I would see if you can pass Y-cruncher (2.5b) a few times. Just know temps will be few deg higher than CB 23 but your fine temp wise.
> 
> What cooler are you using?


 Hi, no, i did not try 0.100 negative offset with ASUS MCE. Will try, and also will try Y-cruncher. I'm using NH-D15S (noctua.at) with 2 fans.


----------



## Nizzen

7empe said:


> Should have stop the test at 30' mark. Would be solid stable.


Better now. Upped a few "V settings " 










Edit: 1 hour mark, and still going. Looks like loading CMO from older bioses is a "no go" for me.


----------



## FreeSpeechIsKnowledge

Nizzen said:


> Better now. Upped a few "V settings "
> 
> 
> View attachment 2568446
> 
> 
> Edit: 1 hour mark, and still going. Looks like loading CMO from older bioses is a "no go" for me.



Failed at the two hour mark roughly. I notice that the memory is running way hotter at this point then it ever has. I feel like they made the memory voltage run at what it is actually set to or something at this point perhaps and that's the difference with this new BIOS.


----------



## 7empe

Nizzen said:


> Better now. Upped a few "V settings "
> 
> 
> View attachment 2568446
> 
> 
> Edit: 1 hour mark, and still going. Looks like loading CMO from older bioses is a "no go" for me.


Do I see this right? VDD/VDDQ +10 mV?


----------



## 7empe

FreeSpeechIsKnowledge said:


> Failed at the two hour mark roughly. I notice that the memory is running way hotter at this point then it ever has. I feel like they made the memory voltage run at what it is actually set to or something at this point perhaps and that's the difference with this new BIOS.
> 
> View attachment 2568449


It will be stable with Z790 Apex. Just wait for it.


----------



## Nizzen

7empe said:


> Do I see this right? VDD/VDDQ +10 mV?


+ 1 on mc too
There is no doubt loading old CMO is bad on this bios. No problem with manual input from scratch.


----------



## Nizzen

7empe said:


> It will be stable with Z790 Apex. Just wait for it.


Not for FreeSpeechIsKnowledge 😆


----------



## FreeSpeechIsKnowledge

Nizzen said:


> Not for FreeSpeechIsKnowledge 😆


If they delete my comments about you being rude and out of line and not your attack. I'm done with this site.

Edit: You wish you had the life I have hahahahahahaha.

Tell me if you want me to come get 6800 running on your mb like mine is, better then yours at 6600. 😂

😂 😂 😂 🤣 🤣


----------



## dyanikoglu

7empe said:


> It will be stable with Z790 Apex. Just wait for it.


this must be a joke, right?


----------



## Martin778

The same joke ASUS currently is with their Z690 offerings


----------



## TSportM

Any feedback from extreme users for this new bios 1701?

cheers


----------



## FreeSpeechIsKnowledge

Nizzen said:


> Not for FreeSpeechIsKnowledge 😆



Here I managed to make it further then your system at 6600 again 

Just turned my cache to stock. I hope you can see the file name.


----------



## Alberto_It

Nizzen said:


> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 Series Beta Bios 1701
> 01. Improve system performance.
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 HERO BETA BIOS 1701
> https://drive.google.com/.../1rq7GH10vktNBi7_d.../view...
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 HERO EVA BETA BIOS 1701
> https://drive.google.com/.../1CUZMZDtV49K18oN1gCP.../view...
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 FORMULA BETA BIOS 1701
> https://drive.google.com/.../15p7NCepa.../view...
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX BETA BIOS 1701
> https://drive.google.com/.../17VK2X7ljnpA44VBZOdi.../view...
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME BETA BIOS 1701
> https://drive.google.com/.../18jAPxKveUXJSqIblCsr.../view...
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME GLACIAL BETA BIOS 1701
> https://drive.google.com/.../1WmvU3RxJjaoOR.../view...


Source?


----------



## Nizzen

Alberto_It said:


> Source?


In house Asus overclocker


----------



## Alberto_It

Nizzen said:


> In house Asus overclocker


Ah ok it's a secret. I'll wait some feedback before to give a try


----------



## Nizzen

Alberto_It said:


> Ah ok it's a secret. I'll wait some feedback before to give a try


There is no secret who are the overclockers at Asus 
Bianbao and Safedisk


----------



## Alberto_It

Nizzen said:


> There is no secret who are the overclockers at Asus
> Bianbao and Safedisk


Thanks very much, but I'm not an expert overclockers and I would like to know how it run this new release of the Bios


----------



## Nizzen

Alberto_It said:


> Thanks very much, but I'm not an expert overclockers and I would like to know how it run this new release of the Bios


There is no rule. Everyone will have different results, just like with gpu drivers.
Test yourself is ALLWAYS the best.


----------



## Csavez™

I installed the 1701 apex bios, and in a few minutes the aida sst turned red, I had to adjust two voltages, increase the sa and decrease the imc.


----------



## 7empe

dyanikoglu said:


> this must be a joke, right?


A full-blown sarcastic joke.


----------



## 7empe

Csavez™ said:


> I installed the 1701 apex bios, and in a few minutes the aida sst turned red, I had to adjust two voltages, increase the sa and decrease the imc.
> View attachment 2568488
> View attachment 2568488


I managed to stabilize my old profile without changing voltages by doing ~10x CMOS clear + read saved profile from 1505. Stable again, probably as long as I don't switch profiles that trigger full memory training. If you ask me, since last few bios releases, every newer bios means higher amount of pain in getting things stable - "it's not a bug, it's a feature".

BIOS voltages:

VDD 1.55V
VDDQ 1.45V
CPU VDDQ 1.50V
IMC (VDD2) 1.25V
SA 0.95V


----------



## Csavez™

7empe said:


> I managed to stabilize my old profile without changing voltages by doing ~10x CMOS clear + read saved profile from 1505. Stable again, probably as long as I don't switch profiles that trigger full memory training. If you ask me, since last few bios releases, every newer bios means higher amount of pain in getting things stable - "it's not a bug, it's a feature".
> 
> BIOS voltages:
> 
> VDD 1.55V
> VDDQ 1.45V
> CPU VDDQ 1.50V
> IMC (VDD2) 1.25V
> SA 0.95V
> 
> View attachment 2568490


How do I understand, bios F5 then F10, and this 10x?


----------



## edkieferlp

7empe said:


> I managed to stabilize my old profile without changing voltages by doing ~10x CMOS clear + read saved profile from 1505. Stable again, probably as long as I don't switch profiles that trigger full memory training. If you ask me, since last few bios releases, every newer bios means higher amount of pain in getting things stable - "it's not a bug, it's a feature".
> 
> BIOS voltages:
> 
> VDD 1.55V
> VDDQ 1.45V
> CPU VDDQ 1.50V
> IMC (VDD2) 1.25V
> SA 0.95V
> 
> View attachment 2568490


Should your tWRPRE [34], tWRPDEN [35] be the same to get tWR?


----------



## Nizzen

edkieferlp said:


> Should your tWRPRE [34], tWRPDEN [35] be the same to get tWR?


I use 42 and 39. Try it 

For 6800mhz+


----------



## edkieferlp

Nizzen said:


> I use 42 and 39. Try it
> 
> For 6800mhz+


ok, I just thought those needed to be the same, maybe this is different than DDR4 as I am on DDR4 but figured a lot timings work similar.


----------



## Maximization

affxct said:


> I didn't really have to adjust anything for some reason.



The speakers on my 43" Predator blew, It is under warranty, but tech told me for some reason win 11 is damaging controller boards w the speakers. I am using all the I/O ports and sata ports, I think some configs have more issues.


----------



## Nizzen

Testing 1701 bios:
Dell green 4800c40 2x16


----------



## Alberto_It

Nizzen said:


> Testing 1701 bios:
> Dell green 4800c40 2x16
> View attachment 2568494


Can you try to push up the memory and cpu? OK I'm a little lazy, I would you like to see the stability and gains with this new bios release


----------



## TSportM

Updated from 1601 to 1701

manualy inserted all values (no cmo loaded) and it did improved system performance  150points


----------



## Alberto_It

TSportM said:


> Updated from 1601 to 1701
> 
> manualy inserted all values (no cmo loaded) and it did improved system performance  150points


And DDR5 stability and frequency


----------



## Nizzen

Alberto_It said:


> Can you try to push up the memory and cpu? OK I'm a little lazy, I would you like to see the stability and gains with this new bios release


Aida: 100% stock cpu, 6800c32 memory







Aida: 5400 p-cores all core, 4200 e-cores, powersave= on







Too bad this isn't my daily job. No payment for testing


----------



## Alberto_It

Nizzen said:


> Aida: 100% stock cpu, 6800c32 memory
> View attachment 2568500
> 
> Too bad this isn't my daily job. No payment for testing


Thanks very much I owe you a beer 🍺


----------



## 7empe

edkieferlp said:


> Should your tWRPRE [34], tWRPDEN [35] be the same to get tWR?


No. tWRPDEN sets tWR. tWRPRE = tWRPDEN - 1, but tWRPRE = tWRPDEN is also ok.


----------



## 7empe

Csavez™ said:


> How do I understand, bios F5 then F10, and this 10x?


CMOS button at the back panel of the motherboard. It wipes out all the registers affected by former trainings + sets state machine to null. F5 just sets bios settings to their defaults. I did this as long as my profile got stable. It was something like 10 full training cycles. After each cycle you need to test for stability. I used yc for fast forward check.


----------



## 7empe

Nizzen said:


> Testing 1701 bios:
> Dell green 4800c40 2x16
> View attachment 2568494


Is 1.60V cpu vddq really needed here?


----------



## Csavez™

7empe said:


> CMOS button at the back panel of the motherboard. It wipes out all the registers affected by former trainings + sets state machine to null. F5 just sets bios settings to their defaults. I did this as long as my profile got stable. It was something like 10 full training cycles. After each cycle you need to test for stability. I used yc for fast forward check.


Could you send me a cmo? I also have sp88.
Anyway, I'm looking at the 6800 posts here and I have to smile, on an aida system stability test, it would bleed in the first second.


----------



## TSportM

Alberto_It said:


> And DDR5 stability and frequency


No problems, only had problems with 15** and below versions 

cheers


----------



## Alberto_It

TSportM said:


> No problems, only had problems with 15** and below versions
> 
> cheers


Thanks very much mate 👊 🍺


----------



## TSportM

Alberto_It said:


> Thanks very much mate 👊 🍺


going to try my luck on doing 7000mhz think this bios for me is the best 

cheers


----------



## Martin778

So it can run 6800-7000MHz on OC but won't run 6000+ XMP properly, what's the catch? Unsafe voltages?


----------



## Nizzen

4 hours BF 2042 temps:


----------



## tubs2x4

Nizzen said:


> 4 hours BF 2042 temps:
> View attachment 2568544


What cooled ram? Seems pretty cool or high speed fans ?


----------



## Nizzen

tubs2x4 said:


> What cooled ram? Seems pretty cool or high speed fans ?


Watercooled. Supercool computer dimm bloks.


----------



## TSportM

Martin778 said:


> So it can run 6800-7000MHz on OC but won't run 6000+ XMP properly, what's the catch? Unsafe voltages?


Dunno if you are asking me, but after o switched from corsair dominador Samsung chips to tforce hynix have no problems up to 6800 on tighter timmings, but it does not Run Xmp i or ii out the box you need to up the Mc to at least 1.280 to Run it 100%stable on default(Xmp), right now iam testing 7000mhz on Xmp timings and every os ok(1701) going to do same timings for my 6800 setting.

cheers


----------



## zzztopzzz

I've been watching this thread from its inception and I'm kind of on the fence about my upcoming build; i.e., AMD or Intel. I'm wondering, at this point, if any of the Intel group anticipate jumping ship and going over to the AMD/Ryzen side. If so, I would like to see some comments on the reasoning. One of my biggest concerns with the new AMD boards is no DDR4 support.


----------



## TSportM

zzztopzzz said:


> I've been watching this thread from its inception and I'm kind of on the fence about my upcoming build; i.e., AMD or Intel. I'm wondering, at this point, if any of the Intel group anticipate jumping ship and going over to the AMD/Ryzen side. If so, I would like to see some comments on the reasoning. One of my biggest concerns with the new AMD boards is no DDR4 support.


your only concern is what allways happens with new tech, beta testing, being intel or AMD in this case AMD for the new 7000 series and 670 boards, both sytems will carry alot of performance no matter what brand you choose, only fans boys will tell you otherwise. If you need DDR4 its a easy pick intel, amd will not support ddr4 on this generation, at least on their finnest new tech, they said ddr4 on new products but it maybe rebranded 5000 series low stuff.

cheers


----------



## Gking62

anyone happen to notice the Asus memory QVL has been missing off the support for the Extreme at least since mid last week?


----------



## sblantipodi

in the mean armoury crate introduced new awesome bugs...
now you can't turn off your rgb when the PC is turned off.
you MUST see rainbow colors...

congrats Asus, you rocks!


----------



## affxct

Anyone else find it kinda sus that there are two separate BIOSs for the Hero and Hero EVA? Perhaps I'm just overthinking it, but like 🤔.


----------



## Martin778

They're putting the SUS in ASUS. Maybe some RGB differences?


----------



## akgis

sblantipodi said:


> in the mean armoury crate introduced new awesome bugs...
> now you can't turn off your rgb when the PC is turned off.
> you MUST see rainbow colors...
> 
> congrats Asus, you rocks!


I dont have this issue and yeh I use armoury crate... but I have affinity masks for e-cores only cause stupid me brought a Ryuxinx AIO or w/e name and need it for the cpu/gpu readings on the display

By default the hardware is rainbow, I have fixed color on Aura Sync

There is a setting in Bios to not allow RGB when system is shutdown or sleep(sleep keeps the RAM leds since the RAM is kept turned on unless hibernated) maybe you forgot that setting? Or try to redo the aura sync settings again.


----------



## sblantipodi

akgis said:


> I dont have this issue and yeh I use armoury crate... but I have affinity masks for e-cores only cause stupid me brought a Ryuxinx AIO or w/e name and need it for the cpu/gpu readings on the display
> 
> By default the hardware is rainbow, I have fixed color on Aura Sync
> 
> There is a setting in Bios to not allow RGB when system is shutdown or sleep(sleep keeps the RAM leds since the RAM is kept turned on unless hibernated) maybe you forgot that setting? Or try to redo the aura sync settings again.


There are a lot of other users having same problem on ROG forum, it's a brand new bug


----------



## DG1

hey guys just wanted to share that if your aio has a usb connection, similar to the strix lc, then you have to kill the "usb power delivery in soft off state" in the bios for it to fully power down


----------



## Tibby67

DG1 said:


> hey guys just wanted to share that if your aio has a usb connection, similar to the strix lc, then you have to kill the "usb power delivery in soft off state" in the bios for it to fully power down


Not if you have a dedicated USB outlet im NZXT usb Hub... never have any problems...


----------



## trihy

Hi guys. After many months of nagging all asus stuff, looks like there will be a new bios revision to fix the problems with idle cpu voltage among other things. Guess it will be for most 600 series boards.

Hope this brings more stability.


----------



## TSportM

sblantipodi said:


> in the mean armoury crate introduced new awesome bugs...
> now you can't turn off your rgb when the PC is turned off.
> you MUST see rainbow colors...
> 
> congrats Asus, you rocks!


No problems here using the Extreme Also.

what i have realised is sometimes after various updates from Armory crate one on top of the other, the program bugs out, just use the armory crare unnistaller and install the program with latest version installer.

cheers


----------



## sblantipodi

TSportM said:


> No problems here using the Extreme Also.
> 
> what i have realised is sometimes after various updates from Armory crate one on top of the other, the program bugs out, just use the armory crare unnistaller and install the program with latest version installer.
> 
> cheers


Done it and don't solved the problem, ad said, there are dozens of other users with same problem in Rog forum


----------



## Maximization

zzztopzzz said:


> I've been watching this thread from its inception and I'm kind of on the fence about my upcoming build; i.e., AMD or Intel. I'm wondering, at this point, if any of the Intel group anticipate jumping ship and going over to the AMD/Ryzen side. If so, I would like to see some comments on the reasoning. One of my biggest concerns with the new AMD boards is no DDR4 support.



I was waiting till end of year do upgrade from my 10 year old computer. Supposedly AMD and Intel will have HEDT platforms at end of year, but my thinking is if something funky goes down in Taiwan they might be a semi shock to the world so i built now. New case has a removable motherboard tray so easier upgrades for rest of my life. Still waiting on blocks though long long lead times currently.


----------



## Martin778

AMD dropped the HEDT, didn't they? Only Intel is coming with the 'Rapids'.


----------



## Nizzen

Martin778 said:


> AMD dropped the HEDT, didn't they? Only Intel is coming with the 'Rapids'.


AMD gave us HEDT users the middle finger, and Intel abandon us 

Sitting here with x399 1950x and x299 7980xe 🧓


----------



## TSportM

sblantipodi said:


> Done it and don't solved the problem, ad said, there are dozens of other users with same problem in Rog forum


As you have alot of reports of RGB problems, just turn it all off its the best choice for you i think

cheers


----------



## zzztopzzz

Martin778 said:


> AMD dropped the HEDT, didn't they? Only Intel is coming with the 'Rapids'.


Max:
What's the case that you're looking at?


----------



## zzztopzzz

Maximization said:


> I was waiting till end of year do upgrade from my 10 year old computer. Supposedly AMD and Intel will have HEDT platforms at end of year, but my thinking is if something funky goes down in Taiwan they might be a semi shock to the world so i built now. New case has a removable motherboard tray so easier upgrades for rest of my life. Still waiting on blocks though long long lead times currently.


Max:
What's the case that you're looking at?


----------



## Maximization

zzztopzzz said:


> Max:
> What's the case that you're looking at?


I bought the pedistal 10 years ago and loaded all pump and rads in it , then simple to mod a silverstone raven 3 case for a rampage iv extreme on top



Tower Pedestal 24, Mountain Mods



this time around I got the top part that actually is supposed to go with pedestal, reusing all parts in pedistal, flow meter pump rad, allot of koolance fittings for easy upgrades,



Pinnacle 24 - CYO (Custom Computer Case), Mountain Mods


----------



## sblantipodi

testing 1701... the new BIOS is awesome as all the others, it fixes nothing, it improves nothing.

I think that asus devs are pretending to work, they just update the version number, they write
"improve performance and stability" in the changelog and that's it xD


----------



## Alberto_It

sblantipodi said:


> testing 1701... the new BIOS is awesome as all the others, it fixes nothing, it improves nothing.
> 
> I think that asus devs are pretending to work, they just update the version, they write
> "improve performance and stability" in the changelog and that's it xD


Senti ma continui a sperare nel miracolo dei 4 moduli di ram? No perché io ho una Apex e una Extreme con BIOS versione 1101 e non ho alcun tipo problema con 2x16gb G.Skill con ram in XMP 1 a 6000 cl 36


----------



## sblantipodi

Alberto_It said:


> Senti ma continui a sperare nel miracolo dei 4 moduli di ram? No perché io ho una Apex e una Extreme con BIOS versione 1101 e non ho alcun tipo problema con 2x16gb G.Skill con ram in XMP 1 a 6000 cl 36


All the problems I have with icue that destroys SPD are there even with 2 sticks and no overclock at JEDEC frequency, 4800MT/s C40.


----------



## sblantipodi

it seems that I'm not the only one with that problem


We'll be back.


but asus is completely ignoring the problem, they bans people that complains of the forum about it xD


----------



## trihy

New bios was released? Didnt find any 17xx.

But if someone did, please check idle cpu core voltage to see if they merged the new fixes. I should never go below 0.700v


----------



## Alberto_It

sblantipodi said:


> it seems that I'm not the only one with that problem
> 
> 
> We'll be back.
> 
> 
> but asus is completely ignoring the problem, they bans people that complains of the forum about it xD


Do you use ICUE software together with Armoury Crate? If yes probably it is Armoury Crate


----------



## sblantipodi

Alberto_It said:


> Do you use ICUE software together with Armoury Crate? If yes probably it is Armoury Crate


I completely removed crate and same problem


----------



## sblantipodi

trihy said:


> New bios was released? Didnt find any 17xx.
> 
> But if someone did, please check idle cpu core voltage to see if they merged the new fixes. I should never go below 0.700v


yes it has been posted some pages before...
on my extreme with my settings core voltages never goes below 0.700V but this was true even with previous BIOS


----------



## edkieferlp

There no bios that is going to magically fix 4 slot freq's, maybe with the new platform/CPU (Z790/RL) the freq will go up but I wouldn't expect 100% above 6000.


----------



## sblantipodi

edkieferlp said:


> There no bios that is going to magically fix 4 slot freq's, maybe with the new platform/CPU (Z790/RL) the freq will go up but I wouldn't expect 100% above 6000.


those boards has a lot of problems even with 2 sticks only.


----------



## TSportM

@sbpantipodi, i dont experience any problems and i also have the Extreme on 2 stick by the way, i had problems with the corsair dominator ddr5, as far as i aware speed write true or false (default is true) is security feature that for cosair memory needs to be off becouse of RGB implementation on corsair side, so its not Asus fault in that regard, when i used corsair dominator having it True or False did capitulate any problems what so ever.

whats your board production date ?




sblantipodi said:


> testing 1701... the new BIOS is awesome as all the others, it fixes nothing, it improves nothing.
> 
> I think that asus devs are pretending to work, they just update the version number, they write
> "improve performance and stability" in the changelog and that's it xD


Bare in mind that every milage may vary, iam using it and able to achive 7000mhz on same tigher timmings that i use on 6800, still testing but on bios 16** and 15** was not possible, and changing nothing it bumped 150 on Cinebench r23 so bios for did improve system performance. 

Did you apply a previous cmo ? or inputed values from scratch?

cheers


----------



## sblantipodi

TSportM said:


> @sbpantipodi, i dont experience any problems and i also have the Extreme on 2 stick by the way, i had problems with the corsair dominator ddr5, as far as i aware speed write true or false (default is true) is security feature that for cosair memory needs to be off becouse of RGB implementation on corsair side, so its not Asus fault in that regard, when i used corsair dominator having it True or False did capitulate any problems what so ever.
> 
> whats your board production date ?
> 
> cheers


don't know sincerely, it is one of the first board released, but I tried one of the latest and it didn't solved the problem, so I returned it.


----------



## zzztopzzz

Maximization said:


> I bought the pedistal 10 years ago and loaded all pump and rads in it , then simple to mod a silverstone raven 3 case for a rampage iv extreme on top
> 
> 
> 
> Tower Pedestal 24, Mountain Mods
> 
> 
> 
> this time around I got the top part that actually is supposed to go with pedestal, reusing all parts in pedistal, flow meter pump rad, allot of koolance fittings for easy upgrades,
> 
> 
> 
> Pinnacle 24 - CYO (Custom Computer Case), Mountain Mods
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2568694


Thanks for the info.


----------



## Spiriva

trihy said:


> New bios was released? Didnt find any 17xx.
> 
> But if someone did, please check idle cpu core voltage to see if they merged the new fixes. I should never go below 0.700v











[OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread


I'm using a Hero board currently mounted with an Alf2 360. Unlike the flexibility of my Z73 and Ryujin 2 backplates the Artic backplate is solid of course and in my case of having a bow in the mobo, a pain to get even. Idle and ram were no issue, but higher than expected temps under stress...




www.overclock.net





^ You will find the post with the 1701 bioses here


----------



## xarot

TSportM said:


> Dunno if you are asking me, but after o switched from corsair dominador Samsung chips to tforce hynix have no problems up to 6800 on tighter timmings, but it does not Run Xmp i or ii out the box you need to up the Mc to at least 1.280 to Run it 100%stable on default(Xmp), right now iam testing 7000mhz on Xmp timings and every os ok(1701) going to do same timings for my 6800 setting.
> 
> cheers


What's your system agent voltage at? Seems like 0.95 is so far working best with my kit.


----------



## Gking62

TSportM said:


> @sbpantipodi, i dont experience any problems and i also have the Extreme on 2 stick by the way, i had problems with the corsair dominator ddr5, as far as i aware speed write true or false (default is true) is security feature that for cosair memory needs to be off becouse of RGB implementation on corsair side, so its not Asus fault in that regard, when i used corsair dominator having it True or False did capitulate any problems what so ever.
> 
> whats your board production date ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bare in mind that every milage may vary, iam using it and able to achive 7000mhz on same tigher timmings that i use on 6800, still testing but on bios 16** and 15** was not possible, and changing nothing it bumped 150 on Cinebench r23 so bios for did improve system performance.
> 
> Did you apply a previous cmo ? or inputed values from scratch?
> 
> cheers


I have a '21 Extreme, use iCUE and Crate together, 2 sticks of ram and have zero issues since day one...


----------



## sblantipodi

Gking62 said:


> I have a '21 Extreme, use iCUE and Crate together, 2 sticks of ram and have zero issues since day one...


but your signature says a different story, no corsair dominator inside your rig.
the problem is between iCue, dominator and asus.

corsair says that it's an asus problem, asus says nothing.


----------



## bscool

2022 Apex bios 1701 u code 15

Arctic LF2 420 AIO

Memory air cooled Phantek T30 - 7000c30

I removed all u codes and replaced with 15 so KS and newer 13 gens probably wont work. I have only tested with 12900KF as in screenshots.

Karhu/Aida64 are with CPU using AI OC

Y cruncher 53/49 with auto CPU voltage and llc4 in bios

vdd-1.6

vddq/vddqtx-1.55

sa-Auto

link to 1701 with u code 15 ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-1701u15.CAP


----------



## Alberto_It

bscool said:


> 2022 Apex bios 1701 u code 15
> 
> Arctic LF2 420 AIO
> 
> Memory air cooled Phantek T30
> 
> I removed all u codes and replaced with 15 so KS and newer 13 gens probably wont work. I have only tested with 12900KF as in screenshots.
> 
> Karhu/Aida64 are with CPU using AI OC
> 
> Y cruncher 53/49 with auto CPU voltage and llc4 in bios
> 
> vdd-1.6
> 
> vddq/vddqtx-1.55
> 
> sa-Auto
> 
> link to 1701 with u code 15 ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-1701u15.CAP


U code 15 means? Could you please explain me what's? 😳 @bscool


----------



## Nizzen

Alberto_It said:


> U code 15 means? Could you please explain me what's? 😳 @bscool


Avx 512 support. Old cpu "firmware"


----------



## sblantipodi

Nizzen said:


> Avx 512 support. Old cpu "firmware"


there is really no sense in AVX512. why bother?





Linus Torvalds: "I Hope AVX512 Dies A Painful Death" - Phoronix







www.phoronix.com


----------



## Alberto_It

Nizzen said:


> Avx 512 support. Old cpu "firmware"


Thanks very much! Can you please ask or find the Extreme version of 1701 with u code 15?


----------



## Alberto_It

sblantipodi said:


> there is really no sense in AVX512. why bother?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Linus Torvalds: "I Hope AVX512 Dies A Painful Death" - Phoronix
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.phoronix.com


The author


----------



## sblantipodi

what do you mean with this?


----------



## bscool

Alberto_It said:


> U code 15 means? Could you please explain me what's? 😳 @bscool


I do it mostly to mess around. I know some use avx512 for emulators(better perforance) and in some benchmarks it gives better scores.


----------



## sblantipodi

bscool said:


> I do mostly to mess around. I know some need avx512 for emulators and in some benchmarks it gives better scores.


avx512 works on vectorization, emulators does not need vectors, not that big at least.
fields where you can use AVX512 are so few that there is no real sense in having this instruction set on CPUs.
I sincerely don't know real software using AVX512 apart for benchmarks.

AVX512 support in software will not increase in the future and Intel dropping this support is only another confirm.


----------



## affxct

sblantipodi said:


> avx512 works on vectorization, emulators does not need vectors, not that big at least.
> fields where you can use AVX512 are so few that there is no real sense in having this instruction set on CPUs.
> I sincerely don't know real software using AVX512 apart for benchmarks.
> 
> AVX512 support in software will not increase in the future and Intel dropping this support is only another confirm.


AVX-512 runs much colder, so I honestly wish more apps supported it and we could avoid AVX2.


----------



## sblantipodi

affxct said:


> AVX-512 runs much colder, so I honestly wish more apps supported it and we could avoid AVX2.


it does not work that way, SSE, SSE2, AVX, AVX2 or AVX256, and AVX512 works on vectors.
the more you use "a newer" instruction set, the more you need to manipulate big vectors in a single iteration.
the calculation on these kind of vectors is very nichy, the larger it is and the rarer it is necessary.

it's proved that no software needs vectors that big, no software uses AVX512 and if they will ever use it, they will use for such a small part of the software that very rarely can bring noticeable performance improvements.

I'm developing a software (the one in signature) that does image manipulation on screen capture 144 times per seconds on a 4K image, I find some benefits in using AVX and AVX2 when I use vectors, but I really see no point in using AVX512.


----------



## affxct

sblantipodi said:


> it does not work that way, SSE, SSE2, AVX, AVX2 or AVX256, and AVX512 works on vectors.
> the more you use "a newer" instruction set, the more you need to manipulate big vectors in a single iteration.
> the calculation on these kind of vectors is very nichy, the larger it is and the rarer it is necessary.
> 
> it's proved that no software needs vectors that big, no software uses AVX512 and if they will ever use it, they will use for such a small part of the software that very rarely can bring noticeable performance improvements.


I say this with all due respect, but what part of my comment is your argument mounted against? I just said that it runs colder (objectively true) and that I wished it had more support (y-cruncher uses it). I never said that it'll be better for the coders or that it has any inherent advantages in all situations.

This is like me saying I wish it would rain because it's too warm, and then you going on to describe the atmospheric conditions and why rain would be scientifically unlikely to occur XD.


----------



## sblantipodi

affxct said:


> I say this with all due respect, but what part of my comment is your argument mounted against? I just said that it runs colder (objectively true) and that I wished it had more support (y-cruncher uses it). I never said that it'll be better for the coders or that it has any inherent advantages in all situations.


I'm trying to explain you why no software will use that instructions if not the benchmarks, for this reason there is really no reason to hope something about the future of AVX512.
if you don't trust me, trust the father of Linux (Linus Torvalds)


----------



## affxct

sblantipodi said:


> I'm trying to explain you why no software will use that instructions if not the benchmarks, for this reason there is really no reason to hope something about the future of AVX512.
> if you don't trust me, trust the father of Linux (Linus Torvalds)


I don't need to trust anyone, because I do not really care why or why not they might code for it. I'm not a coder and I never will be. I'm just a user hoping for a product with better quality of life features, and AVX-512 cuts my temps by 5c at the low end compared to AVX2. That's all I know and that's all that concerns me. Well, all of the above, and the fact that y-cruncher runs like 25% faster with it enabled.


----------



## sblantipodi

affxct said:


> I don't need to trust anyone, because I do not really care why or why not they might code for it. I'm not a coder and I never will be. I'm just a user hoping for a product with better quality of life features, and AVX-512 cuts my temps by 5c at the low end compared to AVX2. That's all I know and that's all that concerns me.


if you want to hope for something that cuts temps on your CPU, hope in something different than AVX512, because hoping in AVX512 is a false hope


----------



## affxct

sblantipodi said:


> if you want to hope for something that cuts temps on your CPU, hope in something different than AVX512, because hoping in AVX512 is a false hope


Are you saying that AVX-512 does not run colder than AVX2? If you are then my response would be, you haven't tried it have you?

I am literally saying that 12900Ks run colder with 512 and that I don't know/care to know how or why. It just is. And because it is, I like it.

Oh, and y-cruncher.


----------



## bscool

The people I know who want avx512 on 12th gen use it for ps3 emulator. I dont use it myself but guys who do said it makes a big difference on 12th gen using avx512.



https://www.tomshardware.com/news/ps3-emulator-avx-512-30-percent-performance-boost


----------



## sblantipodi

bscool said:


> The people I know who want avx512 on 12th gen use it for ps3 emulator. I dont use it myself but guys who do said it makes a big difference on 12th gen using avx512.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.tomshardware.com/news/ps3-emulator-avx-512-30-percent-performance-boost


I would consider it only a bad designed software that relies on compilers auto vectorizations,
he found a case where compiler find a path for auto vectorization on AV512 but not on AVX256,
better use vectorization on AVX2 than auto vectorization on AVX512 in that case.

but ok... I don't want to convince anyone 

the fact is that Intel is removing this unuseful instruction set, and me and all the others devs are only glad of it.


----------



## affxct

sblantipodi said:


> I would consider it only a bad designed software that relies on compilers auto vectorizations,
> he found a case where compiler find a path for auto vectorization on AV512 but not on AVX256,
> better use vectorization on AVX2 than auto vectorization on AVX512 in that case.
> 
> but ok... I don't want to convince anyone
> 
> the fact is that Intel is removing this unuseful instruction set, and me and all the others devs are only glad of it.


You might be 100% correct, that doesn't change the irrefutable fact that Alder Lake runs significantly colder with 512. The reason no one is arguing against me right now is because everyone has tested it and everyone knows it's true. It's the reason you can't run y-cruncher component stress tester with 512 enabled. 

You'd basically fudge stability running 512, only to heat crash the moment you run an AVX2 load, because they run way warmer. That, and again, y-cruncher benchmark runs significantly faster. Like way way way faster. So much faster that KS chips are irrelevant for y-cruncher.

I don't know why, how, or what has been causing this phenomenon. All that I know is that Intel's current architecture runs so much better with 512, and I would imagine Raptor and Meteor Lake would've too had they not cut it. I might be wrong on that, but I guess we'll never know.


----------



## sblantipodi

affxct said:


> You might be 100% correct, that doesn't change the irrefutable fact that Alder Lake runs significantly colder with 512. The reason no one is arguing against me right now is because everyone has tested it and everyone knows it's true. It's the reason you can't run y-cruncher component stress tester with 512 enabled. You basically fudge stability, only to heat crash the moment you run an AVX2 load.


I'm not saying that AVX512 does not run colder, I'm saying that no real software uses AVX512 if not in very very very rare case and when they use it, the performance improvement is generally not noticeable since AVX512 can be used in a very small part of the code.
y-cruncher is a benchmark, it's not real life.

for this reason, you will not see newer software supporting AVX512 more than todays and even for the fact that intel is dropping AVX512 from their CPUs.
they finally understood that it's better to invest that silicon on something else than on something that no one can use if not for the benchmarks,


----------



## affxct

sblantipodi said:


> I'm not saying that AVX512 does not run colder, I'm saying that no real software uses AVX512 if not in very very very rare case and when they use it, the performance improvement is generally not noticeable since AVX512 can be used in a very small part of the code.
> y-cruncher is a benchmark, it's not real life.


If 512 runs colder then users will want it. Look, I don't program and I never will, as I previously stated. I don't know what goes into coding for 512 and perhaps it's a nightmare for you guys. Unfortunately in this world, the customer experience is the only thing that sells at the end of the day, and the 12900K running AVX2 is a freakin' nightmare to dissipate. When it's running 512, it runs so much faster and so much colder in every use case where 512 can be leveraged. That is all. No more, no less.


----------



## sblantipodi

affxct said:


> Unfortunately in this world, the customer experience is the only thing that sells at the end of the day


I agree but customers can't convince devs to use something they can't use.
it's like asking a pig to fly, ok you can ask it, but I doubt that the pig, even if it wants it, can fly 

We don't use AVX512 because we can't use it for the most part of our software, there are too few real use cases where AVX512 can be used.
It's not a question of lazyness, it's a question that AVX512 can solve "smaller and more nichy" problems than the other instruction set.


----------



## affxct

sblantipodi said:


> I agree but customers can't convince devs to use something they can't use.
> it's like asking a pig to fly, ok you can ask it, but I doubt that the pig, even if it wants it, can fly
> 
> We don't use AVX512 because we can't use it for the most part of our software, there are too few real use cases where AVX512 can be used.
> It's not a question of lazyness, it's a question that AVX512 can solve "smaller and more nichy" problems than the other instruction set.


At the end of the day, it was wishful thinking. I know it'll never happen. That doesn't stop me from wishing though.


----------



## bscool

sblantipodi said:


> I would consider it only a bad designed software that relies on compilers auto vectorizations,
> he found a case where compiler find a path for auto vectorization on AV512 but not on AVX256,
> better use vectorization on AVX2 than auto vectorization on AVX512 in that case.
> 
> but ok... I don't want to convince anyone
> 
> the fact is that Intel is removing this unuseful instruction set, and me and all the others devs are only glad of it.


Intel is still going to be using avx512 in their HEDT Sapphire Rapids from what I have seen.


----------



## affxct

bscool said:


> Intel is still going to be using avx512 in their HEDT Sapphire Rapids from what I have seen.


Ahh true. I've also heard that and it makes sense as to why. Unfortunately HEDT is probably not going to be terribly cost effective, it'll likely be like daily'ing TR.


----------



## bscool

affxct said:


> Ahh true. I've also heard that and it makes sense as to why. Unfortunately HEDT is probably not going to be terribly cost effective, it'll likely be like daily'ing TR.


Supposedly AMDs new gens are going to have avx512. I wonder what they know that @sblantipodi doesnt? he seems to think it is useless.


----------



## affxct

bscool said:


> Supposedly AMDs new gens are going to have avx512. I wonder what they know that @sblantipodi doesnt? he seems to think it is useless.


Possibly just including it to keep up with Intel and to be more competitive in benchmarks, because benchmarks definitely do sell chips to enthusiasts. If they lose at everything, they're going to be relegated to only being useful for average consumers, and average consumers don't buy 16 core chips.


----------



## Nizzen

bscool said:


> Supposedly AMDs new gens are going to have avx512. I wonder what they know that @sblantipodi doesnt? he seems to think it is useless.


I had 7980xe for almost 6 years. It supports avx 512. Still there isn't many popular programs that using avx 512. 
Until this day, it looks pretty useless 
Imagine tripple AAA cpu bound games with avx512 support! Like COD and Battlefield


----------



## sblantipodi

bscool said:


> Supposedly AMDs new gens are going to have avx512. I wonder what they know that @sblantipodi doesnt? he seems to think it is useless.


AMD knows this better than me, they are adding this instruction set because it's easyer to add them on a CPU than to explain to customers what I am trying to explain you.
as I repeat, if you don't trust me, just check what Linus Torvalds says xD


----------



## IronAge

sblantipodi said:


> as I repeat, if you don't trust me, just check what Linus Torvalds says xD




__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1055566894185488384
Most coders are lazy fuqs nowadays, no hand tuned code anymore.


----------



## akgis

AVX-512 is not used simply becuase there is few capable hardware in the market that provides it, ofc no time pressed game developer gona use it when there eis 7% of the sample according to steam survey that has it and not everyone has the whole feature set of AVX512 apparently.

I dont code but if it runs colder and benchmarks are faster with it, there could be a use it and RPCS3 shows gains with it.

With Intel trying to remove AVX512 from mainstram and AMD aparently want to bring it to mainsteam I dont know *** is going on.


----------



## trihy

I guess intel capped 512 cause it worked really well on alder. I was also surprised by power consumption and temps. Rocket lake was hot as hell while running 512. Alder is not.

But they decided end user doesnt deserve good products.


----------



## Mappi75

No "new" experience with 1701 bios on Apex?
Still keeping 1503 with works best with my 12900KS... i'am tired to try every bios and than its more worse than before.

Dont know whats asus doing. On my asus zenith ii extreme alpha the latest bios kills completly 256GB ram compatiblity (not for me only).
And they still offering this 1603 bios on their website with kills everybodys stability... besides they dont offering the latest agesa version with
solves the fTPM shuttering.


----------



## sblantipodi

Mappi75 said:


> No "new" experience with 1701 bios on Apex?
> Still keeping 1503 with works best with my 12900KS... i'am tired to try every bios and than its more worse than before.
> 
> Dont know whats asus doing. On my asus zenith ii extreme alpha the latest bios kills completly 256GB ram compatiblity (not for me only).
> And they still offering this 1603 bios on their website with kills everybodys stability... besides they dont offering the latest agesa version with
> solves the fTPM shuttering.


Asus sells motherbords that are not finished, they sells beta products and as soon as they hit the shelves they abandon the product to create a new beta product to sell.

The good old era of Asus is finished long time ago. Good marketing, but nothing else.


----------



## Nizzen

Mappi75 said:


> No "new" experience with 1701 bios on Apex?
> Still keeping 1503 with works best with my 12900KS... i'am tired to try every bios and than its more worse than before.
> 
> Dont know whats asus doing. On my asus zenith ii extreme alpha the latest bios kills completly 256GB ram compatiblity (not for me only).
> And they still offering this 1603 bios on their website with kills everybodys stability... besides they dont offering the latest agesa version with
> solves the fTPM shuttering.


1701 works great here. Maybe best performance too. 

The question you should ask: Is there any other brands with better bioses overall? 
Not trying to defend Asus or something, but errors will happend with thousends of hw configs and different MB revisjons.

Hardware and software will allways be a pain for enthusiasts that crave for more performance


----------



## Mappi75

@Nizzen

Argh, because of you  I "want" to test 1701 Bios now...

BTW: Got a few Godlike mobos and unfiy-x's an no bios version was worse than before...

Edit: installed cant go over 6.666Mhz - but it seems to be stable at 6.666Mhz like bios 1503 with same voltages.

this works with "moderate" voltages (bios settings):

DRAM VDD Voltage: 1,46v
DRAM VDDQ Voltage: 1,46v
CPU System Agent Voltage: 0,97200v
Memory Controller Voltage: 1,23125v

Edit2: ok, setting is tm5 stable 20 cycles & hci memtest pro 1.400% tested.


----------



## zzztopzzz

sblantipodi said:


> Asus sells motherbords that are not finished, they sells beta products and as soon as they hit the shelves they abandon the product to create a new beta product to sell.
> 
> The good old era of Asus is finished long time ago. Good marketing, but nothing else.


Not so sure about that. Do you have some references to that?


----------



## Tejc

Does anyone have an idea why my SSD sometimes disconnects from M.2_3 slot. My primary SSD Samsung 980 PRO 500GB NVMe on M.2_1 slot works OK, but my secondary SSD Samsung 980 PRO 2TB NVMe on M.2_3 slot sometimes just disconnect, so i need to restart PC, sometimes also restart don't work so I need to full shutdown PC that my PC reconnect SSD and work normally. Any idea what can be problem ?


----------



## dyanikoglu

zzztopzzz said:


> Not so sure about that. Do you have some references to that?


This whole thread is a reference to that


----------



## Mappi75

What is the fastest/best tool to test the

DRAM VDD Voltage
RAM VDDQ Voltage?

Karhu, hci memtest pro, tm5, gsat ?

With bios 1701 i can lower the voltages to 1,42v and karhu runs still well atm..


----------



## Nizzen

Mappi75 said:


> What is the fastest/best tool to test the
> 
> DRAM VDD Voltage
> RAM VDDQ Voltage?
> 
> Karhu, hci memtest pro, tm5 ?
> 
> With bios 1701 i can lower the voltages to 1,42v and karhu runs still well atm..


Fastest is y-cruscher 2.5b 

I prefer 5x y-crucher 2.5b then Karhu after

Within 10 minutes Karhu wil fail if the CDD/VDDQ is too low. Heat also is a factor here. It will fail faster if the memory is hot. Read 40c+ compared to sub 30c (water cooled)


----------



## Mappi75

Thank you, y-cruncher i had never on my testing list.

Which option did you choose for testing ram?

1 and # 14 FFT ?


----------



## sblantipodi

dyanikoglu said:


> This whole thread is a reference to that


I was writing exactly this but then I seen your post xD


----------



## sblantipodi

ot answer


----------



## Nizzen

Mappi75 said:


> Thank you, y-cruncher i had never on my testing list.
> 
> Which option did you choose for testing ram?
> 
> 1 and # 14 FFT ?


What is standard in Benchmate


----------



## Mappi75

I lowered the voltages to 1,40v and did run a test in y-crunsher with option 1 and +14 FFT

the first Iteration run "0" givers errors at test HNT/VST.

Going back to 1,42v and it passes Iteration run "0" and now runnig Iteration "1"
Seems really a way to find very fast errors for too low voltages.

I will test Benchmate too - thanks for the advice.

Edit: maybe its an cpu error my KS reaches 103 degrees max with custom watercooling!


----------



## zzztopzzz

dyanikoglu said:


> This whole thread is a reference to that


I know what the thread is about, but I and others would would like to know what part(s) were missing or what detail on the the board(s) was/where "unfinished". Most can sympathize with a botched BIOS, but an unfinished board by the major manufacturer is a fairly wild accusation.


----------



## JoolzD

My Z690 Hero just got a Windows update (Windows 11) that updated the BIOS to version 1720.
I had only just updated it to 1701 today so not sure if that's a coincidence?


----------



## affxct

JoolzD said:


> My Z690 Hero just got a Windows update (Windows 11) that updated the BIOS to version 1720.
> I had only just updated it to 1701 today so not sure if that's a coincidence?


That, my friend, is literally impossible.


----------



## JoolzD

affxct said:


> That, my friend, is literally impossible.


Well, it just happened lol.


----------



## edkieferlp

Sounds odd but maybe related to this?








KB5012170: Windows update error 0x800f0922, UEFI Bios update may resolve it - gHacks Tech News


Installation of KB5012170 may exit unexpectedly with the error code 0x800f0922. Find out what that means and how to potentially resolve it.



www.ghacks.net


----------



## Alberto_It

edkieferlp said:


> Sounds odd but maybe related to this?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> KB5012170: Windows update error 0x800f0922, UEFI Bios update may resolve it - gHacks Tech News
> 
> 
> Installation of KB5012170 may exit unexpectedly with the error code 0x800f0922. Find out what that means and how to potentially resolve it.
> 
> 
> 
> www.ghacks.net


Sorry for the disturb, can you please tell me when will be available on Asus official website the new bios (no beta) Thanks


----------



## bscool

JoolzD said:


> My Z690 Hero just got a Windows update (Windows 11) that updated the BIOS to version 1720.
> I had only just updated it to 1701 today so not sure if that's a coincidence?


If you disable trusted computing and ppt under Advanced then it wont quailfy according to Windowd for Win11 and then wont auto update if that is what happened.

Edit. Nevermind I see you were already running Windows 11.


----------



## edkieferlp

Alberto_It said:


> Sorry for the disturb, can you please tell me when will be available on Asus official website the new bios (no beta) Thanks


I have no idea when it will be available, I just read that link today.
Do you suffer from that error, if not I would not worry about it IMO.


----------



## Alberto_It

edkieferlp said:


> I have no idea when it will be available, I just read that link today.
> Do you suffer from that error, if not I would not worry about it IMO.


I have got a brand new Z690 Extreme, purchased months ago, never touched until this morning. I would like to flash the board with most stable version if possible


----------



## Martin778

Ordered a Z690 Dark from the US, I know I will cry when it arrives, expecting about €800-1000 including tax but I can't take this ASUS garbage anymore, tried XMP with bumped voltages - still unstable.
Looking at what folks are getting in terms of memory OC on the Dark it should be fine for a 13900K/S and newer DDR5's.


----------



## Alberto_It

Martin778 said:


> Ordered a Z690 Dark from the US, I know I will cry when it arrives, expecting about €800-1000 including tax but I can't take this ASUS garbage anymore, tried XMP with bumped voltages - still unstable.


Now I understand because it is sold out on Ebay


----------



## Martin778

I bought it from Amazon w. express shipping to Europe, easier/quicker to do so.


https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0B2BYFPRF?ref=ppx_pt2_dt_b_prod_image


----------



## Alberto_It

Martin778 said:


> I bought it from Amazon w. express shipping to Europe, easier/quicker to do so.


Amazon.de don't ship to Italy


----------



## Martin778

Ah, I bought it from the US Amazon and paid with a CC, never done it before so we will see how it goes. If it comes through I'll at least have an excuse to try out the Thermalright BCF1700 frame.


----------



## sblantipodi

JoolzD said:


> Well, it just happened lol.
> 
> View attachment 2569159
> View attachment 2569160


never seen something like this, cool!


----------



## Ajinta

It this latest 1701 bios also aviable for strix boards ? I replaced apex with strix f and now memory finaly works as i tended to work...


----------



## Xeq54

JoolzD said:


> My Z690 Hero just got a Windows update (Windows 11) that updated the BIOS to version 1720.
> I had only just updated it to 1701 today so not sure if that's a coincidence?


Same here, I was on 1403 so it is not dependent on the bios version. Version 1720 got installed, which is not even on the asus website.

No issues though, just went to look at this thread to check if it happened to anyone else.


----------



## warbucks

Xeq54 said:


> Same here, I was on 1403 so it is not dependent on the bios version. Version 1720 got installed, which is not even on the asus website.
> 
> No issues though, just went to look at this thread to check if it happened to anyone else.
> 
> View attachment 2569176


I had the same thing happen earlier this morning. Windows 11, bios version 1720 installed through windows update. No issues so far. I did a round of stability tests to ensure my previous bios settings were stable.


----------



## Spicedaddy

It's not showing the update in Windows 10. (Hero...)

I've seen BIOS updates in Windows for OEMs like Dell and Lenovo but it's the first time I see this for a "build your own system" motherboard. Not sure I like it since I've had problems with more recent BIOS versions. Hopefully 1720 is a good one.


----------



## Martin778

Yeah, BIOS updates through Windows Update...you will regret it some day, we all will.
I've had notebooks that I especially kept on old BIOS version because of undervolting, then came that piece of turd called Windows that somehow pushed a BIOS update together with normal Windows updates without notification so at next reboot I was greeted with a BIOS update screen and had the choice - lose UV or brick the laptop and throw it away...not to mention how 'clever' this option is when you have hundreds of students and employees who suddenly get an "updating BIOS" screen at next reboot.
If someone unauthorized gets access to this update system, they will brick thousands if not millions of computers on the spot.


----------



## sblantipodi

warbucks said:


> I had the same thing happen earlier this morning. Windows 11, bios version 1720 installed through windows update. No issues so far. I did a round of stability tests to ensure my previous bios settings were stable.


When I manually update a BIOS, I cannot choose to "save all my settings" and restore them once flashed the new BIOS.

What happens when Windows forces a BIOS update? Do you loose all the settings as well?


----------



## warbucks

sblantipodi said:


> When I manually update a BIOS, I cannot choose to "save all my settings" and restore them once flashed the new BIOS.
> 
> What happens when Windows forces a BIOS update? Do you loose all the settings as well?


Sure do. You need to re-enter your settings. I disabled Windows from automatically updating drivers so it won't happen again.


----------



## sblantipodi

warbucks said:


> Sure do. You need to re-enter your settings. I disabled Windows from automatically updating drivers so it won't happen again.


It's not that smart then.
It's like a forced update. Ok, it can be useful on most OEM computers since most OEM customers does not even know what a bios is, but whats the point for a "maximus average user"?
It's nice to see that Microsoft has newer BIOS than what Asus has to offer on their official site.


----------



## JoolzD

Xeq54 said:


> Same here, I was on 1403 so it is not dependent on the bios version. Version 1720 got installed, which is not even on the asus website.
> 
> No issues though, just went to look at this thread to check if it happened to anyone else.


Glad to hear it's not just me then.
If anyone wants a copy of the CAP file, PM me and I'll send you a link to download it.


----------



## warbucks

JoolzD said:


> Glad to hear it's not just me then.
> If anyone wants a copy of the CAP file, PM me and I'll send you a link to download it.


With bios 1720 my ring frequency is stuck at 3600Mhz no what I enter in the bios(with ring down disabled). You having this issue?


----------



## JoolzD

warbucks said:


> With bios 1720 my ring frequency is stuck at 3600Mhz no what I enter in the bios(with ring down disabled). You having this issue?


No, mine isn't stuck.


----------



## Tergon123

affxct said:


> That, my friend, is literally impossible.


No, it is not impossible my windows 11 updated to 1720 as well just this evening on Asus Strix d4 gaming


----------



## affxct

Tergon123 said:


> No, it is not impossible my windows 11 updated to 1720 as well just this evening on Asus Strix d4 gaming


Well, holy crap. So like how does this even work? It updates BIOS and then your BIOS settings are gone? What if the power goes out? Does it take you to BIOS afterwards? What if you try and roll-back? This sounds like a damn good reason to jump off fhe Asus ship entirely if I'm dead honest. Why didn't Asus inform us or give us the update through the regular channel? What if this update compromises memory training? Like man this has got to be a joke. F***ing tired of this BS.


----------



## Tergon123

warbucks said:


> With bios 1720 my ring frequency is stuck at 3600Mhz no what I enter in the bios(with ring down disabled). You having this issue?


Yes I have noticed the same issue, no control of the ring bus, basically it seems hard locked at 3600Mhz with bios 1720


----------



## Tergon123

warbucks said:


> Sure do. You need to re-enter your settings. I disabled Windows from automatically updating drivers so it won't happen again.


How does one disable windows from automatically updating drivers?


----------



## affxct

@warbucks 
@Tergon123 
Ahh hell no. You guys are kinda scaring me.


----------



## Tergon123

I am going back to 1601 and I manged to disable driver updates in windows 11


----------



## Wilco183

Tergon123 said:


> No, it is not impossible my windows 11 updated to 1720 as well just this evening on Asus Strix d4 gaming


Just finished building with Strix d4 and spare 12900 yesterday. Cranked it up with windows 10 and still on 0901 with current updates. All except the update about being important for "security and performance fixes"...upgrade to win11.


----------



## bscool

I dont think the bios update via Windows is an Asus only thing. I remember seeing this a while ago it was an Intel/Windows 11 thing that was coming. I cant find the article but I know I saw it. Some one with better google foo can maybe find it.

But who wants to spend hours testing/tunning a setup with custom timings and voltages and have it "auto" updated. Sounds like a mess to me.


----------



## Tergon123

the only problem I found with 1720 was the ring bus, locked at 3600MHz otherwise it was running fine, I still went back to 1601


----------



## bscool

Tergon123 said:


> the only problem I found with 1720 was the ring bus, locked at 3600MHz otherwise it was running fine, I still went back to 1601


So if you roll back to an older bios and run Windows update does it try to install the new bios again?

I am currently on Win10 on all my z690 machines so I cant test it myself.


----------



## Tergon123

bscool said:


> So if you roll back to an older bios and run Windows update does it try to install the new bios again?
> 
> I am currently on Win10 on all my z690 machines so I cant test it myself.


Yes that is what happened, windows 11 ****ed me, rolled it back without issues to 1601, even disabled windows driver updates, had to reboot for another reason and bamm, it installed 1720. I ran a bunch of benchmarks and see no difference between 3600 and 4500 which is what I normal run the ring bus at. so yeah so dumb, hope this is a beta build and the one released from Asus fixes this.


----------



## bscool

Tergon123 said:


> Yes that is what happened, windows 11 ****ed me, rolled it back without issues to 1601, even disabled windows driver updates, had to reboot for another reason and bamm, it installed 1720. I ran a bunch of benchmarks and see no difference between 3600 and 4500 which is what I normal run the ring bus at. so yeah so dumb, hope this is a beta build and the one released from Asus fixes this.


Thanks for the feedback.

This is a real pain if you build PCs for friends/fam/business. Imagine setting it up for them and Windows does a bios update and they are calling you for why doesnt my PC work or my fans are so loud or RGB dont work now etc..... lol


----------



## warbucks

bscool said:


> So if you roll back to an older bios and run Windows update does it try to install the new bios again?
> 
> I am currently on Win10 on all my z690 machines so I cant test it myself.


You can disable Windows update from installing device drivers/bios/firmware updates automatically. I had forgot to do this when I did a fresh install.


----------



## Nogrod

In Bios 1720 they separated core & cache voltage setting, so if your ring is locked to 3600 you havn't set the cache voltage. you can see it in the ring limit reasons which should be set true for max voltage reached.


----------



## sulalin

Herald said:


> 有一種非常簡單的方法可以解決頂點內存問題。在使用 2021 板進行數月測試後，我發現只有一種方法可以 100% 地工作。買個unify x 解決你所有的問題😂
> [/引用]
> UX連7200都打不開……UX連7200都打不開……APEX強多了！！！我有兩個 unify-x，沒有一個可以用我的 cpu 和內存打開 7200mhz 16g*2 .....
> 
> DDR5-6400 海力士 MDIE OC 7600/7733/7800/8000mhz 四通道 ON AIR MDIE！！！不是阿迪！！！！
> MSI主板用MDIE打不開7733 7800 8000 mhz Quad CHANNEL！在空氣冷卻
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG Z690 APEX LN2 DDR5 16G*2 雙通道 oc 8844 mhz
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 華碩三星ic DDR5-4800 16g*2 7200~7500mhz
> 單通道至 8274mhz 播出


----------



## sulalin

Mappi75，帖子：29020252，成員：387103 said:


> Apex 上的 1701 BIOS 沒有“新”體驗？
> 仍然保持 1503 與我的 12900KS 配合使用效果最好……我厭倦了嘗試每一個 bios，而且比以前更糟糕。
> 
> 不知道華碩在做什麼。在我的華碩 zenith iiextreme alpha 上，最新的 bios 完全殺死了 256GB ram 兼容性（不僅適用於我）。
> 他們仍然在他們的網站上提供這個 1603 BIOS 殺死每個人的穩定性......除了他們不提供最新的agesa版本
> 解決了 fTPM 模板問題。：不確定：
> [/引用]
> 你可以試試0082~~不同的TRFC模式~添加FGR模式，你可以在我的APEX 8P+8E 24HT 7600/7733/7800/8000四通道16G*2上試試
> 空氣1701也是可以的
> 0082:ROG Z690 APEX 0082 BIOS


----------



## sulalin

Alberto_It，帖子：29019570，成員：646436 said:


> U碼15是什麼意思？你能解釋一下是什麼嗎？😳 @bscool
> [/引用] u15 bios Can open cpu without locked avx512


----------



## bscool

Look like Asus is releasing the new 1720 or 17XX for download incase you are not on Wins11 and getting via Windows updates 

1720 is out for Strix d4 but I dont see it for Apex yet https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/BIOS/ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-1720.zip






ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4 | ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4 | Gaming Motherboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG Global


ASUS ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI Intel LGA 1700 ATX motherboard, OptiMem III, PCIe 5.0, 16+1 power stages, WiFi 6, Intel® 2.5 Gb Ethernet, four M.2 slots, USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 USB Type-C®, SATA and Aura Sync



rog.asus.com


----------



## Alberto_It

New Official Bios

Version 1720
2022/08/16 11.09 MBytes
ROG MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME BIOS 1720
"1. Improve system stability
2. Update Microcode for next generation Intel Processors.

Before running the USB BIOS Flashback tool, please rename the BIOS file (MZ690E.CAP) using BIOSRenamer."
DOWNLOAD

*On ASUS Global website, please check the bios for your board model *
@Nizzen @bscool


----------



## Alberto_It

bscool said:


> Look like Asus is releasing the new 1720 or 17XX for download incase you are not on Wins11 and getting via Windows updates
> 
> 1720 is out for Strix d4 but I dont see it for Apex yet https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/BIOS/ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-1720.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4 | ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4 | Gaming Motherboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG Global
> 
> 
> ASUS ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI Intel LGA 1700 ATX motherboard, OptiMem III, PCIe 5.0, 16+1 power stages, WiFi 6, Intel® 2.5 Gb Ethernet, four M.2 slots, USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 USB Type-C®, SATA and Aura Sync
> 
> 
> 
> rog.asus.com


Excuse me, we made the same post at the same time! LOL If you want I delete mine


----------



## Tergon123

Nogrod said:


> In Bios 1720 they separated core & cache voltage setting, so if your ring is locked to 3600 you havn't set the cache voltage. you can see it in the ring limit reasons which should be set true for max voltage reached.


Ring limit reason using what program tells you that


----------



## Tergon123

Nogrod said:


> In Bios 1720 they separated core & cache voltage setting, so if your ring is locked to 3600 you havn't set the cache voltage. you can see it in the ring limit reasons which should be set true for max voltage reached.


I tried manfully setting cache svid to 1.2volts which is what prediction said for 4500MHz ring and it is still at 3600, so doesn't work. I will try the Bios released from asus it self it there is any difference.


----------



## Alberto_It

It's on Italian website @bscool 






ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX | ROG Maximus | Gaming Schede Madri｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG Italia


AX5400 Dual Band WiFi 6 Gaming Router, WiFi 6 802.11ax, Mobile Game Mode, ASUS AURA RGB, Lifetime Free Internet Security, Mesh WiFi support, Gear Accelerator, Gaming Port, Adaptive QoS, Port Forwarding



rog.asus.com







https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/BIOS/ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-1720.zip


----------



## Nogrod

Tergon123 said:


> Ring limit reason using what program tells you that


hwinfo, if cache voltage is not correct it should say yes for you


----------



## Tergon123

Nogrod said:


> hwinfo, if cache voltage is not correct it should say yes for you
> 
> View attachment 2569303


Well honestly not sure it matters, since I did set a voltage but it didn't change from 3600 to what I set it at was 4500, which on bios 1601 worked just fine, not that I notice any difference tbh. Just faustrating they change stuff that doesn't need to be changed. Also annoying can't seem to stop windows from updating that bios version 1720. Like said when I get more time I will try the release bios direct from Asus see if anything changes.


----------



## Alberto_It

No Copy and paste the profile 🤓


----------



## Nogrod

Tergon123 said:


> Well honestly not sure it matters, since I did set a voltage but it didn't change from 3600 to what I set it at was 4500, which on bios 1601 worked just fine, not that I notice any difference tbh. Just faustrating they change stuff that doesn't need to be changed. Also annoying can't seem to stop windows from updating that bios version 1720. Like said when I get more time I will try the release bios direct from Asus see if anything changes.


the setting did not exist before the update afaik, you set it via vcore before, so use the same value for cache as you use for vcore and everything should be the same...


----------



## sblantipodi

Latest 1601 BIOS completely changed the way my brother's Hero react to LLC, it changed nothing on my Extreme.

Current 1720 completely changed the way my Extreme react to LLC.
With same 1601 settings on 1720 I have 20W more on full load.

I was using LLC4, 0.30/098, now to get the same CPU voltges on full load I need to use LLC4, 0.20/098.

But what kind of problems have Asus boards and Asus engineers?


----------



## warbucks

Tergon123 said:


> Well honestly not sure it matters, since I did set a voltage but it didn't change from 3600 to what I set it at was 4500, which on bios 1601 worked just fine, not that I notice any difference tbh. Just faustrating they change stuff that doesn't need to be changed. Also annoying can't seem to stop windows from updating that bios version 1720. Like said when I get more time I will try the release bios direct from Asus see if anything changes.


You need to disable ring down, set your min/max to the cache ratio you want and then change cache voltage from auto to manual and put the same voltage your using for vcore there.


----------



## Gking62

Tergon123 said:


> How does one disable windows from automatically updating drivers?


I'm on Win 11 but typically under "Advanced Options/Additional Updates" which is usually unticked by default


----------



## Simkin

warbucks said:


> You need to disable ring down, set your min/max to the cache ratio you want and then change cache voltage from auto to manual and put the same voltage your using for vcore there.


Can you be more specific to what to change? My ring is "stuck" at 3600 with the 1720 Bios.

Have disabled Ring Down Bin, set SVID cache to Adaptive + 0.005 (My Vcore is Offset +0.005)

To i need to set something in the Cache Turbo setting?

Apex board


----------



## sulalin

Simkin，職位：29021166，成員：210206 said:


> 您能更具體地說明要更改的內容嗎？我的戒指在 1720 Bios 上“卡”在 3600。
> 
> 已禁用 Ring Down Bin，將 SVID 緩存設置為 Adaptive + 0.005（我的 Vcore 為 Offset +0.005）
> 
> 我需要在 Cache Turbo 設置中設置一些東西嗎？
> 
> 頂點板
> [/引用]
> 3600-4700 Full Preset Mode


----------



## Alberto_It

Hey guys, I haven't understood, this new bios 1720 it is worth trying it or rather the version 1601 version? 

Thanks


----------



## Tergon123

Nogrod said:


> the setting did not exist before the update afaik, you set it via vcore before, so use the same value for cache as you use for vcore and everything should be the same...


Ok not at home to try that right now, but did you get the ring to move from 3600 to say 4500 on Strix d4 board running 1720 bios?


----------



## sulalin

Simkin said:


> Can you be more specific to what to change? My ring is "stuck" at 3600 with the 1720 Bios.
> 
> Have disabled Ring Down Bin, set SVID cache to Adaptive + 0.005 (My Vcore is Offset +0.005)
> 
> To i need to set something in the Cache Turbo setting?
> 
> Apex board


I still think 0082 bios is much stronger...maybe you can tryROG Z690 APEX 0082 BIOS


----------



## Mappi75

Does 0082 support 12900KS ?

Bios 1720 works same like 1701 could lower the dram voltage from 1,46v to 1,40.
(no cpu oc)

Edit: ok 0082 is a newer bios so it should support KS cpu's.


----------



## shrimpmaster

Bios 1720 is good for me. I had some strange stutter/frame drops in the desktop/animations on windows 11 with 1601.
I think these are only noticeable with high refresh (240+hz) but still...
I remember trying stock bios settings and that didn't fix it either. Setting high performance/disabling c states didn't help either. Using either rtx 3070 or igpu same.

Bios 1720 fixed the stutter in windows for me.


----------



## affxct

1720 on the Z690-F is identical to 1601 layout-wise. Can confirm that ring is in fact stuck at 3.6 now. 

No, I don't use CMO files.


----------



## Nizzen

affxct said:


> 1720 on the Z690-F is identical to 1601 layout-wise. Can confirm that ring is in fact stuck at 3.6 now.
> 
> No, I don't use CMO files.


Looks like 1701 is the best then


----------



## affxct

Nizzen said:


> Looks like 1701 is the best then


It isn't available on this board, unfortunately. But yeah, for Maximus users it more than likely is. I'm happy to run stock tbh. I'm mainly gaming now and the LF II 420 is allowing me to do -75mV fairly easily on my current sample. I just grabbed it because I didn't feel like dealing with any future forced updates or idk. I just kinda grabbed it. Some people were saying it's better for stability, so might as well daily it, I suppose.


----------



## Nizzen

affxct said:


> It isn't available on this board, unfortunately. But yeah, for Maximus users it more than likely is. I'm happy to run stock tbh. I'm mainly gaming now and the LF II 420 is allowing me to do -75mV fairly easily on my current sample. I just grabbed it because I didn't feel like dealing with any future forced updates or idk. I just kinda grabbed it. Some people were saying it's better for stability, so might as well daily it, I suppose.


Sorry, forgot you used Strix


----------



## affxct

Nizzen said:


> Sorry, forgot you used Strix


I might scoop up some or other Maximus board again when Z790 releases, if there are some decent deals/used sales.


----------



## Simkin

How do i prevent Windows 11 installing this sh** 1720 bios?

Have downgraded to 1601 twice now,

Followed this









How to Enable/Disable Automatic Driver Updates in Windows 11


Learn how to enable or disable automatic driver updates in Windows 11 in this tutorial. 3 ways with detailed guides are included.




www.minitool.com





But it still updates to 1720.. 

I mean, who thought auto updating bioses was a great idea???


----------



## trihy

There is a new microcode in this bios. Its microcode 23 from jun '22. Wonder if they fused something.


----------



## Tergon123

Nogrod said:


> the setting did not exist before the update afaik, you set it via vcore before, so use the same value for cache as you use for vcore and everything should be the same...


This worked for me with 1720, just put the same voltage as you put for your cpu voltage and the cache ring will change to what you set it to in my case 4500 MHz.


----------



## pitter

Tergon123 said:


> This worked for me with 1720, just put the same voltage as you put for your cpu voltage and the cache ring will change to what you set it to in my case 4500 MHz.


what is good voltage for increasing the cache ? and what is maximum cache i can do with e-cores ON ? cant let auto voltage ?


----------



## Tergon123

pitter said:


> what is good voltage for increasing the cache ? and what is maximum cache i can do with e-cores ON ? cant let auto voltage ?


The most it will let me do with ecores on is 4500MHz using the same voltage as I have set for the cpu which in my case with 12900KS overclocked to all core 5.3 is 1.3 volts even. It is Cinebench and game stable running warzone which all I care about, cinebench hits about 93 degrees, warzone is about 72 max ever and is usually around 66-68 most of the time, with Ryujin II 360 AIO


----------



## tubs2x4

How can win11 change bios? That seems way out of its operating abilities.


----------



## pitter

Tergon123 said:


> The most it will let me do with ecores on is 4500MHz using the same voltage as I have set for the cpu which in my case with 12900KS overclocked to all core 5.3 is 1.3 volts even. It is Cinebench and game stable running warzone which all I care about, cinebench hits about 93 degrees, warzone is about 72 max ever and is usually around 66-68 most of the time, with Ryujin II 360 AIO


 what LLC


Tergon123 said:


> The most it will let me do with ecores on is 4500MHz using the same voltage as I have set for the cpu which in my case with 12900KS overclocked to all core 5.3 is 1.3 volts even. It is Cinebench and game stable running warzone which all I care about, cinebench hits about 93 degrees, warzone is about 72 max ever and is usually around 66-68 most of the time, with Ryujin II 360 AIO


what LLC and VCCSA or other tweaks you have ? couldnt find anything in your history posts


----------



## Tergon123

pitter said:


> what LLC
> 
> what LLC and VCCSA or other tweaks you have ? couldnt find anything in your history posts


Oh sorry LLC 7 and VCCSA is 1.26


----------



## Alberto_It

Hey guys, I need to update the Bios of my Asus Z690 Maximus Extreme, I currently have version 1101. Is anyone so helpful as to recommend a New stable bios version for ram and CPU under overclocking?


Thanks


----------



## bscool

2022 Apex bios 1720 u code 15

Arctic LF2 420 AIO

Memory air cooled Phantek T30 - 7000c30

I removed all u codes and replaced with 15 so KS and newer 13 gens probably wont work. I have only tested with 12900KF as in screenshots.

Y cruncher 53/49 with auto CPU voltage and llc4 in bios

vdd-1.6

vddq/vddqtx-1.55

sa-Auto

link to 1720 with u code 15 ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-1720u15.CAP

Also tested with default u codes and didnt have any issue in the short time I tested.

New u code is 23(before replacing with 15) and Ill include IML 7000c30 CPU AI OC run showing that.


----------



## sulalin

Mappi75 said:


> Does 0082 support 12900KS ?
> 
> Bios 1720 works same like 1701 could lower the dram voltage from 1,46v to 1,40.
> (no cpu oc)
> 
> Edit: ok 0082 is a newer bios so it should support KS cpu's.


It also supports the 13th generation CPU TRFC is also presented in a different way. The biggest change is FGR mode.


----------



## 7empe

sulalin said:


> It also supports the 13th generation CPU TRFC is also presented in a different way. The biggest change is FGR mode.
> View attachment 2569436


Finally! Going to play with manual FGR right now.


----------



## Nizzen

7empe said:


> Finally! Going to play with manual FGR right now.


Repport back if there are any performance gain to find


----------



## trihy

Since most microcodes included in this bios were updated, maybe it´s because intel directives the Windows bios update.

Also platform type was changed from 03 to 07, no idea what this means.


----------



## Alberto_It

A dear friend of mine who has the Hero with the bios 1720 failed to bring his g. Skills over 6200. With the 1601 up to 7000.


----------



## 7empe

del


----------



## Alberto_It

7empe said:


> del


I haven't tried it because my friend is much more experienced than me. I don't waste time redoing a profile


----------



## bastian

1720 running well on my Extreme.



trihy said:


> Since most microcodes included in this bios were updated, maybe it´s because intel directives the Windows bios update.
> 
> Also platform type was changed from 03 to 07, no idea what this means.


People will need to be on the newer BIOS anyway if you are going to upgrade to Raptor Lake, which I assume most will.


----------



## Alberto_It

bastian said:


> 1720 running well on my Extreme.
> 
> 
> 
> People will need to be on the newer BIOS anyway if you are going to upgrade to Raptor Lake, which I assume most will.


Tried to bring the ram to 6400 and lower the timing?


----------



## sugi0lover

no problem with bios 1720,
just needed to raise sa from 0.95 to 1.05v for 7200 cl30~


----------



## Alberto_It

sugi0lover said:


> no problem with bios 1720,
> just needed to raise sa from 0.95 to 1.05v for 7200 cl30~


You are a master, me almost a novice


----------



## 7empe

sugi0lover said:


> no problem with bios 1720,
> just needed to raise sa from 0.95 to 1.05v for 7200 cl30~


Something is wrong with 1720. Ring ratio can't go above 47x. Can be fixed lower though.


----------



## SuperMumrik

sugi0lover said:


> just needed to raise sa from 0.95 to 1.05v for 7200 cl30~


What bios are you comparing it against?


----------



## 7empe

7empe said:


> Something is wrong with 1720. Ring ratio can't go above 47x. Can be fixed lower though.
> 
> View attachment 2569444


***EDIT: It seems that since 1720 it is no longer possible to have CPU voltage in adaptive mode and Ring voltage in manual mode. Both have to be aligned, then ring boosts properly.


----------



## sugi0lover

7empe said:


> Something is wrong with 1720. Ring ratio can't go above 47x. Can be fixed lower though.
> 
> View attachment 2569444


Oh, you are right. I didn't check my ring, but it seems it's 47 instead of 52 I manually put.
I haven't checked the ring will boost higher at load.



SuperMumrik said:


> What bios are you comparing it against?


Bios 1702


----------



## bscool

My ring is 49 in y cruncher screenshot/e cores off with u code 15 on bios 1720.

Didnt check it with original ucode.

Edit flashed 1720 with ucode 23 and cache is only 47 in Windows when set to 49 in bios.









[OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread


How do i prevent Windows 11 installing this sh** 1720 bios? Have downgraded to 1601 twice now, Followed this https://www.minitool.com/news/enable-disable-automatic-driver-updates-windows-11.html But it still updates to 1720.. I mean, who thought auto updating bioses was a great idea???




www.overclock.net


----------



## trihy

Microcodes included in bios 1720 are beyond raptor lake. Bios 16xx already had official support for raptor. Maybe last minute patch, who knows.


----------



## Simkin

But how to prevent Windows installing this bios?


----------



## MrALLroy

7empe said:


> ***EDIT: It seems that since 1720 it is no longer possible to have CPU voltage in adaptive mode and Ring voltage in manual mode. Both have to be aligned, then ring boosts properly.


I'm noticing on 1720 that my cpu adaptive voltage setting doesn't seem to have any effect and I'm running at least 10 degrees hotter. CPU package power is now maxing between 240-250 watts whereas with 1601, it was around 200 watts. I've swtiched back to ver. 1601 and have confirmed this. I think this fits in line with what you've pointed out and if windows update forces me AGAIN to update to a bios I don't want, I'll keep what you've noted in mind.

TY


----------



## Gking62

so, on 1720 consensus? I'm rock solid and pretty satisfied with 1601 currently...


----------



## Csavez™

MrALLroy said:


> I'm noticing on 1720 that my cpu adaptive voltage setting doesn't seem to have any effect and I'm running at least 10 degrees hotter. CPU package power is now maxing between 240-250 watts whereas with 1601, it was around 200 watts. I've swtiched back to ver. 1601 and have confirmed this. I think this fits in line with what you've pointed out and if windows update forces me AGAIN to update to a bios I don't want, I'll keep what you've noted in mind.
> 
> TY


Consumption increased for me too with the 1720, the fpu test from 300 to 330w, the cache test from 230 to 260w. The temperatures and the consumption meter confirm this, but in return the system is stable.


----------



## 7empe

MrALLroy said:


> I'm noticing on 1720 that my cpu adaptive voltage setting doesn't seem to have any effect and I'm running at least 10 degrees hotter. CPU package power is now maxing between 240-250 watts whereas with 1601, it was around 200 watts. I've swtiched back to ver. 1601 and have confirmed this. I think this fits in line with what you've pointed out and if windows update forces me AGAIN to update to a bios I don't want, I'll keep what you've noted in mind.
> 
> TY


Yep, VF curve stops working at some point. Same with adaptive voltage. The only way to control cpu voltage is through the manual VRM voltage. Forget about VF. This bios is **** af, I'm done with it. Just wonder how it could pass the QA? Omg... I would consider this as bad, bad beta bios, but this has been released on the official site... shame on you ASUS!


----------



## 7empe

First minutes with 0082 and it works much better than 1720... at least stable as 1701. Gonna report back if I find any differences between 0082 and 1701.
1720 is broken. Don't use it.


----------



## sulalin

7empe said:


> First minutes with 0082 and it works much better than 1720... at least stable as 1701. Gonna report back if I find any differences between 0082 and 1701.
> 1720 is broken. Don't use it.


0082 is different from other BIOS is TRFC mode, more FGE MODE
This function provide in BIOS ver. 0082, you can find it in the bottom of DRAM Timing Control page.
if FGR mode auto or enabled, BIOS tRFC will unavailable and only can available set tRFC2 value, when it disabled, BIOS tRFC2 will unavailable to set, only tRFC available.
there is some different between FGR mode enabled and disabled, you can choose what mode you want to use.
in general, FGR mode = enabled, more flexible and compatible to use, when FGR mode = disabled it might cause system unstable. Source: bianbao


----------



## MrALLroy

7empe said:


> Yep, VF curve stops working at some point. Same with adaptive voltage. The only way to control cpu voltage is through the manual VRM voltage. Forget about VF. This bios is **** af, I'm done with it. Just wonder how it could pass the QA? Omg... I would consider this as bad, bad beta bios, but this has been released on the official site... shame on you ASUS!


I'm not using VF curve at all, just the global core SVID voltage @ .05 adaptive. My CPU package power, with 1601 maxes around 200W whereas 1720 gives me between 240-250W. This ends up being a 10 degree difference in temps which I'm not to happy about.

I reverted back to 1601 but windows keeps forcing the update to 1720. Does anyone know how to stop windows update from forcing this intrusive update upon us?


----------



## Mappi75

Is 0082 via default limited?










What should i disable (12900KS) ?


----------



## 7empe

MrALLroy said:


> I'm not using VF curve at all, just the global core SVID voltage @ .05 adaptive. My CPU package power, with 1601 maxes around 200W whereas 1720 gives me between 240-250W. This ends up being a 10 degree difference in temps which I'm not to happy about.
> 
> I reverted back to 1601 but windows keeps forcing the update to 1720. Does anyone know how to stop windows update from forcing this intrusive update upon us?


Adaptive voltage uses VF curve (voltage adapts to frequency). If you did not modify VF curve with offsets per point then default curve is used.

The problem with 1720 is that neither modified VF curve works, nor adaptive OC voltage is being used. With adaptive voltage for core SVID the default VF is used, therefore you see higher power consumption than before.

The only way to have an influence on vcore is through the manual VRM voltage control.


----------



## Simkin

7empe said:


> First minutes with 0082 and it works much better than 1720... at least stable as 1701. Gonna report back if I find any differences between 0082 and 1701.
> 1720 is broken. Don't use it.


But how to prevent windows installing it? it just keep installing it on every reboot if i downgrade.


----------



## edkieferlp

7empe said:


> Adaptive voltage uses VF curve (voltage adapts to frequency). If you did not modify VF curve with offsets per point then default curve is used.
> 
> The problem with 1720 is that neither modified VF curve works, nor adaptive OC voltage is being used. With adaptive voltage for core SVID the default VF is used, therefore you see higher power consumption than before.
> 
> The only way to have an influence on vcore is through the manual VRM voltage control.


what about AC_LL, DC_LL along with LLC.


----------



## 7empe

edkieferlp said:


> what about AC_LL, DC_LL along with LLC.


What about them? Not related to the issue described above.


----------



## MrALLroy

7empe said:


> Adaptive voltage uses VF curve (voltage adapts to frequency). If you did not modify VF curve with offsets per point then default curve is used.
> 
> The problem with 1720 is that neither modified VF curve works, nor adaptive OC voltage is being used. With adaptive voltage for core SVID the default VF is used, therefore you see higher power consumption than before.
> 
> The only way to have an influence on vcore is through the manual VRM voltage control.


This totally sums up the issue for sure. I did as you suggested, put a -.050 offset on the VRM voltage and that brought the power consumption down about 20W or so and left the global core svid voltage on stock.

I did call ASUS about this. Of course, they couldn't really help atm but my case was escalated so at least they're aware that there's an issue. Of course, the more people that report this, the less they cant ignore the issue. Ideally, I just want windows update to stop force feeding me crap I don't want. Windows update to flash a motherboard bios? Who in their right mind thought of that?!?!?!?! I can't even revert to 1601 without being forced to update even before windows loads. Kinda grumpy atm.


----------



## 7empe

Simkin said:


> But how to prevent windows installing it? it just keep installing it on every reboot if i downgrade.


No clue, I did not have this problem, which sounds terrifying to me.


----------



## stahlhart

7empe said:


> ***EDIT: It seems that since 1720 it is no longer possible to have CPU voltage in adaptive mode and Ring voltage in manual mode. Both have to be aligned, then ring boosts properly.


I was just about to post a question about this -- I just updated to 1720, and noticed something while I was testing with R23:










I have both minimum and maximum cache ratios set to 42, but I am downclocking to 36. Prior to this BIOS it was a constant 42.

So I have to have adaptive mode set up for ring also? Only things I set were minimum, maximum and disabled ring down bin.


----------



## 7empe

stahlhart said:


> I was just about to post a question about this -- I just updated to 1720, and noticed something while I was testing with R23:
> 
> View attachment 2569466
> 
> 
> I have both minimum and maximum cache ratios set to 42, but I am downclocking to 36. Prior to this BIOS it was a constant 42.
> 
> So I have to have adaptive mode set up for ring also? Only things I set were minimum, maximum and disabled ring down bin.


Adaptive mode also does not work. Neither VF curve. Go back to 1701 or something. As I was trying to run my previous config of 55x all core with OCTVB, vcore (uncontrolled due to this issue) jumped to over 1.55V, so... any adaptive/VF curve settings are not taken into account and you basically rely on auto values...


----------



## 7empe

MrALLroy said:


> This totally sums up the issue for sure. I did as you suggested, put a -.050 offset on the VRM voltage and that brought the power consumption down about 20W or so and left the global core svid voltage on stock.
> 
> I did call ASUS about this. Of course, they couldn't really help atm but my case was escalated so at least they're aware that there's an issue. Of course, the more people that report this, the less they cant ignore the issue. Ideally, I just want windows update to stop force feeding me crap I don't want. Windows update to flash a motherboard bios? Who in their right mind thought of that?!?!?!?! I can't even revert to 1601 without being forced to update even before windows loads. Kinda grumpy atm.


I bet that tomorrow or day after tomorrow, bios 1720 will disappear from the asus z690 download page without any comment about it.


----------



## bscool

Simkin said:


> But how to prevent windows installing it? it just keep installing it on every reboot if i downgrade.


You could try to disable ppt in bios and if that doesnt work disable trusted computing. Other than that no idea.









[OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread


No "new" experience with 1701 bios on Apex? Still keeping 1503 with works best with my 12900KS... i'am tired to try every bios and than its more worse than before. Dont know whats asus doing. On my asus zenith ii extreme alpha the latest bios kills completly 256GB ram compatiblity (not for me...




www.overclock.net


----------



## MrALLroy

. 


7empe said:


> I bet that tomorrow or day after tomorrow, bios 1720 will disappear from the asus z690 download page without any comment about it.


Lets hope so. Or at least find a way to stop windows update from updating the bios.


----------



## stahlhart

7empe said:


> Adaptive mode also does not work. Neither VF curve. Go back to 1701 or something. As I was trying to run my previous config of 55x all core with OCTVB, vcore (uncontrolled due to this issue) jumped to over 1.55V, so... any adaptive/VF curve settings are not taken into account and you basically rely on auto values...


Rolled back to 1304, where I was before, and ring clocks are back to normal.










Funny thing about it, though, was that apart from slightly higher Vcore, it was more or less stable for me, but I'm not clocked as high as yours (52-51-51-50-50-50-50-50 with +2) so that seems about right.


----------



## trihy

Do you think Asus will risk upgrading desktop bios knowing some have unstable uv, oc, different hw, if it wasn't because something important was going on?

They didn't even updated to a know stable bios.


----------



## sblantipodi

7empe said:


> Yep, VF curve stops working at some point. Same with adaptive voltage. The only way to control cpu voltage is through the manual VRM voltage. Forget about VF. This bios is **** af, I'm done with it. Just wonder how it could pass the QA? Omg... I would consider this as bad, bad beta bios, but this has been released on the official site... shame on you ASUS!


You can lower the CPU voltage with load line calibration.
VF curve broked completely with 1720 on all boards.
ROG forum is full of complaints.

It's clear that Asus went from the best board manufacturer to a band wagon of incompetent people. 

They are not able to get it right anymore.
One error after the other. 
They fix one thing, they broke 5 things.


----------



## MrALLroy

bscool said:


> You could try to disable ppt in bios and if that doesnt work disable trusted computing. Other than that no idea.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread
> 
> 
> No "new" experience with 1701 bios on Apex? Still keeping 1503 with works best with my 12900KS... i'am tired to try every bios and than its more worse than before. Dont know whats asus doing. On my asus zenith ii extreme alpha the latest bios kills completly 256GB ram compatiblity (not for me...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net


Thank you! This seems to have worked for me. I'm back on ver 1601 and rebooted 4 times without having a crap bios shoved down my throat. Not ideal but a good band-aid fix for now.


----------



## bscool

MrALLroy said:


> Thank you! This seems to have worked for me. I'm back on ver 1601 and rebooted 4 times without having a crap bios shoved down my throat. Not ideal but a good band-aid fix for now.


Yeah guess just wait until new bios release and enable.

So what did it just disable ppt or the trusted computing also?


----------



## Martin778

Just FYI for anyone still having trouble with the Apex or wanting to buy a Z690 OC board - importing a Z690 Dark Kingpin from Amazon USA at the current $499 discount price is actually cheaper (at least here!) than buying a Z690 Apex locally at €656 (everything included) vs €700+ as Apex increased in price a lot since last year - it used to be around €580.
My DKP arrived in 72 hours from the USA as Amazon already includes all import taxes at checkout so it flies right through the EU customs, no delay at all. Their logistics is pretty bonkers - went through 3 states within a day, next day it was in Germany and next morning it arrived here, paid ~€38 for express shipping.
Disclaimer: No, I'm not sponsored by Amazon or EVGA in any way, I was just shocked how quick it was to get something from the US nowadays.


----------



## tubs2x4

MrALLroy said:


> I'm not using VF curve at all, just the global core SVID voltage @ .05 adaptive. My CPU package power, with 1601 maxes around 200W whereas 1720 gives me between 240-250W. This ends up being a 10 degree difference in temps which I'm not to happy about.
> 
> I reverted back to 1601 but windows keeps forcing the update to 1720. Does anyone know how to stop windows update from forcing this intrusive update upon us?


I’m on win11 and everything. Is up to date and I’m still on 1403 bios and I still don’t get how win would update bios? You have armoury crate installed or something?


----------



## MrALLroy

bscool said:


> Yeah guess just wait until new bios release and enable.
> 
> So what did it just disable ppt or the trusted computing also?


I tried ppt only and it didn't stop the update. I've got both ppt and tpm disabled now which seems to work. Fingers crossed.

I would try with just tpm but I've been through 7 or 8 bios flashes today and I just want to game for the rest of the day.

Thanks again for the tip 😀


----------



## MrALLroy

tubs2x4 said:


> I’m on win11 and everything. Is up to date and I’m still on 1403 bios and I still don’t get how win would update bios? You have armoury crate installed or something?


I have arnoury crate installed but I don't think that would cause windows update to force a bios update. I'm on Windows 11 insider beta, ver 22622.575. Maybe it's a new upcoming"feature"? Either way, it's intrusive, unwanted and totally frustrating.


----------



## bscool

MrALLroy said:


> I tried ppt only and it didn't stop the update. I've got both ppt and tpm disabled now which seems to work. Fingers crossed.
> 
> I would try with just tpm but I've been through 7 or 8 bios flashes today and I just want to game for the rest of the day.
> 
> Thanks again for the tip 😀


For me disable trusted computing makes ppt invisible in my bios so I think just doing that would work for people on Win 11 that dont want 1720 auto updated.


----------



## 673714

Just a guess here, but I'm using 1701 and windows 11, it's not trying to update to 1720. I do have trusted computing and ppt on. I wonder if it's limited to bios 1601 or something?


----------



## Wilco183

Possibly limited to certain boards and/or bios versions. Just upped to win 11 on Strix A with all updates...still on factory installed 0901. Will see about Hero (1403) tomorrow when it gets cranked back up.


----------



## HyperC

MrALLroy said:


> I'm not using VF curve at all, just the global core SVID voltage @ .05 adaptive. My CPU package power, with 1601 maxes around 200W whereas 1720 gives me between 240-250W. This ends up being a 10 degree difference in temps which I'm not to happy about.
> 
> I reverted back to 1601 but windows keeps forcing the update to 1720. Does anyone know how to stop windows update from forcing this intrusive update upon us?


 Have you disabled the asus update in bios? if you use CCleaner you can uninstall asus update using that


----------



## MrALLroy

HyperC said:


> Have you disabled the asus update in bios? if you use CCleaner you can uninstall asus update using that


It's not asus update in this case. It's Microsoft Windows Update that's forcing this update. Asus just supplied the broken bios to MS.


----------



## marco.is.not.80

bahl33ted said:


> Does anyone else have issues with CPU-Z SPD not showing anything? I run it as admin and I've uninstalled and reinstalled. SPD on v2.01 is just blank.


I'm really behind on this thread so forgive me if someone has already answered you but I can reproduce this and fix 100% of the time with a pair of my Gskill's whether DDR4 or DDR5. If I manipulate the RGB lighting on the sticks in any way with any software - including from Gskill themselves - SPD fails in AIDA64 and CPU-Z. Only way to fix it for me is to reboot. So I would check to see if you have software installed that manipulates RGB or even scans for it.If you do, try removing it and see if your SPD values show up.


----------



## Alberto_It

bscool said:


> You could try to disable ppt in bios and if that doesnt work disable trusted computing. Other than that no idea.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread
> 
> 
> No "new" experience with 1701 bios on Apex? Still keeping 1503 with works best with my 12900KS... i'am tired to try every bios and than its more worse than before. Dont know whats asus doing. On my asus zenith ii extreme alpha the latest bios kills completly 256GB ram compatiblity (not for me...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net


Just let the Bios developers know if you can


----------



## sblantipodi

marco.is.not.80 said:


> I'm really behind on this thread so forgive me if someone has already answered you but I can reproduce this and fix 100% of the time with a pair of my Gskill's whether DDR4 or DDR5. If I manipulate the RGB lighting on the sticks in any way with any software - including from Gskill themselves - SPD fails in AIDA64 and CPU-Z. Only way to fix it for me is to reboot. So I would check to see if you have software installed that manipulates RGB or even scans for it.If you do, try removing it and see if your SPD values show up.


Me and many others on the rog forum have the same problem. Asus boards are completely broken.



We'll be back.



Just post in that thread that you have the same problem, probably someone from Asus will chime in.


----------



## Alberto_It

*Bios z690 1720 version issue :

Hi all,*

_ASUS is aware of the recent 1720 BIOS that was pushed by Windows Update as well as the complaints of voltage regulation. This thread will be updated when more information is available.

*Multiple threads merged here. Apologies if some of the conversation is disjointed.



We'll be back.



@bscool @safedisk @Falkentyne please stick that _


----------



## stahlhart

Back to 1304 with my Strix E still; not getting 1720 forced through Windows Update (yet).


----------



## Gking62

Alberto_It said:


> *Bios z690 1720 version issue :
> 
> Hi all,*
> 
> _ASUS is aware of the recent 1720 BIOS that was pushed by Windows Update as well as the complaints of voltage regulation. This thread will be updated when more information is available.
> 
> *Multiple threads merged here. Apologies if some of the conversation is disjointed.
> 
> 
> 
> We'll be back.
> 
> 
> 
> @bscool @safedisk @Falkentyne please stick that _


Thankfully I don't have this issue, been thru several updates but still on 1601, then again I have these types of updates turned off to begin with but still not sure why some are getting them if DD has been done...


----------



## Spicedaddy

Still running 1304 on my Hero because every release since seems worse.

Asus should slow down with the monthly BIOS releases and take time to test them.


----------



## stahlhart

Spicedaddy said:


> Still running 1304 on my Hero because every release since seems worse.
> 
> Asus should slow down with the monthly BIOS releases and take time to test them.


I haven't been able to top 1304 for the Strix E. No plans to install RL on this board, so no real reason to change -- the only thing for me was the update in their QVL that shows several DDR5-6600 kits that are apparently supported, though I'm skeptical. But if it's going to mess up the ring bus clocking like it did, then it's not worth it.


----------



## Nizzen

Spicedaddy said:


> Still running 1304 on my Hero because every release since seems worse.
> 
> Asus should slow down with the monthly BIOS releases and take time to test them.


Not worse for most people it looks like 

With thousends of hw configs there will allways be some with trouble


----------



## sblantipodi

Nizzen said:


> Not worse for most people it looks like
> 
> With thousends of hw configs there will allways be some with trouble


Come One configs are not that much.
Intel let you install very few CPUs on the socket, ram manufactures are only three, hinyx, Samsung and micron, we ask for a minimum common denominator not for the best bios for every possible config.

Asus is a company that losts its path and and they don't remember why they became famous. It will not take long until they will be considered a "Chinese company with Chinese quality products" by mosts.

You can't do worse than this, these boards are the worst ever produced on the PC market.

Nothing works, one fix, five more bugs in an infinite loop.


----------



## Spicedaddy

Nizzen said:


> Not worse for most people it looks like
> 
> With thousends of hw configs there will allways be some with trouble


They release a new BIOS every month, how long do you think they test them? 

I've been building computers for 25 years, and you usually have bugs in the early BIOS versions that get corrected. Asus is introducing new problems 10 months after the hardware is out.


----------



## Nizzen

Spicedaddy said:


> They release a new BIOS every month, how long do you think they test them?
> 
> I've been building computers for 25 years, and you usually have bugs in the early BIOS versions that get corrected. Asus is introducing new problems 10 months after the hardware is out.


You must be a professional bios tester 👏

Building computers *≠* Using computers

Zen still has problems 5 years later


----------



## Spicedaddy

Nizzen said:


> You must be a professional bios tester 👏
> 
> Building computers *≠* Using computers
> 
> Zen still has problems 5 years later


No, it's Asus' job to test the BIOS, not the end users.

You think I build them to look at them? 😂

Defend them if you want, Asus isn't having a good year with Z690.


----------



## safedisk

Nizzen said:


> You must be a professional bios tester 👏
> 
> Building computers *≠* Using computers





Alberto_It said:


> *Bios z690 1720 version issue :
> 
> Hi all,*
> 
> _ASUS is aware of the recent 1720 BIOS that was pushed by Windows Update as well as the complaints of voltage regulation. This thread will be updated when more information is available.
> 
> *Multiple threads merged here. Apologies if some of the conversation is disjointed.
> 
> 
> 
> We'll be back.
> 
> 
> 
> @bscool @safedisk @Falkentyne please stick that _


Sorry
There are some issues with the new microcode that supports Raptor Lake
To fix this, have to wait for the intel new microcode
If you have any problems, please do a bios rollback
Thanks


----------



## trihy

Update Microcode for next generation Intel Processors was removed for all 160X bios changelog.

Probably 1720 or higher will be required for proper raptor lake support.


----------



## Nizzen

safedisk said:


> Sorry
> There are some issues with the new microcode that supports Raptor Lake
> To fix this, have to wait for the intel new microcode
> If you have any problems, please do a bios rollback
> Thanks


1701 works like a champ


----------



## Alberto_It

safedisk said:


> Sorry
> There are some issues with the new microcode that supports Raptor Lake
> To fix this, have to wait for the intel new microcode
> If you have any problems, please do a bios rollback
> Thanks


Ok, thanks @safedisk , we can do a bios rollback, but there is also the Windows Update issue that automatically update the Bios to 1720 version that have microcode and voltages regulations issue. 

I think that Asus must collaborate also with Microsoft to prevent the update 

Thanks in advance


----------



## TSportM

Hello,

I dont seem to have any issues with 1720 voltages, do need to set setting by setting, no load previous profile for em or the voltages do get weird.


cheers


----------



## Alberto_It

TSportM said:


> Hello,
> 
> I dont seem to have any issues with 1720 voltages, do need to set setting by setting, no load previous profile for em or the voltages do get weird.
> 
> 
> cheers


There are several users with 1720 bios issues. There is also a official statement of Asus. 

There are people who want have fun with their pc and don't waste their time doing beta testing or trial and error


----------



## 7empe

TSportM said:


> Hello,
> 
> I dont seem to have any issues with 1720 voltages, do need to set setting by setting, no load previous profile for em or the voltages do get weird.
> 
> 
> cheers


Manual configuration from scratch also does not work. To be exact - VF curve and adaptive seems to work at bios entry after cmos clear. After reboot everything you put on VF curve and adaptive voltage gets fixed and nothing can be modified (neither VF#11 frequency, nor VF offsets). Moreover adaptive OC voltage is ignored and everything runs on auto voltages + some mess with the frequencies (including ring ratio).


----------



## 7empe

Alberto_It said:


> There are several users with 1720 bios issues. There is also a official statement of Asus.
> 
> There are people who want have fun with their pc and don't waste their time doing beta testing or trial and error


I mean, it so fundamental bug that we were able to catch it in less than 5 minutes after bios upgrade. This leads to very sad conclusion: there was no QA performed on 1720 at all at the manufacturer side. Mistakes happen to everyone, sure. But issues of such size should not went live. Ever. In addition forced bios update through the windows update sounds like the dour joke.


----------



## Alberto_It

7empe said:


> I mean, it so fundamental bug that we were able to catch it in less than 5 minutes after bios upgrade. This leads to very sad conclusion: there was no QA performed on 1720 at all at the manufacturer side. Mistakes happen to everyone, sure. But issues of such size should not went live. Ever. In addition forced bios update through the windows update sounds like the dour joke.


Thanks very much mate 👊😎☺


----------



## sblantipodi

safedisk said:


> Sorry
> There are some issues with the new microcode that supports Raptor Lake
> To fix this, have to wait for the intel new microcode
> If you have any problems, please do a bios rollback
> Thanks


@safedisk don't you had time to test it before releasing it?

all the problems bringed by 1720 can be easily reproduced, it's evident that you release BIOSes without a single test,
and I reapeat, it's evident to everyone that you release BIOSes without a single test.

this is unacceptable and it's a real shame for asus.

I don't see any problem in the new Intel microcode here, I see only a big problem here,
I see that asus releases bios without a single test.

The incredible thing here is that asus gave an untested BIOS to Microsoft for wide spreading it.

@safedisk I think that asus engineers should hide instead of saying: "there is a problem with the new "Intel" microcode",
common sense would suggest to shut up, but it's evident that there is no common sense here.


----------



## TSportM

safedisk said:


> Sorry
> There are some issues with the new microcode that supports Raptor Lake
> To fix this, have to wait for the intel new microcode
> If you have any problems, please do a bios rollback
> Thanks


Thats not the issue, and even if so, fixing the Windows update and removing the bios from asus site is not related with that.

asus need to get in check, you cant charge premium for none premium products and 0 QC on products and software.

cheers


----------



## akgis

My experiences with Z690 from Asus has been a rolercoster and first time I pay more than 400euros for a Mobo, I though I would get a premium product for close to 700euros for the Z690 Hero at launch.


Z690 heroes catching fire, luckly I was safe
Z690 general DDR5 instability with XMP settings only(actualy I learned alot of tweaking from this that lead me to stability), I also had to return a set of samsung 6000 xmp mem and buy 6400 Hynix instead.
Ryujinx II 360 randomly stops refusing to work after being turn on from a shutdown, didnt happened on my old z170 mobo, Asus still investigating... meanwhile I have to check if the fans work everytime I turn on the PC, glad I have a glass window :| but wasnt fun with the CPU reached 110º when I found the probleam.


----------



## 7empe

Taking into account that 90% of the most expensive boards in the ASUS lineup are being purchased by the overclockers and enthusiasts it looks like they willingly want to lose this segment of customers.
While being their mobos customer since P2B board for my Pentium 100 I can expect more than what just has happened. At least I can expect a clear communication on the changes provided with new bios versions and transparency on the issues/struggles.

And while I'm writing this, their 1720 crap still hangs on the official site.

So pathetic and ignorant.


----------



## Martin778

They couldn't care less about me, you and the whole OC community - they got so big that there will always be enough sellouts to promote ASUS gear so it keeps selling.
Now you guys complain about bugs, a few years ago ASUS X99's were actually destroying CPU's and you know what - nothing happened, no one got compensated and everyone but the owners who got their CPU Qcode00'ed lived happily ever after.


----------



## 7empe

Martin778 said:


> They couldn't care less about me, you and the whole OC community - they got so big that there will always be enough sellouts to promote ASUS gear so it keeps selling.
> Now you guys complain about bugs, a few years ago ASUS X99's were actually destroying CPU's and you know what - nothing happened, no one got compensated and everyone but the owners who got their CPU Qcode00'ed lived happily ever after.


Well, they won't get my bucks for Z790+ and I don't care what others will do


----------



## stahlhart

RL will more than likely be on a Unify-X here. Have read too many horror stories on this forum. That said, the Strix E I am on now has been absolutely fantastic for what it is; I'd have to go back to the P3B-F for another board I've liked this much.


----------



## tubs2x4

I see mid range board like prime-a has qvl up to 6400 mhz ddr5 and 1720 bios updates now. So that’s new. The 6200mhz on 1403 works fine for me so why change eh?!


----------



## Martin778

The ASUS QVL is nonsense, my 6200 C36 is still unstable on the Apex, no matter the QVL.


----------



## Akadaka

Alberto_It said:


> *Bios z690 1720 version issue :
> 
> Hi all,*
> 
> _ASUS is aware of the recent 1720 BIOS that was pushed by Windows Update as well as the complaints of voltage regulation. This thread will be updated when more information is available.
> 
> *Multiple threads merged here. Apologies if some of the conversation is disjointed.
> 
> 
> 
> We'll be back.
> 
> 
> 
> @bscool @safedisk @Falkentyne please stick that _


Hmm have not had this or heard of a BIOS being pushed through Windows Update. that's crazy!


----------



## Martin778

OEM's like HP / Dell have been forcefully pushing BIOSes through Windows Update for at least a year or two.


----------



## Mappi75

Bios 1503 was (so far) the best bios for my 12900ks (most CB23 points and FPS in BL3).

With bios 1701 and 1720 i could lower the dram voltages from 1,46v to 1,40.

Now with bios 0082 i have to set higher dram voltage 1,42v
but my impression is that cpu temps stay prettly low compared to the other bios versions.
First i thought that some cpu limits are enabled but its not.
CB23 runs all core with 5,2ghz.

Still not able to beat more than 6.666Mhz ram speed.

So for KS 1503/1701 and 0082 looks ok.
Some of the other bios versions limits the KS and i cant disabled these limits.


----------



## Gking62

I'm curious, mind you this may or may not be the case but with those of you getting these forced BIOS updates via Windows update, are you logged into your MS account all the time, i.e. non local account? I'm on a local account on Win 11 Pro and still on v 1601 and honestly I never get these forced updates and Windows generally won't update device specific drivers unless you specifically tell it to, i.e. check boxes on each driver under Windows Update/Advanced Options/Additional Options/Optional Updates/Driver Updates...


----------



## Simkin

safedisk said:


> Sorry
> There are some issues with the new microcode that supports Raptor Lake
> To fix this, have to wait for the intel new microcode
> If you have any problems, please do a bios rollback
> Thanks


Except there is one problem..... if you rollback to 1601, Windows force install 1720 again.


----------



## Alberto_It

Simkin said:


> Except there is one problem..... if you rollback to 1601, Windows force install 1720 again.


What a shame, I don't know whether to laugh or cry


----------



## 7empe

del


----------



## Mappi75

Cant you use DDU to avoid loading bios 1720 ?
(There is this option no driver update in windows)


----------



## edkieferlp

Since it doesn't seem to affect Win10, try disabling TPMS in bios.


----------



## Wilco183

ASUS Computer International Recalls ASUS ROG Maximus Z690 Hero Motherboards Due to Fire and Burn Hazards | CPSC.gov


----------



## Martin778

This is actually old news and was noticed pretty quickly after launch, however - poor showing in terms of QC.


----------



## Akadaka

Wilco183 said:


> ASUS Computer International Recalls ASUS ROG Maximus Z690 Hero Motherboards Due to Fire and Burn Hazards | CPSC.gov


What again!?


----------



## Wilco183

Akadaka said:


> What again!?


Yep, it took 7 months after the issue was identified for the US Consumer Product Safety Commission and Asus to formalize the recall here (18 Aug).


----------



## Wilco183

Martin778 said:


> This is actually old news and was noticed pretty quickly after launch, however - poor showing in terms of QC.


Many didn't find out until after purchase and use. I was lucky to find out in the morning before it arrived. Received return label and dropped with UPS back to Newegg same day. Was on hold with Newegg for 10 minutes while they looked into it after relaying a few website articles about it. They said ok, full refund, and sent label. Hate it for those who had to go though a nut-roll.


----------



## wuty

Damn, I was about to pull the trigger on a z690-f but reading all these posts has made me reconsider.

I should say that I’m a novice and don’t plan on doing any manual oc - if I can get xmp stable at 5600, then I’ll be happy.

Is this latest 1720 issue only on Win11? I’ve got an asus board in my current rig and am comfortable with the bios which is why I had no reason to look at other manufacturers, but would people in here suggest otherwise?

Sorry if this is not right place to post - was just looking into user’s experience with the board and this community seems active and helpful.


----------



## bscool

wuty said:


> Damn, I was about to pull the trigger on a z690-f but reading all these posts has made me reconsider.
> 
> I should say that I’m a novice and don’t plan on doing any manual oc - if I can get xmp stable at 5600, then I’ll be happy.
> 
> Is this latest 1720 issue only on Win11? I’ve got an asus board in my current rig and am comfortable with the bios which is why I had no reason to look at other manufacturers, but would people in here suggest otherwise?
> 
> Sorry if this is not right place to post - was just looking into user’s experience with the board and this community seems active and helpful.


The thing is you go to any manufacture thread or forums you will see people having issues. I visit many forums from EVGA, MSI and see people having issues. The grass is always greener on the other side..........

But Asus has the largest user base so you hear/see the most complaints. But anyway MSI is good too. If I didnt run Asus I would go MSI as they are lower priced and good. I usually buy both MSI and Asus each gen but this gen went with Asus for ddr4 and ddr5.


----------



## tubs2x4

wuty said:


> Damn, I was about to pull the trigger on a z690-f but reading all these posts has made me reconsider.
> 
> I should say that I’m a novice and don’t plan on doing any manual oc - if I can get xmp stable at 5600, then I’ll be happy.
> 
> Is this latest 1720 issue only on Win11? I’ve got an asus board in my current rig and am comfortable with the bios which is why I had no reason to look at other manufacturers, but would people in here suggest otherwise?
> 
> Sorry if this is not right place to post - was just looking into user’s experience with the board and this community seems active and helpful.


5600 xmp will work fine I would say on all boards. The 5600 ddr5 ram
I have I put in a Msi pro-a ddr5 z690 board with 12400 and xmp works fine. It also worked fine on my prime-a z690 with 12700k.


