# MSI B550 Unify / Unify-X Overclocking & Discussions Thread



## Kha

State of the art World Record holders, both B550 Unify & Unify-X are dedicated for extreme overclocking. Be it the aggresive VRM design with Direct 14+2 90A power phases and Titanium Chokes III, the top notch R&D, cooling solutions or the server grade PCB with 6 layers and 2oz Thickened Copper, all of them features are second to none.

Pure Black. Pure Performance.










B550 Unify Official Page
Current Bios version 7D13v10 released on 2020-11-17

B550 Unify-X Official Page
Current Bios version 7D13vA04 released on 2020-11-16

Official MSI Beta BIOS Update & Bug Status


----------



## Kha

(reserved)


----------



## EniGma1987

Normally just the top m.2 is attached to the CPU for full bandwidth, but with the removal of the second PCIE x8 expansion slot to make room for more m.2 does that mean there can be a total of 3 m.2 slots on this board attached to the CPU for full PCIE 4.0 x4 bandwidth?


----------



## aDyerSituation

not available in US yet it seems


----------



## Nicked_Wicked

aDyerSituation said:


> not available in US yet it seems


Same here, patiently waiting.


----------



## Kha

EniGma1987 said:


> Normally just the top m.2 is attached to the CPU for full bandwidth, but with the removal of the second PCIE x8 expansion slot to make room for more m.2 does that mean there can be a total of 3 m.2 slots on this board attached to the CPU for full PCIE 4.0 x4 bandwidth?











From what I understand, the secondary M2 are available at 4.0 x4 only if you go with a x8 graphic card.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Delivery planned between 8th and 14th of December, let's hope!


----------



## Kha

ManniX-ITA said:


> Delivery planned between 8th and 14th of December, let's hope!


Grats mate, hopefully other etailers will bring it too lol. And welcome here too !


----------



## KedarWolf

I'm thinking about getting the Unify-X to go wth my 5950x I have on preorder. 🐺

I heard in USA maybe Dec. 20th the release date but not 100% sure on that.


----------



## EniGma1987

Kha said:


> View attachment 2466492
> 
> From what I understand, the secondary M2 are available at 4.0 x4 only if you go with a x8 graphic card.


Looks like from that page that in the bios if you select "cpu mode" it automatically makes the graphics card in slot 1 go into 8x mode, and allows two of the m.2 slots use the other 8 cpu lanes. That is pretty awesome. Looks like I might change to this board at some point.


----------



## MyUsername

KedarWolf said:


> I'm thinking about getting the Unify-X to go wth my 5950x I have on preorder. 🐺
> 
> I heard in USA maybe Dec. 20th the release date but not 100% sure on that.


Me too. I'm thinking about AMD's smart access memory and will it work okay? Unify x is the nuts though and it needs a 5950x and 6900xt in it.


----------



## Kha

MyUsername said:


> Me too. I'm thinking about AMD's smart access memory and will it work okay? Unify x is the nuts though and it needs a 5950x and 6900xt in it.


Yes, it will work perfectly.


----------



## Nicked_Wicked

ManniX-ITA said:


> Delivery planned between 8th and 14th of December, let's hope!


Where did you pre-order?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

@Kha 
Add to the first page the Beta BIOS page on MSI forum:






MSI Global English Forum


...




forum-en.msi.com


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Nicked_Wicked said:


> Where did you pre-order?


 ProShop.de

Estimated delivery 03.12.2020 - 09.12.2020


----------



## Kha

ManniX-ITA said:


> @Kha
> Add to the first page the Beta BIOS page on MSI forum:


Done.


----------



## Spectre73

Between this and the Asus Dark Hero, which one would you get? I do not need the x570 features. This would be a board I would likely only get for 24/7 daily use with as tight as possible memory timings.
So what I want out of the board, even though it is targeted at overclockers, is maximum stability at a given (mem) frequency without to much bells and whistles. Are the MSI boards mature enough these days?


----------



## KedarWolf

Spectre73 said:


> Between this and the Asus Dark Hero, which one would you get? I do not need the x570 features. This would be a board I would likely only get for 24/7 daily use with as tight as possible memory timings.
> So what I want out of the board, even though it is targeted at overclockers, is maximum stability at a given (mem) frequency without to much bells and whistles. Are the MSI boards mature enough these days?


MSI make the best X570 boards I'm sure. Same likely goes for B550.

Here's my on my MSI X570 board with 2x16GB Dual Rank b-die.

I was running TM5, a modified .cfg, already.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Spectre73 said:


> Between this and the Asus Dark Hero, which one would you get? I do not need the x570 features. This would be a board I would likely only get for 24/7 daily use with as tight as possible memory timings.
> So what I want out of the board, even though it is targeted at overclockers, is maximum stability at a given (mem) frequency without to much bells and whistles. Are the MSI boards mature enough these days?


I got this one because of the 2 x DIMMs, indeed should allow tight timings.
Obviously the Dark Hero costs almost double, that's already quite a difference, and has the DOS; hardware switching from PBO to Static OC.
But it's always an X570 which is worse than B550 and has the SATA ports bugged.
If you don't really need all the expansions and features the B550 it's a much better choice.
First MSI board for me but I've seen a lot of satisfied people; sometimes they do BS just like the others.


----------



## TK421

does the current retail bios allow VTT / dram termination voltage tweak?

poking around the bios code there seems to be VTT option but it's hidden


----------



## Spectre73

ManniX-ITA said:


> I got this one because of the 2 x DIMMs, indeed should allow tight timings.
> Obviously the Dark Hero costs almost double, that's already quite a difference, and has the DOS; hardware switching from PBO to Static OC.
> But it's always an X570 which is worse than B550 and has the SATA ports bugged.
> If you don't really need all the expansions and features the B550 it's a much better choice.
> First MSI board for me but I've seen a lot of satisfied people; sometimes they do BS just like the others.


Yeah, I am (like you) coming from a x570 Master. Strictly speaking I am very satisfied with the board and do not have all the troubles everyone else seems to have. But coming from a rev1 I always ask myself if I am getting the most out of my RAM. The difference between v1.0 and v1.x seems to be significant and I do not like the way, gigabyte went with these revisions. Left a bad taste in my mouth. The master goes to my wife. I do not need the OC features of the Asus board and do not like the way they implemented Armory create in the UEFI. But these are minor annoyances, nothing deal breaking.
Just one question: how are bios updates with MSI? Are they coming regularly? Is the bios well laid out and useable?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

TK421 said:


> does the current retail bios allow VTT / dram termination voltage tweak?
> 
> poking around the bios code there seems to be VTT option but it's hidden


It's not out in retail yet 
But BuildZoid made a vìdeo the other day with a newer BIOS that had it.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Spectre73 said:


> Yeah, I am (like you) coming from a x570 Master. Strictly speaking I am very satisfied with the board and do not have all the troubles everyone else seems to have. But coming from a rev1 I always ask myself if I am getting the most out of my RAM. The difference between v1.0 and v1.x seems to be significant and I do not like the way, gigabyte went with these revisions. Left a bad taste in my mouth. The master goes to my wife. I do not need the OC features of the Asus board and do not like the way they implemented Armory create in the UEFI. But these are minor annoyances, nothing deal breaking.
> Just one question: how are bios updates with MSI? Are they coming regularly? Is the bios well laid out and useable?


Same here; spent a few hours yesterday trying to tweak my B-Die kit with awful results. Hopefully is the Master... pretty bad results.
Mine will go to my niece 

MSI is being the best currently about delivery of updates; not always successful but I like they try. They come regularly, they provide roadmaps, support is long-standing and wow, they do provide change logs even for the Beta releases! There's people answering back in the MSI forum!
The BIOS layout from what I've seen is the best you can find around.
Have to use it first to really make an opinion. But there's stuff you can't find elsewhere and no AMD OC/CBS duplicates.


----------



## Spectre73

ManniX-ITA said:


> Same here; spent a few hours yesterday trying to tweak my B-Die kit with awful results. Hopefully is the Master... pretty bad results.
> Mine will go to my niece
> 
> MSI is being the best currently about delivery of updates; not always successful but I like they try. They come regularly, they provide roadmaps, support is long-standing and wow, they do provide change logs even for the Beta releases! There's people answering back in the MSI forum!
> The BIOS layout from what I've seen is the best you can find around.
> Have to use it first to really make an opinion. But there's stuff you can't find elsewhere and no AMD OC/CBS duplicates.