----------



## 673714

wuty said:


> Damn, I was about to pull the trigger on a z690-f but reading all these posts has made me reconsider.
> 
> I should say that I’m a novice and don’t plan on doing any manual oc - if I can get xmp stable at 5600, then I’ll be happy.
> 
> Is this latest 1720 issue only on Win11? I’ve got an asus board in my current rig and am comfortable with the bios which is why I had no reason to look at other manufacturers, but would people in here suggest otherwise?
> 
> Sorry if this is not right place to post - was just looking into user’s experience with the board and this community seems active and helpful.


Asus motherboards don't really have any problem doing 5600MHz, it's above 6000MHz where issues start. You could get Asus and be happy I think.



bscool said:


> The thing is you go to any manufacture thread or forums you will see people having issues. I visit many forums from EVGA, MSI and see people having issues. The grass is always greener on the other side..........
> 
> But Asus has the largest user base so you hear/see the most complaints. But anyway MSI is good too. If I didnt run Asus I would go MSI as they are lower priced and good. I usually buy both MSI and Asus each gen but this gen went with Asus for ddr4 and ddr5.


I have to say that I've preferred Asus over other brands for many years now and have always been 100% happy. Even with all the Z690 issues they seem to have right now, I'm not really unhappy, but hopeful that soon they'll release a bios that solves more problems than it creates lol

If it wasn't for Aura Sync being the best RBG software (just my opinion), and me already having an Asus RTX3090 (1 software for all my RBG!), I would have definitely considered Gigabyte, MSI or EVGA for the motherboard.

I've owned motherboards by Gigabyte that are just as good as Asus.
I've had friends who owned video cards by MSI and had spectacular results.
My power supply is almost always EVGA and they seem to have made a great reputation for motherboards as well.
So yea, I'd just take all things including budget into consideration and go from there


----------



## wuty

LilOliVert said:


> If it wasn't for Aura Sync being the best RBG software (just my opinion), and me already having an Asus RTX3090 (1 software for all my RBG!), I would have definitely considered Gigabyte, MSI or EVGA for the motherboard.


Yeah, I’ve got a strix 3080 12gb and wanted an asus board to match….think I’ll go for it.

Thanks all, some pc boards can be kinda hostile - this place seems the total opposite.


----------



## affxct

wuty said:


> Yeah, I’ve got a strix 3080 12gb and wanted an asus board to match….think I’ll go for it.
> 
> Thanks all, some pc boards can be kinda hostile - this place seems the total opposite.


Strix Z690-F is legendary. Bar the wholesale 1720 issues and madness, this board performs well above its price. I've had two samples and both have been good. This second sample seems to have better Vcore regulation and slightly higher memory capability though.


----------



## trihy

It's not just Asus. Most companies stopped listening to their customers some time ago. They are just to sell products. After sale service is terrible.

I been reporting problems with pci-e bus on gigabyte boards for years, they never listened. Now they have a recall for pci-e problems.

They need to start listening to their customers again. Asus is getting way too slow to fix problems.

World is full of arrogant companies that went downhill.


----------



## Alberto_It

After several days from the statement of 1720 bios issues, is still present on the support page. 


I don't know if Microsoft has removed the automatic update 

Please @safedisk @Falkentyne update us about the situation 

Thanks in advance


----------



## xarot

sblantipodi said:


> Asus is a company that losts its path and and they don't remember why they became famous. It will not take long until they will be considered a "Chinese company with Chinese quality products" by mosts.
> 
> You can't do worse than this, these boards are the worst ever produced on the PC market.
> 
> Nothing works, one fix, five more bugs in an infinite loop.


I agree about Z690 issues but the worst ever boards…no…ever had NVIDIA 680i/790i based boards?


----------



## TSportM

you kown a company is starting to be crap when they charge 900€ for a 1600W power suply that has 0 control via software no info or regulation of any kind, or button to change the fan, and says its PCI 5.0 compatible putting a sticker on the box and shoving a crappy 2X 8 pin to 16 pcie. Its insane fan blowing at full speed at startup and full speed on low load. another DOA product from Asus.




I was waiting for this to change my AX 1500i gona stay with it or wait for a new one from corsair,

I will be buying EVGA MB, have to import but i dont care its no OK to pay 1000€ and more for motherboards and have alot of problems with software or hardware, iam on the few that have a OK board its not gold stuff but not crap stuff but there are others that have a board that can use but cant use the board for its full potencial, and now bios with 0 testing, problem is that they will crap out as soon as Z790 comes out 0 suport will go to -0 suport


cheers


----------



## Martin778

I bought EVGA Dark MB and it's ergonomics are atrocious, so is the connector placement...wanted to swap from an Apex and now I have to change the case as well because of these stupid angled power connectors, with sleeved cables you can never make a 90* bend to make them fit between MB and the side rad in an O11D XL....also look where the USB3.0 header is, with the USB3.0 cable it ends up way wider than E-ATX.
Now my biggest issue is the Artic LFII freezer with push-pull Noctua's - I doubt there is a case where it will fit anywhere except as a front intake, which is not ideal.


----------



## TSportM

Martin778 said:


> I bought EVGA Dark MB and it's ergonomics are atrocious, so is the connector placement...wanted to swap from an Apex and now I have to change the case as well because of these stupid angled power connectors, with sleeved cables you can never make a 90* bend to make them fit between MB and the side rad in an O11D XL....also look where the USB3.0 header is, with the USB3.0 cable it ends up way wider than E-ATX.
> Now my biggest issue is the Artic LFII freezer with push-pull Noctua's - I doubt there is a case where it will fit anywhere except as a front intake, which is not ideal.


they dont have the bling, but they are not atrocius they focuse on open bench , for me thats not an issue becouse of space i use a corsair 1000D and my asus extreme also has the conections very similar placed, diference is support and you pay premium and get premium


----------



## Martin778

Looking at the 1000D now, that one would fit the P-P LFII on top but everyting at the front would be completely empty. Still, I don't think placing the USB3.0 header at that angle, and in an EATX format is a clever idea, same for covering all the front panel stuff with plastic.
Shame the 1000D got so stupidly expensive here  I'm thinking about just selling it all off at this point (same story every year - things that do not fit, really done with this at this point) and using my 3070Ti notebook instead, been playing nothing but Snowrunner in the past few months.


----------



## TSportM

Martin778 said:


> Looking at the 1000D now, that one would fit the P-P LFII on top but everyting at the front would be completely empty. Still, I don't think placing the USB3.0 header at that angle, and in an EATX format is a clever idea, same for covering all the front panel stuff with plastic.
> Shame the 1000D got so stupidly expensive here  I'm thinking about just selling it all off at this point(same story every year - things that do not fit) and using my 3070Ti laptop instead, been playing nothing but Snowrunner in the past few months.


Also bare in mind that the kingpin as the conections placed closer to the socket and socket placed another way for better power distribution


----------



## Martin778

Yeah, DFI Lanparty style...I don't even know if the LFII can be placed horizontally that way, if not, I will be returning the MB.


----------



## sblantipodi

TSportM said:


> they dont have the bling, but they are not atrocius they focuse on open bench , for me thats not an issue becouse of space i use a corsair 1000D and my asus extreme also has the conections very similar placed, diference is support and you pay premium and get premium


I put the Extreme [email protected] mobo inside middle tower with no problem. I have a 4000D case from Corsair.
No need for open bench or big case, you Need only the right case for the mobo.


----------



## TSportM

sblantipodi said:


> I put the Extreme [email protected] mobo inside middle tower with no problem. I have a 4000D case from Corsair.
> No need for open bench or big case, you Need only the right case for the mobo.


This is getting of topic, we are talking conectors displacement on motherboards and some purpose for that on evga side besides fact of better power to the cpu, evga board ia for performance purpose the extreme from asus should be also but it has alot of bling bling, it has alot of cooling and is a great board also on of the best z690, if you dont have problems (your case), i dont like small cases, the 1000d is the smallest case i can bare with i used to use caselabs, thats my personal choice.

cheers


----------



## affxct

Alberto_It said:


> After several days from the statement of 1720 bios issues, is still present on the support page.
> 
> 
> I don't know if Microsoft has removed the automatic update
> 
> Please @safedisk @Falkentyne update us about the situation
> 
> Thanks in advance
> View attachment 2569658


Mine re-updated me from 1601 to 1720 early this morning while testing. Unfortunately it seems Asus don't really care.


----------



## sblantipodi

TSportM said:


> This is getting of topic, we are talking conectors displacement on motherboards and some purpose for that on evga side besides fact of better power to the cpu, evga board ia for performance purpose the extreme from asus should be also but it has alot of bling bling, it has alot of cooling and is a great board also on of the best z690, if you dont have problems (your case), i dont like small cases, the 1000d is the smallest case i can bare with i used to use caselabs, thats my personal choice.
> 
> cheers


Yes sure, I was just saying that there Is no problem with evga mobo layout and there is no need for huge case for an eatx mobos like evga or Extreme [email protected] from asus. 
No one is arguing on personal tastes 
For my needs, a 4000d is more than enough for an eatx mobo, it fits all perfectly but I understand that the needs and the tastes may varies.


----------



## Alberto_It

affxct said:


> Mine re-updated me from 1601 to 1720 early this morning while testing. Unfortunately it seems Asus don't really care.


 Two days ago I communicated via chat with Microsoft support and they said that are aware about the situation. I'm really angry


----------



## sblantipodi

Alberto_It said:


> Two days ago I communicated via chat with Microsoft support and they said that are aware about the situation. I'm really angry


You should be angry with asus not with Microsoft, it's asus that gived an untested BIOS to Microsoft.

From now on I choosed to not buy any other Asus products. My house is full of asus [email protected], no more asus untested products with no QA in my house.

I don't want to burn my house or to spend months waiting for fixes. 

This guys are dangerous.

They treats things that uses current like a kid would treat a sweet, no QA with things that uses current is dangerous.

We are lucky that we have no Hero's users with burned house and this is thanks to YouTubers not to asus.


----------



## Alberto_It

And @safedisk is sleeping


----------



## affxct

Guys, the fix might be modding the ucode by yourself. Whether it be 15, 18, or 1F. According to @bscool it has observed to get your CPU past the Ring/Cache 36X/47X lock (E-cores dependent). It might possibly help with the VID regulation on some boards unless the issue is the BIOS itself somehow breaking VRM behavior. Safedisk seems to think it's related to the microcode, so we just edit it I guess? Only concern I have is that 0061 and 1505 did not like ucode 15 very much at all and your RAM stability would kinda break.


----------



## FreeSpeechIsKnowledge

I'll stick with my 1701 BIOS.


----------



## Nizzen

Alberto_It said:


> And @safedisk is sleeping


He is overclocking AMD 7 serie cpu's atm


----------



## Alberto_It

Nizzen said:


> He is overclocking AMD 7 serie cpu's atm


If you know someone who works at Asus please tell him that the situation for many users is delicate with this **** of 1720 and Windows Update.


----------



## Martin778

Sorry for everyone having issues but it's always been like this with Asus, they already stepped on the newer stone which is Z790 and new Ryzen. When it launches, Z690 users will be lucky if their bugs ever get fixed, maybe if a big CVE gets discovered and they must release a fix but otherwise the chances are slim they will bother with new BIOSes for previous gen.
My advice would be - if you're having sever problems with your Asus Z690 board, sell it ASAP before the launch of new models and find a stopgap solution for the time being.


----------



## IronAge

Trying to sell one, but nobody wants it, until the pricing for the Z790 Apex has been revealed. 

Then it will probably sell for 500$. (thats what i am asking for a new/unused Z690 Apex)


----------



## affxct

Martin778 said:


> Sorry for everyone having issues but it's always been like this with Asus, they already stepped on the newer stone which is Z790 and new Ryzen. When it launches, Z690 users will be lucky if their bugs ever get fixed, maybe if a big CVE gets discovered and they must release a fix but otherwise the chances are slim they will bother with new BIOSes for previous gen.
> My advice would be - if you're having sever problems with your Asus Z690 board, sell it ASAP before the launch of new models and find a stopgap solution for the time being.


I was happy with my Z690-F until they forced me to update to 1720.


----------



## Martin778

IronAge said:


> Trying to sell one, but nobody wants it, until the pricing for the Z790 Apex has been revealed.
> 
> Then it will probably sell for 500$. (thats what i am asking for a new/unused Z690 Apex)


I tried a used one for <400, no takers...
I'm taking a break from PC's for some time as the EVGA and 12900K kinda died a tragic death today, I got a bit angry that they didn't fit in the O11D XL (the rubber cable grommets in the LL also collide with the EVGA's backplate) and at some point I tore the whole thing to pieces, pretty much bending the board in half, then it got frisbee'd outside. Sad and stupid I know


----------



## IronAge

@Martin778 

pictures for your 15 minutes of fame please.


----------



## Martin778

What is there too see a half bent board with a few ripped out connectors, stupid action.


----------



## stahlhart

Martin778 said:


> What is there too see a half bent board with a few ripped out connectors, stupid action.


I've had moments of frustration like that also -- well, not _quite_ like that, but it felt the same at least.

Hope you're able to work through it and bounce back; maybe the Z790s will inspire you again. Good luck.


----------



## TSportM

Lol


----------



## Martin778

Well at least now I know the B660I Strix w. BIOS 1620 (latest) and a 12700K runs the 6200 C36's at XMP without problems, no issues in MTP but since it's a tiny ITX in a Node304, it runs too toasty for hours of stress testing with a noctua U12 aircooler and a single 120mm pull. Mems run at about ~60*C in Memtest.
Interesting thing is that the B660I Strix sets higher IMC VDD than Apex @ XMP...I'm almost tempted to say I should have bought the B660I strix for my gaming rig and call it a day 


Spoiler














Not sure if I will be going for Raptor Lake, AM5 looks tempting but I expect it to have tons of issues at launch. I went through X370/470 launch with 1800X and then 2700X which wasn't fun, especially RAM support. The rumors of 13900K having a 350W TDP mode are scary if true, same goes for 4090 TDP rumors.

Does anyone know which ROG LGA1700 boards show the CPU SP value?


----------



## Baasha

Err.. it auto updated me to the 1720 BIOS today and my PC won’t boot!

Also, I have the CPU Core Voltage Override setting (from my previous OC settings) set in the Manual Mode.

Do I need to set the Global Core SVID and Cache SVID to be the same voltage?

I am not able to POST at all!

I'm running 5.2Ghz P-Core, 4.0Ghz E-Core, and 4.2Ghz Ring with RAM at 6000mhz CL36 (G-Skill Trident Z RGB).

Can someone please help?


----------



## sblantipodi

Nizzen said:


> He is overclocking AMD 7 serie cpu's atm


I sincerely Hope that he and his team Is on holiday right now, it's Better for everyone xD

Current team is a proved failure, Asus motherboards does not excels since years now but this is the worst launch in the Asus history.

The fact that safedisk comes here saying that it's an Intel fault and that we need to wait for an Intel fix it's the confirmation that this team must be changed.

They have released a BIOS without a single test, they gived it to Microsoft for wide spreading it through windows update and they come here and say: "sorry guys it's an Intel fault".

I really hope for AMD 7 customers that this guys are doing something else.


----------



## Martin778

Current ASUS team if the Ferrari F1 team of enthousiast computing. Both have a good product but can't make it work  The Z690 Hero issue was also handled the same way: "We are looking, standby".


----------



## Tergon123

Baasha said:


> Err.. it auto updated me to the 1720 BIOS today and my PC won’t boot!
> 
> Also, I have the CPU Core Voltage Override setting (from my previous OC settings) set in the Manual Mode.
> 
> Do I need to set the Global Core SVID and Cache SVID to be the same voltage?
> 
> I am not able to POST at all!
> 
> I'm running 5.2Ghz P-Core, 4.0Ghz E-Core, and 4.2Ghz Ring with RAM at 6000mhz CL36 (G-Skill Trident Z RGB).
> 
> Can someone please help?


I hope your profiles were saved to a usb stick. Just clear Cmos on the IO panel and it will reboot. I am on a ddr4 board strix d4, it runs my 12900KS quite well at 5.3 P 4.2 E 1.31volts, Ryujin II 360. I can't speak for your board as you are on ddr5, but yes just set all three of those voltages the same and it booted for me just fine, 1720, I have not had any issues, other than the stuck 3600 ring without the voltages set, I now run it at 4500 without issue.


----------



## Baasha

Tergon123 said:


> I hope your profiles were saved to a usb stick. Just clear Cmos on the IO panel and it will reboot. I am on a ddr4 board strix d4, it runs my 12900KS quite well at 5.3 P 4.2 E 1.31volts, Ryujin II 360. I can't speak for your board as you are on ddr5, but yes just set all three of those voltages the same and it booted for me just fine, 1720, I have not had any issues, other than the stuck 3600 ring without the voltages set, I now run it at 4500 without issue.


I did have a profile saved from April (I'm 99% sure it's the same settings I was using before this latest update). I tried setting those voltages but it still doesn't POST for me. I even tried increasing System Agent voltage and that didn't do it either.

The real funny thing is that I flashed 1403 back and it doesn't POST!

I'm really concerned now. Not sure what to do to troubleshoot. Any ideas?


----------



## Martin778

What is the Qcode when it refuses to POST? Are you running XMP? Try giving it a full CMOS clear first as well.


----------



## nawk

TSportM said:


> i dont like small cases, the 1000d is the smallest case i can bare with i used to use caselabs, thats my personal choice.


Why did you move away from your Caselabs? Which model did you have?


----------



## bscool

Baasha said:


> I did have a profile saved from April (I'm 99% sure it's the same settings I was using before this latest update). I tried setting those voltages but it still doesn't POST for me. I even tried increasing System Agent voltage and that didn't do it either.
> 
> The real funny thing is that I flashed 1403 back and it doesn't POST!
> 
> I'm really concerned now. Not sure what to do to troubleshoot. Any ideas?


I would try loading defaults and see if it posts. If it doesnt then I would start with trying each stick of ram individually and in each slot to verify if a slot or stick died.

It hasnt been too uncommon on ddr5 people have sticks dying. Gskill which I see you have.


----------



## Tergon123

Baasha said:


> I did have a profile saved from April (I'm 99% sure it's the same settings I was using before this latest update). I tried setting those voltages but it still doesn't POST for me. I even tried increasing System Agent voltage and that didn't do it either.
> 
> The real funny thing is that I flashed 1403 back and it doesn't POST!
> 
> I'm really concerned now. Not sure what to do to troubleshoot. Any ideas?


Yeah defiantly do a full cmos clear and load defaults see if it posts. then yeah try each stick at a time like BScool suggested, I am on ddr4 don't have that issue. I sure hope it works for you


----------



## Martin778

In fact, I had a pair of 6000 CL36 die myself, they're Samsung based...at some point they just started throwing errors at 4800MHz JEDEC and got RMA'ed.


----------



## Tergon123

Martin778 said:


> In fact, I had a pair of 6000 CL36 die myself, they're Samsung based...at some point they just started throwing errors at 4800MHz JEDEC and got RMA'ed.


Honestly so glad I stayed with my Trident Gskill b-die 16,16,16, 36 stock for this platform and let ddr5 age a little. the latency alone sold me on staying with it. I have it tuned on 12900 KS 5.3 Ghz all core 1.31 volts, rock solid. At 15,15,15,28 1.46 volts, 4000Mhz, fast enough. AIDA is around 44.5ns, same ram 10900K was at 4400Mhz at 34.5ns super fast, although different platform, 34.5ns is like days upon days of hand tuning in the bios screen and reboot.


----------



## affxct

Ok so I've done some testing. @bscool the modded ucode 15 BIOS definitely works well on my particular -F, with the usual method of creating the BIOS. For everyone else: the modded 1720 works much much much better than the OG version IMO. Of course there could always be variance in testing and it can be argued that my ambients have been slightly lower, but the behaviour seems vastly different. 























Above is a slightly tighter version of my 6600 OC. TX VDDQ, IMC VDD, and VCCSA are identical to what I had them at initially with my 1601 daily config. I first tested with all cores enabled at stock with a 75mV undervolt and went straight into TM5 after I confirmed data channel stability with LinX. I rebooted and ended up back at my old 5.1/4.0/4.2 OC but at 1.38V because I didn't want to risk error'ing at 1.375V. I went to lie down for a few hours because I was tired AF. Upon cold boot, I messed with my settings a bit and managed to get 5.1P/4.8R/AVX2 (512 disabled) stable at 1.37V and also confirmed cold boot stability of 6600Mbps. 512 runs LinX like 10-12c colder (lol Intel) so it needed to be disabled for the test period. But yeah, that's that. Going to re-enable 512 and go watch UFC.


----------



## stahlhart

bscool said:


> I would try loading defaults and see if it posts. If it doesnt then I would start with trying each stick of ram individually and in each slot to verify if a slot or stick died.
> 
> It hasnt been too uncommon on ddr5 people have sticks dying. Gskill which I see you have.


Flashback to 1304 is working fine here (Strix E). A while back I tried and rejected both 1403 and 1505, and wasn't happy with either, but can't recall now exactly what the issues were -- I think they were both incompatible with the overclock I had labored for months to dial in with 1304.

I would try CMOS clear, BIOS flashback and set defaults, as you said.


----------



## Baasha

Martin778 said:


> What is the Qcode when it refuses to POST? Are you running XMP? Try giving it a full CMOS clear first as well.


Qcode shown is 65 (or is it b5?).

Not running XMP - manually tuned to 6000Mhz 36-36-36-76 Mode 1 @ 1.40V.

That's the funny thing; this G-Skill Trident Z RGB kit I have is supposed to be 6000Mhz CL40 at 1.30V but I need 1.40V for it to work at CL36 without any OC on the actual speed (!).

I had another RAM kit which wasn't on the QVL for the MoBo and that didn't even work out of the gate and so I got this - it seemed to work fine until today.












bscool said:


> I would try loading defaults and see if it posts. If it doesnt then I would start with trying each stick of ram individually and in each slot to verify if a slot or stick died.
> 
> It hasnt been too uncommon on ddr5 people have sticks dying. Gskill which I see you have.


Loaded defaults and it boots fine on 1720 - was able to login to Windows without issue.



Tergon123 said:


> Yeah defiantly do a full cmos clear and load defaults see if it posts. then yeah try each stick at a time like BScool suggested, I am on ddr4 don't have that issue. I sure hope it works for you


Did CMOS clear and then loaded defaults and it booted fine. Definitely seems to be something to do with the RAM settings/OC I had before.


----------



## Alberto_It

Needless to say, it starts automatically for me and it is optional for me! The bios 1720 has and creates big problems, and therefore Asus and Microsoft have to remove it!
Asus from the tech support site and Microsoft from its servers.

*Disclaimer for this forum gurus *: Not everyone have got the same experience, each PC it is different even if have with the same type of hardware.

If someone has changed bios 1720 codes or played to trial and error, then issue is not solved.

Thanks for your attention


----------



## Netarangi

Yeah mine's sitting in optional updates too.

This some bullshit


----------



## Alberto_It

Netarangi said:


> Yeah mine's sitting in optional updates too.
> 
> This some bullshit


A dear friend of mine last night had the update of 1720 automatically after flashing with 1601 release losing all bios settings


----------



## sblantipodi

This problem must be escalated for public evaluation.
Is there someone here who have contacts with gamers nexus or jayz2cents ?

I think that we need them.


----------



## IronAge

You should have ripped the case instead, not the expensive parts, what a pitty.



Martin778 said:


> Does anyone know which ROG LGA1700 boards show the CPU SP value?


All Z690 ROG/Strix Boards should show it, B660 Boards do not show it.


----------



## TSportM

nawk said:


> Why did you move away from your Caselabs? Which model did you have?


i did not move way i still have them i have the TH10A and STH10 and a M8, just dont have lets say gaming hardware on it, my gaming pcs are the ones you see on my signature and are both corsair cases 1000D and 900D


cheers


----------



## akgis

It shows now on optional udates, hopefully stays right that optional


----------



## Baasha

Guys - so what do I do re the Qcode 65 (or b5)? What is that error and how do I fix this issue? It boots fine with defaults but doesn't POST the moment I load the OC settings.


----------



## stahlhart

Baasha said:


> Guys - so what do I do re the Qcode 65 (or b5)? What is that error and how do I fix this issue? It boots fine with defaults but doesn't POST the moment I load the OC settings.


I think it's 65 -- the "B" for the Q code display on mine only shows the vertical segment.

I did find this.


----------



## TSportM

Baasha said:


> Guys - so what do I do re the Qcode 65 (or b5)? What is that error and how do I fix this issue? It boots fine with defaults but doesn't POST the moment I load the OC settings.



Dont LOAD any profile just put setting by setting, depending on bios its messes settings and stablity, my advice is use a usb flasback and do setting by setting, if you have dificulties just take screen shots of every tab

cheers


----------



## Baasha

stahlhart said:


> I think it's 65 -- the "B" for the Q code display on mine only shows the vertical segment.
> 
> I did find this.


So DXE refers to device comms - should I unplug all USB devices and see if it posts?

And reseat RAM sticks?

@TSportM will enter the settings manually as well and see if that works.

Also, should MCH Check be 'disabled'?


----------



## stahlhart

Baasha said:


> So DXE refers to device comms - should I unplug all USB devices and see if it posts?
> 
> And reseat RAM sticks?
> 
> @TSportM will enter the settings manually as well and see if that works.
> 
> Also, should MCH Check be 'disabled'?


Won't hurt to try -- you might also be able to try booting with just one stick of RAM, if you haven't yet tried that.


----------



## Nizzen

TSportM said:


> Dont LOAD any profile just put setting by setting, depending on bios its messes settings and stablity, my advice is use a usb flasback and do setting by setting, if you have dificulties just take screen shots of every tab
> 
> cheers


Loading profile from a older bios is messing things up for me. Manual putting the same values work great. Using 1701 bios on apex.


----------



## Baasha

stahlhart said:


> Won't hurt to try -- you might also be able to try booting with just one stick of RAM, if you haven't yet tried that.


Okay so a few updates.

Loaded defaults, then tried just XMP1 setting with the CPU untouched - loaded fine and was able to boot.

Set the OC settings manually - made sure to turn the CPU SVID Support setting to 'Auto' instead of 'Disabled' and it booted!

So now I can boot fine but there are two issues:

1.) Loading time seems to be a LOT slower now - from the time I power on to Windows login screen is perceptibly slow. I tried with both MCH Check setting on 'Auto' and 'Disabled' - both are relatively the same vis-a-vis boot times.

2.) Cinebench R23 now freezes midway - these are the same settings I had before that were rock solid. Of course, now I'm using XMP1 which uses only 1.30V instead of 1.40V for VDD/VDDQ. System Agent is 1.20V (same as before). CPU V-Core setting in BIOS is 'Manual' at 1.350V (same as before).

Is there any setting I need to tweak to get it to be 100% stable again?

I hate these BIOS updates with a passion. That's why I was still on 1403 without issue for months and this stupid auto update forced me into 1720! 

Would appreciate any help getting my OC back to 'normal.' Thanks in advance.

EDIT: Got it R23 stable but had to bump up V-Core to 1.365V which is quite high. Three cores hit 100C during R23 which is redonkulous.

Anyway, would appreciate any pointers on how to cut down load-times. OS is on 980 Pro 1TB so ideally should load fast.


----------



## db000

Baasha said:


> Okay so a few updates.
> 
> Loaded defaults, then tried just XMP1 setting with the CPU untouched - loaded fine and was able to boot.
> 
> Set the OC settings manually - made sure to turn the CPU SVID Support setting to 'Auto' instead of 'Disabled' and it booted!
> 
> So now I can boot fine but there are two issues:
> 
> 1.) Loading time seems to be a LOT slower now - from the time I power on to Windows login screen is perceptibly slow. I tried with both MCH Check setting on 'Auto' and 'Disabled' - both are relatively the same vis-a-vis boot times.
> 
> 2.) Cinebench R23 now freezes midway - these are the same settings I had before that were rock solid. Of course, now I'm using XMP1 which uses only 1.30V instead of 1.40V for VDD/VDDQ. System Agent is 1.20V (same as before). CPU V-Core setting in BIOS is 'Manual' at 1.350V (same as before).
> 
> Is there any setting I need to tweak to get it to be 100% stable again?
> 
> I hate these BIOS updates with a passion. That's why I was still on 1403 without issue for months and this stupid auto update forced me into 1720!
> 
> Would appreciate any help getting my OC back to 'normal.' Thanks in advance.


If you want 1403 back, I have the file. If that help you in any way.


----------



## stahlhart

Baasha said:


> Okay so a few updates.
> 
> Loaded defaults, then tried just XMP1 setting with the CPU untouched - loaded fine and was able to boot.
> 
> Set the OC settings manually - made sure to turn the CPU SVID Support setting to 'Auto' instead of 'Disabled' and it booted!
> 
> So now I can boot fine but there are two issues:
> 
> 1.) Loading time seems to be a LOT slower now - from the time I power on to Windows login screen is perceptibly slow. I tried with both MCH Check setting on 'Auto' and 'Disabled' - both are relatively the same vis-a-vis boot times.
> 
> 2.) Cinebench R23 now freezes midway - these are the same settings I had before that were rock solid. Of course, now I'm using XMP1 which uses only 1.30V instead of 1.40V for VDD/VDDQ. System Agent is 1.20V (same as before). CPU V-Core setting in BIOS is 'Manual' at 1.350V (same as before).
> 
> Is there any setting I need to tweak to get it to be 100% stable again?
> 
> I hate these BIOS updates with a passion. That's why I was still on 1403 without issue for months and this stupid auto update forced me into 1720!
> 
> Would appreciate any help getting my OC back to 'normal.' Thanks in advance.


If you are back on 1403 now, were you able to set something to prevent the automatic 1720 update again?

I am on 1304 -- I don't think that we have the same boards, but I am not getting any BIOS updates pushed on me. Maybe try flashback the version previous to 1403 for yours with the OC settings you had, after clearing CMOS first? I am able to flashback and restore my previous overclock -- I had to after I rolled back from 1720 here -- and everything is as solid and at the same performance level as it was prior to installing 1720.


----------



## bscool

@Baasha I would try 1720 with u code 15. I can make it for you if you want or do it yourself like this (12900k) Patching older ucode to restore AVX512

It is easy to do.


----------



## Martin778

Have to say I'm pleasantly surprised with the ROG B660I Strix...running on IGPU but still. No issues with memory at 6200MHz either.
I know it was throttling here but just barely, consider it's a closed Node304 ITX case with a 12700K, Noctua U12A chromax, 1x Noctua 12x25 push and a 120mm GT @ full speed as exhaust and stock intakes w. 25*C ambient this isn't bad considering it's the absolute worst case scenario...it does need way more on the intake side than the stock 2x 60mm's though.


Spoiler


----------



## affxct

Baasha said:


> Okay so a few updates.
> 
> Loaded defaults, then tried just XMP1 setting with the CPU untouched - loaded fine and was able to boot.
> 
> Set the OC settings manually - made sure to turn the CPU SVID Support setting to 'Auto' instead of 'Disabled' and it booted!
> 
> So now I can boot fine but there are two issues:
> 
> 1.) Loading time seems to be a LOT slower now - from the time I power on to Windows login screen is perceptibly slow. I tried with both MCH Check setting on 'Auto' and 'Disabled' - both are relatively the same vis-a-vis boot times.
> 
> 2.) Cinebench R23 now freezes midway - these are the same settings I had before that were rock solid. Of course, now I'm using XMP1 which uses only 1.30V instead of 1.40V for VDD/VDDQ. System Agent is 1.20V (same as before). CPU V-Core setting in BIOS is 'Manual' at 1.350V (same as before).
> 
> Is there any setting I need to tweak to get it to be 100% stable again?
> 
> I hate these BIOS updates with a passion. That's why I was still on 1403 without issue for months and this stupid auto update forced me into 1720!
> 
> Would appreciate any help getting my OC back to 'normal.' Thanks in advance.
> 
> EDIT: Got it R23 stable but had to bump up V-Core to 1.365V which is quite high. Three cores hit 100C during R23 which is redonkulous.
> 
> Anyway, would appreciate any pointers on how to cut down load-times. OS is on 980 Pro 1TB so ideally should load fast.


Try subbing in ucode 15. I'd be willing to make you one if you need.


----------



## stahlhart

Does the modified 1720 BIOS stop M$ from pushing any further automatic updates?


----------



## cd96bravo

Is bios 1720 safe for my 12900KS ?

All i want to accomplish is XMP 1 , and "Ai" optimized setting for performance and efficient cores. Nothing else.

With 1720, the desktop idle CPU voltage is 1.37v- 1.44v, but load is 1.32v.

Idle voltage seems a little high and I haven't turned on my PC all weekend .
Honestly don't remember what idle voltage was prior to 1720.

Z690 Hero
64Gb 32x2 5600 Gskill CL30

Thanks


----------



## affxct

stahlhart said:


> Does the modified 1720 BIOS stop M$ from pushing any further automatic updates?


Yeah, the ucode has no affect on the recognition of the BIOS. It still thinks you're on 1720.


----------



## Baasha

db000 said:


> If you want 1403 back, I have the file. If that help you in any way.


Thanks but I'm on 1720 - since it updated I enabled XMP1 and put CPU SVID Support on 'Auto' (was on 'Disabled before) and it booted fine.



stahlhart said:


> If you are back on 1403 now, were you able to set something to prevent the automatic 1720 update again?
> 
> I am on 1304 -- I don't think that we have the same boards, but I am not getting any BIOS updates pushed on me. Maybe try flashback the version previous to 1403 for yours with the OC settings you had, after clearing CMOS first? I am able to flashback and restore my previous overclock -- I had to after I rolled back from 1720 here -- and everything is as solid and at the same performance level as it was prior to installing 1720.


No, I'm on 1720. Yesterday it was all messed up where it wouldn't even boot for me in 1403 so I figured it was either going to work on 1720 or I had to get new RAM. Thankfully it worked fine.



bscool said:


> @Baasha I would try 1720 with u code 15. I can make it for you if you want or do it yourself like this (12900k) Patching older ucode to restore AVX512
> 
> It is easy to do.





affxct said:


> Try subbing in ucode 15. I'd be willing to make you one if you need.


Thanks guys - yes, please send me the modified BIOS and I can try it. What does the u-code 15 do btw? Right now my system seems okay on 1720 sans the higher v-core needed for the same OC.


----------



## affxct

Baasha said:


> Thanks but I'm on 1720 - since it updated I enabled XMP1 and put CPU SVID Support on 'Auto' (was on 'Disabled before) and it booted fine.
> 
> 
> 
> No, I'm on 1720. Yesterday it was all messed up where it wouldn't even boot for me in 1403 so I figured it was either going to work on 1720 or I had to get new RAM. Thankfully it worked fine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks guys - yes, please send me the modified BIOS and I can try it. What does the u-code 15 do btw? Right now my system seems okay on 1720 sans the higher v-core needed for the same OC.


Ucode 15 subs in and gives you back AVX-512, as well as it fixes all the Raptor Lake Microcode 23 bugginess. Just need to check though, you don't own a KS right? Also which board do you own?


----------



## akgis

Admin on the ROG forum is said that the update should always been optional which I found BS from you guys stories, even thou for me was optional but only shown a couple days ago.

He is asking for proff so please post there cause I think they dont even know what they are talking about.















BIOS v1720 Compulsory Update Mega Thread - Page 8


Hi all, ASUS is aware of the recent 1720 BIOS that was pushed by Windows Update as well as the complaints of voltage regulation. ASUS provided this update as optional but if you had a different experience please post here in as much detail as possible: -Whether you clicked check for...



rog.asus.com


----------



## bscool

I was going to intsall Win 11 to check out this firmware/bios update via Win11. I reset bios to default and rebooted into Win10 to prepare to do clean Windows install and for the heck of it checked Windows update and it shows 1720 as an optional update for me on Win10.

Maybe I misunderstood I thought this was only offered if on Win11.


----------



## bscool

On another system I had PTT and Trusted Computing Disabled on Strix d4 and it still shows up as Optional update.


----------



## sniperpowa

Rma my third apex asus finally decided to just send me a formula. Pretty upset about the formula since well I already had that board. They could of communicated with me atleast.


----------



## 7empe

Windows 11 since today. Earlier I had no 1720 offer neither as optional, nor as regular update. It appeared today. Did they fix it and now asks ppl for a "proof"?


----------



## Akadaka

I paused my Windows Updates just in case, I'm on BIOS 1304, it shouldn't push to the latest yeah?


----------



## 7empe

Akadaka said:


> I paused my Windows Updates just in case, I'm on BIOS 1304, it shouldn't push to the latest yeah?


yeah


----------



## sulalin

ROG Z690 APEX 1701 BIOS 8P+8E/24HT DDR5 單通道8400/8533/8600MHz


----------



## edkieferlp

bscool said:


> On another system I had PTT and Trusted Computing Disabled on Strix d4 and it still shows up as Optional update.


I am still on Win10 too but SSD is MBR format so no TPSM or secure boot enabled in bios.
I just rechecked WU and no driver or optional shows. I did set in GPE to stop driver updates through WU (when this whole 1720 issue came out) which did work on drivers as when I set that I did have two driver updates (bluetooth, net), those are gone now.


----------



## acoustic

I'm on Win11. TPM, all that stuff enabled. Turned PC on yesterday for first time since this fiasco started; update shows as Optional.

It's possible they've pushed an update to MS to not have it as a required update. I will say that I've seen this before w/ ASUS, albeit not on a desktop; I have an older ASUS laptop that I had flashed a custom/hacked BIOS for some extra performance years ago. I forget exactly when, but a couple years ago, Windows will automatically download+install a "newer" BIOS. I couldn't get it to stop outside of staying offline, but I didn't do much research. It's an old beater laptop I've used for open-source car tuning and playing WoW Classic in the desert lol


----------



## Baasha

affxct said:


> Ucode 15 subs in and gives you back AVX-512, as well as it fixes all the Raptor Lake Microcode 23 bugginess. Just need to check though, you don't own a KS right? Also which board do you own?


I see. I don't have the KS, I have the 12900KF. MoBo is RoG Z690 Extreme.



bscool said:


> I was going to intsall Win 11 to check out this firmware/bios update via Win11. I reset bios to default and rebooted into Win10 to prepare to do clean Windows install and for the heck of it checked Windows update and it shows 1720 as an optional update for me on Win10.
> 
> Maybe I misunderstood I thought this was only offered if on Win11.


It was definitely not optional for me on Win 11 as it showed up under the 'regular' updates for me when I checked for any updates. I first thought it was for my monitor (Asus PG32UQX) and then realized it was the MoBo after I clicked 'Install' like a tard.

Anyway, 1720 seems to work fine for now. Most likely will upgrade to the Z790 platform and will switch to EVGA this time. Trusted Asus for over 10 years but the Z690 experience leaves a sour taste in my mouth. This Z690 Extreme was $1100 iirc which should warrant top notch quality and OC-ability. Understandable at launch but almost a year after release? Inexcusable IMO.


----------



## affxct

Baasha said:


> I see. I don't have the KS, I have the 12900KF. MoBo is RoG Z690 Extreme.
> 
> 
> 
> It was definitely not optional for me on Win 11 as it showed up under the 'regular' updates for me when I checked for any updates. I first thought it was for my monitor (Asus PG32UQX) and then realized it was the MoBo after I clicked 'Install' like a tard.
> 
> Anyway, 1720 seems to work fine for now. Most likely will upgrade to the Z790 platform and will switch to EVGA this time. Trusted Asus for over 10 years but the Z690 experience leaves a sour taste in my mouth. This Z690 Extreme was $1100 iirc which should warrant top notch quality and OC-ability. Understandable at launch but almost a year after release? Inexcusable IMO.


Would you like me to make you one in that case?


----------



## edkieferlp

acoustic said:


> I'm on Win11. TPM, all that stuff enabled. Turned PC on yesterday for first time since this fiasco started; update shows as Optional.
> 
> It's possible they've pushed an update to MS to not have it as a required update. I will say that I've seen this before w/ ASUS, albeit not on a desktop; I have an older ASUS laptop that I had flashed a custom/hacked BIOS for some extra performance years ago. I forget exactly when, but a couple years ago, Windows will automatically download+install a "newer" BIOS. I couldn't get it to stop outside of staying offline, but I didn't do much research. It's an old beater laptop I've used for open-source car tuning and playing WoW Classic in the desert lol


IMO, if your firmware was given with normal WU's, then it's on MS. I doubt ASUS or any other company has any control over that. It should show up as optional updates, same as drivers for devices.


----------



## Baasha

affxct said:


> Would you like me to make you one in that case?


Sure, that would be great. Thanks.


----------



## affxct

Baasha said:


> Sure, that would be great. Thanks.











Microsoft OneDrive - Access files anywhere. Create docs with free Office Online.


Store photos and docs online. Access them from any PC, Mac or phone. Create and work together on Word, Excel or PowerPoint documents.



1drv.ms


----------



## trihy

Something important must have this bios and the new microcodes.

Today Asus pushed through Windows update the equivalent bios for all non z boards.


----------



## aznsniper911

This is super odd. My Z690 Extreme worked fine with 4 x 16GB @ 6000, then had a hard crash when messing with my CPU oc. But now I can't even get the board to boot with 4 sticks even at 4000. Anyone have any ideas? CMOS clear hasn't' helped at all.


----------



## Netarangi

aznsniper911 said:


> This is super odd. My Z690 Extreme worked fine with 4 x 16GB @ 6000, then had a hard crash when messing with my CPU oc. But now I can't even get the board to boot with 4 sticks even at 4000. Anyone have any ideas? CMOS clear hasn't' helped at all.


Check if your bios updated itself


----------



## Baasha

affxct said:


> Microsoft OneDrive - Access files anywhere. Create docs with free Office Online.
> 
> 
> Store photos and docs online. Access them from any PC, Mac or phone. Create and work together on Word, Excel or PowerPoint documents.
> 
> 
> 
> 1drv.ms


Awesome - thanks.

So do I just put this on a USB stick and use EZ Flash or do I have to do something else since it's a modded BIOS?


----------



## aznsniper911

Netarangi said:


> Check if your bios updated itself


Thats what I thought also but no dice, it was still the same 1701. I reverted to a couple of older bios with the same issue. Hopefully it's not the IMC


----------



## affxct

Baasha said:


> Awesome - thanks.
> 
> So do I just put this on a USB stick and use EZ Flash or do I have to do something else since it's a modded BIOS?


Either should be fine tbh. You can use Q-Flash as well (might be better to use but shouldn't matter).


----------



## affxct

aznsniper911 said:


> This is super odd. My Z690 Extreme worked fine with 4 x 16GB @ 6000, then had a hard crash when messing with my CPU oc. But now I can't even get the board to boot with 4 sticks even at 4000. Anyone have any ideas? CMOS clear hasn't' helped at all.


When you say "messing with my CPU," what did you adjust? It could also be that there are settings you used before hand that you perhaps forgot to use. Maybe MRC Fast Boot is Enabled or Full Check is Enabled? I'm thinking this is probably something relativity simple.


----------



## affxct

trihy said:


> Something important must have this bios and the new microcodes.
> 
> Today Asus pushed through Windows update the equivalent bios for all non z boards.


Doubtful tbh. When I hear about a massive vulnerability that somehow affects every gamer as well, combined with MSI and ASRock rushing out BIOSs, I'll believe it.


----------



## trihy

Thats weird too. Other companies still didnt release bios with this microcodes? Why asus rushed the release?

They are always late on bios release and now they are first. Even for non z boards, that always takes more time.

They wont tell if they found a crucial bug, changelog is always the same.


----------



## killer01ws6

Simkin said:


> But how to prevent windows installing it? it just keep installing it on every reboot if i downgrade.


This might have been answered already, I am just catching up on this thread again.. but on windows 11 in this window top option make sure it is off, then you can see towards the bottom where it shows optional updates 5.. yup, it would have put me on 1720 also.


----------



## killer01ws6

Gking62 said:


> I'm curious, mind you this may or may not be the case but with those of you getting these forced BIOS updates via Windows update, are you logged into your MS account all the time, i.e. non local account? I'm on a local account on Win 11 Pro and still on v 1601 and honestly I never get these forced updates and Windows generally won't update device specific drivers unless you specifically tell it to, i.e. check boxes on each driver under Windows Update/Advanced Options/Additional Options/Optional Updates/Driver Updates...


I wondered this also, seeing I did my win 11 install as a local also.. but I also made sure I had the Receive updates for other non Microsoft set to off


----------



## killer01ws6

IronAge said:


> Trying to sell one, but nobody wants it, until the pricing for the Z790 Apex has been revealed.
> 
> Then it will probably sell for 500$. (thats what i am asking for a new/unused Z690 Apex)


Ha, I like your Jayz avatar


----------



## themad

killer01ws6 said:


> This might have been answered already, I am just catching up on this thread again.. but on windows 11 in this window top option make sure it is off, then you can see towards the bottom where it shows optional updates 5.. yup, it would have put me on 1720 also.
> View attachment 2569911


I believe this is related only to Microsoft products such as MS Office.
I have the "Receive udpates for other Microsoft products" set to ON. I receive updates for drivers in general and have received the BIOS 1720. But they stay there on the Optional Updates list, until you explicitly select it and click to download & install.


----------



## J_Lab4645

Does anyone here know where the ambient Motherboard temperature sensor is located on a Z690 Apex? Not the T-sensor, the ambient mainboard one. (As shown in HWinfo64).


----------



## killer01ws6

themad said:


> I believe this is related only to Microsoft products such as MS Office.
> I have the "Receive udpates for other Microsoft products" set to ON. I receive updates for drivers in general and have received the BIOS 1720. But they stay there on the Optional Updates list, until you explicitly select it and click to download & install.
> 
> View attachment 2569912
> 
> 
> View attachment 2569913


That is odd we have it set differently but bassicaly same desired results., but I see several folks here saying they keep getting upgraded automatically even if they down grade.. I am steady at 1505 and while it does show in my optional list, I will not be allowing it to install.


----------



## themad

killer01ws6 said:


> That is odd we have it set differently but bassicaly same desired results., but I see several folks here saying they keep getting upgraded automatically even if they down grade.. I am steady at 1505 and while it does show in my optional list, I will not be allowing it to install.


Very odd indeed.

I have to say I am using 1701 BIOS, XMP1 profile working as a charm on 2x16Gb G.Skill 6400 kit. I did not have any issues since 1304. Temps were reaching 55C-58C running extreme and [email protected] configs at TestMem5 without throwing any errors.
However, I have now installed the Alseye ram cooler with the stock fans and temps don't go over 48C, so great improvement!
Now it is time to tweak bit here and there see how long it takes me to break something...


----------



## killer01ws6

Speaking of odd and a bit scary on the whole windows and system snooping, these are the 5 updates it wants would have auto updated if I allowed it,,
That BenQ monitor... has never been attached to this new rig, it was a gaming monitor 3 build back..I use it in my work from home setup now which is attached to my company work laptop that is always behind a VPN.. My wireless router, is not a Microsoft brand.., the last 3, yeah..I get those, but no I will not allow you to auto install those either.


----------



## edkieferlp

killer01ws6 said:


> Speaking of odd and a bit scary on the whole windows and system snooping, these are the 5 updates it wants would have auto updated if I allowed it,,
> That BenQ monitor... has never been attached to this new rig, it was a gaming monitor 3 build back..I use it in my work from home setup now which is attached to my company work laptop that is always behind a VPN.. My wireless router, is not a Microsoft brand.., the last 3, yeah..I get those, but no I will not allow you to auto install those either.
> View attachment 2569940


Open up GPE, head to Computer configuration >Admin templates >Windows components >Windows Update and enable "do not include drivers with windows update".

You will then not see those under optional updates. and won't be installed.


----------



## akgis

Hey guys just recently I started into Ring OC, after I got DDR5 and CPU stable, I wana keep the e-cores turned on but even on a 40x ratio(wich seems a resonable OC with e-cores) the system isnt y-cruncher 2.5B stable but I never got problems when playing games or even running CBR23, Iam still on 1505 Bios.

iam sure its some voltages that need to be brought up or other settings, any ideas?


----------



## killer01ws6

edkieferlp said:


> Open up GPE, head to Computer configuration >Admin templates >Windows components >Windows Update and enable "do not include drivers with windows update".
> 
> You will then not see those under optional updates. and won't be installed.


Thank you sir


----------



## edkieferlp

akgis said:


> Hey guys just recently I started into Ring OC, after I got DDR5 and CPU stable, I wana keep the e-cores turned on but even on a 40x ratio(wich seems a resonable OC with e-cores) the system isnt y-cruncher 2.5B stable but I never got problems when playing games or even running CBR23, Iam still on 1505 Bios.
> 
> iam sure its some voltages that need to be brought up or other settings, any ideas?


It could be low vcore for the clock increase you set for ring and E cores. they all run off same voltage so when raising those clocks it can very often need a bump, plus Y-cruncher is AVX support so here you need enough voltage compared to say CB2x.


----------



## Baasha

Guys,

Now that I'm on the 1720 BIOS, I'm getting crashes to desktop on *only* GTA V with the following error:



Code:


Faulting application name: GTA5.exe, version: 1.0.2699.0, time stamp: 0x62d9ac71
Faulting module name: ucrtbase.dll, version: 10.0.22621.436, time stamp: 0xf5fc15a3
Exception code: 0xc0000409
Fault offset: 0x000000000007f61e
Faulting process id: 0x0x628
Faulting application start time: 0x0x1D8B74B5DBD8263
Faulting application path: F:\Games\Steam\steamapps\common\Grand Theft Auto V\GTA5.exe
Faulting module path: C:\WINDOWS\System32\ucrtbase.dll
Report Id: fb602bf4-7d7e-41aa-8fcd-892f7bd69db6
Faulting package full name:
Faulting package-relative application ID:

It happens only when trying to play GTA V. All other games work fine.

I tried running SFC /SCANNOW and there are no integrity violations.

I even 'repaired' the Visual C++ Redistributables hoping it would be fixed to no avail.

Can someone please help?


----------



## FreeSpeechIsKnowledge

Baasha said:


> Guys,
> 
> Now that I'm on the 1720 BIOS, I'm getting crashes to desktop on *only* GTA V with the following error:
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> Faulting application name: GTA5.exe, version: 1.0.2699.0, time stamp: 0x62d9ac71
> Faulting module name: ucrtbase.dll, version: 10.0.22621.436, time stamp: 0xf5fc15a3
> Exception code: 0xc0000409
> Fault offset: 0x000000000007f61e
> Faulting process id: 0x0x628
> Faulting application start time: 0x0x1D8B74B5DBD8263
> Faulting application path: F:\Games\Steam\steamapps\common\Grand Theft Auto V\GTA5.exe
> Faulting module path: C:\WINDOWS\System32\ucrtbase.dll
> Report Id: fb602bf4-7d7e-41aa-8fcd-892f7bd69db6
> Faulting package full name:
> Faulting package-relative application ID:
> 
> It happens only when trying to play GTA V. All other games work fine.
> 
> I tried running SFC /SCANNOW and there are no integrity violations.
> 
> I even 'repaired' the Visual C++ Redistributables hoping it would be fixed to no avail.
> 
> Can someone please help?



GTA V has a way of finding unstable settings. I'd say it might not seem like it to you but, you're not stable 100%.


----------



## Baasha

FreeSpeechIsKnowledge said:


> GTA V has a way of finding unstable settings. I'd say it might not seem like it to you but, you're not stable 100%.


I doubt it since I ran Cinebench R23 about 10 times and other benchmarks and it passed without issue. Also, this crash occurs even with no OC on the GPU.


----------



## FreeSpeechIsKnowledge

Baasha said:


> I doubt it since I ran Cinebench R23 about 10 times and other benchmarks and it passed without issue. Also, this crash occurs even with no OC on the GPU.


I can play it fine on my side.


----------



## Alberto_It

Baasha said:


> Guys,
> 
> Now that I'm on the 1720 BIOS, I'm getting crashes to desktop on *only* GTA V with the following error:
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> Faulting application name: GTA5.exe, version: 1.0.2699.0, time stamp: 0x62d9ac71
> Faulting module name: ucrtbase.dll, version: 10.0.22621.436, time stamp: 0xf5fc15a3
> Exception code: 0xc0000409
> Fault offset: 0x000000000007f61e
> Faulting process id: 0x0x628
> Faulting application start time: 0x0x1D8B74B5DBD8263
> Faulting application path: F:\Games\Steam\steamapps\common\Grand Theft Auto V\GTA5.exe
> Faulting module path: C:\WINDOWS\System32\ucrtbase.dll
> Report Id: fb602bf4-7d7e-41aa-8fcd-892f7bd69db6
> Faulting package full name:
> Faulting package-relative application ID:
> 
> It happens only when trying to play GTA V. All other games work fine.
> 
> I tried running SFC /SCANNOW and there are no integrity violations.
> 
> I even 'repaired' the Visual C++ Redistributables hoping it would be fixed to no avail.
> 
> Can someone please help?


Why did you update the Bios to version 1720? I'm curious 
It's at the moment the most unstable of the Bios released so far! 
There are 11 pages of complaint on official Asus's forum and here several users 

In your case it may be a different problem in GTA 5, but I believe that is safe to use a previous version of the Bios, for example 1505 or 1701 beta for system stability


----------



## Simkin

edkieferlp said:


> Open up GPE, head to Computer configuration >Admin templates >Windows components >Windows Update and enable "do not include drivers with windows update".
> 
> You will then not see those under optional updates. and won't be installed.


Pretty sure i tried this last week, 1720 still force install.


----------



## Alberto_It

Simkin said:


> Pretty sure i tried this last week, 1720 still force instal.


Please make a screen shot that I forward it to Asus's support team


----------



## affxct

Alberto_It said:


> Why did you update the Bios to version 1720? I'm curious
> It's at the moment the most unstable of the Bios released so far!
> There are 11 pages of complaint on official Asus's forum and here several users
> 
> In your case it may be a different problem in GTA 5, but I believe that is safe to use a previous version of the Bios, for example 1505 or 1701 beta for system stability


With ucode 15 it behaves quite normally in my testing. Obviously I'm just one sample, but I think Raptor Lake microcode is to blame.


----------



## xarot

Baasha said:


> I doubt it since I ran Cinebench R23 about 10 times and other benchmarks and it passed without issue. Also, this crash occurs even with no OC on the GPU.


Run some memory tests too. Cinebench is hardly a stability test.


----------



## edkieferlp

Simkin said:


> Pretty sure i tried this last week, 1720 still force install.


All I can say is I used this from my 3570k/Z77 days all the way till now and never got drivers updated through WU.
Now if MS mistakenly marks a firmware or driver as normal WU, then yes it wouldn't help but that is wrong on MS side.


----------



## Alberto_It

Hey guys! You must see this conversation on Asus Official support forum!






BIOS v1720 Compulsory Update Mega Thread - Page 12


Hi all, ASUS is aware of the recent 1720 BIOS that was pushed by Windows Update as well as the complaints of voltage regulation. ASUS provided this update as optional but if you had a different experience please post here in as much detail as possible: -Whether you clicked check for...



rog.asus.com





My first comment about 1720 bios









The answer of Asus staff


----------



## Baasha

Alberto_It said:


> Why did you update the Bios to version 1720? I'm curious
> It's at the moment the most unstable of the Bios released so far!
> There are 11 pages of complaint on official Asus's forum and here several users
> 
> In your case it may be a different problem in GTA 5, but I believe that is safe to use a previous version of the Bios, for example 1505 or 1701 beta for system stability


Perhaps you're right - I thought it was stable since everything else seems to work fine - was able to run XMP1 settings whereas in previous BIOS (1403?) I had to use custom settings with VDD/VDDQ at 1.40V (while XMP is 1.30V for my kit).

I will roll back to an older BIOS and try again. Main question I have is which BIOS should I use for best stability? I had 1403 before being forced to update to 1720. Should I go back to 1403 or does 1601 or 1505 work better are stable? Also, where can I get 1701 beta? I don't see it on the Asus website(?).

May be I'll go back to 1403 and try.

The main concern with this error I'm getting in GTA V is whether the OS got corrupted etc. However I'm hoping that's not the case since ONLY this game is giving me this error.

I absolutely DO NOT want to reinstall the OS from scratch - that's like 3 days of wasted time since I have to reinstall ALL the games/programs etc.


----------



## Falkentyne

affxct said:


> With ucode 15 it behaves quite normally in my testing. Obviously I'm just one sample, but I think Raptor Lake microcode is to blame.


1E is the microcode for 12900K in 1701. how can Raptor lake microcode affect ADL? They use the same microcode?


----------



## Gking62

killer01ws6 said:


> That is odd we have it set differently but bassicaly same desired results., but I see several folks here saying they keep getting upgraded automatically even if they down grade.. I am steady at 1505 and while it does show in my optional list, I will not be allowing it to install.


he's absolutely right, I have mine set exactly as he has. I've been at this a long time and again thankfully don't suffer from these forced updates, it's all about the OS install and how one sets up a system and does their DD, that said 1720 showed up today on my Optional updates/Driver updates list.


----------



## Spicedaddy

1720 is now showing as an optional update in Windows 10 as well.

I'll keep 1304 for now


----------



## Alberto_It

Spicedaddy said:


> 1720 is now showing as an optional update in Windows 10 as well.
> 
> I'll keep 1304 for now


It's good also 1505 release


----------



## nyxagamemnon

Can anyone confirm that Undervolting isn't working in 1720? According to someone on the ROG forums there is an "Undervolt protection enabled by default and you can't turn it off."


----------



## 7empe

nyxagamemnon said:


> Can anyone confirm that Undervolting isn't working in 1720? According to someone on the ROG forums there is an "Undervolt protection enabled by default and you can't turn it off."


I think you can still undervolt through the manual VRM voltage settings. This was working if I recall correctly. This is go-for approach only if you have fixed frequency without OCTVB.


----------



## affxct

nyxagamemnon said:


> Can anyone confirm that Undervolting isn't working in 1720? According to someone on the ROG forums there is an "Undervolt protection enabled by default and you can't turn it off."


I'm undervolted currently.


----------



## Manonya

Hello,



Alberto_It said:


> It's good also 1505 release


my experience:

Games crashed with BIOS 1505. Not with 1601.
Since BIOS 1505 CPU Temps are much lower.

ASUS Z690 Hero BIOS 1601
Intel i9 12900k
GSkillF5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK
RTX 3080 FE

now the SM Bus Controller in the Device Manager is under other devices and has a yellow sign and I feel the system doesn‘t run smooth


----------



## 7empe

Manonya said:


> Hello,
> 
> 
> 
> my experience:
> 
> Games crashed with BIOS 1505. Not with 1601.
> Since BIOS 1505 CPU Temps are much lower.
> 
> ASUS Z690 Hero BIOS 1601
> Intel i9 12900k
> GSkillF5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK
> RTX 3080 FE
> 
> now the SM Bus Controller in the Device Manager is under other devices and has a yellow sign and I feel the system doesn‘t run smooth


Install the newest chipset intel firmware. It has a driver for SM bus controller.


----------



## Manonya

7empe said:


> Install the newest chipset intel firmware. It has a driver for SM bus controller.


Thank you! Now the SM bus driver isn’t anymore at other devices 

I installed the version from here: ROG MAXIMUS Z690 HERO - Support

didn‘t find an other Version
and can’t install the Intel GNA driver, what’s this, should this be installed?


----------



## Alberto_It

7empe said:


> Install the newest chipset intel firmware. It has a driver for SM bus controller.


Could you please provide me the link for the new firmware of the Intel chipset? 

I have got a Asus Z690 Maximus Extreme 

Thanks


----------



## Alberto_It

Manonya said:


> Thank you! Now the SM bus driver isn’t anymore at other devices
> 
> I installed the version from here: ROG MAXIMUS Z690 HERO - Support
> 
> didn‘t find an other Version
> and can’t install the Intel GNA driver, what’s this, should this be installed?


Could be a Me Update tool


----------



## 7empe

Alberto_It said:


> Could you please provide me the link for the new firmware of the Intel chipset?
> 
> I have got a Asus Z690 Maximus Extreme
> 
> Thanks





We'll be back.


and





[DRIVERS] Intel Chipset/MEI/SATA (6x/7x/8x/9x)


Intel Chipset/MEI/SATA (6x/7x/8x/9x)



rog.asus.com





Top most link points to the newest revision always.


----------



## 7empe

Alberto_It said:


> Could be a Me Update tool
> 
> View attachment 2570101


ME (Managed Engine) FW does not install these drivers.


----------



## edkieferlp

Manonya said:


> Thank you! Now the SM bus driver isn’t anymore at other devices
> 
> I installed the version from here: ROG MAXIMUS Z690 HERO - Support
> 
> didn‘t find an other Version
> and can’t install the Intel GNA driver, what’s this, should this be installed?











Intel® GNA Scoring Accelerator Driver for Windows® 10 64-bit and Windows 11* for Intel® NUC Products


Installs the Intel® GNA Scoring Accelerator Driver for Windows® 10 64-bit and Windows 11* for Intel® NUC products.




www.intel.com





ASUS has ver 2.1 for TUF Z690 but I don't think I installed it.
Intel lists it for NUC.


----------



## 7empe

edkieferlp said:


> Intel® GNA Scoring Accelerator Driver for Windows® 10 64-bit and Windows 11* for Intel® NUC Products
> 
> 
> Installs the Intel® GNA Scoring Accelerator Driver for Windows® 10 64-bit and Windows 11* for Intel® NUC products.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.intel.com


GNA offloads the CPU in case of some computations needed for e.g. speech recognition. Installing it won't do the harm.


----------



## trihy

Latest chipset driver for z690 is here [DRIVERS] Intel Chipset/MEI/SATA/VMD (1xx/2xx/3xx/4xx/5xx/6xx/7xx)


----------



## Mappi75

Should i set up Z690 DRAM CLK Period fuction?









Z690 DRAM CLK Period fuction | bianbao.dev







bianbao.dev





With 32GB 6.666Mhz ram i set it to "108" ?

Does it help to set "110" for reaching 6800 ?


----------



## Netarangi

Mappi75 said:


> Should i set up Z690 DRAM CLK Period fuction?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z690 DRAM CLK Period fuction | bianbao.dev
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bianbao.dev
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> With 32GB 6.666Mhz ram i set it to "108" ?
> 
> Does it help to set "110" for reaching 6800 ?


Never used this before what does it do?


----------



## edkieferlp

Mappi75 said:


> Should i set up Z690 DRAM CLK Period fuction?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z690 DRAM CLK Period fuction | bianbao.dev
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bianbao.dev
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> With 32GB 6.666Mhz ram i set it to "108" ?
> 
> Does it help to set "110" for reaching 6800 ?


I think your reading that wrong, 6667 show 87 value, 108 is for 8100.
At least that is how I see the chart.


----------



## Martin778

What is going on with ASUS ROG Z690's, they've been going up in price like crazy for the past few weeks? MSI / Aorus pricing seems to be stable, while MSI Unify-X even dropped in price.


----------



## nyxagamemnon

7empe said:


> I think you can still undervolt through the manual VRM voltage settings. This was working if I recall correctly. This is go-for approach only if you have fixed frequency without OCTVB.


Well I use the offset value in the performance and e core sub menu. It doesn't work anymore how laughable. I mean this is pretty ridiculous that none of this was checked before Asus pushed it. I don't have any other issues than this looks like I'm going to go back to 1601.


----------



## Netarangi

nyxagamemnon said:


> Well I use the offset value in the performance and e core sub menu. It doesn't work anymore how laughable. I mean this is pretty ridiculous that none of this was checked before Asus pushed it. I don't have any other issues than this looks like I'm going to go back to 1601.


I don't see any reason for anyone to stay on 1720. What a **** show.


----------



## Falkentyne

Martin778 said:


> What is going on with ASUS ROG Z690's, they've been going up in price like crazy for the past few weeks? MSI / Aorus pricing seems to be stable, while MSI Unify-X even dropped in price.


Links? Where?


----------



## nyxagamemnon

The problem is if I want to drop in raptor lake it's going to need 1720+ and if Asus doesn't fix these issues then having these high end motherboards are totally worthless. Maybe we should contact gamers Nexus and have him investigate the shoddy bioses then perhaps Asus will actually not break features on its own motherboard lineup.


----------



## Falkentyne

nyxagamemnon said:


> The problem is if I want to drop in raptor lake it's going to need 1720+ and if Asus doesn't fix these issues then having these high end motherboards are totally worthless. Maybe we should contact gamers Nexus and have him investigate the shoddy bioses then perhaps Asus will actually not break features on its own motherboard lineup.


1701 and even 1601 have support for Raptor Lake. But performance will not be guaranteed. You can't expect to use ancient bioses and have unreleased chips work, when the OEM's are still working with Intel with engineering samples. Right now all of the companies are having problems with the new microcode, Gigabyte, MSI and Asus have all released statements about it. At least one of them reverted to older ucode, as this is Intel's problem (and I am not sure if RPL uses the same microcode as ADL).


----------



## trihy

Where can we read those statements?


----------



## Ghoosti

Hi there,
Would there be a charitable soul to help me with my configuration.
I have a Z690 Maximus Extreme (2021) and Corsair Doninator Platiniun RAM (CMT32GX5M2X6200C36), Corsair 5000D case with 7 120mm fans and Corsair H150i elite capellix AIO

I try to get 6200 or even 6400 for stable 24/7 but without success, I already have errors in Memtest (bios)
I'm currently on 1601 and can't get better than 5800 
Being a novice, I'm really lost in all the settings
Thanks for your help and advice


----------



## Martin778

Falkentyne said:


> Links? Where?





Spoiler



West EU, Apex already increased by almost €200 since last year.
APEX:









HERO:









MSI UNIFY-X for reference:


----------



## nyxagamemnon

Falkentyne said:


> 1701 and even 1601 have support for Raptor Lake. But performance will not be guaranteed. You can't expect to use ancient bioses and have unreleased chips work, when the OEM's are still working with Intel with engineering samples. Right now all of the companies are having problems with the new microcode, Gigabyte, MSI and Asus have all released statements about it. At least one of them reverted to older ucode, as this is Intel's problem (and I am not sure if RPL uses the same microcode as ADL).


Where are the statements? If they let us know they will fix it no big deal but so far there is zero info regarding the "Undvervolt protection issue"


----------



## Falkentyne

trihy said:


> Where can we read those statements?


They're bios patch notes, not "statements".
MSI already released a new beta which reverted the ucode to fix the problems with adaptive voltage and cache ratios, etc.
Gigabyte acknowledged there is a problem with latest ucode.


----------



## warbucks

nyxagamemnon said:


> The problem is if I want to drop in raptor lake it's going to need 1720+ and if Asus doesn't fix these issues then having these high end motherboards are totally worthless. Maybe we should contact gamers Nexus and have him investigate the shoddy bioses then perhaps Asus will actually not break features on its own motherboard lineup.


You are worrying about nothing. RPL hasn't been officially announced yet and they're still working with board manufacturers to iron out the bugs. Revert back to a working bios, crack a beer and relax. Patience.


----------



## Akadaka

The morning, I turned PC on & NIC wasn't working almost had a heart attack, I fixed it by going into BIOS & disabling LAN turning PC on/off than going into BIOS again enabled it and it start working again has this ever happened to any of you guys?


----------



## tubs2x4

Akadaka said:


> The morning, I turned PC on & NIC wasn't working almost had a heart attack, I fixed it by going into BIOS & disabling LAN turning PC on/off than going into BIOS again enabled it and it start working again has this ever happened to any of you guys?


My nic hasn’t worked properly since new. Bought a 30$ Realtek network card and works good now. Wasn’t going to rma for that. Unfortunate but whatever. This was back in Jan with old bios 1003


----------



## Akadaka

tubs2x4 said:


> My nic hasn’t worked properly since new. Bought a 30$ Realtek network card and works good now. Wasn’t going to rma for that. Unfortunate but whatever. This was back in Jan with old bios 1003


Yeah like this has only happened to me once since I've had it. very weird. just randomly stopped working after turning it on.


----------



## Netarangi

Akadaka said:


> Yeah like this has only happened to me once since I've had it. very weird. just randomly stopped working after turning it on.


Windows drivers could have had a fit when loading? Maybe restarting PC just made windows load the driver properly again. Who knows


----------



## Akadaka

Netarangi said:


> Windows drivers could have had a fit when loading? Maybe restarting PC just made windows load the driver properly again. Who knows


I restarted & didn't fix it, that was the first thing I tried than when I disabled and enabled LAN in Bios it fixed it.


----------



## stn1

Mappi75 said:


> Should i set up Z690 DRAM CLK Period fuction?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z690 DRAM CLK Period fuction | bianbao.dev
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bianbao.dev
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> With 32GB 6.666Mhz ram i set it to "108" ?
> 
> Does it help to set "110" for reaching 6800 ?


Afaik its useless now. We needed it for early bioses to stabilize mem oc because bios calculations were ****. Now its automatical


----------



## nickolp1974

I'm on a Nov 21 Apex and i'm contemplating an RMA, in the past i've only tuned memory to be stable enough to pass benchmarks but as im using it more for other stuff now it needs to be stable 100%. So the best i can achieve is a slack 6400 34-40-40-55-2t, tried everything to get stable more than this. Been using Karhu in admin mode. Should i return board while i still can???


----------



## Martin778

Return or kill it with fire  I wonder if there is another rev of Apex that actually does work as intended?


----------



## nyxagamemnon

If your having memory issues it's the board if you got an late 2021 board = your SOL. The 2022 ones don't seem to have any issues. Nothing you do will amount to anything no settings etc. I've compared two boards one 2021 one 2022 and the 2022 was orders of magnitude better. The 2021 would just give constant memory errors no matter what but the 2022 ran without a hitch.


----------



## Falkentyne

Akadaka said:


> Yeah like this has only happened to me once since I've had it. very weird. just randomly stopped working after turning it on.


This has happened to me since day 1.
The problem happens when from a completely off state to standby power on (Flipping on the PSU from an off to an on state). Sometimes the Intel Nic doesn't get initialized. I'm not sure if it's a random conflict with the Aquantia one or something, but if the cable is plugged in, you will know instantly if it works, if you flip the PSU switch on, but the nic lights don't come on.
If they don't come on, flip the PSU switch to off, wait 5 seconds, flip it back on, and keep trying until you get an activity light. Once you do, then you can power on the system from the case power button (or motherboard start button). No idea about systems with only one nic. I've never seen the Aquantia do this.


----------



## Martin778

nyxagamemnon said:


> If your having memory issues it's the board if you got an late 2021 board = your SOL. The 2022 ones don't seem to have any issues. Nothing you do will amount to anything no settings etc. I've compared two boards one 2021 one 2022 and the 2022 was orders of magnitude better. The 2021 would just give constant memory errors no matter what but the 2022 ran without a hitch.


Any visual differences on both?


----------



## nyxagamemnon

Martin778 said:


> Any visual differences on both?


I mean I didn't put it under a microscope and compare both visually to see if there is any difference they look the same. I just had alot of ram issues and I went through kits/cpu's etc and in the end it was the motherboard. I suspect in the manufacturing of the 2021 boards something is up with the traces in the motherboards layers . I tested everything else until I ruled everything else out and then it was bam the motherboard. To put it into perspective the 2022 board zero tweaks does 1000 mhz higher than the 2021 board. The 2021 board no matter what memory errors that would never end no matter what voltages/settings/etc. The 2022 board? laughable zero tweaks auto does 1000 higher like it's nothing.


----------



## nickolp1974

Martin778 said:


> Return or kill it with fire  I wonder if there is another rev of Apex that actually does work as intended?





nyxagamemnon said:


> If your having memory issues it's the board if you got an late 2021 board = your SOL. The 2022 ones don't seem to have any issues. Nothing you do will amount to anything no settings etc. I've compared two boards one 2021 one 2022 and the 2022 was orders of magnitude better. The 2021 would just give constant memory errors no matter what but the 2022 ran without a hitch.


6400 is last 100% stable freq, anything past and its a no go. I also get random freeze followed by shut down, no bsod which i can only assume is memory related as it rarely happens at my stable frequency but as we all know thats pants for an OC board. I've sent asus a message so i will see what they say.


----------



## sblantipodi

Asus = Jesters


----------



## Baasha

Finally figured out my issue with GTA V - it was a freaking mod (graphics mod) that was causing the weird CTD with ucrtbase.dll error. Anyway, installed a new graphics mod and all is well.

On BIOS 1720 and using XMP1 profile so 6000mhz with 1.30V which is nice. However, I would like to get 6400mhz and if I try it Windows doesn't even boot! I think this RAM kit is bleh so I'll just stick with 6000mhz this time.

Any news on the EVGA Z790 Dark KingPin? Most likely will upgrade to that along with the 13900KS.

Sigh... Z690 is such a disappointment.


----------



## Martin778

Well to be fair Z690 was quite the jump from 590 so many memory stability problems, BIOS issues were to be expected, it's just ASUS that failed big time.
Currently I'm looking forward to Zen 5.


----------



## welldone

I set 40x to ring cache ratio, and option "disabled ring down bin" to enabled, but It keep def 3600mhz :/
Any sugestion?

Best regards


----------



## Nizzen

Martin778 said:


> Well to be fair Z690 was quite the jump from 590 so many memory stability problems, BIOS issues were to be expected, it's just ASUS that failed big time.
> Currently I'm looking forward to Zen 5.


I bet you can't wait for A.G.E.S.A crazyness


----------



## Martin778

Yeah, I know all of it... 3600, 3700X, 3900X, 5950X. Remember WHEA warnings galore for months? My Windows event log was FULL of WHEA warnings.


----------



## sblantipodi

windows still want to update my mobo even if I already have the 1720 bios 










is there something worse than Asus this days?


----------



## acoustic

Isn't that showing under Optional?


----------



## Baasha

Does the Z690 Extreme have the Intel GNA option in the BIOS or is it enabled by default? I believe there's a separate driver for it but not sure if I even have that enabled - any way to check?


----------



## Martin778

sblantipodi said:


> windows still want to update my mobo even if I already have the 1720 bios
> is there something worse than Asus this days?


This is not an ASUS issue but an issue in general with whole idiocracy of pushing BIOS updates through Windows. I've had many other hardware showing this.


----------



## sblantipodi

acoustic said:


> Isn't that showing under Optional?


Yes it's optional in my case


----------



## acoustic

sblantipodi said:


> Yes it's optional in my case


I don't see the big deal if it shows under optional.

In other news, my Z690 TUF D4 may have just died on me. Was playing some Rome2 Total War, got a "STORE_UNEXPECTED_ERROR" blue screen. Super weird since these are the same settings that have been rock solid, haven't touched anything in a while (also been super busy with other things).

Temps are cool in the room, so definitely isn't "summer" issues. I tested these settings for a long time with much higher ambient temps.

Went ahead and rebooted into Windows.. and got a hard lock. Now the board is failing to post if I Save&Exit. Going to try re-flashing the tried&true 0807 that I've been using for a while now.

Sigh.. I haven't had much time to game, finally sit down and get a couple hours, and you get this **** sandwich. Lol

edit: I can't get display in the BIOS anymore. This is new!

After a ton of attempts, was able to get in BIOS to load optimized defaults. Had to reboot 20 something times before I finally got display again, then I was able to flash the BIOS.

No joy. Still not getting display consistently. Swapped to an HDMI cable from my normal DP.. nothing.

Don't know what crack this board smoked today but it's not looking good. I'll troubleshoot further tomorrow/re-seat memory .. if I have time. As of now, she just likes to sit on a green light (as if I'm in BIOS or at a ready screen) and cycle display in standby over and over. I can ctrl+alt+del to reboot, so she's not locked up.. the fact it's doing it after a fresh BIOS flash is not a good sign, though. It'll roll into Windows just fine, no artifacting, and the blue screen was not a GPU related error. I'd say GPU is good to go; unfortunately don't have any others on hand to even test with to verify that 100%.

Gotta love PCs...

Didn't feel too tired so stayed up messing around for a bit. Flashed a few different BIOS, seems something is borked now. Will re-seat CPU and RAM tomorrow. I can get the BIOS to show if I let it boot to Windows once and then don't change settings. If I change any setting, it won't give me any BIOS display on next boot; I'm black screen until Windows is at the log-in screen.


----------



## Mappi75

Bios 0086 enables VMD per default and the device manager shows a unknown (has a yellow icon and exclamation mark) RAID-Controller.
Can i disable this if i dont use any optane drive?

I disabled it and the raid-controller message in the device manager has gone..

(using only 970pros 1TB & 4TB Samsung evo's).

BTW:
in this bios the first time i saw a "*Gaming Legacy Mode*" where you can park the E-Core with the LED Button of the number block on the keyboard...
...never heard of this option..


----------



## Martin778

The Legacy Game Mode has been there for a long time


----------



## sulalin

Martin778，帖子：29024550，成員：270750 said:


> 返回或用火殺死它 我想知道是否有另一個 Apex 版本實際上可以按預期工作？
> [/引用]2022apex Hynix MDIE
> 
> 
> Spoiler


----------



## affxct

sblantipodi said:


> windows still want to update my mobo even if I already have the 1720 bios
> 
> View attachment 2570311
> 
> 
> is there something worse than Asus this days?


Same but under optional.


----------



## affxct

welldone said:


> I set 40x to ring cache ratio, and option "disabled ring down bin" to enabled, but It keep def 3600mhz :/
> Any sugestion?
> 
> Best regards


Microcode


----------



## sulalin

nickolp1974 said:


> 6400 is last 100% stable freq, anything past and its a no go. I also get random freeze followed by shut down, no bsod which i can only assume is memory related as it rarely happens at my stable frequency but as we all know thats pants for an OC board. I've sent asus a message so i will see what they say.


You have to send in your motherboard for repair to get it back to normal


Spoiler


----------



## welldone

affxct said:


> Microcode


Srry, but what you mean? I'm on 1720 bios ver.


----------



## affxct

welldone said:


> Srry, but what you mean? I'm on 1720 bios ver.


Basically you just remove the crap microcode and add in 18 or 15 (KS/K).


----------



## trihy

Anyone tried hotd remake?

I was doing some fine tuning and found this game to be super sensitive to cpu voltage.

Was passing all occt test among others, but found this game requiring like +0.030 to avoid crashing and freezing the system when first level starts.


----------



## akgis

House of the Dead? If so I bet the game is bugged.

For me I stoped caring about hours of stability testing, IF Windows boots no desktop crashes and if I can game a couple of hours of Forza5(for mem) and Deathstranding/Spiderman(for cpu) and none of them crash iam golden. Forza is very sensitive to mem timings and Deathstranding avx2 usage and now spiderman push the CPU


----------



## trihy

Yes that one. I was thinking the same, but sometimes the system freeze when starting the first level. And can avoid that by rising cpu vcore. So I guess it was not that stable. Even when passed every benchmark including avx ones.

Forza 5 run great with the unstable values for hotd. Maybe it's more ram sensitive like you said.


----------



## _Kaurus

Hey guys, I have the Strix z690-a D4 and two kits of ram here. 

32gb 4000cl 18
16gb 3200cl 15

For a while, I was running my 16gb and my system told m,e "feed me more," so I put in my 32 gb. It really appears that Bios only lets me pick 1 XMP profile, so I picked xMP1 4000cl18, though when I get into windows my 4000 kit is running 1333 and my 3200 kit is running 1000. 

checking the manual settings it seems this board doesn't let me pick per pair timings/speeds. It seems strange that something I could do on way cheaper boards in years past cannot be done today.

Would someone qualify for this for me? 

Thank you!


----------



## Manonya

Hello

I want to post in the ROG forum to, but I can‘t (because every time I get this Message and Error and a new password or my account password didn‘t work. (I created a new account with an other E-Mail adress, same problem) What I am doing wrong? German Support told me to contact the US Support, but every time if I contact the support from the Asus website, the German support replies and i can‘t find any contact infos for the US Team.









Since BIOS 1601 or installing the drivers from Asus support website my monitor is noisy (it sounds like a whirring. e.g when I start Microsoft Edge this noise gets louder.) And the graphic card has a coil whine if the fans turn on, also at boot when the fans are spinning for a short time. Could this be a driver Issue? I installed windows 3 times the last months.

does someone have the same experience or can help me?

is there anyone who has also the Hero and Problems with DDR5 and BIOS 1505 (games crashing, XMP not activated) since 1601 games don’t crash (XMP not activated) 

are the 2021 Hero also buggy or only the Apex Boards? With BIOS 1003 XMP Works, Games didn’t crashed. But CPU Temps were higher.

i have this System since february.


----------



## Manonya

tubs2x4 said:


> My nic hasn’t worked properly since new. Bought a 30$ Realtek network card and works good now. Wasn’t going to rma for that. Unfortunate but whatever. This was back in Jan with old bios 1003





Akadaka said:


> I restarted & didn't fix it, that was the first thing I tried than when I disabled and enabled LAN in Bios it fixed it.


Is this problem still present?

When my PC comes out of standby, currently my network card does not work until I restart my PC.
I think I had this with BIOS 1003 and not with BIOS 1505 and now with BIOS 1601 again.

It also could be a driver Problem, which Network driver do you have installed?


----------



## tubs2x4

Manonya said:


> Is this problem still present?
> 
> When my PC comes out of standby, currently my network card does not work until I restart my PC.
> I think I had this with BIOS 1003 and not with BIOS 1505 and now with BIOS 1601 again.
> 
> It also could be a driver Problem, which Network driver do you have installed?


I have on board lan disabled in bios and use pcie slot card. Works 100% all the time.


----------



## akgis

Manonya said:


> Hello
> 
> I want to post in the ROG forum to, but I can‘t (because every time I get this Message and Error and a new password or my account password didn‘t work. (I created a new account with an other E-Mail adress, same problem) What I am doing wrong? German Support told me to contact the US Support, but every time if I contact the support from the Asus website, the German support replies and i can‘t find any contact infos for the US Team.
> 
> View attachment 2570513
> 
> 
> Since BIOS 1601 or installing the drivers from Asus support website my monitor is noisy (it sounds like a whirring. e.g when I start Microsoft Edge this noise gets louder.) And the graphic card has a coil whine if the fans turn on, also at boot when the fans are spinning for a short time. Could this be a driver Issue? I installed windows 3 times the last months.
> 
> does someone have the same experience or can help me?
> 
> is there anyone who has also the Hero and Problems with DDR5 and BIOS 1505 (games crashing, XMP not activated) since 1601 games don’t crash (XMP not activated)
> 
> are the 2021 Hero also buggy or only the Apex Boards? With BIOS 1003 XMP Works, Games didn’t crashed. But CPU Temps were higher.
> 
> i have this System since february.


I have a Hero and suffered from alot of issues, Iam still at 1505 and made my ram stable @6600 with tight timmings but had to lose some of the primaries, I can get 52ns latency so Iam good.
I have a issue with my Ryujin 360 that sometimes when comes from a shutdown the fans on the radiator that are connect to the hub dont spin until a another cold shutdown lol didnt had this issue before with my old mobo, still waiting for asus response Iam sure its a mobo issue.

Dont use XMP2 it has asus stuff that are not stable on the hero, first try to use XMP1 and increse slightly the ram voltage, you should be able to atlest run the DDR5 at XMP settings, Hynix is the best chips for this generation so far, I had to RMA my samsung modules for hynix ones.

About the whiring sound you should get that checked and if its really comming from the monitor, the monitor might be on its last days and Iam pretty sure some capacitor is on its way out, try that monitor on another system or if you have a console see if it does the same cause the mobo should have no interference on the monitor, night be that the system could be doing some interference if you have the case near the monitor.

Its normal on the graphics card for the fans to spin at boot time, pretty sure its the card doing a self check, cause most cards nowadays are silent when on desktop mode


----------



## nickolp1974

so Amazon are refunding me for the Apex,  so do i go for a z690 dark or wait on the z790 boards??


----------



## sblantipodi

nickolp1974 said:


> so Amazon are refunding me for the Apex,  so do i go for a z690 dark or wait on the z790 boards??


get a refund and buy an MSI or an EVGA


----------



## Apecos

Manonya said:


> Is this problem still present?
> 
> When my PC comes out of standby, currently my network card does not work until I restart my PC.
> I think I had this with BIOS 1003 and not with BIOS 1505 and now with BIOS 1601 again.
> 
> It also could be a driver Problem, which Network driver do you have installed?


My hero works very well with 1304 bios, I tried 1505/16XX/17XX version and I get tons of errors (most in TM5).
I use 2x16gb corsair dominator platinum 5600 @6000 vdd 1.28 vddq 1.28 with (samsung) XMP1, ring 43 flawlessly.

No problems with LAN...


----------



## Falkentyne

nickolp1974 said:


> so Amazon are refunding me for the Apex,  so do i go for a z690 dark or wait on the z790 boards??


Z790 is coming out in a month. If you waited this long, what's another month?
Then you can look at the offerings and decide between that and Dark.


----------



## Martin778

Don't buy Z690 or anything AM4 at the moment, way too late.

I sent my Apex back to the shop a week ago, curious what they'll say. I guess it will be returned as 'working as intended'.


----------



## nickolp1974

Falkentyne said:


> Z790 is coming out in a month. If you waited this long, what's another month?
> Then you can look at the offerings and decide between that and Dark.


Kinda what i thought to be fair, hoping Asus have got its act together with the new apex



Martin778 said:


> Don't buy Z690 or anything AM4 at the moment, way too late.
> 
> I sent my Apex back to the shop a week ago, curious what they'll say. I guess it will be returned as 'working as intended'.


Amazon were brilliant, they just said send it back and on receipt your money will be refunded within 5-7 days, no testing or anything!


----------



## TSportM

nickolp1974 said:


> so Amazon are refunding me for the Apex,  so do i go for a z690 dark or wait on the z790 boards??


Wait there is no point of buying a z690 when z790 are arround the corner, also wait for Feedback on all the boards to make your decision 

cheer


----------



## Martin778

I'd say don't gamble on ASUS, they've been a massive hit-or-miss lately and nobody knows if they bothered with Z790 or spent 90% of their R&D on AM5 (looks like it).


----------



## trihy

Z790 is a dead end. AM5 looks more promising. And you will have, at minimum, two gen support.


----------



## Martin778

Obviously, if you can consider AMD - AM5 looks much better in that regard but we'll have to wait for the reviews. So far it looks like they will at best tie Alder Lake in IPC and even though I'd go 7600X/7900X at best, knowing AMD will drop the X3D models in Q1 2023.


----------



## RobertoSampaio

I've been buying AMD for a long time... but after my P8z77-v and 3770K (and a GTX 970), which I bought in 2012, I never went back to AMD or another MB maker.

This PC has been running at 4.4GHz for the last 10 years.. 2 months ago the PSU stopped working, but I just installed a new PSU and everything is working again...

But I'm suspicious to talk about manufacturers since I became an Asus tester.

As soon as the 'z790 and 13900k' NDA is over I'll post my impressions and some OC tips here.


----------



## sblantipodi

7950X seems much more powerful in multi thread, AMD shows a +57% in vray when comparing to 12900K.

I doubt that 13900K can be comparable to such an AMD monster.

Intel is showing ridiculous possibility to push the CPU up to 350W but what's the point?
Just to show some numbers under liquid nitrogen?

No one can cool down 350w without liquid nitrogen.


----------



## Netarangi

I can't find a thread for ASUS TUF z690 boards so I'll ask here, hope that's okay..

What is the best bios for OC for the TUF? I'm wanting to start my OC all over and hope for better gear 1 cr 1 frequencies


----------



## acoustic

Netarangi said:


> I can't find a thread for ASUS TUF z690 boards so I'll ask here, hope that's okay..
> 
> What is the best bios for OC for the TUF? I'm wanting to start my OC all over and hope for better gear 1 cr 1 frequencies


I swore by 0807 before mine died, plus it has AVX512 support if you have a non-KS CPU.


----------



## Martin778

So I wonder if the ROG's only have such problems or is the Prime/TUF also affected?
I pulled the Z690 KP out of the trash, unsoldered the broken connectors. Let me tell you - these PCB's can take insane bends LOL.


----------



## Manonya

akgis said:


> I have a Hero and suffered from alot of issues, Iam still at 1505 and made my ram stable @6600 with tight timmings but had to lose some of the primaries, I can get 52ns latency so Iam good.
> I have a issue with my Ryujin 360 that sometimes when comes from a shutdown the fans on the radiator that are connect to the hub dont spin until a another cold shutdown lol didnt had this issue before with my old mobo, still waiting for asus response Iam sure its a mobo issue.
> 
> Dont use XMP2 it has asus stuff that are not stable on the hero, first try to use XMP1 and increse slightly the ram voltage, you should be able to atlest run the DDR5 at XMP settings, Hynix is the best chips for this generation so far, I had to RMA my samsung modules for hynix ones.
> 
> About the whiring sound you should get that checked and if its really comming from the monitor, the monitor might be on its last days and Iam pretty sure some capacitor is on its way out, try that monitor on another system or if you have a console see if it does the same cause the mobo should have no interference on the monitor, night be that the system could be doing some interference if you have the case near the monitor.
> 
> Its normal on the graphics card for the fans to spin at boot time, pretty sure its the card doing a self check, cause most cards nowadays are silent when on desktop mode


thank you for sharing your experience.

I will try XMP 1 or manual Settings next time, XMP2 worked with Bios 1003. Didn’t try with other BIOS, because I haven’t enough time at the moment and was happy that it works. Have DDR 5 6000 MHz CL 36 GSkill Samsung, hopefully don‘t need to RMA

The Monitor is new and the sound comes from it.
My Case is under the table, will connecting my notebook this has only HDMI and not DisplayPort and reinstall windows 11 again who knows.


----------



## edkieferlp

I am on TUF Z690 wifi D4 running bios 0.707 and have no complaints with the MB. It does what I want and the performance is good so I am happy with it.
I don't push the OC as high as some of you guys as I am on air but temps and performance seem good.
Memory OC seems fine to, I just stopped at 3867 as that was easy and seem very stable.


----------



## Netarangi

edkieferlp said:


> I am on TUF Z690 wifi D4 running bios 0.707 and have no complaints with the MB. It does what I want and the performance is good so I am happy with it.
> I don't push the OC as high as some of you guys as I am on air but temps and performance seem good.
> Memory OC seems fine to, I just stopped at 3867 as that was easy and seem very stable.


Same board and no complaints too. Also can't get past 3867mhz


----------



## Corbak

affxct said:


> Basically you just remove the crap microcode and add in 18 or 15 (KS/K).


Hello I have the same problem on the Z690 Hero and i'm not too sure of how to do this. Do you have a link or more detailed steps for a noob like me please? Thank you


----------



## Csavez™

sblantipodi said:


> No one can cool down 350w without liquid nitrogen.


A 350w can be cooled with water, I have a base block, with base paste,

and if you were to buy one EK-Quantum Delta² TEC D-RGB - Full Nickel, perfectly coolable.

Of course, the good thing is that it consumes as few watts as possible. My answer to "cannot be cooled".
360w:


----------



## trihy

And thats why they used e-cores.

A 16 p-cores should be around 600w. Lol.


----------



## affxct

Corbak said:


> Hello I have the same problem on the Z690 Hero and i'm not too sure of how to do this. Do you have a link or more detailed steps for a noob like me please? Thank you


Step 1:
Grab ucode 15 file and MMTool from the thread related to the ucode swap out on here.
Step 2:
Load 1720 into MMTool and delete the four new microcode patches.
Step 3:
Inject ucode 15 file.
Step 4:
Save the new BIOS and flash away.


----------



## warbucks

Csavez™ said:


> A 350w can be cooled with water, I have a base block, with base paste,
> 
> and if you were to buy one EK-Quantum Delta² TEC D-RGB - Full Nickel, perfectly coolable.
> 
> Of course, the good thing is that it consumes as few watts as possible. My answer to "cannot be cooled".
> 360w:
> View attachment 2570722


The EK-Quantum Delta² TEC D-RGB - Full Nickel is not suitable for cooling that level of heat. They even say this in their marketing material. It's for very light overclocking but I wouldn't use it for anything extreme.


----------



## skullbringer

anyone tested stability with hynix a die on apex at 7000+ ? 

can't get my kit stable on the apex, while on dark and ux it's no problem to do 7400-7466 stable


----------



## affxct

skullbringer said:


> anyone tested stability with hynix a die on apex at 7000+ ?
> 
> can't get my kit stable on the apex, while on dark and ux it's no problem to do 7400-7466 stable


Apex is cursed


----------



## bscool

skullbringer said:


> anyone tested stability with hynix a die on apex at 7000+ ?
> 
> can't get my kit stable on the apex, while on dark and ux it's no problem to do 7400-7466 stable


@sugi0lover posted some results, I dont think I have seen anyone else on here with them yet *Official* Intel DDR5 OC and 24/7 daily Memory Stability...


----------



## Martin778

skullbringer said:


> anyone tested stability with hynix a die on apex at 7000+ ?
> 
> can't get my kit stable on the apex, while on dark and ux it's no problem to do 7400-7466 stable


Old Apex revision? I haven't tried any memory OC on that trashed Dark yet, turns out it won't even fit in the Define 7 XL because of that stupid backplate...had to remove it completetly and even though the Liquid Freezer II backplate is hitting the back of the case because the socket is rotated. Man how I hate non-standard hardware...


----------



## Wasakiqwe

Apecos said:


> My hero works very well with 1304 bios, I tried 1505/16XX/17XX version and I get tons of errors (most in TM5).
> I use 2x16gb corsair dominator platinum 5600 @6000 vdd 1.28 vddq 1.28 with (samsung) XMP1, ring 43 flawlessly.
> 
> No problems with LAN...


Do you know if 1304 support 32gb 6000mhzkit?
I tried 1601 ans 1702 but always had slight stuttering in all games. Using 12900k with 92p score and temp. Is below 65c.


----------



## flashy

Hello!
Yesterday I bought new equipment for my new system. My shopping list:

Intel i9-12900KS
ASUS Maximus Z690 Hero
ASUS TUF Gaming GeForce RTX 3090Ti
Kingston FURY Beast 32GB DDR5-RAM
Kingston FURY Renegade 4TB m.2 SSD

Even the prices dropped the last months it was quite expensive 

For a Case I try to use a Fractal Define 7 Clear Glass and for CPU cooling the "big one" Arctic Freezer II 420. I hope this all will fit because of the big radiator size! According to some reports in the www it should fit 

My question is, are there recommended BIOS settings for my setup? I though if someone could know this, then it would be this community 

Thank you very much and have a nice day!


----------



## Corbak

affxct said:


> Step 1:
> Grab ucode 15 file and MMTool from the thread related to the ucode swap out on here.
> Step 2:
> Load 1720 into MMTool and delete the four new microcode patches.
> Step 3:
> Inject ucode 15 file.
> Step 4:
> Save the new BIOS and flash away.


Thank you I'll search for that topic and try to do it. At least it seems easy in those steps .


----------



## Alberto_It

affxct said:


> Step 1:
> Grab ucode 15 file and MMTool from the thread related to the ucode swap out on here.
> Step 2:
> Load 1720 into MMTool and delete the four new microcode patches.
> Step 3:
> Inject ucode 15 file.
> Step 4:
> Save the new BIOS and flash away.


1505 bios have 15 ucode?


----------



## affxct

Alberto_It said:


> 1505 bios have 15 ucode?


I mean you can inject into 1505, but it's risky. 1505 and 0061 had a weird thing with ucode 15. It just made memory stability horrendous. The thread on OCN about modding ADL BIOSs has both of the files you need uploaded. I can link you guys my OneDrive if needed though.


----------



## Corbak

affxct said:


> I mean you can inject into 1505, but it's risky. 1505 and 0061 had a weird thing with ucode 15. It just made memory stability horrendous. The thread on OCN about modding ADL BIOSs has both of the files you need uploaded. I can link you guys my OneDrive if needed though.


I only found the link for the modded 1720 Extrem bios. Can't find one for the Hero so yeah if you have a link it would be great. Thank you for taking the time to help us.


----------



## affxct

Corbak said:


> I only found the link for the modded 1720 Extrem bios. Can't find one for the Hero so yeah if you have a link it would be great. Thank you for taking the time to help us.


I meant like I could link you the stuff you need to make one. I can make a Hero one for you if you need me to though.


----------



## Martin778

How long have you guys had to wait for a replacement board after the shop has sent it to ASUS?


----------



## 673714

flashy said:


> Hello!
> Yesterday I bought new equipment for my new system. My shopping list:
> 
> Intel i9-12900KS
> ASUS Maximus Z690 Hero
> ASUS TUF Gaming GeForce RTX 3090Ti
> Kingston FURY Beast 32GB DDR5-RAM
> Kingston FURY Renegade 4TB m.2 SSD
> 
> Even the prices dropped the last months it was quite expensive
> 
> For a Case I try to use a Fractal Define 7 Clear Glass and for CPU cooling the "big one" Arctic Freezer II 420. I hope this all will fit because of the big radiator size! According to some reports in the www it should fit
> 
> My question is, are there recommended BIOS settings for my setup? I though if someone could know this, then it would be this community
> 
> Thank you very much and have a nice day!


 "Load optimized defaults" in the bios and be done.


----------



## nickolp1974

Martin778 said:


> How long have you guys had to wait for a replacement board after the shop has sent it to ASUS?


wasn't even an option with Amazon uk, offered me refund straight away on 3rd line of text via chat system


----------



## Netarangi

acoustic said:


> I swore by 0807 before mine died, plus it has AVX512 support if you have a non-KS CPU.


Flashed this version today and it's much better! Couldn't boot over 3500mhz gear mode 1 beforehand and now I'm testing stability for 3733 cl14. Currently 41.5ns in IMLC


----------



## Corbak

affxct said:


> I meant like I could link you the stuff you need to make one. I can make a Hero one for you if you need me to though.


Oh sorry for the misunderstanding. If it is not too much to ask and if you have the time to make one for the hero it would be perfect. As I'm not serene about making one myself and dealing with a failed attempt.


----------



## edkieferlp

Netarangi said:


> Flashed this version today and it's much better! Couldn't boot over 3500mhz gear mode 1 beforehand and now I'm testing stability for 3733 cl14. Currently 41.5ns in IMLC


What bios were you on before, didn't you say before you were stuck at 3867, was that gear2?


----------



## sblantipodi

question of the day.

one year passed (more or less) and Asus is still not able to make Alder Lake work on their Z690 boards.
do you think that your stupidly expensive Asus Z690 board will ever be able to run Raptor Lake?


----------



## FreeSpeechIsKnowledge

sblantipodi said:


> question of the day.
> 
> one year passed (more or less) and Asus is still not able to make Alder Lake work on their Z690 boards.
> do you think that your stupidly expensive Asus Z690 board will ever be able to run Raptor Lake?


I think the dark I just purchased is going to be fun to play with when it gets here.


----------



## affxct

FreeSpeechIsKnowledge said:


> I think the dark I just purchased is going to be fun to play with when it gets here.


Mine's here on Thursday along with a kit of Fury Beast 6000C40. Will be able to bin and maybe see which kit does 7200. The Dark ended up being $650 with shipping and customs to here so I hope it will be worth it.


----------



## Simkin

Thinking of switching out my Team Group 6200 for Kingston Renegade 6400 (surprisingly cheap btw), the Team Group modules is to wide for my RAM cooler so mainly thats the reason.

Is the Hynix A-Die out yet? should i wait for these?


----------



## sblantipodi

Asus and Corsair acknoledged the RGB problem on the Z690 Extreme when paired with Corsair Dominator.





Asus Z690 Extreme hangs on boot due to iCue.







forum.corsair.com





still no fix.


----------



## Netarangi

edkieferlp said:


> What bios were you on before, didn't you say before you were stuck at 3867, was that gear2?


Yeah that was my gear 2 profile on Bios 1304.

I'm testing higher frequencies on gear 2 now, 3900 seems to be stable at the moment


----------



## Martin778

sblantipodi said:


> Asus and Corsair acknoledged the RGB problem on the Z690 Extreme when paired with Corsair Dominator.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Asus Z690 Extreme hangs on boot due to iCue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> forum.corsair.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> still no fix.


As I said before whoever is having big issues with his/her board - sell it ASAP, you'll be completely out of luck when Z790 arrives.


----------



## sblantipodi

Martin778 said:


> As I said before whoever is having big issues with his/her board - sell it ASAP, you'll be completely out of luck when Z790 arrives.


If I bought a motherboard means that I need it, I can't sell it now since I'm using it.


----------



## sulalin

skullbringer，帖子：29026569，成員：345566 said:


> 有人用 hynix a die on apex 測試了 7000+ 的穩定性嗎？
> 
> 無法讓我的套件在頂點上穩定，而在黑暗和 ux 上，做 7400-7466 穩定沒問題
> [/引用]
> 當我發送給我的時候，我會測試一個穩定性。目前，只有一個會先玩。


----------



## affxct

Corbak said:


> Oh sorry for the misunderstanding. If it is not too much to ask and if you have the time to make one for the hero it would be perfect. As I'm not serene about making one myself and dealing with a failed attempt.











Microsoft OneDrive - Access files anywhere. Create docs with free Office Online.


Store photos and docs online. Access them from any PC, Mac or phone. Create and work together on Word, Excel or PowerPoint documents.



1drv.ms





I've been a bit lazy guys, but this is for the Hero. The letter at the end will tell you which Maximus the BIOS is meant for,


----------



## TSportM

sblantipodi said:


> question of the day.
> 
> one year passed (more or less) and Asus is still not able to make Alder Lake work on their Z690 boards.
> do you think that your stupidly expensive Asus Z690 board will ever be able to run Raptor Lake?



All have problems, even EVGA, you have been plagued with a few , but that does not mean its not working my system only had problems with more Overclock and using corsair dominator 5600 (did not have any issues with RGB like you) but after changed for the Tforce 6400 dont have dificulty (cant say problems) every case is not unique, but yes Asus are dropping the ball on alot of products the lastest power supply 1600W is a joke from the video i posted few pages back the motherboards are not 100% QC and tested proprely, and bios releases or cleary a hit and miss on testing just halfbaked iam using 1701 beta and its fine, but no every one uses this forum.....

once more iam sorry to hear you still have problems, you should buy the new Z790 and after sell your Z690 extreme, iam staying on my Z690 extreme and upgrading my KS for the new 13900k 

cheers


----------



## Martin778

EVGA has different problems, also the BIOS interface and available options are very crude compared to ASUS...like it's a budget board, not even fan step up/down delay available.


----------



## Simkin

Can we expect Hynix A-Die to start coming out in the marked for the different brands in near future, or will the availability mainly be the "regular" M-Die?


----------



## acoustic

Simkin said:


> Can we expect Hynix A-Die to start coming out in the marked for the different brands in near future, or will the availability mainly be the "regular" M-Die?


Considering the really stellar prices that have been going on lately on Hynix M-Die, I have a feeling A-Die will be rolling out relatively sooner in mainstream sets.


----------



## Corbak

affxct said:


> Microsoft OneDrive - Access files anywhere. Create docs with free Office Online.
> 
> 
> Store photos and docs online. Access them from any PC, Mac or phone. Create and work together on Word, Excel or PowerPoint documents.
> 
> 
> 
> 1drv.ms
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've been a bit lazy guys, but this is for the Hero. The letter at the end will tell you which Maximus the BIOS is meant for,


Thank you for taking the time to make one for the Hero. And for doing it so quickly.


----------



## affxct

Corbak said:


> Thank you for taking the time to make one for the Hero. And for doing it so quickly.


I was anything but quick, but you're welcome nevertheless.


----------



## Corbak

affxct said:


> I was anything but quick, but you're welcome nevertheless.


Well you had no obligation to do it. You used your own time to help and so i would say that was still quick.


----------



## affxct

Corbak said:


> Well you had no obligation to do it. You used your own time to help and so i would say that was still quick.


That's very nice of you to say, I appreciate that.


----------



## Alberto_It

Feedback: Sold Apex and taken Extreme March 2022, 2x G skill Z5 2x 16Gb 6400 cl32 on XMP1 works smooth like a butter. Tested with CB23 and Memtest without errors

@sblantipodi


----------



## welldone

affxct said:


> Basically you just remove the crap microcode and add in 18 or 15 (KS/K).


Could you explain how to do it?


----------



## affxct

welldone said:


> Could you explain how to do it?


Step 1:
Download MMTool and ucode 15 from the subthread titled "Enabling AVX512 on 12th gen..." 
Step 2:
Load original Asus CAP file into MMTool
Step 3:
Head to CPU patch data and delete all the other crap inside there
Step 4:
Load the ucode 15 file into MMTool from the file selector in that patch data subsection
Step 5:
Apply ucode 15 and watch it drop into the BIOS code, thereafter you can save the new BIOS file


----------



## Martin778

Alberto_It said:


> Feedback: Sold Apex and taken Extreme March 2022, 2x G skill Z5 2x 16Gb 6400 cl32 on XMP1 works smooth like a butter. Tested with CB23 and Memtest without errors
> 
> @sblantipodi


Dark does 6200 C36 easy, something that Apex couldn't.


----------



## Alberto_It

Martin778 said:


> Dark does 6200 C36 easy, something that Apex couldn't.


Apex 2021 is a shame! I'm very happy to own a Z690 Extreme 2022 branch


----------



## FreeSpeechIsKnowledge

Alberto_It said:


> Apex 2021 is a shame! I'm very happy to own a Z690 Extreme 2022 branch


I have my Apex 2021 replacement running pretty good right now. The first one was a complete mess. All the trolls didn't help the situation trolling everyone having issues.


----------



## acoustic

FreeSpeechIsKnowledge said:


> I have my Apex 2021 replacement running pretty good right now. The first one was a complete mess. All the trolls didn't help the situation trolling everyone having issues.


How clean is your Windows install on that Y-Cruncher run? Pretty impressed my 12700K is beating that time at 6600. AVX512 @ what core clocks?


----------



## Alberto_It

FreeSpeechIsKnowledge said:


> I have my Apex 2021 replacement running pretty good right now. The first one was a complete mess. All the trolls didn't help the situation trolling everyone having issues.
> 
> View attachment 2571160
> 
> 
> View attachment 2571161


Do you have a custom loop? 
Anyway in Italy the Asus assistance is quite slow and bad


----------



## FreeSpeechIsKnowledge

acoustic said:


> How clean is your Windows install on that Y-Cruncher run? Pretty impressed my 12700K is beating that time at 6600. AVX512 @ what core clocks?


Fresh install from a couple of days ago. I have no clue about the avx512 question. I'm on 1701 BIOS. These recent runs are the best ones I've been able to get this motherboard to do and I've had it for a couple of months now. I've tweaked things in every manner possible at this point and these are the most stable settings memory, and everything else possible tweaked at this point.



Alberto_It said:


> Do you have a custom loop?
> Anyway in Italy the Asus assistance is quite slow and bad


Yeah custom loop. Four radiators two pumps. The setup is housed outside the case right next to it. I have my gpu in the loop as well. My memory is air cooled though. I could get more speed / better timings if I water cooled them.


----------



## Arni90

acoustic said:


> How clean is your Windows install on that Y-Cruncher run? Pretty impressed my 12700K is beating that time at 6600. AVX512 @ what core clocks?


AVX512 isn't supported when E-cores are active


----------



## acoustic

Arni90 said:


> AVX512 isn't supported when E-cores are active


Haha, DUH! I completely glossed over the Atom cores showing on the result. Thanks


----------



## Justinator

I just got a ROG Strix Z690-E with a 12700F and at startup it takes 20 seconds before the logo shows, and another 10 to complete POST to A0. Is that about what I should expect, or is that longer than it should be? It's a lot longer than my 9900K/Z390 build did...

Apologies if there are posts about this, I did search but I only got one result.