Wow. That really sounds great. I used a MSI x99 back in the day and liked the layout then, but it died on me. What really sells me is the "no duplicates" thing. That is one of the main nitpicks I have with the master.
I just hope that they do not botch the first revision of the unify-x, but given that they have already produced plenty x570 and B550 boards, I am not too worried. Will probably preorder one today, when I am back from work...
Thanks for the great information here.

Regarding the support thing: At first, gigabyte really was active in the forums and that was - besides their hardware - one of the main selling points. That died after some employee left the company, so I am a little bit hesitant. But we will see, nothing is guaranteed - I just hope they are better than Asus.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Spectre73 said:


> Wow. That really sounds great. I used a MSI x99 back in the day and liked the layout then, but it died on me. What really sells me is the "no duplicates" thing. That is one of the main nitpicks I have with the master.
> I just hope that they do not botch the first revision of the unify-x, but given that they have already produced plenty x570 and B550 boards, I am not too worried. Will probably preorder one today, when I am back from work...
> Thanks for the great information here.
> 
> Regarding the support thing: At first, gigabyte really was active in the forums and that was - besides their hardware - one of the main selling points. That died after some employee left the company, so I am a little bit hesitant. But we will see, nothing is guaranteed - I just hope they are better than Asus.


I really hope so, another Rel. 1.0 which is underperforming will drive me crazy....
Indeed, the activity from GB Rep Matthew's is how I made the unfortunate decision.
He left the company and moved to AMD at the same time I bought the Master, so funny.
But in general MSI seems more structured in the customer support and not relaying on a single person.

There's only one thing that I really don't like about MSI and are the very unethical and shady marketing tactics (you can check the GN videos about that).
But indeed nothing that hasn't been already done by ASUS and any other marketing department in this sector.
They all learn form the big players which are the worst; Intel, AMD and nVidia.


----------



## MyUsername

ManniX-ITA said:


> I got this one because of the 2 x DIMMs, indeed should allow tight timings.


That'll be interesting to find out how good the topology is on the new unify's. Tight timings are possible on the Master rel 1.0, but if I set cl14 and other tight timings at 3800 and try to adjust the timings again the board goes weird and hangs in the bios when I save and reboot, if I hold the power button and force a power off it saves the settings, but still it's a bit wobbly at these settings.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

MyUsername said:


> That'll be interesting to find out how good the topology is on the new unify's. Tight timings are possible on the Master rel 1.0, but if I set cl14 and other tight timings at 3800 and try to adjust the timings again the board goes weird and hangs in the bios when I save and reboot, if I hold the power button and force a power off it saves the settings, but still it's a bit wobbly at these settings.


I have a very weird behavior with my B-Die kit, I looking forward to see if it works as expected with the Unify-X.


----------



## Kha

ManniX-ITA said:


> I have a very weird behavior with my B-Die kit, I looking forward to see if it works as expected with the Unify-X.


@Veii ' s last posts made me think if something might be wrong with X570 at hardware level. The way they locked IF @ 1900 is suspicious, not counting the endless stream of WHEA at much lower frequencies.

Who knows, maybe your issues might be related to it.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Kha said:


> @Veii ' s last posts made me think if something might be wrong with X570 at hardware level. The way they locked IF @ 1900 is suspicious, not counting the endless stream of WHEA at much lower frequencies.
> 
> Who knows, maybe your issues might be related to it.


What is wrong with the X570 is the very high temperature (which limits the IF in the CPU since it's the same die for the cIOD) and the bugged SATA controller.
The B550 does not have these issues.
I have the same memory kit behavior with F12a so it's not related to the AGESA version.


----------



## mongoled

ManniX-ITA said:


> What is wrong with the X570 is the very high temperature (which limits the IF in the CPU since it's the same die for the cIOD) and the bugged SATA controller.
> The B550 does not have these issues.
> I have the same memory kit behavior with F12a so it's not related to the AGESA version.


Can you emphasize on the "bugged" SATA controller ??

Are you talking about the issue that BCLK cant be raised above 101.xx mhz ??

Or something else ??

And where is this information about very high temperatures compared to B550 ?

Thanks


----------



## ManniX-ITA

mongoled said:


> Can you emphasize on the "bugged" SATA controller ??
> 
> Are you talking about the issue that BCLK cant be raised above 101.xx mhz ??
> 
> Or something else ??
> 
> And where is this information about very high temperatures compared to B550 ?
> 
> Thanks


About the SATA bug:


__
https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/fwh7q0

The B550 on my niece's ASUS B550 TUF with a simple and tiny passive radiator has lower/same temperature than the X570 on my Master re-pasted with Cryonaut with the active cooling fan set to Balanced...
Of course there are reasons for this difference; while it's more or less the same die has much less active parts and it runs at PCIe 3.0 instead of 4.0


----------



## mongoled

ManniX-ITA said:


> About the SATA bug:
> 
> 
> __
> https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/fwh7q0
> 
> The B550 on my niece's ASUS B550 TUF with a simple and tiny passive radiator has lower/same temperature than the X570 on my Master re-pasted with Cryonaut with the active cooling fan set to Balanced...
> Of course there are reasons for this difference; while it's more or less the same die has much less active parts and it runs at PCIe 3.0 instead of 4.0


Re temps, are you refering to CPU temps or chipset temps ?

Re SATA, I never tested speeds, not using the SATA at all because of BCLK issue which is the reason I asked you as it may be related. X370 SATA had no problems to go to +107 mhz for me.

Need to see more results, from what you posted it seems there was similar issue with B550 that got resolved, hopefully they resolve it for SATA, but need to seem more case of people reporting this to understand it as a fact and not just a few people ....


----------



## ManniX-ITA

mongoled said:


> Re temps, are you refering to CPU temps or chipset temps ?
> 
> Re SATA, I never tested speeds, not using the SATA at all because of BCLK issue which is the reason I asked you as it may be related. X370 SATA had no problems to go to +107 mhz for me.
> 
> Need to see more results, from what you posted it seems there was similar issue with B550 that got resolved, hopefully they resolve it for SATA, but need to seem more case of people reporting this to understand it as a fact and not just a few people ....


Chipset temps; never heard about similar SATA issue on the B550.
It's not related to BCLK, that's another matter.
AMD is aware, has been reported by dozens if not hundreds. They just avoid the question...
If it was fixable via a firmware update would have been solved already since long time.


----------



## mongoled

ManniX-ITA said:


> Chipset temps; never heard about similar SATA issue on the B550.
> It's not related to BCLK, that's another matter.
> AMD is aware, has been reported by dozens if not hundreds. They just avoid the question...
> If it was fixable via a firmware update would have been solved already since long time.


Can you give example of chipset temps ?

I have system temp of 38/39C, ambient is around 27C, my chipset temp idle is at 56C fan is off...


----------



## ManniX-ITA

mongoled said:


> Can you give example of chipset temps ?
> 
> I have system temp of 38/39C, ambient is around 27C, my chipset temp idle is at 56C fan is off...


Right now I have 53c form the Master ITE SuperIO and 62c from the on-die sensor.
Chipset fan is running at 1800rpm and temp is 23.6c.
Under load peaks at 69-70c.

I don't remember the B550 temps but I'll tell you when my Unify-X will be in 
Think it was 5-10c less than this but in passive.


----------



## mongoled

ManniX-ITA said:


> Right now I have 53c form the Master ITE SuperIO and 62c from the on-die sensor.
> Chipset fan is running at 1800rpm and temp is 23.6c.
> Under load peaks at 69-70c.
> 
> I don't remember the B550 temps but I'll tell you when my Unify-X will be in
> Think it was 5-10c less than this but in passive.


So mine is considerably lower, the temps I quoted are from the on-die sensor.

Im am trying to stress the chipset but the temperatue is not moving.

I am using CrystalDiskMark and running 9 passes on an NVMe that is connected to the chipset, is this not the right thing I am stressing ??

Ive run it multiple times in succession but temp remains where it was 56C, must be doing something wrong ....

** EDIT **
Running it on NVMe connected to CPU and NVMe connected to chipset, temps increased by 0.3C


----------



## Nighthog

PCB Breakdown by Actually Hardcore Overclocking. (Buildzoid)


----------



## Spectre73

Nighthog said:


> PCB Breakdown by Actually Hardcore Overclocking. (Buildzoid)


Was quite a positive review and exactly what I was looking for regarding his comments as a daily driver board. So I am now very strongly considering it over a ROG Dark Hero.


----------



## Kha

Spectre73 said:


> Was quite a positive review and exactly what I was looking for regarding his comments as a daily driver board. So I am now very strongly considering it over a ROG Dark Hero.


Indeed, looks really good. Hopefully we won't have to wait too much for it to reach the shops.


----------



## ChaosAD

I am also torn between the Dark Hero and the Unify X, it will be paired with 5900x and 16gb 3600c16 bdies. I am mostly concerned about the Heros advantage at cpu oc rather than mem oc. I dont think any will have issues for 4000 with tight timings.


----------



## Spectre73

ChaosAD said:


> I am also torn between the Dark Hero and the Unify X, it will be paired with 5900x and 16gb 3600c16 bdies. I am mostly concerned about the Heros advantage at cpu oc rather than mem oc. I dont think any will have issues for 4000 with tight timings.


The Techpowerup Review (ASUS ROG Crosshair VIII Dark Hero Review) speaks of subpar memory overclocking, whatever that means. I have not seen many reviews of the board, so take it with a grain of salt. But a 2 DIMM board surely is way ahead. The cpu oc is a thing, but so is curve optimizer. I have no idea if asus would be able to combine these two things with their technique.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

mongoled said:


> So mine is considerably lower, the temps I quoted are from the on-die sensor.
> 
> Im am trying to stress the chipset but the temperatue is not moving.
> 
> I am using CrystalDiskMark and running 9 passes on an NVMe that is connected to the chipset, is this not the right thing I am stressing ??
> 
> Ive run it multiple times in succession but temp remains where it was 56C, must be doing something wrong ....
> 
> ** EDIT **
> Running it on NVMe connected to CPU and NVMe connected to chipset, temps increased by 0.3C
> 
> View attachment 2466728


You need to stress with y-cruncher or a long gaming session.

There's binning also on the chipset, yours seems lucky.
Some people same setup as mine their tops 82c.
Also the Unify has a pretty good placement and heatsink, the Master sucks.


----------



## mongoled

ManniX-ITA said:


> You need to stress with y-cruncher or a long gaming session.
> 
> There's binning also on the chipset, yours seems lucky.
> Some people same setup as mine their tops 82c.
> Also the Unify has a pretty good placement and heatsink, the Master sucks.


Thanks for the feedback, re Y-Cruncher, i never noticed chipset temps to increase and ive stress tested Y-cruncher for over 4+ hours, going to check again, maybe I didnt notice it!

I think its the placement as you said, I changed the thermal paste with Kryonaut, but the difference was negligable, I do have gentle air flow through my case so that is making a difference I am sure.

Re binning, yes, very possible considering ive only has this motherboard for a little over a month so very possible it has a newer chipset.

The CrystalDiskMark testing did eventually lead to a 1C increase in temps.

Will stop the offtopic discussion now



** EDIT **
Does not budge with Y-Cruncher and I would not expect it to.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

mongoled said:


> Thanks for the feedback, re Y-Cruncher, i never noticed chipset temps to increase and ive stress tested Y-cruncher for over 4+ hours, going to check again, maybe I didnt notice it!
> 
> I think its the placement as you said, I changed the thermal paste with Kryonaut, but the difference was negligable, I do have gentle air flow through my case so that is making a difference I am sure.
> 
> Re binning, yes, very possible considering ive only has this motherboard for a little over a month so very possible it has a newer chipset.
> 
> The CrystalDiskMark testing did eventually lead to a 1C increase in temps.
> 
> Will stop the offtopic discussion now
> 
> 
> 
> ** EDIT **
> Does not budge with Y-Cruncher and I would not expect it to.


Yeah, I don't know it was a long time ago and I remembered it was building up with y-cruncher as well.
The only artificial way to build up temperature is OCCT Power or AIDA stress test, it's the most closer thing to a gaming session.
It'd be nice to compare your Unify temperature with the Unify-X.
The Master is building up in 10 minutes with OCCT 7.2.0b2 from 61 to 69 with a GTX 1070 and a Dark Rock Pro 4, the CPU goes up to 91 and GPU up to 80c.


----------



## Kha

Still nothing, no stock whatsoever, no matter where you look. Beginning to lose patience...


----------



## Spectre73

Kha said:


> Still nothing, no stock whatsoever, no matter where you look. Beginning to lose patience...


What would you buy instead?


----------



## Kha

Spectre73 said:


> What would you buy instead?


I guess X570 Unify, but only if the B550 Unify-X won't be available by the end of winter or somehow will appear with idiotic prices.

Asrock never interested me, dunno why ; Asus is nice but doesn't make me want one. I used to like Gigabyte, but these days I find the X570 Pro the only decent priced board, Ultra being overpriced, just a Pro with a different VRM cooler. Master is obviously good but won't pay such money for a mobo that doesn't bring much more to the table than the Pro, so the natural step for me is to change side to MSI, ideally with the Unify-X, which it seems it's the best board in the world for overclocking right now.


----------



## Kha

And today I ordered my 5900x, apparently a ton of them are entering soon the country.


----------



## Spectre73

Any news on availability? I can not find anything. Only new listing was on proshop for end of the year delivery.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Nothing new so far....

*Estimated delivery 04.12.2020 - 14.12.2020*


----------



## Kha

Actually there is a bit of information, if you look at MSI MEG B550 UNIFY-X | Preisvergleich geizhals.eu EU

Proshop Poland:
€ 303.06
*Ordered - 22-12-2020 *
Price updated: 2020-12-03, 08:24:20
PLN 1357.00

Same thing applies to B550 Unify, same 23-12-2020 availability date, much in line with the german Proshop dates too (Bestellt - auf Lager erwartet 22.12.2020).









MSI MEG B550 Unify ab € 210,08 (2021) | Preisvergleich geizhals.eu EU


✔ Preisvergleich für MSI MEG B550 Unify ✔ Bewertungen ✔ Produktinfo ⇒ Formfaktor: ATX • Sockel: AMD AM4 • Chipsatz: AMD B550 • CPU-Kompatibilität: Ryzen 5000G , Ryzen 5000 , R… ✔ AMD Sockel AM4 ✔ Testberichte ✔ Günstig kaufen




geizhals.eu


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Kha said:


> Actually there is a bit of information, if you look at MSI MEG B550 UNIFY-X | Preisvergleich geizhals.eu EU
> 
> Proshop Poland:
> € 303.06
> *Ordered - 22-12-2020 *
> Price updated: 2020-12-03, 08:24:20
> PLN 1357.00
> 
> Same thing applies to B550 Unify, same 23-12-2020 availability date, much in line with the german Proshop dates too (Bestellt - auf Lager erwartet 22.12.2020).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MSI MEG B550 Unify ab € 210,08 (2021) | Preisvergleich geizhals.eu EU
> 
> 
> ✔ Preisvergleich für MSI MEG B550 Unify ✔ Bewertungen ✔ Produktinfo ⇒ Formfaktor: ATX • Sockel: AMD AM4 • Chipsatz: AMD B550 • CPU-Kompatibilität: Ryzen 5000G , Ryzen 5000 , R… ✔ AMD Sockel AM4 ✔ Testberichte ✔ Günstig kaufen
> 
> 
> 
> 
> geizhals.eu


I wish you didn't told me


----------



## Kha

ManniX-ITA said:


> I wish you didn't told me


My bad, buddy. But you still have your toy up working, imagine how is it for me, with this Dual Core G4400 I got from office temporary, that I can only use to browse and some Word lol.










Ontop of it, I just had to cancel my 5900x delivery too, since the shop I got it only allows 14 days refund, and without a mobo wouldn't possibly do any silicon lottery. Hopefully, they'll still have some stock when I'll get my Unify-X...


----------



## Kha

But, @ManniX-ITA , maybe I have some good news too. 
If you look at X570 Unify on Amazon.de, you can see: *In stock on December 18, 2020, *so most probably the MSI transport to Eu will com between 15 and 20, this month.