----------



## Gking62

Alberto_It said:


> Apex 2021 is a shame! I'm very happy to own a Z690 Extreme 2022 branch


My '21 Extreme has been rock solid to date, love it


----------



## 673714

Gking62 said:


> My '21 Extreme has been rock solid to date, love it


I also have a '21 Extreme, but I can only say it's been rock solid with the memory at or below 6200MHz. I suspect the G.Skill Trident Z5 are the issue though


----------



## dyanikoglu

LilOliVert said:


> I also have a '21 Extreme, but I can only say it's been rock solid with the memory at or below 6200MHz. I suspect the G.Skill Trident Z5 are the issue though


ASUS is the issue


----------



## 673714

dyanikoglu said:


> ASUS is the issue


That's the problem though, both G.Skill and Asus messed up and neither want to admit it. I need to buy something different to prove one way or the other and Kingston Ram is cheaper and easier to swap out than a motherboard


----------



## Martin778

dyanikoglu said:


> ASUS is the issue


Trident Z5's are poor as well. Had a set die on me.


----------



## nyxagamemnon

For this gen from the sticks of DDR5, I tested only the Dominators run at least 10C cooler than any of the other brands. Gskill is flimsy and cheaply made. The Dominators are the best.


----------



## Martin778

Still my Doms run 50*C+ at XMP in a case...but agreed, the Z5 is really flimsy and cheap feeling for what is supposed to be premium memory. I wonder how the HyperX Fury and TForce sticks are.


----------



## acoustic

TForce felt cheap too. I had a set of the TForce 6200CL38 and the heatspreaders felt like plastic. At 1.25v for XMP, the sticks hit ~49-50c. The Kingston Renegade 6400CL32 @ 1.4v hit ~48-49c in the exact same setup.

Same temps at higher voltage..


----------



## Alberto_It

LilOliVert said:


> I also have a '21 Extreme, but I can only say it's been rock solid with the memory at or below 6200MHz. I suspect the G.Skill Trident Z5 are the issue though


It can be your G.Skill kit or the imc of your CPU, with my Z690 Extreme paired with 12900k and G. Skill Z5 6400 cl 32 kit all works smooth like a butter with XMP1 profile


----------



## Alberto_It

dyanikoglu said:


> ASUS is the issue


All brands of motherboards can have issues, I have read some comments of Evga Z690 Dark Kingpin's users with problems with ram slots


----------



## Simkin

LilOliVert said:


> That's the problem though, both G.Skill and Asus messed up and neither want to admit it. I need to buy something different to prove one way or the other and Kingston Ram is cheaper and easier to swap out than a motherboard


Like most other with 2021 boards my Apex is also limited on memory OC, i can boot 6400 CL32 but get errors in TM5 after a couple of minutes. My 6200 CL32 have been stable for months now though.

My board is going out as soon as Z790 arrives, gonna buy the Z790 Apex, but Asus better get their sh** together this time.


----------



## IronAge

if it does not have at least 10 layer PCB like the EVGA Dark (?) i will skip it. 

most likely Z790 Apex will cost around 850$-900$ if not more.

my ASRock Z170M OC Formula already had 10 layer PCB like how many years back ? eight years.


----------



## acoustic

Simkin said:


> Like most other with 2021 boards my Apex is also limited on memory OC, i can boot 6400 CL32 but get errors in TM5 after a couple of minutes. My 6200 CL32 have been stable for months now though.
> 
> My board is going out as soon as Z790 arrives, gonna buy the Z790 Apex, but Asus better get their sh** together this time.


Maybe worth considering MSI?


----------



## Simkin

acoustic said:


> Maybe worth considering MSI?


Maybe


----------



## Nizzen

acoustic said:


> Maybe worth considering MSI?


Whatever overclock a-die the best, is the best option for me


----------



## Simkin

Nizzen said:


> Whatever overclock a-die the best, is the best option for me


Better not buy 10 750$ boards next time to get one working as intended


----------



## affxct

Simkin said:


> Like most other with 2021 boards my Apex is also limited on memory OC, i can boot 6400 CL32 but get errors in TM5 after a couple of minutes. My 6200 CL32 have been stable for months now though.
> 
> My board is going out as soon as Z790 arrives, gonna buy the Z790 Apex, but Asus better get their sh** together this time.


That's how they get you. They also ways say they'll change but they never do. It's called an abusive relationship.


----------



## Simkin

affxct said:


> That's how they get you. They also ways say they'll change but they never do. It's called an abusive relationship.


Maybe, but I have had Asus boards since the early 2000, without any issues until z690.

But, im not impressed with the way Asus has handled this in any way.


----------



## xarot

Simkin said:


> Maybe, but I have had Asus boards since the early 2000, without any issues until z690.
> 
> But, im not impressed with the way Asus has handled this in any way.


I think Asus and any manufacturer have bad products sometimes they never bother to fix. Have had tens of Asus boards since 1998, some are very good but there are rotten apples too. When it comes to more unique board, minor chances for them to fix anything because of the amount of ppl using them and the amount of complaints. These days the mainstream boards have quite limited lifecycle on the shelf and if you don't get a fix early on it will surely never arrive.


----------



## killer01ws6

flashy said:


> Hello!
> Yesterday I bought new equipment for my new system. My shopping list:
> 
> Intel i9-12900KS
> ASUS Maximus Z690 Hero
> ASUS TUF Gaming GeForce RTX 3090Ti
> Kingston FURY Beast 32GB DDR5-RAM
> Kingston FURY Renegade 4TB m.2 SSD
> 
> Even the prices dropped the last months it was quite expensive
> 
> For a Case I try to use a Fractal Define 7 Clear Glass and for CPU cooling the "big one" Arctic Freezer II 420. I hope this all will fit because of the big radiator size! According to some reports in the www it should fit
> 
> My question is, are there recommended BIOS settings for my setup? I though if someone could know this, then it would be this community
> 
> Thank you very much and have a nice day!


I suggest BIOs 1505,
Load default settings,
enable XMP,
Load up your favorite games and enjoy.


----------



## Mappi75

@*flashy*

1503 was the best for my 12900KS now running 0082 atm

Old post from me:
_Updated bios 1503 to 1601 = tm5 "hell of errors / most test are red"

Going back to 1503 still the best bios for my 12900KS.
(z690 Apex / 32GB 6.666Mhz 32-40-40-28-2T) _

Edit: 1503 gaves me a little performance boost in CB23 & Borderlands 3 compared to older bios versions.


----------



## bastian

dyanikoglu said:


> ASUS is the issue


No issues with my Z690 Extreme. Not to say others have not had problems and it is related to ASUS. The fact is no product is perfect and no amount of QC can catch anything.


----------



## affxct

bastian said:


> No issues with my Z690 Extreme. Not to say others have not had problems and it is related to ASUS. The fact is no product is perfect and no amount of QC can catch anything.


Good sir, that is a gross understatement and is very dependent on what you deem as a product fit for purpose. My line in the sand was drawn when I observed a 6-layer board doing 400MT/s higher than my previous Apex and especially when they forced us to update to a terrible BIOS. Combine that with the usual high data rate crashes in CSGO even after countless runs of Linpack/IBT/TM5 and I was convinced by the Dark at $500.


----------



## 673714

bastian said:


> No issues with my Z690 Extreme. Not to say others have not had problems and it is related to ASUS. The fact is no product is perfect and no amount of QC can catch anything.


You're the 2nd Extreme owner I've seen come to say you've had no issues, and neither of you are running higher than 6200MHz


----------



## FreeSpeechIsKnowledge

affxct said:


> Good sir, that is a gross understatement and is very dependent on what you deem as a product fit for purpose. My line in the sand was drawn when I observed a 6-layer board doing 400MT/s higher than my previous Apex and especially when they forced us to update to a terrible BIOS. Combine that with the usual high data rate crashes in CSGO even after countless runs of Linpack/IBT/TM5 and I was convinced by the Dark at $500.


My dark just arrived at my door. Looks amazing. I'm going to install it tomorrow though as I'm drinking and just got off from working all day. This is the moment of truth for me. I have run benchmarks on this Apex leading up to this so I can directly compare the results to the Dark. It'll be interesting for sure.


----------



## bastian

LilOliVert said:


> You're the 2nd Extreme owner I've seen come to say you've had no issues, and neither of you are running higher than 6200MHz


I've chosen a balance between frequency and timings. I can do 6400mhz no problem with a little looser timings. I don't really have a need to go higher.


----------



## affxct

FreeSpeechIsKnowledge said:


> My dark just arrived at my door. Looks amazing. I'm going to install it tomorrow though as I'm drinking and just got off from working all day. This is the moment of truth for me. I have run benchmarks on this Apex leading up to this so I can directly compare the results to the Dark. It'll be interesting for sure.


If I can give you some tips to make your life a little easier:

Set VDD and don't set VDDQ, some PMICs will default VDDQ lower and I think it might be better.
1.4 TX VDDQ for 7000 2T works quite well
SA can be left Auto, but I've used 1.25 for 7000
VDD2 can be left Auto and never worried about


----------



## 673714

bastian said:


> I've chosen a balance between frequency and timings. I can do 6400mhz no problem with a little looser timings.


I can't get my G.Skill 6400 above 6200 without losing stability. Do you think your settings for 6400 would work on my Z5s? Probably not because, well, G.Skill, huh? lol


----------



## bastian

LilOliVert said:


> I can't get my G.Skill 6400 above 6200 without losing stability. Do you think your settings for 6400 would work on my Z5s? Probably not because, well, G.Skill, huh? lol


I've only tried the Corsairs myself (Samsung and Hynix). Had more success with Hynix of course. The Corsairs do have better cooling.


----------



## 673714

bastian said:


> I've only tried the Corsairs myself (Samsung and Hynix). Had more success with Hynix of course. The Corsairs do have better cooling.


Exactly. G.Skill support started ignoring me when I pointed out how they don't even have a thermal pad between the PMIC and heat spreader/outside. I have some Kingston on the way. I have a feeling they will do 6400 xmp right out of the box smh


----------



## Voodoo Hoodoo

LilOliVert said:


> You're the 2nd Extreme owner I've seen come to say you've had no issues, and neither of you are running higher than 6200MHz


Gskill 6400C32 with mild tuning. Active fan cooling on the DIMMS.










Maybe I got lucky with a great IMC (SP88) and an overqualified Extreme, but it's not been my experience to get golden parts (I usually only buy one CPU/MB per refresh).

I do agree that there have been numerous issues with Z690 from Asus.. I've been a customer for a long time but that's still no excuse for what's happened with Alder Lake.

I did up the voltage a little from 1.4 to keep stability while tightening the timings.

I hope you can stabilise whatever bandwidth and timings you want.


----------



## affxct

LilOliVert said:


> Exactly. G.Skill support started ignoring me when I pointed out how they don't even have a thermal pad between the PMIC and heat spreader/outside. I have some Kingston on the way. I have a feeling they will do 6400 xmp right out of the box smh


Temps become a problem around the 6800-7000 mark. At 6600 I had no issues up to 47c.


----------



## bastian

Although ASUS got the most attention due to the Hero especially, I think Z690 and DDR5 in general had growing pains, especially early DDR5 kits. Its a brand new platform and memory spec, its gonna have some issues. I suspect Z790 will fair better in general and we have already seen DDR5 improve in short time. But if you got a good Z690/DDR5 combo, Z790 will probably not be necessary for Raptor Lake. I'll probably just stick with my Extreme. The Z790 Extreme is not that much different from what I am hearing.

It is AM5 and AMD 7000 series owners who I bet are gonna have way more of a rollercoaster lol


----------



## Ghoosti

bastian said:


> I've chosen a balance between frequency and timings. I can do 6400mhz no problem with a little looser timings. I don't really have a need to go higher.


Hello Bastian,
I have the same config as you, could you put your .cmo file because I can't exceed 6000. 
Thank you for your help


----------



## nyxagamemnon

I wonder how AM5 is going to handle 4 slots populated vs Z690/Z790 and Raptor lake. According to any limited info I found 2 rank 2D = 3600MT lol. But well have to see.


----------



## affxct

nyxagamemnon said:


> I wonder how AM5 is going to handle 4 slots populated vs Z690/Z790 and Raptor lake. According to any limited info I found 2 rank 2D = 3600MT lol. But well have to see.


The Z690-F boots 6400 4x16GB fine. Getting it stable is a nightmare and testing takes decades, but it can defs be done with enough cooling and enough determination. I reckon with 4x16GB Hynix FURY BEAST sticks it could be done. Attempting it with ADATA Caster oven sticks was an uphill battle.

The FURY BEASTs run at load in the 30s with airflow so I don't foresee it being very hard. If one had access to a highly-binned Hero or Formula capable of 6933, it could probably do 6400-6600 4x16GB with no issue. The board I was using maxed out at 6600 2x16 and could barely train 7000, so the fact it even booted 6400 is testament to how not difficult it is.

As much as I've observed MB variance being the main limitation to RAM speed over the last 2 years that I've taken RAM seriously, I would wager that Ryzen's reaction to DDR5 will come down solely to the memory training programming and how the IMC functions. On Intel we've observed a main memory signalling rail (TX VDDQ) and a drive rail for maintaining data integrity (VDD2). I'm super freakin' curious to see how AMD does it.


----------



## 673714

affxct said:


> Temps become a problem around the 6800-7000 mark. At 6600 I had no issues up to 47c.


Now that you mention it, the temps are much higher now than @6400 and I'm not having any errors. Oh well, Tuesday I should have my Kingston 6400 kit, then I'll know for sure if it's the memory or the motherboard holding me back


----------



## affxct

LilOliVert said:


> Now that you mention it, the temps are much higher now than @6400 and I'm not having any errors. Oh well, Tuesday I should have my Kingston 6400 kit, then I'll know for sure if it's the memory or the motherboard holding me back


It's the board, trust me.


----------



## 673714

affxct said:


> It's the board, trust me.


I can't trust you because that's the absolute worst for me 

Seriously though, I can't think of a worse part to have to remove, let alone go without for weeks


----------



## affxct

LilOliVert said:


> I can't trust you because that's the absolute worst for me
> 
> Seriously though, I can't think of a worse part to have to remove, let alone go without for weeks


I don't blame you tbh. You don't have to act on it either. I paid around $520 for an open-box Apex with shipping and stuff included back in June. I sold the Taichi I had spent around $400 on for way too cheap. I was excited only to be let down weeks in. I went back to a different Strix Z690-F and was absolutely thrilled with 6600MT/s only to end up being forced into BIOS 1720 which made the once a week crashes more like crashes once every few hours of CS. Idk tbh, with these ASUS boards you just can't really rely on them. This all pales in comparison with the horrendous first few weeks of ADL I had back in December. My first Z690-F couldn't run my Z5s with the BIOS at the time and I had to complete my first ever RAM RMA after a lot of back and forth. With BIOS 0803 I legit couldn't even use the system at JEDEC.


----------



## Csavez™

Simkin said:


> Like most other with 2021 boards my Apex is also limited on memory OC, i can boot 6400 CL32 but get errors in TM5 after a couple of minutes. My 6200 CL32 have been stable for months now though.
> 
> My board is going out as soon as Z790 arrives, gonna buy the Z790 Apex, but Asus better get their sh** together this time.


I also have a first edition apex and it doesn't like high cpu imc voltage (bios: max 1.23) and high vddq tx (max: 1.455).
Use aida for the stability test (min. 1 hour), the tm5 extreme allows a lot of wrong settings, usmus is more than enough.


----------



## TechSaskia

sblantipodi said:


> question of the day.
> 
> one year passed (more or less) and Asus is still not able to make Alder Lake work on their Z690 boards.
> do you think that your stupidly expensive Asus Z690 board will ever be able to run Raptor Lake?


Hi someone stolen my account "sblantipodi", if some mods is reading this message please write me in Pvt. They changed the email and the password and I can't relogin. Thanks.


----------



## bscool

TechSaskia said:


> Hi someone stolen my account "sblantipodi", if some mods is reading this message please write me in Pvt. They changed the email and the password and I can't relogin. Thanks.


I ddnt think you were in the US. they just started for sale threads using your account.









Ryzen 9 3900x bnib sealed


3900x bnib sealed $210 shipped. Payment only Venmo or Cashapp, zelle, Crypto accepted.




www.overclock.net













NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti FE 8GB GDDR6


Brand New Still sealed, never opened or tampered with the tape still sealing the product. Please view pictures for details and condition. $500 shipped. Payment only Venmo or Cashapp, zelle, Crypto accepted.




www.overclock.net













EVGA GeForce 3080 Ti FTW3 Ultra Gaming 12G


It has never been used and the box has not been opened. $1050 shipped. I also ship International




www.overclock.net


----------



## TechSaskia

bscool said:


> I ddnt think you were in the US. they just started for sale threads using your account.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ryzen 9 3900x bnib sealed
> 
> 
> 3900x bnib sealed $210 shipped. Payment only Venmo or Cashapp, zelle, Crypto accepted.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti FE 8GB GDDR6
> 
> 
> Brand New Still sealed, never opened or tampered with the tape still sealing the product. Please view pictures for details and condition. $500 shipped. Payment only Venmo or Cashapp, zelle, Crypto accepted.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EVGA GeForce 3080 Ti FTW3 Ultra Gaming 12G
> 
> 
> It has never been used and the box has not been opened. $1050 shipped. I also ship International
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net


thank you for the help bscool, I really appreciate it.
I use that nickname since the beginning of the internet, I don't want that someone scam people with that nickname.

Thank you!!!

Hope that mods will solve the problem soon.
Thank you!


----------



## Simkin

Csavez™ said:


> I also have a first edition apex and it doesn't like high cpu imc voltage (bios: max 1.23) and high vddq tx (max: 1.455).
> Use aida for the stability test (min. 1 hour), the tm5 extreme allows a lot of wrong settings, usmus is more than enough.
> 
> 
> View attachment 2571684
> View attachment 2571685
> View attachment 2571686


My CPU MC voltage is set to 0.95, vddq tx is set to auto.


----------



## affxct

Simkin said:


> My CPU MC voltage is set to 0.95, vddq tx is set to auto.


When you say CPU MC Voltage, do you mean VCCSA? 0.95 VDD2 I'm pretty sure isn't runnable.


----------



## Simkin

affxct said:


> When you say CPU MC Voltage, do you mean VCCSA? 0.95 VDD2 I'm pretty sure isn't runnable.


I meant SA voltage, my bad.


----------



## affxct

Simkin said:


> I meant SA voltage, my bad.


XD nah the worst that would've happened is he wouldn't have been able to train 🤣


----------



## fat4l

Hi all,

I have z690-i Strix gaming mobo, mini itx.
Do I understand it right that it has only socket sense ?

So when I set voltage manually in bios lets say to 1.4v is(is this socket sense as well?), this is actually much lower? then in windows under load(due to llc) if i see 1.35V this is socket sense so actually lower voltage, lets say 1.3v(die??)?

So realistically, I could potentially set the voltage higher in bios because the real voltage in the core is much lower ? 
Whats the safe max voltage you recommend - SOCKET sense, that would be shown in windows in 2 scenarios:
1 core loaded
8 cores loaded
(12900KS)

Thanks


----------



## fat4l

One more 

What is the best bios for 12900KS - Strix z690-i mini itx ? Still on 1403 .


----------



## Mappi75

@fat4l

What i recommend: when you install a newer bios version or some of the beta/modified bioses,
make shure you make a CB23 run an check if your KS run at all core 5,2Ghz.

Some of the bios had some limitations which i was not able to disabe so the cpu limits below 5 ghz
(think it was 4,8Ghz all core on my Apex).


----------



## Papusan

Hi. Can some who have the ASUS ROG Maximus Z690 Apex motherboard confirm that this block (EK-Quantum Velocity² D-RGB - 1700) will fit in well with this MB? And that there is no problem with the fits if you use ram stcks with stock heatspreaders as etc (G.Skill). Thanks. Sorry if this have been talked about before/or wrong thread.

Again thanks.


----------



## Nizzen

Papusan said:


> Hi. Can some who have the ASUS ROG Maximus Z690 Apex motherboard confirm that this block (EK-Quantum Velocity² D-RGB - 1700) will fit in well with this MB? And that there is no problem with the fits if you use ram stcks with stock heatspreaders as etc (G.Skill). Thanks. Sorry if this have been talked about before.
> 
> Again thanks.


I have it. Too big with supercool dimm block. Stock dimm is ofc ok


----------



## Papusan

Nizzen said:


> I have it. Too big with supercool dimm block. Stock dimm is ofc ok


Thanks. So there is no problem with ram sticks with normal/stock heatspreaders. I have the G.Skill Trident 6400 Z5 RGB sticks so I expect this water block will fits. I just can't grasp that EK was forced to max out the size on this Cpu block. They could have made it slightly smaller.


----------



## satinghostrider

Papusan said:


> Hi. Can some who have the ASUS ROG Maximus Z690 Apex motherboard confirm that this block (EK-Quantum Velocity² D-RGB - 1700) will fit in well with this MB? And that there is no problem with the fits if you use ram stcks with stock heatspreaders as etc (G.Skill). Thanks. Sorry if this have been talked about before/or wrong thread.
> 
> Again thanks.


No issues here with Kingston Fury Beast on my Apex. Had no issues with G.skill as well.


----------



## Nizzen

Papusan said:


> Thanks. So there is no problem with ram sticks with normal/stock heatspreaders. I have the G.Skill Trident 6400 Z5 RGB sticks so I expect this water block will fits. I just can't grasp that EK was forced to max out the size on this Cpu block. They could have made it slightly smaller.


It fits with all dimms.

Yes it's stupid that they made it so close to the dimm slots. Epic fail.


----------



## 7empe

Papusan said:


> Hi. Can some who have the ASUS ROG Maximus Z690 Apex motherboard confirm that this block (EK-Quantum Velocity² D-RGB - 1700) will fit in well with this MB? And that there is no problem with the fits if you use ram stcks with stock heatspreaders as etc (G.Skill). Thanks. Sorry if this have been talked about before/or wrong thread.
> 
> Again thanks.


I have it too. Fits fine and works well with EKWB Monarch RAM water block.


----------



## fat4l

fat4l said:


> Hi all,
> 
> I have z690-i Strix gaming mobo, mini itx.
> Do I understand it right that it has only socket sense ?
> 
> So when I set voltage manually in bios lets say to 1.4v is(is this socket sense as well?), this is actually much lower? then in windows under load(due to llc) if i see 1.35V this is socket sense so actually lower voltage, lets say 1.3v(die??)?
> 
> So realistically, I could potentially set the voltage higher in bios because the real voltage in the core is much lower ?
> Whats the safe max voltage you recommend - SOCKET sense, that would be shown in windows in 2 scenarios:
> 1 core loaded
> 8 cores loaded
> (12900KS)
> 
> Thanks


Anyone knows the above ?


----------



## Martin778

Got a message from the shop that "my product was repaired" and is on the way...really wondering if they replaced the whole board or did nothing.


----------



## Csavez™

Martin778 said:


> Got a message from the shop that "my product was repaired" and is on the way...really wondering if they replaced the whole board or did nothing.


Apex?


----------



## Martin778

Yes, Apex. No questions asked whatsoever.


----------



## 7empe

Martin778 said:


> Got a message from the shop that "my product was repaired" and is on the way...really wondering if they replaced the whole board or did nothing.


If you notice that the board is the same but behaves better after the repair, I'm gonna ask what has changed on the board. Hope you have detailed pics of the orginal board 
Maybe fix for the issue is trivial and can be done by ourselves (with or without soldering).


----------



## Csavez™

Martin778 said:


> Yes, Apex. No questions asked whatsoever.


I'm also thinking about returning it, since it's almost unsellable, but if I refer to ram, I have to indicate which one, and I haven't seen a single copy from the list below, and if I check the TG 6400 hynix or the Gskill 6600 hynix, that xmp does not work on it, in fact it only works with a hard voltage increase, the 6600 absolutely does not, the answer from Asus is simple....

G.SKILLF5-6600U4040F16GX2-TZ5RS2x 16GB66006600SSSamsung40-40-40-761.351,2G.SKILLF5-6600U4040F16GX2-TZ5RK2x 16GB66006600SSSamsung40-40-40-761.351,2TeamFF3D532G6400HC40BDC012x 16GB64006400SSMicron40-40-40-841.351,2TeamFF4D532G6400HC40BDC012x 16GB64006400SSMicron40-40-40-841.351,2


----------



## Martin778

6400 C40 Micron? Sounds nonsense, their QVL. 6600 C40 Sammys...maaaayybee plausible.


----------



## Csavez™

Martin778 said:


> 6400 C40 Micron? Sounds nonsense, their QVL. 6600 C40 Sammys...maaaayybee plausible.


They defend themselves with the idiotic qvl.
Everything is good up to 6000, but that's not why I bought apex.


----------



## Agent-A01

7empe said:


> If you notice that the board is the same but behaves better after the repair, I'm gonna ask what has changed on the board. Hope you have detailed pics of the orginal board
> Maybe fix for the issue is trivial and can be done by ourselves (with or without soldering).


Yes before after pictures might give some insight on a 'fix' end users could do


----------



## Martin778

Ah, well I have some pictures of my Apex they are not DSLR quality but should be somehow usable to see general differences.


----------



## nickolp1974

Papusan said:


> Hi. Can some who have the ASUS ROG Maximus Z690 Apex motherboard confirm that this block (EK-Quantum Velocity² D-RGB - 1700) will fit in well with this MB? And that there is no problem with the fits if you use ram stcks with stock heatspreaders as etc (G.Skill). Thanks. Sorry if this have been talked about before/or wrong thread.
> 
> Again thanks.


mine fits fine, i'd still buy something else. Hate the mounting mech


----------



## Agent-A01

Martin778 said:


> Ah, well I have some pictures of my Apex they are not DSLR quality but should be somehow usable to see general differences.


IgorsLab had a comparison of the two, notice the inductor is rotated and also a different part number below ram slots on the right (2R2 part). 



https://www.igorslab.de/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/z690apex_old_new_memory.png


----------



## Martin778

First part of the code is different too - mine is the same as Igor's old one: 916526
Hope it arrives here before AM5 launches, really looking forward to flip it and go AM5, 13900K's power draw looks scary.


----------



## Csavez™

Agent-A01 said:


> IgorsLab had a comparison of the two, notice the inductor is rotated and also a different part number below ram slots on the right (2R2 part).
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.igorslab.de/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/z690apex_old_new_memory.png


I'm changing the paste this week, I'm curious what it's like for me!
thx


----------



## Martin778

So far on Igor's pic I've seen a rotated inductor and a resistor but both aren't polarized components so shouldn't have had any impact.

X670E Apex looks temping but geez...another gamble?


----------



## Nizzen

Martin778 said:


> So far on Igor's pic I've seen a rotated inductor and a resistor but both aren't polarized components so shouldn't have had any impact.
> 
> X670E Apex looks temping but geez...another gamble?


z690 apex has been the only Apex with some high memory speed issues, so I hope it's the one and only time this is happening. All other Apex MB's has been VERY good for memory overclocking on air/water/ln2. Luckily I have a very good z690 Apex, so I'm still happy about Apex.


----------



## Martin778

Oh honestly if mine didn't have the mem issues I wouldn't bother with the DARK. ASUS is miles ahead in terms of BIOS menu's.


----------



## Nizzen

Martin778 said:


> Oh honestly if mine didn't have the mem issues I wouldn't bother with the DARK. ASUS is miles ahead in terms of BIOS menu's.


I can't even buy Evga MB's here in Norway. Not even in europe.


----------



## Martin778

They are 'cheap' from Amazon when discounted - my DARK was €650 delivered to the doorstep here. Delivered in 3 days through Amazon US, all fees included.


----------



## Nizzen

Martin778 said:


> They are 'cheap' from Amazon when discounted - my DARK was €650 delivered to the doorstep here. Delivered in 3 days through Amazon US, all fees included.


I buy in Norway because of 5 year "return if broken" by law. Best in the whole world. Overclockers dream 😇


----------



## acoustic

Nizzen said:


> I buy in Norway because of 5 year "return if broken" by law. Best in the whole world. Overclockers dream 😇


Do you ever have any issues sourcing parts? I know you're a madman when it comes to buying


----------



## tubs2x4

Nizzen said:


> I buy in Norway because of 5 year "return if broken" by law. Best in the whole world. Overclockers dream 😇


must pay a premium price on parts for that "warranty"


----------



## 7empe

Agent-A01 said:


> IgorsLab had a comparison of the two, notice the inductor is rotated and also a different part number below ram slots on the right (2R2 part).
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.igorslab.de/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/z690apex_old_new_memory.png


Inductor can't be rotated, cause it has connectors below. It can be only soldered at 0 and 180 degrees, but it's no difference for inductor. Writing on the SMD is only rotated. That's the same part 2.2 uF part.
If it is the case, that the same board comes back from asus after repair with new inductor then it means that inductor itself is somehow broken and replacement does the thing...


----------



## Maximization

First time I ever got number one on a benchmark, z690-e, maxim for this






GravityMark Leaderboard


GravityMark GPU Benchmark




gravitymark.tellusim.com





I am sure after posting this I will not be


----------



## 7empe

Maximization said:


> First time I ever got number one on a benchmark, z690-e, maxim for this
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> GravityMark Leaderboard
> 
> 
> GravityMark GPU Benchmark
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gravitymark.tellusim.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am sure after posting this I will not be
> 
> View attachment 2571956


Sorry


----------



## Martin778

Got the board back from RMA, same junk as I've sent in, identical code/sn They've reset/flashed the BIOS, my god. You can (_insert bloody angry indian here_) see the shoddy soldering quality on the RAM slots as well, same thing Igor mentioned!
Should I e-mail directly to ASUS now? I registered on the ROG forums and can't even post a damn thing before mailing some ASUS employee MYSELF. What a joke!

Going to make a new RMA ticket, not going to bother with installing this board anymore just to see it will throw RAM errors after an hour or two (the DARK never did on the same CPU/RAM).
Or if someone wants to buy it from me, drop me a PM...


----------



## 7empe

Martin778 said:


> Got the board back from RMA, same junk as I've sent in, identical code/sn They've reset/flashed the BIOS, my god. You can (_insert bloody angry indian here_) see the shoddy soldering quality on the RAM slots as well, same thing Igor mentioned!
> Should I e-mail directly to ASUS now? I registered on the ROG forums and can't even post a damn thing before mailing some ASUS employee MYSELF. What a joke!
> 
> Going to make a new RMA ticket, not going to bother with installing this board anymore just to see it will throw RAM errors after an hour or two (the DARK never did on the same CPU/RAM).
> Or if someone wants to buy it from me, drop me a PM...


Did you receive any note on what has been changed/repaired? Maybe now it's a god tier board


----------



## Martin778

Flashed the BIOS/reset the CMOS as it stated they 'reset the firmware'...


----------



## Arni90

Might be smart to wait for tests before people run out to buy Z790 boards I think.


----------



## Martin778

Depends, they won't be worse (don't know in case of ASUS!) than Z690 as it's more of the same, just refreshed/fixed. X670E AMD will be a bigger gamble.


----------



## Arni90

Martin778 said:


> Depends, they won't be worse (don't know in case of ASUS!) than Z690 as it's more of the same, just refreshed/fixed. X670E AMD will be a bigger gamble.


Sometimes there are mistakes.

X670E is almost guaranteed to be a mess due to the daisy-chained chipset, AGESA being **** at every launch so far, and AMD's first-gen memory controllers...


----------



## 7empe

Personally, I don't see benefit in going from z690 to z790 (beside replacing screwed apex board). I'm gonna wait and see if it's worth it. Maybe z890 will be the more significant leap to take.


----------



## Martin778

Z790 is the last LGA1700 chipset anyway, right?
AGESA used to be a mess at launches, been there done that.


----------



## asdkj1740

7empe said:


> Personally, I don't see benefit in going from z690 to z790 (beside replacing screwed apex board). I'm gonna wait and see if it's worth it. Maybe z890 will be the more significant leap to take.


msi has new/better d5 layout for z790.
gigabyte 6 layers PCB mobo on z790 and x670 are much stronger. those current z690 models are ... there are reasons why they eventually drop 6200mhz in qvl.

and for sure 13th+z790 would be the first priority for mobo vendors to fix bugs and optimize performance / stability.
z690+13th would be lagging behind.

to be fair d5 oc is not that realistic in actual improvement on games and software so z690 is all fine.


----------



## Simkin

Martin778 said:


> Z790 is the last LGA1700 chipset anyway, right?


Yes. Meteor Lake next after LGA1700, rumored to be delayed to 2024, but Intel says its coming 2023 as planned. So who knows


----------



## Martin778

Guess it's really depends from what AMD is going to bring to the table, rumor has it they will release Zen4 X3D's in Q1/2 2023 so a big chance of retaking the gaming CPU crown.
Really thinking about jumping on the 7900X...or maybe just don't give a darn anymore and keep that Dark and 12900K for years.


----------



## akgis

AMD always have issues at launch and its their first take on DDR5 they will do the same errors as Intel if not worst.

Raptor lake would be a better choise more mature, but yeh if you have a bad mobo its ****ty luck 

Me personally I think alder lake with DDR5 is a good plataform for gaming, the CPU sits idle on most games only Spiderman gives it a workout but nothing that bottlenecks the my 3090, for gaming at this point upgrading CPU if you have 12700k+ or 5800x+ its a waste of money.


----------



## tubs2x4

asdkj1740 said:


> to be fair d5 oc is not that realistic in actual improvement on games and software so z690 is all fine.


yea video cards are the biggest gain you will ever see without headaches of finding mem stability thats on the edge. for some thats fun though haha


----------



## SlixFPS

Hey guys, I'm sure it's annoying to see similar questions over and over again but I need some advice as my system still refuses to be completely stable.

I have an Apex with a 12900K and 32Gigs of G.SKILL RAM (5600MHzCL40 RGB) and I can't get my system to run completely stable ever since I've built this PC in November 2021.
So the board is from the 2021 batch and I'm still encountering bluescreens or just entire freezes. I've tried pretty much every BIOS version except for the last two releases.
Right now my RAM has to run without XMP as the system crashes/freezes even more often. At 4800MHz the system usually ran fine but even at this speed my system gives me a headache.
Ages ago I could run 5600MHz with rare crashes but now the system gets unstable. I experimented with the memory voltages (went as high as 1.35 or 1.4V VDD / VDDQ I think) and it helped a little.
Temps at these speeds/voltages should be no problem as I have a Fractal Torrent case. Depending on the OC/Voltage my PC refuses to boot and shows an error code.

As far as I've read it seems to be due to the board or RAM, right? Should I try to get my Apex replaced or get some SK Hynix RAM first? Any settings and BIOS you guys would recommend so I can at least go back to my 5600MHz? And I dreamed of going higher lol...

I had to reinstall Windows at least 10 times as my OS often got corrupted. This gen sucks. More expensive, yet more issues than usual.


----------



## Martin778

Good luck with ASUS RMA...I'm afraid. Also my Samsung RAM was 6000 C36 and it died on the Apex.


----------



## SlixFPS

Martin778 said:


> Good luck with ASUS RMA...I'm afraid. Also my Samsung RAM was 6000 C36 and it died on the Apex.


Damn. :/


----------



## 7empe

asdkj1740 said:


> msi has new/better d5 layout for z790.
> gigabyte 6 layers PCB mobo on z790 and x670 are much stronger. those current z690 models are ... there are reasons why they eventually drop 6200mhz in qvl.
> 
> and for sure 13th+z790 would be the first priority for mobo vendors to fix bugs and optimize performance / stability.
> z690+13th would be lagging behind.
> 
> to be fair d5 oc is not that realistic in actual improvement on games and software so z690 is all fine.


Looking at the Intel's CPU release pace from the past:

9th Q4 2018
10th Q2 2020
11th Q1 2021
12th Q4 2021
it seems logical that shorter release window for the new chipset gives mobo vendors around half a year of the bios bug fixing and stabilization, while the second half is focused on new platform design and development. This is exactly what happened to Z690 and will happen to Z790 as well.


----------



## asdkj1740

7empe said:


> Looking at the Intel's CPU release pace from the past:
> 
> 9th Q4 2018
> 10th Q2 2020
> 11th Q1 2021
> 12th Q4 2021
> it seems logical that shorter release window for the new chipset gives mobo vendors around half a year of the bios bug fixing and stabilization, while the second half is focused on new platform design and development. This is exactly what happened to Z690 and will happen to Z790 as well.


am5 is another whole new platform mobo vendors need to put serious efforts to deal with, so for the smoothest experience new chipset plus new cpu would be the best.
ppl should not expect any sooner than before to receive equivalent support on new cpu with old mobo this time.
however, z690 is coming cheaper and cheaper these days, so it is not a bad choice at all.
the improvement over z690 chipset in terms of hsio (connectivity) is a joke. z690 is well too strong already.

one last point, Microsoft is also messing around with oc now, so mobo vendors also take time to dance with os.
the core isolation in windows settings now may mess with cpu manual oc by increasing or reducing voltages .


----------



## sulalin

ROG Z690 APEX & Hynix DDR5 A-DIE OC 8800MHz
Single Channel / CPU-WATER / MEMORY-AIR COOLING
BIOS: 1304U15 with full settings 8C / 16HT
AVX/AVX2/AVX512 ON
Hope it can help who loves memory overclocking~


Spoiler: BIOS 設置


----------



## flashy

Does anyone removed the RGB part which is on the heatsink? Is it possible to remove it without destroying it?
This RGB plate I mean:










-----



Mappi75 said:


> @*flashy*
> 
> 1503 was the best for my 12900KS now running 0082 atm


Now that is very helpful, thanks a lot !

The Z690 Hero was delivered yesterday  let's see which BIOS version it is by default.
But according to your posting it seems that I would be able to go back in the version history, if needed.


----------



## sulalin

7empe，發布：29030598，成員：641121 said:


> 就個人而言，我認為從 z690 升級到 z790 並沒有什麼好處（除了更換螺紋頂點板）。我會等著看是否值得。也許 z890 將是更重要的飛躍。
> [/引用]
> 13代cpu和z790 HERO可以輕鬆使用世全DDR5-adie 16G*2風冷7600CL36 44 44 76 1.4v通過runmemtest7.0內存燒錄器測試500%單腳跟可以達到8000MHZ。4dimm 板子你還不如等待新的 Z790 HERO 超越你的想像！


----------



## affxct

Martin778 said:


> They are 'cheap' from Amazon when discounted - my DARK was €650 delivered to the doorstep here. Delivered in 3 days through Amazon US, all fees included.


Mine was $653 so basically the same lmao. That's kinda odd. I'm not complaining though XD.


----------



## 7empe

sulalin said:


> 7empe，發布：29030598，成員：641121 said:
> 就個人而言，我認為從 z690 升級到 z790 並沒有什麼好處（除了更換螺紋頂點板）。我會等著看是否值得。也許 z890 將是更重要的飛躍。
> [/引用]
> 13代cpu和z790 HERO可以輕鬆使用世全DDR5-adie 16G*2風冷7600CL36 44 44 76 1.4v通過runmemtest7.0內存燒錄器測試500%單腳跟可以達到8000MHZ。4dimm 板子你還不如等待新的 Z790 HERO 超越你的想像！


Intresting! God tier sample, or an ordinary OC? We will see


----------



## tubs2x4

asdkj1740 said:


> am5 is another whole new platform mobo vendors need to put serious efforts to deal with, so for the smoothest experience new chipset plus new cpu would be the best.
> ppl should not expect any sooner than before to receive equivalent support on new cpu with old mobo this time.
> however, z690 is coming cheaper and cheaper these days, so it is not a bad choice at all.
> the improvement over z690 chipset in terms of hsio (connectivity) is a joke. z690 is well too strong already.
> 
> one last point, Microsoft is also messing around with oc now, so mobo vendors also take time to dance with os.
> the core isolation in windows settings now may mess with cpu manual oc by increasing or reducing voltages .
> View attachment 2572109


Vid didn’t show physical evidence of that? Like show where the overclock voltage was actually being seen changing then what bios was set.


----------



## affxct

asdkj1740 said:


> am5 is another whole new platform mobo vendors need to put serious efforts to deal with, so for the smoothest experience new chipset plus new cpu would be the best.
> ppl should not expect any sooner than before to receive equivalent support on new cpu with old mobo this time.
> however, z690 is coming cheaper and cheaper these days, so it is not a bad choice at all.
> the improvement over z690 chipset in terms of hsio (connectivity) is a joke. z690 is well too strong already.
> 
> one last point, Microsoft is also messing around with oc now, so mobo vendors also take time to dance with os.
> the core isolation in windows settings now may mess with cpu manual oc by increasing or reducing voltages .
> View attachment 2572109


People actually enable core isolation?


----------



## asdkj1740

affxct said:


> People actually enable core isolation?


they dont, ms does that for all of us sooner or later.


----------



## asdkj1740

7empe said:


> Intresting! God tier sample, or an ordinary OC? We will see


he said air cooling only.
2022 z690 hero has been showing some crazier results among four dimm mobos.
guys, try to sell your expensive $400 USD or more m die kit now, and wait for a die kit to be available in your country.


----------



## 7empe

asdkj1740 said:


> he said air cooling only.
> 2022 z690 hero has been showing some crazier results among four dimm mobos.
> guys, try to sell your expensive $400 USD or more m die kit now, and wait for a die kit to be available in your country.


Which vendors have a-die already? Team Group only?


----------



## 673714

affxct said:


> It's the board, trust me.


I hate that I have to say you were right, but it can't do 6400MHz with Kingston memory either. Definitely a bad motherboard 

My order from Kingston was delayed a day, that's why I'm only just now posting this. My first impression was the sticks looked better and felt sturdier in my hands. Unfortunately, that's the first and last good thing I can say.

They actually performed worse than my G.Skill Trident Z5s. They ran just as hot, maybe even hotter. I ordered the RGB version, and they do not work with Asus Aura Sync at all. They require their own software to be installed to control them. As if that wasn't enough reason for me to return them, the software is just absolutely horrendous. It has an options menu with get this, 1 option. There is no button to apply changes after you make them and hitting enter on your keyboard won't do anything either. I gave up very quickly. The LEDs they used are obnoxious, like literally 10x brighter than anyone needs, I had to turn the brightness down to 10 percent so they would look right with everything else. 

Then to make it even worse, if you don't allow the software to start when windows does and run in the background, the RBG will only do the default factory setting (rainbow cycle). And just to kick me in the nuts Armory Crate recognizes the Kingston RGBs on the ram, and will install the services to sync it, but they obviously don't, so now task manager always has "AacKingstonDramHal" in the background tasks even after I took out the RAM, uninstalled the crap software and even rolled windows back to an image from 2 days ago. I was already going to reinstall windows, now I have even more reason to do so. 

Stupid, sloppy, proprietary, garbage pisses me right off


----------



## sulalin

ROG Z690 APEX & Hynix DDR5-ADIE 16G*2
OC DDR5-7600/7800/8000/8200/8266/8400 QUAD CHANNEL
CPU:WATER-COOLING MEMORY-AIR-COOLING
MEMORY: Hynix ADIE -81N AA(214A) + 81N BA(224A)
CPU:8P+8E/24HT
BIOS: 1701


Spoiler: DDR5-7600/7800/8000/8200/8266/8400QUAD-CHANNEL16G*2


----------



## affxct

LilOliVert said:


> I hate that I have to say you were right, but it can't do 6400MHz with Kingston memory either. Definitely a bad motherboard
> 
> My order from Kingston was delayed a day, that's why I'm only just now posting this. My first impression was the sticks looked better and felt sturdier in my hands. Unfortunately, that's the first and last good thing I can say.
> 
> They actually performed worse than my G.Skill Trident Z5s. They ran just as hot, maybe even hotter. I ordered the RGB version, and they do not work with Asus Aura Sync at all. They require their own software to be installed to control them. As if that wasn't enough reason for me to return them, the software is just absolutely horrendous. It has an options menu with get this, 1 option. There is no button to apply changes after you make them and hitting enter on your keyboard won't do anything either. I gave up very quickly. The LEDs they used are obnoxious, like literally 10x brighter than anyone needs, I had to turn the brightness down to 10 percent so they would look right with everything else.
> 
> Then to make it even worse, if you don't allow the software to start when windows does and run in the background, the RBG will only do the default factory setting (rainbow cycle). And just to kick me in the nuts Armory Crate recognizes the Kingston RGBs on the ram, and will install the services to sync it, but they obviously don't, so now task manager always has "AacKingstonDramHal" in the background tasks even after I took out the RAM, uninstalled the crap software and even rolled windows back to an image from 2 days ago. I was already going to reinstall windows, now I have even more reason to do so.
> 
> Stupid, sloppy, proprietary, garbage pisses me right off


The non-RGB variants have cuts in the heatsinks that allow for airflow. I am sorry that this happened to you though. I'm not sure if the Renegades are just worse than Fury Beast. Fury Beast 6000C40 has been treating me very well. With that said, I am unbelievably sorry. I hope you manage to get your board either RMA'd or sold.


----------



## 673714

affxct said:


> The non-RGB variants have cuts in the heatsinks that allow for airflow. I am sorry that this happened to you though. I'm not sure if the Renegades are just worse than Fury Beast. Fury Beast 6000C40 has been treating me very well. With that said, I am unbelievably sorry. I hope you manage to get your board either RMA'd or sold.


Thanks. Honestly, because of the amount of hassle involved, I am seriously considering doing nothing and leaving the memory slightly underclocked. When I started the build, I just wanted to be above 6000MHz on the memory. I doubt anyone could really see or hear any difference between 6200 and 6400 while gaming or VR anyway


----------



## 673714

Voodoo Hoodoo said:


> Gskill 6400C32 with mild tuning. Active fan cooling on the DIMMS.
> 
> View attachment 2571505
> 
> 
> Maybe I got lucky with a great IMC (SP88) and an overqualified Extreme, but it's not been my experience to get golden parts (I usually only buy one CPU/MB per refresh).
> 
> I do agree that there have been numerous issues with Z690 from Asus.. I've been a customer for a long time but that's still no excuse for what's happened with Alder Lake.
> 
> I did up the voltage a little from 1.4 to keep stability while tightening the timings.
> 
> I hope you can stabilise whatever bandwidth and timings you want.


Ok, after the Kingston Fury Renegades did even worse, I looked at this again. Thanks btw, I appreciate any help I can get.

It didn't take me long to realize that I already had a lot of the same settings (only at 6200MHz and 1.4v), either entered manually after following suggestions like in BZ videos, or because that's what the bios went with automatically. Keeping all the settings the same and only bumping it up to 6400 and the vdd to 1.42v with vddq to 1.42v did not work. (The bios doesn't let me enter 1.425 like your screenshot for whatever reason) Grand theft auto crashed to desktop in minutes. Then I tried the higher side of that @1.43v for both and the game CTD even faster than before. Tried something different with vdd 1.42 and vddq 1.4 and it lasted a lot longer but still failed less than 30 minutes later. It gives me hope maybe I can somehow get 6400, but it sucks trying over and over and over again and failing, especially when you start to get your hopes up because it's lasting a long time 

Your screenshots don't tell me what settings you've entered manually and which ones the motherboard has gone with because the setting is on "auto", so idk what if anything I should try to specify. I have high dram power enabled instead of auto, idk what others go with on here. Also, because the manufacturer claims [email protected], that's what I manually select in the bios and just like the high dram setting, it works great with 6200, but if it's just as fast set to 2 I don't care to change that if it means gaining stability. My personal preference is fastest possible response time, so 55ns or lower would make me happy.

Something I noticed in windows using things like HWiNFO64 I'll see the Ring/LLC Clock is only 3600, and other times up to 4700. Do I need to change a setting to make it 4700 every time it boots, or is that normal behavior and it changes as needed?

Almost forgot to ask what IVR transmitter vddq does 6400 require?. I know BZ says 1.4v for 6200, does it need to be the same as vdd or vddq as a rule of thumb or something? that’s why I wanted to ask.


----------



## trihy

Bios 20xx available for some boards. Has the same microcode for alder than 17xx. A new one for raptor.

Changelog:

No need to tell. Pretty obvious.


----------



## tubs2x4

deleted.


----------



## tubs2x4

LilOliVert said:


> Ok, after the Kingston Fury Renegades did even worse, I looked at this again. Thanks btw, I appreciate any help I can get.
> 
> It didn't take me long to realize that I already had a lot of the same settings (only at 6200MHz and 1.4v), either entered manually after following suggestions like in BZ videos, or because that's what the bios went with automatically. Keeping all the settings the same and only bumping it up to 6400 and the vdd to 1.42v with vddq to 1.42v did not work. (The bios doesn't let me enter 1.425 like your screenshot for whatever reason) Grand theft auto crashed to desktop in minutes. Then I tried the higher side of that @1.43v for both and the game CTD even faster than before. Tried something different with vdd 1.42 and vddq 1.4 and it lasted a lot longer but still failed less than 30 minutes later. It gives me hope maybe I can somehow get 6400, but it sucks trying over and over and over again and failing, especially when you start to get your hopes up because it's lasting a long time
> 
> Your screenshots don't tell me what settings you've entered manually and which ones the motherboard has gone with because the setting is on "auto", so idk what if anything I should try to specify. I have high dram power enabled instead of auto, idk what others go with on here. Also, because the manufacturer claims [email protected], that's what I manually select in the bios and just like the high dram setting, it works great with 6200, but if it's just as fast set to 2 I don't care to change that if it means gaining stability. My personal preference is fastest possible response time, so 55ns or lower would make me happy.
> 
> Something I noticed in windows using things like HWiNFO64 I'll see the Ring/LLC Clock is only 3600, and other times up to 4700. Do I need to change a setting to make it 4700 every time it boots, or is that normal behavior and it changes as needed?
> 
> Almost forgot to ask what IVR transmitter vddq does 6400 require?. I know BZ says 1.4v for 6200, does it need to be the same as vdd or vddq as a rule of thumb or something? that’s why I wanted to ask.



On my 4 dimm asus board using those vengeance 6200 with bz timings been working great. I went with 1.375v instead and hwinfo shows 1.360v. 
my MC is at auto which is 1.32v and SA is auto which is 1.23v and ivr is 1.375v.


----------



## Voodoo Hoodoo

LilOliVert said:


> Ok, after the Kingston Fury Renegades did even worse, I looked at this again. Thanks btw, I appreciate any help I can get.
> 
> It didn't take me long to realize that I already had a lot of the same settings (only at 6200MHz and 1.4v), either entered manually after following suggestions like in BZ videos, or because that's what the bios went with automatically. Keeping all the settings the same and only bumping it up to 6400 and the vdd to 1.42v with vddq to 1.42v did not work. (The bios doesn't let me enter 1.425 like your screenshot for whatever reason) Grand theft auto crashed to desktop in minutes. Then I tried the higher side of that @1.43v for both and the game CTD even faster than before. Tried something different with vdd 1.42 and vddq 1.4 and it lasted a lot longer but still failed less than 30 minutes later. It gives me hope maybe I can somehow get 6400, but it sucks trying over and over and over again and failing, especially when you start to get your hopes up because it's lasting a long time
> 
> Your screenshots don't tell me what settings you've entered manually and which ones the motherboard has gone with because the setting is on "auto", so idk what if anything I should try to specify. I have high dram power enabled instead of auto, idk what others go with on here. Also, because the manufacturer claims [email protected], that's what I manually select in the bios and just like the high dram setting, it works great with 6200, but if it's just as fast set to 2 I don't care to change that if it means gaining stability. My personal preference is fastest possible response time, so 55ns or lower would make me happy.
> 
> Something I noticed in windows using things like HWiNFO64 I'll see the Ring/LLC Clock is only 3600, and other times up to 4700. Do I need to change a setting to make it 4700 every time it boots, or is that normal behavior and it changes as needed?
> 
> Almost forgot to ask what IVR transmitter vddq does 6400 require?. I know BZ says 1.4v for 6200, does it need to be the same as vdd or vddq as a rule of thumb or something? that’s why I wanted to ask.


I'll shoot you some PM's when I get home from work tonight with screenshots of bios settings.

Ring/LLC clock behaviour described above is normal if you have e-cores enabled.


----------



## affxct

LilOliVert said:


> Ok, after the Kingston Fury Renegades did even worse, I looked at this again. Thanks btw, I appreciate any help I can get.
> 
> It didn't take me long to realize that I already had a lot of the same settings (only at 6200MHz and 1.4v), either entered manually after following suggestions like in BZ videos, or because that's what the bios went with automatically. Keeping all the settings the same and only bumping it up to 6400 and the vdd to 1.42v with vddq to 1.42v did not work. (The bios doesn't let me enter 1.425 like your screenshot for whatever reason) Grand theft auto crashed to desktop in minutes. Then I tried the higher side of that @1.43v for both and the game CTD even faster than before. Tried something different with vdd 1.42 and vddq 1.4 and it lasted a lot longer but still failed less than 30 minutes later. It gives me hope maybe I can somehow get 6400, but it sucks trying over and over and over again and failing, especially when you start to get your hopes up because it's lasting a long time
> 
> Your screenshots don't tell me what settings you've entered manually and which ones the motherboard has gone with because the setting is on "auto", so idk what if anything I should try to specify. I have high dram power enabled instead of auto, idk what others go with on here. Also, because the manufacturer claims [email protected], that's what I manually select in the bios and just like the high dram setting, it works great with 6200, but if it's just as fast set to 2 I don't care to change that if it means gaining stability. My personal preference is fastest possible response time, so 55ns or lower would make me happy.
> 
> Something I noticed in windows using things like HWiNFO64 I'll see the Ring/LLC Clock is only 3600, and other times up to 4700. Do I need to change a setting to make it 4700 every time it boots, or is that normal behavior and it changes as needed?
> 
> Almost forgot to ask what IVR transmitter vddq does 6400 require?. I know BZ says 1.4v for 6200, does it need to be the same as vdd or vddq as a rule of thumb or something? that’s why I wanted to ask.


Ring fluctuates at stock. Totally normal. It depends on when your chip leverages the E-cores.


----------



## 673714

Voodoo Hoodoo said:


> I'll shoot you some PM's when I get home from work tonight with screenshots of bios settings.
> 
> Ring/LLC clock behaviour described above is normal if you have e-cores enabled.


Oh ok great, thanks. Yep that explains it, I have e-cores enabled lol


----------



## gambit07

Anybody know the best bios revision on the maximus formula for memory compatibility? I've got dominator platinum running at xmp I that throws errors in memtest, no errors at base speeds. If the latest bios is fine, any suggestions on getting xmp stable on the formula?


----------



## TSportM

trihy said:


> Bios 20xx available for some boards. Has the same microcode for alder than 17xx. A new one for raptor.
> 
> Changelog:
> 
> No need to tell. Pretty obvious.


nothing for the extreme yet....


----------



## trihy

Probably next week. It´s already available for z690p among others.


----------



## bastian

trihy said:


> Probably next week. It´s already available for z690p among others.





TSportM said:


> nothing for the extreme yet....


EXTREME 2004 BIOS:



https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/BIOS/ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-2004.zip


----------



## Csavez™

I uploaded the apex 2004 bios, of course the aida sst throws an error, but it no longer allows the older bios to be installed!








It says this for all older bios, it only allows 2004 to be installed, has anyone done 2004u15?


----------



## bastian

HERO 2004 BIOS



https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/BIOS/ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-HERO-ASUS-2004.zip



APEX 2004 BIOS



https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/BIOS/ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-2004.zip


----------



## Mappi75

ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX BIOS 2004
"1. Improve system performance
2. Update ME version to 16.1.25.1885v2






ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX | ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX | Gaming Motherboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG Global


AX5400 Dual Band WiFi 6 Gaming Router, WiFi 6 802.11ax, Mobile Game Mode, ASUS AURA RGB, Lifetime Free Internet Security, Mesh WiFi support, Gear Accelerator, Gaming Port, Adaptive QoS, Port Forwarding



rog.asus.com





Does this bios make sense for alderlake cpu's (12900KS) ?


----------



## Csavez™

Mappi75 said:


> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX BIOS 2004
> "1. Improve system performance
> 2. Update ME version to 16.1.25.1885v2
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX | ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX | Gaming Motherboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG Global
> 
> 
> AX5400 Dual Band WiFi 6 Gaming Router, WiFi 6 802.11ax, Mobile Game Mode, ASUS AURA RGB, Lifetime Free Internet Security, Mesh WiFi support, Gear Accelerator, Gaming Port, Adaptive QoS, Port Forwarding
> 
> 
> 
> rog.asus.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Does this bios make sense for alderlake cpu's (12900KS) ?


if you install it, you'll suck like me!


----------



## Nizzen

Csavez™ said:


> if you install it, you'll suck like me!


Dual bios ftw?


----------



## Csavez™

Nizzen said:


> Dual bios ftw?


I did not use.


----------



## Simkin

trihy said:


> Bios 20xx available for some boards. Has the same microcode for alder than 17xx. A new one for raptor.
> 
> Changelog:
> 
> No need to tell. Pretty obvious.


So, there was issues with the microcode/bios on 1720, and its still the same on 2004 bios?

Didnt Asus say they was aware of it?


----------



## Nizzen

Simkin said:


> So, there was issues with the microcode/bios on 1720, and its still the same on 2004 bios?
> 
> Didnt Asus say they was aware of it?


Try it. Dual bios is there 
Repport back here. 😁


----------



## Csavez™

Nizzen said:


> Dual bios ftw?


Reach the bios switch! 









It worked, thanks for the idea.


----------



## affxct

Csavez™ said:


> Reach the bios switch!
> View attachment 2572399
> 
> 
> It worked, thanks for the idea.
> View attachment 2572400


Which memory cooler is that? Is that a Vengeance Airflow 2 painted white?


----------



## Csavez™

affxct said:


> Which memory cooler is that? Is that a Vengeance Airflow 2 painted white?


----------



## affxct

Csavez™ said:


> View attachment 2572405
> View attachment 2572403
> View attachment 2572402
> View attachment 2572404


Ahhh I knew it! I have the same one. It's super rare I think. I can't really even find reviews for it.


----------



## Csavez™

Asus can go to .....
I installed a virgin bios, which is not full of new microcodes, and the 6600 works right away!
1302 bios.


----------



## affxct

Csavez™ said:


> Asus can go to .....
> I installed a virgin bios, which is not full of new microcodes, and the 6600 works right away!
> View attachment 2572415


Which one?


----------



## TechSaskia

any news on the 2004 BIOS?
is it any good?


----------



## akgis

Does the Hero has dual bios?


----------



## akgis

TechSaskia said:


> any news on the 2004 BIOS?
> is it any good?


I would be jumping on it but a user said they couldnt revert, and Iam not sure I have dual bios on the Hero.


----------



## TSportM

Is this true ? Cant revert if you install 2004
If this is so its a load of crap

any feedback on 2004?

cheers


----------



## akgis

TSportM said:


> Is this true ? Cant revert if you install 2004
> If this is so its a load of crap
> 
> any feedback on 2004?
> 
> cheers


its literally on the previous page.


----------



## bastian

2004 installed on my Extreme. So far so good.


----------



## TechSaskia

Ok I installed the 2004 on my Extreme.
VF curve started working again, with same RAM settings as before training is much faster than previous BIOSes.

2004 seems good for now.


----------



## Csavez™

Can you see if you can install an older bios?
You must exit before installation.
Leave until it displays the old bios number, at which point it will already indicate an error for me.


----------



## TSportM

akgis said:


> its literally on the previous page.


My portuguese friend i can see its on the previous page i only asked if its a fact, it could be some problem as i rolled Back by flashback no problems ( also only install via flashback)

the asus forums also reports similar problems with some users.

cheers


----------



## Agent-A01

Csavez™ said:


> View attachment 2572405
> View attachment 2572403
> View attachment 2572402
> View attachment 2572404


I wonder if it's better than this, 3x 40mm noctuas ( I went this route because it's smaller in total size)


----------



## TechSaskia

Csavez™ said:


> Can you see if you can install an older bios?
> You must exit before installation.
> Leave until it displays the old bios number, at which point it will already indicate an error for me.


2004 needs a new ME.
Update the ME manually by using the Asus updater.

2004 seems solid, no reason to downgrade to an older BIOS.


----------



## Csavez™

TechSaskia said:


> 2004 needs a new ME.
> Update the ME manually by using the Asus updater.
> 
> 2004 seems solid, no reason to downgrade to an older BIOS.


I have an overclocked system and it is sensitive to microcode, all tests threw errors, the aida immediately turned red, I couldn't go back to an older bios even with bios flaskback, but a bios changer helped, now there are no errors!
I installed "the Me", reloaded the 2004 bios several times, nothing, I expect to be able to permanently delete it from the motherboard somehow!


----------



## Tibby67

bastian said:


> 2004 installed on my Extreme. So far so good.


yeah all good here on my Extreme..


----------



## Agent-A01

No problems on an apex with 2004. My old settings on 1720 work just fine. Training seems to be a bit faster too.


----------



## Csavez™

Agent-A01 said:


> No problems on an apex with 2004. My old settings on 1720 work just fine. Training seems to be a bit faster too.


You have "tuf", with ddr4, did you hear from someone that everything is fine with 2004?


----------



## YntooB

Testing 2004 on my strix itx. I have to manually update ME since new bios doesn't include ME update (although the BIOS description indicates that "Update ME version to 16.1.25.1885v2 "). Before I realize it, 2004 with old ME brought me lots of BSOD.


----------



## TSportM

YntooB said:


> Testing 2004 on my strix itx. I have to manually update ME since new bios doesn't include ME update (although the BIOS description indicates that "Update ME version to 16.1.25.1885v2 "). Before I realize it, 2004 with old ME brought me lots of BSOD.
> View attachment 2572469


Yep it says update to that version and so you did


----------



## Nizzen

From our friends at Clock em Up:
Looks like that the new bios is solid


----------



## YntooB

TSportM said:


> Yep it says update to that version and so you did


LOL, just realized it should be a command instead. Anyway, there is no BSOD any more.


----------



## Mutaz koje

Hi;
I have ROG Z690-F WiFi & i7 12700kf
What about bios V 2004 it is fine ?
what first update bios or Intel ME 16.1.25.1885v2 ???
thanks


----------



## nyxagamemnon

You can update the me first I already updated the me without going to the new bios yet.


----------



## Simkin

2004 bios, so far so good on my Apex.


----------



## Bluerain

2004 seems good on my hero though needed higher voltage for memory to be stable than 1601 at 6600mhz.


----------



## bastian

I can confirm there is a couple weird things with 2004 BIOS. It is true you cannot downgrade from it after and if you run MemTest within the BIOS it will throw you a bunch of errors you never had before.


----------



## owikh84

No problem with BIOS 2004 so far, ring/cache clock is not locked at 3600 anymore.

12900KS SP95 (P104/E78) - P52/E42/R43
Maximus Z690 EXTREME | BIOS 2004
G.Skill Trident Z5R F5-6400J3239G16GA2-TZ5RK (Hynix) + 2x Noctua 40mm

*2x16GB DDR5-6800 32-40-40-30-2T
VDD/VDDQ/TX VDDQ 1.55v | SA 0.975v | MC 1.35v*


----------



## hemirunner426

Are profiles from 1720 compatible with 2004?

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk


----------



## Nizzen

hemirunner426 said:


> Are profiles from 1720 compatible with 2004?
> 
> Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk


It isn't recommended. Sometimes it's not 100% compatible, then it's unstable. Update the settings manualy. Best way


----------



## akgis

Iam not upgrading 1505 is rock stable for me, and the fact that 2004 dont allow going back bug or not disturbs me because if my mem is not stable I will get pissed.


----------



## Agent-A01

Csavez™ said:


> You have "tuf", with ddr4, did you hear from someone that everything is fine with 2004?


No, I have an apex. That information is old



owikh84 said:


> No problem with BIOS 2004 so far, ring/cache clock is not locked at 3600 anymore.


Random thought but I wonder why my TM5 took a whole 15 mins less on the same absolut config.
Faster memory should take less time to test in that test but you're not the only one I've seen take over an hour on the same test



hemirunner426 said:


> Are profiles from 1720 compatible with 2004?
> 
> Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk


You have dual bios, switch to the other one and try it out.


----------



## Csavez™

After 5 hours of searching I figured out what was causing the error in the 2004 bios. I had to increase the vdd by +0.02v.
Then the tests were run.

P53/E41/R43 One hour aida system stability test.









P53/E42/R44 Half an hour cbr23 stability test and one hour aida system stability test.

















I love this stuff!


----------



## bastian

Csavez™ said:


> After 5 hours of searching I figured out what was causing the error in the 2004 bios. I had to increase the vdd by +0.02v.
> Then the tests were run.
> 
> P53/E41/R43 One hour aida system stability test.
> View attachment 2572510
> 
> 
> P53/E42/R44 Half an hour cbr23 stability test and one hour aida system stability test.
> View attachment 2572512
> 
> View attachment 2572511
> 
> 
> I love this stuff!
> View attachment 2572513


Were you previously running the VDD at Auto?


----------



## Csavez™

bastian said:


> Were you previously running the VDD at Auto?


No, I had to put it from 1.53 to 1.55, as I wrote before, my sp88 is very sharp, most ks cpu can't do that either, every little voltage counts for stability.


----------



## kmellz

Updated, working fine so far, can confirm the ring etc bugs are not present from what it seems


----------



## Csavez™

kmellz said:


> Updated, working fine so far, can confirm the ring etc bugs are not present from what it seems


However, none of my friends can install an older bios either.
Asus did it directly?


----------



## Csavez™

Nizzen said:


> From our friends at Clock em Up:
> Looks like that the new bios is solid
> 
> View attachment 2572471
> 
> View attachment 2572472


Does this pass any of the stability tests?


----------



## grifers

How about the new 2004 bios for the TUF z690 D4 board? I'm with 1503 which I think is the best (someone correct me).


----------



## Nizzen

Csavez™ said:


> Does this pass any of the stability tests?


It passed aida and geekbench 3, eyyyh  

I will look out for "memtest" post from them. Check out their youtube channel


----------



## Csavez™

Nizzen said:


> It passed aida and geekbench 3, eyyyh
> 
> I will look out for "memtest" post from them. Check out their youtube channel


I looked but didn't see any stability tests on this.


----------



## tubs2x4

akgis said:


> Iam not upgrading 1505 is rock stable for me, and the fact that 2004 dont allow going back bug or not disturbs me because if my mem is not stable I will get pissed.


yea if works fine for what you do I wouldn’t touch bios again unless you put a 13th gen in is only reason why need bios update.


----------



## Mappi75

Maybe i should try 1505 too for my KS - for my experience 1503 was the best for my KS (only ram related).
Now using 0086 which works great too..

1505 i did not used in the past.. (wondering why..) only updated from 1503 to 1601 which was a desaster (tm5 was full blown with errors all sections were red coloured, never saw this ever before).


----------



## stahlhart

tubs2x4 said:


> yea if works fine for what you do I wouldn’t touch bios again unless you put a 13th gen in is only reason why need bios update.


I was going to stay at 1304, since this Strix E isn't ever going to see RL, but being an occasional glutton for punishment I gave BIOS updating for this board one last shot last night. 2004 appears to be quite stable so far; I'm using the same OC and memory timing settings as I had in place for 1304.


----------



## Falkentyne

Downgrade from 2004 is NOT POSSIBLE. There are new security module related changes in the BIOS (which is why Intel ME must also be updated) and this prevents downgrade. BIOS flashback is NOT the same as using a hardware programmer, just because flashback can work without a CPU or RAM installed--there are still EC (Embedded Controller) checks to make sure the BIOS version you are trying to flash back is compatible. (It's the EC that allows the system to even be powered on in the first place, or which controls the primary/secondary BIOS toggle button switch). 2004 will flag all previous bioses as incompatible (the blue flash LED will flash 5 times instead of 2, then stop to signal incompatible bios version, while 2 flashes then stopping means no properly renamed bios found or bad USB file format, etc).

This information comes from bianbao.dev (Asus R&D).

Of course you can force flash an older BIOS with Elmor's tool or another SPI programmer but I would not even attempt such a thing, since you could be risking a complete brick if the EC refuses to boot an old BIOS, or refuses to downgrade the EC firmware to the matching BIOS version).


----------



## Gking62

Falkentyne said:


> Downgrade from 2004 is NOT POSSIBLE. There are new security module related changes in the BIOS (which is why Intel ME must also be updated) and this prevents downgrade. BIOS flashback is NOT the same as using a hardware programmer, just because flashback can work without a CPU or RAM installed--there are still EC (Embedded Controller) checks to make sure the BIOS version you are trying to flash back is compatible. (It's the EC that allows the system to even be powered on in the first place, or which controls the primary/secondary BIOS toggle button switch). 2004 will flag all previous bioses as incompatible (the blue flash LED will flash 5 times instead of 2, then stop to signal incompatible bios version, while 2 flashes then stopping means no properly renamed bios found or bad USB file format, etc).
> 
> This information comes from bianbao.dev (Asus R&D).
> 
> Of course you can force flash an older BIOS with Elmor's tool or another SPI programmer but I would not even attempt such a thing, since you could be risking a complete brick if the EC refuses to boot an old BIOS, or refuses to downgrade the EC firmware to the matching BIOS version).


This all makes perfect sense, would you recommend this BIOS and what of the current numbering scheme, seems odd thanks.


----------



## Falkentyne

Gking62 said:


> This all makes perfect sense, would you recommend this BIOS and what of the current numbering scheme, seems odd thanks.


I'm not using this BIOS nor am I using a Z690 board, sorry.


----------



## Csavez™

Gking62 said:


> This all makes perfect sense, would you recommend this BIOS and what of the current numbering scheme, seems odd thanks.


After adjusting the voltages again, it can be said to be good, but it's annoying that you can only go forward from here!
I can't believe that the Asus testers didn't notice this, they must have made this barrier directly!
I just want to know why this is good for them?


----------



## bscool

2022 Apex bios 2004 u code 15

Arctic LF2 420 AIO

Memory air cooled Phantek T30 - 7000c30

I removed all u codes and replaced with 15 so KS and newer 13 gens probably wont work. I have only tested with 12900K as in screenshots.

Y cruncher 2.5b @ 53/49 on this bios is approximately 2 seconds faster than same settings on previous bioses using same settings for 2.5b.

Also *you cannot flash back to older bioses from this bios*.

I flashed to the "stock" 2004 first. Then I modded 2004 and it can be flashed to this modded 2004 with u code 15.

Edit note I also did not update to the newest IME so maybe that is why my y cruncher score seems "bugged".

If you try it post feedback about your y cruncher score.









2004u15.cap


CAP File



1drv.ms













bscool`s y-cruncher - Pi-2.5b score: 53sec 53ms with a Core i9 12900K (8P)


The Core i9 12900K (8P) @ 5300MHzscores getScoreFormatted in the y-cruncher - Pi-2.5b benchmark. bscoolranks #null worldwide and #null in the hardware class. Find out more at HWBOT.




hwbot.org


----------



## tubs2x4

stahlhart said:


> I was going to stay at 1304, since this Strix E isn't ever going to see RL, but being an occasional glutton for punishment I gave BIOS updating for this board one last shot last night. 2004 appears to be quite stable so far; I'm using the same OC and memory timing settings as I had in place for 1304.


Yea I’m still on 1403. It’s been working just fine. Now you can’t flash bios backwards if you go 2004 not sure what be reasoning for that.


----------



## Nizzen

tubs2x4 said:


> Yea I’m still on 1403. It’s been working just fine. Now you can’t flash bios backwards if you go 2004 not sure what be reasoning for that.


Dual bios is still a winner 
2004 is maybe the best bios for Raptor, so not likely the best for Alder. Haven't seen any effency tests 2004 VS older bioses with 12900k yet. For people that have to much spare time, this is going to be a nice test for this thread


----------



## stahlhart

tubs2x4 said:


> Yea I’m still on 1403. It’s been working just fine. Now you can’t flash bios backwards if you go 2004 not sure what be reasoning for that.


What happens if you try to...?

Edit: has anyone tried flashback from 2004 using the USB port on the back? Because the EZ flashback from within BIOS was already broken with 1720 here.


----------



## TSportM

*none the less asus should tel us that on the change log *


----------



## owikh84

Agent-A01 said:


> Random thought but I wonder why my TM5 took a whole 15 mins less on the same absolut config.
> Faster memory should take less time to test in that test but you're not the only one I've seen take over an hour on the same test


Saw your 6400C30 1T post earlier. Not sure how you could finish the TM5 in 59mins though. Maybe 6400C30 1T is really faster than 6800C32 2T?

Edit: it was 6400C30 1T


----------



## ssgwright

Falkentyne said:


> Downgrade from 2004 is NOT POSSIBLE. There are new security module related changes in the BIOS (which is why Intel ME must also be updated) and this prevents downgrade. BIOS flashback is NOT the same as using a hardware programmer, just because flashback can work without a CPU or RAM installed--there are still EC (Embedded Controller) checks to make sure the BIOS version you are trying to flash back is compatible. (It's the EC that allows the system to even be powered on in the first place, or which controls the primary/secondary BIOS toggle button switch). 2004 will flag all previous bioses as incompatible (the blue flash LED will flash 5 times instead of 2, then stop to signal incompatible bios version, while 2 flashes then stopping means no properly renamed bios found or bad USB file format, etc).
> 
> This information comes from bianbao.dev (Asus R&D).
> 
> Of course you can force flash an older BIOS with Elmor's tool or another SPI programmer but I would not even attempt such a thing, since you could be risking a complete brick if the EC refuses to boot an old BIOS, or refuses to downgrade the EC firmware to the matching BIOS version).


you have been a godsend on these forums with your knowledge and expertise, thanks!


----------



## SuperMumrik

bscool said:


> Y cruncher 2.5b @ 53/49 on this bios is approximately 2 seconds faster than same settings on previous bioses using same settings for 2.5b.
> 
> Also *you cannot flash back to older bioses from this bios*


God damn man! That is one impressive result with an AIO!

I might be able to climb up again with this new bios (currently down at 5th) 
Maybe it's time to switch off the 1304u15, but that bios has treated me so well (no re-train shenanigans with high speed and high vdd), but without a flashback option ..... 😐


----------



## grifers

Good morning. This 2004 bios for my TUF D4 is just awful. It increased the power consumption/temps of my stock 12700KF, with the previous bios (1503) the consumption was 135 wats, now almost 160. And leaving the VDDQ voltage on auto, this 2004 bios puts it at 1.5 with the stock processor and RAM (without XMP or Gear 1 in the RAM). And indeed I can't go back to older bios.

I changed BIOS (bad for me), but because my previous BIOS 1503 which had overclock 5ghz P cores, 4 GHz E-cores, 42 Uncore and 4000 Mhz 15-15-15-35 in RAM all perfectly stable 5 months ago (spending 1 hour of handbrake for 12700KF stability, and almost 5 hours of Karhu + full cycle of testmem 5 profile Absolout by Anta77 successfully completed and no error for the RAM), suddenly after several months going perfectly, it decides the board is unstable, during these 4 months the temperatures perfect playing (no more than 50 degrees the CPU at Back 4 blood, I only play that game), and the ram memory just 43 degrees. I have the feeling that this platform is a nonsense, no matter how stable you have the overclocks that at some point ceases to be, what a joke this is. I started to notice that something was wrong when playing Back 4 Blood the PC restarts after 1 hour or so (at low CPU and GPU loads), me blaming it on the game or the XBOX Gamepass application- In short.

At this point I do not know if my board went crazy or this bios 2004 is a mess, because now from stock happens that, leaving everything from stock and the voltages in AUTO this happens, the VDDQ voltage puts it very high, I had to put it manually to 1.35 which is how I had it before with all overclock and bios 1503.


----------



## TechSaskia

Falkentyne said:


> Downgrade from 2004 is NOT POSSIBLE. There are new security module related changes in the BIOS (which is why Intel ME must also be updated) and this prevents downgrade. BIOS flashback is NOT the same as using a hardware programmer, just because flashback can work without a CPU or RAM installed--there are still EC (Embedded Controller) checks to make sure the BIOS version you are trying to flash back is compatible. (It's the EC that allows the system to even be powered on in the first place, or which controls the primary/secondary BIOS toggle button switch). 2004 will flag all previous bioses as incompatible (the blue flash LED will flash 5 times instead of 2, then stop to signal incompatible bios version, while 2 flashes then stopping means no properly renamed bios found or bad USB file format, etc).
> 
> This information comes from bianbao.dev (Asus R&D).
> 
> Of course you can force flash an older BIOS with Elmor's tool or another SPI programmer but I would not even attempt such a thing, since you could be risking a complete brick if the EC refuses to boot an old BIOS, or refuses to downgrade the EC firmware to the matching BIOS version).


Isn't this an information that needs to be in the changelog?
Why you put only useless Infos in the changelog?

Why Asus is so mediocre even on simple things like that?


----------



## sulalin

如果你使用apex和Hynix adie，你可以使用bios2004，因為它讓你更正常地進入Windows系統和各種跑分測試！！！
























在此之前的舊版本允許我正常使用操作。

If you don't use aide ic, you don't have to use bios2004, which I have observed so far.


----------



## SuperMumrik

sulalin said:


> If you don't use aide ic, you don't have to use bios2004, which I have observed so far.


A-die perform better on 2004 then previous bioses?


----------



## Simkin

Would it be recommended to do a clean Windows install going from Z690 to Z790? Thinking of just swapping my OS NVMe drive directly over.

In my case most probably going from Apex 690 to Apex 790.


----------



## nickolp1974

Finally after 2 weeks, Amazon have now issued my refund for the Apex, another 4-5 week wait now for Raptor!!!


----------



## sulalin

SuperMumrik，帖子：29032204，成員：567353 said:


> A-die 在 2004 年的表現比以前的 bioses 更好？
> [/引用]Yes, before I used 2004bios, adie 7800/8000 frequency could not enter the operating system normally, let alone run any tests.


----------



## SuperMumrik

The only thing I'm missing then is some decently good binned a-dies!


----------



## stahlhart

grifers said:


> Good morning. This 2004 bios for my TUF D4 is just awful. It increased the power consumption/temps of my stock 12700KF, with the previous bios (1503) the consumption was 135 wats, now almost 160. And leaving the VDDQ voltage on auto, this 2004 bios puts it at 1.5 with the stock processor and RAM (without XMP or Gear 1 in the RAM). And indeed I can't go back to older bios.
> 
> I changed BIOS (bad for me), but because my previous BIOS 1503 which had overclock 5ghz P cores, 4 GHz E-cores, 42 Uncore and 4000 Mhz 15-15-15-35 in RAM all perfectly stable 5 months ago (spending 1 hour of handbrake for 12700KF stability, and almost 5 hours of Karhu + full cycle of testmem 5 profile Absolout by Anta77 successfully completed and no error for the RAM), suddenly after several months going perfectly, it decides the board is unstable, during these 4 months the temperatures perfect playing (no more than 50 degrees the CPU at Back 4 blood, I only play that game), and the ram memory just 43 degrees. I have the feeling that this platform is a nonsense, no matter how stable you have the overclocks that at some point ceases to be, what a joke this is. I started to notice that something was wrong when playing Back 4 Blood the PC restarts after 1 hour or so (at low CPU and GPU loads), me blaming it on the game or the XBOX Gamepass application- In short.
> 
> At this point I do not know if my board went crazy or this bios 2004 is a mess, because now from stock happens that, leaving everything from stock and the voltages in AUTO this happens, the VDDQ voltage puts it very high, I had to put it manually to 1.35 which is how I had it before with all overclock and bios 1503.


Have you tried using the "CrashFree" restoration method on page 3-4 of your motherboard's manual, or are you attempting to revert to the earlier BIOS from within the existing BIOS?

Reason I am asking is that I had the same issue with 1720 on my Strix E (not being able to flash back to 1304 in my case), and this was the solution here. On the Strix E there is a specific USB port for flash back, but your manual states "a USB port", so I'm assuming you can use any one, though I'd probably go with one on the I/O panel. You just need to make sure that the thumb drive is formatted FAT32.


----------



## sulalin

nickolp1974 said:


> 終於在 2 週後，亞馬遜現在為 Apex 發放了我的退款，現在再等 4-5 周等待 Raptor ！！！
> [/引用]
> 您可以等待第 13 代處理器和 z790 apex。目前十全DDR5芯片已經在8000頻率下運行memtestpro 7.0 300%+ 8200mhz正在測試中。


----------



## sulalin

等待 ROG Z790 HERO DDR5-7600-7800MHZ MEMTEST
ROG Z790 APEX DDR5-8000/8200+MHZ MEMTEST


----------



## FreeSpeechIsKnowledge

sulalin said:


> WAIT ROG Z790 HERO DDR5-7600-7800MHZ MEMTEST
> ROG Z790 APEX DDR5-8000/8200+MHZ MEMTEST
> View attachment 2572601
> 
> View attachment 2572600
> 
> View attachment 2572599



Those are probably the boards that work though. The ones they sell will be borked.


----------



## nickolp1974

FreeSpeechIsKnowledge said:


> Those are probably the boards that work though. The ones they sell will be borked.


hopefully not this time, surely Asus have learnt there lesson???


----------



## Nizzen

SuperMumrik said:


> The only thing I'm missing then is some decently good binned a-dies!


Visit me, and we play A-Die


nickolp1974 said:


> hopefully not this time, surely Asus have learnt there lesson???


Looks like they are popping off with next gen....


----------



## SuperMumrik

Nizzen said:


> Visit me, and we play A-Die


I'm on-shore for a few weeks more. We should have an OC/drinking event again soon


----------



## sulalin

FreeSpeechIsKnowledge，發布：29032293，成員：669355 said:


> 這些可能是工作的板。他們賣的那些將被淘汰。
> [/引用]
> 我還買了三個z690 apex😭


----------



## grifers

stahlhart said:


> Have you tried using the "CrashFree" restoration method on page 3-4 of your motherboard's manual, or are you attempting to revert to the earlier BIOS from within the existing BIOS?
> 
> Reason I am asking is that I had the same issue with 1720 on my Strix E (not being able to flash back to 1304 in my case), and this was the solution here. On the Strix E there is a specific USB port for flash back, but your manual states "a USB port", so I'm assuming you can use any one, though I'd probably go with one on the I/O panel. You just need to make sure that the thumb drive is formatted FAT32.



Hi, thanks for everything, but isn't bios crashfree when the bios is corrupted and you can't access it? I can if I can, the problem is that, that the stock processor now consumes almost 30 watts more, and thus raised the CPU temperatures.

Also by doing that or the flashback it seems that you can not return to a previous Bios which is in principle what I want, back to the 1503 or 1003 (the best Bios for the TUF D4)

P. D - I tried to go back to previous Bios from the existing Bios 2004 and could not.


----------



## 7empe

What about VF curve undervolting in 2004? Does it work properly now (I heard it does not - it gets ignored)?


----------



## bastian

sulalin said:


> If you don't use aide ic, you don't have to use bios2004, which I have observed so far.


It makes sense. Raptor Lake support has been since 16xx BIOS.


----------



## sulalin

bscool said:


> 2022 Apex bios 2004 u code 15
> 
> Arctic LF2 420 AIO
> 
> Memory air cooled Phantek T30 - 7000c30
> 
> I removed all u codes and replaced with 15 so KS and newer 13 gens probably wont work. I have only tested with 12900K as in screenshots.
> 
> Y cruncher 2.5b @ 53/49 on this bios is approximately 2 seconds faster than same settings on previous bioses using same settings for 2.5b.
> 
> Also *you cannot flash back to older bioses from this bios*.
> 
> I flashed to the "stock" 2004 first. Then I modded 2004 and it can be flashed to this modded 2004 with u code 15.
> 
> Edit note I also did not update to the newest IME so maybe that is why my y cruncher score seems "bugged".
> 
> If you try it post feedback about your y cruncher score.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2004u15.cap
> 
> 
> CAP File
> 
> 
> 
> 1drv.ms
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bscool`s y-cruncher - Pi-2.5b score: 53sec 53ms with a Core i9 12900K (8P)
> 
> 
> The Core i9 12900K (8P) @ 5300MHzscores getScoreFormatted in the y-cruncher - Pi-2.5b benchmark. bscoolranks #null worldwide and #null in the hardware class. Find out more at HWBOT.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hwbot.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [/引用]
> 不好意思，我已經是2004版了。我可以用支持 AVX512 的這個版本來覆蓋它嗎？謝謝你。


----------



## bscool

Yes, you can use Ez flash to flash 2004 with u code 15


----------



## sulalin

bscool，發布：29032366，成員：571521 said:


> 是的，您可以使用 Ez flash 使用 u 代碼 15 來刷 2004
> [/引用Thank you.


----------



## Agent-A01

grifers said:


> Good morning. This 2004 bios for my TUF D4 is just awful. It increased the power consumption/temps of my stock 12700KF, with the previous bios (1503) the consumption was 135 wats, now almost 160. And leaving the VDDQ voltage on auto, this 2004 bios puts it at 1.5 with the stock processor and RAM (without XMP or Gear 1 in the RAM). And indeed I can't go back to older bios.
> 
> I changed BIOS (bad for me), but because my previous BIOS 1503 which had overclock 5ghz P cores, 4 GHz E-cores, 42 Uncore and 4000 Mhz 15-15-15-35 in RAM all perfectly stable 5 months ago (spending 1 hour of handbrake for 12700KF stability, and almost 5 hours of Karhu + full cycle of testmem 5 profile Absolout by Anta77 successfully completed and no error for the RAM), suddenly after several months going perfectly, it decides the board is unstable, during these 4 months the temperatures perfect playing (no more than 50 degrees the CPU at Back 4 blood, I only play that game), and the ram memory just 43 degrees. I have the feeling that this platform is a nonsense, no matter how stable you have the overclocks that at some point ceases to be, what a joke this is. I started to notice that something was wrong when playing Back 4 Blood the PC restarts after 1 hour or so (at low CPU and GPU loads), me blaming it on the game or the XBOX Gamepass application- In short.
> 
> At this point I do not know if my board went crazy or this bios 2004 is a mess, because now from stock happens that, leaving everything from stock and the voltages in AUTO this happens, the VDDQ voltage puts it very high, I had to put it manually to 1.35 which is how I had it before with all overclock and bios 1503.


The newer bios may have unlocked power limits compared to what you had before. All else the same, at the same voltages(assuming you dialed everything in) it's not possible for it be using 30 more watts. If you are using B4B as a test, that wouldn't be a good measure of power as it's highly variable based on what's going on.

Also, stability may be worse now because your CPU IMC has degraded. If your SA was > 1.35 for 4000MT Gear 1 then it's very likely it's slowly degraded over time and stability in extreme tests is much worse. I had that issue on mine 12900K @ 4133 Gear 1



owikh84 said:


> Saw your 6600C30 1T post earlier. Not sure how you could finish the TM5 in 59mins though. Maybe 6600C30 1T is really faster than 6800C32 2T?


My 59m run was on 6400C30 1T with tight secondaries/tertiaries. Maybe those help a lot too.

I'm still playing around with 66001T for stability, may or may not be possible on this board (early apex)


----------



## hemirunner426

7empe said:


> What about VF curve undervolting in 2004? Does it work properly now (I heard it does not - it gets ignored)?


I can confirm this on 1720 (PRIME Z690-A)


----------



## Netarangi

Upgraded to 2004 on ASUS TUF Z690, imported bios settings from 0807 and everything's the same for me, no issues.


----------



## mkimbro

Does anybody know where to buy an ASUS ROG Z690 APEX, build 2022 Motherboard? in the USA????


----------



## grifers

Agent-A01 said:


> The newer bios may have unlocked power limits compared to what you had before. All else the same, at the same voltages(assuming you dialed everything in) it's not possible for it be using 30 more watts. If you are using B4B as a test, that wouldn't be a good measure of power as it's highly variable based on what's going on.
> 
> Also, stability may be worse now because your CPU IMC has degraded. If your SA was > 1.35 for 4000MT Gear 1 then it's very likely it's slowly degraded over time and stability in extreme tests is much worse. I had that issue on mine 12900K @ 4133 Gear 1


Hello Good evening. No, the consumption test I do not do it with B4B, I do it passing a Cinebench, it is 30 watts more with all stock and voltages in manual. Also I remember (before flashing to 2004), I flashed to BIOS 1003 and passing a Cinebench with everything in AUTO I had the consumption of the first day I bought the CPU, ie 135 watts. The problem comes with the BIOS 2004, in my case it seems to have the same problem I had with the BIOS 1720:

BIOS v1720 Compulsory Update Mega Thread (asus.com)

The degradation thing I did not know it was so soon, we are talking about just 4 months. Anyway to degrade the IMC of the processor, isn't it more a matter of having the VDDQ high instead of the SA?, I ask from ignorance. My VDDQ was always 1.36, my SA left it on AUTO and the board set it to 1.35, I thought that was a safe voltage for 24/7. What would be a safe SA voltage to not degrade the IMC of my 12700KF?

Thanks!


----------



## Agent-A01

grifers said:


> Hello Good evening. No, the consumption test I do not do it with B4B, I do it passing a Cinebench, it is 30 watts more with all stock and voltages in manual. Also I remember (before flashing to 2004), I flashed to BIOS 1003 and passing a Cinebench with everything in AUTO I had the consumption of the first day I bought the CPU, ie 135 watts. The problem comes with the BIOS 2004, in my case it seems to have the same problem I had with the BIOS 1720:
> 
> BIOS v1720 Compulsory Update Mega Thread (asus.com)
> 
> The degradation thing I did not know it was so soon, we are talking about just 4 months. Anyway to degrade the IMC of the processor, isn't it more a matter of having the VDDQ high instead of the SA?, I ask from ignorance. My VDDQ was always 1.36, my SA left it on AUTO and the board set it to 1.35, I thought that was a safe voltage for 24/7. What would be a safe SA voltage to not degrade the IMC of my 12700KF?
> 
> Thanks!


I experienced degradation at 1.38~v. I used to could run y-cruncher at that voltage @ 4133 and over time I had to increase SA voltage to run the same test. Eventually I couldn't run 4133 at all even at 1.45v.

With that experience, I'd say 1.35v is the absolute max, but even then I would want to stay around 1.3v if I were planning on keeping that system for years.
VDDQ 1.36 is fine though.

As for power consumption, unless you set voltages manually it's not really comparable as newer bios may increase voltages for some settings on auto voltages.
You said you set vcore to manual but there is L2 cache voltage, SA, etc that can increase power consumption.

Anyways, not something that is a big deal as long as everything runs OK.


----------



## Simkin

mkimbro said:


> Does anybody know where to buy an ASUS ROG Z690 APEX, build 2022 Motherboard? in the USA????


Probably much easier to just get an Apex 790 soon.


----------



## grifers

Agent-A01 said:


> I experienced degradation at 1.38~v. I used to could run y-cruncher at that voltage @ 4133 and over time I had to increase SA voltage to run the same test. Eventually I couldn't run 4133 at all even at 1.45v.
> 
> With that experience, I'd say 1.35v is the absolute max, but even then I would want to stay around 1.3v if I were planning on keeping that system for years.
> VDDQ 1.36 is fine though.
> 
> As for power consumption, unless you set voltages manually it's not really comparable as newer bios may increase voltages for some settings on auto voltages.
> You said you set vcore to manual but there is L2 cache voltage, SA, etc that can increase power consumption.
> 
> Anyways, not something that is a big deal as long as everything runs OK.


Hello, good morning. Thanks for the answers, the truth is that one learns a lot thanks to the people who make this forum. The only thing that was never clear to me (but already for years, several platforms). The vcore is the voltage that feed (in this case, in these z690 boards) to the P-CORES, E-Cores and (I guess) the Uncore. The VDDQ (if I'm not mistaken) is the one that feeds the IMC (I don't know if any other part of the processor), what was never clear to me that is what feeds the System Agent voltage? I guess the communication between processor and RAM? Anything else? Sorry for the ignorance

Best regards!


----------



## Radical_53

Netarangi said:


> Upgraded to 2004 on ASUS TUF Z690, imported bios settings from 0807 and everything's the same for me, no issues.


Thanks for the input. I tried to do the same yesterday but my old settings won't even boot anymore, not even a regular XMP will do so. Reminds me of the AsRock board I had before this...



hemirunner426 said:


> I can confirm this on 1720 (PRIME Z690-A)


... confirm it works or confirm it still gets ignored like before? Thanks!


----------



## mattxx88

hi guyzz
haven't posted in a while, last sunday i updated to 2004, coming from an older version (maybe 1304 if im not wrong)
i saved my 5.2 ghz adaptive profile and loaded it back to new bios without issues

the problem is the 5.2 fixed volt profile, that doesn't load it for me.
I suppose it is because of the new entries in the 2004 bios that were not there in my previous 1304, in the section "manual voltage"
i see 3 new entries, VRM svid, core svid and cache svid (or something like this)
Can someone share his bios profile with fixed voltage OC? I wanted to take a look at the various values
edit: i have a Z690i STRIX


----------



## 7empe

Radical_53 said:


> Thanks for the input. I tried to do the same yesterday but my old settings won't even boot anymore, not even a regular XMP will do so. Reminds me of the AsRock board I had before this...
> 
> 
> 
> ... confirm it works or confirm it still gets ignored like before? Thanks!




__
https://www.reddit.com/r/intel/comments/xitc7e


----------



## IronAge

Prepare yourself for next gen prices, i have doubts that Z790 Apex will cost less than ~950$.









Leaked ASUS X670E & X670 Motherboard Prices Are Insane, Starting at $385 US & Up To $1300 US For Flagship ROG Extreme


The price sheet of ASUS's X670E & X670 motherboards have been leaked by MEGAsizeGPU and range from $385 to $1300 US.




wccftech.com


----------



## nickolp1974

IronAge said:


> Prepare yourself for next gen prices, i have doubts that Z790 Apex will cost less than ~950$.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Leaked ASUS X670E & X670 Motherboard Prices Are Insane, Starting at $385 US & Up To $1300 US For Flagship ROG Extreme
> 
> 
> The price sheet of ASUS's X670E & X670 motherboards have been leaked by MEGAsizeGPU and range from $385 to $1300 US.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> wccftech.com


I won't be buying if there that much, getting ridiculous now.


----------



## 7empe

nickolp1974 said:


> I won't be buying if there that much, getting ridiculous now.


I wonder if it's the same cost-to-trash ratio as it was with z690.


----------



## nickolp1974

7empe said:


> I wonder if it's the same cost-to-trash ratio as it was with z690.


Ha ha hope not.l!! I'll pay around the £650 GBP mark for an Apex but no more. Paid 570 at launch for 690. So just over 10% increase is more than fair.


----------



## sulalin

ROG Z690 APEX & Hynix DDR5-ADIE
DDR5-7800~8533MHZ QUAD CHANNEL 16G*2

7800MHZ/C32 GB3-Memory-Score:15261
8000MHZ/C32 GB3-Memory-Score:15318
AIDI64 TEST 7800MHZ/C32 Latency 45.6ns 8C/16HT
AIDI64 TEST 8000MHZ/C32 Latency 45.7ns 8C/16HT
AIDI64 TEST 8200MHZ/C34 Latency 46.0ns 8C/16HT
AIDI64 TEST 8266MHZ/C34 Latency 45.5ns 8C/16HT
AIDI64 TEST 8400MHZ/C36 Latency 49.1ns 8C/16HT
AIDI64 TEST 7800MHZ/C32 Latency 49.3ns 16C/24HT
AIDI64 TEST 8000MHZ/C34 Latency 48.0ns 16C/24HT
R23 7800MHZ / Score:29344
R20 7800MHZ / Score:11198
BIOS:2004u15 SP:79


Spoiler: BIOS:2004u15 DDR5-ADIE 7800~8533MHZ 16G*2


----------



## 7empe

I


sulalin said:


> ROG Z690 APEX & Hynix DDR5-ADIE
> DDR5-7800~8266MHZ
> 
> 7800MHZ/C32 GB3-Memory-Score:15261
> 8000MHZ/C32 GB3-Memory-Score:15318
> AIDI64 TEST 7800MHZ/C32 Latency 45.6ns 8C/16HT
> AIDI64 TEST 8000MHZ/C32 Latency 45.7ns 8C/16HT
> AIDI64 TEST 8200MHZ/C34 Latency 46.0ns 8C/16HT
> AIDI64 TEST 8266MHZ/C34 Latency 45.5ns 8C/16HT
> AIDI64 TEST 7800MHZ/C32 Latency 49.3ns 16C/24HT
> AIDI64 TEST 8000MHZ/C34 Latency 48.0ns 16C/24HT
> R23 7800MHZ / Score:29344
> R20 7800MHZ / Score:11198
> BIOS:2004u15 SP:79
> 
> 
> Spoiler: BIOS:2004U15
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2572942
> View attachment 2572943
> View attachment 2572944
> View attachment 2572945
> View attachment 2572946
> View attachment 2572947
> View attachment 2572948
> View attachment 2572949
> View attachment 2572950
> 
> View attachment 2572961
> 
> View attachment 2572962


And I can't get my Apex stable at 6800. God damn it.


----------



## bastian

2004 has wild variable results with RAM stability. I do not recommend it. I am back on 1720, lucky for dual BIOS.
@shamino1978
@safedisk


----------



## SlixFPS

7empe said:


> I
> 
> And I can't get my Apex stable at 6800. God damn it.


I can't even properly run 4800 with my 5600MHz RAM anymore lol. I'm so damn tired.


----------



## nyxagamemnon

SlixFPS said:


> I can't even properly run 4800 with my 5600MHz RAM anymore lol. I'm so damn tired.


What year was your board made? Is it a 2021 model or 2022?


----------



## Nizzen

SlixFPS said:


> I can't even properly run 4800 with my 5600MHz RAM anymore lol. I'm so damn tired.


Why on earth haven't you sendt it back for RMA? That is the biggest question here...


----------



## SlixFPS

nyxagamemnon said:


> What year was your board made? Is it a 2021 model or 2022?


It's from 2021.


----------



## SlixFPS

Nizzen said:


> Why on earth haven't you sendt it back for RMA? That is the biggest question here...


Ages ago I managed to make it run somewhat properly at XMP2 and slightly upped voltages or some preapplied settings to get my 5600MHz CL40, I could even run 5800 for a short while. And a while ago my ram refused to work at 5600 anymore. Now I'm not sure if it's the RAM, the board or still some BIOS problems and I was too lazy to RMA anything as I couldn't figure out what's the culprit + the RMA duration would kill me. 
I'll probably order some RAM with Hynix ICs and see if it runs better. But I'm also afraid of the chance that my board might be killing my memory.


----------



## nyxagamemnon

SlixFPS said:


> It's from 2021.


That's why your having issues the 2021 boards = massive issues I know because I've tested both and with the 2021 board you can't even do 4800mhz, but the 2022 board does over 1000mhz higher on 4x16 dimms. I tried everything until I got another board and got a 2022 version and tested it it was like night and day difference zero headaches. No matter what you tweak on the 2021 board it won't mean a dam thing the boards themselves are defective. I finally solved my issues with the 2022 board.


----------



## 7empe

Gents, I have an interesting and "hot" conclusion regarding Apex 2021 and "high" memory OC issues.
I had a chance to play with extremely high frequency oscilloscope and came to the following idea:

set SA PLL frequency to 1600 MHz (on auto it's 3200 MHz)
raise SA PLL voltage to 960 mV (or not, this is at least what I did)
What does it change for me?

since day 1 of having apex (January) I could not find any pattern while playing with vdd/vddq/tx/imc/sa voltages above 6400+
when i thought i found a match between voltages, an hour later my happines got f*****

I can finally see how SA voltage influence the memory stability (-10 mV throws errors in memtest and fails y-cruncher, but +10 mV does not)
repeatable stability with given settings after 10x cmos clear, power cut off, profile change etc.
much lower vdd/vddq/tx than ever before with stabillity in memtest
I've been never able to pass y-cruncher at 6666 MHz even once (no matter the timings, or CL):










If any of you are willing to try this, please report back.

Cheers.


----------



## SlixFPS

nyxagamemnon said:


> That's why your having issues the 2021 boards = massive issues I know because I've tested both and with the 2021 board you can't even do 4800mhz, but the 2022 board does over 1000mhz higher on 4x16 dimms. I tried everything until I got another board and got a 2022 version and tested it it was like night and day difference zero headaches. No matter what you tweak on the 2021 board it won't mean a dam thing the boards themselves are defective. I finally solved my issues with the 2022 board.


Oh damn. I guess I'll have to contact asus then but I'll try to wait until the Z790 boards come out. I don't know if they'd offer me a a new apex (read somewhere that it isn't being produced anymore), a refund or even a Z790 board. x)


----------



## FreeSpeechIsKnowledge

7empe said:


> Gents, I have an interesting and "hot" conclusion regarding Apex 2021 and "high" memory OC issues.
> I had a chance to play with extremely high frequency oscilloscope and came to the following idea:
> 
> set SA PLL frequency to 1600 MHz (on auto it's 3200 MHz)
> raise SA PLL voltage to 960 mV (or not, this is at least what I did)
> What does it change for me?
> 
> since day 1 of having apex (January) I could not find any pattern while playing with vdd/vddq/tx/imc/sa voltages above 6400+
> when i thought i found a match between voltages, an hour later my happines got f*****
> 
> I can finally see how SA voltage influence the memory stability (-10 mV throws errors in memtest and fails y-cruncher, but +10 mV does not)
> repeatable stability with given settings after 10x cmos clear, power cut off, profile change etc.
> much lower vdd/vddq/tx than ever before with stabillity in memtest
> I've been never able to pass y-cruncher at 6666 MHz even once (no matter the timings, or CL):
> 
> View attachment 2573056
> 
> 
> If any of you are willing to try this, please report back.
> 
> Cheers.


Where's the frequency for sa located?


----------



## 7empe

FreeSpeechIsKnowledge said:


> Where's the frequency for sa located?


Tweaker's Paradise


----------



## edkieferlp

7empe said:


> Tweaker's Paradise


that sounds like it might be similar to CPU VRM Switching Frequency , where some boards run better with lower values.

Looking at my TUF D4 profile, I have that setting too (SA PLL Frequency Override [Auto]). wonder if that might helps guys with DDR4 hit higher than 4000 easier.


----------



## affxct

7empe said:


> Gents, I have an interesting and "hot" conclusion regarding Apex 2021 and "high" memory OC issues.
> I had a chance to play with extremely high frequency oscilloscope and came to the following idea:
> 
> set SA PLL frequency to 1600 MHz (on auto it's 3200 MHz)
> raise SA PLL voltage to 960 mV (or not, this is at least what I did)
> What does it change for me?
> 
> since day 1 of having apex (January) I could not find any pattern while playing with vdd/vddq/tx/imc/sa voltages above 6400+
> when i thought i found a match between voltages, an hour later my happines got f*****
> 
> I can finally see how SA voltage influence the memory stability (-10 mV throws errors in memtest and fails y-cruncher, but +10 mV does not)
> repeatable stability with given settings after 10x cmos clear, power cut off, profile change etc.
> much lower vdd/vddq/tx than ever before with stabillity in memtest
> I've been never able to pass y-cruncher at 6666 MHz even once (no matter the timings, or CL):
> 
> View attachment 2573056
> 
> 
> If any of you are willing to try this, please report back.
> 
> Cheers.


No way, imagine this solves it.


----------



## Creativeindy

So... I'm having the D6 issue I seen a few others have in here but I am not sure anyone has actually solved for it, or at least that I could see in searching.

Brand new build.. Z690-E Gaming Wigi 12900k and the 3080TI.... It will not recognize any card be it the 3090TI, the 2080, or my 1080TI.. all 3 give me the D6 and the 1 long beep followed by 3 short beeps. It does work with integrated graphics. I set the VGA option in the bios to auto so it should be able to detect PCIe graphics or integrated. No matter what I do I can't get it to work on any of the cards, only the built in. Running BIOS 2004

Hate to send the MB back as these cards work in my other machine. 

Have checked the seat, tried putting in 2nd PCI slot, bought a new 1000watt power supply thinking low voltage to card but same output(previous was 850 which was more than enough). Unplugged all fans, USB plugs etc same outcome. Really at whits end here and don't want to switch to a different MB manufacturar but this is getting silly at this point.

Any help is appreciated.


----------



## bscool

7empe said:


> Gents, I have an interesting and "hot" conclusion regarding Apex 2021 and "high" memory OC issues.
> I had a chance to play with extremely high frequency oscilloscope and came to the following idea:
> 
> set SA PLL frequency to 1600 MHz (on auto it's 3200 MHz)
> raise SA PLL voltage to 960 mV (or not, this is at least what I did)
> What does it change for me?
> 
> since day 1 of having apex (January) I could not find any pattern while playing with vdd/vddq/tx/imc/sa voltages above 6400+
> when i thought i found a match between voltages, an hour later my happines got f*****
> 
> I can finally see how SA voltage influence the memory stability (-10 mV throws errors in memtest and fails y-cruncher, but +10 mV does not)
> repeatable stability with given settings after 10x cmos clear, power cut off, profile change etc.
> much lower vdd/vddq/tx than ever before with stabillity in memtest
> I've been never able to pass y-cruncher at 6666 MHz even once (no matter the timings, or CL):
> 
> 
> If any of you are willing to try this, please report back.
> 
> Cheers.


Just info/feedback I tried setting SA PLL frequency on 2022 Apex and it must be 1600MHz when on Auto as 3200MHz wont even boot only Auto and 1600 work.

I am running 7000c30 if that matter, I didnt test booting lower clocks.

Also setting SA PLL to 960 wont let me boot either needs Auto. Did not test other voltages on this.

Edit using Bios 2004 u code 15 did not test any other bios or u code.


----------



## Maximization

i don think the 2004 is for our motherboards



Creativeindy said:


> 12900k


nevermind it is


----------



## Creativeindy

Maximization said:


> i don think the 2004 is for our motherboards


Shows on there website version 2004....it installed fine and updated and shows my BIOS is up to date...





ROG STRIX Z690-E GAMING WIFI | ROG STRIX Z690-E GAMING WIFI | Gaming Motherboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG USA


ASUS ROG STRIX Z690-E GAMING WIFI Intel LGA 1700 ATX motherboard, DDR5, PCIe 5.0, 18+1 power stages, WiFi 6E, Intel® 2.5 Gb Ethernet, M.2 Combo-Sink , USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 USB Type-C®, SATA and Aura Sync



rog.asus.com


----------



## Wilco183

Maximization said:


> i don think the 2004 is for our motherboards


It is...Version 2004, 9/16/2022...Asus support page.


----------



## Agent-A01

bscool said:


> Just info/feedback I tried setting SA PLL frequency on 2022 Apex and it must be 1600MHz when on Auto as 3200MHz wont even boot only Auto and 1600 work.
> 
> I am running 7000c30 if that matter, I didnt test booting lower clocks.
> 
> Also setting SA PLL to 960 wont let me boot either needs Auto. Did not test other voltages on this.
> 
> Edit using Bios 2004 u code 15 did not test any other bios or u code.


I also just tried it.
First thing I did was try 6800 C32 with relaxed secondary and tertiaries.
Not stable but after I set IMC voltage to 1.325 I got to about 80% HCI with no errors. I tried 7000 since 6800 seemed stable but I couldn't stop the few odd errors.

Tried 6666 T1 and I was almost stable. Tried 6800 again and I couldn't find any stability like I had before so looks like it's still acting odd(2021 apex).

TLDR it seemed to help a lot until I went back and tried it again. Anyways, back to my stable 6400 CL28-37-37-30 1T profile.

Tomorrow I am getting another apex board from amazon which I hope isn't old stock.