MSI Gaming Motherboard: Amazon.de: Computer & Accessories


MSI Gaming Motherboard: Amazon.de: Computer & Accessories



www.amazon.de


----------



## Kha

And MEG B550 UNIFY-X _Coming Soon_ at Box.Co.Uk


MEG B550 UNIFY-X, MSI UNIFY-X Motherboard | Box.co.uk


----------



## MyUsername

Kha said:


> And MEG B550 UNIFY-X _Coming Soon_ at Box.Co.Uk
> 
> 
> MEG B550 UNIFY-X, MSI UNIFY-X Motherboard | Box.co.uk


Nice. Man I'm so divided, one side I want to wait for my new chip to try in my Master and the other is this Unify ticks all the boxes and I've got a feeling these are going to sell like hot cakes.


----------



## Kha

And MSI Japan officially releases B550 Unify and B550 Unify-X !








MSI、AMD第4世代Ryzen CPUに対応したB550搭載マザーボード「MEG B550 UNIFY」「MEG B550 UNIFY-X」を発売


エムエスアイコンピュータージャパン株式会社のプレスリリース（2020年12月7日 00時00分）MSI、AMD第4世代Ryzen CPUに対応したB550搭載マザーボード[MEG B550 UNIFY][MEG B550 UNIFY-X]を発売




prtimes.jp





quote:

_MSI Computer Japan Co., Ltd. will release the high-end motherboard "MEG B550 UNIFY" compatible with AMD 4th generation Ryzen CPU on December 11th (Friday) and "MEG B550 UNIFY-X" on December 18th (Friday). ) Will be on sale._


----------



## Spectre73

Kha said:


> And MSI Japan officially releases B550 Unify and B550 Unify-X !
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MSI、AMD第4世代Ryzen CPUに対応したB550搭載マザーボード「MEG B550 UNIFY」「MEG B550 UNIFY-X」を発売
> 
> 
> エムエスアイコンピュータージャパン株式会社のプレスリリース（2020年12月7日 00時00分）MSI、AMD第4世代Ryzen CPUに対応したB550搭載マザーボード[MEG B550 UNIFY][MEG B550 UNIFY-X]を発売
> 
> 
> 
> 
> prtimes.jp
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> quote:
> 
> _MSI Computer Japan Co., Ltd. will release the high-end motherboard "MEG B550 UNIFY" compatible with AMD 4th generation Ryzen CPU on December 11th (Friday) and "MEG B550 UNIFY-X" on December 18th (Friday). ) Will be on sale._


I hope the first batches are error free.


----------



## Kha

Spectre73 said:


> I hope the first batches are error free.


Sh/t can happen anytime, but yeah, hopefully won't happen to us


----------



## Kha

Update on availability: Lots of asian sites reporting the B550 Unify and Unify-X, all of them saying basically the same thing: 

_Friday 11th Dec the B550 Unify should reach the shops, then next Friday, on 18th December, the Unify-X should appear too._

Hopefully, this will happen also in UE/ USA and not just in Asia.


----------



## Kha

Update on Availability:

B550 Unify apparently IN STOCK for United Kingdom.



MSI MEG B550 UNIFY (Socket AM4/B550/DDR4/S-ATA 600/ATX) | KSN Online 0871 230 0540


----------



## ManniX-ITA

At ProShop the status is:

*Ordered - expected in stock 22.12.2020 *

So I'm not going to have an happy Christmas 
Where is Santa???


----------



## Kha

ManniX-ITA said:


> At ProShop the status is:
> 
> *Ordered - expected in stock 22.12.2020 *
> 
> So I'm not going to have an happy Christmas
> Where is Santa???


Well, if its going to be in stock on 22, I don't see any reason for you to not get it on 23 or tops 24, right ?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Kha said:


> Well, if its going to be in stock on 22, I don't see any reason for you to not get it on 23 or tops 24, right ?


Hardly the courier will be able to deliver the 24th, most likely will come the 28th as the 26th is Saturday....


----------



## Kha

ManniX-ITA said:


> Hardly the courier will be able to deliver the 24th, most likely will come the 28th as the 26th is Saturday....


Any particular reason there aren't deliveries on Saturday ? In rest of EU there are deliveries on Sat, tho only in the first half of day.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Kha said:


> Any particular reason there aren't deliveries on Saturday ? In rest of EU there are deliveries on Sat, tho only in the first half of day.


Nothing specific, sometimes they deliver on Saturday but mostly not. It's like an half working day.
I guess I have my answer already from ProShop 

*Estimated delivery 28.12.2020 - 05.01.2021 *


----------



## Kha

Some interesting news.

It seems Sparky reached 2166 IF / 4333 with Unify-X. Granted, he has a Renoir, but still, we now know for sure the board is 100% capable for really high fabric.


__
https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocking/comments/k80nz2/_/gevk2js


----------



## Spectre73

Kha said:


> Some interesting news.
> 
> It seems Sparky reached 2166 IF / 4333 with Unify-X. Granted, he has a Renoir, but still, we now know for sure the board is 100% capable for really high fabric.
> 
> 
> __
> https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocking/comments/k80nz2/_/gevk2js


But buildzoid states that he gets even higher results with his GB and ASUS MBs....?


----------



## Kha

Spectre73 said:


> But buildzoid states that he gets even higher results with his GB and ASUS MBs....?


He also admits he didn't use the same bios version as Sparky and we don't know how good is his cpu sample.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

I'll test first the 5950x on the Master, it's being delivered 
Hopefully it's going to be FCLK friendly...


----------



## Spectre73

So I just ordered one via proshop.de, too. Latest buildzoid video where he overclocks a 3200CL14 b-die kit to above 5000 MHz convinced me. It is not so much about the overclock but the robustness of the memory layout, obviously. As I am having the master, too, I am comparing my 5800x on the master against the unify-x, once it has arrived.
I am already stability testing my 5800x with 1900 IF right now (on the master). Looks good so far.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Spectre73 said:


> So I just ordered one via proshop.de, too. Latest buildzoid video where he overclocks a 3200CL14 b-die kit to above 5000 MHz convinced me. It is not so much about the overclock but the robustness of the memory layout, obviously. As I am having the master, too, I am comparing my 5800x on the master against the unify-x, once it has arrived.
> I am already stability testing my 5800x with 1900 IF right now (on the master). Looks good so far.


Awesome! Didn't see yet the latest video


----------



## Kha

at 6:28 you can see a B550 Unify box lol


----------



## Kha

@ManniX-ITA Look at the frequencies this 5600x puppy reach with B550 Unify and CO and +350 override.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Kha said:


> @ManniX-ITA Look at the frequencies this 5600x puppy reach with B550 Unify and CO and +350 override.


Not bad at all


----------



## Kha

ManniX-ITA said:


> Not bad at all


I know it's not sustained, but still, spikes of 5ghz for each core lol, that's beautiful. And also shows that bigger than 200 offsets are useful.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Kha said:


> I know it's not sustained, but still, spikes of 5ghz for each core lol, that's beautiful.


Considering is a 5600x quite impressive


----------



## Kha

ManniX-ITA said:


> Considering is a 5600x quite impressive


Exactly. Again 5 ghz spikes on Cinebench 23. The dude is some korean reviewer, he writes more about Unify and this.









쿨엔조이,쿨앤조이 coolenjoy, cooln, 쿨엔, 검은동네


간단 테스트 결과 공유합니다.UEFI BIOS 셋업 가이드나 더 자세한 내용은 조금 더 테스트 후 정리해서 올릴게요.시스템 사양- CPU: AMD RYZEN 5 3600X @ PB



coolenjoy.net


----------



## Kha

@ManniX-ITA , I am thinking to go for the B550 Unify plain and not for the X, the argument being I won't go for insane memory overclocks, so at 4000-4200 both versions should behave kinda the same. What's your personal take for it ?


----------



## Spectre73

Kha said:


> @ManniX-ITA , I am thinking to go for the B550 Unify plain and not for the X, the argument being I won't go for insane memory overclocks, so at 4000-4200 both versions should behave kinda the same. What's your personal take for it ?


I know it was not directed at me, but let me ask you a question in return: what do you like about the unify non-x that you can not get with any other 4 dimm slot board out there? IMHO the board has nothing, many other boards do not have, also. The only reason for the unify is the 2 dimm variant.
And at least for me it is not about high ram frequencys but about the signal integrity.


----------



## Kha

Spectre73 said:


> I know it was not directed at me, but let me ask you a question in return: what do you like about the unify non-x that you can not get with any other 4 dimm slot board out there? IMHO the board has nothing, many other boards do not have, also. The only reason for the unify is the 2 dimm variant.
> And at least for me it is not about high ram frequencys but about the signal integrity.


First of all, I believe the B550 chipset is better than x570 for overclocking in general, being newer than the X570. This cuts my boards option to half.

Then I believe MSI Bios is superior to the rest of the pack, even if just for their +500 boost alone. To be able to go further than 200 Mhz is simply a feature nowhere else to be found.

So, a MSI B550. They have 3 series, the MAG, the MPG and the MEG, the last being MSI's most advanced product series. For me, the natural choice is either MEG B550 Unify or the Unify-X. Sure, obviously I like the idea of the better memory signal the Unify-X has, but I suspect that at some mere 4 ghz, this feat might not worth it salt and would most probably show it's value in severe overclocking situations where the ram will be pushed at it limits, with super crazy timings and voltages, as in much higher than 5 ghz. And given I am primary a gamer, clearly I won't go that route.

However I like the idea of a top VRM, the 6 layers PCB with 2oz thick copper, fully isolated memory circuit for good signals, and also... no RGB.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Kha said:


> @ManniX-ITA , I am thinking to go for the B550 Unify plain and not for the X, the argument being I won't go for insane memory overclocks, so at 4000-4200 both versions should behave kinda the same. What's your personal take for it ?


As mentioned already by @Spectre73 it's more about signal integrity.
At same frequency means more stability and possibly lower timings; means also you need a very good B-die kit to exploit the advantage.
But of course the difference is not going to be that big, the Unify non-X is certainly going to be awesome as well!


----------



## Kha

Yeah, will see, I guess. The boards are still out of stock evrywhere, apart UK.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Kha said:


> Yeah, will see, I guess. The boards are still out of stock evrywhere, apart UK.


Indeed, it's worrying...

*Estimated delivery 28.12.2020 - 07.01.2021* 

Now it's up to the 7th instead of 5th of Jan.
I have such a bad feeling! Let's hope it's wrong...


----------



## Kha

ManniX-ITA said:


> Indeed, it's worrying...
> 
> *Estimated delivery 28.12.2020 - 07.01.2021*
> 
> Now it's up to the 7th instead of 5th of Jan.
> I have such a bad feeling! Let's hope it's wrong...


Yeah, was almost ordering a B550 Carbon some days ago lol. Not a bad board by any means, probably better than my old Aorus Pro and also cheaper, with a very nice 12+2+1 VRM setup. And well... it has +500 boost too


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Kha said:


> Yeah, was almost ordering a B550 Carbon some days ago lol. Not a bad board by any means, probably better than my old Aorus Pro and also cheaper, with a very nice 12+2+1 VRM setup. And well... it has +500 boost too


Not bad but anything like the Unify 









B550 VRM DB sheet


시트1 Feedback : [email protected] Don't requst permission / You can leave comment :) Product,Price,Config,Phase Type,VRM Type,MOSFET (Vcore),PWM Controller,LAN,Wireless LAN,Audio ASUS ROG STRIX B550-XE Gaming WiFi,$ 330,14+2,Dual-Output,DrMOS,TI X95410RR 90A,ASP1405i (7+1),Intel I225-V (2.5...




docs.google.com





I think it's best to wait, rushing will not bring any good at this point.


----------



## Kha

ManniX-ITA said:


> I think it's best to wait, rushing will not bring any good at this point.


Agreed.


----------



## Kha

@ManniX-ITA , what's the difference between Dual-Output phase and Doubler ? Thought they are the same thing till saw the spreadsheet you linked.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Kha said:


> @ManniX-ITA , what's the difference between Dual-Output phase and Doubler ? Thought they are the same thing till saw the spreadsheet you linked.


Not 100% sure but it should mean the phase-splitting is done directly by the PWM controller without a doubler.
Which is worse than using a doubler for what I know cause it's putting more stress on the PWM controller which could lead to more EMI and power draw.

If you see the ASUS ROG STRIX B550-I GAMING is a 8+2 phases using a ASP1106J (4+2) with Dual Output.
The ASUS ROG STRIX B550-A GAMING is a 12+2 phases using the same ASP1106J (4+2) but with Triple Output.


----------



## Nighthog

Unfiy-X does 5500Mhz DDR4 memory stable.


----------



## Spectre73

ManniX-ITA said:


> Not 100% sure but it should mean the phase-splitting is done directly by the PWM controller without a doubler.
> Which is worse than using a doubler for what I know cause it's putting more stress on the PWM controller which could lead to more EMI and power draw.
> 
> If you see the ASUS ROG STRIX B550-I GAMING is a 8+2 phases using a ASP1106J (4+2) with Dual Output.
> The ASUS ROG STRIX B550-A GAMING is a 12+2 phases using the same ASP1106J (4+2) but with Triple Output.


Buildzoid talks about it quite often. I am no electrical engineer but as far as I understand it, a dual-output just doubles the phases current capability, so a dualed 90a phase is in effect one big giant 180a phase. Whereas a doubled 90a (via phase doubler) phase acts a little like a "interleaved" phase with faster transient response. Again, please do your own research, since I am no expert on this, but that's as far as I understand it.
According to buildzoid, both variants have pros and cons. I don't know what approach he favors.

What is true, though, is, that the manufacturers switched away from phase doublers to dual-output phases. This seems to have to do with compontent availability and also cost cutting measures. Look at the Gigabyte V2 boards!


----------



## Nicked_Wicked

Still looking to pre-order this in my country but no dice as of yet.


----------



## Kha

Nicked_Wicked said:


> Still looking to pre-order this in my country but no dice as of yet.


Something is deeply wrong here. UK has Unify but no other countries. Also, each day Amazon raises the delivery term more and more, to the point it lists now the arrivalas: *Jan 11 - Feb 16* 

Could it be that huge transport that was lost at sea was with these boards ?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Spectre73 said:


> Buildzoid talks about it quite often. I am no electrical engineer but as far as I understand it, a dual-output just doubles the phases current capability, so a dualed 90a phase is in effect one big giant 180a phase. Whereas a doubled 90a (via phase doubler) phase acts a little like a "interleaved" phase with faster transient response. Again, please do your own research, since I am no expert on this, but that's as far as I understand it.
> According to buildzoid, both variants have pros and cons. I don't know what approach he favors.
> 
> What is true, though, is, that the manufacturers switched away from phase doublers to dual-output phases. This seems to have to do with compontent availability and also cost cutting measures. Look at the Gigabyte V2 boards!


Not an expert either but I think the multiple outputs are created exactly the same way as the doubler.
Ig guess it really depends on how good is the PWM controller in doubling or tripling the output.
I got a look at the Infineon IR3598, which is a very high quality MOSFET driver:



https://www.infineon.com/dgdl/ir3598.pdf?fileId=5546d462533600a4015355cdad66176d



Here's the comparison between dual and doubler mode:










This means that if the PWM Controller is able to deliver same frequencies on the input signals it's better in Dual mode.
Otherwise is probably just the same. 

Also a lot of performance metrics are worse in doubler mode:










So I guess here too what matters is if the PWM controller is better on these metrics than the doubler.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Kha said:


> Something is deeply wrong here. UK has Unify but no other countries. Also, each day Amazon raises the delivery term more and more, to the point it lists now the arrivalas: *Jan 11 - Feb 16*
> 
> Could it be that huge transport that was lost at sea was with these boards ?


Oh my. What shipment?
My delivery date in Proshop didn't change so far...


----------



## Kha

Just the product details on Amazon.co.uk






MSI MEG B550 UNIFY Gaming Motherboard ATX-AMD AM4 Ryzen 5000 Ready, 14+2 Phase 90A Power Stage, Integrated Cooling, 4 x DDR4 Dual-Channel (128 GB/5100 MHz), Gen 4 M.2 Connectors, Wi-Fi 6, 2.5 Gb/s LAN: Amazon.co.uk: Computers & Accessories


Buy MSI MEG B550 UNIFY Gaming Motherboard ATX-AMD AM4 Ryzen 5000 Ready, 14+2 Phase 90A Power Stage, Integrated Cooling, 4 x DDR4 Dual-Channel (128 GB/5100 MHz), Gen 4 M.2 Connectors, Wi-Fi 6, 2.5 Gb/s LAN at Amazon UK. Free delivery and return on eligible orders.



www.amazon.co.uk


----------



## Spectre73

ManniX-ITA said:


> Not an expert either but I think the multiple outputs are created exactly the same way as the doubler.
> Ig guess it really depends on how good is the PWM controller in doubling or tripling the output.
> I got a look at the Infineon IR3598, which is a very high quality MOSFET driver:
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.infineon.com/dgdl/ir3598.pdf?fileId=5546d462533600a4015355cdad66176d
> 
> 
> 
> Here's the comparison between dual and doubler mode:
> 
> View attachment 2469655
> 
> 
> This means that if the PWM Controller is able to deliver same frequencies on the input signals it's better in Dual mode.
> Otherwise is probably just the same.
> 
> Also a lot of performance metrics are worse in doubler mode:
> 
> View attachment 2469656
> 
> 
> So I guess here too what matters is if the PWM controller is better on these metrics than the doubler.