----------



## 673714

Creativeindy said:


> So... I'm having the D6 issue I seen a few others have in here but I am not sure anyone has actually solved for it, or at least that I could see in searching.
> 
> Brand new build.. Z690-E Gaming Wigi 12900k and the 3080TI.... It will not recognize any card be it the 3090TI, the 2080, or my 1080TI.. all 3 give me the D6 and the 1 long beep followed by 3 short beeps. It does work with integrated graphics. I set the VGA option in the bios to auto so it should be able to detect PCIe graphics or integrated. No matter what I do I can't get it to work on any of the cards, only the built in. Running BIOS 2004
> 
> Hate to send the MB back as these cards work in my other machine.
> 
> Have checked the seat, tried putting in 2nd PCI slot, bought a new 1000watt power supply thinking low voltage to card but same output(previous was 850 which was more than enough). Unplugged all fans, USB plugs etc same outcome. Really at whits end here and don't want to switch to a different MB manufacturar but this is getting silly at this point.
> 
> Any help is appreciated.


You made it pretty clear that motherboard needs to be replaced


----------



## 7empe

bscool said:


> Just info/feedback I tried setting SA PLL frequency on 2022 Apex and it must be 1600MHz when on Auto as 3200MHz wont even boot only Auto and 1600 work.
> 
> I am running 7000c30 if that matter, I didnt test booting lower clocks.
> 
> Also setting SA PLL to 960 wont let me boot either needs Auto. Did not test other voltages on this.
> 
> Edit using Bios 2004 u code 15 did not test any other bios or u code.


Confirmed difference between 2021 and 2022.


----------



## satinghostrider

7empe said:


> Confirmed difference between 2021 and 2022.


Night and Day difference coming from a 2021 to 2022 Apex.
Rock solid on 2022 Apex.


----------



## 7empe

Have you tried to ease a pressure made by the waterblock/radiator a little? It seems that cpu contact pressure is uneven when I put the max pressure an all 4 screwes I have issues with training and y-cruncher stability. When I ease it equally a bit, board behaves much better as well without change in temps.


----------



## Ghoosti

Creativeindy said:


> Donc... j'ai le problème D6 que j'ai vu que quelques autres ont ici mais je ne suis pas sûr que quelqu'un l'ait réellement résolu, ou du moins que j'ai pu le voir en cherchant.
> 
> Nouvelle construction .. Z690-E Gaming Wigi 12900k et le 3080TI .... Il ne reconnaîtra aucune carte que ce soit le 3090TI, le 2080 ou mon 1080TI .. tous les 3 me donnent le D6 et le 1 long bip suivi de 3 courts bips. Il fonctionne avec des graphiques intégrés. J'ai défini l'option VGA dans le bios sur auto afin qu'il puisse détecter les graphiques PCIe ou intégrés. Peu importe ce que je fais, je ne peux pas le faire fonctionner sur aucune des cartes, seulement celles intégrées. Exécution du BIOS 2004
> 
> Je déteste le MB car ces cartes fonctionnent sur mon autre machine.
> 
> J'ai vérifié le siège, essayé de mettre le 2e emplacement PCI, acheté une nouvelle alimentation de 1000 watts en pensant à la basse tension de la carte mais à la même sortie (la précédente était de 850, ce qui était plus que suffisant) . Débranchez tous les ventilateurs, prises USB, etc., même résultat. Vraiment à la fin ici et je ne veux pas passer à un autre fabricant de MB, mais cela devient idiot à ce stade.
> 
> Toute aide est appréciée.


Je parie que votre CG est connecté en Displayport, essayez en HDMI, pour moi cela a résolu le problème


----------



## 7empe

I've been wondering, what's going to happen if I level up the cpu bracket on Apex by 0.5 mm. Guess what. Anything above 6000 MHz can't be stabilized... bsods, errors in memtests etc. So, it looks like Apex has an issue with the good enough cpu pressure. I've removed the washers and tighten the screws (btw. originally they were not tighten).

If anyone by chance wants to repaste the CPU, it is a good moment to check the CPU bracket screws


----------



## FreeSpeechIsKnowledge

7empe said:


> I've been wondering, what's going to happen if I level up the cpu bracket on Apex by 0.5 mm. Guess what. Anything above 6000 MHz can't be stabilized... bsods, errors in memtests etc. So, it looks like Apex has an issue with the good enough cpu pressure. I've removed the washers and tighten the screws (btw. originally they were not tighten).
> 
> If anyone by chance wants to repaste the CPU, it is a good moment to check the CPU bracket screws



My original Apex was bad. The cpu mounting pressure on that one didn't matter. Not that everyone's here won't matter mind you but, it didn't with that Apex. Probably because it ended up having hardware issues which they replaced it for but still. I tried it at that point to no avail.


----------



## Mappi75

is it possible to make a poll in this thread where everybody can select the actual bios version (and change it)?

Want to know what bios is most used here...

can decide between bios 1503/1505/1701/0082 (KS CPU).

1701 was good for lowering dram voltage.
1503 gave me the best performance gain.
0082 looks like the coolest cpu temps
1601 hell of errors in tm5 (doesnt matter how much voltages never seen this before..)


----------



## grifers

Mappi75 said:


> is it possible to make a poll in this thread where everybody can select the actual bios version (and change it)?
> 
> Want to know what bios is most used here...
> 
> can decide between bios 1503/1505/1701/0082 (KS CPU).
> 
> 1701 was good for lowering dram voltage.
> 1503 gave me the best performance gain.
> 0082 looks like the coolest cpu temps
> 1601 hell of errors in tm5 (doesnt matter how much voltages never seen this before..)


For my TUF D4, the best bios is 1503 as well, followed by 1003. The 1720 I skipped it because I read many negative reviews, and this 2004 I put it because my system was failing the Overclock and I took the opportunity to put the latest BIOS, damn the time I did it, I'm looking forward to return to the bios 1503 and put me back with the new overclock profile.


----------



## sblantipodi

2004 seems the best bios I tried on my Extreme.
I don't want to talk too soon but it seems that it finally solved the problem I had with Corsair iCue.


----------



## akgis

Hero with DDR5 ratted 6400/cl 32, actualy running 6600cl34 with tight timings, 1505 is the most stable for me didnt tested 16xx, but 1720 was horrible and Iam afraid to upgrade to 2004


----------



## Csavez™

7empe said:


> I've been wondering, what's going to happen if I level up the cpu bracket on Apex by 0.5 mm. Guess what. Anything above 6000 MHz can't be stabilized... bsods, errors in memtests etc. So, it looks like Apex has an issue with the good enough cpu pressure. I've removed the washers and tighten the screws (btw. originally they were not tighten).
> 
> If anyone by chance wants to repaste the CPU, it is a good moment to check the CPU bracket screws


I just ran into this problem!
I replaced the cpu frame, put back the cpu water block, and with the CBr23 not a single test ran, it threw an error, even though I installed it with a torque screwdriver, but the temperatures were very good.
I turned it back 2 turns and all tests ran, in return I got +3°C. 
For me, the new CPU frame did not improve the temperatures.

_"If anyone by chance wants to repaste the CPU, it is a good moment to check the CPU bracket screws "_
*The factory screws were loose, which is probably why I was able to reac*_*h P53E42R44.*_


----------



## sblantipodi

sblantipodi said:


> 2004 seems the best bios I tried on my Extreme.
> I don't want to talk too soon but it seems that it finally solved the problem I had with Corsair iCue.


I was joking, this crap hanged again


----------



## 7empe

Csavez™ said:


> I just ran into this problem!
> I replaced the cpu frame, put back the cpu water block, and with the CBr23 not a single test ran, it threw an error, even though I installed it with a torque screwdriver, but the temperatures were very good.
> I turned it back 2 turns and all tests ran, in return I got +3°C.
> For me, the new CPU frame did not improve the temperatures.
> 
> _"If anyone by chance wants to repaste the CPU, it is a good moment to check the CPU bracket screws "_
> *The factory screws were loose, which is probably why I was able to reac*_*h P53E42R44.*_
> 
> View attachment 2573179
> 
> View attachment 2573180
> 
> View attachment 2573181
> 
> View attachment 2573182


In my case, tightening the screwes improved consistency in memory behavior. Temps unchanged but I have my cpu sanded and it is flat even in the standard bracket.
Btw. It looks like your cpu could benefit from sanding as well, at least with the old bracket center and right-center is significantly higher from the rest.


----------



## Spicedaddy

Mappi75 said:


> is it possible to make a poll in this thread where everybody can select the actual bios version (and change it)?
> 
> Want to know what bios is most used here...
> 
> can decide between bios 1503/1505/1701/0082 (KS CPU).
> 
> 1701 was good for lowering dram voltage.
> 1503 gave me the best performance gain.
> 0082 looks like the coolest cpu temps
> 1601 hell of errors in tm5 (doesnt matter how much voltages never seen this before..)


I'm using 1304. I tried 1505 and had apps crashing and TM5 gave errors, so went back to 1304.

Since then every release I tell myself I'll wait and see, then people post problems and a few weeks later Asus releases another BIOS. Rinse and repeat every month or so. 

Hopefully they release one that people agree is great soon, because I'll need to upgrade for 13900K and since 2004 you can't flash back.

I got my stuff at launch: 12900K, Hero board, G.Skill 5600CL36 Samsung (the first batch, not the revised one), running XMP2.


----------



## Csavez™

7empe said:


> In my case, tightening the screwes improved consistency in memory behavior. Temps unchanged but I have my cpu sanded and it is flat even in the standard bracket.
> Btw. It looks like your cpu could benefit from sanding as well, at least with the old bracket center and right-center is significantly higher from the rest.


I did the delid on my cpu back then.
This miracle frame, on the other hand, caused instability for me, yesterday I had to play with the screws of the block again, but it looks like I hit it because the aida is already running.


----------



## Stove

¿Someone with Samsung kit 2x16 6000 36-36-36-96? I´ll replace the 5200 micron with it on my Hero.


----------



## edkieferlp

7empe said:


> In my case, tightening the screwes improved consistency in memory behavior. Temps unchanged but I have my cpu sanded and it is flat even in the standard bracket.
> Btw. It looks like your cpu could benefit from sanding as well, at least with the old bracket center and right-center is significantly higher from the rest.


That's the Thermalright CPU frame, right?
I thought that model frame you tighten till frame hits MB, unlike thermal grizzly where you finger tightens and then 1/4 more turn.


----------



## Apecos

Spicedaddy said:


> I'm using 1304. I tried 1505 and had apps crashing and TM5 gave errors, so went back to 1304.
> 
> Since then every release I tell myself I'll wait and see, then people post problems and a few weeks later Asus releases another BIOS. Rinse and repeat every month or so.
> 
> Hopefully they release one that people agree is great soon, because I'll need to upgrade for 13900K and since 2004 you can't flash back.
> 
> I got my stuff at launch: 12900K, Hero board, G.Skill 5600CL36 Samsung (the first batch, not the revised one), running XMP2.


The same configuration like you, 12900k + hero z690, the same memory (In my case CORSAIR PLATINUM 5600 SAMSUNG)
Tried all bios, but the best is 1304, sorry, (NO BEST), most stable. Allow to push the memory to 6000 mhz.


----------



## 7empe

edkieferlp said:


> That's the Thermalright CPU frame, right?
> I thought that model frame you tighten till frame hits MB, unlike thermal grizzly where you finger tightens and then 1/4 more turn.


I'm using standard asus bracket that comes with apex and I refered to standard bracket in my previous posts.


----------



## edkieferlp

7empe said:


> I'm using standard asus bracket that comes with apex and I refered to standard bracket in my previous posts.


Ah, my bad, I mixed the pic's Csavez posted to your comments.


----------



## Csavez™

edkieferlp said:


> Ah, my bad, I mixed the pic's Csavez posted to your comments.


Yes, thermalright, and the screws must be fully tightened. I sucked with the screws of the "ek velocity2 block", there was no such problem with the factory apex frame.


----------



## fitnessgrampacertest

7empe said:


> I And I can't get my Apex stable at 6800. God damn it.


----------



## fitnessgrampacertest

7empe said:


> I
> 
> And I can't get my Apex stable at 6800. God damn it.


He's only able to clock his DDR5 at 8,000mhz+ because he's running Hynix A-Die, which is not available in the USA at all (yet), and is overall very difficult to find if you don't live in China

You are running Hynix M-Die, which is what the majority of other people are running as well. Hynix M-Die tops put at 6,800mhz-7,000mhz at the very extreme end of DDR5 overclocking. Running 6400 CL30 or 6600 CL32 on hynix M-Die is considered a very good result


----------



## Baasha

So a new BIOS (2004) is out for the Z690 Extreme - what is the verdict on this one? I'm on 1720 and stable so don't want to 'update' unless it's better AND is stable.

Yay or nay gents?


----------



## Falkentyne

Baasha said:


> So a new BIOS (2004) is out for the Z690 Extreme - what is the verdict on this one? I'm on 1720 and stable so don't want to 'update' unless it's better AND is stable.
> 
> Yay or nay gents?


You have dual BIOS. Flash the secondary BIOS with 2004 and test it out. No one here can tell you if it's going to be better except you.
If you intend to put RPL on that board you will need that or a newer BIOS anyway. Keep in mind you can not flash back or use USB flashback port to an older BIOS than 2004, but you can still use the secondary BIOS with the older bios. Do keep in mind switching BIOSes will cause the LED And EC firmwares to get reflashed on switch and these reflashes will use the last stored CPU clocks and voltages! so please do NOT be using per-core overclocking with absurdly high ratios before doing this (clear CMOS on the starting BIOS before switching to prevent problems).


----------



## Maximization

i have a z690-e updated fine today no issues, you can never go back to previous versions though so all timings and everything will be lost. Start from scratch again. AVX512 gets disabled also if you use that don't upgrade. 



Baasha said:


> So a new BIOS (2004) is out for the Z690 Extreme - what is the verdict on this one? I'm on 1720 and stable so don't want to 'update' unless it's better AND is stable.
> 
> Yay or nay gents?


----------



## bscool

Reposting from ddr5 thread, source @J_Lab4645

"For anyone here with a Z690 Apex

90MB18I0-M0AAY0
90MB18I0-M0EAY0 (November 2021)
that has written it off due to the A Channel being complete crap.


I need you to try one thing that has brought my Z690 90MB18I0-M0AAY0 back from the depths of hell. The A Channel is Super sensitive to ram seating.


I could not get my 90MB18I0-M0AAY0 Z690 Apex to OC over 6000mhz. I just thought I had a bum board as documented in Igors lab One Motherboard, Two Faces - ASUS ROG Maximus Z690 Apex review with Teardown, RAM- & Adaptive Core-OC | igor'sLAB (igorslab.de) .


I was ready to write it off and wait for Z790. And then one thing that bugged the heck out of me.....The B channel, (when seating ram) would just "click" in. The Tabs on the North and South Side (being wide open before installation) just worked. It was like hearing a shotgun being loaded. You just placed your ram in that slot and then applied pressure to North and South and Bang Bang. It just pressed into the appropriate place. You can actually hear the "click" , "click" as it seats the ram.


My A Channel was never this way. I approached the installation on the A Channel the same way as the B Channel but never got that "perfectly positive seating". I thought that I was applying enough pressure but never had that positive "click" in as I did with the B Channel.


I ran my system for almost a year in this way. I thought I was lucky to have an Apex that did 6000mhz seamlessly. It seemed to seat perfectly, but ...alas. No Bueno. Whenever I tried to OC the RAM....Sh*tsville. I just chalked it up to no patience and no skill. I literally fu*_ed with this slot for over 10 minutes last week and felt the Ram Stick move lower than I thought it should go. *After this maneuver my A slot is doing 6800mhz passing ram tests when it was intermittent at 6000mhz*. I've had this board since Dec 2021 and the whole time My A Channel Ram wasn't appropriately seated. Can you believe this complete cluster fu*_?




I didn't want to post this 5 minutes after discovery but waited a week to do Ram testing on MemTest86, Kahru, TestMem5. Passed 5 hours of each. ***!? I am a happy camper now and can't believe that having my Ram in the A Channel at 99.5% seated compared to 100% seated made the difference. You would have thought that if your Ram wasn't seated appropriately that it would have bunked out massive errors immediately. We've all heard of this kind of situation with novice builders and would never, ever think this was a possibility with most of us but if this post helps at least 1 of you out there that think you have a complete crap Z690 Apex........screw with that A Channel seating......it literally saved me from buying and rebuilding my PC!"









*Official* Intel DDR5 OC and 24/7 daily Memory Stability...


Well, friends. I will evaluate Dark on my M-Die OEM and 12700KF SP65.




www.overclock.net


----------



## yahfz

Does the Z690 Hero 1720 BIOS not work with AVX512 anymore? I've inserted the right microcode and AVX512 does not work anymore. This system used to have AVX512 on an older bios so not sure what's going on.


----------



## bscool

yahfz said:


> Does the Z690 Hero 1720 BIOS not work with AVX512 anymore? I've inserted the right microcode and AVX512 does not work anymore. This system used to have AVX512 on an older bios so not sure what's going on.


Did you delete all the other microcodes? That is what I on Apex did not sure if it matters or not.


----------



## yahfz

bscool said:


> Did you delete all the other microcodes? That is what I on Apex did not sure if it matters or not.


It shouldn't matter cause it should only load the microcode for the right CPUID, but I checked aida and it was using the right microcode so I'm not sure whats going on.


----------



## 7empe

fitnessgrampacertest said:


> He's only able to clock his DDR5 at 8,000mhz+ because he's running Hynix A-Die, which is not available in the USA at all (yet), and is overall very difficult to find if you don't live in China
> 
> You are running Hynix M-Die, which is what the majority of other people are running as well. Hynix M-Die tops put at 6,800mhz-7,000mhz at the very extreme end of DDR5 overclocking. Running 6400 CL30 or 6600 CL32 on hynix M-Die is considered a very good result


I'm running F5-6400J3239G16G Hynix from G.Skill. I guess it's really good pair of sticks capable of 7000+. So far I have rock solid stable 6666 cl 30 on them with VDD 1.48V, VDDQ 1.41V, CPU VDDQ (TX) 1.41V, IMC (VDD2) 1.45V, VCCSA 1.20V. It looks like CPU/IMC is a bottleneck.









I have 6800 30-39-39-28 profile "almost" stable with VDD 1.52V, VDDQ=TX=1.42V, IMC 1.50V and VCCSA 1.35V. I will work on that and if not able to stabilize, then will try 32-40-40.


----------



## fitnessgrampacertest

7empe said:


> I'm running F5-6400J3239G16G Hynix from G.Skill. I guess it's really good pair of sticks capable of 7000+. So far I have rock solid stable 6666 cl 30 on them with VDD 1.48V, VDDQ 1.41V, CPU VDDQ (TX) 1.41V, IMC (VDD2) 1.45V, VCCSA 1.20V. It looks like CPU/IMC is a bottleneck.
> View attachment 2573418
> 
> 
> I have 6800 30-39-39-28 profile "almost" stable with VDD 1.52V, VDDQ=TX=1.42V, IMC 1.50V and VCCSA 1.35V. I will work on that and if not able to stabilize, then will try 32-40-40.


Hey man, Thats awesome!! Pretty spectacular results. I actually have the same G.SkillDDR5 kit as you. It performs really well. But this G.Skill kit we have uses Hynix M-Die modules, which are not the same as the A-Die modules that the other guy was able to Clock over 8,000mhz. I just don't want you to waste your time trying to hit the upper 7,000's/low 8,000's, because those speeds are not possible on Hynix M-Die. At least not without setting voltages that would require cryogenic cooling. 

However, A-Die should be rolled out in the USA pretty soon here. Teamgroup just launched a 7200mhz Cl32 kit over the weekend, which i assume will utilize A-Die given the high XMP frequency. Check it out on newegg! Just search DDR5, and filter by speed (select 7200, which is the new highest option to filter by) I look forward to getting my hands on a set of A-Die memory sticks!


----------



## 7empe

fitnessgrampacertest said:


> Hey man, Thats awesome!! Pretty spectacular results. I actually have the same G.SkillDDR5 kit as you. It performs really well. But this G.Skill kit we have uses Hynix M-Die modules, which are not the same as the A-Die modules that the other guy was able to Clock over 8,000mhz. I just don't want you to waste your time trying to hit the upper 7,000's/low 8,000's, because those speeds are not possible on Hynix M-Die. At least not without setting voltages that would require cryogenic cooling.
> 
> However, A-Die should be rolled out in the USA pretty soon here. Teamgroup just launched a 7200mhz Cl32 kit over the weekend, which i assume will utilize A-Die given the high XMP frequency. Check it out on newegg! Just search DDR5, and filter by speed (select 7200, which is the new highest option to filter by) I look forward to getting my hands on a set of A-Die memory sticks!


Great news! Gonna wait and see when A-die will hit the shelves in EU. Regarding A-die I heard that they clock very well, but timings (2nd and 3rd) won’t get even close to what M-die could do.


----------



## IronAge

ASUS Z790/H770/B760 – The best motherboards for 13th Gen Intel Raptor Lake and 12th Gen Intel Alder Lake CPUs


ASUS Z790 motherboards are designed to get the most out of 12th and 13th Gen Intel® Core™ processors and feature PCIe® 5.0, DDR5 support with AEMP II, AI-powered technologies, Thunderbolt™ (USB4®) support, and WiFi 6E.




www.asus.com





No Gene and no Apex yet.


----------



## primoz.osolnik0

IronAge said:


> ASUS Z790/H770/B760 – The best motherboards for 13th Gen Intel Raptor Lake and 12th Gen Intel Alder Lake CPUs
> 
> 
> ASUS Z790 motherboards are designed to get the most out of 12th and 13th Gen Intel® Core™ processors and feature PCIe® 5.0, DDR5 support with AEMP II, AI-powered technologies, Thunderbolt™ (USB4®) support, and WiFi 6E.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.asus.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No Gene and no Apex yet.


If the mess it up as they did with Z690....it is better if they dont make it at all. And i guess they will charge 800 eur for a hero now if it stays that maximus line will only be 2 product stack.


----------



## Eaton

Apex info coming later, from ASUS PC DIY:










He also confirmed no Glacial or Formula.


----------



## sblantipodi

I still don't understood what Z790 adds over Z690?
Some USB ports and then?

Are you serious? New mobos for new usb ports?


----------



## Spicedaddy

sblantipodi said:


> I still don't understood what Z790 adds over Z690?
> Some USB ports and then?
> 
> Are you serious? New mobos for new usb ports?


Also chipset PCIE lanes go from 16x PCIE3 and 12x PCIE4 on Z690 to 8x PCIE3 and 20xPCIE4 on Z790.

But yeah, no reason to upgrade motherboards.


----------



## sblantipodi

Spicedaddy said:


> Also chipset PCIE lanes go from 16x PCIE3 and 12x PCIE4 on Z690 to 8x PCIE3 and 20xPCIE4 on Z790.
> 
> But yeah, no reason to upgrade motherboards.


there are really no reasons why have all this lanes, expansion slots can't be used anymore since we have 8 slots GPUs xD
joking apart, I agree, no reason to upgrade mobo.


----------



## Wilco183

Spicedaddy said:


> Also chipset PCIE lanes go from 16x PCIE3 and 12x PCIE4 on Z690 to 8x PCIE3 and 20xPCIE4 on Z790.
> 
> But yeah, no reason to upgrade motherboards.


So, Intel DVLR will not be in play in terms of "performance and power efficiency gains" as speculated by...online speculators early this year. (?)


----------



## Wilco183

sblantipodi said:


> there are really no reasons why have all this lanes, expansion slots can't be used anymore since we have 8 slots GPUs xD
> joking apart, I agree, no reason to upgrade mobo.


Have you seen the new ROG font on the Hero though? It's just totally to click submit in cart for.


----------



## Simkin

Would it be recommended to do a fresh Windows install going from Z690 to Z790?


----------



## sblantipodi

Simkin said:


> Would it be recommended to do a fresh Windows install going from Z690 to Z790?


I don't think that the OS will ever notice the difference xD


----------



## mattxx88

Wilco183 said:


> So, Intel DVLR will not be in play in terms of "performance and power efficiency gains" as speculated by...online speculators early this year. (?)


more likely with meteor


----------



## sulalin

fitnessgrampacertest，發布：29035857，成員：676790 said:


> 嘿伙計，太棒了！！相當壯觀的結果。我實際上有和你一樣的 G.SkillDDR5 套件。它表現得非常好。但是我們擁有的這個 G.Skill 套件使用的是 Hynix M-Die 模塊，這與其他人能夠時鐘超過 8,000mhz 的 A-Die 模塊不同。我只是不想讓您浪費時間嘗試達到 7,000 的上限/8,000 的下限，因為這些速度在 Hynix M-Die 上是不可能的。至少在沒有設置需要低溫冷卻的電壓的情況下是這樣。
> 
> 但是，A-Die 應該很快就會在美國推出。Teamgroup 剛剛在周末推出了 7200mhz Cl32 套件，我假設它會使用 A-Die，因為 XMP 頻率很高。在新蛋上看看！只需搜索 DDR5，然後按速度過濾（選擇 7200，這是新的最高過濾選項）我期待著能拿到一套 A-Die 記憶棒！
> [/引用]Hynix MDIE can open 7600/7733/7800/8000mhz in two 4-channels in air cooling, but it is inefficient and can be opened at frequency! On z690 apex


----------



## FreeSpeechIsKnowledge

Wilco183 said:


> Have you seen the new ROG font on the Hero though? It's just totally to click submit in cart for.



Reminds me of the poke in regard to cars, that the stickers add 10HP at least.


----------



## IronAge

sblantipodi said:


> I don't think that the OS will ever notice the difference xD


... nor will the user notice a difference.  ... aside the new hole in the wallet.


----------



## hemirunner426

FreeSpeechIsKnowledge said:


> Reminds me of the poke in regard to cars, that the stickers add 10HP at least.


Same with all the RGB craze. 

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk


----------



## Spicedaddy

Wilco183 said:


> Have you seen the new ROG font on the Hero though? It's just totally to click submit in cart for.


LOL, it's only 100$ more than Z690 Hero.


----------



## Wilco183

Spicedaddy said:


> LOL, it's only 100$ more than Z690 Hero.


I see that, and improved ram capability alone would be worth it if didn't have Z690 Hero already. Was browsing Asus AMD offerings on Newegg and was surprised that it's cousin Crosshair Hero was priced at $999.

Edit - Can now see Crosshair listed at $699.


----------



## sulalin

Mappi75，帖子：29034598，成員：387103 said:


> 是否可以在這個實際問題中進行民意調查，每個人都可以選擇的簡歷（並更改它）？
> 
> 想知道這裡最常用的是什麼bios...
> 
> 可以在bios 1503/1505/1701/0082 (KS CPU) 之間決定。
> 
> 1701有降低DRAM電壓。
> 150給了我最好的表演3。
> 0082 看起來像最酷的 CPU 溫度
> tm5中的1601般的錯誤（從來沒有見過地獄般的電壓有多少。）
> [/引用]
> 1701BIOS memory voltage is really much lower


----------



## Simkin

Z790 boards and prices are showing up here in Norway, the prices are starting to go insane now 😅

The Z790 Hero is 25% more expensive than the Z690 Apex.


----------



## Martin778

For real, 5800X3D + B450/550 should see a sale hike, now AM5 boards (and z790) are looking to be insanely expensive.
Mfgs lost their minds completely but yet, stupid people keep buying midrange boards for €400+ so the prices will continue to rise each gen.

Anyone with acute stockholm syndrome wants to gamble on Z790 ASUS? 
I'll stick to my z690 Dark and only swap the CPU.
Interestingly enough, there is no Z790 Apex announced yet.


----------



## J_Lab4645

Damn......Z790-

....Not Impressed


----------



## Papusan

Nizzen said:


> I have it. Too big with supercool dimm block. Stock dimm is ofc ok


Thanks. Do you use Grizzlys Contact Frame or the bend fix from Thermalright LGA1700-BCF ? And if so, did you (others kan reply as well) see an difference in temps? I think more in the way in combination with the EK-Quantum Velocity² water block. Thanks


Csavez™ said:


> I just ran into this problem!
> I replaced the cpu frame, put back the cpu water block, and with the CBr23 not a single test ran, it threw an error, even though I installed it with a torque screwdriver, but the temperatures were very good.
> I turned it back 2 turns and all tests ran, in return I got +3°C.
> For me, the new CPU frame did not improve the temperatures.
> 
> _"If anyone by chance wants to repaste the CPU, it is a good moment to check the CPU bracket screws "_
> *The factory screws were loose, which is probably why I was able to reac*_*h P53E42R44.*_
> 
> View attachment 2573179
> 
> View attachment 2573180
> 
> View attachment 2573181
> 
> View attachment 2573182


Thanks. So the conclution is to barely screw down the screws on the contact frame? Equal as for the orginal ILM bracket(the screws was almost loose). I have ordered the Thermalrigh contact frame. Probably a waste of money then. I picked of the block to see how the contact was. I used homemade spacers who is around 0.82 mm thick and with almost loose screws. Still not the best contact between IHS and the cold plate. Especially on the side with the ILM lock arm. But I didn't use a torque screwdriver. Only by hands, so.... Same pressure pattern also with two other type water blocks.









Edit. What torque nm did you screw down the contact frame with?











satinghostrider said:


> No issues here with Kingston Fury Beast on my Apex. Had no issues with G.skill as well.


Thanks


LilOliVert said:


> I hate that I have to say you were right, but it can't do 6400MHz with Kingston memory either. Definitely a bad motherboard


You bougth the wrong board. Apex is forgotten by Asus.

Asus prefer validate new ram on their (cheaper) 4 slot boards and nicely put them on the MEM QVL list. Their high end oc board with two slot design (meant for ram oc'ing) as Apex totally fogotten. Nice done. And why do Asus prefer validating new faster ram with the none K/KF chips? Why? I don't get it. And Asus still haven't bother try G.Skills low latency 6400 sticks on their two slots OC board. A coincidence? Nope.

But their 4 slot boards get all the love. Apex... Nothing! ROG MAXIMUS Z690 HERO | ROG Maximus | Gaming Motherboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG Global


----------



## sulalin

Papusan said:


> Thanks. Do you use Grizzlys Contact Frame or the bend fix from Thermalright LGA1700-BCF ? And if so, did you (others kan reply as well) see an difference in temps? I think more in the way in combination with the EK-Quantum Velocity² water block. Thanks
> Thanks
> You bougth the wrong board. Apex is forgotten by Asus.
> 
> Asus prefer validate new ram on their (cheaper) 4 slot boards and nicely put them on the MEM QVL list. Their high end oc board with two slot design (meant for ram oc'ing) as Apex totally fogotten. Nice done. And why do Asus prefer validating new faster ram with the none K/KF chips? Why? I don't get it. And Asus still haven't bother try G.Skills low latency 6400 sticks on their two slots OC board. A coincidence? Nope.
> 
> But their 4 slot boards get all the love. Apex... Nothing! ROG MAXIMUS Z690 HERO | ROG Maximus | Gaming Motherboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG Global


We have to verify G.SKILL ddr5-6400 ourselves









驗證自己的MDIE


Spoiler: 驗證自己的MDIE














































驗證自己的ADIE


Spoiler: 驗證自己的ADIE


----------



## Papusan

sulalin said:


> We have to verify G.SKILL ddr5-6400 ourselves
> View attachment 2573754
> 
> 
> 驗證自己的MDIE
> 
> 
> Spoiler: 驗證自己的MDIE
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2573755
> 
> View attachment 2573756
> 
> View attachment 2573757
> 
> View attachment 2573758
> 
> 
> 
> 驗證自己的ADIE
> 
> 
> Spoiler: 驗證自己的ADIE
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2573759
> 
> View attachment 2573760
> 
> View attachment 2573761
> 
> View attachment 2573762
> 
> View attachment 2573763


Yep, and thats sad. And Asus didn't make it much easier with the MB lottery (2021/22 boards in several revisions). The bare minimum should be more ram sticks tested, validated and put in the QVL list. This when they know a lot Apex boards don't match the quality you should expect. But turn it the other way... They know about the problems and hence the QVL list is what it is. You just don't put in ram sticks you know will be a problem for the board. Have you seen Z790 Apex listed in press release? Did they forgot that MB as well?











Yep, *Apex is the Ugly child*. Be sure to get compatible ram sticks then go for 4 slots boards... ROG STRIX Z690-F GAMING WIFI | ROG Strix | Gaming Motherboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG Global






ROG MAXIMUS Z690 FORMULA | ROG MAXIMUS Z690 FORMULA | Gaming Motherboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG Global


ROG MAXIMUS Z690 FORMULA



rog.asus.com


----------



## sulalin

Papusan said:


> 是的，這很可悲。華碩並沒有讓 MB 彩票變得更容易（2021/22 董事會多次修訂）。最低限度應該是更多的沖壓棒測試、驗證並放入 QVL 列表。當他們知道很多 Apex 板與您期望的質量不符時，就會出現這種情況。但是反過來……他們知道問題，因此 QVL 列表就是這樣。你只是不放你知道這對董事會來說是個問題的公羊棒。您是否看過新聞稿中列出的 Z790 Apex？他們也忘記了那個MB嗎？
> 
> 是的，*Apex 是醜孩子*。確保獲得兼容的內存條，然後選擇 4 插槽板... ROG STRIX Z690-F GAMING WIFI | ROG Strix | 電競主板｜ROG - 玩家國度｜ROG Global
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 FORMULA | ROG MAXIMUS Z690 FORMULA | Gaming Motherboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG Global
> 
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 FORMULA
> 
> 
> 
> rog.asus.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [/引用]
> No doubt! There is absolutely Z790 APEX and it is absolutely strong~13900K+Z790 APEX 8000MHZ RUNMEMTESTPRO 7.0 500%+
> 8200MHZ OK I have screenshots but can't post them!


----------



## Nizzen

Papusan said:


> Thanks. Do you use Grizzlys Contact Frame or the bend fix from Thermalright LGA1700-BCF ? And if so, did you (others kan reply as well) see an difference in temps? I think more in the way in combination with the EK-Quantum Velocity² water block. Thanks
> 
> Thanks. So the conclution is to barely screw down the screws on the contact frame? Equal as for the orginal ILM bracket(the screws was almost loose). I have ordered the Thermalrigh contact frame. Probably a waste of money then. I picked of the block to see how the contact was. I used homemade spacers who is around 0.82 mm thick and with almost loose screws. Still not the best contact. Especially on the side with the ILM lock arm. But I didn't use a torque screwdriver. Only by hands, so.... Same pattern also with two other type water blocks.
> View attachment 2573782
> 
> Thanks
> You bougth the wrong board. Apex is forgotten by Asus.
> 
> Asus prefer validate new ram on their (cheaper) 4 slot boards and nicely put them on the MEM QVL list. Their high end oc board with two slot design (meant for ram oc'ing) as Apex totally fogotten. Nice done. And why do Asus prefer validating new faster ram with the none K/KF chips? Why? I don't get it. And Asus still haven't bother try G.Skills low latency 6400 sticks on their two slots OC board. A coincidence? Nope.
> 
> But their 4 slot boards get all the love. Apex... Nothing! ROG MAXIMUS Z690 HERO | ROG Maximus | Gaming Motherboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG Global


Using grizzly frame and lapped cpu. Not delidded. A bit better temps, but not much.


----------



## Papusan

Nizzen said:


> Using grizzly frame and lapped cpu. Not delidded. A bit better temps, but not much.


Thanks. I think the Cpu contact frame will do it better if you have an totally flat cpu cold plate. The cold-plates who is more convex as the EK block intended for 1700 socket will reduce the need for the bend fix. In worst case it will do almost nothing as shown by Igorslab. But thanks for the feedback. +reps
















German Engineered Bend Aids for Intels LGA1700 – Thermal Grizzly CPU Contact Frame and Alphacool Apex Backplate Thermal Testing | Review | Page 5 | igor'sLAB


The LGA1700 socket, which Intel introduced for the 12th generation of their Core CPUs last November, is known to have one or two problems with bending hardware. For context, I recommend our other two…




www.igorslab.de


----------



## 673714

Papusan said:


> Thanks. Do you use Grizzlys Contact Frame or the bend fix from Thermalright LGA1700-BCF ? And if so, did you (others kan reply as well) see an difference in temps? I think more in the way in combination with the EK-Quantum Velocity² water block. Thanks
> 
> Thanks. So the conclution is to barely screw down the screws on the contact frame? Equal as for the orginal ILM bracket(the screws was almost loose). I have ordered the Thermalrigh contact frame. Probably a waste of money then. I picked of the block to see how the contact was. I used homemade spacers who is around 0.82 mm thick and with almost loose screws. Still not the best contact. Especially on the side with the ILM lock arm. But I didn't use a torque screwdriver. Only by hands, so.... Same pattern also with two other type water blocks.
> View attachment 2573782
> 
> 
> Edit. What torque nm did you screw down the contact frame with?
> View attachment 2573785
> 
> 
> Thanks
> You bougth the wrong board. Apex is forgotten by Asus.
> 
> Asus prefer validate new ram on their (cheaper) 4 slot boards and nicely put them on the MEM QVL list. Their high end oc board with two slot design (meant for ram oc'ing) as Apex totally fogotten. Nice done. And why do Asus prefer validating new faster ram with the none K/KF chips? Why? I don't get it. And Asus still haven't bother try G.Skills low latency 6400 sticks on their two slots OC board. A coincidence? Nope.
> 
> But their 4 slot boards get all the love. Apex... Nothing! ROG MAXIMUS Z690 HERO | ROG Maximus | Gaming Motherboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG Global


I have the ThermalRight bracket and compared to the washer mod it has improved, both temp and stability. You seem to have gotten a little mixed up about my motherboard, I don't have an Apex, I have the Maximus Extreme


----------



## Ghoosti

Hello to you,
I noticed a VDD voltage difference (SWA) between Dim 1 and Dim 3 in Hwinfo 7-30.
1. Do you have that too?
2. Is there a way to correct this value in the bios? (2004 on Maximus Extreme)
Thank you for your help and advice


----------



## 7empe

Ghoosti said:


> Hello to you,
> I noticed a VDD voltage difference (SWA) between Dim 1 and Dim 3 in Hwinfo 7-30.
> 1. Do you have that too?
> 2. Is there a way to correct this value in the bios? (2004 on Maximus Extreme)
> Thank you for your help and advice
> View attachment 2573799


VDD fluctuates, that's normal. Each DIMM has own voltage regulator so these two won't match all the time.


----------



## Ghoosti

@ 7e empe
Thanks


----------



## Liquid4rt

Anyone with the Asus Z690-I ITX board been having issues with SSD's randomly disappearing and external sound cards not picking up on first boot since the last Bios update?

Been abit of a pain in the butt.. wondering if i've configured something wrong in bios but i don't think so.


----------



## warbucks

Martin778 said:


> For real, 5800X3D + B450/550 should see a sale hike, now AM5 boards (and z790) are looking to be insanely expensive.
> Mfgs lost their minds completely but yet, stupid people keep buying midrange boards for €400+ so the prices will continue to rise each gen.
> 
> Anyone with acute stockholm syndrome wants to gamble on Z790 ASUS?
> I'll stick to my z690 Dark and only swap the CPU.
> Interestingly enough, there is no Z790 Apex announced yet.


I don't see why anyone who has a Z690 Dark should upgrade to Z790. Grab some new a-die ram and a 13900k if you want and you'll be perfectly fine with the Dark.


----------



## affxct

warbucks said:


> I don't see why anyone who has a Z690 Dark should upgrade to Z790. Grab some new a-die ram and a 13900k if you want and you'll be perfectly fine with the Dark.


The Z790 Dark has 14 layers, Asus Z790 all support 7000/7200+ (even the Prime), ASRock support 7000+ and MSI is supporting 7600+ on the Carbon. I would like to agree with you, but we could very well see 8200-8800MT/s on Z790. The limiting factor would be RPL's IMC clock as 9000 would already require a 2250MHz IMC unless we go to Gear 4 (which would reset the entire performance proposition). If the 13900K maxes at around 2000-2050MHz like most 12900Ks, then the Z690 Dark with A-die will definitely remain the go-to at $500.


----------



## Agent-A01

Repost as it's obviously relevant here.


Yesterday I swapped my apex no production date, M0AAY0 with a 2021 Nov. date, the problematic M0EAY0. Bought it off amazon listed as new but this board was clearly a used/return/refurb.
Fingerprints plus IO plastic had hair/fibers all over it.

With that being known, I decided to spend time comparing the boards behavior with DDR5. I also borrowed another 12900K CPU(SP90) from a buddy that he had lapped for testing.

Using G.Skill 6400C32 kit, the M0AAY0 board was not stable on the borrowed 12900K with XMP. Lots of errors in memtests. To stabilize it required additional IMC VDD( 1.2 > 1.3).
After that, I was also able to stabilize 6400 CL28-37-37-30 1T and tight tertiary timings without too much trouble(tm5, memtest pro).

Above 6400 was impossible to stabilize. I started at 6800 and It acted like it was almost stable but then it would act like it was extremely unstable on a reboot with a tiny change of voltage.
I got to the point where I only get 1 or 2 errors on 100% test run of memtest pro; adding .01v to VCCSA would cause dozens of errors within a min on the next run.
Even reverting that voltage change wouldn't bring back the stability it had before.

Going down to 6600 would still have this weird behavior. Y-cruncher was impossible to pass above 6400 as well. No combination of voltages or relaxed timings would help. So that's when I bought the second board.

Anyways, onto the M0EAY0 board. I used my original CPU (SP89) plus the same memory kit to see how the two acted differently.

The same 64001T profile from the last combo was 100% stable on this board. In fact, I quickly learned that this combination was able to test 6800 with no issues at all.
Once I found out the required voltages to run 6800 with relaxed primary timings, I dialed in them to the minimum floor(IMC VDD, IVR TX, VDD etc) of stability.

I was also able to lower timings to 30-40-40-30 and stabilize it with 1.55VDD 1.5VDDQ.

With this new found information I figured maybe my buddies SP90 chip has a worse IMC.
I threw my SP89 into my M0AAY0 and observed different behavior. XMP was stable with this CPU whereas the other SP90 isn't. But alas, the odd behavior above 6400 remains.

After that, I tried my buddies SP90 chip in the used amazon board. Extremely unstable. Hundreds of errors in memtestpro. Would also freeze/bsod randomly.

It took a while but to gain (not perfect)stability this chip required > 1.4 IMC VDD and 1.5~ VDDQ TX.
My SP89 chip only requires around 1.28~ IMC VDD and 1.4 VDDQ TX to stabilize 6800 30-40-40-30.

Obviously this shows a huge discrepancy in IMC quality.
Also one important thing to note. The 'bad' IMC would only pass y-cruncher 1 out of 3 times on whereas my SP89 would pass every time(on the good board)

So in the end, I yanked out my original Apex board and installed the used/return amazon board.

Now I am running a stable 6800 setup with decently tight timings(will dial in a little more)

View attachment 2574023
View attachment 2574024


There were reports that the nov 2021 boards were all worse but that's not true. There's probably a lot of good boards that people return without testing.

Sorry for the long text wall but TLDR:

1. Bad Nov 2021 boards can be good(or better than early batches).
2. People who think they have bad boards may be good and their problem is a weak CPU IMC.
3. The inverse of that, good CPU + bad motherboard will also be limited in max frequency.
4. Rip the people that have bad CPU IMC and bad apex. I imagine those that can't even do 6000 are among those who are affected.

Anyways, after I finalize my 6800 tertiaries, I'll try 7000 next, though I'm probably close to the limit of m-die.
Mine errors out above 52c with my trc/trefi settings.


----------



## primoz.osolnik0

I wonder....will there be any negative performance hit if I use 13900k on z690 strix f board compared to z790 variant ? I dont plan changing ram from my gskill 6000 cl36 for at least 3 years.


----------



## affxct

Agent-A01 said:


> Repost as it's obviously relevant here.
> 
> 
> Yesterday I swapped my apex no production date, M0AAY0 with a 2021 Nov. date, the problematic M0EAY0. Bought it off amazon listed as new but this board was clearly a used/return/refurb.
> Fingerprints plus IO plastic had hair/fibers all over it.
> 
> With that being known, I decided to spend time comparing the boards behavior with DDR5. I also borrowed another 12900K CPU(SP90) from a buddy that he had lapped for testing.
> 
> Using G.Skill 6400C32 kit, the M0AAY0 board was not stable on the borrowed 12900K with XMP. Lots of errors in memtests. To stabilize it required additional IMC VDD( 1.2 > 1.3).
> After that, I was also able to stabilize 6400 CL28-37-37-30 1T and tight tertiary timings without too much trouble(tm5, memtest pro).
> 
> Above 6400 was impossible to stabilize. I started at 6800 and It acted like it was almost stable but then it would act like it was extremely unstable on a reboot with a tiny change of voltage.
> I got to the point where I only get 1 or 2 errors on 100% test run of memtest pro; adding .01v to VCCSA would cause dozens of errors within a min on the next run.
> Even reverting that voltage change wouldn't bring back the stability it had before.
> 
> Going down to 6600 would still have this weird behavior. Y-cruncher was impossible to pass above 6400 as well. No combination of voltages or relaxed timings would help. So that's when I bought the second board.
> 
> Anyways, onto the M0EAY0 board. I used my original CPU (SP89) plus the same memory kit to see how the two acted differently.
> 
> The same 64001T profile from the last combo was 100% stable on this board. In fact, I quickly learned that this combination was able to test 6800 with no issues at all.
> Once I found out the required voltages to run 6800 with relaxed primary timings, I dialed in them to the minimum floor(IMC VDD, IVR TX, VDD etc) of stability.
> 
> I was also able to lower timings to 30-40-40-30 and stabilize it with 1.55VDD 1.5VDDQ.
> 
> With this new found information I figured maybe my buddies SP90 chip has a worse IMC.
> I threw my SP89 into my M0AAY0 and observed different behavior. XMP was stable with this CPU whereas the other SP90 isn't. But alas, the odd behavior above 6400 remains.
> 
> After that, I tried my buddies SP90 chip in the used amazon board. Extremely unstable. Hundreds of errors in memtestpro. Would also freeze/bsod randomly.
> 
> It took a while but to gain (not perfect)stability this chip required > 1.4 IMC VDD and 1.5~ VDDQ TX.
> My SP89 chip only requires around 1.28~ IMC VDD and 1.4 VDDQ TX to stabilize 6800 30-40-40-30.
> 
> Obviously this shows a huge discrepancy in IMC quality.
> Also one important thing to note. The 'bad' IMC would only pass y-cruncher 1 out of 3 times on whereas my SP89 would pass every time(on the good board)
> 
> So in the end, I yanked out my original Apex board and installed the used/return amazon board.
> 
> Now I am running a stable 6800 setup with decently tight timings(will dial in a little more)
> 
> View attachment 2574023
> View attachment 2574024
> 
> 
> There were reports that the nov 2021 boards were all worse but that's not true. There's probably a lot of good boards that people return without testing.
> 
> Sorry for the long text wall but TLDR:
> 
> 1. Bad Nov 2021 boards can be good(or better than early batches).
> 2. People who think they have bad boards may be good and their problem is a weak CPU IMC.
> 3. The inverse of that, good CPU + bad motherboard will also be limited in max frequency.
> 4. Rip the people that have bad CPU IMC and bad apex. I imagine those that can't even do 6000 are among those who are affected.
> 
> Anyways, after I finalize my 6800 tertiaries, I'll try 7000 next, though I'm probably close to the limit of m-die.
> Mine errors out above 52c with my trc/trefi settings.


True.

Also, I'm super happy for you man. This was sort of what I hoped would happen when I ordered an M0EAY0 off Amazon the one time.


----------



## 7empe

Agent-A01 said:


> Repost as it's obviously relevant here.
> 
> 
> Yesterday I swapped my apex no production date, M0AAY0 with a 2021 Nov. date, the problematic M0EAY0. Bought it off amazon listed as new but this board was clearly a used/return/refurb.
> Fingerprints plus IO plastic had hair/fibers all over it.
> 
> With that being known, I decided to spend time comparing the boards behavior with DDR5. I also borrowed another 12900K CPU(SP90) from a buddy that he had lapped for testing.
> 
> Using G.Skill 6400C32 kit, the M0AAY0 board was not stable on the borrowed 12900K with XMP. Lots of errors in memtests. To stabilize it required additional IMC VDD( 1.2 > 1.3).
> After that, I was also able to stabilize 6400 CL28-37-37-30 1T and tight tertiary timings without too much trouble(tm5, memtest pro).
> 
> Above 6400 was impossible to stabilize. I started at 6800 and It acted like it was almost stable but then it would act like it was extremely unstable on a reboot with a tiny change of voltage.
> I got to the point where I only get 1 or 2 errors on 100% test run of memtest pro; adding .01v to VCCSA would cause dozens of errors within a min on the next run.
> Even reverting that voltage change wouldn't bring back the stability it had before.
> 
> Going down to 6600 would still have this weird behavior. Y-cruncher was impossible to pass above 6400 as well. No combination of voltages or relaxed timings would help. So that's when I bought the second board.
> 
> Anyways, onto the M0EAY0 board. I used my original CPU (SP89) plus the same memory kit to see how the two acted differently.
> 
> The same 64001T profile from the last combo was 100% stable on this board. In fact, I quickly learned that this combination was able to test 6800 with no issues at all.
> Once I found out the required voltages to run 6800 with relaxed primary timings, I dialed in them to the minimum floor(IMC VDD, IVR TX, VDD etc) of stability.
> 
> I was also able to lower timings to 30-40-40-30 and stabilize it with 1.55VDD 1.5VDDQ.
> 
> With this new found information I figured maybe my buddies SP90 chip has a worse IMC.
> I threw my SP89 into my M0AAY0 and observed different behavior. XMP was stable with this CPU whereas the other SP90 isn't. But alas, the odd behavior above 6400 remains.
> 
> After that, I tried my buddies SP90 chip in the used amazon board. Extremely unstable. Hundreds of errors in memtestpro. Would also freeze/bsod randomly.
> 
> It took a while but to gain (not perfect)stability this chip required > 1.4 IMC VDD and 1.5~ VDDQ TX.
> My SP89 chip only requires around 1.28~ IMC VDD and 1.4 VDDQ TX to stabilize 6800 30-40-40-30.
> 
> Obviously this shows a huge discrepancy in IMC quality.
> Also one important thing to note. The 'bad' IMC would only pass y-cruncher 1 out of 3 times on whereas my SP89 would pass every time(on the good board)
> 
> So in the end, I yanked out my original Apex board and installed the used/return amazon board.
> 
> Now I am running a stable 6800 setup with decently tight timings(will dial in a little more)
> 
> View attachment 2574023
> View attachment 2574024
> 
> 
> There were reports that the nov 2021 boards were all worse but that's not true. There's probably a lot of good boards that people return without testing.
> 
> Sorry for the long text wall but TLDR:
> 
> 1. Bad Nov 2021 boards can be good(or better than early batches).
> 2. People who think they have bad boards may be good and their problem is a weak CPU IMC.
> 3. The inverse of that, good CPU + bad motherboard will also be limited in max frequency.
> 4. Rip the people that have bad CPU IMC and bad apex. I imagine those that can't even do 6000 are among those who are affected.
> 
> Anyways, after I finalize my 6800 tertiaries, I'll try 7000 next, though I'm probably close to the limit of m-die.
> Mine errors out above 52c with my trc/trefi settings.


What bios version you have used?
Did you try y-cruncher at locked ring ratio?


----------



## Telstar

primoz.osolnik0 said:


> I wonder....will there be any negative performance hit if I use 13900k on z690 strix f board compared to z790 variant ? I dont plan changing ram from my gskill 6000 cl36 for at least 3 years.


Probably not, since both boards look identical except for the heatsinks look. 
But we need to wait and see how the bios and the 13xxxx IMC behave.


----------



## affxct

Telstar said:


> Probably not, since both boards look identical except for the heatsinks look.
> But we need to wait and see how the bios and the 13xxxx IMC behave.


It seems like 8 layers is the minimum now.


----------



## Telstar

affxct said:


> It seems like 8 layers is the minimum now.


Do you know if the x790 strix ddr4 is 6 or 8 layers? That's the only information I wasn't able to find.


----------



## affxct

Telstar said:


> Do you know if the x790 strix ddr4 is 6 or 8 layers? That's the only information I wasn't able to find.


Asus never adverise layer count, but the Scan marketing for the X670E-A shows 8 so I assume all Z790s will be 8. X670E and Z790s are basically identical per vendor.


----------



## Telstar

affxct said:


> Asus never adverise layer count, but the Scan marketing for the X670E-A shows 8 so I assume all Z790s will be 8. X670E and Z790s are basically identical per vendor.


I just wrote to them to ask this question.
Anyway, assuming 8 layers, that would translate in a better, not worse, memory support, provided RPL memory controller isn't worse than ADL (it shouldnt be).


----------



## Agent-A01

7empe said:


> What bios version you have used?
> Did you try y-cruncher at locked ring ratio?


When I got the original apex, I had 1304 I believe, 6400 was the limit. Updated to 1820(I stabilized 6400 1T on this version) then I updated to 2004 when it was released.
Same settings were stable but still not possible to go above > 6400.

I've ran y-cruncher on 49x ring before if that's what you mean by locked.



affxct said:


> True.
> 
> Also, I'm super happy for you man. This was sort of what I hoped would happen when I ordered an M0EAY0 off Amazon the one time.


It took a lot of time to test everything, but it was worth it in the end.

While 64001T is pretty decent It just didn't sit right with me having the 'best' and being so limited in frequency.
One of those things that bothers you in the back of your head lol.

Also glad to see all those weird BSODs that didn't seem to make sense are all gone. I frequently crashed when I stopped a stress test on that board.
0x139, 0xBE, 0xEF, 0x119 and so on


----------



## primoz.osolnik0

Telstar said:


> Probably not, since both boards look identical except for the heatsinks look.
> But we need to wait and see how the bios and the 13xxxx IMC behave.


Yeah...i asked exactly coise i looked at it and basicly all components look the same hehe.


----------



## david12900k

Is anyone experiencing instability after switching to ASUS 2004 Bios? Im running a 2021 Apex with 12900KS @ 5.5 GHz P cores and 4.3 GHz e cores. On 1505, everything super stable (3x30min C23 Runs) and after upgrading, I cannot seem to stabilize this with even more voltage. Im wondering if they messed something up in this new bios.


----------



## tubs2x4

david12900k said:


> Is anyone experiencing instability after switching to ASUS 2004 Bios? Im running a 2021 Apex with 12900KS @ 5.5 GHz P cores and 4.3 GHz e cores. On 1505, everything super stable (3x30min C23 Runs) and after upgrading, I cannot seem to stabilize this with even more voltage. Im wondering if they messed something up in this new bios.


What did you feel you would gain by changing bios’ if you were stable ?


----------



## david12900k

tubs2x4 said:


> What did you feel you would gain by changing bios’ if you were stable ?


Usually new bios have brought me small performance gains. It seemed like after the new microcode a few months ago everything has gone to ****


----------



## Radical_53

david12900k said:


> Is anyone experiencing instability after switching to ASUS 2004 Bios? Im running a 2021 Apex with 12900KS @ 5.5 GHz P cores and 4.3 GHz e cores. On 1505, everything super stable (3x30min C23 Runs) and after upgrading, I cannot seem to stabilize this with even more voltage. Im wondering if they messed something up in this new bios.


I had to change several settings when I upgraded to 2004. One thing was the "Asus user profile" memory setting, the other thing I needed to do was a thorough CMOS clear. I actually re-did all my settings in packs and found stability back.


----------



## david12900k

Additionally it seems like the ring ratio is stuck on 47 for some reason in HWInfo. I just tried reflashing bios 1505, but I'm still getting instability


----------



## sulalin

Before waiting for the arrival of Z790 APEX~ Review the performance and record of Z690 APEX in SAMSUNG IC/Hynix IC MDIE/ADIE frequency


Spoiler: z690 apex samsung ic

























Spoiler: z690 apex hynix ic mdie









































































Spoiler: z690 apex hynix adie


----------



## 7empe

david12900k said:


> Is anyone experiencing instability after switching to ASUS 2004 Bios? Im running a 2021 Apex with 12900KS @ 5.5 GHz P cores and 4.3 GHz e cores. On 1505, everything super stable (3x30min C23 Runs) and after upgrading, I cannot seem to stabilize this with even more voltage. Im wondering if they messed something up in this new bios.


Avoid anything above 1601.


----------



## CptSpig

7empe said:


> Avoid anything above 1601.


1720 is best for me with 12900K and green A-Die memory.


----------



## 7empe

CptSpig said:


> 1720 is best for me with 12900K and green A-Die memory.


As long as you don't use VF curve or global svid voltage.


----------



## 7empe

david12900k said:


> Additionally it seems like the ring ratio is stuck on 47 for some reason in HWInfo. I just tried reflashing bios 1505, but I'm still getting instability


This issue with ring ratio being stuck at default started with 1720.


----------



## affxct

1720 broke me; literally had a BSOD on my previously rock-solid Z690-F and ordered a Z690 Dark. I want someone to list a cheap Z690 Apex sometime in the next few years so that I can own one as a commemoration piece.


----------



## acoustic

affxct said:


> 1720 broke me; literally had a BSOD on my previously rock-solid Z690-F and ordered a Z690 Dark. I want someone to list a cheap Z690 Apex sometime in the next few years so that I can own one as a commemoration piece.


LOL.

When my TUF D4 died, I was pretty pissed .. especially with Z790 about to release .. but it's been a fun (aka frustrating) DDR5 adventure so far with the Unify-X, this 12700K's awful IMC, and the Kingston 6400CL32 kit.

I'm thinking the DARK might have to happen with a 13900K. I'm going to get the chip first to see if my frequency limitation is truly the chip as I suspect. If I'm still limited, then the Unify-X will be next to go.

I have IceManCooler DDR5 heatsinks+block coming too. Should be here mid-October. That'll be another fun experiment.


----------



## affxct

acoustic said:


> LOL.
> 
> When my TUF D4 died, I was pretty pissed .. especially with Z790 about to release .. but it's been a fun (aka frustrating) DDR5 adventure so far with the Unify-X, this 12700K's awful IMC, and the Kingston 6400CL32 kit.
> 
> I'm thinking the DARK might have to happen with a 13900K. I'm going to get the chip first to see if my frequency limitation is truly the chip as I suspect. If I'm still limited, then the Unify-X will be next to go.
> 
> I have IceManCooler DDR5 heatsinks+block coming too. Should be here mid-October. That'll be another fun experiment.


Mmm in that regard I think the new chip will sort it out. The Unify-X was a fairly early production board (they didn't do any major revision upgrade) whereas the Apex M0UAY1 and the Dark were both mature 2022 boards, so there might be less consistency with Unify-X samples, but I haven't really ever come across anyone struggling to do 6800 with it (if they do manually tune). In that regard it may be purely TX VDDQ and VDD2 scaling on your 12700K.


----------



## acoustic

affxct said:


> Mmm in that regard I think the new chip will sort it out. The Unify-X was a fairly early production board (they didn't do any major revision upgrade) whereas the Apex M0UAY1 and the Dark were both mature 2022 boards, so there might be less consistency with Unify-X samples, but I haven't really ever come across anyone struggling to do 6800 with it (if they do manually tune). In that regard it may be purely TX VDDQ and VDD2 scaling on your 12700K.


That's what I think it is. I get inconsistent stability at 6800, and 6666 has issues too. 6600? Perfectly stable super tight with low voltages. This chip had a weak DDR4 IMC that required a lot of voltage for 3800 GR1, so it doesn't shock me. The cores are really good though.. one thing I noticed with the Unify-X over the TUF D4 is that my P-Cores are taking less voltage for higher clocks. I used to have to pump really high wattage for 5.2Ghz all-core, but it's stable at noticeably lower voltages.

The TUF D4 was my last incursion with ASUS for a long time. When that board started throwing issues I was ready to chuck it out the window.


----------



## affxct

acoustic said:


> That's what I think it is. I get inconsistent stability at 6800, and 6666 has issues too. 6600? Perfectly stable super tight with low voltages. This chip had a weak DDR4 IMC that required a lot of voltage for 3800 GR1, so it doesn't shock me. The cores are really good though.. one thing I noticed with the Unify-X over the TUF D4 is that my P-Cores are taking less voltage for higher clocks. I used to have to pump really high wattage for 5.2Ghz all-core, but it's stable at noticeably lower voltages.
> 
> The TUF D4 was my last incursion with ASUS for a long time. When that board started throwing issues I was ready to chuck it out the window.


I've found the Dark to require the least core voltage out of any other board I've tested. I have changed chips, but I've basically been able to carry over chips between boards to build up head-to-heads, and currently the Dark > second Strix Z690-F = Z690 Apex > Z690 Taichi > first Strix Z690-F. If that makes any sense XD. Not that the Apex, Z690-F and Taichi are bad in any way. They're all great boards for core regulation, but the Dark just seems to require ever-so-slightly less and allows more ring clock.


----------



## Falkentyne

affxct said:


> I've found the Dark to require the least core voltage out of any other board I've tested. I have changed chips, but I've basically been able to carry over chips between boards to build up head-to-heads, and currently the Dark > second Strix Z690-F = Z690 Apex > Z690 Taichi > first Strix Z690-F. If that makes any sense XD. Not that the Apex, Z690-F and Taichi are bad in any way. They're all great boards for core regulation, but the Dark just seems to require ever-so-slightly less and allows more ring clock.


If the Dark doesn't have direct VRM Readings (IOUT / VR Out, etc) or die sense voltage, you can't really compare voltages between different boards that have die versus socket sense unless you have die-sense readings also. And the Dark's LLC steps are different. You almost have to go by guesstimation and load temps, although if you can get a close LLC between each board, the socket sense voltages should at least be comparable.


----------



## affxct

Falkentyne said:


> If the Dark doesn't have direct VRM Readings (IOUT / VR Out, etc) or die sense voltage, you can't really compare voltages between different boards that have die versus socket sense unless you have die-sense readings also. And the Dark's LLC steps are different. You almost have to go by guesstimation and load temps, although if you can get a close LLC between each board, the socket sense voltages should at least be comparable.


The Dark does have an IOUT being that it uses an IR controller and not the RAA one present on basically all the other boards (not sure why it matters, but I've noticed that only the Dark has the direct sensor). Dark's sensor reminds me of how the older Aorus boards used to offer direct reads from their IR controllers. However, how I deduced this is pretty simple. The Taichi L2 is 50mV of AVX droop, as is the Strix Z690-F at L5, and the Apex at L5 (Apex with socket sense yields the same read-outs as the -F as it should). I extrapolated that loose comparison hierarchy by using at least one common chip between boards and observing Vcore behavior.

The findings with the Dark ended up being that this particular 12900K can do 1 extra bin of ring, while requiring 1.33-1.34V set (I use 1.34 as a buffer but 1.33 passed Linpack), and doing so at the Dark's default Vdroop which ends up being around 90mV in Linpack. It is IOUT and that can differ between boards, but being that set was 40mV lower than on the Strix, and the Vdroop used was the board's default, it kinda makes up for it.

Basically with 1.37 set on the Strix with L5, it sits at around 1.326V during Linpack and heats up quite a bit. The Dark would be at around 1.25V at load and running colder with higher ambients and a higher ring clock. It's not totally 1:1, but if I had the Apex and compared IOUT to die sense, the Dark should still come out ahead by 10-20mV. My reasoning being that the Strix and Apex seem to behave identically with regards to set voltage and LLC.

Essentially, the load voltage requirements on the Strix were somewhat higher, and testing for the Strix happened in the heart of our winter, which lends itself even more favorably to the Dark, as it passed testing in our spring with around 5c higher ambients during testing.

5.2GHz also is potentially doable whereas 5.2 on this P 89 chip would've required 1.4+ on my previous Strix. Before you ask, I made sure to do testing with 512 disabled, so this wasn't some diminished heat thing. The Dark's IR controller and IR power stages along with however they arranged the power plain does seem to be a positive contributing factor, not sure how they did it but it definitely feels like OCing is substantially easier.

Again, not to discredit RAA or the other boards mentioned, and the difference is not very big. It just kinda is there though. It's a bit difficult to describe this, but I'm sure it'd be easier to demonstrate if you had two boards side by side.









Microsoft OneDrive - Access files anywhere. Create docs with free Office Online.


Store photos and docs online. Access them from any PC, Mac or phone. Create and work together on Word, Excel or PowerPoint documents.



1drv.ms





I have folders for each i9 bin labeled and the ambient temp. Not all stress tests ran were the same, but there's at least one common batch between common i9 bins that can be compared between boards. The most interesting results are the Dark with the SP 83 vs the Strix Z690-F with the same chip running Linpack Xtreme, and then comparing the Strix Z690-F IBT testing vs the Apex with a significantly better P-core i9. I'm not sure how it worked out that way, but it seems as though the Strix with the worse i9 does as well as the Apex. It might be that the Apex's better i9 actually had worse thermal resistance or something but I'm not sure.

This for sure isn't an ideal way to test this, but to be honest, I can't practically afford to own four Z690 boards and I'm only mentioning my findings as an opinion piece. In no way am I suggesting that my good results with the Dark should override anyone's personal decision making. The Apex has a monstrous array of filtering caps so maybe it's better and I just did something incorrectly.


----------



## bastian

Perhaps your milage will vary with 2004 depending on what board you are using. For me, on the Extreme it was terrible. 1720 is better.

I'll be getting a new Z790 for Raptor. Not sure which one yet.


----------



## affxct

bastian said:


> Perhaps your milage will vary with 2004 depending on what board you are using. For me, on the Extreme it was terrible. 1720 is better.
> 
> I'll be getting a new Z790 for Raptor. Not sure which one yet.


Strix -F is always a great option (against all odds). I'm not even kidding. They're cheap and reliable. If you want something high end, you're probably better off just buying the Apex.


----------



## stahlhart

david12900k said:


> Is anyone experiencing instability after switching to ASUS 2004 Bios? Im running a 2021 Apex with 12900KS @ 5.5 GHz P cores and 4.3 GHz e cores. On 1505, everything super stable (3x30min C23 Runs) and after upgrading, I cannot seem to stabilize this with even more voltage. Im wondering if they messed something up in this new bios.


I know that it's mostly irrelevant to the discussion here because of the board models that are in context, but just as an aside -- 2004 is still working perfectly on my Strix E. It corrected the ring bus clocking issue with 1720, and I'm using the same overclock settings as I was with 1304.


----------



## 673714

affxct said:


> It's the board, trust me.





LilOliVert said:


> I hate that I have to say you were right, but it can't do 6400MHz with Kingston memory either. Definitely a bad motherboard
> 
> My order from Kingston was delayed a day, that's why I'm only just now posting this. My first impression was the sticks looked better and felt sturdier in my hands. Unfortunately, that's the first and last good thing I can say.
> 
> They actually performed worse than my G.Skill Trident Z5s. They ran just as hot, maybe even hotter. I ordered the RGB version, and they do not work with Asus Aura Sync at all. They require their own software to be installed to control them. As if that wasn't enough reason for me to return them, the software is just absolutely horrendous. It has an options menu with get this, 1 option. There is no button to apply changes after you make them and hitting enter on your keyboard won't do anything either. I gave up very quickly. The LEDs they used are obnoxious, like literally 10x brighter than anyone needs, I had to turn the brightness down to 10 percent so they would look right with everything else.
> 
> Then to make it even worse, if you don't allow the software to start when windows does and run in the background, the RBG will only do the default factory setting (rainbow cycle). And just to kick me in the nuts Armory Crate recognizes the Kingston RGBs on the ram, and will install the services to sync it, but they obviously don't, so now task manager always has "AacKingstonDramHal" in the background tasks even after I took out the RAM, uninstalled the crap software and even rolled windows back to an image from 2 days ago. I was already going to reinstall windows, now I have even more reason to do so.
> 
> Stupid, sloppy, proprietary, garbage pisses me right off





LilOliVert said:


> Ok, after the Kingston Fury Renegades did even worse, I looked at this again. Thanks btw, I appreciate any help I can get.
> 
> It didn't take me long to realize that I already had a lot of the same settings (only at 6200MHz and 1.4v), either entered manually after following suggestions like in BZ videos, or because that's what the bios went with automatically. Keeping all the settings the same and only bumping it up to 6400 and the vdd to 1.42v with vddq to 1.42v did not work. (The bios doesn't let me enter 1.425 like your screenshot for whatever reason) Grand theft auto crashed to desktop in minutes. Then I tried the higher side of that @1.43v for both and the game CTD even faster than before. Tried something different with vdd 1.42 and vddq 1.4 and it lasted a lot longer but still failed less than 30 minutes later. It gives me hope maybe I can somehow get 6400, but it sucks trying over and over and over again and failing, especially when you start to get your hopes up because it's lasting a long time
> 
> Your screenshots don't tell me what settings you've entered manually and which ones the motherboard has gone with because the setting is on "auto", so idk what if anything I should try to specify. I have high dram power enabled instead of auto, idk what others go with on here. Also, because the manufacturer claims [email protected], that's what I manually select in the bios and just like the high dram setting, it works great with 6200, but if it's just as fast set to 2 I don't care to change that if it means gaining stability. My personal preference is fastest possible response time, so 55ns or lower would make me happy.
> 
> Something I noticed in windows using things like HWiNFO64 I'll see the Ring/LLC Clock is only 3600, and other times up to 4700. Do I need to change a setting to make it 4700 every time it boots, or is that normal behavior and it changes as needed?
> 
> Almost forgot to ask what IVR transmitter vddq does 6400 require?. I know BZ says 1.4v for 6200, does it need to be the same as vdd or vddq as a rule of thumb or something? that’s why I wanted to ask.


Well, it turns out I was wrong again 

I got a 40mm Noctua and pointed it at the ram from the side at an angle so it would actually get cool air in behind those RGBs and it still managed to fail Y-cruncher 2.5 so I assumed it was still temperature related. Then I was literally in the process of researching how to take the heat spreaders off and ordering thermal pads, had the hairdryer out and even had the back side of 1 stick off already. I was curious how much cooler it might be with just that out of the way, so I popped it back in the slot and booted. Not any noticeable difference, but I decided to y-crunch real fast and it failed while the memory was actually still very cool and I was stunned 

So, I did something I admit I should have done a long time ago. I took the stick closest to the CPU out and booted up into windows, started Aida to warm it up a bit, opened Y-cruncher to test it over and over and over again. It never failed. It also stayed pretty cool. I took the other stick and put it in place of the first, booted, aida, y-crunch and failed pretty quick most times. I tried several times but it would only pass 1 time.

I feel dumb for not checking 1 stick at a time before. I guess I never imagined 1 stick being just a little bit bad, enough to sometimes pass tests and game without crashing. insane. I still plan to test the other slot on the motherboard, before I say there's not also something wrong with this '21 Z690Extreme.

I have a set of 6600MHz on the way, which I might return for a refund if 7200+ become available within 30 days. I also definitely want to upgrade to the 4090, and maybe the 13900 too. If I do the CPU, I definitely plan on making sure it's a much higher SP than this 12900k, I didn't know this motherboard made binning possible at the time or I would have a better 12th gen right now lol. I'm not very interested in the Z790 for a couple reasons, not least of which is how much of a pain the motherboard is to swap out 

Technical information: the correct voltage settings for this build @6400MHz turned out to be 1.44v for VDD, VDDQ and IVR Transmitter. It can run 1.43 or 1.45, but 1.43 tested slower and 1.45 was just hotter for no reason


----------



## affxct

LilOliVert said:


> Well, it turns out I was wrong again
> 
> I got a 40mm Noctua and pointed it at the ram from the side at an angle so it would actually get cool air in behind those RGBs and it still managed to fail Y-cruncher 2.5 so I assumed it was still temperature related. Then I was literally in the process of researching how to take the heat spreaders off and ordering thermal pads, had the hairdryer out and even had the back side of 1 stick off already. I was curious how much cooler it might be with just that out of the way, so I popped it back in the slot and booted. Not any noticeable difference, but I decided to y-crunch real fast and it failed while the memory was actually still very cool and I was stunned
> 
> So, I did something I admit I should have done a long time ago. I took the stick closest to the CPU out and booted up into windows, started Aida to warm it up a bit, opened Y-cruncher to test it over and over and over again. It never failed. It also stayed pretty cool. I took the other stick and put it in place of the first, booted, aida, y-crunch and failed pretty quick most times. I tried several times but it would only pass 1 time.
> 
> I feel dumb for not checking 1 stick at a time before. I guess I never imagined 1 stick being just a little bit bad, enough to sometimes pass tests and game without crashing. insane. I still plan to test the other slot on the motherboard, before I say there's not also something wrong with this '21 Z690Extreme.
> 
> I have a set of 6600MHz on the way, which I might return for a refund if 7200+ become available within 30 days. I also definitely want to upgrade to the 4090, and maybe the 13900 too. If I do the CPU, I definitely plan on making sure it's a much higher SP than this 12900k, I didn't know this motherboard made binning possible at the time or I would have a better 12th gen right now lol. I'm not very interested in the Z790 for a couple reasons, not least of which is how much of a pain the motherboard is to swap out
> 
> Technical information: the correct voltage settings for this build @6400MHz turned out to be 1.44v for VDD, VDDQ and IVR Transmitter. It can run 1.43 or 1.45, but 1.43 tested slower and 1.45 was just hotter for no reason


It's actually very common for B2 to do good settings and A2 to be awful. This was the case for a lot of Maximus owners :/.


----------



## david12900k

For me on 2004 bios with 2021 APEX z690, setting any ring manually results in instability and still shows the bugged ring ratio in HWInfo


----------



## 673714

affxct said:


> It's actually very common for B2 to do good settings and A2 to be awful. This was the case for a lot of Maximus owners :/.


I might be one of the lucky Maximus owners then. I've since tested the other slot with the single stick I know is good, and it's passed every time so far. I almost feel proud, because thinking back to when I tried the AI overclock, it did get this i9 with a low SP (81) to do 5.5 GHz stable on the first try 

I am happy now that I know both slots can do 6400MHz, but I do still want to push them both further and see if one performs significantly better than the other


----------



## affxct

LilOliVert said:


> I might be one of the lucky Maximus owners then. I've since tested the other slot with the single stick I know is good, and it's passed every time so far. I almost feel proud, because thinking back to when I tried the AI overclock, it did get this i9 with a low SP (81) to do 5.5 GHz stable on the first try
> 
> I am happy now that I know both slots can do 6400MHz, but I do still want to push them both further and see if one performs significantly better than the other


Hold on. How did you get 5.5 on an SP 81? Wouldn't that require a crap ton of voltage to run Linpack?


----------



## Nizzen

affxct said:


> Hold on. How did you get 5.5 on an SP 81? Wouldn't that require a crap ton of voltage to run Linpack?


Linpack gamers


----------



## Falkentyne

affxct said:


> Hold on. How did you get 5.5 on an SP 81? Wouldn't that require a crap ton of voltage to run Linpack?


You can't do 5.5 on an SP81 unless you go sub ambient.
Even custom loop + Mora 420 will fail this at 20C water.
And a 12900KS SP81 doesn't exist.


----------



## CptSpig

affxct said:


> Hold on. How did you get 5.5 on an SP 81? Wouldn't that require a crap ton of voltage to run Linpack?


World Record 12900KS from Splave! Great cooler score.


----------



## 673714

affxct said:


> Hold on. How did you get 5.5 on an SP 81? Wouldn't that require a crap ton of voltage to run Linpack?





Falkentyne said:


> You can't do 5.5 on an SP81 unless you go sub ambient.
> Even custom loop + Mora 420 will fail this at 20C water.
> And a 12900KS SP81 doesn't exist.


I don't know what to tell you, but my cooler score is 172. I have an EK AIO 280mm, BUT I used a much better thermal paste than what it came with and a thermalright bracket 

Also, overall SP= 81, but P cores SP= 88


----------



## affxct

Nizzen said:


> Linpack gamers


I mean, is it so bad to like running Linpack for a daily XD?


----------



## TSportM

Any chance new 7400mhz Will work on z690 out of the box


----------



## schug

_moving to DDR5 thread_


----------



## Falkentyne

LilOliVert said:


> I don't know what to tell you, but my cooler score is 172. I have an EK AIO 280mm, BUT I used a much better thermal paste than what it came with and a thermalright bracket
> 
> Also, overall SP= 81, but P cores SP= 88


This sounds like an V/F curve bug.
Do you have any screenshots of the V/F chart?
Improper too high low frequency V/F points can completely tank the entire rating, like how some people were getting" SP 124" chips that were actually SP 90.


----------



## 673714

Falkentyne said:


> This sounds like an V/F curve bug.
> Do you have any screenshots of the V/F chart?
> Improper too high low frequency V/F points can completely tank the entire rating, like how some people were getting" SP 124" chips that were actually SP 90.


Back when I did this, I was far too concerned with getting my memory to do 6400MHz stable and in that pursuit reverted back to more conservative settings (5.2GHz) pretty quickly because I didn't think it was that big of a deal anyway. So, no screenshots of it, but I don't mind trying it again sometime. I feel like I should mention that the SP rating given by the motherboard has never changed even with bios updates. The cooler rating has, but has never been lower than 150-ish.


----------



## Papusan

Falkentyne said:


> This sounds like an V/F curve bug.
> Do you have any screenshots of the V/F chart?
> Improper too high low frequency V/F points can completely tank the entire rating,* like how some people were getting" SP 124" chips that were actually SP 90*.


Want higher SP rating then use EK's-Loop Torque Screwdriver. SP200 (316 for the P-cores). The EK screwdriver is waste of money. Some here with better chips? Had to re-flash bios to get rid of the SP bug. Nothing else helped. Normal SP93.

















Edit. I know there have been talked about what’s the best bios for Z690 Apex in later posts. Is 1304 with u15 the best option? Or is there other versions to consider? What with 1701 (pros - cons). Thanks


----------



## sugi0lover

Falkentyne said:


> You can't do 5.5 on an SP81 unless you go sub ambient.
> Even custom loop + Mora 420 will fail this at 20C water.
> And a 12900KS SP81 doesn't exist.


I could run Linx 5.5Ghz only because of my P SP 115 + delided + Mora420 + full A/C on.
It is not that hard to run Linx if ram oc is not high and gflops is low like 700s~800s.
It is very hard to run Linx when ram oc is very high and gflops is over 900.



sugi0lover said:


> ran Linx 10 Cycles with A/C Max on.
> Hwinfo was on after Linx for higher Gflops.
> 
> 12900K (SP103, Direct-Die) : all cores P 5.5Ghz, E 4.3Ghz, Cache 4.3Ghz
> Ram : 7200Mhz-30-41-40-28-310-2T
> MB : Z690 Apex
> 
> Personally, Gflops over 900 is very satisfactory^^
> View attachment 2567386


----------



## bscool

CptSpig said:


> World Record 12900KS from Splave! Great cooler score.


I think that is a bug look at the p core clock 3300 I have only seen that when it is a bios bug(cold bug?).

I wondered if I buy that CPU and I load it up in bios and it shows different SP and p core etc I should get my $$ back since doesnt match what he shows. Not that I wanna buy it, but if I was selling it I would get it figured out so dont have to deal with it not being what was shown in pics.






FS: 12900KS WR CPU


Best chip on the bot. Retail lapped See my profile for scores. Invest in hw points 👉 $750 shipped USA.



community.hwbot.org


----------



## Zyther

What’s currently the most stable z690 hero bios?


----------



## akgis

Zyther said:


> What’s currently the most stable z690 hero bios?


1505 for me, havent tried 2004


----------



## owikh84

Testing 4x16GB Hynix A-Die... 7000 32-42-42-30-2T @ 1.435v
Just for fun though, obviously not stable because the unlocked 2x16GB 81N sticks can't stable at 7000c32.
Maybe I should start testing at 6400 first.


----------



## tubs2x4

nevermind see why


----------



## 673714

Not A-die obviously, but I just found the voltage combo that makes this new 6600MHz Trident Z5 RGB stable on my motherboard.

1.44v  that’s the exact same as the 6400MHz kit required lol

Anyway, the fact that I was able to pass y-cruncher using 6600MHz XMP1 with a little bump to the voltage the same day I got it, scratch that, within hours, gives me a lot of hope this memory is good and so is my motherboard and CPU 

next step is to get the timings as tight as possible


----------



## fitnessgrampacertest

CptSpig said:


> World Record 12900KS from Splave! Great cooler score.


Interesting. I have a 12900KS with an overall SP of 77 (P core 97, E core 37💀💀💀)


----------



## affxct

fitnessgrampacertest said:


> Interesting. I have a 12900KS with an overall SP of 77 (P core 97, E core 37💀💀💀)


WHAAAAAAAAAAT!? CURSED E-CORES. 🥵☠


----------



## fitnessgrampacertest

affxct said:


> WHAAAAAAAAAAT!? CURSED E-CORES. 🥵☠


Lmao, i know right? Just look at this utter filth:










I decided to just disable the e-cores entirely so that i can yeet the ring ratio to 5ghz. (Im running BIOS v2004)

Intel needs to chill out with the E-Cores. Definitely dont need 16 of these tiny cache hogs on the 13900K


----------



## Manonya

Zyther said:


> What’s currently the most stable z690 hero bios?


1601 for me haven‘t try later Version because of troubles Version before


----------



## bigfootnz

fitnessgrampacertest said:


> Lmao, i know right? Just look at this utter filth:
> 
> View attachment 2574561
> 
> 
> I decided to just disable the e-cores entirely so that i can yeet the ring ratio to 5ghz. (Im running BIOS v2004)
> 
> Intel needs to chill out with the E-Cores. Definitely dont need 16 of these tiny cache hogs on the 13900K


In my opinion this is SP bug, all cores have sane VID and SP is way to low for E cores. If reflashing BIOS didn’t help, you have to resit CPU to get correct SP.
I had almost same bug with same SP for E cores with my KS


----------



## 7empe

bigfootnz said:


> In my opinion this is SP bug, all cores have sane VID and SP is way to low for E cores. If reflashing BIOS didn’t help, you have to resit CPU to get correct SP.
> I had almost same bug with same SP for E cores with my KS


I concur. If CPU contact is not good enough then VIDs are far worse than should be. Resit the CPU, tighten all the socket screws and try again.


----------



## fitnessgrampacertest

7empe said:


> I concur. If CPU contact is not good enough then VIDs are far worse than should be. Resit the CPU, tighten all the socket screws and try again.


I'll give the bios reflash a go

If that doesn't work, i'll probably just leave it for a while. If bios reflash doesn't work, and i finally get around to reating the CPU, what exactly should i be looking for? Should i just release the bracket and give it a little wiggle? Blow on it like an N64 cartridge? Lol


----------



## 673714

LilOliVert said:


> Well, it turns out I was wrong again
> 
> I got a 40mm Noctua and pointed it at the ram from the side at an angle so it would actually get cool air in behind those RGBs and it still managed to fail Y-cruncher 2.5 so I assumed it was still temperature related. Then I was literally in the process of researching how to take the heat spreaders off and ordering thermal pads, had the hairdryer out and even had the back side of 1 stick off already. I was curious how much cooler it might be with just that out of the way, so I popped it back in the slot and booted. Not any noticeable difference, but I decided to y-crunch real fast and it failed while the memory was actually still very cool and I was stunned
> 
> So, I did something I admit I should have done a long time ago. I took the stick closest to the CPU out and booted up into windows, started Aida to warm it up a bit, opened Y-cruncher to test it over and over and over again. It never failed. It also stayed pretty cool. I took the other stick and put it in place of the first, booted, aida, y-crunch and failed pretty quick most times. I tried several times but it would only pass 1 time.
> 
> I feel dumb for not checking 1 stick at a time before. I guess I never imagined 1 stick being just a little bit bad, enough to sometimes pass tests and game without crashing. insane. I still plan to test the other slot on the motherboard, before I say there's not also something wrong with this '21 Z690Extreme.
> 
> I have a set of 6600MHz on the way, which I might return for a refund if 7200+ become available within 30 days. I also definitely want to upgrade to the 4090, and maybe the 13900 too. If I do the CPU, I definitely plan on making sure it's a much higher SP than this 12900k, I didn't know this motherboard made binning possible at the time or I would have a better 12th gen right now lol. I'm not very interested in the Z790 for a couple reasons, not least of which is how much of a pain the motherboard is to swap out
> 
> Technical information: the correct voltage settings for this build @6400MHz turned out to be 1.44v for VDD, VDDQ and IVR Transmitter. It can run 1.43 or 1.45, but 1.43 tested slower and 1.45 was just hotter for no reason





LilOliVert said:


> Not A-die obviously, but I just found the voltage combo that makes this new 6600MHz Trident Z5 RGB stable on my motherboard.
> 
> 1.44v  that’s the exact same as the 6400MHz kit required lol
> 
> Anyway, the fact that I was able to pass y-cruncher using 6600MHz XMP1 with a little bump to the voltage the same day I got it, scratch that, within hours, gives me a lot of hope this memory is good and so is my motherboard and CPU
> 
> next step is to get the timings as tight as possible


Yet another update. Holy crap, after a little testing today..

1, I was right about the 6400MHz kit having a bad stick, no doubt.
2, I was wrong about the 6600MHz kit being stable last night, today it wouldn't consistently pass, so I started testing the motherboards ram slots at 6600MHz
3, This 2021 Maximus Extreme does in fact suffer from a bad Dimm_A2. Both 6600MHz sticks would pass with flying colors in Dimm_B2, but both failed miserably in Dimm_A2

I'm already in the middle of contacting Asus as I type this


----------



## bscool

I would take SP with a big grain of salt as so many things can make it inaccurate/skewed. Even loading cmo file from another cpu with show the others CPU SP.

Another Example is Strix d4 flash back to older bios from newer will mess up SP and to get it right again you have to flash in a certain order starting from originaly bios.

Go by what run for actual clocks not what SP shows.


----------



## 673714

bscool said:


> I would take SP with a big grain of salt as so many things can make it inaccurate/skewed. Even loading cmo file from another cpu with show the others CPU SP.
> 
> Another Example is Strix d4 flash back to older bios from newer will mess up SP and to get it right again you have to flash in a certain order starting from originaly bios.
> 
> Go by what run for actual clocks not what SP shows.


I totally agree. Especially since the SP doesn't tell you how good the IMC or the other stuff is


----------



## 7empe

fitnessgrampacertest said:


> I'll give the bios reflash a go
> 
> If that doesn't work, i'll probably just leave it for a while. If bios reflash doesn't work, and i finally get around to reating the CPU, what exactly should i be looking for? Should i just release the bracket and give it a little wiggle? Blow on it like an N64 cartridge? Lol


You can blow on it, sure  But IMO a little better result can be achieved by tightening the bracket's screws and assuring that all the sockets pins aren't bend, especially the VCC pins.


----------



## Crow77

Any Z690 Strix A gaming 2004 bios edited with AVX512 doing the rounds?


----------



## fitnessgrampacertest

7empe said:


> You can blow on it, sure  But IMO a little better result can be achieved by tightening the bracket's screws and assuring that all the sockets pins aren't bend, especially the VCC pins.


Making sure all the sockets pins aren't bent? But there are no pins in an LGA cpu socket?? The cpu uses pads, not pins. What pins are you referring to?


----------



## FreeSpeechIsKnowledge

fitnessgrampacertest said:


> Making sure all the sockets pins aren't bent? But there are no pins in an LGA cpu socket?? The cpu uses pads, not pins. What pins are you referring to?


The socket itself has the pins.


----------



## fitnessgrampacertest

7empe said:


> I concur. If CPU contact is not good enough then VIDs are far worse than should be. Resit the CPU, tighten all the socket screws and try again.


@bscool
@LilOliVert
@bigfootnz
@affxct 
Reseating the CPU did in fact work.

I removed the CPU (even blew on it like an N64 cartridge 🤠), and tightened each of the four socket screws by a half turn each. They turned very easily, and with little effort. There was minimal torque applied to the screws from the factory.

*Before* booting back up, i cleared the CMOS using the CMOS button.

*P-Core SP* increased from *97 to 99*, and *E-Core SP* increased from *37 to 77*. Overall SP is now *91*. Maybe i should put just a smidge more torque into the socket screws? Perhaps an additional quarter turn? How tight is too tight?

I will attach a photo of the BIOS screen here in an hour or two


----------



## 7empe

fitnessgrampacertest said:


> @bscool
> @LilOliVert
> @bigfootnz
> @affxct
> Reseating the CPU did in fact work.
> 
> I removed the CPU (even blew on it like an N64 cartridge 🤠), and tightened each of the four socket screws by a half turn each. They turned very easily, and with little effort. There was minimal torque applied to the screws from the factory.
> 
> *Before* booting back up, i cleared the CMOS using the CMOS button.
> 
> *P-Core SP* increased from *97 to 99*, and *E-Core SP* increased from *37 to 77*. Overall SP is now *91*. Maybe i should put just a smidge more torque into the socket screws? Perhaps an additional quarter turn? How tight is too tight?
> 
> I will attach a photo of the BIOS screen here in an hour or two


Good job. Default socket screws are dummy. There is no logic like with socket frame - should be tight as far as they go. With this score and good custom water loop you should be able to do 5.2-5.3 p-cores and 4.3 e-cores with ring 44x or even 45x.


----------



## affxct

fitnessgrampacertest said:


> @bscool
> @LilOliVert
> @bigfootnz
> @affxct
> Reseating the CPU did in fact work.
> 
> I removed the CPU (even blew on it like an N64 cartridge 🤠), and tightened each of the four socket screws by a half turn each. They turned very easily, and with little effort. There was minimal torque applied to the screws from the factory.
> 
> *Before* booting back up, i cleared the CMOS using the CMOS button.
> 
> *P-Core SP* increased from *97 to 99*, and *E-Core SP* increased from *37 to 77*. Overall SP is now *91*. Maybe i should put just a smidge more torque into the socket screws? Perhaps an additional quarter turn? How tight is too tight?
> 
> I will attach a photo of the BIOS screen here in an hour or two


No freakin' way. This means that a lot of bad chips could be down to the mounting pressure. This is extremely weird.


----------



## bigfootnz

affxct said:


> No freakin' way. This means that a lot of bad chips could be down to the mounting pressure. This is extremely weird.


I do not think that is lot of bad chips, just few of them. It is usually when SP readout is buggy like for @fitnessgrampacertest especcialy with low e-core SP readout. In my case this has happen with 1 cpu of 10 of them. 
Also, as @bscool has pointed out you should take SP with big grain of salt. For example recently, I've compared KF with SP100 (SP P-111) and KS 92 (SP P100), and KF can't clock even close to KS. I understand that KS and KF are different chips, but always test OC, preferably static OC as this is best measurement of CPU quality.


----------



## affxct

bigfootnz said:


> I do not think that is lot of bad chips, just few of them. It is usually when SP readout is buggy like for @fitnessgrampacertest especcialy with low e-core SP readout. In my case this has happen with 1 cpu of 10 of them.
> Also, as @bscool has pointed out you should take SP with big grain of salt. For example recently, I've compared KF with SP100 (SP P-111) and KS 92 (SP P100), and KF can't clock even close to KS. I understand that KS and KF are different chips, but always test OC, preferably static OC as this is best measurement of CPU quality.


The KS and KF thing are because the KS has a different clock point for the VID and it basically means the KS SP is derived from a far more difficult goal clock. Basically KSs can't be compared to regular 12900Ks, and in a sense, 12700Ks and 12600Ks can't be either. You can only really compared 12900Ks. In that regard, I've had four or five now and the SP always accurately predicts the final clock when both Ps and Es are enabled. Sometimes when you disable Es, a chip with better cache will do a higher ratio/require less voltage to reach like 4.8-5.0 of course, so in those cases maybe a P 89 edges a P 92 or something, but generally it has (unfortunately) been bang on. I truly really do wish this weren't the case.


----------



## Gking62

honestly I never paid much mind to this SP rating, I am using AI OC, have great temps with separate loop for CPU and all is rock solid, not sure what the range of good scores are but my SP is 85 (184 cooler pts), could've sworn I had an 88 awhile back in earlier BIOS, btw how do you find your separate P-core, E-core SPs? my separate scores are 92/72 P/E, what do you all have "Cooler Efficiency Customize" & "Cooler Re-eval Algo" set at? Also I am considering a 13900K, shall I check my socket screws and tighten perhaps?


----------



## bscool

For people using the "contact" or anti bend frames. Have you checked it once you have your water block mounted if you can move it(the fame)? I have 3 on 3 different MB and after the waterblock is mounted my frame moves around slightly.

I think over tightening the frame is more of an issue than under tightening. The CPU cooler in "most cases", I would think is going to be putting enough pressure on it when tightened down.

Depending on the cooler you are using it is hard to get at the frame like with Arctic AIO block I had to use small plastic stick to get at frame to see if it moved around, but it is loose and no issues. On Raystorm block I can get at frame easy with my finger and again it is loose and just floating there and no issues with mem or cpu stability.

Edit maybe it depends on the brand of contact frame. I am using Thermalright frames on all 3 MB 2021 Apex, 2022 Apex and Strix d4.

CPU coolers are Arctic 420 AIO, Arctic 360 AIO and Raystorm block.


----------



## Wilco183

bscool said:


> For people using the "contact" or anti bend frames. Have you checked it once you have your water block mounted if you can move it(the fame)? I have 3 on 3 different MB and after the waterblock is mounted my frame moves around slightly.
> 
> I think over tightening the frame is more of an issue than under tightening. The CPU cooler in "most cases", I would think is going to be putting enough pressure on it when tightened down.
> 
> Depending on the cooler you are using it is hard to get at the frame like with Arctic AIO block I had to use small plastic stick to get at frame to see if it moved around, but it is loose and no issues. On Raystorm block I can get at frame easy with my finger and again it is loose and just floating there and no issues with mem or cpu stability.
> 
> Edit maybe it depends on the brand of contact frame. I am using Thermalright frames on all 3 MB 2021 Apex, 2022 Apex and Strix d4.


Same with TG on Artic/Strix d4...no concerns. Will check Thermalright/Hero in countdown 2 weeks plus shipping.


----------



## Simkin

7empe said:


> I concur. If CPU contact is not good enough then VIDs are far worse than should be. Resit the CPU, tighten all the socket screws and try again.


Loose socket screws huh. It's common that these are lose? I guess they are lose from the factory then? And not become loose over time?


----------



## xKots

Hey guys I need some help or knowledge. I recently got Asus ROG Strix z690a d4 paired with 12600k, 3060ti, 4 sticks of 8gb rams from Team. The problem is both channel A are not detecting or working my Team ram. I have tried a1 + b1 and a2 + b2 combination but nothing worked and doesnt boot. if placed on all 4 dimms and doesnt boot. It only boot when 2 rams are on both B channel. Ram part number is TF4D416G3600HC18JDC01 and are on the QVL list. I have not played with the setting on the bios. Is there any work around this to make it work? VRM core voltage is on auto and is reading at 1.146v.


----------



## bscool

xKots said:


> Hey guys I need some help or knowledge. I recently got Asus ROG Strix z690a d4 paired with 12600k, 3060ti, 4 sticks of 8gb rams from Team. The problem is both channel A are not detecting or working my Team ram. I have tried a1 + b1 and a2 + b2 combination but nothing worked and doesnt boot. if placed on all 4 dimms and doesnt boot. It only boot when 2 rams are on both B channel. Ram part number is TF4D416G3600HC18JDC01 and are on the QVL list. I have not played with the setting on the bios. Is there any work around this to make it work? VRM core voltage is on auto and is reading at 1.146v.


It sounds like MB or CPU issue.

My first guess would be MB and then CPU channel A is bad if getting another MB doenst work.. Going to be difficult to diagnos without another MB and CPU.


----------



## affxct

bscool said:


> It sounds like MB or CPU issue.
> 
> My first guess would be MB and then CPU channel A is bad if getting another MB doenst work.. Going to be difficult to diagnos without another MB and CPU.


100%. Either the board's first two DIMM slots (A1/A2) are borked, or one of your IMCs is borked. If the latter ends up being the case then this will be one of the first documented instances of this happening on Intel. Intel never used to use two dedicated IMCs, so you'd usually have merely a faulty CPU that wouldn't train at all. Not sure if having access to just channel B is good or bad.

With all of the above in consideration, this might actually be a continuation of the socket discussion. If your CPU has weird mounting pressure or perhaps you have a bent pin... It could genuinely just require a good re-seating.


----------



## edkieferlp

bscool said:


> For people using the "contact" or anti bend frames. Have you checked it once you have your water block mounted if you can move it(the fame)? I have 3 on 3 different MB and after the waterblock is mounted my frame moves around slightly.
> 
> I think over tightening the frame is more of an issue than under tightening. The CPU cooler in "most cases", I would think is going to be putting enough pressure on it when tightened down.
> 
> Depending on the cooler you are using it is hard to get at the frame like with Arctic AIO block I had to use small plastic stick to get at frame to see if it moved around, but it is loose and no issues. On Raystorm block I can get at frame easy with my finger and again it is loose and just floating there and no issues with mem or cpu stability.
> 
> Edit maybe it depends on the brand of contact frame. I am using Thermalright frames on all 3 MB 2021 Apex, 2022 Apex and Strix d4.
> 
> CPU coolers are Arctic 420 AIO, Arctic 360 AIO and Raystorm block.


Did you tighten the Thermalright frame all way till it in contact with MB, I think they have pads even on the bottom for it. I could see the TG being loose as you don't tighten that one down and if the cooler mounting pressure is more than the frame screw pressure for sure it would be loose.

I am not to familiar with open loops but do the CPU blocks mount in a way that there a stop or at least on spring pressure and not screw mounting pressure?


----------



## Telstar

I have a simple question: does the strix D4 have dual bios?


----------



## Gking62

so, trying to understand the phenomena of these cpu socket frames everyone is talking about, admittedly this is new to me but as I understand it it offers markedly better contact & cooling? which one to get? On another note, regarding the 2004 BIOS is it safe or shall I wait for the next one, I will be looking to add a 13900K eventually so will need it at some point, thank you.


----------



## bscool

edkieferlp said:


> Did you tighten the Thermalright frame all way till it in contact with MB, I think they have pads even on the bottom for it. I could see the TG being loose as you don't tighten that one down and if the cooler mounting pressure is more than the frame screw pressure for sure it would be loose.
> 
> I am not to familiar with open loops but do the CPU blocks mount in a way that there a stop or at least on spring pressure and not screw mounting pressure?


I tighten the Thermalright frame down evenly using a criss cross pattern. I only make it finger tight on the screws using the straight part of the install tool between my thumb and forefinger so it is not very tight. When done the frame itself is tight as it cannot be moved around, only after installing the CPU 'block" then it is "loose".

The Artic LF2 AIO block is made so it has "stops" so you do not over tighten and to meet Intel specs. The Raystorm I use has springs(no stops) but I added 1.5mm approx of washers as it is an lga1200 mount and temps where higher by 15-20c without the added washers.


----------



## bscool

Telstar said:


> I have a simple question: does the strix D4 have dual bios?


1 bios only.


----------



## bscool

Gking62 said:


> so, trying to understand the phenomena of these cpu socket frames everyone is talking about, admittedly this is new to me but as I understand it it offers markedly better contact & cooling? which one to get? On another note, regarding the 2004 BIOS is it safe or shall I wait for the next one, I will be looking to add a 13900K eventually so will need it at some point, thank you.


With the Intel ILM it will make a "hole/dip" in the middle of the IHS. So with the frames it doesnt make a "hole" so flatter for better contact between IHS and cooler base interface.


----------



## bscool

affxct said:


> 100%. Either the board's first two DIMM slots (A1/A2) are borked, or one of your IMCs is borked. If the latter ends up being the case then this will be one of the first documented instances of this happening on Intel. Intel never used to use two dedicated IMCs, so you'd usually have merely a faulty CPU that wouldn't train at all. Not sure if having access to just channel B is good or bad.
> 
> With all of the above in consideration, this might actually be a continuation of the socket discussion. If your CPU has weird mounting pressure or perhaps you have a bent pin... It could genuinely just require a good re-seating.


I have seen at least 1 person get a bad 12th gen and it was the CPU having defective mem controller.

"So what happens is that it (now I know it's the 12900K and not the board) refuses to boot in channel A, so a DIMM in A2 and B2 slot is a no go, it flat out refuses to boot, and that's in Safe Mode after a CMOS Clear or a failed Overclock."









[Official] Intel Z690 / Z790 DDR4 Daily Memory Overclock


This post aged well. You mean like 8% not 20%. No, it's very close to 20%, 16.74% faster in CPU-Z to be exact, which is lower than the real number, I'm trying to get some R23 scores which are more accurate, I'll let you know once I got them. https://www.capframex.com/tests/Alder Lake-S 12900K...




www.overclock.net


----------



## edkieferlp

bscool said:


> I tighten the Thermalright frame down evenly using a criss cross pattern. I only make it finger tight on the screws using the straight part of the install tool between my thumb and forefinger so it is not very tight. When done the frame itself is tight as it cannot be moved around, only after installing the CPU 'block" then it is "loose".
> 
> The Artic LF2 AIO block is made so it has "stops" so you do not over tighten and to meet Intel specs. The Raystorm I use has springs(no stops) but I added 1.5mm approx of washers as it is an lga1200 mount and temps where higher by 15-20c without the added washers.


Ok, I see so here is my take, the Thermalright frame felt tight after installation because of tension pushing back up from socket pins. Once you installed the cooler block, this seems to have greater force than pins so the frame "feels" a little loose (probably only in the sense of "sliding" back and forth).
If you tightened the frame a tiny bit more it probably feel tight to after cooler install.

I would take all of this as fine and probably not cause issues unless the cooler block pressure on each corner is not even, as it is more than the frame it would maybe affect pin contact.

This then brings up another question, does the stock retention frame get loose too when the water block is installed? It should do the same here too unless all the 3rd party frames don't exert the same pressure as stock retention frame.


----------



## Gking62

bscool said:


> With the Intel ILM it will make a "hole/dip" in the middle of the IHS. So with the frames it doesnt make a "hole" so flatter for better contact between IHS and cooler base interface.


yikes! that vid is telling, thanks for posting that, I'm going to consider this mod if I'm going to change to a 13900K, which of these frames shall I consider and ones I should avoid, I am using the Thermal Griz though currently, thank you @bscool oh btw I am now on BIOS 2004, all seems 5x5, actually have a better AI OC at 71%, 68% previously.


----------



## bscool

Gking62 said:


> yikes! that vid is telling, thanks for posting that, I'm going to consider this mod if I'm going to change to a 13900K, which of these frames shall I consider and ones I should avoid, thank you @bscool oh btw I am now on BIOS 2004, all seems 5x5, actually have a better AI OC at 71%, 68% previously.


I think the Thermalright are great for the price. Igors and Gamer Nexus has tested a bunch of them and they are all very close. I think the Thermalright is the easiest to use and not have mounting pressure/memory issues, going by feedback I have seen.

The frames vary a little how they "sit" on the MB and Thermalright makes contact more link the Intel ILM vs TG and others that only make contact with a washer in each corner and I think that is why they are more "picky" about screw tightness.


----------



## affxct

bscool said:


> I have seen at least 1 person get a bad 12th gen and it was the CPU having defective mem controller.
> 
> "So what happens is that it (now I know it's the 12900K and not the board) refuses to boot in channel A, so a DIMM in A2 and B2 slot is a no go, it flat out refuses to boot, and that's in Safe Mode after a CMOS Clear or a failed Overclock."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Official] Intel Z690 / Z790 DDR4 Daily Memory Overclock
> 
> 
> This post aged well. You mean like 8% not 20%. No, it's very close to 20%, 16.74% faster in CPU-Z to be exact, which is lower than the real number, I'm trying to get some R23 scores which are more accurate, I'll let you know once I got them. https://www.capframex.com/tests/Alder Lake-S 12900K...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net


Basically the Zen phenomenon. I actually didn't know it was already happening. I had hoped that perhaps Intel IMCs would continue being rather resilient. It sucks that this could possibly now have happened for a second time. On one hand I guess it's good that only one of the IMCs is borked, but even still...


----------



## 7empe

Simkin said:


> Loose socket screws huh. It's common that these are lose? I guess they are lose from the factory then? And not become loose over time?


They come loose from the factory. No way they could loose over time if tighten properly.


----------



## Simkin

7empe said:


> They come loose from the factory. No way they could loose over time if tighten properly.


Ah, another Asus Z690 greatness thing i guess 🤣

Have filed an RMA on my Apex, cant wait to throw this garbage board out


----------



## Gking62

Just curious, is anyone running the Kingston KF556C40BBK2-64 2x32GB kit on their Extreme or any other board by chance? As I posted several weeks ago I had a stick of GSkill 
F5-5600U3636C16GX2-TZ5K go bad so rather than risk any more bad sticks from them, I opted instead for the fresh on the QVL list the Kingston set. Now, with the GSkill on older BIOSs, such as 1601 where I was on since it's release until recently, I could run XMP1 or XMP2 error free albeit at 1.25v (over 1.20v default) vdd, vddq, MC vdd, TX vdd, and vccsa was at around 1.13 (auto) and all passed MemTest86 (9.4 free) without a hitch and this is with a modest 68% AI OC. Fast forward to today, on BIOS 2004 with AI OC 71% and the Kingston can't pass to save it's life though in all respects, multiple 3DMark stress tests passing 99%+ along with playing games for seemingly hours, mainly flight simulators (DCS World) FPS (BF2042) etc. at settings of what I had previously except what I noticed that with the GSkill, the VCCSA was at auto and only showed approx 1.13v, however with the Kingston and on BIOS 2004, the VCCSA @ Auto was up higher at 1.25v, presumably due to 2x32 DS, with it that high it would start throwing errors fairly quickly after around test 3. So I knocked VCCSA down manually to about 1.12v, close to what it was with the GSkill and it ran without errors until deep into the 2nd test so I don't know exactly what to make of it, anyone have any advice or thoughts on this? I'm looking at the AI OC perhaps dialing it down a notch but anyhow, any advice here is appreciated.

Update: well after fighting with this some more after the above post, I disabled AI OC for the time being and running ram at Auto which pains me but IMHO, I've come to the conclusion that BIOS 2004 is utter garbage and ruined my previous stable setup I had under 1601, with 2004 and AI OC, it pushed the system too far, and when I tried to dial down the OC, setting it at 5400 P-Core (previous stable 68% OC) rather than the 55 P-Core (71% OC) it had, it would just revert back to 71 no matter how many times I tried and went Back to crappy 52 P-Core and auto 4800 ram, hoping for a better developed BIOS while wondering in astonishment who the hell are these clowns working on them anyhow?