Nice find, but I am totally out of my league here. I recommend this video. It has an quite in depth explanation.






This diagram explains it quite well, IMHO:


----------



## Kha

Another pretty nice B550 that appeared these days appears to be the B550-XE from Asus, 90A phases VRM, guess it's the B550 Unify contender.






ROG STRIX B550-XE GAMING WIFI | ROG STRIX B550-XE GAMING WIFI | Gaming Motherboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG Global


ROG Strix B550-XE Gaming ATX motherboard is PCIe® 4.0-ready and features a robust power design, comprehensive cooling controls, AI Networking and cyberpunk-inspired looks.



rog.asus.com


----------



## Spectre73

Kha said:


> Another pretty nice B550 that appeared these days appears to be the B550-XE from Asus, 90A 16 direct phases VRM, guess it's the B550 Unify contender.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG STRIX B550-XE GAMING WIFI | ROG STRIX B550-XE GAMING WIFI | Gaming Motherboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG Global
> 
> 
> ROG Strix B550-XE Gaming ATX motherboard is PCIe® 4.0-ready and features a robust power design, comprehensive cooling controls, AI Networking and cyberpunk-inspired looks.
> 
> 
> 
> rog.asus.com


I thought about it. I like it very much, but again, it has 4 DIMM slots. Even though it looks nicer, I will go for the Unify-X. Except if it will not be available at all....


----------



## Kha

Spectre73 said:


> I thought about it. I like it very much, but again, it has 4 DIMM slots. Even though it looks nicer, I will go for the Unify-X. Except if it will not be available at all....


Sadly, it lacks optical SPDIF, so it's a nono for me. Guess I'll have to wait for the Unify(x)


----------



## Spectre73

Kha said:


> Sadly, it lacks optical SPDIF, so it's a nono for me. Guess I'll have to wait for the Unify(x)


The one thing I do not like about the Unify-X are the 4 m.2 slots. It is a patchwork for a chipset that is not equipped to handle that. For example, I can not use 2 m.2 SSDs and some addin card in the PCIe slot, without losing all 16 GPU lanes in the first PCIe slot. 
I wanted to use 2 m.2 plus a LAN addin card for intel LAN, but that does only work in chipset mode and with this I would lose 8 PCIe lanes.

The alternative would be to run 1 m.2 at pcie 3.0 x2....


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Spectre73 said:


> The one thing I do not like about the Unify-X are the 4 m.2 slots. It is a patchwork for a chipset that is not equipped to handle that. For example, I can not use 2 m.2 SSDs and some addin card in the PCIe slot, without losing all 16 GPU lanes in the first PCIe slot.
> I wanted to use 2 m.2 plus a LAN addin card for intel LAN, but that does only work in chipset mode and with this I would lose 8 PCIe lanes.
> 
> The alternative would be to run 1 m.2 at pcie 3.0 x2....


As far as I remember that's how it works with the B550.

There's a solution, use the Intel card in one of the x1 slots and put the M.2 in a PCI-e adapter in the 4th slot to use it at 3.0 x4.
Unless you need full 10GBps for the Intel card, then you need the x4 slot.


----------



## Kha

Yup, that's how B550 is, not a personal fault of the Unify.


----------



## Nicked_Wicked

Kha said:


> Sadly, it lacks optical SPDIF, so it's a nono for me. Guess I'll have to wait for the Unify(x)


Missing some heat sinks for the M.2 SSD’s too, would’ve preferred 2 DIMM slots over 4 as well.

At least they have Intel 2.5Gb instead of Realtek, let’s just hope they used the latest revision of the chip because the original had severe problems.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Spectre73 said:


> Nice find, but I am totally out of my league here. I recommend this video. It has an quite in depth explanation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This diagram explains it quite well, IMHO:
> View attachment 2469673


VRM is a too big topic to dig in casually...
I trust BZ advice fully on this!

Yes it seems the Dual/Twin solution could be better if well designed than the Doublers.
But bottom line is true phases are the only highway to heaven


----------



## Speed Potato

Spectre73 said:


> The one thing I do not like about the Unify-X are the 4 m.2 slots. It is a patchwork for a chipset that is not equipped to handle that. For example, I can not use 2 m.2 SSDs and some addin card in the PCIe slot, without losing all 16 GPU lanes in the first PCIe slot.
> I wanted to use 2 m.2 plus a LAN addin card for intel LAN, but that does only work in chipset mode and with this I would lose 8 PCIe lanes.
> 
> The alternative would be to run 1 m.2 at pcie 3.0 x2....


I'm in the same situation: I want to run 2 NVME ssd's, one pciex4 LAN card and my pciex1 audio card. In chipset mode the bottom M.2 slot is limited to Pcie3 x2. Two lanes of pcie3 should provide about 2000Mbps if the storage controller will allow the drive to connect at 2x. Considering that I use a Intel 660p 3TB drive in there, it won't be a problem since that drive tops out around 1800MBps anyway. Honestly I would not consider that to be much of a problem even if I had a better drive, peak bandwidth is only used for sequential transfers and that's not a common occurrence.

I'm planing to swithc to that board ( the UnifyX ) from the x570 Unify because of the memory OC capacity. The memory QVL is insane and it's clear that MSI is pushing all efforts on that board and that it will be "the" AM4 board to have in the future.


----------



## Spectre73

Speed Potato said:


> I'm in the same situation: I want to run 2 NVME ssd's, one pciex4 LAN card and my pciex1 audio card. In chipset mode the bottom M.2 slot is limited to Pcie3 x2. Two lanes of pcie3 should provide about 2000Mbps if the storage controller will allow the drive to connect at 2x. Considering that I use a Intel 660p 3TB drive in there, it won't be a problem since that drive tops out around 1800MBps anyway. Honestly I would not consider that to be much of a problem even if I had a better drive, peak bandwidth is only used for sequential transfers and that's not a common occurrence.
> 
> I'm planing to swithc to that board ( the UnifyX ) from the x570 Unify because of the memory OC capacity. The memory QVL is insane and it's clear that MSI is pushing all efforts on that board and that it will be "the" AM4 board to have in the future.


Afaik the solution @ManniX-ITA suggested does not work for you and me, because the LAN card is PCIe x4. I looked into the lane distribution on the *ASUS ROG Strix B550-XE Gaming *and this thing could do it, if I am not mistaken. But if it is only intel LAN you are after (I do not trust realtek) this ROG Strix would have it already, so additionally, your LAN card would not even be needed.
Still, your considerations are all well laid out. In effect, peak bandwidth would not matter, but it still leaves a bad taste, because your SSD is not operationg to its full potential.


----------



## Spectre73

At this point in time it is just a waiting game and I am slowly getting impatient. Not that I could not wait a little longer but except for the MB and a GPU, a new system waits to be built. Once I start I have to shuffle around hardware between 4 sytems (wifes, 2 kids, mine). Since for me that is part of the fun, I can not wait....on the edge of ordering something else, but still resisting.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Spectre73 said:


> Afaik the solution @ManniX-ITA suggested does not work for you and me, because the LAN card is PCIe x4. I looked into the lane distribution on the *ASUS ROG Strix B550-XE Gaming *and this thing could do it, if I am not mistaken. But if it is only intel LAN you are after (I do not trust realtek) this ROG Strix would have it already, so additionally, your LAN card would not even be needed.
> Still, your considerations are all well laid out. In effect, peak bandwidth would not matter, but it still leaves a bad taste, because your SSD is not operationg to its full potential.


Indeed flexibility is not the main characteristic of the Unify-X...
But anyway I wouldn't use a B550 at all if you need add-in cards.
That's why I bought a Master beginning with.
Ended up not using any so... I'm going for the B550 till the next generation with a new PCIe level.

I don't think the Strix would work for you as well:










The 3rd slot with x4 PCIe 3.0 will cut the x1 slots once used fully.
Therefore you should use bifurcation and run the GPU at x8.
But then you would waste x8 4.0 bandwidth for an x4 3.0 card.
You'll be able to run the x1 Audio card, another x1 PCIe card, an M.2 PCIe at x2 3.0 and the M.2_2 at x4 3.0 with 4 SATA.

I feel "lucky" that I don't need 10GBps


----------



## Spectre73

ManniX-ITA said:


> Indeed flexibility is not the main characteristic of the Unify-X...
> But anyway I wouldn't use a B550 at all if you need add-in cards.
> That's why I bought a Master beginning with.
> Ended up not using any so... I'm going for the B550 till the next generation with a new PCIe level.
> 
> I don't think the Strix would work for you as well:
> 
> View attachment 2469790
> 
> 
> The 3rd slot with x4 PCIe 3.0 will cut the x1 slots once used fully.
> Therefore you should use bifurcation and run the GPU at x8.
> But then you would waste x8 4.0 bandwidth for an x4 3.0 card.
> You'll be able to run the x1 Audio card, another x1 PCIe card, an M.2 PCIe at x2 3.0 and the M.2_2 at x4 3.0 with 4 SATA.
> 
> I feel "lucky" that I don't need 10GBps


That is exactly what I was referring to. You can use 2 m.2 at full speed (gen 3 and 4 respectively) and still populate the last x4 (x16) slot. Doing exactly what I would want. This is different to the layout of the unify-x.
But as you, I went for x570 the first round without using it, at all. But I recently got a second nvme drive and chosing the unify-x would mean realtek lan. It will probably be no deal breaker (my order still stands), but I am a little worried if it will loose connection from time to time (never happened with intel). Other than that, I feel comfortable with either using my m.2 at x2 speeds or just reusing my sata ssd, without a second m.2. Just not optimal, but manageable.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Spectre73 said:


> That is exactly what I was referring to. You can use 2 m.2 at full speed (gen 3 and 4 respectively) and still populate the last x4 (x16) slot. Doing exactly what I would want. This is different to the layout of the unify-x.
> But as you, I went for x570 the first round without using it, at all. But I recently got a second nvme drive and chosing the unify-x would mean realtek lan. It will probably be no deal breaker (my order still stands), but I am a little worried if it will loose connection from time to time (never happened with intel). Other than that, I feel comfortable with either using my m.2 at x2 speeds or just reusing my sata ssd, without a second m.2. Just not optimal, but manageable.


Ok, I thought you wanted to use also the x1 audio card.
We have to hope the Realtek card performs decently.
I'm aiming to replace the GPU beginning of next year with a PCIe 4.0 therefore the x8 link will be more than enough.
With 3 x M.2 at x4 4.0 and one at x4 3.0 guess I'll be fine with storage.


----------



## Kha

And Amazon.co.uk just pushed it 1 more day. From Feb 16th, now to *Feb 17th.*
Also, last night both Unify boards appeared on alternate.de too, not in stock tho.


----------



## Kha

And another update from Amazon.co.uk., this time the date appears to be settled:

Arrives: *Thursday, Jan 7*
Fastest delivery: *Jan 4 - 6*


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Just got listed on Alternate but with no delivery date:



https://www.alternate.de/MSI/MEG-B550-UNIFY-X-Mainboard/html/product/1702462?campaign=Sockel+AM4/MSI/1702462


----------



## Nicked_Wicked

ManniX-ITA said:


> Just got listed on Alternate but with no delivery date:
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.alternate.de/MSI/MEG-B550-UNIFY-X-Mainboard/html/product/1702462?campaign=Sockel+AM4/MSI/1702462


Wow I feel quite tempted, very decent price.


----------



## Kha

@ManniX-ITA Feeling like trying the Strix B550-E Gaming from Asus ; has a beast of a VRM (14+2 70A), ton of features and screams high quality. What do you think about it ?

I know it's not a board especially made with overclocking in mind, but tbh, the Realtek networking on the Unify kinda turns me off a bit, combined with some insane prices we got here in the country, was listed today here too (not yet in stock) with over 400 Euros.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Kha said:


> @ManniX-ITA Feeling like trying the Strix B550-E Gaming from Asus ; has a beast of a VRM (14+2 70A), ton of features and screams high quality. What you think of it ?


I have investigated the line for a friend of mine who's being forced to get one of these boards in bundle with the 5600x. Otherwise no proc...
They wouldn't be that bad except that seems they are not good at all with memory OC.
There's an Italian guy reviewing and testing boards in BZ style and seems he got very bad results with B-dies and low timings:






You can see on screen the configs that failed.
All these boards from ASUS share the same memory layout so I'd double check around first.

Except that if you can stand the ASUS BIOS they are all ok.
I've installed a B550 TUF Gaming for my niece and while not brilliant is quite reliable and very easy to tweak.


----------



## Kha

ManniX-ITA said:


> I have investigated the line for a friend of mine who's being forced to get one of these boards in bundle with the 5600x. Otherwise no proc...
> They wouldn't be that bad except that seems they are not good at all with memory OC.
> There's an Italian guy reviewing and testing boards in BZ style and seems he got very bad results with B-dies and low timings:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You can see on screen the configs that failed.
> All these boards from ASUS share the same memory layout so I'd double check around first.
> 
> Except that if you can stand the ASUS BIOS they are all ok.
> I've installed a B550 TUF Gaming for my niece and while not brilliant is quite reliable and very easy to tweak.


I see and thanks. But how about the Zen 3 RAM Overclocking sheet ? Because it looks like Asus is quite there, has 5 boards in the top 10 ; surely it can't be just chance.









Zen RAM OC Leaderboards


Zen 4 Sheet is sorted and verified submissions LOCKED each Thursday. Please provide proof of stability via Y-Cruncher AND a memory stability test, otherwise your submission will be removed. Refer to the FAQ for more info. MEMORY,PROCESSOR Username,Memory Latency,L3 Latency,DIMMs,Die Type,Rank,Me...




docs.google.com


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Kha said:


> I see and thanks. But how about the Zen 3 RAM Overclocking sheet ? Because it looks like Asus is quite there, has 5 boards in the top 10 ; surely it can't be just chance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Zen RAM OC Leaderboards
> 
> 
> Zen 4 Sheet is sorted and verified submissions LOCKED each Thursday. Please provide proof of stability via Y-Cruncher AND a memory stability test, otherwise your submission will be removed. Refer to the FAQ for more info. MEMORY,PROCESSOR Username,Memory Latency,L3 Latency,DIMMs,Die Type,Rank,Me...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> docs.google.com


They have all a different setup for the RAM; the CH is completely different.
Almost all X570 so a different board layout.
The X570-P shares the same PWM controller but is using a different set of MOSFET.
Overall there are very few ASUS B550 and very far from the top positions.

Could also been a long and tiresome hurdle to tweak those timings.
Memory is the worst thing to OC, one of the reasons I'm going for the Unify-X.
I'd really like it to be easy peasy


----------



## KedarWolf

In Canada is listed here at a really good price.






Channel Electronics - Buy Mfgs Part-#:B550UNIFYX online in Canada


Channel Electronics sells Computers, Computer Components, Computer Peripherals, Computer Software, Handheld Computing Devices, and specialized electronics equipment such as stereographic equipment, mp3 devices and other multimedia equipment. The selection of computers offered includes desktops...



www.channelelectronics.ca





Also listed on DirectDial website but the description says it's the four DIMM board even though the title says Unify-X.

Edit: A few dollars cheaper here.