----------



## sulalin

xKots，帖子：29041027，成員：677509 said:


> 嘿伙計們，我需要一些幫助或知識。我最近從 Team 購買了 Asus ROG Strix z690a d4 和 12600k、3060ti、4 條 8gb 內存條。問題是通道 A 都沒有檢測或工作我的團隊 ram。我嘗試了 a1 + b1 和 a2 + b2 組合，但沒有任何效果並且無法啟動。如果放置在所有 4 個調光器上並且不啟動。它僅在兩個 B 通道上都有 2 個 RAM 時啟動。Ram 部件號為 TF4D416G3600HC18JDC01，在 QVL 列表中。我沒有玩過bios上的設置。有什麼辦法可以解決這個問題嗎？VRM 核心電壓自動開啟，讀數為 1.146v。
> [/引用]
> 檢查您的 CPU 插槽和引腳是否彎曲或髒污！你內存中的一個通道檢測到低於99%是CPU插槽問題或者散熱器鎖太緊，導致主板彎曲，導致內存異常！檢查內存插槽！如果ab異常，可能是主板問題！


----------



## morph.

Gking62 said:


> Just curious, is anyone running the Kingston KF556C40BBK2-64 2x32GB kit on their Extreme or any other board by chance? As I posted several weeks ago I had a stick of GSkill
> F5-5600U3636C16GX2-TZ5K go bad so rather than risk any more bad sticks from them, I opted instead for the fresh on the QVL list the Kingston set. Now, with the GSkill on older BIOSs, such as 1601 where I was on since it's release until recently, I could run XMP1 or XMP2 error free albeit at 1.25v (over 1.20v default) vdd, vddq, MC vdd, TX vdd, and vccsa was at around 1.13 (auto) and all passed MemTest86 (9.4 free) without a hitch and this is with a modest 68% AI OC. Fast forward to today, on BIOS 2004 with AI OC 71% and the Kingston can't pass to save it's life though in all respects, multiple 3DMark stress tests passing 99%+ along with playing games for seemingly hours, mainly flight simulators (DCS World) FPS (BF2042) etc. at settings of what I had previously except what I noticed that with the GSkill, the VCCSA was at auto and only showed approx 1.13v, however with the Kingston and on BIOS 2004, the VCCSA @ Auto was up higher at 1.25v, presumably due to 2x32 DS, with it that high it would start throwing errors fairly quickly after around test 3. So I knocked VCCSA down manually to about 1.12v, close to what it was with the GSkill and it ran without errors until deep into the 2nd test so I don't know exactly what to make of it, anyone have any advice or thoughts on this? I'm looking at the AI OC perhaps dialing it down a notch but anyhow, any advice here is appreciated.
> 
> Update: well after fighting with this some more after the above post, I disabled AI OC for the time being and running ram at Auto which pains me but IMHO, I've come to the conclusion that BIOS 2004 is utter garbage and ruined my previous stable setup I had under 1601, with 2004 and AI OC, it pushed the system too far, and when I tried to dial down the OC, setting it at 5400 P-Core (previous stable 68% OC) rather than the 55 P-Core (71% OC) it had, it would just revert back to 71 no matter how many times I tried and went Back to crappy 52 P-Core and auto 4800 ram, hoping for a better developed BIOS while wondering in astonishment who the hell are these clowns working on them anyhow?


I genuinely don't want to sound rude but next to nearly no one on this forum would run AI OC it is totally the wrong demographic... A lot if not most active people on this forum are all about pushing their OC's on their cooling solution as much/optimally as they can not with a 1 click oc.


----------



## Simkin

Asus Z790 Apex listed here in Norway. No pictures, but I guess its coming very soon.

100$ more than the Hero, so almost a 40% increase in price over Z690 Apex.


----------



## Nizzen

Simkin said:


> Asus Z790 Apex listed here in Norway. No pictures, but I guess its coming very soon.
> 
> 100$ more than the Hero, so almost a 40% increase in price over Z690 Apex.








ASUS ROG MAXIMUS Z790 APEX Hovedkort - Intel Z790 - Intel LGA1700 socket - DDR5 RAM - ATX


10 390,00 kr Hovedkort, ATX, Intel LGA1700 Socket, Intel Z790, 2 x PCI-Express 5.0 x16, Dual <strong>DDR5-5600</strong> - 2 x DIMM slots, 6 x SATA-600 / 4 x M.2 NVMe PCI-Express 4.0 / 1 x M.2 NVMe PCI-Express 5.0 (2242 / 2260 / 2280), USB 3.2 Gen 2 Type A & C, 2 x Dis.




www.proshop.no


----------



## bastian

Simkin said:


> Asus Z790 Apex listed here in Norway. No pictures, but I guess its coming very soon.
> 
> 100$ more than the Hero, so almost a 40% increase in price over Z690 Apex.


Did anyone really expect the Z790 to be the best price optioned when Z690 is still available? Especially from ASUS lol


----------



## Telstar

bastian said:


> Did anyone really expect the Z790 to be the best price optioned when Z690 is still available? Especially from ASUS lol


Nope, but maybe 50 and not 100 premium.


----------



## bastian

Telstar said:


> Nope, but maybe 50 and not 100 premium.


Best to stick with Z690 if you want to save some $. Z790 honestly is not going to be a huge improvement, unless you got a bad Z690 board previously.


----------



## Telstar

bastian said:


> Best to stick with Z690 if you want to save some $. Z790 honestly is not going to be a huge improvement, unless you got a bad Z690 board previously.


For Asus probably. But 2021 z690s had some bugs (LAN etc), and I still don't know the price of the new Strix D4 which is the only Asus board I'm interested in, maybe won't be too overpriced.


----------



## Falkentyne

bastian said:


> Did anyone really expect the Z790 to be the best price optioned when Z690 is still available? Especially from ASUS lol


It will be worth it. Hold onto your butts, Dorothy, because Kansas is going bye-bye.


----------



## tubs2x4

Falkentyne said:


> It will be worth it. Hold onto your butts, Dorothy, because Kansas is going bye-bye.


Where you going then?


----------



## dyanikoglu

Everybody gangsta until z790 also has ram issues.


----------



## Wilco183

tubs2x4 said:


> Where you going then?


Jurassic World Dominion.


----------



## NoGuru

Just picked up a Strix Z690-A gaming in prep for Raptor lake so subbing.


----------



## sblantipodi

Hi all, I have a strange issue with 4090.
I would not be surprised if it's an Asus problem.

I have a Corsair HX1200i and an MSI Suprim X RTX 4090.

PC works well until I have no nvidia driver, as soon as I install nvidia driver the PC reboots abruptly,
then windows starts, shows the desktop and reboot, this happen in a loop.

If I uninstall nvidia drivers PC works well.

If I rollback to an RTX2080Ti I don't have this problem.

What can it be?
Is there someone with z690 Extreme running 4090 cards here?


----------



## darth_meh

sblantipodi said:


> Hi all, I have a strange issue with 4090.
> I would not be surprised if it's an Asus problem.
> 
> I have a Corsair HX1200i and an MSI Suprim X RTX 4090.
> 
> PC works well until I have no nvidia driver, as soon as I install nvidia driver the PC reboots abruptly,
> then windows starts, shows the desktop and reboot, this happen in a loop.
> 
> If I uninstall nvidia drivers PC works well.
> 
> If I rollback to an RTX2080Ti I don't have this problem.
> 
> What can it be?
> Is there someone with z690 Extreme running 4090 cards here?


I would try clearing the CMOS.


----------



## morph.

@sblantipodi, you can try using DDU: Display Driver Uninstaller Download version 18.0.5.5


----------



## sblantipodi

morph. said:


> @sblantipodi, you can try using DDU: Display Driver Uninstaller Download version 18.0.5.5


Done it, didn't solved.


----------



## sblantipodi

darth_meh said:


> I would try clearing the CMOS.


Done it, same problem.


----------



## D3C022

Hi guys, I'm having a problem with my z690 hero, I can't post with XMP on if my RAM is just in slots 1 and 3. If I boot with all 4 sticks in and XMP on it will post fine, and also if I just have 2 sticks in slots 2 and 4 it will post fine. So I could just post with all 4 sticks and XMP, but that seems to cause massive instability, bsods pretty much straight away, although I know that combining kits of high speed ddr5 has some issues, so maybe I’ll have to tweak the settings later, I’m more concerned over the fact that the board will boot loop if I’m just trying to boot with sticks in 1 and 3. I have tried both my kits of RAM (both T-Force Delta 6200) on their own in slots 2 and 4 just to make sure that one of my RAM sticks isn't faulty, but they all seem to work fine. I'm on latest BIOS (2004) and have an i9-12900ks, just wanted to know if anyone else was experiencing anything similar or if I have a bad board/imc. Thanks


----------



## 673714

D3C022 said:


> Hi guys, I'm having a problem with my z690 hero, I can't post with XMP on if my RAM is just in slots 1 and 3. If I boot with all 4 sticks in and XMP on it will post fine, and also if I just have 2 sticks in slots 2 and 4 it will post fine. So I could just post with all 4 sticks and XMP, but that seems to cause massive instability, bsods pretty much straight away, although I know that combining kits of high speed ddr5 has some issues, so maybe I’ll have to tweak the settings later, I’m more concerned over the fact that the board will boot loop if I’m just trying to boot with sticks in 1 and 3. I have tried both my kits of RAM (both T-Force Delta 6200) on their own in slots 2 and 4 just to make sure that one of my RAM sticks isn't faulty, but they all seem to work fine. I'm on latest BIOS (2004) and have an i9-12900ks, just wanted to know if anyone else was experiencing anything similar or if I have a bad board/imc. Thanks


If I'm not mistaken, that's to be expected, since DDR5 does not run at higher frequencies with all 4 Dimms populated. Also, Dimms 2 and 4 are specifically for 2 stick, high frequency configurations, so 1 and 3 are probably not designed to handle high frequencies.


----------



## sulalin

Get T-FORCE DDR5-7200 XMP in stock for your z790 hero/apex! Slow down!


----------



## sblantipodi

sblantipodi said:


> Hi all, I have a strange issue with 4090.
> I would not be surprised if it's an Asus problem.
> 
> I have a Corsair HX1200i and an MSI Suprim X RTX 4090.
> 
> PC works well until I have no nvidia driver, as soon as I install nvidia driver the PC reboots abruptly,
> then windows starts, shows the desktop and reboot, this happen in a loop.
> 
> If I uninstall nvidia drivers PC works well.
> 
> If I rollback to an RTX2080Ti I don't have this problem.
> 
> What can it be?
> Is there someone with z690 Extreme running 4090 cards here?


are there someone here with a 4090 card?
is there some compatibility problems like on X670 mobos?


----------



## morph.

sblantipodi said:


> Done it, didn't solved.


hopefully, it's not a damaged cable or faulty PSU then weirder things have happened.


----------



## sblantipodi

morph. said:


> hopefully, it's not a damaged cable or faulty PSU then weirder things have happened.


A new PSU is arriving tomorrow. Hope it will help but I doubt.


----------



## acoustic

D3C022 said:


> Hi guys, I'm having a problem with my z690 hero, I can't post with XMP on if my RAM is just in slots 1 and 3. If I boot with all 4 sticks in and XMP on it will post fine, and also if I just have 2 sticks in slots 2 and 4 it will post fine. So I could just post with all 4 sticks and XMP, but that seems to cause massive instability, bsods pretty much straight away, although I know that combining kits of high speed ddr5 has some issues, so maybe I’ll have to tweak the settings later, I’m more concerned over the fact that the board will boot loop if I’m just trying to boot with sticks in 1 and 3. I have tried both my kits of RAM (both T-Force Delta 6200) on their own in slots 2 and 4 just to make sure that one of my RAM sticks isn't faulty, but they all seem to work fine. I'm on latest BIOS (2004) and have an i9-12900ks, just wanted to know if anyone else was experiencing anything similar or if I have a bad board/imc. Thanks


Try boosting DRAM VDD/VDDQ 0.03-0.04v when all 4 sticks are in. I noticed 4-DIMM boards tend to want slightly higher voltages for stability.

Have you tried slot 1/slot 3 individually? Could be a weak slot.


----------



## sblantipodi

it seems that there are other Z690 Asus users with same problem here...
are there any new BIOS from Asus that fixes this problem? Is this a known issue?









RTX4090 and boot loop


Hi all, I have a Corsair HX1200i and an MSI Suprim X RTX 4090. PC works well until I have no nvidia driver, as soon as I install nvidia driver the PC reboots abruptly, then windows starts, shows the desktop and reboot, this happen in a loop. If I uninstall nvidia drivers PC works well. Is my...




www.overclock.net


----------



## D3C022

LilOliVert said:


> If I'm not mistaken, that's to be expected, since DDR5 does not run at higher frequencies with all 4 Dimms populated. Also, Dimms 2 and 4 are specifically for 2 stick, high frequency configurations, so 1 and 3 are probably not designed to handle high frequencies.


Ahh interesting, I had heard about running 4 sticks of high speed ddr5 and the problems with it, so the instability makes sense. I didn’t know that different slots are able to handle different frequencies though, makes sense I suppose that 2 and 4 would be able to handle more, I just wanted to rule out bad slots on my board.

Thanks


----------



## D3C022

acoustic said:


> Try boosting DRAM VDD/VDDQ 0.03-0.04v when all 4 sticks are in. I noticed 4-DIMM boards tend to want slightly higher voltages for stability.
> 
> Have you tried slot 1/slot 3 individually? Could be a weak slot.


Hi, thanks for the suggestion, I’ll give that a try later on. I have tried both slots 1 and 3 on their own and neither will boot with XMP enabled. So I guess both slots are weaker?


----------



## sblantipodi

This evening I tried the card on my brother's PC, he has an Asus Z690 Hero,
it works like a charm on his PC.

At this point I really don't know where is the problem.

Tomorrow I'll try a brand new 1500W power supply but I doubt that it's the power supply because the power supply I'm using on my pc is am HX1200i that works well with a 2080ti.

It could be some incompatibility with my Z690 Extreme.


----------



## bastian

sblantipodi said:


> it seems that there are other Z690 Asus users with same problem here...
> are there any new BIOS from Asus that fixes this problem? Is this a known issue?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RTX4090 and boot loop
> 
> 
> Hi all, I have a Corsair HX1200i and an MSI Suprim X RTX 4090. PC works well until I have no nvidia driver, as soon as I install nvidia driver the PC reboots abruptly, then windows starts, shows the desktop and reboot, this happen in a loop. If I uninstall nvidia drivers PC works well. Is my...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net


Jay says his Strix 4090 won't work on a certain Asrock mobo:





Perhaps there is an issue with third party cards and some mobos?

The FE seems fine.


----------



## morph.

bastian said:


> Jay says his Strix 4090 won't work on a certain Asrock mobo:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps there is an issue with third party cards and some mobos?
> 
> The FE seems fine.


He should learn to update his asrock bios then, especially if its amd platform, as the late bios's released yesterday provide better compatibility to 4090s.


----------



## tfletch90

Peculiar problem if anyone would like to chime in. Getting random CTD's and app crashing while gaming, Memtest86 passes fine on JEDEC standards however Aida64 cache and memory stress tests failing with "hardware failure". Running ram at 4600mhz instead of standard 4800mhz seems to be the fix. I've freshly installed Windows 11 about 5 times, updated all drivers, DDU for graphics, BIOS, and replaced PSU with the Seasonic. I've tried literally everything and have scoured the internet for weeks reading forums applying any potential fix I could with no luck. Next step is different ram kits to exclude my two matching sets of Dominator 5200 with Micron chips.

12900k
Z690 Maximus Extreme
2x16 Corsair Dominator Platinum 5200
EVGA 3090 FTW3
Seasonic PX1300 Platinum PSU
All EK water-cooled with **** all for high temps.


----------



## TSportM

sblantipodi said:


> it seems that there are other Z690 Asus users with same problem here...
> are there any new BIOS from Asus that fixes this problem? Is this a known issue?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RTX4090 and boot loop
> 
> 
> Hi all, I have a Corsair HX1200i and an MSI Suprim X RTX 4090. PC works well until I have no nvidia driver, as soon as I install nvidia driver the PC reboots abruptly, then windows starts, shows the desktop and reboot, this happen in a loop. If I uninstall nvidia drivers PC works well. Is my...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net


My 4090 suprim x works fine but dont have a hx 1200i i have a ax1500i

What is the problem exactly?


----------



## sblantipodi

TSportM said:


> My 4090 suprim x works fine but dont have a hx 1200i i have a ax1500i
> 
> What is the problem exactly?


My MSI Suprim X 4090 causes my PC to abruptly reboot as soon as the Windows desktop is loaded and then again and again In a boot loop.
This only happens if there is Nvidia driver installed, if I clean drivers using ddu it does not happen.
Using Z690 Extreme from Asus with latest BIOS with all stock frequency and no xmp and a Corsair HX1200i PSU. PC works no problem if I rollback to my 2080ti.

On my brother's pc my 4090 works no problem, his PC is identical to mine apart the PSU, he has an Hx1000 and the mobo, he has an Asus z690 hero.

Both pc used 12900k with same ram sticks and latest 2004 bios.

This is so frustrating.


----------



## Spicedaddy

sblantipodi said:


> My MSI Suprim X 4090 causes my PC to abruptly reboot as soon as the Windows desktop is loaded and then again and again In a boot loop.
> This only happens if there is Nvidia driver installed, if I clean drivers using ddu it does not happen.
> Using Z690 Extreme from Asus with latest BIOS with all stock frequency and no xmp and a Corsair HX1200i PSU. PC works no problem if I rollback to my 2080ti.
> 
> On my brother's pc my 4090 works no problem, his PC is identical to mine apart the PSU, he has an Hx1000 and the mobo, he has an Asus z690 hero.
> 
> Both pc used 12900k with same ram sticks and latest 2004 bios.
> 
> This is so frustrating.


Must be your PSU if you have a clean Windows install.


----------



## skhitzo

sblantipodi said:


> My MSI Suprim X 4090 causes my PC to abruptly reboot as soon as the Windows desktop is loaded and then again and again In a boot loop.
> This only happens if there is Nvidia driver installed, if I clean drivers using ddu it does not happen.
> Using Z690 Extreme from Asus with latest BIOS with all stock frequency and no xmp and a Corsair HX1200i PSU. PC works no problem if I rollback to my 2080ti.
> 
> On my brother's pc my 4090 works no problem, his PC is identical to mine apart the PSU, he has an Hx1000 and the mobo, he has an Asus z690 hero.
> 
> Both pc used 12900k with same ram sticks and latest 2004 bios.
> 
> This is so frustrating.


I wouldn't mess too much, I have the exact same issue.
Zotac 4090 trinity oc
12900k
32 gog ddr5 gskill 600 
ASUS hero on 2004 BIOS.
corsair av or ax1200

Same random reboot, can't use at all.


----------



## skhitzo

skhitzo said:


> I wouldn't mess too much, I have the exact same issue.
> Zotac 4090 trinity oc
> 12900k
> 32 gog ddr5 gskill 600
> ASUS hero on 2004 BIOS.
> corsair av or ax1200
> 
> Same random reboot, can't use at all.





skhitzo said:


> I wouldn't mess too much, I have the exact same issue.
> Zotac 4090 trinity oc
> 12900k
> 32 gog ddr5 gskill 600
> ASUS hero on 2004 BIOS.
> corsair av or ax1200
> 
> Same random reboot, can't use at all.


ignore mistakes, you know what it means  gi and 6000


----------



## sblantipodi

skhitzo said:


> I wouldn't mess too much, I have the exact same issue.
> Zotac 4090 trinity oc
> 12900k
> 32 gog ddr5 gskill 600
> ASUS hero on 2004 BIOS.
> corsair av or ax1200
> 
> Same random reboot, can't use at all.


Please join the discussion here. We need to understand what is going on.









RTX4090 and boot loop


Do you guys both have strix cards? Jayz2cents can't get it to work either, while his 4090FE runs fine: (Although that looks like a slightly different issue)




www.overclock.net


----------



## 673714

tfletch90 said:


> Peculiar problem if anyone would like to chime in. Getting random CTD's and app crashing while gaming, Memtest86 passes fine on JEDEC standards however Aida64 cache and memory stress tests failing with "hardware failure". Running ram at 4600mhz instead of standard 4800mhz seems to be the fix. I've freshly installed Windows 11 about 5 times, updated all drivers, DDU for graphics, BIOS, and replaced PSU with the Seasonic. I've tried literally everything and have scoured the internet for weeks reading forums applying any potential fix I could with no luck. Next step is different ram kits to exclude my two matching sets of Dominator 5200 with Micron chips.
> 
> 12900k
> Z690 Maximus Extreme
> 2x16 Corsair Dominator Platinum 5200
> EVGA 3090 FTW3
> Seasonic PX1300 Platinum PSU
> All EK water-cooled with **** all for high temps.


I was having all kinds of issues with my Extreme until I realized I had both a bad memory module and a bad motherboard/Dimm. I'm waiting for my replacement motherboard to be shipped from Asus as we speak. Testing each slot with only 1 stick of ram will most likely reveal you only have 1 Dimm strong enough to do XMP, if that. This is even more likely if your motherboard was made/purchased in 2021 

Update: I got a tracking number for my replacement which says it will be here tomorrow. I decided to go with the "advance" replacement RMA, where they put a hold on a credit card and send a different one, then have you send the old one back. Just to make sure they didn't send the same unit back in the same condition and claim nothing is wrong. After I saw your posts on the other thread, that's exactly what they did to you once already, so it sounds like you need to do the advanced RMA as well.

I plan on thoroughly testing the new board before keeping it and sending the original back. Obviously with only 1 stick of ram at first this time, and only after testing both slots I'll put both sticks in and test. The clock starts ticking when the replacement gets here so I know I'll be very busy, but I'm hopeful to finally have a Maximus Extreme that can do 6800MHz+ on 2 slots.


----------



## sblantipodi

Asus users are still not able to use 4090.
Asus please answer
@shamino1978 
@Falkentyne


----------



## Nizzen

Version 0705
2022/10/11 9.17 MBytes
ROG CROSSHAIR X670E HERO BIOS 0705
"Update AGESA version to ComboAM5PI 1.0.0.3 patch A
Improve system performance
Improve GPU compatibility for GeForce RTX 40 series

Before running the USB BIOS Flashback tool, please rename the BIOS file (CX670EH.CAP) using BIOSRenamer."

Edit : wrong thread LOL


----------



## skhitzo

sblantipodi said:


> Asus users are still not able to use 4090. Asus please answer @shamino1978 @Falkentyne


 Yes, please help us. z690 hero and trinity oc 4090 zotac doing the exact same thing. Tried everything.


----------



## TSportM

sblantipodi said:


> My MSI Suprim X 4090 causes my PC to abruptly reboot as soon as the Windows desktop is loaded and then again and again In a boot loop.
> This only happens if there is Nvidia driver installed, if I clean drivers using ddu it does not happen.
> Using Z690 Extreme from Asus with latest BIOS with all stock frequency and no xmp and a Corsair HX1200i PSU. PC works no problem if I rollback to my 2080ti.
> 
> On my brother's pc my 4090 works no problem, his PC is identical to mine apart the PSU, he has an Hx1000 and the mobo, he has an Asus z690 hero.
> 
> Both pc used 12900k with same ram sticks and latest 2004 bios.
> 
> This is so frustrating.


install icue and conect your psu to usb, reduce 1 amp on the conections for the gpu, it fixed that problem for few friends that have that psu, i cant test becouse like i said have the ax 1500i,

Bare in mind this:

Also disable in bios Pci E power management, 4090 only uses abot 15w from it but its something you should disable.

Also check using the stock adapter cable not the corsair 2x 8pin to 12Vhpwr, i bought the cablemod 4x 8 pin to 12vhpwr not the corsair one and it works fine.

also one of does friend using the cablemod cable works fine and using the nvidia adapter. it could be someting with that psu or psu and corsair cable, dunno

cheers


----------



## sblantipodi

TSportM said:


> install icue and conect your psu to usb, reduce 1 amp on the conections for the gpu, it fixed that problem for few friends that have that psu, i cant test becouse like i said have the ax 1500i
> 
> cheers


Hx series does not let you choose the amp of the ports.


----------



## Hulk1988

I got the 7200 T-Force and running XMP1 and XMP2 resulting into a direct windows error on boot on the Z690 Apex. Default settings running well.

Any idea how I could run the memory on the board? XMP1 and 1,45v?


----------



## 673714

So I got my replacement Z690 Extreme and one of the first things I checked was the part number.

Doesn’t M0AAY0 at the end indicate it was made in 2021? The one they sent is M0XCN1.

Does anyone have any insight as to what that means? Pretty sure it means it‘s not a 2021 board, but figured I’d ask, since maybe there’s something else new/exciting/awesome about it


----------



## affxct

LilOliVert said:


> So I got my replacement Z690 Extreme and one of the first things I checked was the part number.
> 
> Doesn’t M0AAY0 at the end indicate it was made in 2021? The one they sent is M0XCN1.
> 
> Does anyone have any insight as to what that means? Pretty sure it means it‘s not a 2021 board, but figured I’d ask, since maybe there’s something else new/exciting/awesome about it


That sounds like a cracked sample.


----------



## TSportM

sblantipodi said:


> Hx series does not let you choose the amp of the ports.



Wich one do you have ?


----------



## sblantipodi

TSportM said:


> Wich one do you have ?


First one, it let me choose single ocp or multiple ocp from the software. I tried both but it didn't helped.


----------



## 673714

affxct said:


> That sounds like a cracked sample.


Wait, I took that as a good thing, is that a good thing?


----------



## pittfurg

Hey guys, another (suffering?) STRIX 4090 and Z690-E motherborad sufferer here. All kinds of strange issues. I see there's a BIOS release for Strix boards as above; any idea if there is one for the Crosshair; anything like this exists for the Strix 690-E?


----------



## fitnessgrampacertest

sblantipodi said:


> Asus users are still not able to use 4090.
> Asus please answer
> @shamino1978
> @Falkentyne


I can use my Asus ROG Strix RTX 4090 just fine


----------



## pittfurg

fitnessgrampacertest said:


> I can use my Asus ROG Strix RTX 4090 just fine


Great, but not especially helpful. Seems like more than a few of us are having an issue.

Hey @sblantipodi and @skhitzo can you list out your system specs, so we can compare notes?


----------



## skhitzo

pittfurg said:


> Great, but not especially helpful. Seems like more than a few of us are having an issue.
> 
> Hey @sblantipodi and @skhitzo can you list out your system specs, so we can compare notes?


I have mine working in the other PCI slot. Not ideal as rubbish airflow.
Unusable in the main slot.
ASUS hero z690
gskill ddr5 6000
zotac 4090
1 x 980pro on board 2x 980pro on hypercard
corsair av1200


----------



## skhitzo

I now see that running in slot PCIEX16(G5)_2 makes it x8 1.1.
Confused as the manual states both PCI slots are x16.
So I removed ALL SATA and Nvme drives.. no change. 
The Bios always shows 8x if in PCIEX16(G5)_2
***!
So to test I put in back into PCIEX16(G5)_1 and yes it list as x16.
I put ALL SATA and Nvme in one at a time and it always lists a x16.
Put GPU back in PCIEX16(G5)_2 ....x8!!
I'm sick of this motherboard.
PCIEX16(G5)_1 can't be used for my 4090 without constantly rebooting..
Am I stupid or something?


----------



## pittfurg

skhitzo said:


> I now see that running in slot PCIEX16(G5)_2 makes it x8 1.1.
> Confused as the manual states both PCI slots are x16.
> So I removed ALL SATA and Nvme drives.. no change.
> The Bios always shows 8x if in PCIEX16(G5)_2
> ***!
> So to test I put in back into PCIEX16(G5)_1 and yes it list as x16.
> I put ALL SATA and Nvme in one at a time and it always lists a x16.
> Put GPU back in PCIEX16(G5)_2 ....x8!!
> I'm sick of this motherboard.
> PCIEX16(G5)_1 can't be used for my 4090 without constantly rebooting..
> Am I stupid or something?


@skhitzo

That's usually the case; only the top-most PCI-E slot on most gaming/consumer boards runs at 16x, so to get the most bandwidth it has to run in the top slot. One COULD argue that there's not a big performance drop between 8X and 16X, but I fall into the "get out of the way of the card" camp and want it to run at 16X.

Looking at your specs, you and I DO have something in common: we both run a hypercard; I have two Samsung drives in mine as well, and I am running in the bottom-most slot of my board. When you moved your 4090 to the second slot, are you still running your hypercard? It may be worth testing that as well. Otherwise our systems look very similar, except I'm running the Strix 690-E, not the Hero. You also have 200 more watts in your PSU than I do (I've only got 1000W).


----------



## skhitzo

pittfurg said:


> @skhitzo
> 
> That's usually the case; only the top-most PCI-E slot on most gaming/consumer boards runs at 16x, so to get the most bandwidth it has to run in the top slot. One COULD argue that there's not a big performance drop between 8X and 16X, but I fall into the "get out of the way of the card" camp and want it to run at 16X.
> 
> Looking at your specs, you and I DO have something in common: we both run a hypercard; I have two Samsung drives in mine as well, and I am running in the bottom-most slot of my board. When you moved your 4090 to the second slot, are you still running your hypercard? It may be worth testing that as well. Otherwise our systems look very similar, except I'm running the Strix 690-E, not the Hero. You also have 200 more watts in your PSU than I do (I've only got 1000W).


I took out the Hyper card because of this. It's the only way I could put the 4090 in slot 2.
I put all nvme back in one at a time and booted to bios. 
With 3 nvme onboard slots the pci slot 1 never went down from 16.
I tried slot 2 on its own with no drives and it only say x8.
The hero has 2x x16 slots
It just says that it can be only one slot at a time or you get 8 x 8.
So the second slot should be x16 when nothing else is connected.
it isn't though..


----------



## TuboBoy

sblantipodi said:


> Asus users are still not able to use 4090.
> Asus please answer
> @shamino1978
> @Falkentyne


My Gigabyte 4090 Gaming OC works perfectly with ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4.
Here is configuration:
Intel Core i9-12900K @5.0~5.2 MB 
ASUS ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4 @ 2004 BIOS
Micron Crucial Ballistix D4 3600/32G(16G*2) @3800 CL16
Gigabyte GeForce RTX 4090 GAMING OC 24G 
EVGA SuperNOVA 1000 G6 1000W
Windows 11 22H2 Pro 64-bit
FYR


----------



## L0wPull

sulalin said:


> Before waiting for the arrival of Z790 APEX~ Review the performance and record of Z690 APEX in SAMSUNG IC/Hynix IC MDIE/ADIE frequency
> 
> 
> Spoiler: z690 apex samsung ic
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2574142
> 
> View attachment 2574141
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: z690 apex hynix ic mdie
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2574151
> 
> View attachment 2574149
> 
> View attachment 2574152
> 
> View attachment 2574150
> 
> View attachment 2574148
> 
> View attachment 2574147
> 
> View attachment 2574146
> 
> View attachment 2574153
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: z690 apex hynix adie
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2574154
> View attachment 2574158
> 
> View attachment 2574162
> 
> View attachment 2574159
> 
> View attachment 2574160
> 
> View attachment 2574161
> 
> View attachment 2574155
> 
> View attachment 2574157
> 
> View attachment 2574156
> 
> View attachment 2574166
> 
> View attachment 2574167
> 
> View attachment 2574164
> 
> View attachment 2574163
> 
> View attachment 2574165
> 
> View attachment 2574168


Solid work, thank you.
A little hard to follow, but is conclusion 2004 is fine for adie?
After selling on my binned 11/2021, I have 2022 board arriving tomorrow, if not already on 2004 wondering what I should use..
Thanks for this 👍


----------



## sulalin

L0wPull said:


> Solid work, thank you.
> A little hard to follow, but is conclusion 2004 is fine for adie?
> After selling on my binned 11/2021, I have 2022 board arriving tomorrow, if not already on 2004 wondering what I should use..
> Thanks for this 👍


1720/2004BIOS should be OK I myself use 2004 in ADIE


----------



## Telstar

2004 seems to perform better with 4 sticks of ddr5. YMMV.


----------



## sblantipodi

Telstar said:


> 2004 seems to perform better with 4 sticks of ddr5. YMMV.


I agree, 2004 is the absolute best bios for 4 sticks on my Extreme.
Unfortunately my Extreme made my shiny new RTX 4090 a brick.

Thanks to my Asus mobo, I can't use the card without boot looping.









RTX4090 and boot loop


My second bios is 1720. Same problem with both 1720 and 2004. Will try to downgrade the second bios even more. Never more an Asus mobo. I've updated my original reply and confirm it still happens although it did let me do some lengthy stress tests. I'm trying the other suggestion here to use...




www.overclock.net


----------



## Spicedaddy

Next BIOS your GPU will work, but not the ram.


----------



## sblantipodi

Spicedaddy said:


> Next BIOS your GPU will work, but not the ram.


ahahah, I agree.


----------



## Telstar

probably lol


----------



## KedarWolf

We'll be back.


----------



## sblantipodi

sblantipodi said:


> I agree, 2004 is the absolute best bios for 4 sticks on my Extreme.
> Unfortunately my Extreme made my shiny new RTX 4090 a brick.
> 
> Thanks to my Asus mobo, I can't use the card without boot looping.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RTX4090 and boot loop
> 
> 
> My second bios is 1720. Same problem with both 1720 and 2004. Will try to downgrade the second bios even more. Never more an Asus mobo. I've updated my original reply and confirm it still happens although it did let me do some lengthy stress tests. I'm trying the other suggestion here to use...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net


On this thread there are people with the same issue of mine with Z790 motherboards form Asus.
I can't believe it.


----------



## energie80

its not your borad fault


----------



## TSportM

sblantipodi said:


> On this thread there are people with the same issue of mine with Z790 motherboards form Asus.
> I can't believe it.


I have the same gpu and no problem what so ever on the same board


----------



## 673714

LilOliVert said:


> So I got my replacement Z690 Extreme and one of the first things I checked was the part number.
> 
> Doesn’t M0AAY0 at the end indicate it was made in 2021? The one they sent is M0XCN1.
> 
> Does anyone have any insight as to what that means? Pretty sure it means it‘s not a 2021 board, but figured I’d ask, since maybe there’s something else new/exciting/awesome about it





affxct said:


> That sounds like a cracked sample.


It may have taken me almost 3 days to get it done, but I swapped the motherboards. First thing I noticed was they already had bios 2004 loaded. Checked the 2nd bios and it's 1304 iirc, so I'm not too mad about that. Next thing I did was just get some basic bios settings the way I like, boot the thing into windows at JDEC (aka 4800MHz) and checked things. Then I updated windows and whatnot. By that point I was finally ready to try testing Dimm_A2, since that was my problem with the original. Nothing fancy, just selected XMP 1 (6600MHz) and it booted, so I checked email and browsed some webpages.

Once I got up the courage, I started y-cruncher pretty much expecting the worst, and to my surprise it passed. It was slow, but it did not fail. Idk, but I think that might be a good sign. The original couldn't do 6200MHz with just 1 stick in Dimm_A2, this one did 6600 first try, with no extra voltage and no tweaks?!

More testing to do tomorrow


----------



## sblantipodi

TSportM said:


> I have the same gpu and no problem what so ever on the same board
> 
> 
> View attachment 2576723
> 
> View attachment 2576722


Never more an Asus board.
What's your BIOS versione?
Did you upgraded the Intel microcode to the latest One?


----------



## TSportM

sblantipodi said:


> Never more an Asus board.
> What's your BIOS versione?
> Did you upgraded the Intel microcode to the latest One?



hello

iam using the 2004 and latest microcode


----------



## sblantipodi

TSportM said:


> hello
> 
> iam using the 2004 and latest microcode


Do you have a new revision of the board?
I have One of the First batch bought at z690 launch


----------



## TSportM

sblantipodi said:


> Do you have a new revision of the board?
> I have One of the First batch bought at z690 launch


Hi

Mine is from november 2021, i kown you have problems my is first batchs, only had a few minor issues with memory, after changin from corsair (samsung modules) to delta Tforce 0 problems, also the contact frame helped alot on memory oc 

friend in the uk has the same system same board same gpu same memory and KS and has no problems (is memory overclock is not as stable)

cheers


----------



## sblantipodi

TSportM said:


> Hi
> 
> Mine is from november 2021, i kown you have problems my is first batchs, only had a few minor issues with memory, after changin from corsair (samsung modules) to delta Tforce 0 problems, also the contact frame helped alot on memory oc
> 
> friend in the uk has the same system same board same gpu same memory and KS and has no problems (is memory overclock is not as stable)
> 
> cheers


so we have the same batch and I have hynix memory that appears to work very well with 2004 bios.

can't understand why I have the problem and you not if we have the same system


----------



## TSportM

sblantipodi said:


> so we have the same batch and I have hynix memory that appears to work very well with 2004 bios.
> 
> can't understand why I have the problem and you not if we have the same system


did you update to latest microcode ?

do you have a K or KS ?

i can send you a bios profile with lower settings and you see if it works...

cheers


----------



## sblantipodi

TSportM said:


> did you update to latest microcode ?
> 
> do you have a K or KS ?
> 
> i can send you a bios profile with lower settings and you see if it works...
> 
> cheers


I have a 12900K
Yes I have the latest microcode.

Ok, I tried default BIOS settings, I think that there are nothing lower than that though


----------



## TSportM

O mean lower oc, o Will send the file via pm


----------



## sblantipodi

https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/BIOS/ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-2103.zip



For the extreme is online.
Is there someone who tried it?
What's the changelog?


----------



## TSportM

sblantipodi said:


> https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/BIOS/ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-2103.zip
> 
> 
> 
> For the extreme is online.
> Is there someone who tried it?
> What's the changelog?


the change log by asus - improved system performance 










Have you tried the file a sent you?


----------



## sblantipodi

I tried your CMO file and the latest 2103 bios and the boot loop problems is still there.

Damn Asus


----------



## TSportM

try changing the bios on the gpu silent/gaming


----------



## sblantipodi

TSportM said:


> try changing the bios on the gpu silent/gaming


I tried it and updated the VBIOS to the latest one


----------



## sblantipodi

Is there a new Intel microcode that I can download separately along with 2103 bios?


----------



## TSportM

sblantipodi said:


> I tried it and updated the VBIOS to the latest one


theres a new vbios ?

how do you update via msi center ?

Did you tried the gpu on another pc ?

You can try if you see if there is something here that helps:






[INDEX] All My Firmware/Drivers/Software Threads


All My Firmware/Drivers/Software Threads



rog.asus.com


----------



## sblantipodi

TSportM said:


> theres a new vbios ?
> 
> how do you update via msi center ?
> 
> Dos you troes the gpu on another pc ?
> 
> You can try if you see if there is something here that helps:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [INDEX] All My Firmware/Drivers/Software Threads
> 
> 
> All My Firmware/Drivers/Software Threads
> 
> 
> 
> rog.asus.com


Yes there is a new VBIOS here:





MSI Global English Forum


...




forum-en.msi.com





there is the instructions on how to update it, it's very simple but you need to read carefully.

yes I tried the GPU on another PC and it works like a charm. there are a lot of users in my same situation here:








RTX4090 and boot loop


those of u with z690 asus issue. is your cpu oced? is it octvb or manual oc? I tried with stock frequencies and same problem.




www.overclock.net





I'll check for the drivers, thanks


----------



## 7empe

Same for APEX Z690: https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/BIOS/ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-2103.zip


----------



## 673714

_grumpy comment removed_


----------



## TSportM

2103 is the best bios so far for me, KS and memory is loving it


----------



## Mappi75

Mh.. maybe i should try 2103 too

"for my KS"
_1701 was good for lowering dram voltage.
1503 gave me the best performance gain.
0082 looks like the coolest cpu temps
1601 hell of errors in tm5 (doesnt matter how much voltages never seen this before..)

using atm 0082 which works without any problems.._


----------



## Mappi75

Did someone noticed a strange behavior with Windows 11 22H2 ?

My system is in idle and sometimes (i would say every 1/2 hour) the fans running at 100% the system is going very loud (for 15 seconds)
but its only in idle desktop !?


----------



## Papusan

Mappi75 said:


> Did someone noticed a strange behavior with Windows 11 22H2 ?
> 
> My system is in idle and sometimes (i would say every 1/2 hour) the fans running at 100% the system is going very loud (for 15 seconds)
> but its only in idle desktop !?


Open up task manager or Process Explorer to see what tasks that will push the cpu to max.


----------



## grifers

Hello and good morning. I flashed this new version 2103. I did a couple of tests and it seems the same as the previous 2004, it raises the consumption of my stock 12700KF. I want to go back to an older bios, version 1503 (which is the best so far for my board, the tuf D4 but without Wifi), and it doesn't let me, it says "File is not a proper BIOS". I used bios renamer and it doesn't matter, it doesn't let me go back to bios 1503, it's the same as with bios 2004 that didn't let me go back to 1503, isn't it supposed that with this new bios you could go back to older bios? will I never be able to go back to older bios? The method I use is the same, a USB Pendrive formatted in fat 32 and put in a USB port of my case.

Best regards and thanks!


----------



## KedarWolf

grifers said:


> Hello and good morning. I flashed this new version 2103. I did a couple of tests and it seems the same as the previous 2004, it raises the consumption of my stock 12700KF. I want to go back to an older bios, version 1503 (which is the best so far for my board, the tuf D4 but without Wifi), and it doesn't let me, it says "File is not a proper BIOS". I used bios renamer and it doesn't matter, it doesn't let me go back to bios 1503, it's the same as with bios 2004 that didn't let me go back to 1503, isn't it supposed that with this new bios you could go back to older bios? will I never be able to go back to older bios? The method I use is the same, a USB Pendrive formatted in fat 32 and put in a USB port of my case.
> 
> Best regards and thanks!


I shared here yesterday if you flash the latest BIOS you can't go back. I linked the Asus forum about it.



We'll be back.


----------



## Nizzen

KedarWolf said:


> I shared here yesterday if you flash the latest BIOS you can't go back. I linked the Asus forum about it.
> 
> 
> 
> We'll be back.


Dual bios is nice 
New bios is very good, so no worry anyway


----------



## grifers

KedarWolf said:


> I shared here yesterday if you flash the latest BIOS you can't go back. I linked the Asus forum about it.
> 
> 
> 
> We'll be back.


Hi, yes, with the 2004 bios I knew that you could not revert to older bios but I thought this would be solved with the new 2103 BIOS. Does this mean that we will never be able to revert back to older bios? or is this something that ASUS has to fix?

It's a big bummer to be tied to only being able to flash new bios when the old ones are better. With these new bios (2004, 2103) and with everything in stock I have a higher power consumption, almost 40 watts more than in the older versions also in stock (1003 or 1503 bios version), it's 135 watts vs almost 160 watts.

Let's see what happens with this issue. I was all this month waiting for ASUS to release a bios to be able to go back to the old ones and I find that the same thing happens as with bios 2004 in this 2103 

Best regards


----------



## KedarWolf

Deleted


----------



## 7empe

I've sacrified one of my Apex' bios flash for 2103. Good and stable so far. My 6600 CL 30 profile got trained immediately during the first boot after flash. No issues here. The VF-curve is also working fine.


----------



## asimelopesz

deleted


----------



## CptSpig

New bios 2103 is very good! Booted with AEMP 6800 1.25v stable in TM5 on OEM green sticks. Should scale A Die very well 8000+.


----------



## Gking62

So, with BIOS 2004 as I've posted a few pages back, I was XMP unstable as all get out, now on 2103 (1601 on other) I am passing MemTest86 (Bios) on XMP1 & 2 while on AI OC (5.4 GHz) for now, please no peanut gallery comments, for now it works for me so I'm satisfied. Also have 13900K on pre-order from the Egg and can move forward with relief.


----------



## TSportM

first 13900K impressions

GREAT, memory does xmp on auto no voltagem needed not mc voltage bump every thing on auto and it works and is stable on benchmarks and stresstests and my timmings settigns stock frequency 6400
no oc for now only power and amps at max and auto letbios optimize, 39088 on R23 

cheers


----------



## sblantipodi

TSportM said:


> first 13900K impressions
> 
> GREAT, memory does xmp on auto no voltagem needed not mc voltage bump every thing on auto and it works and is stable on benchmarks and stresstests and my timmings settigns stock frequency 6400
> no oc for now only power and amps at max and auto letbios optimize, 39088 on R23
> 
> cheers


sad that 13900K can't be handled with a 360mm AIO but only with custom loops.


----------



## TSportM

sblantipodi said:


> sad that 13900K can't be handled with a 360mm AIO but only with custom loops.


dunno i dont use aio

but on stock with power limits removed it has better performance the Ks , 5.5 all cores and 5.8 boost on the pcores and 4.3 e cores and ring changes from 4.5 and 4.6.
And temps are better this way vs my 12900ks overclocked and like o said it feels like a diferent system on memory alot more stable with auto settings 

cheers


----------



## Simkin

Z790 Apex looks sweet. Perfect that they kept the Z690 design.


----------



## roooo

Ok folks, I've got a little problem. Have been running my 12900KS with Gskill 6400C32 on Z690 Hero BIOS 1403 for half a year without issues. Updated BIOS to 2103 today because I received my 13900K. With the 12900K and 2103 everything was fine, also with my mem OC.

Slapped in the 13900K and noticed two issues:

1. One of my NVME drives is missing now.
2. I won't be able to POST with memory any higher than 4800 (!) even with increased voltages - the machine will just hang with Code 23.

I tried reseating CPU, swapping sticks and trying with only one slot, clear CMOS and starting from scratch - to no avail. Any ideas?


Cheers.
r.


----------



## acoustic

Check the socket pins. Missing NVME combined with the memory speed issues sound like something is wrong with the socket


----------



## bigfootnz

roooo said:


> Ok folks, I've got a little problem. Have been running my 12900KS with Gskill 6400C32 on Z690 Hero BIOS 1403 for half a year without issues. Updated BIOS to 2103 today because I received my 13900K. With the 12900K and 2103 everything was fine, also with my mem OC.
> 
> Slapped in the 13900K and noticed two issues:
> 
> 1. One of my NVME drives is missing now.
> 2. I won't be able to POST with memory any higher than 4800 (!) even with increased voltages - the machine will just hang with Code 23.
> 
> I tried reseating CPU, swapping sticks and trying with only one slot, clear CMOS and starting from scratch - to no avail. Any ideas?
> 
> 
> Cheers.
> r.


What is happening if you put 12900 back? If 12900 is working then your 13900 is faulty. If not then you either have bend pins or motherboard is dying.


----------



## sblantipodi

TSportM said:


> dunno i dont use aio
> 
> but on stock with power limits removed it has better performance the Ks , 5.5 all cores and 5.8 boost on the pcores and 4.3 e cores and ring changes from 4.5 and 4.6.
> And temps are better this way vs my 12900ks overclocked and like o said it feels like a diferent system on memory alot more stable with auto settings
> 
> cheers


Are you using the z690 Extreme on the new 13900k?


----------



## roooo

acoustic said:


> Check the socket pins. Missing NVME combined with the memory speed issues sound like something is wrong with the socket


Thanks - but I had already done that when reseating the CPU - the pins are fine, see below.



bigfootnz said:


> What is happening if you put 12900 back? If 12900 is working then your 13900 is faulty. If not then you either have bend pins or motherboard is dying.


Well I was just about to do that - the 12900KS is running nicely with mem at 6400 and all NVME drives present.

Installed the 13900K back in and - no POST beyond 4800 on mem and NVME drive is missing again.

So we might have a faulty 13900K here - or some weird BIOS issue. I've go another 13900K coming tomorrow and will hopefully figure it out.


----------



## acoustic

roooo said:


> Thanks - but I had already done that when reseating the CPU - the pins are fine, see below.
> 
> 
> Well I was just about to do that - the 12900KS is running nicely with mem at 6400 and all NVME drives present.
> 
> Installed the 13900K back in and - no POST beyond 4800 on mem and NVME drive is missing again.
> 
> So we might have a faulty 13900K here - or some weird BIOS issue. I've go another 13900K coming tomorrow and will hopefully figure it out.


Ah yes, could be a damaged 13900K. Could you post a pic of the backside of the chip? Maybe damaged contact pads..


----------



## roooo

acoustic said:


> Ah yes, could be a damaged 13900K. Could you post a pic of the backside of the chip? Maybe damaged contact pads..


Can do that tomorrow, but looked fine to me so far.


----------



## Telstar

roooo said:


> So we might have a faulty 13900K here - or some weird BIOS issue. I've go another 13900K coming tomorrow and will hopefully figure it out.


Early bios issues maybe?


----------



## roooo

Telstar said:


> Early bios issues maybe?


Maybe - but a bit weird as is working all fine with the 12900KS.


----------



## roooo

LOL...something's really borked - now I'm missing two NVME drives... :-(


----------



## bastian

There are confirmed problems with MT and drive detections with Raptor Lake and Z690 on ASUS


----------



## roooo

bastian said:


> There are confirmed problems with MT and drive detections with Raptor Lake and Z690 on ASUS


MT? Multithreading?


----------



## bastian

roooo said:


> MT? Multithreading?


Yup

Andreas Schilling 🇺🇦 on Twitter: "I’ve encountered several issues with Raptor Lake and the ASUS ROG Z690 Hero with the newest BIOS 2103. MT performance is way behind in some applications and also the system is not detecting the NVMe drive installed in M2_1. https://t.co/DSejvuy8P1" / Twitter


----------



## roooo

bastian said:


> Yup
> 
> Andreas Schilling 🇺🇦 on Twitter: "I’ve encountered several issues with Raptor Lake and the ASUS ROG Z690 Hero with the newest BIOS 2103. MT performance is way behind in some applications and also the system is not detecting the NVMe drive installed in M2_1. https://t.co/DSejvuy8P1" / Twitter


Ah ok thanks, I first thought you meant that HT enabled had an impact on NVME drive detection.

But yes - I can confirm MT performance (as per CPU-Z) is only about 25% of that of the 12900KS. However, it is not consistent, after another reboot it was up to 90% again.


----------



## acoustic

roooo said:


> Ah ok thanks, I first thought you meant that HT enabled had an impact on NVME drive detection.
> 
> But yes - I can confirm MT performance (as per CPU-Z) is only about 25% of that of the 12900KS. However, it is not consistent, after another reboot it was up to 90% again.


Could be BIOS related? Have you tried the BIOS prior to 2103 - 2003 or whatever it was?


----------



## roooo

acoustic said:


> Could be BIOS related? Have you tried the BIOS prior to 2103 - 2003 or whatever it was?


Flashing 2004 now...


----------



## roooo

Well, same issues with 2004 :-(


----------



## Baasha

I installed a new GPU (3080 Ti) in the Z690 rig today and the computer won't POST. The OLED display on the mobo just says "CMOS ERROR" and I've tried clearing CMOS multiple times but nothing happens. Help?!

EDIT: Nvm, I had to install GPU drivers of course! Doh! lel


----------



## Falkentyne

roooo said:


> Well, same issues with 2004 :-(


Update the Management Engine firmware?
Similar issues happened on Rocket Lake / Comet Lake S1200 socket, including some BIOS bricks (When people tried to boot/flash firmware with RKL installed with a too old ME firmware).
(I got the idea from your own message you wrote that it already worked. I went back in time, see...)


----------



## Gking62

Falkentyne said:


> Update the Management Engine firmware?
> Similar issues happened on Rocket Lake / Comet Lake S1200 socket, including some BIOS bricks (When people tried to boot/flash firmware with RKL installed with a too old ME firmware).
> (I got the idea from your own message you wrote that it already worked. I went back in time, see...)


I've recently updated to below interface besides what BIOS 2004 gave us, I have the following:

Version 2229.3.2.0

2022/09/19 315.77 MBytes

Intel ME V2229.3.2.0 for Windows 10 64-bit and Windows 11 64-bit.,

is this all correct?


----------



## roooo

Falkentyne said:


> Update the Management Engine firmware?
> Similar issues happened on Rocket Lake / Comet Lake S1200 socket, including some BIOS bricks (When people tried to boot/flash firmware with RKL installed with a too old ME firmware).
> (I got the idea from your own message you wrote that it already worked. I went back in time, see...)


Thanks - that was exactly the issue. Some guy on the 13900K OC thread had pointed me to this and it appears to have solved all the issues, now working with 2103 as well!


----------



## roooo

For those with the same problem, please check this thread:






[FIRMWARE] Intel ME (H610/B660/H670/Z690/B760/H770/Z790)


Intel ME (H610/B660/H670/Z690/B760/H770/Z790)



rog.asus.com





Cheers,
r.


----------



## Nizzen

Can someone pleace explain what Management Engine do? Is it even needed to get the best performance on Intel cpu's?
@Falkentyne


----------



## roooo

Falkentyne said:


> (I got the idea from your own message you wrote that it already worked. I went back in time, see...)


By the way: with or without a Delorean?!


----------



## cstkl1

Nizzen said:


> Can someone pleace explain what Management Engine do? Is it even needed to get the best performance on Intel cpu's?
> @Falkentyne


we are using K cpu. this is needed bro.

hence not da Extreme cpu of the past

whats weird. i didnt reinstall my os. its still da first release win 11 from ghost soectre. so odd ppo need to install me again


----------



## Gking62

roooo said:


> For those with the same problem, please check this thread:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [FIRMWARE] Intel ME (H610/B660/H670/Z690/B760/H770/Z790)
> 
> 
> Intel ME (H610/B660/H670/Z690/B760/H770/Z790)
> 
> 
> 
> rog.asus.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cheers,
> r.


thank you, I've since updated this am from ME_Intel_v16.1.25.1885


----------



## Xtaze

Hi @all, 

i ruined my Z690 Hero with the BIOS Version 2004 - XMP 1 and 2 are not even booting the system. (GSkill CL32 6400 - i912900K) 

Yesterday i updated the BIOS to the newest version 2103 in the hope of improvement.. but same issue with XMP Profils 1 and 2.

Does anyone have an idea what I can do? maybe revert to an older version if that's even possible?


----------



## sblantipodi

Xtaze said:


> Hi @all,
> 
> i ruined my Z690 Hero with the BIOS Version 2004 - XMP 1 and 2 are not even booting the system. (GSkill CL32 6400 - i912900K)
> 
> Yesterday i updated the BIOS to the newest version 2103 in the hope of improvement.. but same issue with XMP Profils 1 and 2.
> 
> Does anyone have an idea what I can do? maybe revert to an older version if that's even possible?


2004 and 2103 are the best BIOS I have tried for my 4 sticks.

you have two bios, just switch to the second one.


----------



## Xtaze

sblantipodi said:


> 2004 and 2103 are the best BIOS I have tried for my 4 sticks.
> 
> you have two bios, just switch to the second one.


what do you mean with two Bios? switch to the second one (Sorry i am new to this).


----------



## sblantipodi

Xtaze said:


> what do you mean with two Bios? switch to the second one (Sorry i am new to this).


BIOS 2103 is really a great BIOS, the fact that you are very new probably means that you are doing something wrong and reverting back to an older bios could not be the right solution.

in any case, I have read the Z690 Hero manual, a 600€ mobo that does not have a second bios, Asus, what a shame.

you are out of luck, you need to stick with that bios.


----------



## Xtaze

sblantipodi said:


> BIOS 2103 is really a great BIOS, the fact that you are very new probably means that you are doing something wrong and reverting back to an older bios could not be the right solution.
> 
> in any case, I have read the Z690 Hero manual, a 600€ mobo that does not have a second bios, Asus, what a shame.
> 
> you are out of luck, you need to stick with that bios.


i updated from 2004 to 2103 and all i did in the Bios was enable XMP 1 and tried to boot the system.


----------



## sblantipodi

Xtaze said:


> i updated from 2004 to 2103 and all i did in the Bios was enable XMP 1 and tried to boot the system.


just lower the memory frequency and boot the system.
try to put it at 4.8GHz to boot the system.
there are a lot of infos in the ddr5 thread.


----------



## Xtaze

sblantipodi said:


> just lower the memory frequency and boot the system.
> try to put it at 4.8GHz to boot the system.
> there are a lot of infos in the ddr5 thread.


with XMP off everything is working flawless - its just a shame that XMP is not working on the latest bios versions (for me). 

thank you for the advise.


----------



## 7empe

It looks so far that 2103 is the best bios for apex. Huge improvement in every possible aspect, including cpu and mem oc.


----------



## CptSpig

Nizzen said:


> Can someone pleace explain what Management Engine do? Is it even needed to get the best performance on Intel cpu's?
> @Falkentyne


You need to update IME when you update the bios. If you don't you may have stability issues

The Intel® Management Engine is an embedded microcontroller (integrated on some Intel chipsets) running a lightweight microkernel operating system that provides a variety of features and services for Intel® processor–based computer systems.

*What kind of features does Intel® Management Engine have?*

Features include (but are not limited to):


Low-power, out-of-band (OOB) management services
Capability Licensing Service (CLS)
Anti-Theft Protection
Protected Audio Video Path (PAVP)
At system initialization, the Intel® Management Engine loads its code from system flash memory. This allows the Intel® Management Engine to be up before the main operating system is started. For run-time data storage, the Intel® Management Engine has access to a protected area of system memory (in addition to a small amount of on-chip cache memory for faster and more efficient processing).

A fundamental feature of the Intel® Management Engine is that its power states are independent of the host OS power states. This feature allows it to be up when the microprocessor and many other components of the system are in deeper sleep states. As a result, the Intel® Management Engine can be a fully functioning component as soon as power is applied to the system. This capability allows it to respond to OOB commands from the IT management console without having to wake up the rest of the system. Therefore, power consumption is reduced significantly.


----------



## edkieferlp

So should users of older bios use newer ME versions and firmware?
example I use .707 with ME (ME 2131.1.4.0 - 7/27/2021) with the below firmware (Intel ME firmware v16.0.15.1545).

Version 0707
2021/11/16 8.91 MBytes
TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS WIFI D4 BIOS 0707
"1. Improve system performance
2. Update Intel ME firmware v16.0.15.1545"

Everything is good, no issues or stability but just curious.


----------



## CptSpig

edkieferlp said:


> So should users of older bios use newer ME versions?
> example I use .707 with ME (ME 2131.1.4.0 - 7/27/2021) with the below firmware.
> 
> Version 0707
> 2021/11/16 8.91 MBytes
> TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS WIFI D4 BIOS 0707
> "1. Improve system performance
> 2. Update Intel ME firmware v16.0.15.1545"
> 
> Everything is good, no issues or stability but just curious.


I always use the latest ME with any bios update.


----------



## Spicedaddy

Updated to 2103 from 1304 last night, then updated the ME firmware, then updated the ME driver. Everything works as it should, no errors in TM5 with my G.Skill 5600CL36 at XMP2.

All ready for Raptor Lake, but there's not a single i9 in Canada.


----------



## KedarWolf

Spicedaddy said:


> Updated to 2103 from 1304 last night, then updated the ME firmware, then updated the ME driver. Everything works as it should, no errors in TM5 with my G.Skill 5600CL36 at XMP2.
> 
> All ready for Raptor Lake, but there's not a single i9 in Canada.


You can preorder a 13900k from Memory Express.


----------



## edkieferlp

CptSpig said:


> I always use the latest ME with any bios update.


do you mean firmware too?


----------



## CptSpig

edkieferlp said:


> do you mean firmware too?


Use the MEUpdateTool and it will do both.


----------



## roooo

Xtaze said:


> i updated from 2004 to 2103 and all i did in the Bios was enable XMP 1 and tried to boot the system.


Moin, 

did you read my above posts on how I solved it? Your issue sound pretty much like mine before updating the ME....scroll up some pages.... ;-)


----------



## Mappi75

1200KS Apex want to update to Version 2103 

Then i would update the ME Firmware to 16.1.25.1917



We'll be back.



But which driver did i need (installed) before updating the firmware?
Thank you.


----------



## roooo

Mappi75 said:


> 1200KS Apex want to update to Version 2103
> 
> Then i would update the ME Firmware to 16.1.25.1917
> 
> 
> 
> We'll be back.
> 
> 
> 
> But which driver did i need (installed) before updating the firmware?
> Thank you.


Um...don't know but I did not install any additional driver. I just followed that thread - first run the check thingy and then the install - both as Admin. Wait until finished and your machine automatically reboots - done!


----------



## Mappi75

In the past asus says:

"We suggest you update ME Driver to the latest Version 16.0.15.1620 simultaneously." "


Edit:

here should be the correct (latest) driver:


We'll be back.


----------



## roooo

Mappi75 said:


> Asus recommends to install a newer driver software - before - updating (when i should remember correctly).


Ah ok, didn't do that but maybe was running latest drivers anyway. You'll get them in the Download section of the mobo support page at Asus.


----------



## CptSpig

Mappi75 said:


> In the past asus says:
> 
> "We suggest you update ME Driver to the latest Version 16.0.15.1620 simultaneously." "
> 
> 
> Edit:
> 
> here should be the correct (latest) driver:
> 
> 
> We'll be back.


Delete Already Posted.


----------



## Gking62

deleted


----------



## 7empe

roooo said:


> Um...don't know but I did not install any additional driver. I just followed that thread - first run the check thingy and then the install - both as Admin. Wait until finished and your machine automatically reboots - done!


.1917 is the latest ME firmware. It contains a bunch of sub-firmwares responsible for southbound and northbound physical layer from the chipset’ perspective. Just install .1917 and that’s all you need to do. You will see the updated fw version in bios too. In general, first thing I would do is ME fw update, then bios upgrade.


----------



## TSportM

sblantipodi said:


> Are you using the z690 Extreme on the new 13900k?


yes


----------



## trihy

Asus: oops, I did it again


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1583164015013830656


----------



## sblantipodi

7empe said:


> It looks so far that 2103 is the best bios for apex. Huge improvement in every possible aspect, including cpu and mem oc.


same here on Z690 Extreme, 2103 and 2004 are the best BIOS yet for my Hynix on 4 sticks.


----------



## Spiriva

trihy said:


> Asus: oops, I did it again
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1583164015013830656


There is a thread about that on asus forum.



We'll be back.


----------



## trihy

Someone commented m2 issue can be fixed by updating ME firmware.

Not sure about performance issues.


----------



## Mappi75

Updated bios 2103 (12900KS) no problems so far could lowering ram voltage from 1,46v to 1,42v > perfect stable (maybe less voltage would work too).
UPDATE: same voltages like 0082 are needed.

But still cant reach 6800mhz all time max is 6.666Mhz 32-40-40-28 2T / CB23 & hwinfo show up to 309 watt power consumption.

the ME firmware must be updated with its on firmware update (NOT included in 2103 bios).

Edit:
In the Firmware update folder there is a check.cmd (run as admin) file which shows you the current installed version.


----------



## Baasha

Great explanation - thanks!

How do we check the version of the firmware that is currently installed (in Device Manager)?

I installed the latest BIOS 2103 and updated the ME and things seem solid.



CptSpig said:


> You need to update IME when you update the bios. If you don't you may have stability issues
> 
> The Intel® Management Engine is an embedded microcontroller (integrated on some Intel chipsets) running a lightweight microkernel operating system that provides a variety of features and services for Intel® processor–based computer systems.
> 
> *What kind of features does Intel® Management Engine have?*
> 
> Features include (but are not limited to):
> 
> 
> Low-power, out-of-band (OOB) management services
> Capability Licensing Service (CLS)
> Anti-Theft Protection
> Protected Audio Video Path (PAVP)
> At system initialization, the Intel® Management Engine loads its code from system flash memory. This allows the Intel® Management Engine to be up before the main operating system is started. For run-time data storage, the Intel® Management Engine has access to a protected area of system memory (in addition to a small amount of on-chip cache memory for faster and more efficient processing).
> 
> A fundamental feature of the Intel® Management Engine is that its power states are independent of the host OS power states. This feature allows it to be up when the microprocessor and many other components of the system are in deeper sleep states. As a result, the Intel® Management Engine can be a fully functioning component as soon as power is applied to the system. This capability allows it to respond to OOB commands from the IT management console without having to wake up the rest of the system. Therefore, power consumption is reduced significantly.


----------



## Papusan

Baasha said:


> Great explanation - thanks!
> 
> How do we check the version of the firmware that is currently installed (in Device Manager)?
> 
> I installed the latest BIOS 2103 and updated the ME and things seem solid.


You can use HWiNFO I prefer the portable version. Or bios main screen.


----------



## Baasha

Papusan said:


> You can use HWiNFO I prefer the portable version. Or bios main screen.


Which line in HWInfo? I have that installed but where do we find the firmware version (screenshot pls)?


----------



## bscool

Baasha said:


> Which line in HWInfo? I have that installed but where do we find the firmware version (screenshot pls)?


Not on my z690 but same thing


----------



## Papusan

Baasha said:


> Which line in HWInfo? I have that installed but where do we find the firmware version (screenshot pls)?


You find it if you run summary. Hwinfo is able to show almost everything in your pc


----------



## Nizzen

trihy said:


> Asus: oops, I did it again
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1583164015013830656


Woops, someone forgot to update their drivers again....


----------



## Mappi75

Baasha said:


> How do we check the version of the firmware that is currently installed (in Device Manager)?


In the Firmware update folder there is a check.cmd (run as admin) file which shows you the current installed version.


----------



## Netarangi

Cant for the life of me find Asrock Timing Configurator that works on TUF Z690.. I've lost and found it so many times


----------



## bscool

Netarangi said:


> Cant for the life of me find Asrock Timing Configurator that works on TUF Z690.. I've lost and found it so many times


Here is the newest works with z690 12th and 13th gen










*Official* Intel DDR5 OC and 24/7 daily Memory Stability...


amazon had it in stock afaik 309usd now. just not sure which batch. Only one I can find is G.Skill Trident Z5 RGB Series (Intel XMP) 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin SDRAM DDR5 6600 CL34-40-40-105 1.40V Dual Channel Desktop Memory F5-6600J3440G16GA2-TZ5RK (Matte Black) at Amazon.com Part# doesn't...




www.overclock.net


----------



## Netarangi

bscool said:


> Here is the newest works with z690 12th and 13th gen
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Official* Intel DDR5 OC and 24/7 daily Memory Stability...
> 
> 
> amazon had it in stock afaik 309usd now. just not sure which batch. Only one I can find is G.Skill Trident Z5 RGB Series (Intel XMP) 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin SDRAM DDR5 6600 CL34-40-40-105 1.40V Dual Channel Desktop Memory F5-6600J3440G16GA2-TZ5RK (Matte Black) at Amazon.com Part# doesn't...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net


Thank you!


----------



## Xtaze

roooo said:


> Moin,
> 
> did you read my above posts on how I solved it? Your issue sound pretty much like mine before updating the ME....scroll up some pages.... ;-)


updated ME to 16.1.25.1917 and also updated (Intel ME V2229.3.2.0 and Intel ISO Driver V30.100.2221.20) but i can`t get the Chipset Driver to work. 
during the update, the intel update window always freezes at around 90 percent.


----------



## Csavez™

13900k sp97 + first edition apex + and my 6600 ram finally works flawlessly.
CBr23 10m throttling test.

















and the 7000 also runs.









6800


----------



## Simkin

⁰


Xtaze said:


> updated ME to 16.1.25.1917 and also updated (Intel ME V2229.3.2.0 and Intel ISO Driver V30.100.2221.20) but i can`t get the Chipset Driver to work.
> during the update, the intel update window always freezes at around 90 percent.


On a fresh Windows install, Chipset Driver should be installed first before the ME, MEI, IO etc. if you just started now installing these drivers, maybe this is the issue?

Read post #286



We'll be back.


----------



## Mappi75

@Csavez™

What was your max mem before the 13900K ? 

Only the cpu gives you a much better ram performance?


----------



## Csavez™

6400
_"Only the cpu gives you a much better ram performance?" _*Yes.*


----------



## Mappi75

Great, so no need to replace Mobo/RAM per se!

For my understanding:

with bios 2103 my 12900KS need 309 watts > the same like the 13900K will need?
(both with unlimited settings) or does the 13900K need max 350 watts?


----------



## Csavez™

I don't think it's necessary, but my gskill 7600 A-die ram will arrive next week, I'm curious what you can do with it.


----------



## Telstar

Mappi75 said:


> with bios 2103 my 12900KS need 309 watts > the same like the 13900K will need?
> (both with unlimited settings) or does the 13900K need max 350 watts?


Sorry I thought u had the 13700k. The i9 will require about 100W more, unless u use some power limit.


----------



## Csavez™

Mappi75 said:


> Great, so no need to replace Mobo/RAM per se!
> 
> For my understanding:
> 
> with bios 2103 my 12900KS need 309 watts > the same like the 13900K will need?
> (both with unlimited settings) or does the 13900K need max 350 watts?


The 12900k is 5.3ghz--> 320w, the 13900k is 5.7ghz-->330w.
on cbr23 test


----------



## SuperMumrik

Does anyone know how the bios flashback is working on z690? Pressed the the bios button for three seconds, it starts flashing a few seconds before it goes solid and nothing changes. 

Forgot to update bios before I pulled the direct die cooled cpu..


----------



## Csavez™

SuperMumrik said:


> Does anyone know how the bios flashback is working on z690? Pressed the the bios button for three seconds, it starts flashing a few seconds before it goes solid and nothing changes.
> 
> Forgot to update bios before I pulled the direct die cooled cpu..


Me too, I forgot, but I solved it with usb, it should be fat32/empty, only the bios file is renamed, it lasts for 3 seconds, and then it starts flashing for 5-10 minutes, when the light goes out at the end.


----------



## Nizzen

SuperMumrik said:


> Does anyone know how the bios flashback is working on z690? Pressed the the bios button for three seconds, it starts flashing a few seconds before it goes solid and nothing changes.
> 
> Forgot to update bios before I pulled the direct die cooled cpu..


Wait longer and use fat 32 usb


----------



## SuperMumrik

Usb is fat32 and the only file is the "renamed" 2103 bios in root directory... Gawd.. It just flashing for three ish seconds then solid and nothing changes


----------



## Telstar

I heard somewhere that the usb drive should also be small, max 16GB. I have always used ntfs with my asus boards, but never done a flashback, so that may need fat32.


----------



## CptSpig

SuperMumrik said:


> Does anyone know how the bios flashback is working on z690? Pressed the the bios button for three seconds, it starts flashing a few seconds before it goes solid and nothing changes.
> 
> Forgot to update bios before I pulled the direct die cooled cpu..





Csavez™ said:


> Me too, I forgot, but I solved it with usb, it should be fat32/empty, only the bios file is renamed, it lasts for 3 seconds, and then it starts flashing for 5-10 minutes, when the light goes out at the end.


Wait until it flashes three times and let go. If it stays solid it's not working. It will flash faster until it stops then you done. It will take some time so be patient.
NOTE: Use the bios rename .exe to rename the file to .cap


----------



## Csavez™

CptSpig said:


> Wait until it flashes three times and let go. If it stays solid it's not working. It will flash faster until it stops then you done. It will take some time so be patient.
> NOTE: Use the bios rename .exe to rename the file to .cap


Did you plug it in the right place?, sry for the stupid question, often another flash drive solves this problem.


----------



## SuperMumrik

Changed the 16GB stick to a 8GB one and it's flashing now🙈


----------



## Telstar

SuperMumrik said:


> Changed the 16GB stick to a 8GB one and it's flashing now🙈


Oh so it was 8GB not 16 the limit. I have an old 4GB stick that I always use only for bios flashes.


----------



## roooo

Um...just for curiosity: Did anyone here manage setting AVX offset with 13900K on Asus Hero? I'm on Hero Z690 with 2103 BIOS and no matter how high I set AVX2 offset, I'm seeing the same clock speeds no matter if I'm using non-AVX or heavy AVX loads.

Any ideas?


----------



## SuperMumrik

Error code 55, hope my apex isn't dead😬


----------



## Csavez™

SuperMumrik said:


> Error code 55, hope my apex isn't dead😬


Does it stop at code 55?


----------



## affxct

SuperMumrik said:


> Error code 55, hope my apex isn't dead😬


G.Skill RAM?


----------



## SuperMumrik

Yes, stops at 55.
G.skill m-dies


----------



## affxct

SuperMumrik said:


> Yes, stops at 55.
> G.skill m-dies


Mmm yeah that’s not a good sign. I don’t want to jump to conclusions though. Maybe do a deep CMOS clear or even re-seat your chip.


----------



## SuperMumrik

Yeah.. I'm a bit nervous now! I'll have to try find the heat spreader for my 12900k and give that a try first. As long as the board isn't dead it's no problem really


----------



## Baasha

bscool said:


> Not on my z690 but same thing


Strange - I don't see that in my Device Manager - this is what I have:












Papusan said:


> You find it if you run summary. Hwinfo is able to show almost everything in your pc
> View attachment 2577351


I don't have a 'Summary' tab on my HWInfo64 - I don't have the 'Pro' version...



Mappi75 said:


> In the Firmware update folder there is a check.cmd (run as admin) file which shows you the current installed version.


The Firmware update folder only has an EXE.


----------



## roooo

roooo said:


> Um...just for curiosity: Did anyone here manage setting AVX offset with 13900K on Asus Hero? I'm on Hero Z690 with 2103 BIOS and no matter how high I set AVX2 offset, I'm seeing the same clock speeds no matter if I'm using non-AVX or heavy AVX loads.
> 
> Any ideas?


Ok...found a post on this elsewhere: AVX offset counts from the highest core ratio (incl. TVB) and has to be larger than the ratio difference between one-core and all-core. Setting offset accordingly solved my problem!


----------



## Csavez™

SuperMumrik said:


> Yes, stops at 55.
> G.skill m-dies


With bad ram settings, it often stopped at 55 for me, check the ram slots, maybe replace them, or try a cmos reset. 55 is definitely a ram problem!


----------



## akgis

Any Z690 HERO person with the newest bios 2103 can give feedback?


----------



## Nizzen

SuperMumrik said:


> Yeah.. I'm a bit nervous now! I'll have to try find the heat spreader for my 12900k and give that a try first. As long as the board isn't dead it's no problem really


55 is too unstable memory too


----------



## SuperMumrik

Csavez™ said:


> With bad ram settings, it often stopped at 55 for me, check the ram slots, maybe replace them, or try a cmos reset. 55 is definitely a ram problem!


Yeah, but this is "first" boot with a brand new cpu and bios. Hopefully it's just some moisture underneath the dimms from the dismantl of direct die cooler and not a dead mobo


----------



## SuperMumrik

Nizzen said:


> 55 is too unstable memory too


I have yet to see something else then no signal😂


----------



## Csavez™

Apex is flying now! (the problem was not with Asus, but with Intel)
6800 cl30, the red CBr23 is the 10 minute throttling test without hwinfo.


----------



## roooo

akgis said:


> Any Z690 HERO person with the newest bios 2103 can give feedback?


On what?


----------



## edkieferlp

Baasha said:


> Strange - I don't see that in my Device Manager - this is what I have:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't have a 'Summary' tab on my HWInfo64 - I don't have the 'Pro' version...
> 
> 
> 
> The Firmware update folder only has an EXE.


Are you looking for ME driver and firmware version?

In Device manager got to system devices >Intel management engine interface> firmware tab for firmware and driver tab for driver version.

With HWinfo close Summary, Main HWinfo window go to the > MB, and click down to "Intel ME", on right you'll see versions for both.

I am on free, you don't need Pro for this info.


----------



## SuperMumrik

It's alive!! Only SP 104 tho!
At least it can boot [email protected] without issues
Initially somewhat stronger than my 12900k IMC, but that remains to be seen


----------



## Papusan

Baasha said:


> I don't have a 'Summary' tab on my HWInfo64 - I don't have the 'Pro' version...


You don't need an Pro version. How to use Hwinfo.


----------



## bscool

Baasha said:


> Strange - I don't see that in my Device Manager - this is what I have:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't have a 'Summary' tab on my HWInfo64 - I don't have the 'Pro' version...
> 
> 
> 
> The Firmware update folder only has an EXE.


Unclick sensor when you open HWfino. 🙃


----------



## Csavez™

SuperMumrik said:


> It's alive!! Only SP 104 tho!
> At least it can boot [email protected] without issues
> Initially somewhat stronger than my 12900k IMC, but that remains to be seen
> View attachment 2577468


And is it stable too?


----------



## CptSpig

Csavez™ said:


> Did you plug it in the right place?, sry for the stupid question, often another flash drive solves this problem.


I am not having issues with Flash Back I was helping someone else.


----------



## SuperMumrik

Csavez™ said:


> And is it stable too?


Not quite @7400, BUT 7300 looks promising =)


----------



## schug

I just updated my Z690 Strix-E to latest bios and ME firmware. I'm having a problem where after every cold boot I get taken into UEFI settings. I have to save and reset to boot into windows. This is odd behavior and didn't happen prior. Any idea what is causing this?


----------



## Nizzen

SuperMumrik said:


> Not quite @7400, BUT 7300 looks promising =)
> View attachment 2577474


M-die madness 🥳


----------



## Gking62

does anyone have the GSkill 6600 or anything else at that speed or higher running reliably @ XMP on the Extreme by chance? my 64GB of Kingston 5600 is running rock solid, yes I said 5600 but now with a 13900K and 4090 inbound soon, I need to move up now, thanks


----------



## sniperpowa

Anyone got 1T cmr to work on a z690 formula?


----------



## dyanikoglu

Does 13900k work in z690 apex 2021? After the recent mess with ram slots, I wonder if it works.


----------



## Csavez™

You should read back a bit!


----------



## TSportM

Gking62 said:


> does anyone have the GSkill 6600 or anything else at that speed or higher running reliably @ XMP on the Extreme by chance? my 64GB of Kingston 5600 is running rock solid, yes I said 5600 but now with a 13900K and 4090 inbound soon, I need to move up now, thanks


I have the tforce 6400, running on the extreme with tighter timmings and 7000mhz, now with the 13900k it requires less voltage for does settings and iam testing 7400 and its achivable With the same settings for 7000 on the KS.

cheers


----------



## Mappi75

Where did you get all those high SP 13900K cpu's ? Its because the first shippment is the best batch?

Thought Intel would (already) cherry pick these high sp cpu's for the KS ?


----------



## affxct

Mappi75 said:


> Where did you get all those high SP 13900K cpu's ? Its because the first shippment is the best batch?
> 
> Thought Intel would (already) cherry pick these high sp cpu's for the KS ?


SP 100-110 is not high. Not for the 13900K anyway.


----------



## Mappi75

oh ok - thanks.


----------



## affxct

Mappi75 said:


> oh ok - thanks.


Wait lemme rephrase that. It’s not that high. SP 95-99 is like what would’ve been an SP 80-84 with the 12900K. Basically a mediocre sample. SP 100-102 is decent/respectable. SP 105-110 is an A. SP of over 110 means potentially a P SP of 120-130 and this would be golden as of current sampling. This is down to my very rough judgement of reading everyone’s posts. It should be no coincidence that most of the chips from all over the world are weighing in at around SP 100-110, with a few odd samples in the mid 110s. I’m considering buying one, but I have a Dark so I wouldn’t be able to tell you what a South African shipment chip is like.


----------



## Mappi75

Updated apex (12900KS) from 0082 to 2103 > same voltages are needed same setup works stable for ram.
(less voltages does not work)

CB23 needed max. 309 watts (hwinfo):


----------



## sblantipodi

I answered my self


----------



## sblantipodi

Csavez™ said:


> Apex is flying now! (the problem was not with Asus, but with Intel)
> 6800 cl30, the red CBr23 is the 10 minute throttling test without hwinfo.
> View attachment 2577452
> 
> View attachment 2577452


Are you on a powerful custom loop? 
You are pushing more than 300W without thermal throttling. Wow


----------



## Csavez™

sblantipodi said:


> Are you on a powerful custom loop?
> You are pushing more than 300W without thermal throttling. Wow


Yes, with 3 radiators.


----------



## sblantipodi

Csavez™ said:


> Yes, with 3 radiators.
> View attachment 2577706
> View attachment 2577707
> View attachment 2577705
> View attachment 2577704
> View attachment 2577703


Ok thanks.
Did you noticed some slow down due to z690?

There are rumours that says that z690 slows down raptor over z790


----------



## Csavez™

Slow down?  Acceleration, although I don't have a z790, so I have nothing to compare it to.


----------



## affxct

Csavez™ said:


> Slow down?  Acceleration, although I don't have a z790, so I have nothing to compare it to.
> View attachment 2577709


Raptor Lake ROOAAAAAAAR


----------



## Mappi75

I decided to keep my 12900KS and try to optimize the cpu settings.
With manual core ratio i save 50-70 watts only in CB23 with more points and 10 dregrees less.
(and this is only the beginning of my testing).

For only gaming the difference is too low for spending € 750,-

Can recommend the YT chanel " Frame Chasers" but posting a video shows a fullscreen picture of the vid.


----------



## 673714

Gking62 said:


> does anyone have the GSkill 6600 or anything else at that speed or higher running reliably @ XMP on the Extreme by chance? my 64GB of Kingston 5600 is running rock solid, yes I said 5600 but now with a 13900K and 4090 inbound soon, I need to move up now, thanks


Yes. This is not my original 2021 Extreme though, I had to do an RMA. The replacement does XMP easily with 1 stick with absolutely no changes. To get both sticks stable, I only had to change the CPU input voltage to 1.8v (12900k using bios 2004)


----------



## IIDaXII

Hello all, 
I have a question before installing my 4090 on my Extreme. I have an ssd in the M2-1 slot of my motherboard. Should I move it to the M2-2 slot to get the maximum bandwidth for my 4090?


----------



## Gking62

LilOliVert said:


> Yes. This is not my original 2021 Extreme though, I had to do an RMA. The replacement does XMP easily with 1 stick with absolutely no changes. To get both sticks stable, I only had to change the CPU input voltage to 1.8v (12900k using bios 2004)


this? thanks bud


----------



## 673714

Gking62 said:


> this? thanks bud


Yes, exactly, but keep in mind different CPU = different needs, even if it was also a 12900k, and 13th gen is obviously even more different


----------



## 673714

IIDaXII said:


> Hello all,
> I have a question before installing my 4090 on my Extreme. I have an ssd in the M2-1 slot of my motherboard. Should I move it to the M2-2 slot to get the maximum bandwidth for my 4090?


If you have it installed behind the OLED, I think you should move it down 1. That's where I put mine, and iirc that was why


----------



## karloy

Wondering if someone experienced this as well, i have significant memory issues after going from a 12900k to a 13900k, and performing the firmware upgrade to BIOS 2103. With the 12900k (not sure what the firmware was), with the same memory, I was able to run rock solid with zero issues for a year. After the upgrade, I have constant memory issues. It gets stuck at the memory check (yellow) connected to A2/B2, but when I only use B2,it passes. Constant BSOD during operations with a memory error. MemTest86 in the BIOS is producing a lot of errors.

I have a few theories:

I messed up the installation of the CPU - pins all look good though
The BIOS upgrade introduced the memory issues - looking at forums, it seems that issue is very common for the Strix (why?)
For some reason, the memory module broke. Feels unlikely.

I am at a point where I am considering switching to a z790 board, but disappointed since the was supposed to be compatible. Wondering if anyone tried the upgrade, and found a workaround.


----------



## Exilon

sblantipodi said:


> Ok thanks.
> Did you noticed some slow down due to z690?
> 
> There are rumours that says that z690 slows down raptor over z790


There is no slowdown. ASUS's BIOS update doesn't bundle the required ME firmware with it so people that only update the BIOS but not the ME firmware ends up running into performance and NVMe issues.


----------



## dante`afk

whats the latest bios here for my crappy 2021 apex?

did I already tell you I send it to RMA, asus send it back 2 months later without any notes and support does not respond?


----------



## cstkl1

karloy said:


> Wondering if someone experienced this as well, i have significant memory issues after going from a 12900k to a 13900k, and performing the firmware upgrade to BIOS 2103. With the 12900k (not sure what the firmware was), with the same memory, I was able to run rock solid with zero issues for a year. After the upgrade, I have constant memory issues. It gets stuck at the memory check (yellow) connected to A2/B2, but when I only use B2,it passes. Constant BSOD during operations with a memory error. MemTest86 in the BIOS is producing a lot of errors.
> 
> I have a few theories:
> 
> I messed up the installation of the CPU - pins all look good though
> The BIOS upgrade introduced the memory issues - looking at forums, it seems that issue is very common for the Strix (why?)
> For some reason, the memory module broke. Feels unlikely.
> 
> I am at a point where I am considering switching to a z790 board, but disappointed since the was supposed to be compatible. Wondering if anyone tried the upgrade, and found a workaround.


Ucode update for cpu requires new tuninv and rechecking oc for ram. is it running xmp?


----------



## cstkl1

chances are its SA. 12900k plagued with SA overvolt causing instability. 13900k is ok


----------



## TSportM

sblantipodi said:


> Ok thanks.
> Did you noticed some slow down due to z690?
> 
> There are rumours that says that z690 slows down raptor over z790





sblantipodi said:


> Ok thanks.
> Did you noticed some slow down due to z690?
> 
> There are rumours that says that z690 slows down raptor over z790


dont see that issue, performance is on pair with Z790 on stock settings , and its overcloking great, maybe ppl that are complaining are on buggy bios???

cheers


----------



## sblantipodi

Exilon said:


> There is no slowdown. ASUS's BIOS update doesn't bundle the required ME firmware with it so people that only update the BIOS but not the ME firmware ends up running into performance and NVMe issues.


Is it this the ME firmware you are running?
Version 16.1.25.1885

Thanks


----------



## karloy

cstkl1 said:


> Ucode update for cpu requires new tuninv and rechecking oc for ram. is it running xmp?


Tried to disable to the defaults, gets more stable but still issues with two sticks.


----------



## karloy

cstkl1 said:


> chances are its SA. 12900k plagued with SA overvolt causing instability. 13900k is ok


What is the CA, VCCSA? Would you recommend to increase it?


----------



## bscool

On Strix d4 2103 is best bios yet for me. On 12900ks almost makes it into Windows at DR b die 4400c15 gear 1, no other bois even got close for me to boot 4400 gear 1.

4300 can run 1.5b y cruncher. CPU was AI OC for this run.

Need to mess with CPU/mem voltages to pass 2.5b as it fails right at the end.

Edit 2.5b needed 1.45 SA to pass.


----------



## cstkl1

karloy said:


> What is the CA, VCCSA? Would you recommend to increase it?


yes. Mdie 12900k prone to this . instability with overvolt.


----------



## cstkl1

guys use bios 2103 to get correct sp
2004 bugged. this will effect your cpu stability btw


----------



## morph.

What’s a “safe” idle vcore for the 13900k LLC5 in a custom loop? I managed to quickly whip this up and when on load it droops to around 1.28v haven’t really had much time to test and dial in settings.


----------



## edkieferlp

morph. said:


> What’s a “safe” idle vcore for the 13900k LLC5 in a custom loop? I managed to quickly whip this up and when on load it droops to around 1.28v haven’t really had much time to test and dial in settings.
> 
> 
> View attachment 2577904


What LLC is that, #3?
Edit: duh, to early I should read better 

While high voltage with low utilization (current) shouldn't hurt IMO that's a little to high, I would try limit to like 1.5v.
Have you tried this option, I think it can limit high peaks.
IA VR Voltage Limit [1500]


----------



## morph.

edkieferlp said:


> What LLC is that, #3?
> 
> While high voltage with low utilization (current) shouldn't hurt IMO that's a little to high, I would try limit to like 1.5v.
> Have you tried this option, I think it can limit high peaks.
> IA VR Voltage Limit [1500]


LLC5 I'm was lazy on working out the voltage points haha see how I go now.


----------



## Telstar

morph. said:


> What’s a “safe” idle vcore for the 13900k LLC5 in a custom loop? I managed to quickly whip this up and when on load it droops to around 1.28v haven’t really had much time to test and dial in settings.


Buildzoid used around 1.40 but with a giga board and minimum LLC. YMMV


----------



## CptSpig

karloy said:


> Wondering if someone experienced this as well, i have significant memory issues after going from a 12900k to a 13900k, and performing the firmware upgrade to BIOS 2103. With the 12900k (not sure what the firmware was), with the same memory, I was able to run rock solid with zero issues for a year. After the upgrade, I have constant memory issues. It gets stuck at the memory check (yellow) connected to A2/B2, but when I only use B2,it passes. Constant BSOD during operations with a memory error. MemTest86 in the BIOS is producing a lot of errors.
> 
> I have a few theories:
> 
> I messed up the installation of the CPU - pins all look good though
> The BIOS upgrade introduced the memory issues - looking at forums, it seems that issue is very common for the Strix (why?)
> For some reason, the memory module broke. Feels unlikely.
> 
> I am at a point where I am considering switching to a z790 board, but disappointed since the was supposed to be compatible. Wondering if anyone tried the upgrade, and found a workaround.


Did you update Intel ME?


----------



## morph.

Yeah thanks, I've dialled it down a bit more to be safe sub 1.47v


----------



## trihy

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1583812650537930752
Anyone told him to update ME firmware?


----------



## sblantipodi

trihy said:


> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1583812650537930752
> Anyone told him to update ME firmware?


But is the me firmware 16.1.25.1885 sufficient to not have this problem?
This is the latest version from the Asus website.


----------



## Spicedaddy

sblantipodi said:


> But is the me firmware 16.1.25.1885 sufficient to not have this problem?
> This is the latest version from the Asus website.








[FIRMWARE] Intel ME (H610/B660/H670/Z690/B760/H770/Z790)


Intel ME (H610/B660/H670/Z690/B760/H770/Z790)



rog.asus.com





*Intel ME Consumer Firmware* :
Firmware : 16.1.25.1917 [11/07/2022]


----------



## sblantipodi

Spicedaddy said:


> [FIRMWARE] Intel ME (H610/B660/H670/Z690/B760/H770/Z790)
> 
> 
> Intel ME (H610/B660/H670/Z690/B760/H770/Z790)
> 
> 
> 
> rog.asus.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Intel ME Consumer Firmware* :
> Firmware : 16.1.25.1917 [11/07/2022]


That firmware is saved on mega.nz I would not consider an official one 

Is 16.1.25.1885 official from the Asus site enough to not have the nvme problem?


----------



## trihy

Don't know. That link can be trusted, I'm using .1917

Still If it's mandatory, there should be a proper warning or embedded with the bios with a script to be updated.

But there were last minute changes to raptor bios. The microcode problems and so. So this was kind of expected.


----------



## morph.

Something to consider regarding its legitimacy. MoKiChU has been doing this for years on the ROG/Asus forums and his thread is pinned by mods/admins there, Asus is a slow beast when it comes to updating their websites for supported downloads just think of all the different subpages and sku's(products) they have that they need to update every time a new "version" is out.


----------



## TSportM

morph. said:


> Something to consider regarding its legitimacy. MoKiChU has been doing this for years on the ROG/Asus forums and his thread is pinned by mods/admins there, Asus is a slow beast when it comes to updating their websites for supported downloads just think of all the different subpages and sku's(products) they have that they need to update every time a new "version" is out.
> 
> View attachment 2578055



Yes thats true MoKiChu has done a real service,

Any improvements with that ME @morph. ?

did any onte test it ?

cheers


----------



## 7empe

morph. said:


> Yeah thanks, I've dialled it down a bit more to be safe sub 1.47v
> 
> View attachment 2578058


Nice e-cores clock! What's your SP?


----------



## sblantipodi

What is the average IMC voltage needed for 6ghz on DDR5 on raptor lake?

Is it higher than the one needed on alder lake?


----------



## cstkl1

sblantipodi said:


> What is the average IMC voltage needed for 6ghz on DDR5 on raptor lake?
> 
> Is it higher than the one needed on alder lake?


u mean vcore?


----------



## sblantipodi

cstkl1 said:


> u mean vcore?


No Memory controller's voltage


----------



## cstkl1

sblantipodi said:


> No Memory controller's voltage


oh ure talking about 6000 ram?


----------



## cstkl1

atm 7600 arnd 1v two dimm


----------



## affxct

P


cstkl1 said:


> atm 7600 arnd 1v two dimm


I think you’re referring to VCCSA and he’s referring to VDD2 (ASUS bad naming scheme).


----------



## cstkl1

affxct said:


> P
> 
> I think you’re referring to VCCSA and he’s referring to VDD2 (ASUS bad naming scheme).


ah


----------



## morph.

7empe said:


> Nice e-cores clock! What's your SP?


101


----------



## sblantipodi

affxct said:


> P
> 
> I think you’re referring to VCCSA and he’s referring to VDD2 (ASUS bad naming scheme).


so, does raptor requires more memory controller voltage than alder?


----------



## sblantipodi

as soon as I installed the 13900K 










it seems that I lost the Raid Controller driver.

Where can I get the raid controller driver?


----------



## Telstar

look for intel chipset driver on your motherboard drivers page


----------



## Csavez™

What nice inclusions it has, congratulations "intel"! 13900k sp97 p106/e81


----------



## snakeeyes111

I flashed my 1st bios chip to 2103, now i cant flash my second one to 2004 or 2103. Can someone help? 

Code 55 stuck... no way out.


----------



## Soleias74

For issues with Z690 and new bios :
RaptorLake Resources (asus.com)


----------



## edkieferlp

Csavez™ said:


> What nice inclusions it has, congratulations "intel"! 13900k sp97 p106/e81
> View attachment 2578242
> 
> View attachment 2578241
> 
> View attachment 2578240
> 
> 
> View attachment 2578245
> View attachment 2578244
> View attachment 2578246


Wow, that solder seems so thick.
Should get a good reduction in temps.


----------



## dyanikoglu

Apex Z690 + 13900KF at stock XMP I settings.

Bios: 2103


----------



## bscool

Test BIOS for Maximus Z690 Apex
BIOS Ver. 0002

update memory overclock capability.


ASUS ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX | APEX 14

I havent tried it yet about too.


----------



## jeiselramos

bscool said:


> Test BIOS for Maximus Z690 Apex
> BIOS Ver. 0002
> 
> update memory overclock capability.
> 
> 
> ASUS ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX | APEX 14
> 
> I havent tried it yet about too.


i'll try that probably tomorrow on my bad apex with 13900k

with bad i mean 
6600 slot A bsod
7400 slot B boot


----------



## TSportM

sblantipodi said:


> as soon as I installed the 13900K
> 
> View attachment 2578217
> 
> 
> it seems that I lost the Raid Controller driver.
> 
> Where can I get the raid controller driver?


here you go



https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/05SATA/DRV_RST_Intel_SZ_TSD_W11_64_V19501037_20220928R.zip


----------



## satinghostrider

bscool said:


> Test BIOS for Maximus Z690 Apex
> BIOS Ver. 0002
> 
> update memory overclock capability.
> 
> 
> ASUS ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX | APEX 14
> 
> I havent tried it yet about too.


2103 made me lose multithread performance (more than 500 point drop) in Cinebench R23 with my 12900K. 0002 largely got it back to where it was. 2103 and 0002 memory settings work the same way as far as I've tested the whole of yesterday.


----------



## sblantipodi

TSportM said:


> here you go
> 
> 
> 
> https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/05SATA/DRV_RST_Intel_SZ_TSD_W11_64_V19501037_20220928R.zip


Thanks downloaded It previously from the z790 Asus Page. 
The z690 Asus Page had the old One that doesn't support Raptor.

Damn Asus is not even able to update a web Page on a 1200€ mobo that has less than 1 year.


----------



## affxct

sblantipodi said:


> so, does raptor requires more memory controller voltage than alder?


The memory controller voltage is a horrible term for it because it isn’t an internal voltage and it has no real correlation to the CPU. It simply enhances single strength for the DRAM. It’s why too little of it (VDD2) results in RAM-like BSOD codes such as page file.


----------



## acoustic

affxct said:


> The memory controller voltage is a horrible term for it because it isn’t an internal voltage and it has no real correlation to the CPU. It simply enhances single strength for the DRAM. It’s why too little of it (VDD2) results in RAM-like BSOD codes such as page file.


I've also not seen anything about damage to any component for overvolting it. Doesn't VDD2 run off the FIVR rail, so it's protected anyway? Just like VDDQ TX?


----------



## Papusan

Soleias74 said:


> For issues with Z690 and new bios :
> RaptorLake Resources (asus.com)





bscool said:


> Test BIOS for Maximus Z690 Apex
> BIOS Ver. 0002
> 
> update memory overclock capability.
> 
> 
> ASUS ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX | APEX 14
> 
> I havent tried it yet about too.


Why is the test bios for Apex Z690 blocked from download? RaptorLake Resources









Because it's bugged? Or they make ready for a new one?


----------



## bscool

Papusan said:


> Why is the test bios for Apex Z690 blocked from download? RaptorLake Resources
> View attachment 2578454
> 
> 
> Because it's bugged? Or they make ready for a new one?


Download works for me for the Apex bios, here it is on my onedrive.

It worked OK for me with m die but still didnt help with my A die.

Edit I used the download from Hwbot









ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0002.CAP


CAP File



1drv.ms


----------



## Papusan

bscool said:


> Download works for me for the Apex bios, here it is on my onedrive.
> 
> It worked OK for me with m die but still didnt help with my A die.
> 
> Edit I used the download from Hwbot
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0002.CAP
> 
> 
> CAP File
> 
> 
> 
> 1drv.ms


Yep, those works. I saved it once it was up afew days ago. But it was veird it was blocked on Asus own forum as I linked to.

Have flashed the v2004 to prepare for 13th gen. Still a few days until I get the 13900K. But what bios version to stay on when I get it and put it in? I expect it's still too soon tell what version that works best with Raptor lake and Z690 Apex board. Thanks


----------



## trihy

Another ME firmware released

16.1.25.2020


----------



## bscool

@shamino1978 Is there any reason I would need to flash from 2004 to 2103 on z690 Strix d4 before instaling 13900k?

I had 12900ks installed flashed from 1601 to 2103 and it was like I had a really bad IMC gear 1 after installing 13900k, it would not be stable for memtest or y cruncher. Current ME firmware(1917) was installed before installing 13900k

So I flashed back to bios 2004 and then to 2103 and now it is stable in gear 1 4300 with DR b die.

Just wanted to let anyone know if having issues on Strix d4 try that.

Edit used Ezflash for flashing for info


----------



## affxct

acoustic said:


> I've also not seen anything about damage to any component for overvolting it. Doesn't VDD2 run off the FIVR rail, so it's protected anyway? Just like VDDQ TX?


Not at all actually, again I’m gonna reference the Dark; on the baseplate provided that you use for the mini test bench, it indicates exactly which component is responsible for generating VDD2. As explained by BZ, it is basically the missing compliment from DRAM VDD/VDDQ that would’ve made up the old DRAM rail from D4 days. The voltage would be generated on-board with no PMIC. Now that we have a PMIC, we will still the VDD2 rail to enhance signal. This is likely why some boards and CPUs require more or less. Too much distorts signal while too little causes memory errors.

Essentially if your board PCB is very clean electrically or your CPU itself doesn’t enjoy receiving a 1.5-1.6V signal, that’s what will determine your value. Another thing is that the CPU not enjoying high VDD2 is likely why a lot of chips can’t scale to high DDR5 data rates. D5 requires relatively high voltage to hit the impressive 7000-8000 to speeds. If your chip are board can’t facilitate a clean supply of high VDD2 and your RAM requires it to run high speed, you will inherently suffer instability at high data rate.

This is one of the parts of the equation of why A-die seems to extend the board capabilities of all boards. Essentially A-die doesn’t require as high VDD/VDDQ (consequently VDD2) and thus it is far easier to drive high data rate A-die signals. If your M-die requires 1.65V to hit 7200 for instance, you straight up might hit an IMC bottleneck because your CPU is like “1.5-1.6 VDD2 what the hell is this” and you thus won’t be able to drive your 7200 signal. This might be irrespective of whether or not the board has a good PCB (I can’t do 7200 with my recently sold 12900K).

It’s a very complicated rail, but it will heavily affect MRC as well as it forms part of the DRAM voltage ecosystem if you can call it that? It’s part of why reboot instability happens on some board samples (all vendors). The Dark suffers no reboot instability and this is likely due to how well the Dark manages the clean delivery of this voltage (short distance between CPU and DIMMs/VDD2 + good trace layout). A lot of this is kinda deductible if you do a lot of testing.

SA actually has a limit below 1.4V. A handful of forum members have suffered degradation at 1.4-1.45 after a few months. TX as a result I’d say would be save at around 1.4. ASUS guys don’t hate me. Something is up with Asus because on the U-X and Dark you would almost never have to use more than 1.4 and I actually see roll over at 1.45 on my Dark.

So:
VDD2 - to infinity and beyond (whatever is needed to drive signals)
TX - 1.4 (IMO)
SA - 1.35 (safety)

Roughly speaking because obvs this is dependent on what the actual temp of the die is. Maybe you’re daily’ing a config that stays below 65c at all times and idles at 10c. That would likely change things. VDD2 requirements also will decrease as DIMM temp comes down for obvious reasons.


----------



## sblantipodi

affxct said:


> Not at all actually, again I’m gonna reference the Dark; on the baseplate provided that you use for the mini test bench, it indicates exactly which component is responsible for generating VDD2. As explained by BZ, it is basically the missing compliment from DRAM VDD/VDDQ that would’ve made up the old DRAM rail from D4 days. The voltage would be generated on-board with no PMIC. Now that we have a PMIC, we will still the VDD2 rail to enhance signal. This is likely why some boards and CPUs require more or less. Too much distorts signal while too little causes memory errors.
> 
> Essentially if your board PCB is very clean electrically or your CPU itself doesn’t enjoy receiving a 1.5-1.6V signal, that’s what will determine your value. Another thing is that the CPU not enjoying high VDD2 is likely why a lot of chips can’t scale to high DDR5 data rates. D5 requires relatively high voltage to hit the impressive 7000-8000 to speeds. If your chip are board can’t facilitate a clean supply of high VDD2 and your RAM requires it to run high speed, you will inherently suffer instability at high data rate.
> 
> This is one of the parts of the equation of why A-die seems to extend the board capabilities of all boards. Essentially A-die doesn’t require as high VDD/VDDQ (consequently VDD2) and thus it is far easier to drive high data rate A-die signals. If your M-die requires 1.65V to hit 7200 for instance, you straight up might hit an IMC bottleneck because your CPU is like “1.5-1.6 VDD2 what the hell is this” and you thus won’t be able to drive your 7200 signal. This might be irrespective of whether or not the board has a good PCB (I can’t do 7200 with my recently sold 12900K).
> 
> It’s a very complicated rail, but it will heavily affect MRC as well as it forms part of the DRAM voltage ecosystem if you can call it that? It’s part of why reboot instability happens on some board samples (all vendors). The Dark suffers no reboot instability and this is likely due to how well the Dark manages the clean delivery of this voltage (short distance between CPU and DIMMs/VDD2 + good trace layout). A lot of this is kinda deductible if you do a lot of testing.
> 
> SA actually has a limit below 1.4V. A handful of forum members have suffered degradation at 1.4-1.45 after a few months. TX as a result I’d say would be save at around 1.4. ASUS guys don’t hate me. Something is up with Asus because on the U-X and Dark you would almost never have to use more than 1.4 and I actually see roll over at 1.45 on my Dark.
> 
> So:
> VDD2 - to infinity and beyond (whatever is needed to drive signals)
> TX - 1.4 (IMO)
> SA - 1.35 (safety)
> 
> Roughly speaking because obvs this is dependent on what the actual temp of the die is. Maybe you’re daily’ing a config that stays below 65c at all times and idles at 10c. That would likely change things. VDD2 requirements also will decrease as DIMM temp comes down for obvious reasons.


very nice anwer, thanks for it.


----------



## Simkin

sblantipodi said:


> That firmware is saved on mega.nz I would not consider an official one
> 
> Is 16.1.25.1885 official from the Asus site enough to not have the nvme problem?


Just use the drivers/FW from ROG Forum, it's 100% safe.

I use only from that site on my Z690 Apex, not using from the Asus Site.


----------



## 7empe

affxct said:


> Not at all actually, again I’m gonna reference the Dark; on the baseplate provided that you use for the mini test bench, it indicates exactly which component is responsible for generating VDD2. As explained by BZ, it is basically the missing compliment from DRAM VDD/VDDQ that would’ve made up the old DRAM rail from D4 days. The voltage would be generated on-board with no PMIC. Now that we have a PMIC, we will still the VDD2 rail to enhance signal. This is likely why some boards and CPUs require more or less. Too much distorts signal while too little causes memory errors.
> 
> Essentially if your board PCB is very clean electrically or your CPU itself doesn’t enjoy receiving a 1.5-1.6V signal, that’s what will determine your value. Another thing is that the CPU not enjoying high VDD2 is likely why a lot of chips can’t scale to high DDR5 data rates. D5 requires relatively high voltage to hit the impressive 7000-8000 to speeds. If your chip are board can’t facilitate a clean supply of high VDD2 and your RAM requires it to run high speed, you will inherently suffer instability at high data rate.
> 
> This is one of the parts of the equation of why A-die seems to extend the board capabilities of all boards. Essentially A-die doesn’t require as high VDD/VDDQ (consequently VDD2) and thus it is far easier to drive high data rate A-die signals. If your M-die requires 1.65V to hit 7200 for instance, you straight up might hit an IMC bottleneck because your CPU is like “1.5-1.6 VDD2 what the hell is this” and you thus won’t be able to drive your 7200 signal. This might be irrespective of whether or not the board has a good PCB (I can’t do 7200 with my recently sold 12900K).
> 
> It’s a very complicated rail, but it will heavily affect MRC as well as it forms part of the DRAM voltage ecosystem if you can call it that? It’s part of why reboot instability happens on some board samples (all vendors). The Dark suffers no reboot instability and this is likely due to how well the Dark manages the clean delivery of this voltage (short distance between CPU and DIMMs/VDD2 + good trace layout). A lot of this is kinda deductible if you do a lot of testing.
> 
> SA actually has a limit below 1.4V. A handful of forum members have suffered degradation at 1.4-1.45 after a few months. TX as a result I’d say would be save at around 1.4. ASUS guys don’t hate me. Something is up with Asus because on the U-X and Dark you would almost never have to use more than 1.4 and I actually see roll over at 1.45 on my Dark.
> 
> So:
> VDD2 - to infinity and beyond (whatever is needed to drive signals)
> TX - 1.4 (IMO)
> SA - 1.35 (safety)
> 
> Roughly speaking because obvs this is dependent on what the actual temp of the die is. Maybe you’re daily’ing a config that stays below 65c at all times and idles at 10c. That would likely change things. VDD2 requirements also will decrease as DIMM temp comes down for obvious reasons.


I think that TX is fine up to 1.5V, over 1.5V fivr cannot make it (at least at my apex) but as always - lower is better.


----------



## Telstar

bscool said:


> @shamino1978 Is there any reason I would need to flash from 2004 to 2103 on z690 Strix d4 before instaling 13900k?
> 
> I had 12900ks installed flashed from 1601 to 2103 and it was like I had a really bad IMC gear 1 after installing 13900k, it would not be stable for memtest or y cruncher. Current ME firmware(1917) was installed before installing 13900k
> 
> So I flashed back to bios 2004 and then to 2103 and now it is stable in gear 1 4300 with DR b die.
> 
> Just wanted to left anyone know if having issues on Strix d4 try that.


So basically, it's better to flash 2004 and then 2103 before installing a 13xxx? 
I may be getting this mobo (as the z790 is 100€ more, for no reason) and i would be using fiashback button.


----------



## bscool

Telstar said:


> So basically, it's better to flash 2004 and then 2103 before installing a 13xxx?
> I may be getting this mobo (as the z790 is 100€ more, for no reason) and i would be using fiashback button.


It may have been a fluke, I dont know.

@PhoenixMDA did 1720, 2004 and 2103. ASUS ROG Strix Z690-A Gaming WiFi D4 Thread


----------



## TSportM

trihy said:


> Another ME firmware released
> 
> 16.1.25.2020


have you test it ?


----------



## trihy

Not yet. But will update today.


----------



## 7empe

bscool said:


> It may have been a fluke, I dont know.
> 
> @PhoenixMDA did 1720, 2004 and 2103. ASUS ROG Strix Z690-A Gaming WiFi D4 Thread


It does not matter. BIOS upgrade nulls the chip' memory cells first, then does the write with new image. There's nothing like update path or so.


----------



## TSportM

trihy said:


> Not yet. But will update today.



please post feedback  i will update later when iam home, is this on MoKiChu on asus forums ?

cheers


----------



## trihy

Yes, it's on rog forum.


----------



## Soleias74

I would need some help to undervolt my 13900K (SP 106) and get the temperature down
mounted on Z690 ROG Hero / bios 2103

there are a lot of voltage settings
If anyone knows the settings or has done it on this card with this cpu
Thanks


----------



## affxct

sblantipodi said:


> very nice anwer, thanks for it.


Anytime


----------



## edkieferlp

Soleias74 said:


> I would need some help to undervolt my 13900K (SP 106) and get the temperature down
> mounted on Z690 ROG Hero / bios 2103
> 
> there are a lot of voltage settings
> If anyone knows the settings or has done it on this card with this cpu
> Thanks


I don't have 13xxx but 12th gen, should work the same either way.
First, run whatever BM stability programs to make sure stock settings pass (they should). This way you have baseleine, and only change one setting at time.
I think easiest way to undervolt is go to CPU Core/Cache Voltage, set this to adaptive and then minus offset. IMO good starting point might be -0.050.

Test that for stable and if ok you can raise the offset and retest till you get temps under control, though make sure your mount is good on the IHS, I think many run into issues of not good contact.
What I would recommend is when installing HS/water block, mount it then carefully remove and check contact patch. If ok I remount same way and should be good.


----------



## trihy

Installed latest ME firmware. Didnt notice any changes. Works fine. Altough gen 12 here.


----------



## TSportM

trihy said:


> Installed latest ME firmware. Didnt notice any changes. Works fine. Altough gen 12 here.


will try it on 13 gen few hour from now

cheers


----------



## snakeeyes111

My mdie work again with new ME!!! Rly n1 good job


----------



## bigfootnz

snakeeyes111 said:


> My mdie work again with new ME!!! Rly n1 good job


ME 2020 or 1917?


----------



## snakeeyes111

bigfootnz said:


> ME 2020


!


----------



## sblantipodi

I hoped that Raptor lake could have done a bit Better than alder lake on 4 sticks of RAM but it's not the case.

I can't go past 5.2GHz on two kits of 6.2GHz.

Ok I'll live with It xD


----------



## TSportM

sblantipodi said:


> I hoped that Raptor lake could have done a bit Better than alder lake on 4 sticks of RAM but it's not the case.
> 
> I can't go past 5.2GHz on two kits of 6.2GHz.
> 
> Ok I'll live with It xD



Sorry to hear that, i do 7000mhz on tighter timmings on my 13900k only change from 12 gen is that i need less voltage on the sticks

Whats your 13 i9 SP rating ?

try the new ME....

cheers


----------



## Mappi75

trihy said:


> Installed latest ME firmware. Didnt notice any changes. Works fine. Altough gen 12 here.


Updated FW Version: 16.1.25.2020 too, no probs with 12900KS.


----------



## satinghostrider

Updated FW Version: 16.1.25.2020 too, no probs with 12900K + Z690 Apex (0002 BIOS).


----------



## TSportM

Updated FW Version: 16.1.25.2020 also on 13900k doing testting on auto cpu voltages are lower, and same performance and stabilty.

cheers


----------



## nyxagamemnon

Initial tests seem the raptor lake Imc is either the same or slightly better than the alder lake, when it comes to 4x dimm configs. My Zen 4 tests have it going higher with less issues and volts than Raptor. Tested on a z690 maximus extreme. Not sure if z790 will change the results.

Also any of you getting higher temp readings in the bios vs in windows? if I use HWMonitor My temps at idle are in the 30's but in the bios it's saying im @45c?


----------



## TSportM

nyxagamemnon said:


> Initial tests seem the raptor lake Imc is either the same or slightly better than the alder lake, when it comes to 4x dimm configs. My Zen 4 tests have it going higher with less issues and volts than Raptor. Tested on a z690 maximus extreme. Not sure if z790 will change the results.
> 
> Also any of you getting higher temp readings in the bios vs in windows? if I use HWMonitor My temps at idle are in the 30's but in the bios it's saying im @45c?


Dont see that variations same board, on custom loop

cheers


----------



## nyxagamemnon

TSportM said:


> Dont see that variations same board, on custom loop
> 
> cheers


Yeah not sure what's going on why there is a variance in temp readings. in the bios and outside. I initially thought it might be a bad mount but then when I got into windows the temps were alot lower and I'm sort of like ***. Perhaps I'll remount the cooler again tomorrow and see if anything changes.


----------



## jeiselramos

I don't know how but now I can boot 7000c30 with 13900K on my apex, on my 12900K i couldn't boot 6600.
6200c28 1T was my best oc
I'll let you know more in these weeks


----------



## sblantipodi

TSportM said:


> Sorry to hear that, i do 7000mhz on tighter timmings on my 13900k only change from 12 gen is that i need less voltage on the sticks
> 
> Whats your 13 i9 SP rating ?
> 
> try the new ME....
> 
> cheers





nyxagamemnon said:


> Initial tests seem the raptor lake Imc is either the same or slightly better than the alder lake, when it comes to 4x dimm configs. My Zen 4 tests have it going higher with less issues and volts than Raptor. Tested on a z690 maximus extreme. Not sure if z790 will change the results.
> 
> Also any of you getting higher temp readings in the bios vs in windows? if I use HWMonitor My temps at idle are in the 30's but in the bios it's saying im @45c?


My z690 Extreme have seen no improvement at all with 4 dimm.
I have 2 kit of SK hynix 6200MHz from Corsair, they clock very well when using only one kit, but if I use both kits there is no way to push it harder than 5.2GHz.

This is true on alder and same for raptor.

I was expecting something better from raptor...


----------



## acoustic

sblantipodi said:


> My z690 Extreme have seen no improvement at all with 4 dimm.
> I have 2 kit of SK hynix 6200MHz from Corsair, they clock very well when using only one kit, but if I use both kits there is no way to push it harder than 5.2GHz.
> 
> This is true on alder and same for raptor.
> 
> I was expecting something better from raptor...


We've told you so many times that running two separate kits causes more issues.. if you want to run 4 sticks, you should buy a kit that comes with 4.

Mismatching kits is never a good idea.. but everyone has told you this already. Raptor Lake wasn't going to fix that.


----------



## TSportM

sblantipodi said:


> My z690 Extreme have seen no improvement at all with 4 dimm.
> I have 2 kit of SK hynix 6200MHz from Corsair, they clock very well when using only one kit, but if I use both kits there is no way to push it harder than 5.2GHz.
> 
> This is true on alder and same for raptor.
> 
> I was expecting something better from raptor...



i dont use 4 sticks only 2 and its Tforce 6400mhz Bdie


cheers


----------



## trihy

Anyone with aida64 get this message when doing mem benchmarks?










Was happening since installed windows 11. Never activated anything related to hypervisor or virtual machines.

It's worth disabling? For performance purposes? If It worth, any proper way to disable it on Asus boards?

On latest aida64 the warning won't appear anymore, but that doesn't mean hyper v is disabled.


----------



## CptSpig

trihy said:


> Anyone with aida64 get this message when doing mem benchmarks?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Was happening since installed windows 11. Never activated anything related to hypervisor or virtual machines.
> 
> It's worth disabling? For performance purposes? If It worth, any proper way to disable it on Asus boards?
> 
> On latest aida64 the warning won't appear anymore, but that doesn't mean hyper v is disabled.


Go to Windows security / Device security / Core isolation and disable Memory Integrity. Hypervisor should be disabled by default in the bios.


----------



## J_Lab4645

trihy said:


> Anyone with aida64 get this message when doing mem benchmarks?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Was happening since installed windows 11. Never activated anything related to hypervisor or virtual machines.
> 
> It's worth disabling? For performance purposes? If It worth, any proper way to disable it on Asus boards?
> 
> On latest aida64 the warning won't appear anymore, but that doesn't mean hyper v is disabled.



You can disable as CPtSpig says in Windows Security or in your bios: Go to: Advanced/Cpu Configuration/Intel VMX technology (DISABLE)

There is a performance hit, not much but it is there. For Example: Run Cinebench R23 CPU (Multi Core) BEFORE you disable Memory Integrity or VMX in the Bios. Note your score.
Now DISABLE Memory Integrity or VMX in Bios. Run test again. Score will be higher.


----------



## nyxagamemnon

Just some updates on some tests I've done.

Tested 2 13900ks on a z690 maximus extreme. Both have big issues running 6000+ on 4x dimms. Tested to 6200. While on the am5 x670e extreme it's a joke runs without issues.

Now the only other variable that remains is z690 and I'm suspecting z690 is inferior to z790 when it comes to 4x configs. But until I can get a z790 maximus extreme board I won't know and I'm debating if it's worth even testing.


----------



## Tibby67

nyxagamemnon said:


> Just some updates on some tests I've done.
> 
> Tested 2 13900ks on a z690 maximus extreme. Both have big issues running 6000+ on 4x dimms. Tested to 6200. While on the am5 x670e extreme it's a joke runs without issues.
> 
> Now the only other variable that remains is z690 and I'm suspecting z690 is inferior to z790 when it comes to 4x configs. But until I can get a z790 maximus extreme board I won't know and I'm debating if it's worth even testing.


Getting my Z790 maximus extreme today 4 g skill 7200 ready to go lets see if this works...


----------



## nyxagamemnon

Tibby67 said:


> Getting my Z790 maximus extreme today 4 g skill 7200 ready to go lets see if this works...


Are you going to run 2 or 4 sticks ?


----------



## WayWayUp

Any news on the z790 apex?
They announced it but I haven’t seen any for sale


----------



## Nizzen

WayWayUp said:


> Any news on the z790 apex?
> They announced it but I haven’t seen any for sale


Some shops has preorder. Some say ~15 November. Not confirmed date.


----------



## Spiriva

WayWayUp said:


> Any news on the z790 apex?
> They announced it but I haven’t seen any for sale


I placed an order on "Proshop", its a shop located in Denmark. Its the only shop i have found that have even listed the z790 Apex in Scandinavia.



https://www.proshop.se/Moderkort/ASUS-ROG-MAXIMUS-Z790-APEX-Moderkort-Intel-Z790-Intel-LGA1700-socket-DDR5-RAM-ATX/3109496




Beställd - förväntas på lager 2022-11-15 = Ordered - expected in stock 2022-11-15


----------



## Telstar

Spiriva said:


> https://www.proshop.se/Moderkort/ASUS-ROG-MAXIMUS-Z790-APEX-Moderkort-Intel-Z790-Intel-LGA1700-socket-DDR5-RAM-ATX/3109496


You are paying a pretty preorder markup of about 30%.


----------



## IronAge

Z790 Apex is way too expensive, for that price no 10G LAN and no backplate + Asus QA issues, KMA.


----------



## Spiriva

Telstar said:


> You are paying a pretty preorder markup of about 30%.


The z790 Hero in Sweden cost 9890kr (€904) and the z790 Apex is 10890kr (€996)


----------



## IronAge

Telstar said:


> You are paying a pretty preorder markup of about 30%.


That's about the best price in europe, it's regular price, no 30% early adopter tax.


----------



## Telstar

IronAge said:


> That's about the best price in europe, it's regular price, no 30% early adopter tax.


The Apex has the same msrp as the hero (which still has a 10-15% early adopter tax in EU).
I'm considering to get an apex myself, but i'll wait until the price goes under 750€.


----------



## IronAge

Telstar said:


> I'm considering to get an apex myself, but i'll wait until the price goes under 750€.


then you will buy one when meteor lake is within sight, hope you enjoy waiting.


----------



## Telstar

IronAge said:


> then you will buy one when meteor lake is within sight, hope you enjoy waiting.


Very likely, but i'll be away til next April so it doesn't really matter. I like tested and true platforms, so I was gonna skip ML anyway.


----------



## IronAge

Due to the weak Euro even the Z690 Apex costs ~100€ more than what i have paid when it has been released.


----------



## cstkl1

RaptorLake Resources


i will use this as a collection of test bioses/tools/info targeted towards Raptorlake + z69/790 NOTE for Z690: You must update ME on your Z690 to properly support raptorlake (if you are on dual bioses then you need to do this to both bioses) 1) d/l and install ME driver...



rog.asus.com


----------



## WayWayUp

i was thinking it would be priced at $800 here in the US
z790 hero is priced at $630 mostly. If it matches that price I'm picking up the Apex asap. I also hear the apex is cleaned up this time around and much better than the z690


----------



## Gking62

13900K now live, XMP2 passed, running new FW (2020) with SP of 104, not great but I'm ok with it along with P-118/E-76 @ 6.2GHz with temps 30-32 idle. This CPU is a mothercussing BEAST!


----------



## Falkentyne

Gking62 said:


> 13900K now live, XMP2 passed, running new FW (2020) with SP of 104, not great but I'm ok with it along with P-118/E-76 @ 6.2GHz with temps 30-32 idle. This CPU is a mothercussing BEAST!


Not great??
Those P cores are almost golden!
Why are you paying attention to the low E core SP? What matters are the P-cores.
Sure, maybe you will have problems running x46 on E cores stable, but is that so important?
Enjoy your chip...


----------



## Telstar

only p-cores SP matters


----------



## Gking62

Falkentyne said:


> Not great??
> Those P cores are almost golden!
> Why are you paying attention to the low E core SP? What matters are the P-cores.
> Sure, maybe you will have problems running x46 on E cores stable, but is that so important?
> Enjoy your chip...


I humble myself before you Sensei, I will smash a dozen cinder blocks and sweep his legs next time!!!


----------



## bscool

Telstar said:


> only p-cores SP matters


All SP's matter 

All lives..........


----------



## sniperpowa

Anyone have success with a-die on a 4 dim z690? I’ve gotten to 7200 but it’s not stable yet. 7000 passed tm5 what imc voltage should we run on z690 formula 13900k?


----------



## owikh84

sniperpowa said:


> Anyone have success with a-die on a 4 dim z690? I’ve gotten to 7200 but it’s not stable yet. 7000 passed tm5 what imc voltage should we run on z690 formula 13900k?


Check out my 7400c34 and 7600c36 on Z690 Extreme that I shared in another thread.



owikh84 said:


> Same timings, but my unlocked Hynix A-die green PCB sticks require a voltage bump on the VPP = 1.85V.
> 
> 13900K SP101 (P110/E83) - P55/E43/R45
> Maximus Z690 EXTREME | BIOS 2103
> Sk-Hynix HMCG78AGBUA081N BA (Hynix A-Die) + 2x Noctua A6x25 + Iceman Cooler heatspreaders
> Ambient: 28C
> 
> *2x16GB DDR5-7400 34-43-43-30-2T
> VDD/VDDQ 1.435V | TX VDDQ 1.40V | SA 1.15V | MC 1.40V
> View attachment 2577851
> *





owikh84 said:


> 13900K SP101 (P110/E83) - P55/E43/R45
> Maximus Z690 EXTREME | BIOS 2103
> Sk-Hynix HMCG78AGBUA081N BA (Hynix A-Die) + 2x Noctua A6x25 + Iceman Cooler heatspreaders
> Ambient: 30C
> 
> *2x16GB DDR5-7600 36-45-45-30-2T
> VDD/VDDQ/TX VDDQ 1.45V | SA 1.15V | MC 1.40V*
> View attachment 2577898


----------



## EEE-RAY

Can someone with a hero please help me - I pulled off the VRM heatsinks to my hero to check something and wrecked the thermal pads.

What is the thickness of the OEM pads the VRMs and chokes?


----------



## dante`afk

when does apex z790 launch?

no luck here on my unifyx and memory OC


----------



## Falkentyne

EEE-RAY said:


> Can someone with a hero please help me - I pulled off the VRM heatsinks to my hero to check something and wrecked the thermal pads.
> 
> What is the thickness of the OEM pads the VRMs and chokes?


Buy a $10 caliper from Amazon or elsewhere (digital micrometer) and measure the pads yourself. They can't be completely distingrated.
Try to measure around the edges of the pads that are most intact.


----------



## bscool

2022 z690 Apex bios 0006
13900k Arctic 420 AIO
V color 7200 A die (no cooling or fan on ram for this testing)

Just some quick testing, this is the best so far for me with these A die. Other bioses it was difficult booting 7200 or lower and wouldnt run y cruncher or Karhu/memest.

0006 boots and is stable with 7200 XMP 1 and also with the "7600 preset timings" settings at 7200.

Also 7400 ran y cruncher with same settings for timings and voltages.

Didnt test with M die yet.


----------



## EEE-RAY

Falkentyne said:


> Buy a $10 caliper from Amazon or elsewhere (digital micrometer) and measure the pads yourself. They can't be completely distingrated.
> Try to measure around the edges of the pads that are most intact.


Totally logical. I didn't mention this in my original post because I thought it was unnecessary detail - I pulled the heat sinks when I got the board at launch. Life stuff happened and I am coming back to this board hoping to build a backup PC and found it in a partially disassembled state with no pads to be seen. I must have thrown them out. 😝


----------



## Falkentyne

EEE-RAY said:


> Totally logical. I didn't mention this in my original post because I thought it was unnecessary detail - I pulled the heat sinks when I got the board at launch. Life stuff happened and I am coming back to this board hoping to build a backup PC and found it in a partially disassembled state with no pads to be seen. I must have thrown them out. 😝


I doubt anyone here knows what the thicknesses of the original pads are.
Maybe if you tag Shamino and ask him VERY VERY VERY politely, he may be able to find this information for you.
But can you imagine how busy he would be if everyone bugged him with questions like this?

Your best chance of success is to contact Asus via a support ticket and ask if someone can get the pad thickness schematics for you for your board.


----------



## satinghostrider

bscool said:


> 2022 z690 Apex bios 0006
> 13900k Arctic 420 AIO
> V color 7200 A die (no cooling or fan on ram for this testing)
> 
> Just some quick testing, this is the best so far for me with these A die. Other bioses it was difficult booting 7200 or lower and wouldnt run y cruncher or Karhu/memest.
> 
> 0006 boots and is stable with 7200 XMP 1 and also with the "7600 preset timings" settings at 7200.
> 
> Also 7400 ran y cruncher with same settings for timings and voltages.
> 
> Didnt test with M die yet.


It could be the CPU microcodes. I noticed on 0006, CPU microcode is 26. On 002 and 2103, it was 25. At least for my 12900k. I've yet to swap my 13900K as of yet.


----------



## bscool

satinghostrider said:


> It could be the CPU microcodes. I noticed on 0006, CPU microcode is 26. On 002 and 2103, it was 25. At least for my 12900k. I've yet to swap my 13900K as of yet.


On 13900k. 10E has been on the last couple.


----------



## sniperpowa

owikh84 said:


> Check out my 7400c34 and 7600c36 on Z690 Extreme that I shared in another thread.


That booted at 7400 thanks


----------



## Mappi75

Where did you get bios 0006 for z690 apex - worth a try for 12900KS ?


----------



## bscool

Mappi75 said:


> Where did you get bios 0006 for z690 apex - worth a try for 12900KS ?








RaptorLake Resources


i will use this as a collection of test bioses/tools/info targeted towards Raptorlake + z69/790 NOTE for Z690: You must update ME on your Z690 to properly support raptorlake (if you are on dual bioses then you need to do this to both bioses) 1) d/l and install ME driver...



rog.asus.com





No idea if it helps with a 12th gen or if it is more for A die or 13th gen. You have dual bios why not try it.

Be warned though I am guessing you wont be able to flash back to older bios than 2004 after flashing this one so keep that in mind.


----------



## Mappi75

Thanks! Whats up with bios 0002 which i found here:









Test BIOS for Maximus Z690 Apex | bianbao.dev







bianbao.dev





one comment:

_"Really good improvement, thanks! i can use high system agent fine. For memtest im still unable to do 7000 c32-42 memtest with hynix a die which is stable on alderlake and 0061 bios. In my test so far above 1.4v vdd/vddq cant do stable on memtest. So far this is best raptorlake bios i have tested. CPU performance also really good. "_


----------



## bscool

Mappi75 said:


> Thanks! Whats up with bios 0002 which i found here:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Test BIOS for Maximus Z690 Apex | bianbao.dev
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bianbao.dev
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> one comment:
> 
> _"Really good improvement, thanks! i can use high system agent fine. For memtest im still unable to do 7000 c32-42 memtest with hynix a die which is stable on alderlake and 0061 bios. In my test so far above 1.4v vdd/vddq cant do stable on memtest. So far this is best raptorlake bios i have tested. CPU performance also really good. "_


I tried that one and for me it didnt help with running this A die I have.

I added to my last post about flashing these newer bios you wont be able to go to older bios than 2004 so something to keep in mind if you want to keep one of your dual bios an older bios. Like I will keep 1 for older bios that I run u code 15 on for avx 512 cpus.


----------



## Mappi75

Ok its nothing for my memory: G Skill F5-6400J3239G16G > should be hynix M-Die 
(cant load thaiphoon burner > win says it got a virus inside)


----------



## TZeroBR

owikh84 said:


> Check out my 7400c34 and 7600c36 on Z690 Extreme that I shared in another thread.


My friend.
I'm novice to memory overclocking settings.
I can't guide myself through ASROCK MEM CONFIG.
Could you, if possible, attach the text file of your CMOS (cmos.txt) for us?


----------



## owikh84

TZeroBR said:


> My friend.
> I'm novice to memory overclocking settings.
> I can't guide myself through ASROCK MEM CONFIG.
> Could you, if possible, attach the text file of your CMOS (cmos.txt) for us?


Sorry mate I did not save the profiles in txt or CMO format and now I have moved to Z690I UNIFY board.
Maybe by looking at my MemTweakIt below will help you a bit?

13900K SP101 (P110/E83) - P55/E43/R45
Maximus Z690 EXTREME | BIOS 2103
Sk-Hynix HMCG78AGBUA081N BA (Hynix A-Die) + 2x Noctua A6x25 + Iceman Cooler heatspreaders
Ambient: 28-30C

*2x16GB DDR5-7400 34-43-43-30-2T
VDD/VDDQ 1.435V | TX VDDQ 1.40V | SA 1.15V | MC 1.40V* 










*2x16GB DDR5-7600 36-45-45-30-2T
VDD/VDDQ/TX VDDQ 1.45V | SA 1.15V | MC 1.40V*


----------



## jeiselramos

Baseline with 13900K + z690 Apex
1.35 vdd/vddq
Sa offset auto 0.893
Vddq tx 1.25
Mc auto


----------



## IronAge

Mappi75 said:


> Ok its nothing for my memory: G Skill F5-6400J3239G16G > should be hynix M-Die


New 0086 should be best for your M-Die AFAIK, 1505 worked well with M-Die for me, better than 1304 or 1403.


----------



## TZeroBR

owikh84 said:


> Sorry mate I did not save the profiles in txt or CMO format and now I have moved to Z690I UNIFY board.
> Maybe by looking at my MemTweakIt below will help you a bit?
> 
> 13900K SP101 (P110/E83) - P55/E43/R45
> Maximus Z690 EXTREME | BIOS 2103
> Sk-Hynix HMCG78AGBUA081N BA (Hynix A-Die) + 2x Noctua A6x25 + Iceman Cooler heatspreaders
> Ambient: 28-30C
> 
> *2x16GB DDR5-7400 34-43-43-30-2T
> VDD/VDDQ 1.435V | TX VDDQ 1.40V | SA 1.15V | MC 1.40V*
> 
> View attachment 2579206
> 
> 
> *2x16GB DDR5-7600 36-45-45-30-2T
> VDD/VDDQ/TX VDDQ 1.45V | SA 1.15V | MC 1.40V*
> View attachment 2579207


Thank you very much my friend
😇🙂


----------



## Mappi75

IronAge said:


> New 0086 should be best for your M-Die AFAIK, 1505 worked well with M-Die for me, better than 1304 or 1403.


All in all i am limited by the apex 2021 mainboard. Never cant go any further than 6.666Mhz
(nevertheless i can still be happy to achieve such values).

ATM i need 1,46v for running 6.666 32-40-40-28-2T (bios 2103)
(think same was needed on 0086)

1701 & 1720 needed only 1,40v on 0082 i need a step higher 1,42v
(1601 was a desaster).

1503/0082/0086 feels pretty good on my KS
is there any difference in OC/undervolting the cpu ?
Any recommendation for Alderlake cpu's ? Thanks.

1701 needed much more power consumption if i can remember right..?


----------



## killer01ws6

EEE-RAY said:


> Can someone with a hero please help me - I pulled off the VRM heatsinks to my hero to check something and wrecked the thermal pads.
> 
> What is the thickness of the OEM pads the VRMs and chokes?


I suggest if no quick answer to check Steve's vids on that board teardown at GamersNexus


----------



## dante`afk

owikh84 said:


> Sorry mate I did not save the profiles in txt or CMO format and now I have moved to Z690I UNIFY board.
> Maybe by looking at my MemTweakIt below will help you a bit?
> 
> 13900K SP101 (P110/E83) - P55/E43/R45
> Maximus Z690 EXTREME | BIOS 2103
> Sk-Hynix HMCG78AGBUA081N BA (Hynix A-Die) + 2x Noctua A6x25 + Iceman Cooler heatspreaders
> Ambient: 28-30C
> 
> *2x16GB DDR5-7400 34-43-43-30-2T
> VDD/VDDQ 1.435V | TX VDDQ 1.40V | SA 1.15V | MC 1.40V*
> 
> View attachment 2579206
> 
> 
> *2x16GB DDR5-7600 36-45-45-30-2T
> VDD/VDDQ/TX VDDQ 1.45V | SA 1.15V | MC 1.40V*
> View attachment 2579207


thanks dude!!! these helped! now to find the time to tweak some numbers


----------



## sblantipodi

nyxagamemnon said:


> Just some updates on some tests I've done.
> 
> Tested 2 13900ks on a z690 maximus extreme. Both have big issues running 6000+ on 4x dimms. Tested to 6200. While on the am5 x670e extreme it's a joke runs without issues.
> 
> Now the only other variable that remains is z690 and I'm suspecting z690 is inferior to z790 when it comes to 4x configs. But until I can get a z790 maximus extreme board I won't know and I'm debating if it's worth even testing.


never seen 4 dimms stable above 5.6GHz on Z690.


----------



## jeiselramos

sblantipodi said:


> never seen 4 dimms stable above 5.6GHz on Z690.


----------



## sblantipodi

jeiselramos said:


>


that is very rare and not the standard on Z690...
it seems that with Asus cheaper boards runs better than more expensive boards.

with that settings I can't even to 5.4MT/s


----------



## J_Lab4645

Mappi75 said:


> All in all i am limited by the apex 2021 mainboard. Never cant go any further than 6.666Mhz
> (nevertheless i can still be happy to achieve such values).
> 
> ATM i need 1,46v for running 6.666 32-40-40-28-2T (bios 2103)
> (think same was needed on 0086)
> 
> 1701 & 1720 needed only 1,40v on 0082 i need a step higher 1,42v
> (1601 was a desaster).
> 
> 1503/0082/0086 feels pretty good on my KS
> is there any difference in OC/undervolting the cpu ?
> Any recommendation for Alderlake cpu's ? Thanks.
> 
> 1701 needed much more power consumption if i can remember right..?



Hey, Can I make a comment/suggestion since I have the exact same cpu/mobo/ram combo as yourself? I thought I had a 'bad' Apex since I couldn't get anything above 6400mhz to run stable. (*But I was doing all my testing with both sticks installed*). So I decided, like so many others have suggested, to test 1 stick of ram at a time in each slot. I got 6800mhz to run on both Dimm_A1 and Dimm_B1 with *one* of the Gskill 6400mhz sticks. But on Dimm_A1 to achieve 6800mhz I had to really loosen up the timings to 32-45-45-102. Dimm_B1 ran at 6800mhz 32-41-41-32. As others have stated here Dimm_B1 is always going to be the stronger channel. Now I tested the other Gskill 6400mhz stick and that red-headed stepchild boot-looped at anything other than the XMP profile of 32-39-39-102/1.40V in either A1 or B1. No wonder everyone is binning ram. Not all modules are created equal! That second stick performs nothing like the other one. I couldn't believe the difference. So if you haven't done so already, check each ram stick individually!

For OC to 6800mhz 32-41-41-32 on *'good'* Gskill stick:
VDD 1.45_v_
VDDQ 1.45_v_
VDDQ TX 1.45_v_ (Auto)
IMC VDD 1.332_v_ (Auto)
SA 1.328_v_ (Auto)

Bios=1403
i9-12900KS/P5.2/E4.0
No Cache OC

*Haven't even tried to OC further with that stick or adjust timings/subs, I just plagiarized his hard work here: Next Gen performance and OC potential - G.Skill Trident Z5 RGB DDR5-6400 CL32 2x 16 GB kit test with teardown | igor'sLAB (igorslab.de)

.................and a few more ram kits ordered. Add to cart....yes please!

-and while I wait for a 'matched' twin brother here's the results from stick Alpha:


----------



## owikh84

dante`afk said:


> thanks dude!!! these helped! now to find the time to tweak some numbers
> 
> View attachment 2579238


Good job bro. What are your voltages?


----------



## bscool

Edit need to test more and will repost.


----------



## owikh84

sblantipodi said:


> never seen 4 dimms stable above 5.6GHz on Z690.


I did, managed to stabilize 4x16GB on the Z690 Extreme. 
You need strong CPU IMC, RAM sticks, mobo for that.

2021 Extreme - 4x16GB 5600 CL34 Samsung sticks
2022 Extreme - 4x16GB 6200 CL32 Hynix M die
2022 Extreme - 4x16GB 6400 CL30 Hynix A die



owikh84 said:


> 12900K SP88 - Stock
> Maximus Z690 EXTREME | BIOS 0070
> G.Skill F5-6000U3636E16GX2-TZ5RK (Samsung)
> *4x16GB DDR5-5600 34-36-36-56-2T
> VDD/VDDQ/TX VDDQ 1.35v | SA 1.25v (Auto) | MC 1.25v*
> View attachment 2542798
> 
> 
> Attached below is the RAM profile in case you would like to give it a try on your Extreme + 4x16GB Samsung. Kindly rename the CMO file to remove the .txt extension.
> SA is at auto = 1.25v, currently trying to reduce this.
> SA 0.9-1.1v: TM5 error within 60 mins
> SA 1.15v: TM5 error at 2 hours
> 
> Currently still waiting for the bubbles to disappear from both loops, this gonna take some time I guess.
> 
> View attachment 2542807
> 
> 
> View attachment 2542809
> 
> 
> View attachment 2542808
> 
> 
> My hardware setup:
> CPU: 12900K SP88
> M/B: ASUS ROG Maximus Z690 Extreme BIOS 0070
> RAM: 4x16GB G.Skill Trident Z5 RGB DDR5-6000C36 @ 5600 CL34 1.35v
> SSD: WD SN850 1TB + SN750 4TB
> HDD: Seagate Barracuda 4TB
> GPU: ASUS ROG Strix 3090 vBIOS V4 Rebar ON
> PSU: Corsair AX1500i + CableMod ModFlex Carbon/Black full cable set
> Case: Lian Li V3000
> Others: Lancool Vertical GPU Mount Bracket (modded) + ADT PCIe4 15cm Riser Cable + Jonsbo VC-20 Mini GPU Stand
> 
> Custom loop setup:
> CPU: EK-Velocity2 Nickel+Plexi D-RGB + TG Kryonaut
> GPU: EK-Vector Strix + Active Backplate Nickel+Plexi D-RGB + TG Kryonaut paste + TR Extreme Odyssey pads
> Rad: 2x EK PE 480mm
> Pump: 2x Laing D5 Vario
> Distro plate: WV Mech D5 Dual Loop
> Fans: 12x EK Vardar-S 120mm D-RGB
> Fittings: Bitspower+Barrow+Bykski
> Tubing: Barrow PETG 14mm





owikh84 said:


> 12900K SP98 (P108/E80) - Stock
> Maximus Z690 EXTREME | BIOS 1505
> G.Skill Trident Z5R F5-6400J3239G16GA2-TZ5RK (Hynix IC, Richtek PMIC)
> Kingston Fury Beast KF556C40BBK2-32 (Hynix IC, ANPEC PMIC)
> 120mm 120mm EK Vardar-S
> 
> *4x16GB DDR5-6200 32-38-38-32-2T
> VDD/VDDQ/TX VDDQ 1.45v | SA 0.925v | MC 1.35v
> View attachment 2564039
> *





owikh84 said:


> 12900KS SP95 (P104/E78) - P52/E42/E43 LLC7 1.24v
> Maximus Z690 EXTREME | BIOS 2004
> 2x16GB Sk-Hynix HMCG78AGBUA084N BA (Hynix A-Die) + Bitspower heatspreaders
> 2x16GB Sk-Hynix HMCG78AGBUA081N BA (Hynix A-Die) + Iceman Cooler heatspreaders
> 2x Noctua A6x25
> Ambient: 30C
> 
> *4x16GB DDR5-6400 30-38-38-28-2T
> VDD/VDDQ/TX VDDQ 1.40V | SA 1.25v | MC 1.35v*
> View attachment 2574653


----------



## dante`afk

owikh84 said:


> Good job bro. What are your voltages?


vdd/vddq 1.5v, vddqtx 1.4, SA 1.2. MC 1.45, SA and MC can possibly go lower but I didnt bother.

Was even able to tweak numbers a bit more.


----------



## sblantipodi

Are there someone who noticed IMC degradation at 1.35V ?


----------



## jeiselramos

jeiselramos said:


> Baseline with 13900K + z690 Apex
> 1.35 vdd/vddq
> Sa offset auto 0.893
> Vddq tx 1.25
> Mc auto
> 
> View attachment 2579211
> 
> View attachment 2579212


New 13900K arrived sp 103 111/88 instead of 99 109/81 and required different voltages for the same profile 
Sa offset mode + 0.015 (0.911)
Vddq tx 1.2 
Mc auto


----------



## Csavez™

jeiselramos said:


> New 13900K arrived sp 103 111/88 instead of 99 109/81 and required different voltages for the same profile
> Sa offset mode + 0.015 (0.911)
> Vddq tx 1.2
> Mc auto


What was the problem with sp99?


----------



## J_Lab4645

jeiselramos said:


> Baseline with 13900K + z690 Apex
> 1.35 vdd/vddq
> Sa offset auto 0.893
> Vddq tx 1.25
> Mc auto
> 
> View attachment 2579211
> 
> View attachment 2579212


Since you have 13th gen and using Z690 any hints of performance drop? Looks to be NO by your CBR23 score but just found this: Intel Core i9-13900K May Be up to 25% Slower on ASUS Z690 Motherboards (vs. Z790) | Hardware Times


----------



## Csavez™

J_Lab4645 said:


> Since you have 13th gen and using Z690 any hints of performance drop? Looks to be NO by your CBR23 score but just found this: Intel Core i9-13900K May Be up to 25% Slower on ASUS Z690 Motherboards (vs. Z790) | Hardware Times


Don't believe everything, this is also a paid test.


----------



## Nizzen

J_Lab4645 said:


> Since you have 13th gen and using Z690 any hints of performance drop? Looks to be NO by your CBR23 score but just found this: Intel Core i9-13900K May Be up to 25% Slower on ASUS Z690 Motherboards (vs. Z790) | Hardware Times


I have z690 apex and z790 apex. Both with 13900k. Same performance in CB 23


----------



## acoustic

J_Lab4645 said:


> Since you have 13th gen and using Z690 any hints of performance drop? Looks to be NO by your CBR23 score but just found this: Intel Core i9-13900K May Be up to 25% Slower on ASUS Z690 Motherboards (vs. Z790) | Hardware Times


It was an issue with using older ME as far as I know. Kind of old news already.


----------



## Csavez™

Sp97 p106/e81
The *stable 5700* needs 1.25v, the cb runs with much less, but that's all you need for the half-hour test.


----------



## 7empe

Csavez™ said:


> What was the problem with sp99?


I guess the problem was sp99


----------



## 7empe

Csavez™ said:


> Sp97 p106/e81
> The *stable 5700* needs 1.25v, the cb runs with much less, but that's all you need for the half-hour test.
> View attachment 2579564
> View attachment 2579564


Good temps. Most probably will do 58x just around 1.3V?


----------



## sblantipodi

I have a Z690 extreme with dual bios.

I bought the motherboard with a 12900K but before upgrading to raptor lake I upgraded both bioses to the latest 2103 bios.

Unfortunantly I upgraded to the latest ME firmware only one bios not the other.

Now I have two bios to the latest version 2103 but only one have the latest ME firmware.

I read somewhere that in order to support raptor lake both bioses should run the latest me firmware.

Is this true?

Will I crash my mobo if I switch to the second biso now that I have raptor but I haven't upgraded the latest ME firmware on the second bios?


----------



## Csavez™

7empe said:


> I guess the problem was sp99


Many people return the cpu because of the low sp number, they get a better one, but they can't do anything with it, just flash!


----------



## Csavez™

7empe said:


> Good temps. Most probably will do 58x just around 1.3V?


It doesn't work stably, and I've already been around 400w.


----------



## Falkentyne

Csavez™ said:


> Sp97 p106/e81
> The *stable 5700* needs 1.25v, the cb runs with much less, but that's all you need for the half-hour test.
> View attachment 2579564
> View attachment 2579564


Run some chess infinite analysis hashes and then let's see how stable you are 


Stockfish Development Versions


(BMI2 is hardest, then AVX2)



Arena Chess GUI


(engine must be installed and # of cores (threads) set up).


----------



## Csavez™

This is a gamer machine, I'm not preparing for NASA with it, which passes the half-hour cbr23 and the 1-hour aida test with four ticks, the games don't freeze during that time, i.e. it's stable!


----------



## jeiselramos

Csavez™ said:


> What was the problem with sp99?


Nothing, just binning.
The "worst" chip I'll sell to my friend who doesn't care


----------



## ESRCJ

This is my first time on a mainstream Intel platform after many years on Intel HEDT platforms and most recently AM4 for Zen 3. I ended up getting a Maximus Z790 Extreme, along with a 7600 CL36 kit. Pretty bummed it won't even boot at 7200. I'm getting the board is the issue, given that it's a 4-dimm board. I know this kit is listed on the QVL, but I should have known better.


----------



## TSportM

sblantipodi said:


> I have a Z690 extreme with dual bios.
> 
> I bought the motherboard with a 12900K but before upgrading to raptor lake I upgraded both bioses to the latest 2103 bios.
> 
> Unfortunantly I upgraded to the latest ME firmware only one bios not the other.
> 
> Now I have two bios to the latest version 2103 but only one have the latest ME firmware.
> 
> I read somewhere that in order to support raptor lake both bioses should run the latest me firmware.
> 
> Is this true?
> 
> Will I crash my mobo if I switch to the second biso now that I have raptor but I haven't upgraded the latest ME firmware on the second bios?



As long as you have the latest supporting bios it should boot OK to update the ME, just load optimized defaults, and update the ME (thats what i did)

cheers


----------



## Manonya

Do you think it is better to update Intel ME first and then the BIOS or the other way around?
I have the ASUS z690 Hero with BIOS 1601 and the ME Firmware is 16.0.0.1423. 

My system works now but I think it is not stable and the RAM is now only running at 4800 Mhz.

Before I updated the BIOS, the MC voltage was 1.296V (6000 Mhz) with XMP. Since the first BIOS update, the BIOS hardware monitor shows 1.119V at 4800 Mhz and 1.01V at 6000 Mhz. Is it possible that I have to set the values manually or could it be the Intel ME version because it is still the very old one?

Unfortunately, I have no experience with RAM overclocking and there are many settings here, which settings would be the base settings and can I ignore the others if I set manually? Also I can't find MC Voltage in the BIOS settings, which Voltage i need to set?

I disabled ASUS MCE, i want no CPU overclocking, only running the RAM at 6000 Mhz speed.


----------



## kmellz

So, still haven't gotten it returned (goddamn slow webstore...) and I'm thinking it might not be dead (13900kf, it booted at the start, after trying to tweak ram to old settings it just didn't want to boot again, old cpu works) but actually some super weird RAM problem from either board/cpu? 
Since if it was dead, it would presumably get stuck on the CPU qcode-led no? It does actually go past that, past the RAM one, but then it gets stuck there, VGA doesn't light up.
Would that mean a problem with training, or could it still be something on the CPU side, and might still be dead in that way?
Tried it with some older ram now also, still no boot, doesn't matter 1-2 sticks, also tried all 4 slots with mixed ram, nothing. Tons of bios resets.
Everything updated, anyone had any problems like this and got it to work?
Any test bioses around? shamino? save meeeeee 😂


----------



## Jacinto1023

I upgraded from 12700k to a 13700k on my Strix Z690 Gaming E and now my m.2 slots dont work except for the bottom right one. 

Any ideas?

I already updated bios to latest version.


----------



## bscool

Jacinto1023 said:


> I upgraded from 12700k to a 13700k on my Strix Z690 Gaming E and now my m.2 slots dont work except for the bottom right one.
> 
> Any ideas?
> 
> I already updated bios to latest version.


ME firmware needs to be updated. 

*NOTE for Z690*: You must update ME on your Z690 to properly support raptorlake RaptorLake Resources


----------



## FarmerJo

just stumbled across this thread hoping someone can help me. using a 2022 z690 apex with a 13900k and having issues raising memory voltages over 1.45. i can get settings stable at those volages but as soon as i increase the voltage i get errors. any weird settings i need to change on this board?


----------



## killer01ws6

bscool said:


> ME firmware needs to be updated.
> 
> *NOTE for Z690*: You must update ME on your Z690 to properly support raptorlake RaptorLake Resources


You would think folks would have read that by now, but you keep beating the drum bscool! maybe they will listen!


----------



## Jacinto1023

bscool said:


> ME firmware needs to be updated.
> 
> *NOTE for Z690*: You must update ME on your Z690 to properly support raptorlake RaptorLake Resources


Thank you so much man!

I was about to go crazy and buy a Z790 board lol


----------



## bscool

Jacinto1023 said:


> Thank you so much man!
> 
> I was about to go crazy and buy a Z790 board lol


I see the site is down for me. It should be up later if it is not working for you. Or download the ME from somewhere else. I can link it for you if you need.


----------



## Jacinto1023

I was able to get it done before the site went down. All is well now.

Once again thanks.


----------



## Papusan

What is the best approach to swap to 13900K? Turn off the pc then clear bios with the buttom back on the MB then put in the new Cpu? I usually clear bios before Cpu swap.
Edit. I mean should I clear cmos after I have taken out the Cpu from the socket.

And I have asked this before but got no clear answer... Is v2004 the better option to start with? And what mc is offered with v2004 for 13900K? Have flashed this bios version and flashed to ME: 16.1.25.2020 on my Z690 Apex board. Thanks.


----------



## sniperpowa

Papusan said:


> What is the best approach to swap to 13900K? Turn off the pc then clear bios with the buttom back on the MB then put in the new Cpu? I usually clear bios before Cpu swap.
> Edit. I mean should I clear cmos after I have taken out the Cpu from the socket.
> 
> And I have asked this before but got no clear answer... Is v2004 the better option to start with? And what mc is offered with v2004 for 13900K? Have flashed this bios version and flashed to ME: 16.1.25.2020 on my Z690 Apex board. Thanks.


I don’t think it matters when you’ve cleared it. The motherboard will sense new cpu installed. I swapped on a z690 formula been running adie at 7400 on 13900k.


----------



## IIDaXII

Hello,
I just installed my 4090 and I have a problem.
The speed of the pcie is in x8.
I can't find the solution to activate the x16.
I specify that I do not have an ssd in the M2_1 port of my extreme motherboard.
Can you help me ?


----------



## killer01ws6

IIDaXII said:


> Hello,
> I just installed my 4090 and I have a problem.
> The speed of the pcie is in x8.
> I can't find the solution to activate the x16.
> I specify that I do not have an ssd in the M2_1 port of my extreme motherboard.
> Can you help me ?


Hey bud,
Needs more information..
What board and the rest of the system info would also be good to know what drives you have installed etc.


----------



## IIDaXII

I have a Z690 Extreme with 2 NVME SSDs in slots M2_2 and M2_3
My 4090 is an MSI Suprim X.
Thanks


----------



## Gking62

killer01ws6 said:


> Hey bud,
> Needs more information..
> What board and the rest of the system info would also be good to know what drives you have installed etc.


check my sig, though I've recently sold my 3080 Ti along with prior 12900K, I have a Strix 4090 delivering tomorrow with pre-ordered EK full block installed later


----------



## badjz

IIDaXII said:


> I have a Z690 Extreme with 2 NVME SSDs in slots M2_2 and M2_3
> My 4090 is an MSI Suprim X.
> Thanks


is the GPU in slot 1 or 2? Pretty sure the latter will default to x8…


----------



## Tibby67

IIDaXII said:


> Hello,
> I just installed my 4090 and I have a problem.
> The speed of the pcie is in x8.
> I can't find the solution to activate the x16.
> I specify that I do not have an ssd in the M2_1 port of my extreme motherboard.
> Can you help me ?


I had this problem with my Asus Extreme z690 i had 2x M.2 Installed I was told to make sure I use only 1 M.2 closest to CPU sold both M.2 went with just one at 2GB stick.. x16 now..probably sharing to many lanes


----------



## IIDaXII

My 4090 is in slot 1.
My bios is up to date.
After a lot of testing, I restarted my system several times and I realize that it is back to x16.
Out of curiosity, I restart my system again and it goes back to x8...
It is driving me crazy...


----------



## Tibby67

IIDaXII said:


> My 4090 is in slot 1.
> My bios is up to date.
> After a lot of testing, I restarted my system several times and I realize that it is back to x16.
> Out of curiosity, I restart my system again and it goes back to x8...
> It is driving me crazy...


Sounds like its lane sharing with something...


----------



## IIDaXII

As indicated, I have nothing in the M2_1 slot and in the PCIEx16_2


----------



## 7empe

IIDaXII said:


> As indicated, I have nothing in the M2_1 slot and in the PCIEx16_2


Did you do anything with the CPU? Like resitting, switching to new CPU? It can be that some of the socket pins have bad contact with CPU. I had similar case, where one of the pins responsible for PCIEx16 was minimally bent. Had to straighten it up.


----------



## badjz

7empe said:


> Did you do anything with the CPU? Like resitting, switching to new CPU? It can be that some of the socket pins have bad contact with CPU. I had similar case, where one of the pins responsible for PCIEx16 was minimally bent. Had to straighten it up.


Hmmm, I recently moved to 13900k with a z690 extreme and I’m at x8 - although I’m in slot 2… is x8 correct or should it in fact be x16?


----------



## IIDaXII

7empe said:


> Did you do anything with the CPU? Like resitting, switching to new CPU? It can be that some of the socket pins have bad contact with CPU. I had similar case, where one of the pins responsible for PCIEx16 was minimally bent. Had to straighten it up.



No, I didn't touch the CPU.
Could it be the motherboard bios?


----------



## Aldair

Ehi ragazzi, ciao! Piacere di conoscervi. Vorrei chiedere informazioni sul mio PC

Z690 STRIX A-Gaming WIFI D4
12900KF ROG RUYGIN 2 6Ventilatore
1080TI OC STRIX
CORSAIR DDR4 2X32GB
NVME WD SN850 500 GB (Windows 11)
870 EVO SAMSUNG 500GB memoria AHCI
THOR PLATINUM II 1200W

Pensano che sia normale che il tempo di pubblicazione Windows sia di 25 secondi? Dall'inizio
nella mia vecchia configurazione con i7 7700k bastano solo 12 secondi sul desktop


----------



## 7empe

badjz said:


> Hmmm, I recently moved to 13900k with a z690 extreme and I’m at x8 - although I’m in slot 2… is x8 correct or should it in fact be x16?


Second slot will be 8x, first 16x. That’s fine.


----------



## affxct

I took a Strix Z690-A off a friend. I think my Arctic mount is bad, because my SP rating doesn’t make sense and idle temps were super high. Friend’s chip does 54/43/47 @ 1.26 Vmin and mine does 55/44/48 @ 1.26 Vmin (we use the same stress testing procedure). His max temp was 97 and mine was 91. He uses the LF 360 and I use the 420, same ambient temps during testing as well. Apparently my SP is 79 (89 P, 59 E) and his is 84 with 92 P. It doesn’t really make a lot of sense. Either SP is not accurate or it’s my cooler mount. But yeah, this is super annoying. I don’t really feel like messing with the mount for 2 days like with the Strix-F I used to own so I think I’m just gonna ditch it tbh.


----------



## sblantipodi

I noticed that VRM temp is much much lower on my Z690 Extreme since I upgraded from a 12900K to a 13900K.

is this normal?
I mean, why a CPU should lower VRM temp?

thanks


----------



## 7empe

sblantipodi said:


> I noticed that VRM temp is much much lower on my Z690 Extreme since I upgraded from a 12900K to a 13900K.
> 
> is this normal?
> I mean, why a CPU should lower VRM temp?
> 
> thanks


Due to lower vcore? Lower LLC? Lower AC_LL?


----------



## sblantipodi

7empe said:


> Due to lower vcore? Lower LLC? Lower AC_LL?


no, I have higher of everything now.


----------



## amirand74

I have the same problem with my Z690 Extreme. If I use until BIOS 1304 I get x16 but if I load BIOS 1403 or later I get x8


----------



## amirand74

Tibby67 said:


> Sounds like its lane sharing with something...


I have the same problem with my Z690 Extreme. If I use until BIOS 1304 I get x16 but if I load BIOS 1403 or later I get x8


----------



## akgis

ESRCJ said:


> This is my first time on a mainstream Intel platform after many years on Intel HEDT platforms and most recently AM4 for Zen 3. I ended up getting a Maximus Z790 Extreme, along with a 7600 CL36 kit. Pretty bummed it won't even boot at 7200. I'm getting the board is the issue, given that it's a 4-dimm board. I know this kit is listed on the QVL, but I should have known better.


Welcome to the club 

XMP I or II, try I, most of us on Z690 and older 12900k cant do XMP out of the box aswell you have to massage it like increasing/decreasing system agent voltage, imput voltage, ram voltages, imc voltages, lose up timings etc.

But all in all the 13k is a better DDR5 plataform than the 12k, most ppl are getting better memory OC with same z690 mobo but 13k cpu


----------



## 673714

Woohooo! Got lucky earlier today and ordered a 13900K before it went out of stock again seconds later 

Should be here no later than Monday, and it was $65 off, making it a bit cheaper than the 13900KF


----------



## IIDaXII

amirand74 said:


> I have the same problem with my Z690 Extreme. If I use until BIOS 1304 I get x16 but if I load BIOS 1403 or later I get x8


and you have nothing in the M2_1?


----------



## amirand74

IIDaXII said:


> and you have nothing in the M2_1?


No. M2.1 is empty. I only use M2.2 and M2.3.


----------



## IIDaXII

I'm not the only one then... it is to understand nothing... since last night everything was fine my 4090 was in x16. and tonight I go back to the pc, I restart it and it is in x8....


----------



## TSportM

amirand74 said:


> I have the same problem with my Z690 Extreme. If I use until BIOS 1304 I get x16 but if I load BIOS 1403 or later I get x8


where are you confirming this information ?

cheers


----------



## amirand74

IIDaXII said:


> I'm not the only one then... it is to understand nothing... since last night everything was fine my 4090 was in x16. and tonight I go back to the pc, I restart it and it is in x8....


With the BIOS 1403 or later, I had the same problem. In some restart, x16 until switch off the computer. In BIOS 1304 always x16. I have created ticket in Asus support but no response.


----------



## amirand74

TSportM said:


> where are you confirming this information ?
> 
> cheers


I tested several BIOS in my motherboard. I have 1304 now and it's perfect. I don't know if in other motherboard is the same. The original idea is here, but I confirmed BIOS 1304 is OK. The ASUS response is very strange (Hardware Failure?)






OFFICIAL Bios ver. 2004 will not allow bios flashback THREAD - Page 5


Hi all, It looks like at least a couple of us have an issue flashing back to earlier bios with ver. 2004. Both with the UEFI method and the usb flash back will not work (3 usb drives and none worked). The bios setting to allow this is enabled. I have a Z690 Hero. If you have this issue...



rog.asus.com


----------



## IIDaXII

TSportM said:


> where are you confirming this information ?
> 
> cheers


on my side I can not say from which bios it appeared. Since the beginning of the construction of my pc I had an ssd in port M2_1. It was when I installed my 4090 that I transferred my ssd to port M2_2. It is from there that I checked the PCIE speeds and identified the problem. This morning I turn on my pc and it is x16 again...


----------



## adi518

Bought the Extreme yesterday. Newegg had it on a combo deal with 12700K for $1K. This is a massive thread. Read a lot of comments about XMP and stability issues. What kits are best for this board?


----------



## Nizzen

adi518 said:


> Bought the Extreme yesterday. Newegg had it on a combo deal with 12700K for $1K. This is a massive thread. Read a lot of comments about XMP and stability issues. What kits are best for this board?


Best for latency is still maybe hynix m-die based kits. G.skill up to 6400, corsair up to 6200, Team up to 6400 etc...
G.skill 6600 is m-die on old kits, and a-die on new kits.


High bandwidth is hynix a-die based kits.
G.skill 6800 and up, team 7200 and up etc...


----------



## adi518

Thanks. Should I go for a dual kit or a quad kit?


----------



## Gking62

adi518 said:


> Thanks. Should I go for a dual kit or a quad kit?


IMHO the fastest dual (2x32) set you can find for the best overall stability which is why I'm waiting since I grabbed my 5600 Kingston set. I have the 13900K humming right along and would dearly love to try the 2x32 7000 G.Skill set but it's nowhere to be seen much less 6600.


----------



## sblantipodi

adi518 said:


> Thanks. Should I go for a dual kit or a quad kit?


4 sticks is a real pain if you want to achieve really stable frequency.
I have 4 sticks of Hynix 6.2MT/s from Corsair and can't go past 5.2GHz.

I can push them at 5.6MT/s but there are always some error from time to time at that frequency.


----------



## killer01ws6

IIDaXII said:


> My 4090 is in slot 1.
> My bios is up to date.
> After a lot of testing, I restarted my system several times and I realize that it is back to x16.
> Out of curiosity, I restart my system again and it goes back to x8...
> It is driving me crazy...


This seems to be a thing all of a sudden, not sure if it is combo related to card and Mobo but...


----------



## Papusan

IIDaXII said:


> I'm not the only one then... it is to understand nothing... since last night everything was fine my 4090 was in x16. and tonight I go back to the pc, I restart it and it is in x8....


Several see the same. I expect it's a bios problem. Even der8auer experience the bug... See video post above. A sum up....

It seems problems with the newer boards will never end


----------



## TSportM

sblantipodi said:


> I noticed that VRM temp is much much lower on my Z690 Extreme since I upgraded from a 12900K to a 13900K.
> 
> is this normal?
> I mean, why a CPU should lower VRM temp?
> 
> thanks


Same here, chipset temperature, etc, its just a better cpu


----------



## Gking62

deleted


----------



## Kampers

Hello can get help witch oc my 13900k? Before have 12900k @ 5.2 / 4.2 (4.3) 1.25v LLC 4

My setup it's:

SP P 109 / E 85 - SP101


Asus ROG Maximus Z690 Hero
13900k
Corsair Dominator DDR5, 6400 MHz, CL32-39-39-28 2x16gb
Strix 3090 OC
Corsair HX 1000i
Corsair 7000x RGB
Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut Extreme 1g


----------



## Nizzen

Kampers said:


> Hello can get help witch oc my 13900k? Before have 12900k @ 5.2 / 4.2 (4.3) 1.25v LLC 4
> 
> My setup it's:
> 
> SP P 109 / E 85 - SP101
> 
> 
> Asus ROG Maximus Z690 Hero
> 13900k
> Corsair Dominator DDR5, 6400 MHz, CL32-39-39-28 2x16gb
> Strix 3090 OC
> Corsair HX 1000i
> Corsair 7000x RGB
> Thermal Grizzly Kryonaut Extreme 1g
> 
> View attachment 2581664


Use stock 13900k. But oc memory. Put watercooling on dimms 😎
Memory OC is meta


----------



## Gking62

deleted...


----------



## Csavez™

I tried another 13900k, no "delid" yet.










*5700 @ 1.21v, 10m cbr23 test.







*


----------



## JAYSIMPLE

Will the z690 maximus hero run corsair dominator 2x 16gb 7200mhz memory cas 34?


----------



## sblantipodi

Csavez™ said:


> I tried another 13900k, no "delid" yet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *5700 @ 1.21v, 10m cbr23 test.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


Do you have a beefy custom loop?


----------



## shamino1978

ive put up 2201 here to match the 0801 of Z790 updates





RaptorLake Resources


i will use this as a collection of test bioses/tools/info targeted towards Raptorlake + z69/790 NOTE for Z690: You must update ME on your Z690 to properly support raptorlake (if you are on dual bioses then you need to do this to both bioses) 1) d/l and install ME driver...



rog.asus.com


----------



## Nizzen

shamino1978 said:


> ive put up 2201 here to match the 0801 of Z790 updates
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RaptorLake Resources
> 
> 
> i will use this as a collection of test bioses/tools/info targeted towards Raptorlake + z69/790 NOTE for Z690: You must update ME on your Z690 to properly support raptorlake (if you are on dual bioses then you need to do this to both bioses) 1) d/l and install ME driver...
> 
> 
> 
> rog.asus.com


Nice work! Good morning Saturday from Norway 😍


----------



## Kampers

Csavez™ said:


> I tried another 13900k, no "delid" yet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *5700 @ 1.21v, 10m cbr23 test.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


Can you send BIOS setup? 😃


----------



## Agent-A01

shamino1978 said:


> ive put up 2201 here to match the 0801 of Z790 updates
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RaptorLake Resources
> 
> 
> i will use this as a collection of test bioses/tools/info targeted towards Raptorlake + z69/790 NOTE for Z690: You must update ME on your Z690 to properly support raptorlake (if you are on dual bioses then you need to do this to both bioses) 1) d/l and install ME driver...
> 
> 
> 
> rog.asus.com


Can you post Z790 Prime A too boss? Playing around with one but bios is older, 0502.


----------



## Gking62

updated successfully to 2201 on both BIOSs, I noticed new entry "XMP Tweaked" what is the nature of this?

ran a quick C-BENCH: multi core, 40157 pts, single core 2258 pts, this any good?


----------



## adi518

I got my board from Newegg today (Extreme) and it has blemishes and a massive dent, and paint that has come off right above the SATA ports. Upon further inspection, it also had dust around the GPU slot. Clearly a used unit. So disappointing with a board this expensive. Is that something causal with NE? to get a used board when you pay for a brand new one? how do they do such stupid mistakes? I filed a return obviously, but it's still quite infuriating.


----------



## TZeroBR

Guys, I really need someone to help me with this problem.

I installed 13900KF on my Z690 FORMULA.

Even using any performance settings (AUTO/ASUS/INTEL) in BIOS 2103 and 2201 (Beta) my E-Cores are ALWAYS fixed at 3,500Mhz (???)
I've tried everything (even lowering the frequency of the P-Cores) but the E-Cores are fixed at the same frequency (even choosing alternatives frequencies Per-Core)

Follow the photos below and I would appreciate it if someone discovers the mystery (I'm even starting to think the cooler is too tight)





















































Does anyone have any idea what could be going on??? Could the cooler be putting too much pressure on the CPU?


----------



## seranidy

Gking62 said:


> updated successfully to 2201 on both BIOSs, I noticed new entry "XMP Tweaked" what is the nature of this?
> 
> ran a quick C-BENCH: multi core, 40157 pts, single core 2258 pts, this any good?


It "optimizes" the manufacturer set XMP profile


----------



## Csavez™

Kampers said:


> Can you send BIOS setup? 😃


Txt or cmo ?


----------



## TZeroBR

.


----------



## Mappi75

Any thought/experiences with Beta Bios 2201 and 12th gen cpus ?
(got a 12900KS)

Edit: test it now myself..

CB23 runs a lots faster on default bios setting:

*Default* Bios 2103 (no changes / all unlocked / LLC4):
Auto / 5,2 GHz / *CB23: 27.695 

Default* Bios 2201 (no changes / all unlocked / LLC3):
Auto / 5,2 Ghz / *CB23: 28.748 *

With Bios 2103 i only reach over 28.000 point with undervolting the cpu like this:

Bios / GHz / CPU-Z / CB23 / CPU max. / CPU Avg. / max Watt /
1,38v / 5,1 GHz / 1,199v / 28.331 / 73 / 67 / 242.481w
1,37v / 5,1 GHz / 1,190v / 28.291 / 71 / 67 / 232.332w
1,36v / 5,1 GHz / 1,181v / 28.320 / 71 / 66 / 230.234w
1,35v / 5,1 GHz / 1,172v / 28,203 / 70 / 66 / 223.336w
1,34v / 5,1 GHz / 1,163v / 27.821 / 69 / 65 / 225.204w

1,38v / 5,2 GHz / 1,199v / 28.671 / 74 / 68 / 252.878w
1,36v / 5,2 GHz / 1,181v / 28.666 / 72 / 67 / 241.175w
1,35v / 5,2 GHz / 1,163v / 28.622 / 71 / 66 / 236.292w

Edit: ok 2103 uses via default LLC4 and 2201 uses LLC3


----------



## snakeeyes111

No, my slot b died. 6800max 😒. Start testing this one and reconized something went wrong. 

2022er apex gone. R.i.p honey


----------



## bhav

snakeeyes111 said:


> No, my slot b died. 6800max 😒. Start testing this one and reconized something went wrong.
> 
> 2022er apex gone. R.i.p honey


Damn, I've been OCing with crazy voltages on multiple Asus DDR4 boards and never ran into any issues.

So many people are having problems with Asus Z690 / Z790 on both DDR4 and DDR5, whats gone wrong with Asus?


----------



## Kampers

Csavez™ said:


> Txt or cmo ?


Txt


----------



## snakeeyes111

Not asus fault. Used board a lot and swap many times dimms and cpus. 
Its also xoc used. Maybe only Socket isnt fine.


----------



## sblantipodi

Mappi75 said:


> Any thought/experiences with Beta Bios 2201 and 12th gen cpus ?
> 
> Edit: test it now myself..
> 
> CB23 runs a lots faster on default bios setting:
> 
> *Default* Bios 2103 (no changes / all unlocked / LLC4):
> Auto / 5,2 GHz / *CB23: 27.695
> 
> Default* Bios 2201 (no changes / all unlocked / LLC3):
> Auto / 5,2 Ghz / *CB23: 28.748 *
> 
> With Bios 2103 i only reach over 28.000 point with undervolting the cpu like this:
> 
> Bios / GHz / CPU-Z / CB23 / CPU max. / CPU Avg. / max Watt /
> 1,38v / 5,1 GHz / 1,199v / 28.331 / 73 / 67 / 242.481w
> 1,37v / 5,1 GHz / 1,190v / 28.291 / 71 / 67 / 232.332w
> 1,36v / 5,1 GHz / 1,181v / 28.320 / 71 / 66 / 230.234w
> 1,35v / 5,1 GHz / 1,172v / 28,203 / 70 / 66 / 223.336w
> 1,34v / 5,1 GHz / 1,163v / 27.821 / 69 / 65 / 225.204w
> 
> 1,38v / 5,2 GHz / 1,199v / 28.671 / 74 / 68 / 252.878w
> 1,36v / 5,2 GHz / 1,181v / 28.666 / 72 / 67 / 241.175w
> 1,35v / 5,2 GHz / 1,163v / 28.622 / 71 / 66 / 236.292w
> 
> Edit: ok 2103 uses via default LLC4 and 2201 uses LLC3


What CPU are you using?


----------



## Mappi75

@sblantipodi

12900KS


----------



## affxct

I’m getting a Z690 Hero soon, I can’t wait. Kinda missed owning an ASUS board. I’m tempted to daily both boards.


----------



## sblantipodi

Are there someone using 13900k on z690?
I found that 5.4GHz all cores on Pcores is way better than 5.5GHz all cores...
I loose so few for such less heat... 

can't understand why Intel and Asus pushes 5.5GHz on PCores by default, it's so silly


----------



## Nizzen

sblantipodi said:


> Are there someone using 13900k on z690?
> I found that 5.4GHz all cores on Pcores is way better than 5.5GHz all cores...
> I loose so few for such less heat...
> 
> can't understand why Intel and Asus pushes 5.5GHz on PCores by default, it's so silly


Here 5.5ghz is 45-48c in gaming. Need 5.8ghz to see over 60c


----------



## sblantipodi

Nizzen said:


> Here 5.5ghz is 45-48c in gaming. Need 5.8ghz to see over 60c


A CPU is not meant for gaming only xD
I'm talking about all cores frequency that is not a gaming scenario.


----------



## Gking62

So, anyone with a 13900K using faster than QVL approved 64GB (2x32) kits DDR5 at XMP, e.g. 6400+? I'm pretty certain some have run the 32 GB kits successfully, I'm just interested in 64GB kits only. Its my understanding that the improved IMC on the 13900K could allow for this along with beta 2201 bios, thanks.


----------



## IronAge

sblantipodi said:


> I'm talking about all cores frequency that is not a gaming scenario.


you shall not use your P-Cores for transcoding your x-rated collection.


----------



## HanSeol

I upgraded my rig with 13900K (P110) on MZ690H EVA (22.04 manufactured)

On bios 2103, 2201 I can boot it up about 7800 with 6800J34 TZ5 32gb kit, but I can't even stable it loosen timings 7200++
Sometimes It can pass 7200C32 Karhu 6400% but after reboot It shows me error on 6~7% immediately.
I tried almost every timings, vdd combos I can find.
Strangely for 7000, I can stable it with C32-40-40 Karhu 10000%

Is this problem with my CPU's IMC? or Board(itself or BIOS)
I am noob for xoc kind of things so It maybe my skill problem ;p any advices?


----------



## seranidy

HanSeol said:


> I upgraded my rig with 13900K (P110) on MZ690H EVA (22.04 manufactured)
> 
> On bios 2103, 2201 I can boot it up about 7800 with 6800J34 TZ5 32gb kit, but I can't even stable it loosen timings 7200++
> Sometimes It can pass 7200C32 Karhu 6400% but after reboot It shows me error on 6~7% immediately.
> I tried almost every timings, vdd combos I can find.
> Strangely for 7000, I can stable it with C32-40-40 Karhu 10000%
> 
> Is this problem with my CPU's IMC? or Board(itself or BIOS)
> I am noob for xoc kind of things so It maybe my skill problem ;p any advices?


Its possible your temps are fluctuating a ton, but you should try and get a good boot to where you can pass Karhu and check your rtl/iol's in asrock timing configurator and lock those in bios.


----------



## HanSeol

seranidy said:


> Its possible your temps are fluctuating a ton, but you should try and get a good boot to where you can pass Karhu and check your rtl/iol's in asrock timing configurator and lock those in bios.


I'm active cooling my rams with 12x25 rn, and I checked subtimings with memtweakit but there is no difference when 7200 passes and showed me error after reboot.
anyways thank you for advice!


----------



## skhitzo

Mappi75 said:


> Any thought/experiences with Beta Bios 2201 and 12th gen cpus ?
> (got a 12900KS)
> 
> Edit: test it now myself..
> 
> CB23 runs a lots faster on default bios setting:
> 
> *Default* Bios 2103 (no changes / all unlocked / LLC4):
> Auto / 5,2 GHz / *CB23: 27.695
> 
> Default* Bios 2201 (no changes / all unlocked / LLC3):
> Auto / 5,2 Ghz / *CB23: 28.748 *
> 
> With Bios 2103 i only reach over 28.000 point with undervolting the cpu like this:
> 
> Bios / GHz / CPU-Z / CB23 / CPU max. / CPU Avg. / max Watt /
> 1,38v / 5,1 GHz / 1,199v / 28.331 / 73 / 67 / 242.481w
> 1,37v / 5,1 GHz / 1,190v / 28.291 / 71 / 67 / 232.332w
> 1,36v / 5,1 GHz / 1,181v / 28.320 / 71 / 66 / 230.234w
> 1,35v / 5,1 GHz / 1,172v / 28,203 / 70 / 66 / 223.336w
> 1,34v / 5,1 GHz / 1,163v / 27.821 / 69 / 65 / 225.204w
> 
> 1,38v / 5,2 GHz / 1,199v / 28.671 / 74 / 68 / 252.878w
> 1,36v / 5,2 GHz / 1,181v / 28.666 / 72 / 67 / 241.175w
> 1,35v / 5,2 GHz / 1,163v / 28.622 / 71 / 66 / 236.292w
> 
> Edit: ok 2103 uses via default LLC4 and 2201 uses LLC3


Where can we download this 2201 bios please?


----------



## roooo

skhitzo said:


> Where can we download this 2201 bios please?








RaptorLake Resources


i will use this as a collection of test bioses/tools/info targeted towards Raptorlake + z69/790 NOTE for Z690: You must update ME on your Z690 to properly support raptorlake (if you are on dual bioses then you need to do this to both bioses) 1) d/l and install ME driver...



rog.asus.com


----------



## sblantipodi

skhitzo said:


> Where can we download this 2201 bios please?


they don't even write a changelog for beta bios, it's like, try it and let me know if it burn your mobo 
never more an asus product.


----------



## Madness11

Guys anyone facing problem with 690 asus + rtx 4090 ?? boot loop ... Coz sometime i cant load to windows , with reboot only . Got z69 hero and rtx 4090 msi liquid


----------



## Madness11

Csavez™ said:


> I tried another 13900k, no "delid" yet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *5700 @ 1.21v, 10m cbr23 test.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


What Vcore u use in BIOS ?? ))


----------



## sblantipodi

Madness11 said:


> Guys anyone facing problem with 690 asus + rtx 4090 ?? boot loop ... Coz sometime i cant load to windows , with reboot only . Got z69 hero and rtx 4090 msi liquid


there is a dedicated thread on this.








RTX4090 and boot loop


Hi all, I have a Corsair HX1200i and an MSI Suprim X RTX 4090. PC works well until I have no nvidia driver, as soon as I install nvidia driver the PC reboots abruptly, then windows starts, shows the desktop and reboot, this happen in a loop. If I uninstall nvidia drivers PC works well. Is my...




www.overclock.net


----------



## Madness11

sblantipodi said:


> there is a dedicated thread on this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RTX4090 and boot loop
> 
> 
> Hi all, I have a Corsair HX1200i and an MSI Suprim X RTX 4090. PC works well until I have no nvidia driver, as soon as I install nvidia driver the PC reboots abruptly, then windows starts, shows the desktop and reboot, this happen in a loop. If I uninstall nvidia drivers PC works well. Is my...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net


Ye i know that(( So its sad


----------



## sulalin

Does anyone use the 13th generation CPU plus Z690 motherboard in ADIE overclocking is worse than the 12th generation CPU plus 690!!! The high frequency can't go up at all. My 12900KF can easily achieve 8000-8533MHX on the Z690 APEX with air cooling 16G *2 Changed the 13th generation U, updated the latest ME, and changed the 2.3 version of the BIOS, and it can't open the 8200MHZ and above, and even the 8200 is unstable!!!

Is this the reason why Qiangpo wants you to spend money to upgrade the Z790 motherboard!!!

Has anyone noticed the difference in this too!!!

So I can only play some small running points to get through the disappointing 13th generation U+Z690 APEX!


Spoiler: It's too boring~ It won't exceed the CPU, so I can just run around to pass the time SP:77. …


----------



## acoustic

I think your 13900K just has a weak IMC.


----------



## stahlhart

Has anyone else ever seen an error like this in their logs?

I am assuming that this is due to the installation of a new SSD (a WD Black SN850X 1Tb) in motherboard slot M2_3, which replaced a WD 500Gb previously there.










I never saw the error before -- does having two 1Tb drives in M2_2 and M2_3 trigger some sort of RAID function in the motherboard/chipset? Or did I just get a bad drive? Everything appears to be working correctly with it, nothing bad reported in SMART monitoring, etc.

I don't see any RAID options in the motherboard BIOS to enable or disable -- I'm not even sure why Windows considers this to be a "RAID port", since I've never had anything except individual standalone drives set up. I can't find RAID referenced anywhere, for that matter -- not in the registry, Disk Management, anywhere. I don't have Intel RST installed. Firmware on both of the SSDs is up to date.

Is this just something benign that I can safely ignore? It's just annoying to have the event logs get filled up with stuff like this that gets triggered at every boot/reboot.


----------



## 050

I've been playing with the "cpu core auto voltage cap" and it oddly seems like it is working backwards - or far more likely there's something I'm not fully understanding. If I run with a set of v/f curve points, and a cpu core auto voltage cap of 1.5v, the 4 cores I have allowed to boost to 5.8ghz boost to 5.8ghz. If I increase the cpu core auto voltage cap to 1.52v, they seem to only want to boost to 5.7ghz - almost as if it is somehow stretching out the v/f curve or something. For now I've just dialed it a bit lower to 1.49v and it seems to work great, boosting to effective clocks of 5.74ghz. Anyone seen something like this behavior? I feel like there's just an interaction between the cpu core auto voltage cap and the v/f curve points that I'm not fully seeing.
On a somewhat related note, it would be nice if v/f points 7,8,9,and 10 were not all targeting the same frequency. Anyone know if there's a way to change that?I'd like to be able to have 7=5.4ghz, 8=5.5ghz, 9=5.6ghz, 10=5.7ghz, and 11=5.8ghz, so that the curve could be adjusted more finely in the region that most of the boosting is happening.


----------



## SuperMumrik

sulalin said:


> Has anyone noticed the difference in this too!!!


Yes, there is definitely something iffy with raptor lake and a-die on z690 Apex(2022).
I think it will be resolved with a new bios! 😊

Edit: I switched back from a-die to m-die because of bios support. However, m-die seems to be even stronger on raptor lake


----------



## Shawnb99

I'm about to RMA my Extreme for a 2nd time for non locking GPU slot but part me wonders *** is the point, I'll just get same issue again. If I could get more then pennies on the dollar for it I'd wash my hands of everything and sell it all.


----------



## sulalin

I'm pretty sure 13th Gen CPU plus Z690 APEX for memory overclocking is a completely different thing than 12th Gen CPU plus Z690 APEX for memory overclocking!!!!! 

I've been on Z690 APEX + 12900KF for almost a year now The experience of memory overclocking is completely different from the current 13th generation plus Z690 APEX overclocking!!!! 

The voltage is very different, especially the ADIE memory with the same TX VDDQ & MC V & DRAM VPP & DARM VDDQ/VDD Using different CPUs on the same board is a completely different thing!

Of course, I have been expecting that this can be solved through BIOS update and tuning~ But in terms of interests, the authorities certainly hope that you will spend more money to buy a new Z790 motherboard! This is unavoidable

Let us quietly see if the Z690 APEX will be released!!!!!!


Spoiler: This is the overclocking of 12900KF+Z690+ADIE


































































Spoiler: This is the overclocking of 13700KF+Z690+ADIE






































Damn SP:77


----------



## affxct

HanSeol said:


> I upgraded my rig with 13900K (P110) on MZ690H EVA (22.04 manufactured)
> 
> On bios 2103, 2201 I can boot it up about 7800 with 6800J34 TZ5 32gb kit, but I can't even stable it loosen timings 7200++
> Sometimes It can pass 7200C32 Karhu 6400% but after reboot It shows me error on 6~7% immediately.
> I tried almost every timings, vdd combos I can find.
> Strangely for 7000, I can stable it with C32-40-40 Karhu 10000%
> 
> Is this problem with my CPU's IMC? or Board(itself or BIOS)
> I am noob for xoc kind of things so It maybe my skill problem ;p any advices?


7000 on a Z690 Hero sounds about right for a daily limit. If you know what you’re doing as 7200+ seems like a brick wall but 7000 hits 10K Karhu with ease, then unfortunately 7200 is not happening. It might happen but you’re going to have to test for hours and hours to determine exactly what breaks re-train stability. I’ve been down that road to get 6400 working with Samsung on my Z690-F early this year. It took days and the solution was nonsensical. 6400% is close though so I have faith in you.


----------



## roooo

stahlhart said:


> View attachment 2582842
> 
> 
> Has anyone else ever seen an error like this in their logs?
> 
> I am assuming that this is due to the installation of a new SSD (a WD Black SN850X 1Tb) in motherboard slot M2_3, which replaced a WD 500Gb previously there.
> 
> View attachment 2582847
> 
> 
> I never saw the error before -- does having two 1Tb drives in M2_2 and M2_3 trigger some sort of RAID function in the motherboard/chipset? Or did I just get a bad drive? Everything appears to be working correctly with it, nothing bad reported in SMART monitoring, etc.
> 
> I don't see any RAID options in the motherboard BIOS to enable or disable -- I'm not even sure why Windows considers this to be a "RAID port", since I've never had anything except individual standalone drives set up. I can't find RAID referenced anywhere, for that matter -- not in the registry, Disk Management, anywhere. I don't have Intel RST installed. Firmware on both of the SSDs is up to date.
> 
> Is this just something benign that I can safely ignore? It's just annoying to have the event logs get filled up with stuff like this that gets triggered at every boot/reboot.


Just to rule that out: did you update Intel ME and BIOS properly? Aside from that, it appears the WD SN850s are prone to issues with several mobos/BIOS. I have one, too, and had issues with the drive powering down several seconds to minutes after boot in both Windows 10 and Linux on a Hero Z690. I solved this by simply swapping the drive from M2.3 to M2.2. If that won't help, I suggest returning the drive if you have the chance and get another model. Background story here: the issue had initially only popped up with my 12900K after a particular kernel update on Linux. A fix was released shortly after and everything was fine. Then after I got my 13900K, I had to update BIOS and Intel ME to solve some other issues. After that update, the M2 issue reappeared, but now also in Windows.

Cheers,
r.


----------



## kmellz

SO..... second time's the charm???
Got my warranty replacement 13900KF today, after the first one just gave up and died when I was starting to dial in memory oc again  Like literally first start went ok, back to bios and memory and.. ded. Fun!
So far this one seems ok, good temps, idling <30C in windows (ambient ~20C, pump on 100% fans 50%) gonna give it a few test runs, but man the SP.. and it doesn't seem bugged either, SP 99, P111, E76..... that's gotta be illegaly low 😂

First run with stock so unlimited for a time, Cbench23 101C, second run with 280W limit, 94C so tweaking ahead! And not dead yet! woooh. 39,7k points, and yeah the limit did **** all for the score, just stupid with 320W powerdraw by default on this board with no gain


----------



## Nizzen

sulalin said:


> Does anyone use the 13th generation CPU plus Z690 motherboard in ADIE overclocking is worse than the 12th generation CPU plus 690!!! The high frequency can't go up at all. My 12900KF can easily achieve 8000-8533MHX on the Z690 APEX with air cooling 16G *2 Changed the 13th generation U, updated the latest ME, and changed the 2.3 version of the BIOS, and it can't open the 8200MHZ and above, and even the 8200 is unstable!!!
> 
> Is this the reason why Qiangpo wants you to spend money to upgrade the Z790 motherboard!!!
> 
> Has anyone noticed the difference in this too!!!
> 
> So I can only play some small running points to get through the disappointing 13th generation U+Z690 APEX!
> 
> 
> Spoiler: It's too boring~ It won't exceed the CPU, so I can just run around to pass the time SP:77. …
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2582821
> 
> View attachment 2582824
> 
> View attachment 2582819
> 
> View attachment 2582826
> 
> View attachment 2582820
> 
> View attachment 2582817
> 
> View attachment 2582818
> 
> View attachment 2582823
> 
> View attachment 2582822
> 
> View attachment 2582825
> 
> View attachment 2582816


You are comparing "the best 12900k imc in the world" vs a unlucky 13900k imc


----------



## stahlhart

roooo said:


> Just to rule that out: did you update Intel ME and BIOS properly? Aside from that, it appears the WD SN850s are prone to issues with several mobos/BIOS. I have one, too, and had issues with the drive powering down several seconds to minutes after boot in both Windows 10 and Linux on a Hero Z690. I solved this by simply swapping the drive from M2.3 to M2.2. If that won't help, I suggest returning the drive if you have the chance and get another model. Background story here: the issue had initially only popped up with my 12900K after a particular kernel update on Linux. A fix was released shortly after and everything was fine. Then after I got my 13900K, I had to update BIOS and Intel ME to solve some other issues. After that update, the M2 issue reappeared, but now also in Windows.
> 
> Cheers,
> r.


Thank you for the response -- I'm fairly certain that I have the BIOS (2103) and firmware (1885) in place okay, though to be honest I am not aware of any way to verify this.

I thought it weould be okay, because the boot drive is an SN850, and there have been no problems at all here -- I could have gotten a second identical one, but I went for the 850X because it was a little cheaper and a little faster. Lesson learned.

There don't appear to be any other issues apart from the log error getting thrown whenever Windows starts. At some point I'll probably switch it out.


----------



## SuperMumrik

Nizzen said:


> You are comparing "the best 12900k imc in the world" vs a unlucky 13900k imc


It's definitely not that simple 😝
My rpl imc is stronger then my adl imc and tested on z790 apex, that also applies to the sticks.


----------



## Simkin

RMA approved on my Z690 Apex, Z790 Apex should be on its way this week. 

Not sure if i just keep my 12900K or go for the 13900K, in gaming how is the temp on the 13900k compared to the 12900K? My H170i kept my 12900K arund 60-65c


----------



## affxct

Simkin said:


> RMA approved on my Z690 Apex, Z790 Apex should be on its way this week.
> 
> Not sure if i just keep my 12900K or go for the 13900K, in gaming how is the temp on the 13900k compared to the 12900K? My H170i kept my 12900K arund 60-65c


They gave you a Z790?


----------



## IIDaXII

Shawnb99 said:


> I'm about to RMA my Extreme for a 2nd time for non locking GPU slot but part me wonders *** is the point, I'll just get same issue again. If I could get more then pennies on the dollar for it I'd wash my hands of everything and sell it all.


what do you mean by unlocked gpu slot?


----------



## kmellz

Initial testing seems promising! Just set up most the basic stuff and time for some PoE gaming, see if manages to survive som more random core loads. Got it set so it scales higher with fewer cores and so on.
IMC seems to be a lot better than my 12700KF, can boot up to 4266mhz atm, currently running 4200mhz with actually lower timings than my 12700 did 4100mhz at (same ram), nice. Can probably push it some more!


----------



## Simkin

affxct said:


> They gave you a Z790?


Had to pay the difference.


----------



## tubs2x4

Shawnb99 said:


> I'm about to RMA my Extreme for a 2nd time for non locking GPU slot but part me wonders *** is the point, I'll just get same issue again. If I could get more then pennies on the dollar for it I'd wash my hands of everything and sell it all.


Does the Gpu work? I think the locks are dumb. Pain in the ass to get unlocked. It’s screwed down in the front where is it going to go?


----------



## HanSeol

affxct said:


> 7000 on a Z690 Hero sounds about right for a daily limit. If you know what you’re doing as 7200+ seems like a brick wall but 7000 hits 10K Karhu with ease, then unfortunately 7200 is not happening. It might happen but you’re going to have to test for hours and hours to determine exactly what breaks re-train stability. I’ve been down that road to get 6400 working with Samsung on my Z690-F early this year. It took days and the solution was nonsensical. 6400% is close though so I have faith in you.


Yeah I thought right now 7200+ will never happens 😂 
Just got passes with tighten timings of 7000C32, I’ll find out 22ish M14A or wait for official release of M15A on Japan.


----------



## Talon2016

HanSeol said:


> Yeah I thought right now 7200+ will never happens 😂
> Just got passes with tighten timings of 7000C32, I’ll find out 22ish M14A or wait for official release of M15A on Japan.


Did you update your ME? I updated mine using the Z790 Apex firmware updater tonight and it actually allowed me to push my RAM further than on 1885 version from Asus website. 

If you try and update with the Z790 updater it will say not compatible with Z690 Hero. So I just copied over the FW .bin file to the Z690 updater for 1885 and it flashed to version 2020 no issue. 

Prior to flash A-Die 7400 CL34 would error out less than 100% coverage, usually around 40-60%. I tested 2000% so far and no errors yet. I am going to go game a bit to see if it crashes any games.


----------



## HanSeol

Talon2016 said:


> Did you update your ME? I updated mine using the Z790 Apex firmware updater tonight and it actually allowed me to push my RAM further than on 1885 version from Asus website.
> 
> If you try and update with the Z790 updater it will say not compatible with Z690 Hero. So I just copied over the FW .bin file to the Z690 updater for 1885 and it flashed to version 2020 no issue.
> 
> Prior to flash A-Die 7400 CL34 would error out less than 100% coverage, usually around 40-60%. I tested 2000% so far and no errors yet. I am going to go game a bit to see if it crashes any games.


I’m already updated ME firmware to .2020 since I bought my 139K.
You mean update Hero’s ME with Apex’s?


----------



## Papusan

How does Bios 2201 working with Raptor lake (13900K) and Z690 Apex? Is it any good? Found any bugs?

And Microsoft continue offer old bios version with blessings from Asus software/driver/firmware department. If you have flashed a newer bios... It doesn't matter. This below is what they prefer you should install. *When you thought stupidity had a limit*. Does Asus tech team have a dialogue with the stupids at Microsoft? Or maybe they think this is just fine?


----------



## mattxx88

Soleias74 said:


> For issues with Z690 and new bios :
> RaptorLake Resources (asus.com)


thanks for posting, i'll try it

My Strix Z690i is really garbage, i'm testing 10 sticks of A die Hynix and just A1 ram slot can push them 8000+
no chance on B1, how this is possible?

edit: both firmware and ME driver updated*


----------



## owikh84

mattxx88 said:


> thanks for posting, i'll try it
> 
> My Strix Z690i is really garbage, i'm testing 10 sticks of A die Hynix and just A1 ram slot can push them 8000+
> no chance on B1, how this is possible?
> 
> edit: both firmware and ME driver updated*


It could be your CPU IMC being weak at B channel.


----------



## mattxx88

owikh84 said:


> It could be your CPU IMC being weak at B channel.


sounds weird to me, but i will try another MB first

my z690i strix was the first gen, seems the same problems that afflicted 2021 Apex


----------



## Shawnb99

tubs2x4 said:


> Does the Gpu work? I think the locks are dumb. Pain in the ass to get unlocked. It’s screwed down in the front where is it going to go?


Yeah it still works just slides out easily.


----------



## sulalin

mattxx88 said:


> 對我來說聽起來很奇怪，但我會先試試另一個MB
> 
> 我的 z690i strix 是第一代，好像與坑害 2021 Apex 的問題相同
> [/引用]





Papusan said:


> Bios 2201 如何與 Raptor lake (13900K) 和 Z690 Apex 配合使用？有什麼好處嗎？發現任何錯誤？
> 
> 在華碩軟件/驅動程序/固件部門的支持下，微軟繼續提供舊的 bios 版本。如果您刷過更新的 BIOS... 沒關係。以下是他們希望您安裝的內容。*當你認為愚蠢是有限度的時候*。華碩技術團隊是否與微軟的愚蠢對話？或者也許他們認為這很好？
> View attachment 2582975
> 
> [/引用]
> 13700KF+Z690 APEX 可以參考
> 
> 
> Spoiler: 13700KF+Z690 APEX SP:77


----------



## mattxx88

however make peace with the quote button


----------



## Simkin

I guess the G.Skill 7200/7600 kits are A-Die? How are the thermals on these on Air running 7000+?


----------



## Nizzen

Simkin said:


> I guess the G.Skill 7200/7600 kits are A-Die? How are the thermals on these on Air running 7000+?


Running g.skill 7600 @ 1.67v now on air. 8400c34. 40-45c in gaming on an open testbench. Around 25c ambient.
Memorytesting on air, and it's 50c easy. Stock 1.4v, and it's no problem cooling them with direct fan.


----------



## AndreTM

Hey guys,
Z690 Maximus Extreme (BIOS 2103) paired with 12900K and G.Skill 6000Mhz CL40.
I’m literally getting mad with this RAM kit..
I performed the following tests:
1) Passed 6h of TestMem5 (ABSOLUTE config) with RAM @ 6000 36-36-36-76 without errors, yesterday after about 1 week I got a BSOD with restart. Performed TestMem5 again and got errors after few minutes.
2) The same as point 1 but with RAM @ 5866 36-36-36-76.. passed stability test for around 5/6h and after almost a week BSOD and unstable.

It seems that the system is unstable after startup… but only sometimes.

Any help would be really appreciated.
Thanks in advance guys.


----------



## Simkin

Nizzen said:


> Running g.skill 7600 @ 1.67v now on air. 8400c34. 40-45c in gaming on an open testbench. Around 25c ambient.
> Memorytesting on air, and it's 50c easy. Stock 1.4v, and it's no problem cooling them with direct fan.


8400 c34, insane 😀

Maybe i go for the 7200kit.


----------



## Telstar

Simkin said:


> I guess the G.Skill 7200/7600 kits are A-Die?


According to Buildzoid, also 6800 trident z5 is hynx a-die.


----------



## Simkin

Telstar said:


> According to Buildzoid, also 6800 trident z5 is hynx a-die.


Interesting. Quite a bit cheaper for the 6800 kit than the 7200.


----------



## morph.

AndreTM said:


> Hey guys,
> Z690 Maximus Extreme (BIOS 2103) paired with 12900K and G.Skill 6000Mhz CL40.
> I’m literally getting mad with this RAM kit..
> I performed the following tests:
> 1) Passed 6h of TestMem5 (ABSOLUTE config) with RAM @ 6000 36-36-36-76 without errors, yesterday after about 1 week I got a BSOD with restart. Performed TestMem5 again and got errors after few minutes.
> 2) The same as point 1 but with RAM @ 5866 36-36-36-76.. passed stability test for around 5/6h and after almost a week BSOD and unstable.
> 
> It seems that the system is unstable after startup… but only sometimes.
> 
> Any help would be really appreciated.
> Thanks in advance guys.


Impossible to help you as your post doesnt have enough information.

Your voltages VDD/VDDQ/IMC/SA? What have you tried have you increased it?

Did you only manually adjust the primary timings and no secondary or tertiaries if so what are they?

How do you know it is because your ram causing the BSOD over say your CPU OC or ring oc?

What about the temperatures of the modules are they getting warm are they cooled or passively?

Have you tried running stability tests with other tools like Karhu/OCCT etc?


----------



## AndreTM

morph. said:


> Impossible to help you as your post doesnt have enough information.
> 
> Your voltages VDD/VDDQ/IMC/SA? What have you tried have you increased it?
> 
> Did you only manually adjust the primary timings and no secondary or tertiaries if so what are they?
> 
> How do you know it is because your ram causing the BSOD over say your CPU OC or ring oc?
> 
> What about the temperatures of the modules are they getting warm are they cooled or passively?
> 
> Have you tried running stability tests with other tools like Karhu/OCCT etc?


Thanks so much, my answers below: 

*Your voltages VDD/VDDQ/IMC/SA? What have you tried have you increased it?*
VDD: 1.35V (tried to increase it up to 1.39V)
VDDQ: 1.35V (tried to increase it up to 1.39V)
IMC: 1.187V
SA: 1.25V

*Did you only manually adjust the primary timings and no secondary or tertiaries if so what are they?*
I set only primary timings (36-36-36-76).

*How do you know it is because your ram causing the BSOD over say your CPU OC or ring oc?*
You're right, going to test with CPU @ Stock (now it's 5.1Ghz on all cores).
I assumed that my errors are memory related because of the errors that I'm getting in TestMem5.

*What about the temperatures of the modules are they getting warm are they cooled or passively?*
I haven't checked yet but i'm going to install HWInfo to monitor them.
What it's strange for me is that they are stable (or at least, they look stable) for about 6h and not after a cold boot where modules are certanly colder than after a stress session.
Using the stock RAM heatsink, no active cooling.

*Have you tried running stability tests with other tools like Karhu/OCCT etc?*
Nope, installing those this evening.

Do you have any suggestion about some settings that I should try?
Thanks again.


----------



## morph.

AndreTM said:


> Thanks so much, my answers below:
> 
> *Your voltages VDD/VDDQ/IMC/SA? What have you tried have you increased it?*
> VDD: 1.35V (tried to increase it up to 1.39V)
> VDDQ: 1.35V (tried to increase it up to 1.39V)
> IMC: 1.187V
> SA: 1.25V
> 
> *Did you only manually adjust the primary timings and no secondary or tertiaries if so what are they?*
> I set only primary timings (36-36-36-76).
> 
> *How do you know it is because your ram causing the BSOD over say your CPU OC or ring oc?*
> You're right, going to test with CPU @ Stock (now it's 5.1Ghz on all cores).
> I assumed that my errors are memory related because of the errors that I'm getting in TestMem5.
> 
> *What about the temperatures of the modules are they getting warm are they cooled or passively?*
> I haven't checked yet but i'm going to install HWInfo to monitor them.
> What it's strange for me is that they are stable (or at least, they look stable) for about 6h and not after a cold boot where modules are certanly colder than after a stress session.
> Using the stock RAM heatsink, no active cooling.
> 
> *Have you tried running stability tests with other tools like Karhu/OCCT etc?*
> Nope, installing those this evening.
> 
> Do you have any suggestion about some settings that I should try?
> Thanks again.


Try vddq/vdd at 1.45-1.5v IMC 1.3 - 1.385 SA 1.1-1.2


----------



## affxct

MEUpdateTool_16.1.25.2020_T
Obviously, use at your own risk, etc, but this is a modified version of the flash tool that I used to move my Hero to the 16.1.25.2020 FW. The regular folder from the forum didn't run the update.


----------



## fitnessgrampacertest

sblantipodi said:


> What CPU are you using?


how does one obtain beta bios 2201


----------



## affxct

@Falkentyne I followed all the steps you mentioned earlier in the thread exactly, and somehow my SP remained at 79. Weird.


----------



## fitnessgrampacertest

AndreTM said:


> Hey guys,
> Z690 Maximus Extreme (BIOS 2103) paired with 12900K and G.Skill 6000Mhz CL40.
> I’m literally getting mad with this RAM kit..
> I performed the following tests:
> 1) Passed 6h of TestMem5 (ABSOLUTE config) with RAM @ 6000 36-36-36-76 without errors, yesterday after about 1 week I got a BSOD with restart. Performed TestMem5 again and got errors after few minutes.
> 2) The same as point 1 but with RAM @ 5866 36-36-36-76.. passed stability test for around 5/6h


i dont think 1.35 - 1.39 is enough voltage. ive had the best luck with VDD & VDDQ set equal to eachother, in the range of 1.45 - 1.48. These are perfectly safe voltages to run


----------



## TZeroBR

fitnessgrampacertest said:


> how does one obtain beta bios 2201


RaptorLake Resources


----------



## TSportM

hello

does any one tested the 2201 on the extreme vs 2103 ?

cheers


----------



## Gking62

TSportM said:


> hello
> 
> does any one tested the 2201 on the extreme vs 2103 ?
> 
> cheers


I'm on it now with 13900K seems fine though I'm having a tough time with 64GB kits higher than 6000


----------



## TSportM

hello

on the new bios 2201 on the extreme there is new options

Enable - remove all limits (90c)









Sync all cores (+1 to 2)









can some one please elaborate on them 

thanks


----------



## Simkin

How is the 13900K Raptor Lake when it comes to Memory OC? Do they all do 7000+? From what i remember almost every 12900K could do 6000 and above


----------



## Mappi75

@TSportM

Same here on Apex z690 (2201) + 12900KS

Enable - remove all limits (90c)
Sync all cores (+1 to 2)


Edit: 
someone wrote:

"Adaptive mode is not working for me from last 2 updates so I tried beta BIOS 2201 and it's still not working. It was working on 1720.
MB = Z690 Extreme"



We'll be back.


----------



## Gking62

I'd love to know, these boards have been out now for what a year and with recent bios releases we can't get 64GB kits (2x32) to run reliably including and beyond 6000? rediculous


----------



## TSportM

Mappi75 said:


> @TSportM
> 
> Same here on Apex z690 (2201) + 12900KS
> 
> Enable - remove all limits (90c)
> Sync all cores (+1 to 2)
> 
> 
> Edit:
> someone wrote:
> 
> "Adaptive mode is not working for me from last 2 updates so I tried beta BIOS 2201 and it's still not working. It was working on 1720.
> MB = Z690 Extreme"
> 
> 
> 
> We'll be back.


But what does it do ?

the 90c limits ? To that temp

+ 1 to 2 is what ?

cheers


----------



## 7empe

Mappi75 said:


> @TSportM
> 
> Same here on Apex z690 (2201) + 12900KS
> 
> Enable - remove all limits (90c)
> Sync all cores (+1 to 2)
> 
> 
> Edit:
> someone wrote:
> 
> "Adaptive mode is not working for me from last 2 updates so I tried beta BIOS 2201 and it's still not working. It was working on 1720.
> MB = Z690 Extreme"
> 
> 
> 
> We'll be back.


I'm on Apex Z690. Adaptive works perfectly on 2103 but does not work on 2201 again. The same issue as it was on the post 1720 bioses. Sounds like a regression problem.

Enable - remove all limites (90c) removes all the limits until 90c on cpu package temp is reached.
Sync all cores (+1 to 2) allows on adaptive core boosting up to +1 or +2 on all cores (if sync all cores set to 55, then boost will go up to 57 if possible).


----------



## Bluerain

Simkin said:


> How is the 13900K Raptor Lake when it comes to Memory OC? Do they all do 7000+? From what i remember almost every 12900K could do 6000 and above


My Z690 Hero does 7200 stable with an 13900k. Not sure if that's "normal" or if I got a good bin. Bios is 2201.


----------



## sblantipodi

7empe said:


> I'm on Apex Z690. Adaptive works perfectly on 2103 but does not work on 2201 again. The same issue as it was on the post 1720 bioses. Sounds like a regression problem.


Can't understand why people still buy Asus.
I think that very few ones will continue to buy such a bad quality products in the future.
Come One, One year passed and they continue to push more regressions than fixes.

Shame on Asus. The good old Asus is vanished, this Is the "new Asus".


----------



## Agent-A01

TSportM said:


> But what does it do ?
> 
> the 90c limits ? To that temp
> 
> + 1 to 2 is what ?
> 
> cheers


It's just like remove all limits but when CPU temp hits 90c it will start downclocking like stock. 
Regular remove all limits won't downclock unless hitting tjmax 100c~.

+1 to 2 is sync all cores but it adds plus 1 to 2 bins(100-200mhz) on the best two cores like stock acts out of the box.


----------



## EEE-RAY

Is there any advantage esp in memory stability in updating from BIOS 1402 (which I am running) to 2201? I am on an 2021 Apex.

I have never been able to run my Gskill 6400 C32 kit at XMP without memtest errors - I have more time in my life now and am about to pull apart and rebuild my PC, so was wondering if it is worth updating the BIOS.
I am aware there is no going back after updating to BIOS 2XXX, hence the question instead of just testing .


----------



## fitnessgrampacertest

Has BIOS 2201 been officially published for any of the Z690 motherboards yet?


----------



## EEE-RAY

Not AFAIK, but its the latest available.
I guess I am in general referring to all of the 2XXX BIOs.


----------



## affxct

EEE-RAY said:


> Is there any advantage esp in memory stability in updating from BIOS 1402 (which I am running) to 2201? I am on an 2021 Apex.
> 
> I have never been able to run my Gskill 6400 C32 kit at XMP without memtest errors - I have more time in my life now and am about to pull apart and rebuild my PC, so was wondering if it is worth updating the BIOS.
> I am aware there is no going back after updating to BIOS 2XXX, hence the question instead of just testing .


Tbh I would yeah.


----------



## EEE-RAY

As in you would recommend updating?


----------



## affxct

EEE-RAY said:


> As in you would recommend updating?


I would. Many people have been having good experiences with 2201. I can’t say if it’s necessarily Raptor Lake’s IMC or if it’s a combination between Raptor and the new BIOS, but I think your best bet would be to give 2201 a shot, update the ME firmware, consider a cheap A-die kit, and potentially even a CPU upgrade. If you’re really stuck with your 2021 Apex, those would be actually potential solutions.


----------



## 7empe

EEE-RAY said:


> Not AFAIK, but its the latest available.
> I guess I am in general referring to all of the 2XXX BIOs.


2201 is much worse in terms of memory training and ddr voltages vs 2103 on Z690 Apex + 12900KF. Don't know how does it work with 13900 though. And btw. VF curve does not work (always 0 mV offsets no matter the value set), at least in my case.


----------



## sblantipodi

7empe said:


> 2201 is much worse in terms of memory training and ddr voltages vs 2103 on Z690 Apex + 12900KF. Don't know how does it work with 13900 though.


Is it confirmed that 2201 introduce the regression on adaptive voltage?
Does adaptive voltage works with 2201?


----------



## 7empe

sblantipodi said:


> Is it confirmed that 2201 introduce the regression on adaptive voltage?
> Does adaptive voltage works with 2201?


I did not look for confirmation. It did not work for me after an upgrade, so I switched back to 2103, especially that board had tremendous problems in training memory settings that with 2103 were immediatelly trained without any issues.


----------



## sblantipodi

7empe said:


> I did not look for confirmation. It did not work for me after an upgrade, so I switched back to 2103, especially that board had tremendous problems in training memory settings that with 2103 were immediatelly trained without any issues.


Ok thanks for the feedback. Will skip this bios.
The bad thing is that many people needs it to properly run the 4090 card.


----------



## TSportM

Also on 2201 bios

eliminates setting in tpm and on some reboots Windows security says no tpm module is installed

This setting is not present on 2201


----------



## EEE-RAY

sblantipodi said:


> Ok thanks for the feedback. Will skip this bios.
> The bad thing is that many people needs it to properly run the 4090 card.


Wait, what is has the 2201 BIOS got to do with the 4090 card?


----------



## sblantipodi

EEE-RAY said:


> Wait, what is has the 2201 BIOS got to do with the 4090 card?


It solves this problem.








RTX4090 and boot loop


Hi all, I have a Corsair HX1200i and an MSI Suprim X RTX 4090. PC works well until I have no nvidia driver, as soon as I install nvidia driver the PC reboots abruptly, then windows starts, shows the desktop and reboot, this happen in a loop. If I uninstall nvidia drivers PC works well. Is my...




www.overclock.net


----------



## affxct

7empe said:


> 2201 is much worse in terms of memory training and ddr voltages vs 2103 on Z690 Apex + 12900KF. Don't know how does it work with 13900 though. And btw. VF curve does not work (always 0 mV offsets no matter the value set), at least in my case.


Wait, did you stay on M-die? It might be that 2201 is meant to optimise RPL and A-die.


----------



## 7empe

affxct said:


> Wait, did you stay on M-die? It might be that 2201 is meant to optimise RPL and A-die.


Yeah, M-die, but still new bios shall not break backward compatibility with 2103, especially without upgrading ME.


----------



## affxct

7empe said:


> Yeah, M-die, but still new bios shall not break backward compatibility with 2103, especially without upgrading ME.


No I definitely think it works fine for 12th-Gen and M-die, but I think that perhaps they added optimisations that changed the way that M-die behaves. I say this because 2201 seemed more stable for A-die and 13th-Gen than 2103. I also was able to boot higher data rates than with 2103 and old ME (updated the ME as well). Granted I didn’t test for very long, but 7200 is doable on the Z690 Hero.


----------



## EEE-RAY

sblantipodi said:


> It solves this problem.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RTX4090 and boot loop
> 
> 
> Hi all, I have a Corsair HX1200i and an MSI Suprim X RTX 4090. PC works well until I have no nvidia driver, as soon as I install nvidia driver the PC reboots abruptly, then windows starts, shows the desktop and reboot, this happen in a loop. If I uninstall nvidia drivers PC works well. Is my...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net


Does it fix only the boot loop problem or also the intermittent black screen idle problem? I have the latter problem.


----------



## 7empe

affxct said:


> No I definitely think it works fine for 12th-Gen and M-die, but I think that perhaps they added optimisations that changed the way that M-die behaves. I say this because 2201 seemed more stable for A-die and 13th-Gen than 2103. I also was able to boot higher data rates than with 2103 and old ME (updated the ME as well). Granted I didn’t test for very long, but 7200 is doable on the Z690 Hero.


IMO, if it boot loops with the same memory settings as used for 2103 and VF curve is ignored then it does not work neither for m-die nor for 12th gen. for Apex (Hero 2201 is a different bios).


----------



## affxct

7empe said:


> IMO, if it boot loops with the same memory settings as used for 2103 and VF curve is ignored then it does not work neither for m-die nor for 12th gen. for Apex (Hero 2201 is a different bios).


I’m not sure I worded my initial reply well. But I know what you mean.


----------



## sblantipodi

EEE-RAY said:


> Does it fix only the boot loop problem or also the intermittent black screen idle problem? I have the latter problem.


I don't know sincerely, if you have problems with your 4090 you should look at that bios and at the latest firmware from Nvidia.






NVIDIA GPU UEFI Firmware Update Tool | NVIDIA







nvidia.custhelp.com


----------



## TSportM

i cant Asus just release a bios that is freaking ok to every one or just release 3 or 4 bios stating change logs (decent ones) and saying v1 v2 v3 v4 stating the pros and cons, if they did that they would be another level for the entusiast consumer


----------



## Gking62

No 4090 issues here with my Strix thankfully, even with 2103, however, I just hope that Asus can help us Z690 owners with better ram compatibility, I was hopeful with the 13900K IMC helping with this but I could not get the 64G 6400 G.Skill kit to work, booted fine but threw a ton of memtest error though realizing it's not on their QVL so guess I'm stuck with the CL30 6000 stuff which isn't the worse thing I suppose.


----------



## bscool

ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0001.zip


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com





MC SP 

If anyone on z690 Apex has z790 Apex or plans on getting one and tests MC SP on the same CPU if you could post results I would be curious to see how they compare. I have both but too lazy to switch cpu back from z790 Apex to z690 to test.


----------



## bscool

2021 Apex 12900KF

MC SP 56

I also have 2022 z690 Apex and z790 Apex if I get around to it Ill test all of them with the same CPU to see how the MC SP compares.

I know someone that tested a 12900ks CPU in z790 Apex and he had a 58 MC SP. My 13900k has 74 MC SP on z790 Apex. So from the little data I have seen looks like 13th gens IMC is quite a bit better but that was already known.


----------



## dante`afk

Wrong threat


----------



## satinghostrider

MC SP : 79


----------



## affxct

Last night I was trying to get my friend’s M-die stable at 6800-7000 on his Z690 Hero and we were getting close to a stable config but were having some issues. I decided to test 2103 again. 2201 is significantly better. It’s not even comparable. He literally cannot train 6800 on 2103 with his Z690 Hero. Just anecdotal, I know, but there’s something to consider.

Another interesting thing is that the settings I was using this M-die with when paired with my 13700K and Dark were not doable on the Hero. I thought there was only a real difference towards the board limit, but no, apparently the Dark just runs lower memory voltages and IMC voltages. His SP is 84 and mine is 79, so he should have a much stronger IMC theoretically if P-SP scaling is indicative.

This was quite a frustrating experience. I had 7600 booting fine on the Hero with my A-die, and the kit I sold to my friend was good for 7000C34/1.45VDD/1.35VDDQ. Somehow on the Hero, the kit behaviour is just totally different. It even prefers higher VDDQ. Maybe his IMC is just way worse than mine, idk.


----------



## SuperMumrik

Will be interesting to test if this bios (0001) is more gaered towards a-die 😊 I've had some re-train issues with a-die an rpl.
Still on my m-dies though, but they run great at least! Will test a-die later


----------



## TSportM

hello

is it normal to have this option grayed out ?


----------



## 673714

TSportM said:


> hello
> 
> is it normal to have this option grayed out ?


Mine will do this with Fine Granularity Refresh mode enabled


----------



## TSportM

LilOliVert said:


> Mine will do this with Fine Granularity Refresh mode enabled


can you please point me out where that is if you dont mind 

cheers


----------



## 673714

TSportM said:


> can you please point me out where that is if you dont mind
> 
> cheers











What different in Fine Granularity Refresh mode? | bianbao.dev







bianbao.dev


----------



## affxct

TSportM said:


> can you please point me out where that is if you dont mind
> 
> cheers


FGR is a good thing. When you disable FGR, use tRFC1 and make tREFI conservative. With FGR enabled, use tRFC2 and make tREFI 130560 or max (if you have water cooling).


----------



## 673714

affxct said:


> FGR is a good thing. When you disable FGR, use tRFC1 and make tREFI conservative. With FGR enabled, use tRFC2 and make tREFI 130560 or max (if you have water cooling).


Interesting, I haven't messed with tRFC 1 or 2 since FGR was added/enabled. Is tRFC2 where you enter 130560 to make this change? also, is 130560 a safe setting to use if your DDR5 is only passive cooled? If not, what setting would be optimal?


----------



## affxct

LilOliVert said:


> Interesting, I haven't messed with tRFC 1 or 2 since FGR was added/enabled. Is tRFC2 where you enter 130560 to make this change? also, is 130560 a safe setting to use if your DDR5 is only passive cooled? If not, what setting would be optimal?


It's very hard to explain technically because I have a loose grasp on it, but basically the tRFC setting your board enables you to input tells you whether it's FGR or not. My friend's Carbon used tRFC2, my old Taichi used tRFC2, and my Dark uses tRFC1 (unless EVGA mislabelled it). Whenever I do tRFC2, I use 130560 because it's the same thing as doing 65280 with tRFC1. Up till this point, I've never had tREFI-related errors. On ASUS they used to manage tRFC1 and 2 and tREFI through some obscure method that wasn't actually disclosed upon looking at the BIOS, as elaborated on by @7empe way back in Q1 of this year. After the one BIOS coder for ASUS began explaining it, they included it on the Apex 0082 test BIOS and I assume every BIOS from there on out. Now you can pretty much pick. I'm not sure which of tRFC1/65280 or tRFC2/130560 is better. I guess just go with whichever method you prefer. Obviously, max performance would be tRFC1/Max tREFI and the least performance would be with tRFC2 and a super low tREFI value.


----------



## 673714

affxct said:


> It's very hard to explain technically because I have a loose grasp on it, but basically the tRFC setting your board enables you to input tells you whether it's FGR or not. My friend's Carbon used tRFC2, my old Taichi used tRFC2, and my Dark uses tRFC1 (unless EVGA mislabelled it). Whenever I do tRFC2, I use 130560 because it's the same thing as doing 65280 with tRFC1. Up till this point, I've never had tREFI-related errors. On ASUS they used to manage tRFC1 and 2 and tREFI through some obscure method that wasn't actually disclosed upon looking at the BIOS, as elaborated on by @7empe way back in Q1 of this year. After the one BIOS coder for ASUS began explaining it, they included it on the Apex 0082 test BIOS and I assume every BIOS from there on out. Now you can pretty much pick. I'm not sure which of tRFC1/65280 or tRFC2/130560 is better. I guess just go with whichever method you prefer. Obviously, max performance would be tRFC1/Max tREFI and the least performance would be with tRFC2 and a super low tREFI value.


Oh boy, now I'm more confused than ever. I used to set tRFC1 to 333, but after FGR was introduced and the section greyed out, I left it on auto. When I saw "65280" I assumed you were talking about the refresh interval (tREFi) which is where TSportM and myself have it set to 65000.


TSportM said:


> hello
> 
> is it normal to have this option grayed out ?


So in that image where this board reads 510 and has 300 manually entered just to the right of that, this is the setting we should be going all the way up to 130560?
I was assuming tREFi is what we'd need to bump up to 130560
Seems like maybe tRFC2 = 666 would be the equivalent to tRFC1 = 333 ?


----------



## affxct

LilOliVert said:


> Oh boy, now I'm more confused than ever. I used to set tRFC1 to 333, but after FGR was introduced and the section greyed out, I left it on auto. When I saw "65280" I assumed you were talking about the refresh interval (tREFi) which is where TSportM and myself have it set to 65000.
> 
> So in that image where this board reads 510 and has 300 manually entered just to the right of that, this is the setting we should be going all the way up to 130560?
> I was assuming tREFi is what we'd need to bump up to 130560
> Seems like maybe tRFC2 = 666 would be the equivalent to tRFC1 = 333 ?


Yeah so basically now that you have FGR either at auto or enabled, you use tRFC2 at 333 and can comfortably set 130560 (or max tREFI if you’re brave).


----------



## 673714

affxct said:


> Yeah so basically now that you have FGR either at auto or enabled, you use tRFC2 at 333 and can comfortably set 130560 (or max tREFI if you’re brave).


After I took my shower, I tried setting tREFi to 130560, and left tRFC2 on auto and it wasn't stable. Y-cruncher failed at like 5%. So, I went back and changed it to 65280 instead of 65000. That also failed pretty quick. Third try was 130560 again but I also changed the tRFC2 to 666 (assuming that's equal to tRFC1 @ 333 on Asus boards). The third time really was the charm, now the copy speed is finally above 100GB/s where my read and write have always been, and the latency actually cracked 55ns on the first attempt = 54.2ns. Not huge, but it's an improvement, so I'll take it


----------



## 7empe

FYI - I’ve installed bios 0001 on my Nov. 2021 Z690 Apex and my 12900KF has 46 MC SP and that clarifies why the highest stable clock is 6666 cl30 with 1.48 vdd, 1.40 vddq and 1.30 cpu vddq. MC voltage needs to be 1.35V for that.


----------



## affxct

LilOliVert said:


> After I took my shower, I tried setting tREFi to 130560, and left tRFC2 on auto and it wasn't stable. Y-cruncher failed at like 5%. So, I went back and changed it to 65280 instead of 65000. That also failed pretty quick. Third try was 130560 again but I also changed the tRFC2 to 666 (assuming that's equal to tRFC1 @ 333 on Asus boards). The third time really was the charm, now the copy speed is finally above 100GB/s where my read and write have always been, and the latency actually cracked 55ns on the first attempt = 54.2ns. Not huge, but it's an improvement, so I'll take it


Just to confirm, which IC do you have and what data rate are you currently at?


----------



## affxct

7empe said:


> FYI - I’ve installed bios 0001 on my Nov. 2021 Z690 Apex and my 12900KF has 46 MC SP and that clarifies why the highest stable clock is 6666 cl30 with 1.48 vdd, 1.40 vddq and 1.30 cpu vddq. MC voltage needs to be 1.35V for that.


Wow, what if it was an IMC thing this entire time? My friend’s 13700KF also seems to be awful. Max data rate seems to be 6600 on the Z690 Hero. Same result as my last 12900K with a Z690-F.


----------



## affxct

So I’m wondering, does MC SP derive from VDD2 scaling at the socket pins, TX VDDQ requirement, or VCCSA requirement? Or is it like some weird combo of the three? I have no idea how they would design an algorithm for that.


----------



## 7empe

affxct said:


> So I’m wondering, does MC SP derive from VDD2 scaling at the socket pins, TX VDDQ requirement, or VCCSA requirement? Or is it like some weird combo of the three? I have no idea how they would design an algorithm for that.


From the tests being performed while training it seems that all memory-related voltages are taken into account for the non-xmp (thus standard 4800 MT/s) memory speed. This is VDD, VDDQ, CPU TX, VDD2. Not sure about SA.


----------



## 7empe

affxct said:


> Wow, what if it was an IMC thing this entire time? My friend’s 13700KF also seems to be awful. Max data rate seems to be 6600 on the Z690 Hero. Same result as my last 12900K with a Z690-F.


Tomorrow 13900KF arrives. Same mobo and memory will be in use, so we will see if I can get m-die to run at 7k with reasonable voltages this time. I could boot to windows with 7k and current cpu but unstable ofc.


----------



## 7empe

bscool said:


> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-0001.zip
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MC SP
> 
> If anyone on z690 Apex has z790 Apex or plans on getting one and tests MC SP on the same CPU if you could post results I would be curious to see how they compare. I have both but too lazy to switch cpu back from z790 Apex to z690 to test.


@bscool, do you know what's the source bios version for 0001? Is it 2103 or 2201? Thanks!


----------



## satinghostrider

VDD/VDDQ - 1.4V
MC - 1.4V
TX - Auto
SA - Auto

CPU: SP105 (P116 E83)
Memory Controller: SP79

TREFI : 130560

Installed a Ram cooler over the DIMMS and using Feng Zao contact frame.

Memtest86 in bios passed so far after 4 passes.

Gonna wait to watercool my DIMMS before pushing further on this A-Die.
But pretty pleased with the 6600 A-Die so far on my 2022 Z690 Apex. Just hate the fact the rams at 1.4V runs so much more hotter than my M-Die at 1.5V due to the lack of PMIC pads.


----------



## Agent-A01

7empe said:


> @bscool, do you know what's the source bios version for 0001? Is it 2103 or 2201? Thanks!


Should be the latter.



satinghostrider said:


> But pretty pleased with the 6600 A-Die so far on my 2022 Z690 Apex. Just hate the fact the rams at 1.4V runs so much more hotter than my M-Die at 1.5V due to the lack of PMIC pads.


That doesn't matter, only important temps are memory ICs but we don't have a way to measure that.


----------



## affxct

7empe said:


> From the tests being performed while training it seems that all memory-related voltages are taken into account for the non-xmp (thus standard 4800 MT/s) memory speed. This is VDD, VDDQ, CPU TX, VDD2. Not sure about SA.


Very interesting. I honestly don’t have the slightest idea how they would’ve been able to get through all of that data. Good on team ASUS if the rating is accurate.


----------



## 673714

affxct said:


> Just to confirm, which IC do you have and what data rate are you currently at?


I'm still using the G.Skill Z5 RGB 6400 (pretty sure it's M-die) on my replacement Z690 Extreme with my 12th gen 12900K because even though I have a 13900K and better thermal paste just sitting here, I'm still waiting for my G.Skill 7600 (A-die obviously) to get here Friday according to the tracking. Plus I just wasn't feeling like getting into it, I had a small injury I was recovering from  

I keep saying it, but this newer Z690 is awesome, that's why I'm probably keeping it instead of going after a Z790. I didn't have to increase the voltage on memory to run XMP. I did increase CPU input voltage to 1.8v to get stable, but auto was reading 1.77v or something very close already. Since then, I've bumped it up to 6600MHz and changed primaries to 32/39/39/30 and copied a bunch of secondary and tertiary timings I've seen others on here do as well as buildzoid videos, just testing every time to make sure it's stable 

Having a motherboard that works as intended really truly makes all the difference between ram overclocking being fun or a nightmare. I wish I would have done the advanced RMA process several months ago. To be fair though, I did get 2 bad DDR5 kits in a row at the same time the motherboard was bad 

I feel like everyone should test their memory and motherboards 1 stick at a time, 1 slot at a time and make sure everything is up to the task before diving in! Quality Control at these places can't be trusted as much as they could be in the past unfortunately


----------



## affxct

LilOliVert said:


> I'm still using the G.Skill Z5 RGB 6400 (pretty sure it's M-die) on my replacement Z690 Extreme with my 12th gen 12900K because even though I have a 13900K and better thermal paste just sitting here, I'm still waiting for my G.Skill 7600 (A-die obviously) to get here Friday according to the tracking. Plus I just wasn't feeling like getting into it, I had a small injury I was recovering from
> 
> I keep saying it, but this newer Z690 is awesome, that's why I'm probably keeping it instead of going after a Z790. I didn't have to increase the voltage on memory to run XMP. I did increase CPU input voltage to 1.8v to get stable, but auto was reading 1.77v or something very close already. Since then, I've bumped it up to 6600MHz and changed primaries to 32/39/39/30 and copied a bunch of secondary and tertiary timings I've seen others on here do as well as buildzoid videos, just testing every time to make sure it's stable
> 
> Having a motherboard that works as intended really truly makes all the difference between ram overclocking being fun or a nightmare. I wish I would have done the advanced RMA process several months ago. To be fair though, I did get 2 bad DDR5 kits in a row at the same time the motherboard was bad
> 
> I feel like everyone should test their memory and motherboards 1 stick at a time, 1 slot at a time and make sure everything is up to the task before diving in! Quality Control at these places can't be trusted as much as they could be in the past unfortunately


I’m just confused as to why you were error’ing at 333 tRFC2 @ 6600 with tREFI 130560. My friend is currently at 330 and it’s completely fine (kinda expectedly). I’m just curious as to why.


----------



## 673714

affxct said:


> I’m just confused as to why you were error’ing at 333 tRFC2 @ 6600 with tREFI 130560. My friend is currently at 330 and it’s completely fine (kinda expectedly). I’m just curious as to why.


I did not try 333 tRFC2 with tREFI 130560 because that's not what I thought you were saying. I was using 333 tRFC1 before FGR was enabled, and what you said made me think that "333 tRFC1 without FGR = 666 tRFC2 with FGR", so that's what I tried and it worked


----------



## mattxx88

mattxx88 said:


> thanks for posting, i'll try it
> 
> My Strix Z690i is really garbage, i'm testing 10 sticks of A die Hynix and just A1 ram slot can push them 8000+
> no chance on B1, how this is possible?
> 
> edit: both firmware and ME driver updated*


just switched that garbage Asus z690 with a new z790, Asus z690 series have been embarassing, few gold mainboard samples don't make text










now i can work on my kits finally


----------



## affxct

LilOliVert said:


> I did not try 333 tRFC2 with tREFI 130560 because that's not what I thought you were saying. I was using 333 tRFC1 before FGR was enabled, and what you said made me think that "333 tRFC1 without FGR = 666 tRFC2 with FGR", so that's what I tried and it worked


Now I'm confused too haha. XD uhm damn. Uhh so basically lock FGR to enabled so that tRFC1 is greyed out. Set tRFC2 to 330, and then give 130560 tREFI a shot.


----------



## bscool

7empe said:


> @bscool, do you know what's the source bios version for 0001? Is it 2103 or 2201? Thanks!


No idea, @shamino1978 posted it in the z790 thread, but I see there is already a newer beta bios out ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-2203.zip

No idea if the newer beta have the MC SP I havent tried them.






RaptorLake Resources


i will use this as a collection of test bioses/tools/info targeted towards Raptorlake + z69/790 NOTE for Z690: You must update ME on your Z690 to properly support raptorlake (if you are on dual bioses then you need to do this to both bioses) 1) d/l and install ME driver...



rog.asus.com





Also info about MC SP for those who didnt see it.

"MC SP
--------------------------------------


Tests the MC solely, without touching the DRAM (you can even remove the dram while its testing) , same mc on different boards/dimms should give similar score
Tests the FMax of an MC at a fixed low SA voltage. In the same way you test a core's fmax at a low voltage idling.
Since there is an element of luck when testing FMax like you would when running for a cpuz record, the outcome will not be 100% the same everytime and score will shift a little.
Temperature affects FMax but the effect is weighted and the maximum package temperature during the training is taken into account to generate an unbiased score.
there is a strong co-relation between MC FMax and DRAM OC just like Core FMax with Core Cinebench Freq.

a sample from a not so good board , no so good dram at 1.4v by a not so good overclocker (me!):










in other words, all things remaining the same, there is a high probability that a higher mc sp will net a higher dram oc.



*Attachments"*










[OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z790 Owners Thread


XMP 1, Tweaked both failed at 7600. XMP 2 got super close but did fail Cycle 19/20... Z790 Apex 😢 This looks 100% temps based on lapsed run. Gskill have no thermal pads on PMIC and it gets iffy past 60 degrees.




www.overclock.net


----------



## satinghostrider

bscool said:


> No idea, @shamino1978 posted it in the z790 thread, but I see there is already a newer beta bios out ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-2203.zip
> 
> No idea if the newer beta have the MC SP I havent tried them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RaptorLake Resources
> 
> 
> i will use this as a collection of test bioses/tools/info targeted towards Raptorlake + z69/790 NOTE for Z690: You must update ME on your Z690 to properly support raptorlake (if you are on dual bioses then you need to do this to both bioses) 1) d/l and install ME driver...
> 
> 
> 
> rog.asus.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also info about MC SP for those who didnt see it.
> 
> "MC SP
> --------------------------------------
> 
> 
> Tests the MC solely, without touching the DRAM (you can even remove the dram while its testing) , same mc on different boards/dimms should give similar score
> Tests the FMax of an MC at a fixed low SA voltage. In the same way you test a core's fmax at a low voltage idling.
> Since there is an element of luck when testing FMax like you would when running for a cpuz record, the outcome will not be 100% the same everytime and score will shift a little.
> Temperature affects FMax but the effect is weighted and the maximum package temperature during the training is taken into account to generate an unbiased score.
> there is a strong co-relation between MC FMax and DRAM OC just like Core FMax with Core Cinebench Freq.
> 
> a sample from a not so good board , no so good dram at 1.4v by a not so good overclocker (me!):
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> in other words, all things remaining the same, there is a high probability that a higher mc sp will net a higher dram oc.
> 
> 
> 
> *Attachments"*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z790 Owners Thread
> 
> 
> XMP 1, Tweaked both failed at 7600. XMP 2 got super close but did fail Cycle 19/20... Z790 Apex 😢 This looks 100% temps based on lapsed run. Gskill have no thermal pads on PMIC and it gets iffy past 60 degrees.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net


Yeah I just noticed it too. It was 2201 for a long time there, then @shamino1978 posted here 0001. Now there is 2203 on the RaptorLake resources. Not sure if it's a newer one or an official one that is based on 0001.

I believe Shamino consolidates the Z790 ones to the Z690 Apex bios pretty fast so this could be Z790 0804 equivalent to the current Z690 2203 we are seeing. Of course I may be wrong.

0001 works great so far running 7600C36. But I had to relax secondary timings to 44-44 instead of 43-43 which had random errors during 2nd pass in TM5. With 36-44-44-36, no errors at all using 1usmus config for 5 passes.


----------



## 7empe

Anyone knows why general SP for 13900k/kf is counted in the same way as it was for 12900k/kf, i.e. (P-Core SP x 16 + E-Core SP x 8)/24? Is it for 12th-13th gen. comparison purpose? I bet it should be (P-Core SP x 16 + E-Core SP x 16)/32. Same is true for Z790 boards.


----------



## bscool

(P x 2 + E)/3 =SP

Also works

Edit, I dont know why just saw someone esle post this formula and it hurt my head less 😁


----------



## 7empe

Lucky at last with silicon lottery for the first time in my life...

13900KF 118 P-Cores, 88 E-Cores, 80 MC.


----------



## 7empe

2203 has MC SP


----------



## 7empe

Guys, I did not notice that at the first glimps, but take a look on the per core VID distribution...


----------



## 7empe

7empe said:


> Guys, I did not notice that at the first glimps, but take a look on the per core VID distribution...
> View attachment 2584766


This CPU is insane... I've started to look for the minimal VF curve for each VF point. The E-Cores are disabled for now.

Synch All Cores, Vcore die sense under CB23 load. LLC=4, AC_LL=0.20

VF Point #6: 51x, Vcore MIN = 0,986V
VF Point #7: 54x, Vcore MIN = 
VF Point #8: 57x, Vcore MIN =
VF Point #9-10: 58x, Vcore MIN =
VF Point #11: 59x, Vcore MIN = 1,270V

Ring 52x works well with 59x all cores. Max temp at hottest core is 87C, on coldest 74C.

60x all core and 53x ring seems doable.


----------



## TSportM

ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-2203.zip


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com





Any one tested 2203 for the Z690 extreme ?

any inputs?

cheers


----------



## sblantipodi

TSportM said:


> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-2203.zip
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Any one tested 2203 for the Z690 extreme ?
> 
> any inputs?
> 
> cheers


pass... I'm done with beta testing.


----------



## TSportM

sblantipodi said:


> pass... I'm done with beta testing.



on this one tere is a new XMP parameter (tweaked) testing it now and my memory get better latency same speed 7000mhz


----------



## sblantipodi

TSportM said:


> on this one tere is a new XMP parameter (tweaked) testing it now and my memory get better latency same speed 7000mhz


Where did you get that bios?
Thanks for sharing.


----------



## jeiselramos

7empe said:


> FYI - I’ve installed bios 0001 on my Nov. 2021 Z690 Apex and my 12900KF has 46 MC SP and that clarifies why the highest stable clock is 6666 cl30 with 1.48 vdd, 1.40 vddq and 1.30 cpu vddq. MC voltage needs to be 1.35V for that.


12900K sp 88 mc 44 6200c28 1T best oc
13900K sp 103, i don't know mc because I sold 12900K and apex but i did some testing and I could do 6800c32 kinda easily or at least A TON more easily than 6200c28 1T


----------



## Minciu

Strix-F Z690 also have 2203 ?


----------



## sblantipodi

my MC SP seems to be pretty good 










unfortunantly my 6200MHz SK Hynix kit can't go past 5.2GHz on 4 sticks.


----------



## 7empe

Anyone here with 13900 pushing 60x all cores? What vcore at load? Right now I have 59x and ring 52x at 1.27V under load (87C hottest core).


----------



## TSportM

sblantipodi said:


> Where did you get that bios?
> Thanks for sharing.


shamino

So what do think ? Gets better for you on your memory settings?


----------



## 7empe

TSportM said:


> shamino
> 
> So what do think ? Gets better for you on your memory settings?


@TSportM How much Vcore do you need to reach 59x all cores and what’s your VF11 offset for 62x? Btw. On how many cores you can reach 61x and 62x?


----------



## sblantipodi

TSportM said:


> shamino
> 
> So what do think ? Gets better for you on your memory settings?


No same crap


----------



## affxct

sblantipodi said:


> pass... I'm done with beta testing.


It’s good though


----------



## sblantipodi

affxct said:


> It’s good though


at the end I tried it and as I said, same crap.
there is some points more on cinebench but ram stability or CPU stability isn't improved.


----------



## TSportM

7empe said:


> @TSportM How much Vcore do you need to reach 59x all cores and what’s your VF11 offset for 62x? Btw. On how many cores you can reach 61x and 62x?


Hello 

glad you have a nice sample

when 2 cores are at 6.2 other 2 are 6.0, 1.420v for all 8 at 5.9 also have a nice sample 

cheers


----------



## affxct

sblantipodi said:


> at the end I tried it and as I said, same crap.
> there is some points more on cinebench but ram stability or CPU stability isn't improved.


Check MC SP? It might give you an idea of if your IMC is good/bad.


----------



## sblantipodi

affxct said:


> Check MC SP? It might give you an idea of if your IMC is good/bad.


I have 76, don't know if it's good or not


----------



## affxct

sblantipodi said:


> I have 76, don't know if it's good or not
> 
> View attachment 2584864


76 is actually quite good. Not insane like some, but definitely not bad.


----------



## sblantipodi

affxct said:


> 76 is actually quite good. Not insane like some, but definitely not bad.


My Z690 Extreme can't go past 5.2GHz on 4x16GB Corsair Dominator 6200MHz.

If the IMC is not bad, the mobo is trash


----------



## 673714

sblantipodi said:


> My Z690 Extreme can't go past 5.2GHz on 4x16GB Corsair Dominator 6200MHz.
> 
> If the IMC is not bad, the mobo is trash


Never mind what I was saying, it's unclear to me now exactly what intel is trying to say here, I'll just post the link instead



Processor SKU Support Matrix - 002 - ID:743844 | 13th Generation Intel® Core™ Processors



Doesn't mean the board is trash was my point, they can't run as fast with 4 sticks as they can with 2


----------



## TSportM

sblantipodi said:


> My Z690 Extreme can't go past 5.2GHz on 4x16GB Corsair Dominator 6200MHz.
> 
> If the IMC is not bad, the mobo is trash


*have you tried using only 2 dimms?

i could not do much over 5600 on my extreme with Samsung also thats wy i changed to hynix*


----------



## EEE-RAY

Urghh my Z5 6400 M die kit is still throwing me errors at XMP.
My 12900KS's MC SP is 53 . Terrible. 
Is there a DDR5 overclocking beginner's guide that I can read to try to get manually overclocking? I am looking at the billions of voltages and wondering what I should try first.


----------



## sblantipodi

LilOliVert said:


> Never mind what I was saying, it's unclear to me now exactly what intel is trying to say here, I'll just post the link instead
> 
> 
> 
> Processor SKU Support Matrix - 002 - ID:743844 | 13th Generation Intel® Core™ Processors
> 
> 
> 
> Doesn't mean the board is trash was my point, they can't run as fast with 4 sticks as they can with 2


Thank you for the link I appreciate it.
Can you help me reading it?

I have 4x16GB, a 16GB stick should be single rank as far as I know.

So am I in this situation where the supported frequency is up to 4GHz?










Am I right? Thanks!!!


----------



## sblantipodi

TSportM said:


> *have you tried using only 2 dimms?
> 
> i could not do much over 5600 on my extreme with Samsung also thats wy i changed to hynix*


2 sticks can do much better but it's unclear to me why they sell 4 sticks mobo if you "can't use it".

Damn I can use XMP no problem with 2 sticks at 6.2MT/s and can't go past 5.2MT/s with 4 sticks.

The difference seems to big, it's like that you can use 2 sticks but not 4 sticks. I thought that Raptor should have improved this situation but it seems not.


----------



## TSportM

sblantipodi said:


> 2 sticks can do much better but it's unclear to me why they sell 4 sticks mobo if you "can't use it".
> 
> Damn I can use XMP no problem with 2 sticks at 6.2MT/s and can't go past 5.2MT/s with 4 sticks.
> 
> The difference seems to big, it's like that you can use 2 sticks but not 4 sticks. I thought that Raptor should have improved this situation but it seems not.


cant comment on 4 sticks, but its normal to get worse performance on 4 sticks overall, but like i said on Samsung chips my extreme was crap, hynix chips no problem can do 7200mhz but hot but 7000mhz on my 6400 with tighter timmings is great for me

Cheers


----------



## sblantipodi

TSportM said:


> cant comment on 4 sticks, but its normal to get worse performance on 4 sticks overall, but like i said on Samsung chips my extreme was crap, hynix chips no problem can do 7200mhz but hot but 7000mhz on my 6400 with tighter timmings is great for me
> 
> Cheers


I have SK Hinyx chip.


----------



## serjserj77

My processor is so bad that it even causes a bunch of errors for 6200 XMP 40-40-40-76 
12900kf, Apex, Hynix 6200
SP40
SP CPU 81


----------



## CptSpig

sblantipodi said:


> 2 sticks can do much better but it's unclear to me why they sell 4 sticks mobo if you "can't use it".
> 
> Damn I can use XMP no problem with 2 sticks at 6.2MT/s and can't go past 5.2MT/s with 4 sticks.
> 
> The difference seems to big, it's like that you can use 2 sticks but not 4 sticks. I thought that Raptor should have improved this situation but it seems not.


Eventually there will be matched 4-stick kits.


----------



## TSportM

sblantipodi said:


> I have SK Hinyx chip.


A or B die ?


----------



## Gking62

so, how are you guys finding this MC SP? I've looked all over and cannot see it.


----------



## 7empe

Gking62 said:


> so, how are you guys finding this MC SP? I've looked all over and cannot see it.


You need bios 2203 for that.


----------



## Gking62

7empe said:


> You need bios 2203 for that.


welp that explains it  link? ty


----------



## 7empe

Gking62 said:


> welp that explains it  link? ty








RaptorLake Resources


i will use this as a collection of test bioses/tools/info targeted towards Raptorlake + z69/790 NOTE for Z690: You must update ME on your Z690 to properly support raptorlake (if you are on dual bioses then you need to do this to both bioses) 1) d/l and install ME driver...



rog.asus.com


----------



## Gking62

7empe said:


> RaptorLake Resources
> 
> 
> i will use this as a collection of test bioses/tools/info targeted towards Raptorlake + z69/790 NOTE for Z690: You must update ME on your Z690 to properly support raptorlake (if you are on dual bioses then you need to do this to both bioses) 1) d/l and install ME driver...
> 
> 
> 
> rog.asus.com


ahh right, I had that page bookmarked but on the 3rd page, feeling dumb now but ty


----------



## sblantipodi

TSportM said:


> A or B die ?


I don't know how to tell it, I'm using two kits of 
DDR5 DRAM DOMINATOR PLATINUM RGB 32GB (2x16GB) 6200MHz C36 from Corsair

how can I tell if it's A die or B die?

I know for sure that they are SK Hynix.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

sblantipodi said:


> I don't know how to tell it, I'm using two kits of
> DDR5 DRAM DOMINATOR PLATINUM RGB 32GB (2x16GB) 6200MHz C36 from Corsair
> 
> how can I tell if it's A die or B die?
> 
> I know for sure that they are SK Hynix.


That's M-Die. I have the same set(2x16) and have it @7200MHz CL32.


----------



## TSportM

sblantipodi said:


> I don't know how to tell it, I'm using two kits of
> DDR5 DRAM DOMINATOR PLATINUM RGB 32GB (2x16GB) 6200MHz C36 from Corsair
> 
> how can I tell if it's A die or B die?
> 
> I know for sure that they are SK Hynix.


In the box you can see that an on sticker on the module itself, but does are M die, think you Will have better luck with B or A die, possibilty….
but its recomended that yoi ditch the other 2 modules, do you need 64gb for any particulary reason ?


cheers


----------



## 050

I'm on bios version 2103, Asus z690-E and a 12900ks. When I set my v/f curve points, set the vcore to "auto" and set the vcore auto voltage cap to 1.48v, I can see in hwinfo64 that the cpu boosts to 5.8ghz on (the allowed) certain p cores, and when running light single threaded loads it achieves effective clocks of roughly 5.7-5.75ghz at the highest. If I leave the v/f points the same, but raise the score auto voltage cap to 1.52v, I would expect that the extra headroom would allow for better/higher boosting but instead I see those same cores boosting to a maximum effective clock of 5.65ghz instead. Any idea why lowering the auto vcore limit/cap would cause a less aggressive boosting? Thermals are a non- issue, in both cases the cpu is only around 65c max.


----------



## 673714

sblantipodi said:


> Thank you for the link I appreciate it.
> Can you help me reading it?
> 
> I have 4x16GB, a 16GB stick should be single rank as far as I know.
> 
> So am I in this situation where the supported frequency is up to 4GHz?
> 
> View attachment 2584916
> 
> 
> Am I right? Thanks!!!


I once found a page on the Intel website where they stated the CPU MC was rated up to 4800MHz on 12th gen and 5600MHz on 13th gen. So that means anything above that is technically overclocked.








*Official* Intel DDR5 OC and 24/7 daily Memory Stability...


Wondering if anyone here is running this G Skill kit? 6400J3239G16GX2-TZ5RK (6400 32-39-39-102) Wondering what kind of OC I can expect from this paired with a 13700K and a Unify Z690I. Or should I go ahead and jump up to the newer 7200 kits that just came out? +$150 F5-7200J3445G16GX2-TZ5RK...




www.overclock.net





Then there's a post on Reddit where an Asus representative says 5000-5200MHz is the optimal range w/ 4 sticks.
Yet information from that page I linked yesterday seems to suggest as low as 3600MHz or as high as 5200MHz for 4 sticks depending on rank?.
All I know for sure is that as a rule of thumb DDR5 runs best on a motherboard with only 2 Dimm slots, and 4 slot boards can't go as high, especially with all 4 slots populated.
Not many people are overclocking 4 Dimm (with all 4 populated) setups, but some have got into the 6000s or so iirc.
What sucks is I didn't realize this until I already had a 4 Dimm motherboard, and it was well beyond the return period.
I leave 2 Dimms empty, and can overclock to 6600MHz easy, and just got a 7600MHz kit to try today with my 13900K, so I've got a lot of work to do 

Here's a little more on the topic:





DDR5 - is there ANY advantage to using 4 sticks instead of 2 - other than looks...?


DDR5 - is there ANY advantage to using 4 sticks instead of 2 - other than looks...? I have seen one of Linus' YouTube videos where he says that using (2) 32 GB (64 GB) sticks of RAM - instead of (4) 16 GB (64 GB) of RAM is easier on the CPU's memory controller...?




linustechtips.com





If you have a good cpu and motherboard you can probably get up to 6000-6200MHz, but it doesn't sound easy.
Good luck, hopefully you can figure out what works best for you


----------



## morph.

LilOliVert said:


> I once found a page on the Intel website where they stated the CPU MC was rated up to 4800MHz on 12th gen and 5600MHz on 13th gen. So that means anything above that is technically overclocked.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Official* Intel DDR5 OC and 24/7 daily Memory Stability...
> 
> 
> Wondering if anyone here is running this G Skill kit? 6400J3239G16GX2-TZ5RK (6400 32-39-39-102) Wondering what kind of OC I can expect from this paired with a 13700K and a Unify Z690I. Or should I go ahead and jump up to the newer 7200 kits that just came out? +$150 F5-7200J3445G16GX2-TZ5RK...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then there's a post on Reddit where an Asus representative says 5000-5200MHz is the optimal range w/ 4 sticks.
> Yet information from that page I linked yesterday seems to suggest as low as 3600MHz or as high as 5200MHz for 4 sticks depending on rank?.
> All I know for sure is that as a rule of thumb DDR5 runs best on a motherboard with only 2 Dimm slots, and 4 slot boards can't go as high, especially with all 4 slots populated.
> Not many people are overclocking 4 Dimm (with all 4 populated) setups, but some have got into the 6000s or so iirc.
> What sucks is I didn't realize this until I already had a 4 Dimm motherboard, and it was well beyond the return period.
> I leave 2 Dimms empty, and can overclock to 6600MHz easy, and just got a 7600MHz kit to try today with my 13900K, so I've got a lot of work to do
> 
> Here's a little more on the topic:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DDR5 - is there ANY advantage to using 4 sticks instead of 2 - other than looks...?
> 
> 
> DDR5 - is there ANY advantage to using 4 sticks instead of 2 - other than looks...? I have seen one of Linus' YouTube videos where he says that using (2) 32 GB (64 GB) sticks of RAM - instead of (4) 16 GB (64 GB) of RAM is easier on the CPU's memory controller...?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> linustechtips.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you have a good cpu and motherboard you can probably get up to 6000-6200MHz, but it doesn't sound easy.
> Good luck, hopefully you can figure out what works best for you


You are over complicating it a little bit. It is the same concept as ddr4 as well as ddr5. XMP is classed as overclocking. It is just that DDR4 is much more mature. People forget how bleeding edge ddr5 is as it’s only been out just over a year…

Running more than a pair of sticks will increase IMC stress thus inhibiting the maximum/extreme overclockability.

Dual dimm / XOC motherboards tend to have better dimm topology traces. They also have the two slots as close as possible to one another to have the shortest signal distance this the best ms fastest signal strength. This all plays a part on getting the most out of ram oc.


----------



## 673714

morph. said:


> You are over complicating it a little bit. It is the same concept as ddr4 as well as ddr5. XMP is classed as overclocking. It is just that DDR4 is much more mature. People forget how bleeding edge ddr5 is as it’s only been out just over a year…
> 
> Running more than a pair of sticks will increase IMC stress thus inhibiting the maximum/extreme overclockability.
> 
> Dual dimm / XOC motherboards tend to have better dimm topology traces. They also have the two slots as close as possible to one another to have the shortest signal distance this the best ms fastest signal strength. This all plays a part on getting the most out of ram oc.


Yes, what you are saying is essentially right, but it's not me overcomplicating it, as much as DDR5 is more complicated than DDR4


----------



## sblantipodi

TSportM said:


> In the box you can see that an on sticker on the module itself, but does are M die, think you Will have better luck with B or A die, possibilty….
> but its recomended that yoi ditch the other 2 modules, do you need 64gb for any particulary reason ?
> 
> 
> cheers


On the box of the ram and on the sticks itself there is no mention to M die.
How can I tell if they are m die or a die or b die?

And what a, b or m die means exactly?
This is a noob question but Google doesn't have a clear answer for it.


----------



## bscool

There is also MB variation. I know people who have bought 2 z690 Formula MB as an example and with 2 or 4 dim 1 MB will OC better than another. So unless you wanna bin MBs it is not just about having a good IMC and memory.

I have seen people post about nothing but problems with a MB since release. I have no idea why they keep using it or thinking a bios update is going to make it better.

I had a 2021 Apex that will only do 6400 stable consistently, no bios update will fix it. Putting the same component in 2022 z690 Apex or z790 Apex let me run 7000 to 8000 with 2x16. Bios updates will never fix a weak/bad MB.


----------



## 673714

bscool said:


> There is also MB variation. I know people who have bought 2 z690 Formula MB as an example and with 2 or 4 dim 1 MB will OC better than another. So unless you wanna bin MBs it is not just about having a good IMC and memory.
> 
> I have seen people post about nothing but problems with a MB since release. I have no idea why they keep using it or thinking a bios update is going to make it better.
> 
> I had a 2021 Apex that will only do 6400 stable consistently, no bios update will fix it. Putting the same component in 2022 z690 Apex or z790 Apex let me run 7000 to 8000 with 2x16. Bios updates will never fix a weak/bad MB.


Exactly! That's why as soon as I discovered a weak Dimm on my original board, I wasted no time starting an RMA! 
Same story here, new board is a totally different ballgame. Learning DDR5 overclocking can be a nightmare, or kinda fun, mostly depends on if you have good hardware to begin with


----------



## affxct

sblantipodi said:


> On the box of the ram and on the sticks itself there is no mention to M die.
> How can I tell if they are m die or a die or b die?
> 
> And what a, b or m die means exactly?
> This is a noob question but Google doesn't have a clear answer for it.


I’ve got you.

1. Any XMP at 4800-5200 is usually Micron A-die.
2. Any XMP at 6800+ is guaranteed Hynix A-die.
3. G.SKILL Z5 6400C32 and 6600C34 kits marked with an 820A tag are Hynix A-die, and those marked with an 820M tag are Hynix M-die.
4. Kingston 6000+ kits are Hynix M-die, and on rare occasions the 6000C36/40 kits are Samsung B-die.
5. Kits with CAS 30/32 are currently exclusively Hynix M-die.
6. G.SKILL/CORSAIR/ADATA kits at 5600-6000 with CAS 36/40 are almost exclusively Samsung B-die (some rare ADATA kits are Hynix M).
7. For basic sticks; Klevv 4800 kits are Hynix M-die, SK Hynix 5600 46-45-45 kits are Hynix A-die, TeamGroup 5600-6000 1.1V kits are Hynix M-die, and Adata 5600 46-45-45 kits are binned Samsung B-die.
8. Corsair and TeamGroup kits at 6200-6400 are exclusively Hynix M-die.
9. All Crucial kits are Micron A-die (currently).


----------



## sblantipodi

affxct said:


> I’ve got you.
> 
> 1. Any XMP at 4800-5200 is usually Micron A-die.
> 2. Any XMP at 6800+ is guaranteed Hynix A-die.
> 3. G.SKILL Z5 6400C32 and 6600C34 kits marked with an 820A tag are Hynix A-die, and those marked with an 820M tag are Hynix M-die.
> 4. Kingston 6000+ kits are Hynix M-die, and on rare occasions the 6000C36/40 kits are Samsung B-die.
> 5. Kits with CAS 30/32 are currently exclusively Hynix M-die.
> 6. G.SKILL/CORSAIR/ADATA kits at 5600-6000 with CAS 36/40 are almost exclusively Samsung B-die (some rare ADATA kits are Hynix M).
> 7. For basic sticks; Klevv 4800 kits are Hynix M-die, SK Hynix 5600 46-45-45 kits are Hynix A-die, TeamGroup 5600-6000 1.1V kits are Hynix M-die, and Adata 5600 46-45-45 kits are binned Samsung B-die.
> 8. Corsair and TeamGroup kits at 6200-6400 are exclusively Hynix M-die.
> 9. All Crucial kits are Micron A-die (currently).


Wow, I'll save this post for the future. Thank you very much, I really appreciate it.
So is my M die bad for raptor lake?


----------



## affxct

sblantipodi said:


> Wow, I'll save this post for the future. Thank you very much, I really appreciate it.
> So is my M die bad for raptor lake?


I wouldn’t say that. The only correlation between ICs and performance seems to be related to bad BIOSs or unoptimised ones. As with very early ASUS Z690 and Samsung, as well as current revisions that lack optimisations for Hynix A-die, and potentially some that lack optimisation for Hynix M-die, the CPU should not really be a factor. My Dark currently lacks Hynix A optimisation, and I’ve heard that some Z690 BIOSs currently have sort-of de-optimised Hynix M in place of Hynix A to a degree (not sure). BIOS 2201 on my friend’s MZ690H can train up to 7000 on Hynix M and 7600 on my Hynix A. With 2103 we could not even get Hynix M to train 6800 haha. So 2201 (and 2203) are objectively better tuned for Raptor Lake IMCs (in our opinion/subjective experience).


----------



## sblantipodi

affxct said:


> I wouldn’t say that. The only correlation between ICs and performance seems to be related to bad BIOSs or unoptimised ones. As with very early ASUS Z690 and Samsung, as well as current revisions that lack optimisations for Hynix A-die, and potentially some that lack optimisation for Hynix M-die, the CPU should not really be a factor. My Dark currently lacks Hynix A optimisation, and I’ve heard that some Z690 BIOSs currently have sort-of de-optimised Hynix M in place of Hynix A to a degree (not sure). BIOS 2201 on my friend’s MZ690H can train up to 7000 on Hynix M and 7600 on my Hynix A. With 2103 we could not even get Hynix M to train 6800 haha. So 2201 (and 2203) are objectively better tuned for Raptor Lake IMCs (in our opinion/subjective experience).


thank you very much!!!


----------



## 7empe

Now I can confirm that this was not Apex Z690 (November 2021) that made issues with mem oc. It was IMC on 12900KF. Fun fact is that I checked 5 CPUs back then, from different batches, none of them could do higer mem oc than 6400-6666 on g.skill 6400 CL32 kit (m-die).

12900KF (the best from the tested set): MC SP 45
13900KF (current): MC SP 81
The highest stable mem oc for 12900KF was 6666 30-39-39-28 at VDD/VDDQ 1.48V/1.40V. Could boot up to 7000 MT/s.
With 13900KF I'm doing now 6800 30-39-39-36 at VDD/VDDQ 1.49V/1.40V easy. Can boot up to 7800 MT/s at VDD 1.55V. CPU at 58x all core, no avx offset, 52x ring.

Let's see how far I can push it.

M-die is not so bad...


----------



## affxct

sblantipodi said:


> thank you very much!!!


Happy to help


----------



## affxct

7empe said:


> Now I can confirm that this was not Apex Z690 (November 2021) that made issues with mem oc. It was IMC on 12900KF. Fun fact is that I checked 5 CPUs back then, from different batches, none of them could do higer mem oc than 6400-6666 on g.skill 6400 CL32 kit (m-die).
> 
> 12900KF (the best from the tested set): MC SP 45
> 13900KF (current): MC SP 81
> The highest stable mem oc for 12900KF was 6666 30-39-39-28 at VDD/VDDQ 1.48V/1.40V. Could boot up to 7000 MT/s.
> With 13900KF I'm doing now 6800 30-39-39-36 at VDD/VDDQ 1.49V/1.40V easy. Can boot up to 7800 MT/s at VDD 1.55V. CPU at 58x all core, no avx offset, 52x ring.
> 
> Let's see how far I can push it.
> 
> M-die is not so bad...


Wow, so bad IMCs just make not great Apex sample performance awful. I wonder what my old Apex could do with my current CPU.


----------



## IronAge

Supported by Intel, make 12900K IMC look worse sell more 13900K.


----------



## Agent-A01

7empe said:


> Now I can confirm that this was not Apex Z690 (November 2021) that made issues with mem oc. It was IMC on 12900KF. Fun fact is that I checked 5 CPUs back then, from different batches, none of them could do higer mem oc than 6400-6666 on g.skill 6400 CL32 kit (m-die).
> 
> 12900KF (the best from the tested set): MC SP 45
> 13900KF (current): MC SP 81
> The highest stable mem oc for 12900KF was 6666 30-39-39-28 at VDD/VDDQ 1.48V/1.40V. Could boot up to 7000 MT/s.
> With 13900KF I'm doing now 6800 30-39-39-36 at VDD/VDDQ 1.49V/1.40V easy. Can boot up to 7800 MT/s at VDD 1.55V. CPU at 58x all core, no avx offset, 52x ring.
> 
> Let's see how far I can push it.
> 
> M-die is not so bad...


I doubt you'll stabilize much more than 7000.

My 12900K did 6800 max stable on 2021 apex, with 13900K it did 7000.
I could boot XMP 7600 but impossible to stabilize > 7000 but that was before newest A-die optimized BIOS, maybe you will get lucky.


----------



## Gking62

so having updated to BIOS 2203, what constitutes an above average MC SP? mine is 82, ty.


----------



## 673714

Well, I got the 13900K installed on my Z690 Extreme and I was hoping for some better results but here's where it landed.
SP = 95
P cores = 105
E cores = 76
MC = 69

They're better than my 12900K was, but I was expecting a P core SP of like 110+ and the MC to be 75+ honestly.
Now I'm not sure what I want to do 

*Previously with 12900K
SP = 81
P cores = 88
E cores = 69
MC = 42


----------



## 7empe

LilOliVert said:


> Well, I got the 13900K installed on my Z690 Extreme and I was hoping for some better results but here's where it landed.
> SP = 95
> P cores = 105
> E cores = 76
> MC = 69
> 
> They're better than my 12900K was, but I was expecting a P core SP of like 110+ and the MC to be 75+ honestly.
> Now I'm not sure what I want to do
> 
> *Previously with 12900K
> SP = 81
> P cores = 88
> E cores = 69
> MC = 42


Don't rely on the SP score too much. You need to test it during manual oc.


----------



## sblantipodi

Gking62 said:


> so having updated to BIOS 2203, what constitutes an above average MC SP? mine is 82, ty.


my 13900K has a MC SP of 76.

82 should be good enough


----------



## Agent-A01

LilOliVert said:


> Well, I got the 13900K installed on my Z690 Extreme and I was hoping for some better results but here's where it landed.
> SP = 95
> P cores = 105
> E cores = 76
> MC = 69
> 
> They're better than my 12900K was, but I was expecting a P core SP of like 110+ and the MC to be 75+ honestly.
> Now I'm not sure what I want to do
> 
> *Previously with 12900K
> SP = 81
> P cores = 88
> E cores = 69
> MC = 42


Try checking other bios. My SP was bugged on my Z690 apex, read SP89 but correct # was SP105.


----------



## monday_morning_qb

LilOliVert said:


> Well, I got the 13900K installed on my Z690 Extreme and I was hoping for some better results but here's where it landed.
> SP = 95
> P cores = 105
> E cores = 76
> MC = 69
> 
> They're better than my 12900K was, but I was expecting a P core SP of like 110+ and the MC to be 75+ honestly.
> Now I'm not sure what I want to do
> 
> *Previously with 12900K
> SP = 81
> P cores = 88
> E cores = 69
> MC = 42


I also had a 95 on a Z690 Apex (BIOS 2103)
SP=95
P=103
E=81
MC= never checked on newer BIOS

I ended up returning it since I can easily wait for the KS in a few months.

The very weird thing I noticed is that the 13900K (stock) idled 6 C hotter than my 12900K (OC). Both sat around 0.760V on the desktop and the 13900K ran 32C and the 12900K runs 26C. I even tried remounting and got the exact same results. I started to think that maybe my IHS had a defect in the solder or something.


----------



## 673714

monday_morning_qb said:


> I also had a 95 on a Z690 Apex (BIOS 2103)
> SP=95
> P=103
> E=81
> MC= never checked on newer BIOS
> 
> I ended up returning it since I can easily wait for the KS in a few months.
> 
> The very weird thing I noticed is that the 13900K (stock) idled 6 C hotter than my 12900K (OC). Both sat around 0.760V on the desktop and the 13900K ran 32C and the 12900K runs 26C. I even tried remounting and got the exact same results. I started to think that maybe my IHS had a defect in the solder or something.


Yeah I think I'll do some testing with it, and unless it's far better than the SP suggests, I'll buy another and return it. I don't know if I want to wait for KS though, do they run even hotter than the K versions typically?


----------



## Juggalo23451

I have a stupid question so I got the z690 formula. I checked the bios and it says to update Intel firmware before upgrading the bios. Would it matter if I upgrade the bios then the firmware?


----------



## sblantipodi

Juggalo23451 said:


> I have a stupid question so I got the z690 formula. I checked the bios and it says to update Intel firmware before upgrading the bios. Would it matter if I upgrade the bios then the firmware?


no


----------



## bscool

Juggalo23451 said:


> I have a stupid question so I got the z690 formula. I checked the bios and it says to update Intel firmware before upgrading the bios. Would it matter if I upgrade the bios then the firmware?


If you flash the bios first and have your OS on NVME driver for some without the newer ME FIrmware the top NVME drive will not show up so then you will need to move it to another slot or use Sata SSD/HDD to update ME so I would do ME firmware first and then bios.


----------



## Papusan

Juggalo23451 said:


> I have a stupid question so I got the z690 formula. I checked the bios and it says to update Intel firmware before upgrading the bios. Would it matter if I upgrade the bios then the firmware?


Save the link for later (beta bioses) RaptorLake Resources

Heres the correct order... And how to prepare firmware updates.









-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Installed Bios 2203. MC SP75










How does the G.Skill Trident Z5 RGB DDR5-7200 work with the late 2021 Z690 Apex board and 13900K? Anyone who have this ram kit and can tell how it worked out for you? Thanks.


----------



## Juggalo23451

bscool said:


> If you flash the bios first and have your OS on NVME driver for some without the newer ME FIrmware the top NVME drive will not show up so then you will need to move it to another slot or use Sata ssd/NDD to update ME so I would do ME firmware first and then bios.


I would be getting raptor lake. I don't have a 12gen cpu that's the only problem. Best bet is to put Os on a SSD. Then update firmware.then transfer is to a different drive.


----------



## 7empe

More or less I know what to expect from my 13900KF now (SP 108, P 118, E 88, MC 81). It's a damn cool sample. I do not use OCTVB this time - got better results without clock oscillations.

E-Cores disabled (LLC5, AC_LL *0.01*, Adaptive voltage 1.43V)

AVX offset: 0x
P-Cores: 63x2, 62x3, 61x4, 60x5, 59x6, 58x8
Ring: 52x
All-core Vcore under y-cruncher's SFT load: 1.225V (die sense), ~300W and max temp 88 on 420mm rad wc.
E-Cores enabled (LLC5, AC_LL *0.12*, Adaptive voltage 1.44V)

AVX offset: 0x
P-Cores: 63x2, 62x3, 61x4, 60x5, 59x6, 58x8.
E-Cores: 45x16
Ring: 51x
Memory at 6800c32:

VDD/VDDQ: 1.46V
CPU VDDQ: 1.30V
MC: 1.43V (1.38V under load)
SA: 1.20V
[*EDIT:* more benchmarks added]

(e-cores disabled):































(e-cores enabled):


----------



## SuperMumrik

Testing my a-dies again with new cpu (mc85) on my trusty apex (been on m-die due to unmature bios for rpl).
Training is waaay better now on (0001 and) 2203.
Can't quite hit 8k yet as it seems to requre some work, but 7800c34 seems to easy and is re-train stable and got some what decent performance.
To bad my motherboard require high VDD and my dimms don't scale well with high VDD 😅

This is with naked G.Skill 6600 with a fan (my waterblock is still attached to the m-dies).


----------



## 7empe

SuperMumrik said:


> Testing my a-dies again with new cpu (mc85) on my trusty apex (been on m-die due to unmature bios for rpl).
> Training is waaay better now on (0001 and) 2203.
> Can't quite hit 8k yet as it seems to requre some work, but 7800c34 seems to easy and is re-train stable and got some what decent performance.
> To bad my motherboard require high VDD and my dimms don't scale well with high VDD 😅
> 
> This is with naked G.Skill 6600 with a fan (my waterblock is still attached to the m-dies).
> View attachment 2585719
> 
> View attachment 2585721


I wonder how does it go with testing N32 in y-cruncher (test 15). Does your CPU works well with the VDD2 (MC voltage) generated by the motherboard? If test crashes, is your memory stable game-wise?


----------



## SuperMumrik

7empe said:


> wonder how does it go with testing N32 in y-cruncher (test 15). Does your CPU works well with the VDD2 (MC voltage) generated by the motherboard?


Stable MC voltage om m-dies @7300c32 was 1.375V. Y-cruncher was no issue. 
I'm running 1.45 now, but that's just for initial testing. Can bring it down for sure! 


7empe said:


> If test crashes, is your memory stable game-wise?


Usually no, it will fail in warzone eventually if it isn't stable. I run low settings with high framerate so it stresses cpu and ram quite a lot


----------



## sblantipodi

latest 2203 BIOS seems to push harder the ring clock at default settings.










with previous BIOS never seen values higher than 4600MHz, now 5GHz seems the new normal.


----------



## Papusan

New test bios out... v2204 RaptorLake Resources

Please, tell how it works if you flash it. Thanks


----------



## TSportM

Yea 

will be trying it as soon as i can… does any one have feedback on 2204 ?

cheers


----------



## SuperMumrik

Papusan said:


> New test bios out... v2204 RaptorLake Resources
> 
> Please, tell how it works if you flash it. Thanks


Nice! I'll test with both A and M-die later =)


----------



## satinghostrider

TSportM said:


> Yea
> 
> will be trying it as soon as i can… does any one have feedback on 2204 ?
> 
> cheers


Interested to know as well later when I test.
Wonder if there are any microcode changes based on the latest one.


----------



## 7empe

[deleted]
(my mistake)


----------



## satinghostrider

2204 bios no microcode change. Still 10E.
Doesn't seem to do anything for memory worth flashing to. Didn't try others yet.


----------



## TSportM

satinghostrider said:


> 2204 bios no microcode change. Still 10E.
> Doesn't seem to do anything for memory worth flashing to. Didn't try others yet.



its basicly 2203 more refined from what i tested, boot times have improved, and less voltage fluctuations but more voltage, its better overall

cheers


----------



## satinghostrider

TSportM said:


> its basicly 2203 more refined from what i tested, boot times have improved, and less voltage fluctuations, its better overall
> 
> cheers


Yes I noticed ddr5 voltage is hell of alot more stable and less drops under load. Boot times also have improved slightly.

Still need to test further but Cinebench R23 seems to draw consistent power and much more consistent between runs. I remembered 2203 had sometimes slight power spikes around 10-15W. Right now between runs seems much more in line with what it's supposed to be consuming.


----------



## sblantipodi

hi guys, I noticed a strange behaviour on WIndows 11...
it seems that the power management profile switches automatically to "ultimate performance".










this means that my CPU never goes below 5.6GHz even in idle.

is this something new?
I never seen this before, is there some Asus app that can switch that profile to ultimage automatically?


----------



## Papusan

Papusan said:


> Installed Bios 2203. MC SP75
> View attachment 2585576
> 
> 
> 
> How does the G.Skill Trident Z5 RGB DDR5-7200 work with the late 2021 Z690 Apex board and 13900K? Anyone who have this ram kit and can tell how it worked out for you? Thanks.





Papusan said:


> New test bios out... v2204 RaptorLake Resources
> 
> Please, tell how it works if you flash it. Thanks


MC SP increased from 75 to 77 after bios v2204


----------



## bscool

sblantipodi said:


> hi guys, I noticed a strange behaviour on WIndows 11...
> it seems that the power management profile switches automatically to "ultimate performance".
> 
> View attachment 2586194
> 
> 
> this means that my CPU never goes below 5.6GHz even in idle.
> 
> is this something new?
> I never seen this before, is there some Asus app that can switch that profile to ultimage automatically?


Funny I saw someone on a German forum said their PC started switching to balanced or power saver. Sounds like a Windows or software issue.

I have been running Windows 10 and havent noticed any power plan switching on any of my PCs.

Edit why does your PC have a HP power plan, is this your z690 Asus system? Or is that a generic photo?


----------



## sblantipodi

bscool said:


> Funny I saw someone on a German forum said their PC started switching to balanced or power saver. Sounds like a Windows or software issue.
> 
> I have been running Windows 10 and havent noticed any power plan switching on any of my PCs.
> 
> Edit why does your PC have a HP power plan, is this your z690 Asus system? Or is that a generic photo?


generic photo from the internet, using a Z690 Extreme here.


----------



## sblantipodi

asus website is down and I cannot download 2204


----------



## bscool

sblantipodi said:


> generic photo from the internet, using a Z690 Extreme here.


I found the post, I was wrong his goes to High Performance also. Die Dinos sind da: Die Raptor-Lake-Prozessoren sind eingetroffen

I read thru it and he has a lot of different software he uses from Asus Armout Crate(fan expert, RGB etc) to Logitech so no idea if it is Windows 11 issue or software. But it sounds like your not alone.


----------



## TSportM

sblantipodi said:


> asus website is down and I cannot download 2204


here it is









ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-2204


MediaFire is a simple to use free service that lets you put all your photos, documents, music, and video in a single place so you can access them anywhere and share them everywhere.



www.mediafire.com






@sblantipodi give-me feedback if you see any better stuff on your side


----------



## Wihglah

Strix -E couldn't boot RAM faster than 7000MT's, even with loose timings.

Updated my BIOS - immediately booted at XMP...


----------



## affxct

Wihglah said:


> Strix -E couldn't boot RAM faster than 7000MT's, even with loose timings.
> 
> Updated my BIOS - immediately booted at XMP...
> 
> View attachment 2586235


Z790 or Z690?


----------



## Wihglah

affxct said:


> Z790 or Z690?


Z790 / 13900K


----------



## sblantipodi

TSportM said:


> here it is
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-EXTREME-ASUS-2204
> 
> 
> MediaFire is a simple to use free service that lets you put all your photos, documents, music, and video in a single place so you can access them anywhere and share them everywhere.
> 
> 
> 
> www.mediafire.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @sblantipodi give-me feedback if you see any better stuff on your side


MC SP increased from 76 to 77 switching from 2203 to 2204,
I would consider it a difference in the "margin of error".

I can't get 5.4GHz stable on 4 sticks as before but I can easily train 5.6GHz and boot windows with no error (like on older bios).

I'll try to improve timings on 5.2GHz on my M-DIE Hynix to see if I can squeeze something else from this new bios.


----------



## WayWayUp

can someone point me to where i can locate MC SP ?


----------



## sblantipodi

WayWayUp said:


> can someone point me to where i can locate MC SP ?


Extreme tweaker, AI features.
To see the value the first time you need to click the Get MC SP. 
It will take some time to get that value so don't worry if the screen goes black.


----------



## Nizzen

WayWayUp said:


> can someone point me to where i can locate MC SP ?


Under AI if you have a new bios


----------



## Wihglah

Nizzen said:


> Under AI if you have a new bios


Is this just an Apex thing?


----------



## Nizzen

Wihglah said:


> Is this just an Apex thing?


Maximus series of z690 and z790.


----------



## fitnessgrampacertest

Asus site is still down, anybody have a shareable link for bios 2204 on Z690 *APEX*?


----------



## Papusan

fitnessgrampacertest said:


> Asus site is still down, anybody have a shareable link for bios 2204 on Z690 *APEX*?


*ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-APEX-ASUS-2204*


----------



## SuperMumrik

Papusan said:


> New test bios out... v2204 RaptorLake Resources
> 
> Please, tell how it works if you flash it. Thanks


I can't really tell any difference between 2203 and 2204.
M-die is as good as ever and A-die works, but is still finicky as hell 😅


----------



## themad

I have just started playing around with my Apex and 12900k. I have not changed voltages yet but I am concerned if the cpu cooling is good enough.

Some BIOS Settings:


Spoiler



P-cores: AI Optimize
E-Cores: AI Optimize
Voltages are all default
DDR5 set to XMP1
Maximum CPU Core Temperature [AUTO]
Package Temperature Threshold [95]
Regulate Frequency by above Threshold [ENABLE]
Cooler Rating is 160 (if that makes any difference)



With that I hit 28400 in Cinebench R23 (10min), CPU-Z bench 880 single thread and 12000 multi thread.
Temps stabilize around 82C, but has some instant peaks of 91C, 92C in some cores. Ambient (inside case) is around 30C, I'd say.
Effective P-core clocks are max 5100Mhz for one or two cores only. Others are around 4900Mhz.
I see a few cores hit 1.359V but usually less than that.

Questions:
1-Is 82C temp OK? Should I change radiator fans (or reseat the CPU, get a contact frame) before messing with the voltages?
2-Where should I go from here? Should I fix Vcore to something like 1.40V, re-run CB23 and see how it goes? P-core clocks seem quite far from what they could do.
3-Which temps should I closely monitor? CPU Package is the most important and keep an eye on P and E-cores temps?

Thanks in advance!

System is below:


Spoiler



12900k - SP Score: 98 (P 88, E 77)
Cooling: Lian Li 360mm AIO CPU. Case is well vented
Gskill DDR5 6400Mhz 2x16Gb (fans on the rams, temps below 45C on TM5 @absolut777)
Z690 Apex Bios 2103
HWinfo64 v7.32-4900 for monitoring
PSU Asus 1200W


----------



## kmellz

Man I want to try the new bios, what are they even doing to the website xD


----------



## TSportM

sblantipodi said:


> MC SP increased from 76 to 77 switching from 2203 to 2204,
> I would consider it a difference in the "margin of error".
> 
> I can't get 5.4GHz stable on 4 sticks as before but I can easily train 5.6GHz and boot windows with no error (like on older bios).
> 
> I'll try to improve timings on 5.2GHz on my M-DIE Hynix to see if I can squeeze something else from this new bios.


Test this way

svid behavior to- typical

llc to - 3

xmp tweaked - voltages to 1.4 and vvdq 1.390

Remove all kimits 

cpu current to 140%

all other settings to extreme and 511.72 A 4095w etc etc 

test this way and see if you can get it to boot on default memory (XMP)

cheers


----------



## sblantipodi

TSportM said:


> Test this way
> 
> svid behavior to- typical
> 
> llc to - 3
> 
> xmp tweaked - voltages to 1.4 and vvdq 1.390
> 
> Remove all kimits
> 
> cpu current to 140%
> 
> all other settings to extreme and 511.72 A 4095w etc etc
> 
> test this way and see if you can get it to boot on default memory (XMP)
> 
> cheers


No way the extreme can boot at 6.2MT/s with my m-die and even if I can boot it no way to stabilize that frequency with 4 sticks.


----------



## pinkmonster95

anyone have the intel ME version ending 2020 and also 2204? asus website is still down... currently running z690 formula mobo.


----------



## H3adex

Asus site is still down, anybody have link for bios 2204 on Z690 Hero plz ?


----------



## jerrytsao

Anyone has Z690 Formula BIOS 2204 as forum is still down?


----------



## hoanglonglhp

Me too, anybody have link for bios 2204 on Z690 Hero please send.


----------



## Wihglah

Dammit - spent 2 days tracking down a recurring WHEA correctable error.











was the latest nVidia driver...


----------



## affxct

pinkmonster95 said:


> anyone have the intel ME version ending 2020 and also 2204? asus website is still down... currently running z690 formula mobo.











MEUpdateTool_16.1.25.2020_T


Folder



1drv.ms


----------



## ssgwright

anyone have a link to the hero 2204? The latest I saw was 2203 but then the forum went down


----------



## cd96bravo

I use Asus AI enabled and at times the VID is hitting 1.6v (yes 1.6v) with my 13900K. I'm having a hard time understanding setting a static voltage on the CPU (with all the LLC stuff, etc.) on my 13900K, Asus Z690 Hero, and 64GB DDR5 5600 Gskill Kit.

Would anyone be open to making a YouTube video with all the needed BIOS Z690 Hero settings? my 13900K is not a good one, SP95. just looking for all the BIOS settings for the lowest voltages and highest 100% stable clocks (even if they are CPU stock clocks) possible without ever a blue screen. Thanks in advance.


----------



## sulalin

Z690 APEX 2204/2203 BIOS TEST 


Spoiler: 2203/2204BIOS TEST


----------



## TSportM

cd96bravo said:


> I use Asus AI enabled and at times the VID is hitting 1.6v (yes 1.6v) with my 13900K. I'm having a hard time understanding setting a static voltage on the CPU (with all the LLC stuff, etc.) on my 13900K, Asus Z690 Hero, and 64GB DDR5 5600 Gskill Kit.
> 
> Would anyone be open to making a YouTube video with all the needed BIOS Z690 Hero settings? my 13900K is not a good one, SP95. just looking for all the BIOS settings for the lowest voltages and highest 100% stable clocks (even if they are CPU stock clocks) possible without ever a blue screen. Thanks in advance.


if you are using AI, set LLC to 3 and use VID to trained and set you cooler score to acording (voltage is set by that score) or use typical scenery.


----------



## ssgwright

anyone got the Hero Z690 2204 bios? I'm still having the D6 error with my 4080 if I run my ram faster than 5200mhz.


----------



## sulalin

誰有Z690-HERO 跟 E 的2203/2204BIOS？謝謝


----------



## FengXi7

Asus site is still down, anybody have a shareable link for bios 2204 on Z690 *FORMULA* ?


----------



## ssgwright

sulalin said:


> 誰有Z690-HERO 跟 E 的2203/2204BIOS？謝謝


i have 2203 i need the 2204


----------



## FengXi7

ssgwright said:


> i have 2203 i need the 2204


Do you have 2203 or 2204 for formula ?


----------



## EEE-RAY

I am getting a few crashes after trying to wake up from sleep with 2204.
No issues with total cold starts or restart, but when I try to wake the computer up from sleep by pressing a key or something all the fans spin up (normal behavior), but it doesn't progress from there and all the fans remain spinning/keyboard never lights up. I have to do a full power cycle and then BIOS indicates the PC previously failed to POST

Post core at stall is E1. Happens with 2203 bios too
Have also had POST stall at code 69 with the VGA light on. Nothing could fix it, had to reset CMOS.

Whats going on


----------



## ssgwright

FengXi7 said:


> Do you have 2203 or 2204 for formula ?


no sorry just the hero


----------



## pinkmonster95

will it be recommended to update to 2104 first den update to 2203/2204 or its okie to update to 2203/2204 straight?


----------



## 7empe

pinkmonster95 said:


> will it be recommended to update to 2104 first den update to 2203/2204 or its okie to update to 2203/2204 straight?


Go to 2204 straight.


----------



## pinkmonster95

7empe said:


> Go to 2204 straight.


i still dun have 2204. i only have 2203 on hand now.


----------



## 7empe

pinkmonster95 said:


> i still dun have 2204. i only have 2203 on hand now.


If you have an Apex, here is 2204 (change .txt to .zip).


----------



## pinkmonster95

7empe said:


> If you have an Apex, here is 2204 (change .txt to .zip).


mine is formula.


----------



## Mappi75

What a big joke Asus website (forum) since days offline...thats not normal!

Edit: today i cant boot the pc which was switched off (bios 2204).

Needed 3 reboots and unplug the monitor from power.


----------



## ssgwright

Mappi75 said:


> What a big joke Asus website (forum) since days offline...thats not normal!


nope...


----------



## EEE-RAY

Has anyone ever heard of post code error E1 from sleep?

What does that even mean? "S3 boot script execution"


----------



## 7empe

Apex on bios 2204 is crazy good.
13900KF 58x all-core, 52x cache.
M-die (g.skill 6400 c32) running 6800 C32-39-39-28 stable at VDD/Q 1.39V.

SA: 900 mV
MC: 1250 mV
VDD2 (Tx): 1250 mV


----------



## TSportM

7empe said:


> Apex on bios 2204 is crazy good.
> 13900KF 58x all-core, 52x cache.
> M-die (g.skill 6400 c32) running 6800 C32-39-39-28 stable at VDD/Q 1.39V.
> 
> SA: 900 mV
> MC: 1250 mV
> VDD2 (Tx): 1250 mV
> 
> View attachment 2586778


whats the llc, svid, voltage for your cpuand cache for does frequencies ?

cheers


----------



## 7empe

TSportM said:


> whats the llc, svid, voltage for your cpuand cache for does frequencies ?
> 
> cheers


llc=6, ac_ll=0.01, svid=1.254v (load), vcore=1.252v (load). Ring at 52x (svid 1.314v, manual ring vid 1.29v is enough).


----------



## acoustic

7empe said:


> llc=6, ac_ll=0.01, svid=1.254v (load), vcore=1.252v (load). Ring at 52x (svid 1.314v, manual ring vid 1.29v is enough).


That's really nice voltage for 52x Ring. Nice chip!


----------



## TSportM

7empe said:


> llc=6, ac_ll=0.01, svid=1.254v (load), vcore=1.252v (load). Ring at 52x (svid 1.314v, manual ring vid 1.29v is enough).


Nice, thats using auto svid behavior?

cheers


----------



## Wihglah

So 7600mt/s stability is still illusive, but I am there at 7400. 

The only thing is it seems to need 1.385v on the IMC VDD. Is this too high?


----------



## acoustic

Wihglah said:


> View attachment 2586811
> 
> 
> So 7600mt/s stability is still illusive, but I am there at 7400.
> 
> The only thing is it seems to need 1.385v on the IMC VDD. Is this too high?


Nah. 1.385v is fine. Pretty good for 7400.


----------



## 7empe

acoustic said:


> That's really nice voltage for 52x Ring. Nice chip!


SP P-Cores 118, E-Cores 88, MC 81.


----------



## acoustic

7empe said:


> SP P-Cores 118, E-Cores 88, MC 81.


Golden chip. Makes sense lol


----------



## Wihglah

acoustic said:


> Nah. 1.385v is fine. Pretty good for 7400.


Trying for 7600, what would you consider 24/7 safe?


----------



## pinkmonster95

anyone know why my oled screen on my z690 formula still have play effect despite me putting shut down effect to off and aura to aura only?


----------



## acoustic

Wihglah said:


> Trying for 7600, what would you consider 24/7 safe?


I'd try to stay under 1.45v. There's nothing official about VDDQ TX (what ASUS calls IMC VDD), but these new IMC's with 12/13th gen don't seem to like being slapped with a ton of voltage.

If I absolutely had to run 1.50v VDDQ TX, that's probably as far as I'd go, but it would need to be a significant frequency improvement to justify the risk of degradation.


----------



## FengXi7

pinkmonster95 said:


> mine is formula.


Can you share formula's 2203?


----------



## satinghostrider

pinkmonster95 said:


> anyone know why my oled screen on my z690 formula still have play effect despite me putting shut down effect to off and aura to aura only?


Use armoury Crate, go to your motherboard page, click shutdown effects then click off.

Uninstall armoury Crate after that if you don't intend to use it.


----------



## escape2k

Hi all, I wish to undervolt my cpu 12700k on my z690 hero. Need some guidance on what settings I need to change and what settings I need to play around with my silicone. Very much appreciated!


----------



## Chimper

-


----------



## 7empe

This time 6933 C32-40-40-30 stable at VDD/Q 1.45V.
SA: 900 mV
MC: 1350 mV
VDD2 (Tx): 1350 mV











7empe said:


> Apex on bios 2204 is crazy good.
> 13900KF 58x all-core, 52x cache.
> M-die (g.skill 6400 c32) running 6800 C32-39-39-28 stable at VDD/Q 1.39V.
> 
> SA: 900 mV
> MC: 1250 mV
> VDD2 (Tx): 1250 mV
> 
> View attachment 2586778


----------



## H3adex

many days later ...


----------



## kmellz

Yeah site better be the best ever made after this downtime!


----------



## sblantipodi

guys what is your PCH temp on your Z690 Extreme?









my temp is insane considering that I have a TAMB of 22°C.

will my mobo burn on summer when I'll have 8°C more?


----------



## 673714

sblantipodi said:


> guys what is your PCH temp on your Z690 Extreme?
> View attachment 2587046
> 
> 
> my temp is insane considering that I have a TAMB of 22°C.
> 
> will my mobo burn on summer when I'll have 8°C more?


That is higher than I've ever seen mine get 

The original Z690 Extreme, and the replacement I got from the RMA both top out around 50-52 once they reach normal operating temperature. It usually takes a little while to get up there, maybe 20-30 minutes. Even during benchmarks and games it really never goes much higher, but if I change the case fans from turbo to normal or silent, then it will get up to about 60


----------



## shamino1978

latest test bioses link folder








2204


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com


----------



## ssgwright

shamino1978 said:


> latest test bioses link folder
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2204
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


you my friend... are the man


----------



## sblantipodi

LilOliVert said:


> That is higher than I've ever seen mine get
> 
> The original Z690 Extreme, and the replacement I got from the RMA both top out around 50-52 once they reach normal operating temperature. It usually takes a little while to get up there, maybe 20-30 minutes. Even during benchmarks and games it really never goes much higher, but if I change the case fans from turbo to normal or silent, then it will get up to about 60


I don't know if this can be related to the fact that I have two SSD drives on the DIMM.2 slot.
should I RMA the board for this?


----------



## affxct

7empe said:


> Apex on bios 2204 is crazy good.
> 13900KF 58x all-core, 52x cache.
> M-die (g.skill 6400 c32) running 6800 C32-39-39-28 stable at VDD/Q 1.39V.
> 
> SA: 900 mV
> MC: 1250 mV
> VDD2 (Tx): 1250 mV
> 
> View attachment 2586778


I honestly commend you for sticking to M-die. I freakin’ hate A-die. To call A-die a hassle would be an understatement. Such a nightmare of an IC.


----------



## TSportM

sblantipodi said:


> I don't know if this can be related to the fact that I have two SSD drives on the DIMM.2 slot.
> should I RMA the board for this?


i had that thermal problem on early bios, there is a setting to reduce that alot, but you should not be that hot on idle, you should check if something is loading the pch, also use another program to monitor it, also air flow in your case, how do have the 4090 mounted ?

cheers


----------



## 673714

sblantipodi said:


> I don't know if this can be related to the fact that I have two SSD drives on the DIMM.2 slot.
> should I RMA the board for this?


Oh idk, to be honest I’ve never tried using the DIMM.2


----------



## SuperMumrik

affxct said:


> I honestly commend you for sticking to M-die. I freakin’ hate A-die. To call A-die a hassle would be an understatement. Such a nightmare of an IC.


Agree! I'm still running my m-dies for daily


----------



## sblantipodi

TSportM said:


> i had that thermal problem on early bios, there is a setting to reduce that alot, but you should not be that hot on idle, you should check if something is loading the pch, also use another program to monitor it, also air flow in your case, how do have the 4090 mounted ?
> 
> cheers


Yes 4090, what bios setting reduce that temp? Thanks


----------



## 7empe

affxct said:


> I honestly commend you for sticking to M-die. I freakin’ hate A-die. To call A-die a hassle would be an understatement. Such a nightmare of an IC.


I'm waiting for the z-dies running 10000 MT/s  Don't plan for a-dies, not in the current shape.


----------



## Cirrus550

Lots of lots of messages and I was even bit lazy to search.

How has been asus strix z690-i? Memory wise more than CPU oc. I have been trying to get 7000Mhz with hynix a-die. Seems 6800MHz with decent timings and very fair voltages would be go, but 7000MHz is no go. Best post is 7600MHz

Sidenote: 2204 dropped my 13700k SP score from 101 to 86.


----------



## affxct

7empe said:


> I'm waiting for the z-dies running 10000 MT/s  Don't plan for a-dies, not in the current shape.


Hynix Z-die💀
Hynix S-die ❤


----------



## Nizzen

7empe said:


> I'm waiting for the z-dies running 10000 MT/s  Don't plan for a-dies, not in the current shape.


Samsung z-die?


----------



## satinghostrider

Nizzen said:


> Samsung z-die?


Apparently the Russians are producing that. 🤣


----------



## acoustic

satinghostrider said:


> Apparently the Russians are producing that. 🤣


Yikes. Do they spontaneously combust while rolling down the street? Lol


----------



## Papusan

sblantipodi said:


> guys what is your PCH temp on your Z690 Extreme?
> View attachment 2587046
> 
> 
> my temp is insane considering that I have a TAMB of 22°C.
> 
> will my mobo burn on summer when I'll have 8°C more?


The PCH chips also have differences in bin quality (same as for memory and processors). This hot PCH temps reminds me all too much about some older Dell Alienware laptops. A few of them had PCH temps around 95C, cooked boiling ssd's and hence unstable machines. This isn't the normal. Maybe swap out the thermal pad for the PCH chips to something better.


----------



## 7empe

Nizzen said:


> Samsung z-die?


Z "die".


----------



## Wihglah

sblantipodi said:


> I don't know if this can be related to the fact that I have two SSD drives on the DIMM.2 slot.
> should I RMA the board for this?


I saw a huge improvement in PCH when I water-cooled my M.2 drives.


----------



## H3adex

what is sync all core +1 to 2 ? (bios version 2204)


----------



## TSportM

H3adex said:


> what is sync all core +1 to 2 ? (bios version 2204)


same as stock or AI optimized, but when you sync all cores at your desire frequency it will boost like stock the one or 2 bin

cheers


----------



## TSportM

software for the 13900k is here for cryo tec2

modded it the 4 tecs to 80w tecs, software limits it to 300 with diferent tecs (similar mod to frame chasers, tec1), if you want to do stress tests just activate unrregulated mode and it handles it fine, but iam happy with it gaming all cores are at 6.0 to 6.2 on 2 bins and E cores at 4.8 to 4.9, cashe at 5.0, for me its great, stock basicly the same but cant handle streess tests after 10 minutes even on unrregulated.













idle temps


----------



## ssgwright

so I think I have a pretty decent 13900k.. SP 115 (P cores) 105 overall, all I did was use the AI tuner no manual overclock, i think it said it overclocked to 108%. It boosts to 6.2 and under heavy load to 5.6


----------



## Yamcha2209

7empe said:


> This CPU is insane... I've started to look for the minimal VF curve for each VF point. The E-Cores are disabled for now.
> 
> Synch All Cores, Vcore die sense under CB23 load. LLC=4, AC_LL=0.20
> 
> VF Point #6: 51x, Vcore MIN = 0,986V
> VF Point #7: 54x, Vcore MIN =
> VF Point #8: 57x, Vcore MIN =
> VF Point #9-10: 58x, Vcore MIN =
> VF Point #11: 59x, Vcore MIN = 1,270V
> 
> Ring 52x works well with 59x all cores. Max temp at hottest core is 87C, on coldest 74C.
> 
> 60x all core and 53x ring seems doable.


Hi 
*7empe*


I was fortunate to have a very similar P-core/ E-core rating to your chip, your above settings is this with an auto cpu voltage ?

Thanks mate


----------



## acoustic

7empe said:


> This CPU is insane... I've started to look for the minimal VF curve for each VF point. The E-Cores are disabled for now.
> 
> Synch All Cores, Vcore die sense under CB23 load. LLC=4, AC_LL=0.20
> 
> VF Point #6: 51x, Vcore MIN = 0,986V
> VF Point #7: 54x, Vcore MIN =
> VF Point #8: 57x, Vcore MIN =
> VF Point #9-10: 58x, Vcore MIN =
> VF Point #11: 59x, Vcore MIN = 1,270V
> 
> Ring 52x works well with 59x all cores. Max temp at hottest core is 87C, on coldest 74C.
> 
> 60x all core and 53x ring seems doable.


What are you utilizing to determine stability?


----------



## 7empe

acoustic said:


> What are you utilizing to determine stability?


Y-cruncher SFT for CPU and L1/L2 cache, VST for the L3 - IMC - SA - Ring Bus - Memory pipeline (and CPU as well).


----------



## 7empe

Yamcha2209 said:


> Hi
> *7empe*
> 
> 
> I was fortunate to have a very similar P-core/ E-core rating to your chip, your above settings is this with an auto cpu voltage ?
> 
> Thanks mate


Congrats! No way mate, not on auto. I’m using adaptive voltage with manual offsets per each VF point starting from 54x up. Adaptive for e-cores and cache as well.


----------



## TSportM

7empe said:


> Congrats! No way mate, not on auto. I’m using adaptive voltage with manual offsets per each VF point starting from 54x up. Adaptive for e-cores and cache as well.


can you share a bios.txt please 

cheers


----------



## Yamcha2209

Would be keen to have a look as bios settings as well. 
Cheers


----------



## Self Tapper

shamino1978 said:


> latest test bioses link folder
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2204
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com



@shamino1978 thanks much for sharing these here. Takes a bit of the frustration and weirdness out of the Asus outage. 

Bearing in mind the RoG forum's still u/s, can I ping a bug report at you? Both 2203 and 2204 are causing hang-ups during POST on my Z690 Hero/12900K/32MB Corsair 5600/GTX970 setup, irrespective of settings applied. Q-code shown during the hang is 0x97. 

I routinely re-enter UEFI settings from scratch after flashing so it isn't like I've tried to re-install a profile from an old build or anything similar. It won't POST at default speeds/etc - let alone with overclocked settings on it. I remember a previous beta bios doing the same thing with the same 0x97 code a few months ago but can't remember for certain which one it was. Hopefully it's something you guys are already aware of, but feel free to ask for any more info you need if it'll help diagnose an d eliminate it.


----------



## ssgwright

HERO 2204 bios officially posted along with update ME


----------



## ssgwright

still no fix for my D6 error though....


----------



## ssgwright

so I'm still getting a D6 error after installing my 4080 so I can't run my gskill at it's XMP of 6600 (only 5200 will boot) but i was able to overclock this 13900k to 5.7 all core 6.1 single... not too shabby


----------



## 7empe

TSportM said:


> can you share a bios.txt please
> 
> cheers


Sure. If you can adopt this, it will give you 44k+ in CB R23


----------



## ssgwright

7empe said:


> Sure. If you can adopt this, it will give you 44k+ in CB R23


interesting...


----------



## TSportM

7empe said:


> Sure. If you can adopt this, it will give you 44k+ in CB R23



thanks **


----------



## Yamcha2209

cheers mate


----------



## chibi

Anyone pair a z690i strix with 13900k + adie memory? If so, can you reach 8k on the adie?


----------



## Mappi75

Its 2204 Beta bios the same like the final 2204?






ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX | ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX | Gaming Motherboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG Global


AX5400 Dual Band WiFi 6 Gaming Router, WiFi 6 802.11ax, Mobile Game Mode, ASUS AURA RGB, Lifetime Free Internet Security, Mesh WiFi support, Gear Accelerator, Gaming Port, Adaptive QoS, Port Forwarding



rog.asus.com


----------



## bscool

Mappi75 said:


> Its 2204 Beta bios the same like the final 2204?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX | ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX | Gaming Motherboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG Global
> 
> 
> AX5400 Dual Band WiFi 6 Gaming Router, WiFi 6 802.11ax, Mobile Game Mode, ASUS AURA RGB, Lifetime Free Internet Security, Mesh WiFi support, Gear Accelerator, Gaming Port, Adaptive QoS, Port Forwarding
> 
> 
> 
> rog.asus.com


Probably compare hash and it will show if they are the same.


I use the portably version









MultiHasher · abelhadigital.com


MultiHasher is a freeware file hash calculator.




www.abelhadigital.com


----------



## ssgwright

Mappi75 said:


> Its 2204 Beta bios the same like the final 2204?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX | ROG MAXIMUS Z690 APEX | Gaming Motherboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG Global
> 
> 
> AX5400 Dual Band WiFi 6 Gaming Router, WiFi 6 802.11ax, Mobile Game Mode, ASUS AURA RGB, Lifetime Free Internet Security, Mesh WiFi support, Gear Accelerator, Gaming Port, Adaptive QoS, Port Forwarding
> 
> 
> 
> rog.asus.com


i would assume so, if the version was different wouldn't they use a different version number?


----------



## sblantipodi

Self Tapper said:


> Both 2203 and 2204 are causing hang-ups during POST on my Z690 Hero/12900K/32MB Corsair 5600/GTX970 setup, irrespective of settings applied. Q-code shown during the hang is 0x97


does this hang on boot happen during a reboot or during a cold boot?


----------



## zeezey

Z690 Formula here.. 2204 kept freezing in Windows for me. Reverted back to 2103 and stable again.


----------



## pinkmonster95

Z690 Formula with Bios 2203. 12700k and A die ram memory. Managed to Pass testmem5 booting at 7000-32-42-42-100 @1.5v


----------



## TSportM

Any one tested 2204 oficial to kown if beta and ofi are the same ?

Asus are going stupid mad, They removed the release dates for all software on the products…..
Asus please stop doing crap…. If it aint broken dont Mess with it…..

cheers


----------



## Nizzen

TSportM said:


> Any one tested 2204 oficial to kown if beta and ofi are the same ?
> 
> Asus are going stupid mad, They removed the release dates for all software on the products…..
> Asus please stop doing crap…. If it aint broken dont Mess with it…..
> 
> cheers


Send e-mail to Asus


----------



## TSportM

Nizzen said:


> Send e-mail to Asus


if they are doing this kind of things they dont even have notion whats an e-mail….

cheers


----------



## Nizzen

TSportM said:


> Any one tested 2204 oficial to kown if beta and ofi are the same ?
> 
> Asus are going stupid mad, They removed the release dates for all software on the products…..
> Asus please stop doing crap…. If it aint broken dont Mess with it…..
> 
> cheers


This is the place for updated drivers, not anywhere else 






Station-Drivers - News


News




station-drivers.com


----------



## TSportM

Nizzen said:


> This is the place for updated drivers, not anywhere else
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Station-Drivers - News
> 
> 
> News
> 
> 
> 
> 
> station-drivers.com


yea i use it, but some times they mess up

cheers


----------



## nanochippie

For those who updated to 2204 with a z690 motherboard with an onboard thunderbolt controller (e.g., Hero, ProArt, Formula, etc), did the update also update your thunderbolt controller NVM? 

If so, let me ask: if you cold boot, enter the BIOS, and then warm reboot (I.e., don’t shut down first), is your thunderbolt controller detected on warm reboot?


----------



## sblantipodi

TSportM said:


> Any one tested 2204 oficial to kown if beta and ofi are the same ?
> 
> Asus are going stupid mad, They removed the release dates for all software on the products…..
> Asus please stop doing crap…. If it aint broken dont Mess with it…..
> 
> cheers


just calculate a SHA256 of both files using 7zip or similar software,
if the resulting number matches the files are identical.










the 2204 BIOS posted from Shamino and the file on the official asus site are identical in my case (z690 "extreme-bug" here)


----------



## Brakedown

Hello,
I have a Maximus z690 Extreme, Core I9 12900ks, 3x NVME (2xGen3, 1xGen4) and Asus Strix RTX3090. Is anyone having problems with the PCIe bus?
I recently noticed that the video card was running x8 and not x16. I tried everything, I removed all NVME Gen3 to see if that was the problem, but it didn't solve it. I can no longer use the x16 bus, only in x8 mode. I went back to BIOS 1101 (original) and it's back to normal.
Anyone else having this problem?


----------



## KurruptAus

Just booted my 13900k in my maximus extreme z690 with 2204 bios

SP P core 105
SP E core 88

Decent enough chip?


----------



## TSportM

sblantipodi said:


> just calculate a SHA256 of both files using 7zip or similar software,
> if the resulting number matches the files are identical.
> 
> View attachment 2588024
> 
> 
> the 2204 BIOS posted from Shamino and the file on the official asus site are identical in my case (z690 "extreme-bug" here)












they are the same thing, at least for the extreme, 

cheers


----------



## Agent-A01

KurruptAus said:


> Just booted my 13900k in my maximus extreme z690 with 2204 bios
> 
> SP P core 105
> SP E core 88
> 
> Decent enough chip?


Average or slightly below average P cores. E cores above average.


----------



## 673714

KurruptAus said:


> Just booted my 13900k in my maximus extreme z690 with 2204 bios
> 
> SP P core 105
> SP E core 88
> 
> Decent enough chip?





Agent-A01 said:


> Average or slightly below average P cores. E cores above average.


Agent-A01 is right, but I'm more interested in the MC SP rating than the P or E cores honestly. I'd be happy with average or slightly below average P cores if the memory controller is well above average for 13th gen


----------



## sblantipodi

LilOliVert said:


> Agent-A01 is right, but I'm more interested in the MC SP rating than the P or E cores honestly. I'd be happy with average or slightly below average P cores if the memory controller is well above average for 13th gen


Performances depends on CPU frequency not on memory.
DDR5 doesn't affect performance that much, not in real world at least.


----------



## amirand74

Brakedown said:


> Hello,
> I have a Maximus z690 Extreme, Core I9 12900ks, 3x NVME (2xGen3, 1xGen4) and Asus Strix RTX3090. Is anyone having problems with the PCIe bus?
> I recently noticed that the video card was running x8 and not x16. I tried everything, I removed all NVME Gen3 to see if that was the problem, but it didn't solve it. I can no longer use the x16 bus, only in x8 mode. I went back to BIOS 1101 (original) and it's back to normal.
> Anyone else having this problem?
> View attachment 2588053
> View attachment 2588054
> View attachment 2588055


Hi:

I have the same problem. If I use until BIOS 1304 I have x16 but if I use BIOS 1403 or later I have x8. I didn't test BIOS 2xxx.


----------



## Brakedown

amirand74 said:


> Hi:
> 
> I have the same problem. If I use until BIOS 1304 I have x16 but if I use BIOS 1403 or later I have x8. I didn't test BIOS 2xxx.


I tried to go back to BIOS and I can't anymore. Until BIOS 2004 I can go back, but before that I can't. And it continues the same. I'm looking for something about ME Firmware Version 16.1.25.2020, I think it's the problem.


----------



## Zyther

currently on 1403 wondering what bios i should upgrade to that is the most current stable. looking to OC my 12900k and hynix ram now i have a custom loop.


----------



## Self Tapper

For those wondering whether the 'beta' 2204 and the release 2204 are the same, for the Hero at least, they _are_.

@sblantipodi, if I remember right, it was hanging from cold boot as well as warm reboot but it's difficult to remember for sure. Using the reset button to restart it resulted in a power cycle fromo what I remember. If I get a mo tomorrowI'll flash the release 2204 to investigate further and try to do some more playing with settings to get to a bootable configuration (and therefore possibly shine a light on the source of the error). 

When the ROG forums come back I'll look through my posting history to find which build caused this error before too. Hopefully there will be an entry in my overclocking log but given that I didn't actually do any tuning with it, it might not get a specific mention.

Oh, memory jogging as I write. I have a feeling that in order to work around this issue on the last beta UEFI that caused the 0x97 hang, I needed to enable the on-chip video controller - even tho nothing's connected to it. Will try same and see if that gets anywhere.


----------



## KurruptAus

LilOliVert said:


> Agent-A01 is right, but I'm more interested in the MC SP rating than the P or E cores honestly. I'd be happy with average or slightly below average P cores if the memory controller is well above average for 13th gen



Ill have to check MC score today and let you know, Fingers crossed.


What seems to be a good MC score?



Agent-A01 said:


> Average or slightly below average P cores. E cores above average.


Funnily enough this is binned better than the 12900KS i had


----------



## Agent-A01

KurruptAus said:


> Ill have to check MC score today and let you know, Fingers crossed.
> 
> 
> What seems to be a good MC score?
> 
> 
> 
> Funnily enough this is binned better than the 12900KS i had


I think even poor sample 13900Ks are plenty fast to not worry about it.

Even the worst ones can do 5.6-5.7 all core with good cooling.

And MC score's I've seen low to mid 60s. Haven't seen many over low 80s so I'd say around 70 is average.


----------



## KurruptAus

Agent-A01 said:


> I think even poor sample 13900Ks are plenty fast to not worry about it.
> 
> Even the worst ones can do 5.6-5.7 all core with good cooling.
> 
> And MC score's I've seen low to mid 60s. Haven't seen many over low 80s so I'd say around 70 is average.


Awesome thanks for that.

I took a look at my bios again and all the p core VIDs are 1.438. Surely they cant all be exactly the same?


----------



## Agent-A01

KurruptAus said:


> Awesome thanks for that.
> 
> I took a look at my bios again and all the p core VIDs are 1.438. Surely they cant all be exactly the same?


That's normal. Cores have a lot less variability to them this generation. 
Although at max clocks( 5.7-6ghz) you may see some cores being slightly better than others


----------



## KurruptAus

Agent-A01 said:


> That's normal. Cores have a lot less variability to them this generation.
> Although at max clocks( 5.7-6ghz) you may see some cores being slightly better than others


Thanks for clearing that up!


----------



## KurruptAus

Only 66 on my MC score apparently


----------



## shamino1978

Latest 2301:








2301


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com


----------



## KurruptAus

shamino1978 said:


> Latest 2301:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2301
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


Anyone running this yet? Any improvements?


----------



## Nizzen

KurruptAus said:


> Anyone running this yet? Any improvements?


You try, then repport back


----------



## tubs2x4

Zyther said:


> currently on 1403 wondering what bios i should upgrade to that is the most current stable. looking to OC my 12900k and hynix ram now i have a custom loop.


If your setup is stable why upgrade bios? ESP on 12gen


----------



## killer01ws6

tubs2x4 said:


> If your setup is stable why upgrade bios? ESP on 12gen


I have to agree, I am on 1505 and have zero issues with my 12700K setup, now when I get my 13700K soon, I hope they have a BIOs by then that is as stable, does not change my PCIE lanes to x8 and zero issues then too.. but one can hope.


----------



## sblantipodi

shamino1978 said:


> Latest 2301:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2301
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


What's new? What did you fixed or improved?


----------



## TSportM

tested it for me 7400 on memory is now possible without errors, great work @shamino1978

cheers


----------



## Gking62

shamino1978 said:


> Latest 2301:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2301
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


thanks as always shamino, but in your opinion will the Z690 ever realize 64GB (2x32GB) XMP speeds above 6000 (Asus QVL)?

also, what if anything has changed in terms of AI OC with this BIOS in comparison to prior versions? my OC has decreased 100 with 2301 from 6.2 to 6.1, however my MC SP increased from 82 to 83.


----------



## ssgwright

KurruptAus said:


> Anyone running this yet? Any improvements?


will this work on the hero?


----------



## TSportM

ssgwright said:


> will this work on the hero?


just check the link and see if your board is on the list……..


----------



## Brakedown

Be careful with version 2301. I installed it on my MB and now I can't downgrade to 2204.


----------



## Gking62

Brakedown said:


> Be careful with version 2301. I installed it on my MB and now I can't downgrade to 2204.


it's been that way since 2004


----------



## TSportM

Brakedown said:


> Be careful with version 2301. I installed it on my MB and now I can't downgrade to 2204.


That should be a note to take note 

you should reference your motherboard, on the z690 extreme dunno if you cant revert, but the bios is better for me then 2204.

cheers


----------



## Gking62

TSportM said:


> That should be a note to take note
> 
> you should reference your motherboard, on the z690 extreme dunno if you cant revert, but the bios is better for me then 2204.
> 
> cheers


well you know there is the so-called BIOS Rollback Enable/Disable, not sure if it's usable with these latter versions as I haven't tried it to date.


----------



## owikh84

With BIOS 2301 on Z690 Extreme, my 8000 CL36 setting will give error almost instantly.
Can't roll back to 2004-2204 but thankfully this board has dual BIOS feature.


----------



## bscool

Looks like they need to change the name of Flashback to FlashSame or FlashForward  🤡


----------



## sblantipodi

owikh84 said:


> With BIOS 2301 on Z690 Extreme, my 8000 CL36 setting will give error almost instantly.
> Can't roll back to 2004-2204 but thankfully this board has dual BIOS feature.


Never flash a beta BIOS from these guys.

They treat us as paying beta testers and they don't even care to test them extensively before the release.

Don't forget when they released a completely broken firmware to Microsoft saying the the coulprit was Intel xD.

Why test an untested bios that can harm your motherboard that can't even be reverted to previous bios?

These mobos are expensive enough to let Asus pay some beta testers that does the dirty job for us.

We are not beta testers, they don't even care to tell what's the difference between the old beta and the new one, it's like Hey, we scrambled a bit, lets see if It improved something or if It created more problems than before because we don't even want to test It ourself. xD


----------



## ssgwright

sblantipodi said:


> Never flash a beta BIOS from these guys.
> 
> They treat us as paying beta testers and they don't even care to test them extensively before the release.
> 
> Don't forget when they released a completely broken firmware to Microsoft saying the the coulprit was Intel xD.
> 
> Why test an untested bios that can harm your motherboard that can't even be reverted to previous bios?
> 
> These mobos are expensive enough to let Asus pay some beta testers that does the dirty job for us.
> 
> We are not beta testers, they don't even care to tell what's the difference between the old beta and the new one, it's like Hey, we scrambled a bit, lets see if It improved something or if It created more problems than before because we don't even want to test It ourself. xD


I don't really have a choice... ever since installing my 4080 I get a D6 error unless I turn my ram down to 5200mhz (from 6600 xmp1) works fine with my 3090 but for some reason with this card it affects my ram speed idk what to do


----------



## ssgwright

been running 2301 and besides my D6 error still being present it's running good. I'm running 57 all core 61 1&2 on my 13900k no issues.


----------



## sulalin

z690 apex & hynix adie 81N&T-FORCE 7200 DDR5-8000~9000MHZ QUAD CHANNEL / single channel G2 9200 / G4 9510MHZ ON AIR COOLING
BIOS 2201/2203/2204
13900K SP 97 MC SP 62~69


Spoiler: MC SP 62~69


----------



## Bluerain

Yeah version 2301 is not good, 7200 is not stable but it was on 2203/2204.


----------



## Hexes

Today I went 2203 -> 2204 -> 2301 -> 2204 just fine on a Z690-A GAMING D4.


----------



## Gking62

Hexes said:


> Today I went 2203 -> 2204 -> 2301 -> 2204 just fine on a Z690-A GAMING D4.


interesting, well I receive the "Selected file is not a proper BIOS!" when I try.


----------



## Hexes

Gking62 said:


> interesting, well I receive the "Selected file is not a proper BIOS!" when I try.


Wish I knew why but works well here.


----------



## bscool

Hexes said:


> Wish I knew why but works well here.


Which one has been the best for you on d4 or all the same/close?


----------



## Hexes

bscool said:


> Which one has been the best for you on d4 or all the same/close?


Close with my setup. I tested them very briefly so I could be wrong but 2204 seems best. Boots easier with tight timings and requires a pinch less SA voltage.


----------



## TSportM

Gking62 said:


> interesting, well I receive the "Selected file is not a proper BIOS!" when I try.


try downloading the oficial one from asus website, i will try to downgrade later and see if its possible (have the same board as you)

cheers


----------



## Gking62

TSportM said:


> try downloading the oficial one from asus website, i will try to downgrade later and see if its possible (have the same board as you)
> 
> cheers


hmm actually I did, I did however use beta 2204 the first time around before moving to 2301


----------



## merrowind

Hi,

I recently bought ASUS ROG Strix Z690 Gaming WiFI D4 motherboard and chose G.Skill Ripjaws V, DDR4 5066MHz, CL20's and Intel 13600k. Initial BIOS was v2103 and I was not able to get to POST by using various manual, AI and XMP profile options, though the combinations consisted of trying blind settings. I found several threads with the same issue and updated the BIOS to v2204 with no success. I ended up allowing the dynamic real-time DRAM OC, setting "ASUS Multicore Enhancement" to "Enabled - Remove All Limits", CR=2N and leaving related settings on AUTO. That resulted in a dynamically adjusting frequencyof 3300 and 4500 MHz according to CPU-Z. XMP set the voltage to 1.6, so I tried 1.65 and 1.55 to no avail.
I see on thi thread and elsewhere that there are many issues alike, so can anyone advise me on how to get expected performance from this setup?


----------



## Agent-A01

merrowind said:


> Hi,
> 
> I recently bought ASUS ROG Strix Z690 Gaming WiFI D4 motherboard and chose G.Skill Ripjaws V, DDR4 5066MHz, CL20's and Intel 13600k. Initial BIOS was v2103 and I was not able to get to POST by using various manual, AI and XMP profile options, though the combinations consisted of trying blind settings. I found several threads with the same issue and updated the BIOS to v2204 with no success. I ended up allowing the dynamic real-time DRAM OC, setting "ASUS Multicore Enhancement" to "Enabled - Remove All Limits", CR=2N and leaving related settings on AUTO. That resulted in a dynamically adjusting frequencyof 3300 and 4500 MHz according to CPU-Z. XMP set the voltage to 1.6, so I tried 1.65 and 1.55 to no avail.
> I see on thi thread and elsewhere that there are many issues alike, so can anyone advise me on how to get expected performance from this setup?


Why did you purchase a 5066 kit? No chance that's running XMP settings at gear 1 setting (IMC ratio).
The only chance you have at booting is to manually set a lower frequency around 4000 OR set IMC ratio to 1:2 which is way worse for performance.


----------



## Zyther

tubs2x4 said:


> If your setup is stable why upgrade bios? ESP on 12gen


Only becuase if havent done any OC yet, so seeing if there is any newer stable bios out as this well over a year old now


----------



## tubs2x4

Zyther said:


> Only becuase if havent done any OC yet, so seeing if there is any newer stable bios out as this well over a year old now


well good luck


----------



## owikh84

shamino1978 said:


> Latest 2301:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2301
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com





owikh84 said:


> With BIOS 2301 on Z690 Extreme, my 8000 CL36 setting will give error almost instantly.
> Can't roll back to 2004-2204 but thankfully this board has dual BIOS feature.


I think I spoke too soon. When I switched to the other BIOS chip (bios2) that contains older than 2004 BIOS version, I got debug code 55 with one/two sticks of Hynix A/M-die. Successfully USB backflashed to 2004 but I'm still getting code 55. Switching back to BIOS chip (bios1) that contains 2301 is fine though. CPU is 13900K btw.


----------



## CptSpig

owikh84 said:


> I think I spoke too soon. When I switched to the other BIOS chip (bios2) that contains older than 2004 BIOS version, I got debug code 55 with one/two sticks of Hynix A/M-die. Successfully USB backflashed to 2004 but I'm still getting code 55. Switching back to BIOS chip (bios1) that contains 2301 is fine though. CPU is 13900K btw.


Power down turn off PS and unplug. Clear Cmo's for 10 to 15 seconds. Take battery out for a few seconds and reinstall. Do this for both bios and then update with EZ Flash.


----------



## Self Tapper

Another negative report on 2301 here. Seemed stable enough on initial setup and load test but left PC running at idle during the day while I was working, and came back to find three spontaneous reboots in the syslog, and it's bluescreened twice this evening while using it. On a system and configuration that was rock stable 24x7 with 2103.

And that's revealed another big problem with 2301. I'm another one getting the "Selected file is not a proper BIOS!" error dialog when trying to regress to an earlier build (MZ690 Hero). Have tried 2103 and 2204, no dice with either. I haven't tried USB flashback yet as my system is buried under the desk and a PITA to reach the button. @shamino1978, really poor form to release a test UEFI with this 'feature' without any prior warning. Is there another beta in the offing that will correct this and allow us to flash back to a known stable build?

Also, while I'm here, although it's a moot point at the moment, but in case it helps someone else, some extra information on that non-POST and 0x97 Q-Code hang I found with 2203 and 2204. I did indeed find that the previous workaround - enabling the IGP, got the system to POST and boot fine. However, the really curious aspect, is that after that first successful boot into the OS, if I went back into the UEFI UI and disabled the IGP again, it continued to POST and boot completely successfully. What is causing _that_ behaviour?

I'm not sure whether 2301 is doing the same thing as I left the IGP enabled when I initially set it up. I've disabled it now tho and the system is still running.


----------



## Zyther

RoG forums still down, anyone know if MoKiChUs drivers are posted anywhere else?


----------



## dyanikoglu

2301 for apex not working, says file is not an uefi bios.


----------



## superino091

Zyther said:


> RoG forums still down, anyone know if MoKiChUs drivers are posted anywhere else?


I add to the question if MoKiChUs puts the drivers else.
I think the rog forum is no longer open


----------



## EEE-RAY

Far out I am still getting failure to recover from sleep with code E1. I have no idea what that means.


----------



## Zyther

superino091 said:


> I add to the question if MoKiChUs puts the drivers else.
> I think the rog forum is no longer open








[INDEX] All My Firmware/Drivers/Software Threads


Hi everyone, I created this thread in order to simply index all the threads that I offer : FIRMWARE Intel ME (H610/B660/H670/Z690)



web.archive.org





bit of luck


----------



## Zyther

nvm, all the mega links are dead, he must of deleted the files as they got updated


----------



## trihy

So they took the money and run away? 

I think forum will come back. Not sure why is taking so long.


----------



## sulalin

merrowind said:


> Hi,
> 
> I recently bought ASUS ROG Strix Z690 Gaming WiFI D4 motherboard and chose G.Skill Ripjaws V, DDR4 5066MHz, CL20's and Intel 13600k. Initial BIOS was v2103 and I was not able to get to POST by using various manual, AI and XMP profile options, though the combinations consisted of trying blind settings. I found several threads with the same issue and updated the BIOS to v2204 with no success. I ended up allowing the dynamic real-time DRAM OC, setting "ASUS Multicore Enhancement" to "Enabled - Remove All Limits", CR=2N and leaving related settings on AUTO. That resulted in a dynamically adjusting frequencyof 3300 and 4500 MHz according to CPU-Z. XMP set the voltage to 1.6, so I tried 1.65 and 1.55 to no avail.
> I see on thi thread and elsewhere that there are many issues alike, so can anyone advise me on how to get expected performance from this setup?


The gear of the 11th generation CPU ddr4 is only on, and it is only valid for 5066-5600 DJR ic. 12/13th generation Gear2 has DDR4 after DDR5, and 12/13th generation DDR4 gear 1 has no choice, but to use Samsung bdie ic is the fastest performance.


----------



## 050

For some reason "Vcore Auto Voltage Cap" seems to be influencing my v/f curves.
I'm on bios version 2103, Asus z690-E and a 12900ks. 

When I set my v/f curve points, set the vcore to "auto" and set the vcore auto voltage cap to 1.48v, I can see in hwinfo64 that the cpu boosts to 5.8ghz on (the allowed) certain p cores, and when running light single threaded loads it achieves effective clocks of roughly 5.7-5.75ghz at the highest. If I leave the v/f points the same, but raise the score auto voltage cap to 1.52v, I would expect that the extra headroom would allow for better/higher boosting but instead I see those same cores boosting to a maximum effective clock of 5.65ghz instead. 

If I set 1.48v vcore auto voltage cap and boot up to idle, it boosts to 5.8ghz on 4 cores. At 1.5v vcore auto voltage cap booted up to idle in otherwise identical conditions, it only boosts to 5.7ghz. It's like the system is re-allocating the v/f bins when it has the slightly higher ceiling on vcore voltage, but in a way that makes it boost less at least in this case.

Any idea why _raising_ the auto vcore limit/cap would cause a _less aggressive _boosting? Thermals are a non- issue, in both cases the cpu is only around 65c max.

So to get _higher_ boost clocks with the same v/f curve values set in the bios, 1.48v vcore auto voltage cap seems to boost higher faster and more actively than 1.5v vcore auto voltage cap. Is this the way it's supposed to behave?


----------



## Shaohui

owikh84 said:


> I think I spoke too soon. When I switched to the other BIOS chip (bios2) that contains older than 2004 BIOS version, I got debug code 55 with one/two sticks of Hynix A/M-die. Successfully USB backflashed to 2004 but I'm still getting code 55. Switching back to BIOS chip (bios1) that contains 2301 is fine though. CPU is 13900K btw.


Could you also share the z690i latest beta BIOS？the stable BIOS is not stable for 13th. Thanks


----------



## Shaohui

shamino1978 said:


> Latest 2301:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2301
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


Could you also share the latest z690i beta BIOS？I meet freeze screen even all parameters are default.


----------



## Shaohui

Shaohui said:


> Could you also share the z690i latest beta BIOS？the stable BIOS is not stable for 13th. Thanks


Wrong replay, please ignore.


----------



## adi518

I just installed the Extreme and for some strange reason the power led doesn't come on. Any ideas? the power button works fine, but not the led.


----------



## trihy

Have you tried the other power led pins?

Most asus motherboards had two. Not sure what's the difference, but sometimes I have to exchange it to make it work.

Only difference I noticed is one is 3 pin (one empty in the middle) and the other is 2 pin. But it's easy to adapt the connector.


----------



## stahlhart

adi518 said:


> I just installed the Extreme and for some strange reason the power led doesn't come on. Any ideas? the power button works fine, but not the led.


Header connector reversed...?


----------



## stahlhart

Just updated my Strix-E to 2204. Vcore appears to be a little more aggressive than I'd like compared to 2103, but stability tests are all passing so far, and scores are consistent.

Edit: rolled back to 2103; 2204 is unstable during stress testing and core temperatures are too high.


----------



## TSportM

2301 for me is fine got better memory stabilty and overclock, but it is what it is…. Milage may vary


----------



## Brakedown

Hi...

I found a very interesting article about PCIe. And I finally understood how it works. I recommend reading








NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 PCI-Express Scaling


The new NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 is a graphics card powerhouse, but what happens when you run it on a PCI-Express 4.0 x8 bus? In our mini-review we've also tested various PCI-Express 3.0, 2.0 and 1.1 configs to get a feel for how FPS scales with bandwidth.




www.techpowerup.com





See ya.


----------



## Zyther

Has anyone found any software besides armoury crate that lets you change the colour of the rgb of the polymo lighting?


----------



## TSportM

Zyther said:


> Has anyone found any software besides armoury crate that lets you change the colour of the rgb of the polymo lighting?








OpenRGB


Open source RGB lighting control that doesn't depend on manufacturer software




openrgb.org


----------



## Mappi75

Is there any chance to run 64GB 6.400Mhz RAM (G.Skill) on an old Apex Z690 with 12900KS ?
(G.Skill lists only Asus z790 series boards..)

ATM i can run 32GB at 6.666Mhz CL32 - thank you!


----------



## sblantipodi

are there other people here who set the PCIe link power management to maximum save to reduce by 15°C the temp of the chipset?









Z690 chipset extreme temp


Hello, I have noticed that my Z690 chipset idles at around 80°C and that while gaming it can goes up to 90°C due to the GPUs throwing in hot air. I have a well vented case (Corsair 4000D) with an Asus Z690 Extreme. Will my chipset degrade over time considering the fact that now we are in...




www.overclock.net





do you noticed some reduction in performance?


----------



## Zyther

TSportM said:


> OpenRGB
> 
> 
> Open source RGB lighting control that doesn't depend on manufacturer software
> 
> 
> 
> 
> openrgb.org


Cheers,
Gave it ago but couldn’t make any changes. No other rgb app installed to mess with it. Where you able to change yours with it?


----------



## ssgwright

ok update to my D6 error, so I made the mistake of running out and buying another 4080 hoping it was the card... it wasn't. Same issue as soon as I put it in D6 error. I tried an old 1030 card and it boots fine, tried my 3090 boots fine. It's something to do with 40 series on this board (oh it's a z690 Hero). 

So I put the 1030 in the bottom slot and left my 4080 installed and boom boots fine and the 4080 is recognized just fine (I do have to disconnect the HDMI off of my second monitor after boot but no big deal it just switched automatically to the display port)

So what could the issue be? Something its doing during boot where the card isn't recognized (unless I run my ddr5 down from 6600 to 4800)


----------



## TSportM

Zyther said:


> Cheers,
> Gave it ago but couldn’t make any changes. No other rgb app installed to mess with it. Where you able to change yours with it?


i dont use it, cant tell you that sorry,


----------



## TSportM

sblantipodi said:


> are there other people here who set the PCIe link power management to maximum save to reduce by 15°C the temp of the chipset?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z690 chipset extreme temp
> 
> 
> Hello, I have noticed that my Z690 chipset idles at around 80°C and that while gaming it can goes up to 90°C due to the GPUs throwing in hot air. I have a well vented case (Corsair 4000D) with an Asus Z690 Extreme. Will my chipset degrade over time considering the fact that now we are in...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> do you noticed some reduction in performance?


mine is off my temp is 55 to 65 

cheers


----------



## sblantipodi

TSportM said:


> mine is off my temp is 55 to 65
> 
> cheers


Your temp is more weird than mine, never seen a z690 with that temp without using the PCIe link express Power management "saving feature". xD


----------



## TSportM

sblantipodi said:


> Your temp is more weird than mine, never seen a z690 with that temp without using the PCIe link express Power management "saving feature". xD


my temps changed when bios 2**** released came out, and when i change my ddr5 dimms dunno if its related.

also i have a thermal pad here:


----------



## TSportM

Guys need some help troubleshooting a bug or
Not.

my system is rock stable on settings below, memory is stable (3hours of aida64, 2 hours of anta extreme tesmem, linkpack, octt 2 hours etc) cinebench r23 and r20 no problems but r15 gives a error does not crash or bsod just gives a error (normaly that error is related to instability but can get the system to crash, does any one experience that ? (Using 2301)

Cheers


----------



## 7empe

TSportM said:


> Guys need some help troubleshooting a bug or
> Not.
> 
> my system is rock stable on settings below, memory is stable (3hours of aida64, 2 hours of anta extreme tesmem, linkpack, octt 2 hours etc) cinebench r23 and r20 no problems but r15 gives a error does not crash or bsod just gives a error (normaly that error is related to instability but can get the system to crash, does any one experience that ? (Using 2301)
> 
> Cheers


-1x on e-cores.


----------



## TSportM

7empe said:


> -1x on e-cores.


its strange only on that benchmark more voltage pherhaps?

cheers


----------



## sblantipodi

TSportM said:


> my temps changed when bios 2**** released came out, and when i change my ddr5 dimms dunno if its related.
> 
> also i have a thermal pad here:
> 
> View attachment 2589378


I have thermal pads too but how thermal pads on SSDs can affect chipset temp?
I have only one SSD there, the other SSDs are on the DIMM.2 slot.


----------



## TSportM

sblantipodi said:


> I have thermal pads too but how thermal pads on SSDs can affect chipset temp?
> I have only one SSD there, the other SSDs are on the DIMM.2 slot.


Look at the pic, i have a thermal pad placed by me on that place i marked in red, the heat generated from the chipset also goes to the ssd cooler, i placed it there when i got high temps and it did come down a few degrees at the time, but like i told you after the 2**** bios came out and i did change my ram at the time also never had does temps again cant tell you if its the bios or ram it just went way, dunno if its bad reading


----------



## sblantipodi

TSportM said:


> Look at the pic, i have a thermal pad placed by me on that place i marked in red, the heat generated from the chipset also goes to the ssd cooler, i placed it there when i got high temps and it did come down a few degrees at the time, but like i told you after the 2**** bios came out and i did change my ram at the time also never had does temps again cant tell you if its the bios or ram it just went way, dunno if its bad reading


ok thanks for sharing


----------



## 7empe

TSportM said:


> its strange only on that benchmark more voltage pherhaps?
> 
> cheers


This is very obvious result of e-cores being pushed too high (cb r23 and r15 extreme are really good in finding unstable oc of the e-cores). You can try increasing vcore, but... a) is it worth to overvolt p-cores for 100 mhz of e-cores? b) you may be at the very limit of the e-cores and they won't do 47x stable at any voltage. Too high overclock of e-cores causes similar effects like unstable ring.


----------



## TSportM

7empe said:


> This is very obvious result of e-cores being pushed too high (cb r23 and r15 extreme are really good in finding unstable oc of the e-cores). You can try increasing vcore, but... a) is it worth to overvolt p-cores for 100 mhz of e-cores? b) you may be at the very limit of the e-cores and they won't do 47x stable at any voltage. Too high overclock of e-cores causes similar effects like unstable ring.


and upping the offset voltage for E cores i have 1.200 upping it to 1.250 maybe ?

cheers


----------



## IAMXAM

Hello,

I hope all is well... my first post here. Two weeks ago I updated my BIOS from 1720 to 2204 (Intel ME 16.1.25.2020) and ran into a slew of issues (BSOD, etc.) and spent the last two weeks troubleshooting (reinstalling windows, attempting to roll back to 1720, etc.) all the way to the BIOS_B and now back to BIOS_M. I'm back up and running now for the most part (on BIOS_M with all basic drivers, etc. installed), but previously I was running 128GB: 2x 2x32GB DIMMs all set to AUTO in the BIOS (iirc 4000 Hz). Now I can get the computer to boot properly only on 64GB: 2x32GB (slots A2, B2) on AUTO (4800 Hz).

When I first built the rig back in August I ran memtest on all four DIMMS at 4000Hz and encountered no errors.

This past weekend I ran mdsched on each DIMM individually (in slot A2) and mdsched on 2x32GB (A2, B2)... all resulting in no errors.

Today I dropped in the other two DIMMs to put me back on 128GB: 2x 2x32GB (everything set to to default/optimal settings in BIOS aka F5) to hopefully run mdsched, but the computer wont boot into Windows. I pulled the two DIMMS and back on 2x 32GB and did a system restore point (repair didnt work) back into Windows.

What did 2204 change or what is the possible causes that I can't run four DIMMs? Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Intel i9 12900KS
ASUS ROG Z690 MAXIMUS EXTREME GLACIAL
GSKILLZ 2x 2x32GB DDR5 6000 30-40-40-96
ASUS ROG STRIX LC 3090Ti OC
SKHYNIX M.2 NVME 2TB for Windows 10 22H2 (M.2_2)
ASUS ROG THOR 1200W


----------



## bscool

IAMXAM said:


> Hello,
> 
> I hope all is well... my first post here. Two weeks ago I updated my BIOS from 1720 to 2204 (Intel ME 16.1.25.2020) and ran into a slew of issues (BSOD, etc.) and spent the last two weeks troubleshooting (reinstalling windows, attempting to roll back to 1720, etc.) all the way to the BIOS_B and now back to BIOS_M. I'm back up and running now for the most part (on BIOS_M with all basic drivers, etc. installed), but previously I was running 12GB: 2x 2x32GB DIMMs all set to AUTO in the BIOS (iirc 4000 Hz). Now I can get the computer to boot properly only on 64GB: 2x32GB (slots A2, B2) on AUTO (4800 Hz).
> 
> When I first built the rig back in August I ran memtest on all four DIMMS at 4000Hz and encountered no errors.
> 
> This past weekend I ran mdsched on each DIMM individually (in slot A2) and mdsched on 2x32GB (A2, B2)... all resulting in no errors.
> 
> Today I dropped in the other two DIMMs to put me back on 128GB: 2x 2x32GB (everything set to to default/optimal settings in BIOS aka F5) to hopefully run mdsched, but the computer wont boot into Windows. I pulled the two DIMMS and back on 2x 32GB and did a system restore point (repair didnt work) back into Windows.
> 
> What did 2204 change or what is the possible causes that I can't run four DIMMs? Any help would be greatly appreciated.
> 
> Intel i9 12900KS
> ASUS ROG Z690 MAXIMUS EXTREME GLACIAL
> GSKILLZ 2x 2x32GB DDR5 6000 30-40-40-96
> ASUS ROG STRIX LC 3090Ti OC
> SKHYNIX M.2 NVME 2TB for Windows 10 22H2 (M.2_2)
> ASUS ROG THOR 1200W


It might be that you need to set some of the ram voltages even at JEDEC. I have ran into this with some stick on z690 APEX. V color A dies I have don't like to work at JEDEC if I leave all settings on auto. Setting vdd, vddq to something like 1.2 helps, otherwise I eventually run into issues when trying to boot/reboot.

I set defaults when installing Windows or when I am want something that's stable on a new set up.


----------



## IAMXAM

bscool said:


> It might be that you need to set some of the ram voltages even at JEDEC. I have ran into this with some stick on z690 APEX. V color A dies I have don't like to work at JEDEC if I leave all settings on auto. Setting vdd, vddq to something like 1.2 helps, otherwise I eventually run into issues when trying to boot/reboot.
> 
> I set defaults when installing Windows or when I am want something that's stable on a new set up.


bscool,
Thank you very much for the insight and info! I thought there might be some kind of voltage settings or the such that I could adjust but since I'm not too familiar with this aspect yet I will research into this further and hopefully be able to test it in the next few days!


----------



## Self Tapper

sblantipodi said:


> Your temp is more weird than mine, never seen a z690 with that temp without using the PCIe link express Power management "saving feature". xD


Whut? Mine (MZ690 Hero) does 50-55 with four spinning hard disks, two M.2 PCIe SSDs and a PCIe soundcard attached to it. Admittedly I've lapped the heatsink and fitted a TG Minus Pad but they knocked about 10 celsius off the temps when I did it as I recall. LSPM is disabled.


----------



## PoizenJam

sblantipodi said:


> are there other people here who set the PCIe link power management to maximum save to reduce by 15°C the temp of the chipset?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z690 chipset extreme temp
> 
> 
> Hello, I have noticed that my Z690 chipset idles at around 80°C and that while gaming it can goes up to 90°C due to the GPUs throwing in hot air. I have a well vented case (Corsair 4000D) with an Asus Z690 Extreme. Will my chipset degrade over time considering the fact that now we are in...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> do you noticed some reduction in performance?


I had the opposite problem on my Maximus Z690 Extreme + 13900k combo. When PCI-E Native Power Management is set to ENABLED, my PCH temps climb over 80C, and I get a host of random errors and freezes including (most prominently) tens of thousands of WHEA-17 errors on my ROG DIMM2_1 slot _if a Gen4 NVME is installed in that slot. _Note that Installing a Gen3 or manually limiting DIMM2_1 to Gen3 mitigates the WHEA-17 errors. Disabling PCI-E Native Power Management dropped my PCH temps by almost 20C and resolved the WHEA-17 errors.

Unfortunately, I am still having a problem where my PC just sort of... Hangs if any OC is applied*. Even the basic out-of-the-box AIOC. I will usually wake up the next day to find my PC frozen sometime during the night and completely unresponsive. If I am at the PC when this happens, it usually manifests as a gradual lock-up of the OS (i.e., search stops working, menus stop responding, restart is broken.) Even the OLED readout on the motherboard is frozen. The RGB light + fans stay on, but nothing else responds. I have to hit reset. Unfortunately, there are no BSOD or Event Viewer logs that point to the cause.

I am genuinely running out of ideas as to what might be causing this.

*I have not had it hang when running default settings... But cannot completely rule it out. Memtest does not show memory errors either, on stock or XMP.


----------



## trihy

That seems like an storage issue.


----------



## PoizenJam

trihy said:


> That seems like an storage issue.


The freezing/locking up that I'm experiencing when overclocking? Perhaps. System drive may have been put through one too many stability/stress tests and blue screens at this point. But I thus far have not managed to get it to hang when running stock or crash if running stock settings on CPU and RAM. I plan to run stock for a few days now just to be sure, and possibly also restore a backup of the drive to another SSD for testing.

If, however, you're talking about the ROG DIMM.2_1 WHEA-17 errors and high PCH temps when PCI-E Native Power Management is enabled... No, I don't think so. At least not directly. I have 2 x SN850, 2 x SN850x, and a few PCI3 NVME. All the WD PCI-E 4.0 drives throw WHEA-17 errors if installed ROG DIMM.2_1, as long as PCI-E Native Power Management is enabled and DIMM.2_1 is operating at Gen4 speeds. This issue, and the associated high PCH temps... I don't think they're related to my instability directly. At least it's not specific to a particular _drive. _If anything, it's the port/motherboard. 

However, and I don't know if it's relevant, the boot drive _is _installed in M.2_2, which are CPU PCI-E Lanes. May be why things lock up if the CPU isn't rock solid stable, and I also don't know if those are controlled by a different setting than 'PCI-E Native Power Management' for PCH.


----------



## 673714

PoizenJam said:


> I had the opposite problem on my Maximus Z690 Extreme + 13900k combo. When PCI-E Native Power Management is set to ENABLED, my PCH temps climb over 80C, and I get a host of random errors and freezes including (most prominently) tens of thousands of WHEA-17 errors on my ROG DIMM2_1 slot _if a Gen4 NVME is installed in that slot. _Note that Installing a Gen3 or manually limiting DIMM2_1 to Gen3 mitigates the WHEA-17 errors. Disabling PCI-E Native Power Management dropped my PCH temps by almost 20C and resolved the WHEA-17 errors.
> 
> Unfortunately, I am still having a problem where my PC just sort of... Hangs if any OC is applied*. Even the basic out-of-the-box AIOC. I will usually wake up the next day to find my PC frozen sometime during the night and completely unresponsive. If I am at the PC when this happens, it usually manifests as a gradual lock-up of the OS (i.e., search stops working, menus stop responding, restart is broken.) Even the OLED readout on the motherboard is frozen. The RGB light + fans stay on, but nothing else responds. I have to hit reset. Unfortunately, there are no BSOD or Event Viewer logs that point to the cause.
> 
> I am genuinely running out of ideas as to what might be causing this.
> 
> *I have not had it hang when running default settings... But cannot completely rule it out. Memtest does not show memory errors either, on stock or XMP.


That sounds like a bad motherboard. I know the first Z690 Extreme I bought was trash and would still pass testing on default settings. It would do a lot of the things you're describing here as well. I highly recommend you do an Advanced RMA so Asus will send you a replacement before you send the bad one back, otherwise I've read stories about Asus simply flashing the bios and shipping it back with the same problems


----------



## PoizenJam

LilOliVert said:


> That sounds like a bad motherboard. I know the first Z690 Extreme I bought was trash and would still pass testing on default settings. It would do a lot of the things you're describing here as well. I highly recommend you do an Advanced RMA so Asus will send you a replacement before you send the bad one back, otherwise I've read stories about Asus simply flashing the bios and shipping it back with the same problems


Ironically this one board _is _an Advanced RMA after my first Extreme just kind of... failed to boot.

In any case, I've since 1.) Restored a working backup, 2.) Uninstalled programs I thought might be a problem, 3.) Loaded optimized defaults, 4.) Disabled Native Power + PEG ASPM, 5.) Enabled XMP + AIOC. So far so good- no freezing or lockups the first night, and it's passing Cinebench, y-cruncher pi, etc. this morning. But I know better than to assume all is good yet- but I'm happy that the out-of-the-box OC settings are working for the time being. I'd like to get back to _actual _OC tweaking and stability checks though- default AIOC is happy to throw 320W of high voltage at the CPU in Cinebench and I don't like that.

Since you also have the Extreme... Do you have a Gen4 NVME in the ROG DIMM accessory? Would be interesting to see if you get the WHEA-17 errors with the same settings I do (Gen4 in DIMM.2_1 w/ PCI-E Native Power Management and ASPM enabled. Frankly, it sounds a lot like the problem people were having early on with lots of Z690 boards and certain PCI-E lanes not operating at PCI4 properly about a year back. Gigabyte boards, MSI boards, and I think some Strix boards? Perhaps it wasn't noticed on the Extreme because it's a niche mobo and the problem slot is DIMM.2_1.... Or maybe my ROG DIMM is busted.


----------



## 673714

PoizenJam said:


> Ironically this one board _is _an Advanced RMA after my first Extreme just kind of... failed to boot.
> 
> In any case, I've since 1.) Restored a working backup, 2.) Uninstalled programs I thought might be a problem, 3.) Loaded optimized defaults, 4.) Disabled Native Power + PEG ASPM, 5.) Enabled XMP + AIOC. So far so good- no freezing or lockups the first night, and it's passing Cinebench, y-cruncher pi, etc. this morning. But I know better than to assume all is good yet- but I'm happy that the out-of-the-box OC settings are working for the time being. I'd like to get back to _actual _OC tweaking and stability checks though- default AIOC is happy to throw 320W of high voltage at the CPU in Cinebench and I don't like that.
> 
> Since you also have the Extreme... Do you have a Gen4 NVME in the ROG DIMM accessory? Would be interesting to see if you get the WHEA-17 errors with the same settings I do (Gen4 in DIMM.2_1 w/ PCI-E Native Power Management and ASPM enabled. Frankly, it sounds a lot like the problem people were having early on with lots of Z690 boards and certain PCI-E lanes not operating at PCI4 properly about a year back. Gigabyte boards, MSI boards, and I think some Strix boards? Perhaps it wasn't noticed on the Extreme because it's a niche mobo and the problem slot is DIMM.2_1.... Or maybe my ROG DIMM is busted.


No, I'm sorry but I don't use the DIMM.2 accessory.
I've considered buying a couple 1TB M.2s to try it out in the past, but it's starting to look like more hassle than it's worth from what I've seen on here lately


----------



## Papusan

TSportM said:


> 2301 for me is fine got better memory stabilty and overclock, but it is what it is…. Milage may vary


Hi. Does 2301 come with same MC as for 2204? And with what memory and what memory speed do you see an improvement? M-die or A-die? Or with both? And thanks for the feedback.

Other here that can share their experience with bios v2301 (Z690 Apex) ? Thanks


----------



## Kyozon

IAMXAM said:


> Hello,
> 
> I hope all is well... my first post here. Two weeks ago I updated my BIOS from 1720 to 2204 (Intel ME 16.1.25.2020) and ran into a slew of issues (BSOD, etc.) and spent the last two weeks troubleshooting (reinstalling windows, attempting to roll back to 1720, etc.) all the way to the BIOS_B and now back to BIOS_M. I'm back up and running now for the most part (on BIOS_M with all basic drivers, etc. installed), but previously I was running 12GB: 2x 2x32GB DIMMs all set to AUTO in the BIOS (iirc 4000 Hz). Now I can get the computer to boot properly only on 64GB: 2x32GB (slots A2, B2) on AUTO (4800 Hz).
> 
> When I first built the rig back in August I ran memtest on all four DIMMS at 4000Hz and encountered no errors.
> 
> This past weekend I ran mdsched on each DIMM individually (in slot A2) and mdsched on 2x32GB (A2, B2)... all resulting in no errors.
> 
> Today I dropped in the other two DIMMs to put me back on 128GB: 2x 2x32GB (everything set to to default/optimal settings in BIOS aka F5) to hopefully run mdsched, but the computer wont boot into Windows. I pulled the two DIMMS and back on 2x 32GB and did a system restore point (repair didnt work) back into Windows.
> 
> What did 2204 change or what is the possible causes that I can't run four DIMMs? Any help would be greatly appreciated.
> 
> Intel i9 12900KS
> ASUS ROG Z690 MAXIMUS EXTREME GLACIAL
> GSKILLZ 2x 2x32GB DDR5 6000 30-40-40-96
> ASUS ROG STRIX LC 3090Ti OC
> SKHYNIX M.2 NVME 2TB for Windows 10 22H2 (M.2_2)
> ASUS ROG THOR 1200W


I've this happen when I upgraded to the 13900K. I no longer remember what BIOS I was running before, but I remember it being the one before the initial Raptor Lake support dropped.

I was running 4x16GB modules of DDR5 5200 on the 12900K. I had to manually dial down the frequency to 4800 but never once had it crash during heavy load or randomly freeze/BSOD/lockup.

As soon as I upgraded to 2004 and installed the 13900K, the 4 modules config were still booting fine. But after updating to 2103 and now 2204 I just can't seem to boot with the 4 modules installed, no matter what I do.

Even without any overclocking at all and only 2 RAM modules installed, I have noticed the system is now freezing randomly at night with no issues coming up on Event Viewer or WHEA errors detected by HWInfo. Similar to what was mentioned by @PoizenJam above.

I have no clue as to what could be going on here.

System Specs:

Intel i9 13900K
ASUS ROG Z690 MAXIMUS Extreme
Corsair Dominator 4x16GB DDR5 5200 C38.
Gainward Phantom GS RTX 4090
Corsair MP600 PRO XT 4TB OS drive.
Corsair AX1600i PSU.


----------



## dyanikoglu

Did they forget password of rog forums or something like that?


----------



## injurer

sblantipodi said:


> Never flash a beta BIOS from these guys.
> 
> They treat us as paying beta testers and they don't even care to test them extensively before the release.
> 
> Don't forget when they released a completely broken firmware to Microsoft saying the the coulprit was Intel xD.
> 
> Why test an untested bios that can harm your motherboard that can't even be reverted to previous bios?
> 
> These mobos are expensive enough to let Asus pay some beta testers that does the dirty job for us.
> 
> We are not beta testers, they don't even care to tell what's the difference between the old beta and the new one, it's like Hey, we scrambled a bit, lets see if It improved something or if It created more problems than before because we don't even want to test It ourself. xD


This is a very harsh comment. Those beta BIOS-es are here for enthusiasts. If you have doubts, you should visit the official ASUS page, and not the forums.


----------



## kgussk

injurer said:


> This is a very harsh comment. Those beta BIOS-es are here for enthusiasts. If you have doubts, you should visit the official ASUS page, and not the forums.


I agree.


----------



## TSportM

injurer said:


> This is a very harsh comment. Those beta BIOS-es are here for enthusiasts. If you have doubts, you should visit the official ASUS page, and not the forums.


Yes agree also @sblantipodi i understand your furstration, but all manufactures have problems, you dont see them posting in this forum beta bios or other info (guides etc) (very rare) asus did drop the ball not on motherboards but al products but also other manufacters, your problem is related to using 4 dims, intel shows that information , if you want to overclock dont use 4 dimms, i dont consider my self a beta tester they provide the bios and dont ask for feedback then dont create a discussion on it on this forum on it.

on 2301 is for me the best bios so far so.... if you want to test improvements ditch does 2 modules you have


cheers


----------



## sblantipodi

PoizenJam said:


> Ironically this one board _is _an Advanced RMA after my first Extreme just kind of... failed to boot.
> 
> In any case, I've since 1.) Restored a working backup, 2.) Uninstalled programs I thought might be a problem, 3.) Loaded optimized defaults, 4.) Disabled Native Power + PEG ASPM, 5.) Enabled XMP + AIOC. So far so good- no freezing or lockups the first night, and it's passing Cinebench, y-cruncher pi, etc. this morning. But I know better than to assume all is good yet- but I'm happy that the out-of-the-box OC settings are working for the time being. I'd like to get back to _actual _OC tweaking and stability checks though- default AIOC is happy to throw 320W of high voltage at the CPU in Cinebench and I don't like that.
> 
> Since you also have the Extreme... Do you have a Gen4 NVME in the ROG DIMM accessory? Would be interesting to see if you get the WHEA-17 errors with the same settings I do (Gen4 in DIMM.2_1 w/ PCI-E Native Power Management and ASPM enabled. Frankly, it sounds a lot like the problem people were having early on with lots of Z690 boards and certain PCI-E lanes not operating at PCI4 properly about a year back. Gigabyte boards, MSI boards, and I think some Strix boards? Perhaps it wasn't noticed on the Extreme because it's a niche mobo and the problem slot is DIMM.2_1.... Or maybe my ROG DIMM is busted.


I have 2x Samsung 980 Pro on my dimm.2 slots but I don't have this problems.

Extreme mobo is a crap and I have other problems with pc hanging on boot if I use Corsair icue along with my dominator memory but that it's another story.


----------



## PoizenJam

And both are running at Gen4? Please note I earlier advice you to disable PCI-E Native Power Management, and that _also _eliminates the errors I experience with the ROG DIMM.2_1 slot. So you won't get the WHEA-17 errors on the ROG DIMM if you followed that advice. I suppose it's possible that there is an unfortunate interaction or incompatibility between the MOBO and Western Digital SN850 / SN850x drives on my end. I'm trying to convince ASUS to RMA my ROG DIMM accessory to check if that's the problem- wish I had a non-WD NVME laying around to test though.

I also wish I knew how to set the Extreme's OLED to its default behaviour (i.e. when booting up, it cycles through all its readouts). Once Armoury Crate is installed it takes over. Worse yet, I have noticed that the system RGB will stutter if the OLED is playing an animation or set to a custom readout cycle. Kind of regret buying this board more each day.


----------



## Simkin

dyanikoglu said:


> Did they forget password of rog forums or something like that?


Seems like it. 

What a smart move to shut down the old forum while working on a new one.


----------



## 673714

PoizenJam said:


> And both are running at Gen4? Please note I earlier advice you to disable PCI-E Native Power Management, and that _also _eliminates the errors I experience with the ROG DIMM.2_1 slot. So you won't get the WHEA-17 errors on the ROG DIMM if you followed that advice. I suppose it's possible that there is an unfortunate interaction or incompatibility between the MOBO and Western Digital SN850 / SN850x drives on my end. I'm trying to convince ASUS to RMA my ROG DIMM accessory to check if that's the problem- wish I had a non-WD NVME laying around to test though.
> 
> I also wish I knew how to set the Extreme's OLED to its default behaviour (i.e. when booting up, it cycles through all its readouts). Once Armoury Crate is installed it takes over. Worse yet, I have noticed that the system RGB will stutter if the OLED is playing an animation or set to a custom readout cycle. Kind of regret buying this board more each day.


This just reminded me how my RGB would flicker randomly when I used 2 different fan ports for my 2 ThermalTake sync controllers on the faulty Z690 Extreme I had. Now I want to try that on this board, but I might as well wait until my new 360mm cooler arrives and do all the tinkering at the same time


----------



## sblantipodi

PoizenJam said:


> And both are running at Gen4? Please note I earlier advice you to disable PCI-E Native Power Management, and that _also _eliminates the errors I experience with the ROG DIMM.2_1 slot. So you won't get the WHEA-17 errors on the ROG DIMM if you followed that advice. I suppose it's possible that there is an unfortunate interaction or incompatibility between the MOBO and Western Digital SN850 / SN850x drives on my end. I'm trying to convince ASUS to RMA my ROG DIMM accessory to check if that's the problem- wish I had a non-WD NVME laying around to test though.
> 
> I also wish I knew how to set the Extreme's OLED to its default behaviour (i.e. when booting up, it cycles through all its readouts). Once Armoury Crate is installed it takes over. Worse yet, I have noticed that the system RGB will stutter if the OLED is playing an animation or set to a custom readout cycle. Kind of regret buying this board more each day.


I buy computers since the Commodore 64 era, I always bought high end computers since then and Z690 Extreme is the absolute worst mobo I had (and one of the most expensive) 
next mobo will be an MSI.

PS: both drives runs gen4, I don't had whea-17 errors even when PCI-E Native Power Management was enabled.


----------



## firthen

Hello guys!
so, some weaks ago i started to get some random crashes on my strix z690-a gaming wifi d4 (Bios v. 2004) while gaming, youtube, discord, twitch on second screen, nothing fancy.
12700KF
2x16 Corsair Dominator [email protected]
3090FE
Win 10
Asus AI OC, XMP1 and some OC on the 3090 were enabled and were running stable.

So i updated bios to latest version (2204). Kept the settings, the crashed kept going, like every 20-30 mins. Blue screen with error.
I though that the overclock wasnt stable on this bios version. Set everything to default settings and disabled xmp. The crashes still occur.
Weird thing is that they wont happen when i run cinebench, 3dmark or heavenbenchmark. i´m also passing the memtest86 without errors.
The pc is crashing only during gaming, even when i just idle without load. Sometimes its crashes when i tab out and change the youtube video.
I can even see the crash coming cause the charakters wont move (like they stuck at invisible wall) or the browser become unclickable and after 2-3
seconds blue screen happen and pc restarts.

i also reinstalled the cpu (the pins were fine) and tried switching ram slots, still no difference.

My last try would be a clean reinstall but i would like to avoid it.
So is there a way to figure out what is going on? Is something physically broken? Or could it be the bios? Or even some weird software error? A dying m2?

I´m open for any advice!
Thanks in advance!

Edit: cinebench r23 runs fine, 3dmark timespy crashes with stock settings and xmp off


----------



## sblantipodi

Few months later.











What do you expect from a company like this? xD


----------



## tomerturbo

hello everyone i have strange problem i have motherbord asus z690 hero and I9 13900K from some reason my cpu voltage not drop in idle i try auto voltage and offset voltage and stil the voltage scaling between 1.25-1.35 can this degrading the cpu faster? i know with my oter bords and cpu when idle the cpu drop to low voltage 0.9-1.14
thanks for the help


----------



## tubs2x4

firthen said:


> Hello guys!
> so, some weaks ago i started to get some random crashes on my strix z690-a gaming wifi d4 (Bios v. 2004) while gaming, youtube, discord, twitch on second screen, nothing fancy.
> 12700KF
> 2x16 Corsair Dominator [email protected]
> 3090FE
> Win 10
> Asus AI OC, XMP1 and some OC on the 3090 were enabled and were running stable.
> 
> So i updated bios to latest version (2204). Kept the settings, the crashed kept going, like every 20-30 mins. Blue screen with error.
> I though that the overclock wasnt stable on this bios version. Set everything to default settings and disabled xmp. The crashes still occur.
> Weird thing is that they wont happen when i run cinebench, 3dmark or heavenbenchmark. i´m also passing the memtest86 without errors.
> The pc is crashing only during gaming, even when i just idle without load. Sometimes its crashes when i tab out and change the youtube video.
> I can even see the crash coming cause the charakters wont move (like they stuck at invisible wall) or the browser become unclickable and after 2-3
> seconds blue screen happen and pc restarts.
> 
> i also reinstalled the cpu (the pins were fine) and tried switching ram slots, still no difference.
> 
> My last try would be a clean reinstall but i would like to avoid it.
> So is there a way to figure out what is going on? Is something physically broken? Or could it be the bios? Or even some weird software error? A dying m2?
> 
> I´m open for any advice!
> Thanks in advance!
> 
> Edit: cinebench r23 runs fine, 3dmark timespy crashes with stock settings and xmp off


So you set defaults or did you actually clear cmos?


----------



## Self Tapper

tomerturbo said:


> hello everyone i have strange problem i have motherbord asus z690 hero and I9 13900K from some reason my cpu voltage not drop in idle i try auto voltage and offset voltage and stil the voltage scaling between 1.25-1.35 can this degrading the cpu faster? i know with my oter bords and cpu when idle the cpu drop to low voltage 0.9-1.14
> thanks for the help


Couple of basics first so we can understand the situation better and advise you more accurately: What are you using to monitor the CPU voltage?

And what OS are you running? If Windows, what power management profile is selected?

And finally, for now, what UEFI build are you using on the Hero, what ME firmware build, and how have you got the CPU set up? Default, overclocked? How have you set the various SVID options in the UEFI?


----------



## Self Tapper

BTW on the subject of the disappearance of the ROG forums, has anyone seen anything here or elsewhere from Asus employees - or those with close association - who know what the hell is going on?

To say that it doesn't exactly inspire confidence in the brand would be a pronounced understatement.


----------



## tomerturbo

Self Tapper said:


> Couple of basics first so we can understand the situation better and advise you more accurately: What are you using to monitor the CPU voltage?
> 
> And what OS are you running? If Windows, what power management profile is selected?
> 
> And finally, for now, what UEFI build are you using on the Hero, what ME firmware build, and how have you got the CPU set up? Default, overclocked? How have you set the various SVID options in the UEFI?


i monitor the cpu voltage with hwmonitor and cpuz

i run windows 10 with blanced power management
i run lastes bios and frimware first i run it default now its overclocked
How have you set the various SVID options in the UEFI i dont understand this question


----------



## PoizenJam

I'm about 4 days deep running basic AIOC (SP 102, Cooler 160, optimism 100) + XMP I setup on the latest BIOS (Z690 extreme + 13900k + 64GB GSkill 5600 RAM). A lot _more _stable with this config, but not quite there yet. I'm not getting overnight restarts, random lockups, or weird hangs anymore. However, I still hit a couple BSODs- particularly those that point to memory (or at least an interaction between OC + XMP). e.g. 0x3b.

Taking a look at AI Tweaker- it seems my SP is reasonably high for both my P and E cores, but the memory controller (MC) SP seems to be a bit on the low side. So maybe the RAM isn't quite stable despite passing every stress test I've thrown at it? I've not done much manual RAM overclocking in my life- I assume I might want to bump the MC voltage up from 1.35V to 1.4V to check?



Self Tapper said:


> BTW on the subject of the disappearance of the ROG forums, has anyone seen anything here or elsewhere from Asus employees - or those with close association - who know what the hell is going on?
> 
> To say that it doesn't exactly inspire confidence in the brand would be a pronounced understatement.


Yeah, the disappearance of the forums has been very frustrating and disappointing. It was an absolutely invaluable resource for troubleshooting



sblantipodi said:


> I buy computers since the Commodore 64 era, I always bought high end computers since then and Z690 Extreme is the absolute worst mobo I had (and one of the most expensive)
> next mobo will be an MSI.
> 
> PS: both drives runs gen4, I don't had whea-17 errors even when PCI-E Native Power Management was enabled.


Interesting- thanks for the update. So I either have a bad motherboard, bad ROG DIMM accessory, or there's a compatibility issue between WD NVME SSDs and the ASUS mobos.
.


----------



## Simkin

Self Tapper said:


> BTW on the subject of the disappearance of the ROG forums, has anyone seen anything here or elsewhere from Asus employees - or those with close association - who know what the hell is going on?
> 
> To say that it doesn't exactly inspire confidence in the brand would be a pronounced understatement.


ROG Forum is back now.


----------



## Mappi75

👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏


----------



## firthen

tubs2x4 said:


> So you set defaults or did you actually clear cmos?


Changed the PSU and it seems that the crashes are gone and OC is stable again.


----------



## Nizzen

firthen said:


> Changed the PSU and it seems that the crashes are gone and OC is stable again.


What psu did you have?


----------



## firthen

Nizzen said:


> What psu did you have?


went from asus rog thor platinum 850W to corsair rm850x, my local store had sadly nothing else above 750W
Seem like the old psu just died. Curios that warranty ended in october..


----------



## bscool

tomerturbo said:


> i monitor the cpu voltage with hwmonitor and cpuz
> 
> i run windows 10 with blanced power management
> i run lastes bios and frimware first i run it default now its overclocked
> How have you set the various SVID options in the UEFI i dont understand this question


It is best to list the bios and firmware version because there are newer bioses that some do not know about or they missed them. Bios 2301 and firmware 2020 are the latest.


----------



## TSportM

Simkin said:


> ROG Forum is back now.


yes but previous topics dont come online you have to search for them on this new forum


----------



## Self Tapper

Simkin said:


> ROG Forum is back now.


Thanks. 



Mappi75 said:


> 👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏


Is that one handclap for each day it was gone?


----------



## Self Tapper

tomerturbo said:


> i monitor the cpu voltage with hwmonitor and cpuz
> 
> i run windows 10 with blanced power management
> i run lastes bios and frimware first i run it default now its overclocked
> How have you set the various SVID options in the UEFI i dont understand this question


As has already been said, as a general point, it'd be helpful if you could list the exact UEFI and other firmware/software build numbers. "The latest" could mean the latest release (2204), latest beta (2301, or higher), or the latest release _you_ know about 

With regard to that SVID question, how do you have the SVID Behavior, Actual VRM Core Voltage, Global Core SVID Voltage and CPU SVID Support options set in the UEFI? They are the ones with primary responsibility for controlling whether and how the core voltage ramps.

Aaalso, what version of CPU-Z and HWMonitor have you tried - and have you used anything else? Armoury Crate's dashboard, if installed, or, if you have any Corsair stuff, iCUE correctly reports the CPU core voltage, while Intel's XTU and HWInfo64 also show the SVID properly. Possibly relevant - I don't have HWM installed, and don't use CPU-Z often but just started the version I had installed (2.00), and it wasn't correctly displaying the core voltage either. After a couple of seconds uptime the displayed voltage would just 'freeze' - which sounds a lot like what you are seeing. However, updating to version 2.03 fixed this issue. Maybe trying a couple of other monitoring suites would be a good move before you start chasing your tail fixing something that isn't actually broke


----------



## Self Tapper

owikh84 said:


> I think I spoke too soon. When I switched to the other BIOS chip (bios2) that contains older than 2004 BIOS version, I got debug code 55 with one/two sticks of Hynix A/M-die. Successfully USB backflashed to 2004 but I'm still getting code 55. Switching back to BIOS chip (bios1) that contains 2301 is fine though. CPU is 13900K btw.


Yep this is mirroring my experience pretty closely. Managed to solve the occasional BSOD issue by adding 0.03v to DRAM VDD and VDDQ. So once running it will now run all week. However, it's still suffering instability on resume from sleep. Frequently seeing it hang on the 0x55 Q-Code - or double-POST and resume the OS from the (hybrid sleep) hibernation file instead of from RAM.



CptSpig said:


> Power down turn off PS and unplug. Clear Cmo's for 10 to 15 seconds. Take battery out for a few seconds and reinstall. Do this for both bios and then update with EZ Flash.


I tried this technique on my Hero just to see, and it didn't work either via USB Flashback or using EZ-Flash. 2103 and 2204 still not flashing in EZ-Flash, and giving the solid blue light when renamed and attempted USB FlashBack. Really bad form for Asus to issue this beta without a health warning that you're apparently stuck with it until something newer comes along.


----------



## akgis

ssgwright said:


> been running 2301 and besides my D6 error still being present it's running good. I'm running 57 all core 61 1&2 on my 13900k no issues.


Hello mate were you using a 12900k before? Mind to test it, Iam running that mobo with 6600mhz DDR5 but a 12900k with a 4090 that should interface the same as a 4080, Iam on 2103 bios still


----------



## akgis

Z690 hero, I have 2301 rocking stable, Can I flashback to 2301 after upgrading to 2204(in case Its bad)


----------



## jase78

Self Tapper said:


> BTW on the subject of the disappearance of the ROG forums, has anyone seen anything here or elsewhere from Asus employees - or those with close association - who know what the hell is going on?
> 
> To say that it doesn't exactly inspire confidence in the brand would be a pronounced understatement.


mightw want to check that again. the forums are back up. with one tiny little problem 99 percent of new posts / replies etc show up BLANK


----------



## sulalin

akgis said:


> Z690 hero, I have 2301 rocking stable, Can I flashback to 2301 after upgrading to 2204(in case Its bad)


2301 is newer than 2204/2203/2201 and cannot be flashed back to 2204/2203/2201 or lower, but 2204/2203/2201, which also start with 22, can be flashed back from 2201 to 2203/2204, and can be flashed back to 2201. Guess it is the front 22/23 is different, the main reason why the new bios cannot flash back to the old bios


----------



## PoizenJam

I put 2301 on my second BIOS chip yesterday and switched over to it. Curiously, when I booted into Windows it asked me to reset my PIN because it detected a hardware change. Now it's telling me I cannot activate Windows. Switching back to BIOS chip 1 (running 2204) resulted in the same behaviour- I had to reset my Windows account PIN and it told me Windows was not activated.

Thankfully, I dump nightly backups to my home server, so I'm going to stay on BIOS Chip 1 (2204) and try restoring to yesterday before I updated the BIOS... But a BIOS update _really _shouldn't deactivate Windows. And unfortunately, since my key was one that was upgraded from Windows 10, I really can't seem to get the Microsoft support reps to help me out much.

Just thought I'd give a heads up to others that might be trying out the beta bios. Clearly most aren't encountering this issue but it may be a cause for concern to some.

EDIT: Good news- I was able to revert to an activated windows by first switching back to BIOS_A (running 2204) _then _restoring a backup from _before _I switched to BIOS_B.


----------



## IAMXAM

PoizenJam said:


> I put 2301 on my second BIOS chip yesterday and switched over to it. Curiously, when I booted into Windows it asked me to reset my PIN because it detected a hardware change. Now it's telling me I cannot activate Windows. Switching back to BIOS chip 1 (running 2204) resulted in the same behaviour- I had to reset my Windows account PIN and it told me Windows was not activated.
> 
> Thankfully, I dump nightly backups to my home server, so I'm going to stay on BIOS Chip 1 (2204) and try restoring to yesterday before I updated the BIOS... But a BIOS update _really _shouldn't deactivate Windows. And unfortunately, since my key was one that was upgraded from Windows 10, I really can't seem to get the Microsoft support reps to help me out much.
> 
> Just thought I'd give a heads up to others that might be trying out the beta bios. Clearly most aren't encountering this issue but it may be a cause for concern to some.


Actually the same PIN issue happened to me, but I didn't update my BIOS_B because I read it was supposedly read only (its the stock factory BIOS). The PIN issue occurred for me the last time when I switched back over from BIOS_B to BIOS_M (I ended up reformatting Win10 a couple of times trying to trouble shoot on both BIOS).

I called Microsoft, was on the phone with them for about 45mins (holds and all) and the rep said there was a bug with the Win10 login activation. He remoted in and selected my MS surface instead and it fixed it. 🤷‍♂️


----------



## TSportM

Thing is that Windows detects a new Mac its not related to bios update, bios 01 and bios 02 changing them does that windows thinks motherboard changes, but you can buy a Windows 11 pro xeon 2,50€ not big deal 

cheers


----------



## oskuro

BenchAndGames said:


> Dont desesperate Im getting the same error 315x WHEA id 17 errors in 2 seconds
> I have TUF Z690 WIFI version
> 
> But Im sure its not from you GPU, pay atention how to detect exactly from wich device is:
> 
> In your case its looks like comign from
> DEV_460D
> 
> So go to
> Device Manager --> System devices --> Click on "*Intel(R) PEG10 - 460D*" (The problem device) once.
> Then click on the "View" Panel --> Select "Device by connection"
> 
> And than you will able to see exactly wich device is conected to that port, im preaty sure its your M2 Samsung 960 Evo 500GB.
> 
> If is this the case, try take out that M2 and test it, if is saying that on *Intel(R) PEG10 - 460D *its your video card I dont know, but definitly somethign weird happaning with this Asus Boards, cuz as I said I have same problem.
> 
> But in my case is my NVMe device WD Black SN850 1GB that it on the PCI-root with the WHEA errors.
> 
> But I dont have freeze or anything, for me its working ok its just this anoying WHEA error sometimes like 300x times in 1 sec.....make no sense....
> 
> I hope bios or sata firmware will fix this.
> 
> _*EDIT: I can see here we are like 4 or 5 with the same issue, all we have asus boards so something bad with thise boards*_


Hi, I think I have those issues as well.

This is what my System Devices ("device by connection") for *Intel(R) PEG10 - 460D *shows:










The thing is that this PC is new, with this setup:

CPU: Intel i9 12900K
GPU: RTX 3080Ti
RAM: Kingston Fury Renegade 32GB DDR5 6400
MOBO: Asus ROG STRIX Z690-F
HD: Samsung 980 Pro M.2 1TB

And with a fresh W10 or W11 install, with Asus official drivers installed with Armoury Crate and even Asus BIOS latest version, I'm getting random freezings just when I'm posting something with maybe just Spotify opened and that´s it (not even playing). I always hear like a short electric interference before the freezing.

I thought that RAM was the reason, as I was trying to run it at 6400 (DDR5) and someone told me that i9 12900K supports DDR5 4800, but even just using 4800 without XMP didn't solve the issue and I'm still getting freezings from time to time.

These are the conflicts that I have using *msinfo32.exe*









and this is what LatencyMon reports:










What can I do?.
Thanks.


----------



## akgis

The audtio controler you see on the same port of the Graphics card is the Nvidia audio controller for HDMI/DP, you can also disabled that on the device manager if you dont use it.

Resouce alocation should work out of the box with a non messued up bios and a standard WIndows 10/11 install.

12900k with the e-cores is normal to have higher DPC on a out of the box Optimized defaults BIOS settings, you should mesure with e-cores and HT disable and all superfull devices disabled in Bios with a debloated windows install for sub 10  thats how the Kids do it.

Also for further DPC you should check your best core and affinity the interrupts to it but thats extreme.

A spike here and there on a out of the box system is default power settings is nothing to worry about, just be aware if the high DPC is constasnt. 

You can also try to use all in MSI interrupt mode instead of IRQ, all devices on a Z690Hero for me work in MSI(Network Wifi, Realtek usb audio, Sata, and NV card) , you might get better DPC, M2 pci ex storage should be already neable in MSI by default in W11 if they arent be carefull you might end with a non bootable device. 

What worries me is that the ASmedia controler is using same IRQ than HD audio controler. By standard Intel provices 4 sata ports, but some Asus Cards have 6 sata ports and for those 2 extra use the ASmedia, if you dont use more than 4, disable the ASmedia in the Bios, You might be using Asmedia ports if so move to the intel sata ports check the manual.


----------



## akgis

sulalin said:


> 2301 is newer than 2204/2203/2201 and cannot be flashed back to 2204/2203/2201 or lower, but 2204/2203/2201, which also start with 22, can be flashed back from 2201 to 2203/2204, and can be flashed back to 2201. Guess it is the front 22/23 is different, the main reason why the new bios cannot flash back to the old bios


I ment 2103.

I have 2103 bios if I upgrade to 2204, can I get back to 2103 since the first 2 numbers are smaller


----------



## sulalin

akgis said:


> 我提到 2103。
> 
> 如果我升級到 2204，我有 2103 bios，我可以回到 2103 因為前 2 個數字較小
> [/引用]


It should not work. 2103 is older than 2204! What can be brushed back is only the same 22 opening 2203 2201 These are the same 22 opening, but different versions of bios!!


----------



## Benni231990

hello!

i have a stupid question xD 

why allways only apex and maximus has high DDR5 frequenzy like 7400+ but no Strix F board? is the Strix F a bad board for DDR5 OC? 

Im asking because i have a Strix F board and want to buy a 7400+ Kit but will it run with the normal XMP?


----------



## Kylianter

Looking forward to asus z690 components inside the us. Everything is right here ready. Requested asus help and they don’t understand the release date.


----------



## raad11

sulalin said:


> 2301 is newer than 2204/2203/2201 and cannot be flashed back to 2204/2203/2201 or lower, but 2204/2203/2201, which also start with 22, can be flashed back from 2201 to 2203/2204, and can be flashed back to 2201. Guess it is the front 22/23 is different, the main reason why the new bios cannot flash back to the old bios


So you can't go back from 2204 to 2103? Guess I might just chill on 2103 then lol. Too scared to update. No major issues on 2103 atm (Strix Z690-A Gaming WiFi D4).

Only issue I'm having is software related, games or OS not utilizing cores properly and stuttering unless I manually assign it to P-Cores (Overwatch 2). I'm on Windows 10 though.


----------



## TSportM

Benni231990 said:


> hello!
> 
> i have a stupid question xD
> 
> why allways only apex and maximus has high DDR5 frequenzy like 7400+ but no Strix F board? is the Strix F a bad board for DDR5 OC?
> 
> Im asking because i have a Strix F board and want to buy a 7400+ Kit but will it run with the normal XMP?



hello

Bare in mind that the apex has only 2 dimms slots and bare in mind that even if qvl is 7400+ does not mean your pc will do it out of the box XMP

cheers


----------



## akgis

raad11 said:


> So you can't go back from 2204 to 2103? Guess I might just chill on 2103 then lol. Too scared to update. No major issues on 2103 atm (Strix Z690-A Gaming WiFi D4).
> 
> Only issue I'm having is software related, games or OS not utilizing cores properly and stuttering unless I manually assign it to P-Cores (Overwatch 2). I'm on Windows 10 though.


Had that aswell in Windows 11 22h2 games were being all asigned to e-cores no mater the energy plan, never saw it on 21h2. It went away with a hard restart.

Any performance gains or stability in enabling the VMD device mode even thou you wont be using RAID?


----------



## Papusan

Papusan said:


> Hi. Does 2301 come with same MC as for 2204? And with what memory and what memory speed do you see an improvement? M-die or A-die? Or with both? And thanks for the feedback.
> 
> Other here that can share their experience with bios v2301 (Z690 Apex) ? Thanks


My experience... Older 2204 was better than 2301. And yep, Asus went back to to put in bios v2204 in their download folder in their forum RaptorLake Resources . I expect they also saw exactly the same themself. And now, people are stuck with the latest beta bios. I expect it's a nice bugged piece of work art. Damn good job Asus. Dell could't do a better job. Yep., its beta bios but a minimum should be listing a real change log in the download folder. Gigabyte can do it for their cheapest boards.. Asus could as well.

And 3 weeks with Asus forum down time (we'll back shortly, LOOL) also helped on to get rid of MoKiChU nice firmware/driver updates collection. Yep, fantastic work.

EVGA and beta bios. And from Asus…. Nothing.


----------



## Netarangi

why cant these cunts just test ****? ***


----------



## sblantipodi

Papusan said:


> Damn good job Asus. Dell could't do a better job. Yep., its beta bios but a minimum should be listing a real change log in the download folder. Gigabyte can do it for their cheapest boards.. Asus could as well.
> 
> And 3 weeks with Asus forum down time (we'll back shortly, LOOL) also helped on to get rid of MoKiChU nice firmware/driver updates collection. Yep, fantastic work.
> 
> EVGA and beta bios. And from Asus…. Nothing.
> View attachment 2591424


you are talking about a company who gived Microsoft a crappy BIOS with tons of regressions for public availability bundled in a simple Windows update, after that episode Asus guys came here saying that it was an Intel fault that gived them a bad microcode (they didn't even tested).

we are talking about apprentices, there are no more professionals behing asus mobos.
you can see it from their changelog, they don't even know what to write in the changelog,
their changelog it's something like. "hey we've done something we don't even understand just because we need to do it to get our wage, we hope that it fixes more than what it breaks, not because we care about you, just because we don't want to bother behind compliants, try it and report. finger crossed. if something breaks, do an RMA and pray to get a working mobo back. "


----------



## sulalin

Looking forward to Z690 apex having new bios or testing bios😄


----------



## acoustic

The amount of test BIOS and direct communication with members like Shamino and test team is a blessing. As an MSI board owner right now, it's something I wish they did.

Complaining about guys like shamino is just dumb. Try not running 4 mis-matched sticks of DDR5 and you'll be better off.


----------



## raad11

akgis said:


> Had that aswell in Windows 11 22h2 games were being all asigned to e-cores no mater the energy plan, never saw it on 21h2. It went away with a hard restart.


I figured it out, required editing Windows power plans' hidden field for "heterogeneous thread scheduling policy" and some other variables to give the CPU some juice/aggressiveness and prefer P-Cores. I will test it in Win11, but should work there. It's from a thread on Guru3D for Windows power plan settings explorer utility, last page.

My post:



> I changed the following policies:
> 
> “Allow Throttle States” to OFF under Ultimate Performance Power Plan (if you don’t have this, you can create one from High, it’s useful to experiment with)
> 
> “Heterogeneous policy in effect” to 0 for Ultimate Perf Power Plan (default is 4 for everything else)
> 
> “Heterogeneous thread scheduling policy” to “Prefer performant processors” for Ultimate Perf Power Plan
> 
> Try the latter two first, then the Throttle States after if the problem still isn’t fixed. I just did it for good measure. I tried to turned off CPU Idle and it hilariously was idling at 180 watts lol.
> 
> I did all this under Windows 10 22H2 (this may work on Win 11 too, worth a try).
> 
> And so far I’ve had no stutters when using that performance plan. I’ll keep testing it.





> Any performance gains or stability in enabling the VMD device mode even thou you wont be using RAID?


What do you mean enabling VMD? In the BIOS? I'm not sure what I had that set to, whatever the default was.


----------



## raad11

Is there any particular reason one should upgrade to 2204 from 2103? 2204 was pushed to Asus' main website for general public. Are we missing out on anything by not? If our system is currently stable. Any bug fixes or something?

Is the bug still there where all-core voltage goes up if you increase voltage at 5800 or higher points on VF Curve?


----------



## sblantipodi

acoustic said:


> The amount of test BIOS and direct communication with members like Shamino and test team is a blessing. As an MSI board owner right now, it's something I wish they did.
> 
> Complaining about guys like shamino is just dumb. Try not running 4 mis-matched sticks of DDR5 and you'll be better off.


I'm not complaining about shamino, I never complain about people, I'm complaining about a big corporation that acts like a dozens of interims, starting from a website that is down for months.

MSI don't need people like shamino just because they release working things, they test things internally, they don't release breaking things that breaks everything to everyone without a single smoke test saying that Intel is the coulprit.

Shamino and its guys is no bless, he is someone that don't have mobos to do it's tests (it's surely an Asus problem not a shamino one) and asks to paying users to do something that Asus should do internally. 

It's a shame to asks to customers to test things that isn't tested internally and we have the proof that they release things without a single smoke test.

Having an rma in Europe is something so difficult and so time consuming that you end to give up.

I sincerely don't know what we should bless.

A simple z690 hero, a mobo that does not even have a backplate or dual bios costs 700€ in Europe, I would say two times more than a comparable MSI.


----------



## Simkin

sblantipodi said:


> I'm not complaining about shamino, I never complain about people, I'm complaining about a big corporation that acts like a dozens of interims, starting from a website that is down for months.
> 
> MSI don't need people like shamino just because they release working things, they test things internally, they don't release breaking things that breaks everything to everyone without a single smoke test saying that Intel is the coulprit.
> 
> Shamino and its guys is no bless, he is someone that don't have mobos to do it's tests (it's surely an Asus problem not a shamino one) and asks to paying users to do something that Asus should do internally.
> 
> It's a shame to asks to customers to test things that isn't tested internally and we have the proof that they release things without a single smoke test.
> 
> Having an rma in Europe is something so difficult and so time consuming that you end to give up.
> 
> I sincerely don't know what we should bless.
> 
> A simple z690 hero, a mobo that does not even have a backplate or dual bios costs 700€ in Europe, I would say two times more than a comparable MSI.


No one is forced to use these bioses, if you want an official one, go to the website and download it there.

So far i have had zero issues with the test bioses on my Z790 Apex, i have been on 3-4 of them now, currently on 0810, running 7600Mhz on memory.

Yes, the Z690 lineup was bad for most people, incuding me, but i had no problems RMA my Z690 Apex and actually got a Z790 Apex replacement board by paying the difference, and i live in Europe.


----------



## monday_morning_qb

Simkin said:


> No one is forced to use these bioses, if you want an official one, go the the website and download it there.
> 
> So far i have had zero issues with the test bioses on my Z790 Apex, i have been on 3-4 of them now, currently on 0810, running 7600Mhz on memory.
> 
> Yes, the Z690 lineup was bad for most people, incuding me, but i had no problems RMA my Z690 Apex and actually got a Z790 Apex replacement board by paying the difference, and i live in Europe.


What did you RMA the Z690 Apex for? Sorry if it was answered earlier, I couldn't find it.


----------



## Simkin

monday_morning_qb said:


> What did you RMA the Z690 Apex for? Sorry if it was answered earlier, I couldn't find it.


Not stable with memory speed even at 6200Mhz (m-die) randomly freezes, crash to desktop, bsod etc.


----------



## HeliXpc

Simkin said:


> Not stable with memory speed even at 6200Mhz (m-die) randomly freezes, crash to desktop, bsod etc.


have you updated to the new INTEL ME? also make sure you are not running 1T (1N) timing, I am at 6400 stable.


----------



## Nizzen

HeliXpc said:


> have you updated to the new INTEL ME? also make sure you are not running 1T (1N) timing, I am at 6400 stable.


He did everything he could do


----------



## TSportM

sblantipodi said:


> I'm not complaining about shamino, I never complain about people, I'm complaining about a big corporation that acts like a dozens of interims, starting from a website that is down for months.
> 
> MSI don't need people like shamino just because they release working things, they test things internally, they don't release breaking things that breaks everything to everyone without a single smoke test saying that Intel is the coulprit.
> 
> Shamino and its guys is no bless, he is someone that don't have mobos to do it's tests (it's surely an Asus problem not a shamino one) and asks to paying users to do something that Asus should do internally.
> 
> It's a shame to asks to customers to test things that isn't tested internally and we have the proof that they release things without a single smoke test.
> 
> Having an rma in Europe is something so difficult and so time consuming that you end to give up.
> 
> I sincerely don't know what we should bless.
> 
> A simple z690 hero, a mobo that does not even have a backplate or dual bios costs 700€ in Europe, I would say two times more than a comparable MSI.


You are aiming your frustration at asus becouse of your specific problems, all brands have there problems bad QC is one thing, getting the community to use beta or alpha things is another thing, MSI is along way from asus in this matter


----------



## sblantipodi

TSportM said:


> You are aiming your frustration at asus becouse of your specific problems, all brands have there problems bad QC is one thing, getting the community to use beta or alpha things is another thing, MSI is along way from asus in this matter


You are not correct. I buy hardware since the commodore era, I know how the world works but here we have a very wrong approach to how things should work with asus.

As I said, I repeat it, Asus is giving us pre-alpha bios without any tests by their own.
This is not how the world is supposed to work. we are paying customers, we can help in beta testing but we are not supposed to do their job.

They should release tested bios that needs the last extra step of testing, they should not release untested BIOS like they did with Microsoft when they released a completely broken BIOS with Windows Update, and I repeat, the most embarassing part was that Asus blamed intel for their microcode when asus itself hadn't even done a smoke test before releasing their BIOS to Microsoft.

do you want to talk about armoury crate?

it's a bloatware no one is able to use due to the enourmous amount of bugs and hiccups, they don't even care about obvious frontend problems like some chinese words that popup from time to time... come one...

if I bought this mobo from Aliexpress at 100€ I could have undestood it, but I paid 1200€ for a mobo that adds nothing to the mix over the competition that costs less than half the price and that still have problems after a year from the release.


----------



## TSportM

sblantipodi said:


> You are not correct. I buy hardware since the commodore era, I know how the world works but here we have a very wrong approach to how things should work with asus.
> 
> As I said, I repeat it, Asus is giving us pre-alpha bios without any tests by their own.
> This is not how the world is supposed to work. we are paying customers, we can help in beta testing but we are not supposed to do their job.
> 
> They should release tested bios that needs the last extra step of testing, they should not release untested BIOS like they did with Microsoft when they released a completely broken BIOS with Windows Update, and I repeat, the most embarassing part was that Asus blamed intel for their microcode when asus itself hadn't even done a smoke test before releasing their BIOS to Microsoft.
> 
> do you want to talk about armoury crate?
> 
> it's a bloatware no one is able to use due to the enourmous amount of bugs and hiccups, they don't even care about obvious frontend problems like some chinese words that popup from time to time... come one...
> 
> if I bought this mobo from Aliexpress at 100€ I could have undestood it, but I paid 1200€ for a mobo that adds nothing to the mix over the competition that costs less than half the price and that still have problems after a year from the release.



for your information, regarding hardware manufactures like MSI, ASUS, GIGABYTE etc





i dont have any problems with armory crate, (did in some early releases fixed it by unnistalling it and installing it)

i buy hardware long before the commodore era, and ??? whats that suppose to mean ?

you are talking about some very specific thing that happens to you, you use corsair memory that requires icue and use also armory crate and need to turn on memory SPD write on the bios and it does not work for you.

You want to some kind of magic bios that fixes your memory problems using 4 dimms of memory so you can use XMP or overclock it alot, i had problems using corsair memory it jus did not overclocked so well, you keep complaining about RGB and memory, dont use any RGB software all are crap = problem fixed, buy kit of TFORCE 32gb (2x 16gb) 6400 or 6600 A die or B die, you will start saying asus is great again.

you missunderstood, sharing bios with comunity is for testing yes but they dont get the QC information, its a feature if you can call it that.

YOU have paid like me 1200€ and YOU state specific problems that i dont have the only time i had problems i found the root cause and fixed them.

iam not trying to give you a hard time, but if you dont like asus just buy a new brand.


best regards and happy new year


----------



## sblantipodi

TSportM said:


> for your information, regarding hardware manufactures like MSI, ASUS, GIGABYTE etc
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For
> 
> i dont have any problems with armory crate, (did in some early releases fixed it by unnistalling it and installing it)
> 
> i buy hardware long before the commodore era, and ??? whats that suppose to mean ?
> 
> you are talking about some very specific thing that happens to you, you use corsair memory that requires icue and use also armory crate and need to turn on memory SPD write on the bios and it does not work for you.
> 
> You want to some kind of magic bios that fixes your memory problems using 4 dimms of memory so you can use XMP or overclock it alot, i had problems using corsair memory it jus did not overclocked so well, you keep complaining about RGB and memory, dont use any RGB software all are crap = problem fixed, buy kit of TFORCE 32gb (2x 16gb) 6400 or 6600 A die or B die, you will start saying asus is great again.
> 
> you missunderstood, sharing bios with comunity is for testing yes but they dont get the QC information, its a feature if you can call it that.
> 
> YOU have paid like me 1200€ and YOU state specific problems that i dont have the only time i had problems i found the root cause and fixed them.
> 
> iam not trying to give you a hard time, but if you dont like asus just buy a new brand.
> 
> 
> best regards and happy new year


For your information I don't have problems with 4 sticks currently. I can run 5200MT/s no problem and it's good since I'm using 4 sticks.

My english is surely not as good as yours, we are talking different languages and we don't understand each other and I sincerely don't care about convincing that I'm right or wrong.

Are you happy with your Asus? Are you happy to act like a beta tester for Asus? Are you happy that Asus releases broken bios without testing things their self before giving it to you?

I'm glad for you. No need to argue.


----------



## satinghostrider

sblantipodi said:


> For your information I don't have problems with 4 sticks currently. I can run 5200MT/s no problem and it's good since I'm using 4 sticks.
> 
> My english is surely not as good as yours, we are talking different languages and we don't understand each other and I sincerely don't care about convincing that I'm right or wrong.
> 
> Are you happy with your Asus? Are you happy to act like a beta tester for Asus? Are you happy that Asus releases broken bios without testing things their self before giving it to you?
> 
> I'm glad for you. No need to argue.


I don't quite understand your beef with these beta/test bioses. Asus has beta and test bioses. Test bioses all are starting with 00xx and the normal beta bios are like 0810/2204, etc. Perhaps one can argue test bioses are not as stable as beta bioses but YMMV. Anyways, Asus mainly releases beta bioses and that's what most people are using.

Fact is Asus is improving their bios every single time they address a fix and/or add features. They are also the first one to get their bios out once a microcode comes out. You do understand that if they make one bios official for the sake of it being latest and official, it is a matter of days or weeks before a beta bios comes out to address a new feature. Not every beta/test bios is fix it can also be new features/new tuning based on microcodes. These developments are so fast that no one bothers with official anymore. Official Vs beta to me works no different but the beta one has much better features and fixes to work with when pushing both CPU and RAM in the current state to the best of what your hardware can achieve.


----------



## Self Tapper

Without wishing to actively agree with @sblantipodi...



satinghostrider said:


> I don't quite understand your beef with these beta/test bioses. Asus has beta and test bioses. Test bioses all are starting with 00xx and the normal beta bios are like 0810/2204, etc. Perhaps one can argue test bioses are not as stable as beta bioses but YMMV. Anyways, Asus mainly releases beta bioses and that's what most people are using.
> 
> Fact is Asus is improving their bios every single time they address a fix and/or add features.


...except that isn't universally true. Asus is not "improving their BIOS every single time". 2301, for a bunch of us, has seen previously stable configurations throwing memory-related errors. But the biggest issue with it is the (unadvertised) inability to regress back to a previous stable build.

On this point, the failure to tell us that we're stuck with it is seriously bad form. And the lack of anything newer (or at least a tweaked version that will enable regression to a public build) isn't great either.


----------



## satinghostrider

Yes I agree but it's


Self Tapper said:


> Without wishing to actively agree with @sblantipodi...
> 
> 
> 
> ...except that isn't universally true. Asus is not "improving their BIOS every single time". 2301, for a bunch of us, has seen previously stable configurations throwing memory-related errors. But the biggest issue with it is the (unadvertised) inability to regress back to a previous stable build.
> 
> On this point, the failure to tell us that we're stuck with it is seriously bad form. And the lack of anything newer (or at least a tweaked version that will enable regression to a public build) isn't great either.


Yes I agree that there are times bios do screw up and is bad. But it's the same for others too. Like for 2301, they pulled it off at least from their shared drive too.

2301 is not the only one that threw memory related errors. Even bios with new microcodes will do that but you have to retune the voltages. Most will just say that the bios is not good because of this. I've personally experienced this before as with many others who manually tune their rams. Though I'd swing back to the point that 2301 wasn't a good bios not just even for memory. There were other weird bugs with that too that I experienced. I guess sometimes it's a good investment getting a board with dual bios that way so you can switch back in the event you can't roll back though I do acknowledge not every board has this feature.

You can tell just by looking at the bios version if you can roll back. 22xx series all can be downgraded no issues. 23xx is a one way ticket you can't roll back. So if you see 24xx, you'll know you can roll back to 23xx. If you follow these series of bios updates frequently, you'll know which bios you should wait and see before jumping on especially if you don't have dual bios.


----------



## acoustic

What I don’t understand is why you can’t rollback. This isn’t happening with other manufacturers; why is ASUS doing that?


----------



## Self Tapper

satinghostrider said:


> 2301 is not the only one that threw memory related errors. Even bios with new microcodes will do that but you have to retune the voltages. Most will just say that the bios is not good because of this. I've personally experienced this before as with many others who manually tune their rams.


You're more than welcome to hop on over and sort mine out if you think a bit of tweaking is all that's necessary. As per previous post I've already experimented quite a bit (because I'm currently stuck with it) with voltages, timings and beyond in an effort to get 2301 working satisfactorily, and I'm by no means new to this. The only thing that's got some interim stability in-OS is a voltage boost _and_ dropping the RAM from 6000 down to 5600. Which ain't acceptable by any stretch - especially as it's _still_ struggling to resume from suspend to RAM. What is also odd is that it will actually run stably with under benchmarks/stress tests etc at 'full' speed, but will then randomly BSOD while idling or at low load. This UEFI build just ain't good, on my configuration at least.



> I guess sometimes it's a good investment getting a board with dual bios that way so you can switch back in the event you can't roll back though I do acknowledge not every board has this feature.


My Z690 Hero was knocking on 600 quid UK if I recall correct - and a good 100% more expensive than the last Z-series board I purchased for a personal system. I don't consider the price premium for a dual BIOS version a worthwhile investment to save myself from an Asus fritz-up - especially given anecdotal evidence from others above that even dual BIOS boards didn't protect them from 2301's peculiarities. I'd much prefer to see a return to socketed UEFI ICs than pay extra for a dual chip setup.



satinghostrider said:


> You can tell just by looking at the bios version if you can roll back. 22xx series all can be downgraded no issues. 23xx is a one way ticket you can't roll back. So if you see 24xx, you'll know you can roll back to 23xx. If you follow these series of bios updates frequently, you'll know which bios you should wait and see before jumping on especially if you don't have dual bios.


Are you certain about this? You've repeated this contention here a number of times, but evidence elsewhere undermines it, and for fairly self-explanatory reasons, I can't evaluate it myself. Aside from anything else, it is not supported by Asus' previous update history. If you _are_ correct, it, again, reflects negatively on Asus. If you therefore aren't certain, it'd be helpful if you could actually test it and verify your theory before repeating it again.

There is only _one_ Z690 release UEFI that Asus has _publicly_ stated has a regression block:










1003 doesn't include this statement in its release notes (and neither, FWIW do 2103 or 2204, or _any_ other release):










If your theory held true, 1003 shouldn't have allowed regression back to 0811, and 2204 shouldn't have permitted regression back to 2103 etc etc etc. So, if Asus's release noting policy is accurate in this respect, your theory that an increment in the most significant build numbers brings with it an inherent regression block is incorrect. If, however, you're right, it's an implied criticism of Asus' release note policy not being verbose when this issue arrises.

As above, have you actually checked and confirmed this, or is it an untested theory that you thought fitted the facts as you saw them? Not criticising you, just seeking confirmation/accuracy.


----------



## satinghostrider

Self Tapper said:


> You're more than welcome to hop on over and sort mine out if you think a bit of tweaking is all that's necessary. As per previous post I've already experimented quite a bit (because I'm currently stuck with it) with voltages, timings and beyond in an effort to get 2301 working satisfactorily, and I'm by no means new to this. The only thing that's got some interim stability in-OS is a voltage boost _and_ dropping the RAM from 6000 down to 5600. Which ain't acceptable by any stretch - especially as it's _still_ struggling to resume from suspend to RAM. What is also odd is that it will actually run stably with under benchmarks/stress tests etc at 'full' speed, but will then randomly BSOD while idling or at low load. This UEFI build just ain't good, on my configuration at least.
> 
> 
> 
> My Z690 Hero was knocking on 600 quid UK if I recall correct - and a good 100% more expensive than the last Z-series board I purchased for a personal system. I don't consider the price premium for a dual BIOS version a worthwhile investment to save myself from an Asus fritz-up - especially given anecdotal evidence from others above that even dual BIOS boards didn't protect them from 2301's peculiarities. I'd much prefer to see a return to socketed UEFI ICs than pay extra for a dual chip setup.
> 
> 
> 
> Are you certain about this? You've repeated this contention here a number of times, but evidence elsewhere undermines it, and for fairly self-explanatory reasons, I can't evaluate it myself. Aside from anything else, it is not supported by Asus' previous update history. If you _are_ correct, it, again, reflects negatively on Asus. If you therefore aren't certain, it'd be helpful if you could actually test it and verify your theory before repeating it again.
> 
> There is only _one_ Z690 release UEFI that Asus has _publicly_ stated has a regression block:
> 
> View attachment 2591920
> 
> 
> 1003 doesn't include this statement in its release notes (and neither, FWIW do 2103 or 2204, or _any_ other release):
> 
> View attachment 2591921
> 
> 
> If your theory held true, 1003 shouldn't have allowed regression back to 0811, and 2204 shouldn't have permitted regression back to 2103 etc etc etc. So, if Asus's release noting policy is accurate in this respect, your theory that an increment in the most significant build numbers brings with it an inherent regression block is incorrect. If, however, you're right, it's an implied criticism of Asus' release note policy not being verbose when this issue arrises.
> 
> As above, have you actually checked and confirmed this, or is it an untested theory that you thought fitted the facts as you saw them? Not criticising you, just seeking confirmation/accuracy.


I've had no issues with my memory at 6800c30 on 2301 but I lost 500 points on Cinebench R23 while running hotter by 3 degrees at the same time. I had to also up my TX voltage and MC voltage slightly for 2301 to work stable as my old settings on 2204 threw errors. I had to set ring back to auto as manually setting to 5.0Ghz had high idle voltages. I went back to 2204 flashed on my backup bios. I didn't bother to test if I can downgrade. I never found the need to downgrade as I switch between bios if the other one doesn't work well. And I'm not the only one who have repeated this contention about downgrading on 2301 to 2203/2204 there were others who shared the same view. Whether they work or not I don't know. I just don't usually try to downgrade if they don't follow the numbering as I outlined earlier. It is easier for me to just switch to the backup bios and use back the settings that worked because I don't know if downgrading would brick my bios and that's something I don't take a risk for.

Asus usually don't give a breakdown on what's updated. Certain firmwares when updated with the bios usually mean you can't downgrade (theoretically). Whilst I have not tested it, it doesn't mean I'm right or wrong. I just choose to use my backup bios to resume what's working properly as I do not have the habit of downgrading everytime something doesn't work properly.

This has been my experience thus far with Z690 bioses for my Apex so far and YMMV.


----------



## Papusan

MoKiChU is up with a new Intel ME Consumer Firmware : v16.1.25.2091 

Download : *Link*






[FIRMWARE] Intel ME (H610/B660/H670/Z690/B760/H770/Z790) - Page 7


Hi everyone, - Intel ME Consumer Firmware : Firmware : 16.1.25.2091 Firmware PMC : 160.2.00.1041 Firmware PCHC : 16.1.0.1014 Firmware PHY N : 13.60.211.7253 Firmware PHY S : 13.0.1.7084 Download : Link



rog.asus.com


----------



## 7empe

Papusan said:


> MoKiChU is up with a new Intel ME Consumer Firmware : v16.1.25.2091
> 
> Download : *Link*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [FIRMWARE] Intel ME (H610/B660/H670/Z690/B760/H770/Z790) - Page 7
> 
> 
> Hi everyone, - Intel ME Consumer Firmware : Firmware : 16.1.25.2091 Firmware PMC : 160.2.00.1041 Firmware PCHC : 16.1.0.1014 Firmware PHY N : 13.60.211.7253 Firmware PHY S : 13.0.1.7084 Download : Link
> 
> 
> 
> rog.asus.com


Who wants to report on changes with 2091 vs 2020?


----------



## nanochippie

satinghostrider said:


> I don't quite understand your beef with these beta/test bioses. Asus has beta and test bioses. Test bioses all are starting with 00xx and the normal beta bios are like 0810/2204, etc. Perhaps one can argue test bioses are not as stable as beta bioses but YMMV. Anyways, Asus mainly releases beta bioses and that's what most people are using.
> 
> Fact is Asus is improving their bios every single time they address a fix and/or add features. They are also the first one to get their bios out once a microcode comes out. You do understand that if they make one bios official for the sake of it being latest and official, it is a matter of days or weeks before a beta bios comes out to address a new feature. Not every beta/test bios is fix it can also be new features/new tuning based on microcodes. These developments are so fast that no one bothers with official anymore. Official Vs beta to me works no different but the beta one has much better features and fixes to work with when pushing both CPU and RAM in the current state to the best of what your hardware can achieve.


2301 is bugged out. Memory instability at xmp speeds (7200 m/t and above). Prior bioses like 2103 and 2204 were extremely stable. With respect to memory. The problem with 2301 is that it can’t be rolled back to earlier bioses. Not even via usb flashback. It is a one way trip into instability issues and there is no indication prior to updating that it cannot be downgraded.

2204 updates the thunderbolt NVM from version 31 to 36. 36 fixes hotplug problems that plagued prior NVMs (jhl6240 devices do not hot-plug when connected to maple ridge controller with nvm 31, 29, 26.x) but 36 has new bugs with certain nvme enclosures… for example, a warm reboot from within the bios puts the thunderbolt controller into a state where it crashes as soon as a nvme enclosure is connected. Crashes as in it is no longer detected anymore. The Only way to recover is to power off the system and power on again. Without fail.

Seems that for z690 users with thunderbolt, do not upgrade past 2103 whatsoever until Asus (2301 is garbage) and intel(maple ridge nvm 36 is bugged out) issue a fix.


----------



## satinghostrider

nanochippie said:


> 2301 is bugged out. Memory instability at xmp speeds (7200 m/t and above). Prior bioses like 2103 and 2204 were extremely stable. With respect to memory. The problem with 2301 is that it can’t be rolled back to earlier bioses. Not even via usb flashback. It is a one way trip into instability issues and there is no indication prior to updating that it cannot be downgraded.
> 
> 2204 updates the thunderbolt NVM from version 31 to 36. 36 fixes hotplug problems that plagued prior NVMs (jhl6240 devices do not hot-plug when connected to maple ridge controller with nvm 31, 29, 26.x) but 36 has new bugs with certain nvme enclosures… for example, a warm reboot from within the bios puts the thunderbolt controller into a state where it crashes as soon as a nvme enclosure is connected. Crashes as in it is no longer detected anymore. The Only way to recover is to power off the system and power on again. Without fail.
> 
> Seems that for z690 users with thunderbolt, do not upgrade past 2103 whatsoever until Asus (2301 is garbage) and intel(maple ridge nvm 36 is bugged out) issue a fix.


I don't use xmp or thunderbolt so I can't say. But 2301 isn't a great bios for Z690 Apex I run warmer at the same settings.


----------



## nanochippie

satinghostrider said:


> I don't use xmp or thunderbolt so I can't say. But 2301 isn't a great bios for Z690 Apex I run warmer at the same settings.


That’s good that it’s good for you, but at xmp 7200 speeds, 2301 results in windows crashes without fail. All sorts of errors that I have never seen before. For example, I had a Memory_management blue screen. I’ve never seen that before; I didn’t know that was a cause of a stop error. 2103 and 2204 don’t have any issues. My formula is headed back to Asus anyways and a new one is in the mail.

As for the thunderbolt nvm issue, some on z790 (with nvm35) are having similar problems as I reported here.


----------



## raad11

7empe said:


> Who wants to report on changes with 2091 vs 2020?


Don't notice a difference yet.

I don't know whose fault it is but 13th gen, or at least 13900K, runs like **** on Windows (both 10 and 11) compared to 12th gen.

My 12900K idled well, consuming low power, and would clock up upon demand or when put in high performance power plan. You could see it on the graphs, both P/E cores speeding up and dropping. Very, very consistent across benchmark, gaming, productivity for the entire year I had it.

With 13900K (on same Z690 Strix board), it's either at max clocks ALL the time (and thus, max idle voltages which are high) or you enable C-States in BIOS (set C-States to Enabled, then the particular state to go to to 'Auto', so it goes to deepest possible) so it's always fluctuating clocks, even during high performance power plan.

I never had to use Power Saver performance plan with 12900K. I left it in balanced all the time and idle usage dropped to under 15 watts with all my stuff open. Since my system is on 24-7, I have to use power saver with 13900K to get it to not be constantly spinning up the cores all the time and use less than 30 watts.

Then on top of that, 13900K causes stutter issues, fps drops and GPU load/power issues whereas the 12900K didn't. This is also partly on the game developers because one game was egregious for me (Overwatch) while most ran fine. But still, that game runs fine on the 12900K. I had to change some hidden settings in Windows power plan (in both Win 10 and Win 11, and defaults for Win 10 were worse than Win 11... but had no issues with 12900K). Heterogeneous scheduling policy, idle states, parked cores settings, etc. Tweaking those got it to be more stable and stutter less. Never had to use 'Park E-Cores' button (Scroll Lock) from BIOS until 13900K.

I installed Win 11 on a spare drive and it had the same issues and in fact generally performs worse than Win 10 for games, lol.

Done with this hybrid core stuff. 12900K was very promising, I thought it would be the future. I don't know what went wrong with 13th gen. Just waiting on the 7950X3D.


----------



## acoustic

Don’t have any of those issues with either my 12700K or 13900K.

enjoy agesa


----------



## raad11

acoustic said:


> Don’t have any of those issues with either my 12700K or 13900K.
> 
> enjoy agesa


What program are you using for hardware monitoring? And what are your C-State settings in BIOS? Win10 or Win11 and which power plan? What's idle wattage in hwinfo64 for your CPU on Balanced power plan?

I noticed Win 11 fixed idle power issue, except gaming performance was worse.


----------



## acoustic

raad11 said:


> What program are you using for hardware monitoring? And what are your C-State settings in BIOS? Win10 or Win11 and which power plan? What's idle wattage in hwinfo64 for your CPU on Balanced power plan?
> 
> I noticed Win 11 fixed idle power issue, except gaming performance was worse.


I’m on Win11. HWINFO64. C-States set to Auto. Power plan set to Ultimate performance, but I still get idle wattage down in the 5-10watt range.

Gaming performance seems just fine. Haven’t been on Win10 in some time, but buttery smooth. I seen some showing screenshots of MW2 benches.. they’re getting 425fps with extremely tweaked A-Die and I’m getting 400 with my lowly M-Die at only 7000, stock P core, 45x E, and 50x ring.

seems within range given the difference

at idle using ultimate performance plan. just booted into Windows:


----------



## Radical_53

Any idea what to look for when my SA won't go to sleep? It stays around 9-12W at all times, while the "core" CPU will go down below 2W. 
I'm using the 2204 bios currently. Tried SA GV in bios, but I can't boot my RAM overclocks with it enabled.


----------



## SinfulSavior

I've tried looking through the forum and I haven't seen an answer (there are a lot of posts in this thread). Hoping someone out there can help.

I'm running the Z690 Glacial with bios 2301 (same issues on 2204).

Intel 13900K with 4 x 32 GB Corsair 5600 Dominator and I can't get it to run with all 4 sticks. I can get it to run with two sticks in A2 and B2 but not in any other configuration. I saw some posts around this topic, but I'm trying to determine if I need to RMA the board, if I should return a set of RAM, or wait until there is a bios update that fixes this issue.

I do actually need to run 128 GB of ram but can get by with 64 for a while so I'm not in a huge rush.


----------



## Self Tapper

nanochippie said:


> That’s good that it’s good for you, but at xmp 7200 speeds, 2301 results in windows crashes without fail. All sorts of errors that I have never seen before. For example, I had a Memory_management blue screen. I’ve never seen that before; I didn’t know that was a cause of a stop error. 2103 and 2204 don’t have any issues.


Yep, multiple MEMORY_MANAGEMENT BSOD on 2301 here too, along with a handful of other that I've never seen in a year of an otherwise and previously rock stable configuration. Can't remember the other errors specifically now as system was shut down for a week last week due to holidays. 

Meanwhile have tried the 16.1.25.2091 ME firmware from @Papusan (and MoKiChu)'s link upthread in the hope that it will right the ship a bit. Too early to tell yet whether any difference has been made. It _has_ resumed from sleep successfully, once, but then it would do that occasionally using 2301 and the 2020v2 firmware too.


----------



## Radical_53

I flashed the ME .2091 today and just had my first boot with a missing NVMW boot drive. Could be a coincidence.


----------



## bscool

SinfulSavior said:


> I've tried looking through the forum and I haven't seen an answer (there are a lot of posts in this thread). Hoping someone out there can help.
> 
> I'm running the Z690 Glacial with bios 2301 (same issues on 2204).
> 
> Intel 13900K with 4 x 32 GB Corsair 5600 Dominator and I can't get it to run with all 4 sticks. I can get it to run with two sticks in A2 and B2 but not in any other configuration. I saw some posts around this topic, but I'm trying to determine if I need to RMA the board, if I should return a set of RAM, or wait until there is a bios update that fixes this issue.
> 
> I do actually need to run 128 GB of ram but can get by with 64 for a while so I'm not in a huge rush.


RMAing the MB will likely not fix this. Either run 2 sticks or maybe, maybe going z790 MB "might" help but I wouldn't bet on that helping either. But z790 DDR% MB are better at running higher mem speeds. I have not seen a lot of feedback on how they do with 4x32 though but they should be better than z690.

z690/z790 MB are Daisy chain and can run 2 sticks easier than 4. T topology was on older gens(z390) and did better running 4 sticks.


----------



## sulalin

It would be very happy if a board could often have beta bios or continuously update and optimize bios more than a year after it was launched! What else do you complain about? I can't wait to have the launch of optimized beta bios for performance, stability overclocking ability every day. This means that the motherboard factory has not given up and released these boards. You can see the speed of bios update in other factories compared with the total time of continuous update. You will know how happy and lucky it is to have beta bios! People should be content! Only then can you be happy!

When will z690 apex beta bios appear! Waiting for it!


----------



## monday_morning_qb

raad11 said:


> Don't notice a difference yet.
> 
> I don't know whose fault it is but 13th gen, or at least 13900K, runs like **** on Windows (both 10 and 11) compared to 12th gen.
> 
> My 12900K idled well, consuming low power, and would clock up upon demand or when put in high performance power plan. You could see it on the graphs, both P/E cores speeding up and dropping. Very, very consistent across benchmark, gaming, productivity for the entire year I had it.
> 
> With 13900K (on same Z690 Strix board), it's either at max clocks ALL the time (and thus, max idle voltages which are high) or you enable C-States in BIOS (set C-States to Enabled, then the particular state to go to to 'Auto', so it goes to deepest possible) so it's always fluctuating clocks, even during high performance power plan.
> 
> I never had to use Power Saver performance plan with 12900K. I left it in balanced all the time and idle usage dropped to under 15 watts with all my stuff open. Since my system is on 24-7, I have to use power saver with 13900K to get it to not be constantly spinning up the cores all the time and use less than 30 watts.
> 
> Then on top of that, 13900K causes stutter issues, fps drops and GPU load/power issues whereas the 12900K didn't. This is also partly on the game developers because one game was egregious for me (Overwatch) while most ran fine. But still, that game runs fine on the 12900K. I had to change some hidden settings in Windows power plan (in both Win 10 and Win 11, and defaults for Win 10 were worse than Win 11... but had no issues with 12900K). Heterogeneous scheduling policy, idle states, parked cores settings, etc. Tweaking those got it to be more stable and stutter less. Never had to use 'Park E-Cores' button (Scroll Lock) from BIOS until 13900K.
> 
> I installed Win 11 on a spare drive and it had the same issues and in fact generally performs worse than Win 10 for games, lol.
> 
> Done with this hybrid core stuff. 12900K was very promising, I thought it would be the future. I don't know what went wrong with 13th gen. Just waiting on the 7950X3D.


I tried a 13900K on my Z690 Apex last month and saw similar results. It was idling around 32-35C where the 12900K idles around 25C. At first I thought this was a mounting issue, but I remounted and got the same results. Also the gaming temp was pretty solid, around 45C. I followed all the steps around the firmware and BIOS updates to a T, so I don't think that was an issue. My SP was garbage (95 overall, P103,E81) so I ended up returning it anyway.

Does the 13900K run colder at idle on Z790?


----------



## VULC

Where's 2301 for Strix z690a D4? I updated to the latest ME and I'm having issues with LLC and AC DC_LL. I can't go lower then 1.33v no matter what I change AC or DC LL to.

Another issue is I had to set Memory Controller Boot Voltage from Auto to 1.25v in Internal CPU Power Management. My memory OC would become unstable on reboot or if I changed memory settings, RTLS were not changing. I would have to load optimised defaults and re flash my save profile to become stable again. Definitely a bios bug.


----------



## VULC

VULC said:


> Where's 2301 for Strix z690a D4? I updated to the latest ME and I'm having issues with LLC and AC DC_LL. I can't go lower then 1.33v no matter what I change LLC or AC DC to.
> 
> Another issue is I had to set Memory Controller Boot Voltage from Auto to 1.25v in Internal CPU Power Management. My memory OC would become unstable on reboot or if I changed memory settings, RTLS were not changing. I would have to load optimised defaults and re flash my save profile to become stable again. Definitely a bios bug.


@safedisk FYI


----------



## sulalin

sblantipodi said:


> I'm not complaining about shamino, I never complain about people, I'm complaining about a big corporation that acts like a dozens of interims, starting from a website that is down for months.
> 
> MSI don't need people like shamino just because they release working things, they test things internally, they don't release breaking things that breaks everything to everyone without a single smoke test saying that Intel is the coulprit.
> 
> Shamino and its guys is no bless, he is someone that don't have mobos to do it's tests (it's surely an Asus problem not a shamino one) and asks to paying users to do something that Asus should do internally.
> 
> 要求客戶測試未在內部測試的東西是一種恥辱，我們有證據證明他們在沒有進行一次冒煙測試的情況下就發布了東西。
> 
> 在歐洲進行 rma 是一件非常困難和耗時的事情，以至於您最終放棄了。
> 
> 我真的不知道我們應該祝福什麼。
> 
> 一個簡單的 z690 hero，一個甚至沒有背板或雙 BIOS 的主板在歐洲的價格為 700 歐元，我會說是同類 MSI 的兩倍。
> [/引用]


You can take a look at the current 790 ace godlike. Are these prices twice as low asus 4dimm? Which msi's 4dimm board can pass the stability test with more than ddr5 8000mhz? 690/790 asus's bios and board can be solved to 16g*4 6000-7200mhz and the stability test has passed the test! And MSI 4dimm board 16g*4, you can tell you how much you can drive. There is no need for stability testing! Msi is not particularly cheap, but its performance is not as good as the fixed price! Look at msi z790I and you will know why many people change z790 apex. In short, the motherboard factory directly abandons z790 UX UI and want to use Z790I to hit atx eatx 2dimm boards on the market? People can have a position to support the motherboard factory. Everyone respects it! But there is no right or wrong!


----------



## bscool

VULC said:


> Where's 2301 for Strix z690a D4? I updated to the latest ME and I'm having issues with LLC and AC DC_LL. I can't go lower then 1.33v no matter what I change AC or DC LL to.
> 
> Another issue is I had to set Memory Controller Boot Voltage from Auto to 1.25v in Internal CPU Power Management. My memory OC would become unstable on reboot or if I changed memory settings, RTLS were not changing. I would have to load optimised defaults and re flash my save profile to become stable again. Definitely a bios bug.











2301


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com


----------



## Papusan

VULC said:


> Where's 2301 for Strix z690a D4? I updated to the latest ME and I'm having issues with LLC and AC DC_LL. I can't go lower then 1.33v no matter what I change AC or DC LL to.





bscool said:


> 2301
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


Don't forget that Asus removed bios v2301 for a reason. And newer dosen't always mean better.


----------



## bscool

Papusan said:


> Don't forget that Asus removed bios v2301 for a reason. And newer dosen't always mean better.


I have only used it on z690 Strix d4 and it works ok for me. No idea how it is for ddr5.

It is still posted on here by shamino [OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread

Was it posted on the official Asus site and taken down?


----------



## Papusan

bscool said:


> I have only used it on z690 Strix d4 and it works ok for me. No idea how it is for ddr5.
> 
> It is still posted on here by shamino [OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread
> 
> Was it posted on the official Asus site and taken down?


Yep. I expect its easier take down buggy firmware and replace it with last known working bios in Asus own forum (on 1th page) than in a random page here in oc.net forum - RaptorLake Resources


----------



## bscool

Papusan said:


> Yep. I expect its easier take down buggy firmware and replace it with last known working bios in Asus own forum (on 1th page) than in a random page here in oc.net forum - RaptorLake Resources


So he took it down from the Asus site and later put it up on here. It shows he last edit the Asus post "Last edited by Shamino; 11-30-2022 at 10:17 PM".

He posted 2301 on here on 12-12-22 as around that time the Asus site was down for a few weeks.

2301 bios date is 12-09-22. So unless he took it down from Asus site before 11-30-22 and then modified it and reposted it here using the same bios #.


----------



## sblantipodi

SinfulSavior said:


> I've tried looking through the forum and I haven't seen an answer (there are a lot of posts in this thread). Hoping someone out there can help.
> 
> I'm running the Z690 Glacial with bios 2301 (same issues on 2204).
> 
> Intel 13900K with 4 x 32 GB Corsair 5600 Dominator and I can't get it to run with all 4 sticks. I can get it to run with two sticks in A2 and B2 but not in any other configuration. I saw some posts around this topic, but I'm trying to determine if I need to RMA the board, if I should return a set of RAM, or wait until there is a bios update that fixes this issue.
> 
> I do actually need to run 128 GB of ram but can get by with 64 for a while so I'm not in a huge rush.


I can run 4x16GB at 5200, 
4x32GB will be even more difficult, I'll try to start at 3600 to see if it works with the "base frequency" for your configuration.


----------



## Papusan

bscool said:


> So he took it down from the Asus site and later put it up on here. It shows he last edit the Asus post "Last edited by Shamino; 11-30-2022 at 10:17 PM".
> 
> He posted 2301 on here on 12-12-22 as around that time the Asus site was down for a few weeks.
> 
> 2301 bios date is 12-09-22. So unless he took it down from Asus site before 11-30-22 and then modified it and reposted it here using the same bios #.


I can't remember exactly. But its weird if he let own thread (for test bios) on Asus own webpage be stuck with older test bios. Asus forum have been open several days since it went back to life after the shutdown a month ago.Maybe he reach more people her, but why forget Asus own forum. Thats weird.


----------



## VULC

bscool said:


> So he took it down from the Asus site and later put it up on here. It shows he last edit the Asus post "Last edited by Shamino; 11-30-2022 at 10:17 PM".
> 
> He posted 2301 on here on 12-12-22 as around that time the Asus site was down for a few weeks.
> 
> 2301 bios date is 12-09-22. So unless he took it down from Asus site before 11-30-22 and then modified it and reposted it here using the same bios #.


Safe to flash this thing?


----------



## bscool

VULC said:


> Safe to flash this thing?


I have been using it for a couple fo weeks wth no issues. No idea if it will work for you. I see some say it work fine and some dont like it. Like every bios release. I use static voltages so no idea how other methods work.

You can use search at the top and put in 2301 and searh this thread and read others feedback on it. Search results for query: 2301

Edit I think some said you cannot flashback to older bioses from 2301. No idea if this is true as I didnt try it.


----------



## Papusan

bscool said:


> I have been using it for a couple fo weeks wth no issues. No idea if it will work for you. I see some say it work fine and some dont like it. Like every bios release. I use static voltages so no idea how other methods work.
> 
> You can use search at the top and put in 2301 and searh this thread and read others feedback on it. Search results for query: 2301
> 
> Edit I think some said you cannot flashback to older bioses from 2301. No idea if this is true as I didnt try it.


Correct. You need to switch over on second bios if you aren’t happy with the results. I had to do this. Older bios version not recognized as bios file.


----------



## owikh84

2204 works best for my Z690 Extreme, 8000 CL36 stable TM5 Absolut and HCI 1000%.
2301 gave errors almost instantly and cannot flashback to 2204 etc.


----------



## tubs2x4

owikh84 said:


> 2204 works best for my Z690 Extreme, 8000 CL36 stable TM5 Absolut and HCI 1000%.
> 2301 gave errors almost instantly and cannot flashback to 2204 etc.


Wonder why it is so that you can’t flash back? What is making so you can’t?


----------



## VULC

bscool said:


> I have been using it for a couple fo weeks wth no issues. No idea if it will work for you. I see some say it work fine and some dont like it. Like every bios release. I use static voltages so no idea how other methods work.
> 
> You can use search at the top and put in 2301 and searh this thread and read others feedback on it. Search results for query: 2301
> 
> Edit I think some said you cannot flashback to older bioses from 2301. No idea if this is true as I didnt try it.


Can confirm for DDR4 2301 is better across the board with ME 2091. Dropped my core adaptive voltage from 1.415v to 1.387v and dropped my cache Adaptive from 1.413v to 1.385v. That's with 5.1ghz ring and tuned ram.Temps are way better as well. My 4200mhz cl16 OC is good with 1.34sa and 1.34v vddq ram only needs 1.5125v to pass TM5. By core 59, 59, 58, 58, 57, 57, 57, 57 +2 TVB. Atom cores off.


----------



## owikh84

tubs2x4 said:


> Wonder why it is so that you can’t flash back? What is making so you can’t?


EZflash doesn't allow me to downgrade to older bios from 2301. It says "bios image does not support" something like that. USB flashback will just blink for a few seconds and stop there. So basically I'm stuck at 2301.

To make it worse, I can't use the secondary bios chip as I'm getting debug code of 28-54 and end up with 55.

According to @bianbao.dev at the moment there's no bios newer than 2301 so i guess gonna wait for a while.

Related: Asus Maximus Hero z790 DDR5 with error 55 ...


----------



## Papusan

owikh84 said:


> EZflash doesn't allow me to downgrade to older bios from 2301. It says "bios image does not support" something like that. USB flashback will just blink for a few seconds and stop there. So basically I'm stuck at 2301.
> 
> To make it worse, I can't use the secondary bios chip as I'm getting debug code of 28-54 and end up with 55.
> 
> According to @bianbao.dev at the moment there's no bios newer than 2301 so i guess gonna wait for a while.
> 
> Related: Asus Maximus Hero z790 DDR5 with error 55 ...


Maybe we have the *same problem* with the Z680 boards as well....


----------



## tubs2x4

owikh84 said:


> EZflash doesn't allow me to downgrade to older bios from 2301. It says "bios image does not support" something like that. USB flashback will just blink for a few seconds and stop there. So basically I'm stuck at 2301.
> 
> To make it worse, I can't use the secondary bios chip as I'm getting debug code of 28-54 and end up with 55.
> 
> According to @bianbao.dev at the moment there's no bios newer than 2301 so i guess gonna wait for a while.
> 
> Related: Asus Maximus Hero z790 DDR5 with error 55 ...


But what is asus changing that you can’t flash back? Like nothing physically is changing on the board. It’s all software. Don’t get why reflashing software can’t go back to whatever version. That poor on asus part in my mind.


----------



## nanochippie

tubs2x4 said:


> But what is asus changing that you can’t flash back? Like nothing physically is changing on the board. It’s all software. Don’t get why reflashing software can’t go back to whatever version. That poor on asus part in my mind.


And not only can you not flashback, 2204 and 2301 have a thunderbolt nvm update (to v36) with no ability to flash the thunderbolt controller back to v31. And once the controller is updated it appears to have a bug when xmp is on.

Once memory speeds exceed 5000 MT/sec, if a thunderbolt device is connected when the system goes to sleep, the controller takes a very very long to wake up and when it does, the system stutters and sometimes crashes. If no thunderbolt device is connected then there is no issue on wake from sleep. On nvm31, there was no such issue (but there were other issues).


----------



## AndreTM

morph. said:


> Try vddq/vdd at 1.45-1.5v IMC 1.3 - 1.385 SA 1.1-1.2





fitnessgrampacertest said:


> i dont think 1.35 - 1.39 is enough voltage. ive had the best luck with VDD & VDDQ set equal to eachother, in the range of 1.45 - 1.48. These are perfectly safe voltages to run


Sorry guys for not posting a reply for so long but thank you very much for your help.
I tried to raise voltages like you said but after few days I encountered BSOD related to RAM stability again.

I fixed by rolling back to 1304 BIOS version and now I'm stable again!
Almost two months without a single error like before updating to the newer version. 

5867Mhz CL34
VDDQ/VDD: 1.37V
IMC: 1.18V
SA: 1.2

Now I'm planning to upgrade my 12900K to a 13900K (or KS) and I would like to upgrade my G.Skill 6000 CL40 kit too with a better one.
Do you think that buying a 8000Mhz CL38 kit is a waste of money? I just don't wanna buy an extremely expensive kit that I won't be able to use due to other platform limitations.
Watercooling RAM modules is not in my plans, so they will be cooled with their stock heatsink.

I would really like to read your suggestions regarding which DDR5 kit should I choose. My motherboard is still the Z690 Maximus Extreme.
Thanks again!


----------



## VforV

raad11 said:


> Just waiting on the 7950X3D.


That will be on a new level of scheduling issues: 2 CCDs, one with V-cache at max 5Ghz the other one no V-cache, but can do 5.7Ghz. Yeah AMD will mess that up at least as bad, but probably worse than intel with eCores and Pcores. So expect about 6 months to 1 year until it works decent/well, if not more.

If someone really really wants Zen4 3D, the 7800X3D is the one to get: 1 CCD with V-cache, no (apparent) issues. Not the 7950X3D.

But then again a max OC-ed 13900K paired with DDR5 8000+ OC-ed and tuned will be better and more consistent in all games than a V-cache gimmick that works great in some games and in some it's just a regular Zen4, but with reduced clocks, so worse. The performance will be all over the place for Zen4 3D and very game by game dependent.

Also there is a RPL refresh coming this year, which will work on existing motherboards, so there is also that to consider.


----------



## raad11

VforV said:


> That will be on a new level of scheduling issues: 2 CCDs, one with V-cache at max 5Ghz the other one no V-cache, but can do 5.7Ghz. Yeah AMD will mess that up at least as bad, but probably worse than intel with eCores and Pcores. So expect about 6 months to 1 year until it works decent/well, if not more.
> 
> If someone really really wants Zen4 3D, the 7800X3D is the one to get: 1 CCD with V-cache, no (apparent) issues. Not the 7950X3D.
> 
> But then again a max OC-ed 13900K paired with DDR5 8000+ OC-ed and tuned will be better and more consistent in all games than a V-cache gimmick that works great in some games and in some it's just a regular Zen4, but with reduced clocks, so worse. The performance will be all over the place for Zen4 3D and very game by game dependent.
> 
> Also there is a RPL refresh coming this year, which will work on existing motherboards, so there is also that to consider.


It's not really a problem. Microsoft just needs to let companies know how to assign affinities in registry entries or command lines and everyone will release updates for their own software without Microsoft having to lift a finger. Or end users like us will do it on forums for them. Technically, AMD could even do it by driver (run all games on certain cores).

The non V-Cache cores can still run games much much better than the E-Cores on a 12th/13th gen Intel chip. No stuttering. At worst you may have framerate fluctuations which is not quite the same or as bad, but then you can Alt+Tab and manually assign affinity at any time. Just as you can on Intel.

The 7950X3D will match or more likely beat the 13900K in any game that's sensitive to cache and memory latency, doesn't matter how fast the RAM is. L3 cache is still way faster. That means any games which are CPU bound due to high frame rates and/or lower resolutions but still somewhat graphically intense (so not like 10+ year old games running at 1000 fps). Overwatch would be a perfect example. 600 fps cap, very graphically demanding (though for no good reason, doesn't look much better than OW1, lol). This is actually not an uncommon scenario since many people are going to be running dynamic resolution or image scaling options, since some games are now turning those on by default. It's the only way to keep up with the big jump to 1440p 144Hz monitors and beyond in the market while the average gaming machines have stagnated around the lower end of GPU power.

But in any event, people should wait for reviews to see if the jump really is that big in the games they prefer. A lot also depends on how well the developers have optimized their games and you know how often that doesn't happen.

And I'm considering a best case scenario where the thread scheduler in Windows and Intel's Thread Director work flawlessly. For me they haven't been.


----------



## VforV

raad11 said:


> But in any event, people should wait for reviews to see if the jump really is that big in the games they prefer.


That is the most sensible thing to do, but also take the mainstream reviews actual perf shown vs RPL with an open mind, because 99% of the reviewers will test stock vs stock and even give RPL bad DDR5 6000 DRAM actually gimping the RPL CPU. Anything below DDR5 7000 + tight timings is worse than a good DDR4 4000+ & tuned B-die kit.

I know this because I can beat HUB's tests of his 13900K + DDR5 6400 with my 13600K 5.5Ghz OC + DDR4 4000 C15 & tight timings. Not only this of course, I've seen 13900K max OC + DDR5 8000+ too and it's even better.

So those people who know better should look for benchmarks of max OC Zen4 3D (although Zen4 is pretty much at the max from stock) vs max OC RPL + high end DDR5 8000+ and tight timings. That would show the real power of RPL, not a gimped one.

Enthusiasts that buy a 13900K usually buy high end DDR5 too, otherwise it's just a waste of money.

We need more reviewers to test max OC vs max OC (AMD vs intel), because stock vs stock does not even come close to paint the whole picture. Sorry, this is my own gripe with mainstream reviews and how they paint Zen3 3D & Zen4 in such good light, when in fact they pit them against gimped RPL systems. 😑

That's why most people unknowingly think Zen is so good, when in fact it is not. The AMDip (lower 1% lows than intel) is still present even in Zen4 in many games, although not as bad as Zen3.

For casuals Zen4 3D will be a good plug & play CPU, for OC-ers RPL will be better.

And yes, I still stand by what I said above: I do expect dual CCDs Zen4 3D CPUs to have some issues (scheduler or other type), that's why the 7800X3D will be the one to get if someone wants Zen4 3D.


----------



## L0wPull

I'm running 0001 bios on *2022 z690 Apex*, as that was nicest for adie with my 13600K/F binning.
Just switched in my g7400 to check bclk oc function before I try out the 13400 that just arrived.
I can't get it going. 7F even with basement RAM settings....
Is anyone else using 0001 successfully to bclk oc ADL on z690 Apex?
Maybe a ucode missing for this from 0001 BIOS?
If so, could a kind soul mod it, or point me in right direction to learn to do that myself?
IIRC z790 have a ucode selector, but can't find it on z690... 














Cheers 🍺


----------