B550UNIFYX MSI MEG B550 UNIFY-X Desktop Motherboard - AMD B550 Chipset - Socket AM4 - ATX - 128 GB DDR4 SDRAM Maximum RAM - DIMM, UDIMM - 4 x Memory Slots - IEEE 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax - HDMI - 6 x SATA Interfaces - Cendirect Canada


Canada B550UNIFYX MSI MEG B550 UNIFY-X Desktop Motherboard - AMD B550 Chipset - Socket AM4 - ATX - 128 GB DDR4 SDRAM Maximum RAM - DIMM, UDIMM - 4 x Memory Slots - IEEE 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax - HDMI - 6 x SATA Interfaces



www.cendirect.com


----------



## Kha

ManniX-ITA said:


> They have all a different setup for the RAM; the CH is completely different.
> Almost all X570 so a different board layout.
> The X570-P shares the same PWM controller but is using a different set of MOSFET.
> Overall there are very few ASUS B550 and very far from the top positions.
> 
> Could also been a long and tiresome hurdle to tweak those timings.
> Memory is the worst thing to OC, one of the reasons I'm going for the Unify-X.
> I'd really like it to be easy peasy


Well, think I'll get one and see how it is. If it will be a bad experience, will obviously send it back and go for refund, can do it in 30 days. At least will have something to do while waiting for the Unify.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Kha said:


> Well, think I'll get one and see how it is. If it will be a bad experience, will obviously send it back and go for refund, can do it in 30 days.


Why not, while endlessly waiting for the Unify-X...


----------



## KedarWolf

KedarWolf said:


> In Canada is listed here at a really good price.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Channel Electronics - Buy Mfgs Part-#:B550UNIFYX online in Canada
> 
> 
> Channel Electronics sells Computers, Computer Components, Computer Peripherals, Computer Software, Handheld Computing Devices, and specialized electronics equipment such as stereographic equipment, mp3 devices and other multimedia equipment. The selection of computers offered includes desktops...
> 
> 
> 
> www.channelelectronics.ca
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also listed on DirectDial website but the description says it's the four DIMM board even though the title says Unify-X.
> 
> Edit: A few dollars cheaper here.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> B550UNIFYX MSI MEG B550 UNIFY-X Desktop Motherboard - AMD B550 Chipset - Socket AM4 - ATX - 128 GB DDR4 SDRAM Maximum RAM - DIMM, UDIMM - 4 x Memory Slots - IEEE 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax - HDMI - 6 x SATA Interfaces - Cendirect Canada
> 
> 
> Canada B550UNIFYX MSI MEG B550 UNIFY-X Desktop Motherboard - AMD B550 Chipset - Socket AM4 - ATX - 128 GB DDR4 SDRAM Maximum RAM - DIMM, UDIMM - 4 x Memory Slots - IEEE 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax - HDMI - 6 x SATA Interfaces
> 
> 
> 
> www.cendirect.com


I just checked, shipping and handling is more with Channel Electronics so you save about $5 in total from Cendirect. And they are both reputable known Canadian websites.

Edit: $10 cheaper including shipping by FedEx here. Plus I signed up for the newsletter and got a $5 off coupon, so $15 cheaper!



https://www.ncds.ca/eng/msi-b550unifyx.html


----------



## KedarWolf

In the USA is available for preorder here for $299.99









MSI MEG B550 UNIFY-X AM4 ATX Motherboard
 

Buy MSI MEG B550 UNIFY-X AM4 ATX Motherboard featuring ATX Form Factor, AMD B550 Chipset, AM4 Socket, 2 x Dual-Channel DDR4 DIMM Slots, 6 x SATA III, 4 x M.2 PCIe Slots, 1 x PCIe 4.0/3.0 x16 Slot, 1 x PCIe 3.0 x16 Slot, 2 x PCIe 3.0 x1 Slots, 1 x RJ45 2.5 Gigabit Ethernet Port, Windows 10...




www.bhphotovideo.com


----------



## Kha

Bleah. Guess not a good idea, will just eat my impatience and wait for the real thing.


----------



## Speed Potato

KedarWolf said:


> Edit: $10 cheaper including shipping by FedEx here. Plus I signed up for the newsletter and got a $5 off coupon, so $15 cheaper!
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.ncds.ca/eng/msi-b550unifyx.html


Thanks for the heads-up ! I never heard of these guys bit it's better local than Newegg or whatnot I guess. Have you ever done business with them ?
Also, How do you subscribe to the newsletter ?


----------



## KedarWolf

Speed Potato said:


> Thanks for the heads-up ! I never heard of these guys bit it's better local than Newegg or whatnot I guess. Have you ever done business with them ?
> Also, How do you subscribe to the newsletter ?


I've bought a few things from them. Ship fast and cheap. FedEx is like $10.39.

When I went to their website and added it to the cart to check the shipping, a popup came up saying I can get the $5 coupon.

Edit: Here is the promo code though, it'll work for anyone in Canada on your first order. If you've bought stuff with them before, maybe register wth a new email will work? 5OFF50


GET $5 OFF​your entire first order​USE COUPON CODE : 5OFF50
*YOU MUST CREATE AN ACCOUNT ON OUR WEBSITE TO APPLY THIS PROMOTION*​


----------



## Kha

And apparently the B550 Unify / X has already some extreme contender in Asus B550-XE. The XE has not only the same VRM as the Dark Hero, but many other nice stuff borrowed too.

Price is about the same as B550-Unify, in the 250-300 range, and given Asus has unlimited Core Boost Override now, the B550-XE is quite an option.


----------



## KedarWolf

Kha said:


> And apparently the B550 Unify / X has already some extreme contender in Asus B550-XE. The XE has not only the same VRM as the Dark Hero, but many other nice stuff borrowed too.
> 
> Price is about the same as B550-Unify, in the 250-300 range, and given Asus has unlimited Core Boost Override now, the B550-XE is quite an option.


B550-XE is a four DIMM board, Unify-X with two DIMMs going to overclock memory much better.


----------



## Kha

KedarWolf said:


> B550-XE is a four DIMM board, Unify-X with two DIMMs going to overclock memory much better.


No question about it, yet Asus' daisy chain topology is probably the best in bussiness. I am 100% convinced the B550-XE will also overclock like crazy, probably not like the Unify, but not very far either.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Kha said:


> No question about it, yet Asus' daisy chain topology is probably the best in bussiness. I am 100% convinced the B550-XE will also overclock like crazy, probably not like the Unify, but not very far either.


What is for sure better is the Intel LAN instead of Realtek.
But it's a 7+1 twin phases while the Unify is using true 14+2 phases.
Plus the PWM controller and MOSFETs are all Infineon which are just the best available as I know.
It's a contender but the MSI BIOS is just much better.
Unless it has Dynamic OC Switch like the Dark Hero I wouldn't personally consider it.

I correct myself, if this info is right is rubbish:









Elenco B550 con VRM


Foglio1 AMD ,Creato da R3d3x Tech qp,Usa la visualizzazione filtrata per confrontare le schede madri! Come? Chipset B550,<a href="https://www.youtube.com/c/TechqpR3d3x">https://www.youtube.com/c/TechqpR3d3x</a>,1) Clicca sulla riga 8 2) In alto a sinistra vicino all'icona della s...




docs.google.com





The CH line is using for the memory a 2-phases ASP-1103 PWM controller and Nikos MOSFETs.
That's the good stuff.
The XE is using the same 1-phase Richtek RT8125D and Vishay MOSFETs as all the other B550 boards.
Which is the bad stuff; as said earlier about the Strix B550-E, memory OC to low timings or high frequency is very hard.


----------



## Kha

ManniX-ITA said:


> What is for sure better is the Intel LAN instead of Realtek.
> But it's a 7+1 twin phases while the Unify is using true 14+2 phases.
> Plus the PWM controller and MOSFETs are all Infineon which are just the best available as I know.
> It's a contender but the MSI BIOS is just much better.
> Unless it has Dynamic OC Switch like the Dark Hero I wouldn't personally consider it.
> 
> I correct myself, if this info is right is rubbish:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Elenco B550 con VRM
> 
> 
> Foglio1 AMD ,Creato da R3d3x Tech qp,Usa la visualizzazione filtrata per confrontare le schede madri! Come? Chipset B550,<a href="https://www.youtube.com/c/TechqpR3d3x">https://www.youtube.com/c/TechqpR3d3x</a>,1) Clicca sulla riga 8 2) In alto a sinistra vicino all'icona della s...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> docs.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The CH line is using for the memory a 2-phases ASP-1103 PWM controller and Nikos MOSFETs.
> That's the good stuff.
> The XE is using the same 1-phase Richtek RT8125D and Vishay MOSFETs as all the other B550 boards.
> Which is the bad stuff; as said earlier about the Strix B550-E, memory OC to low timings or high frequency is very hard.


Don't think so, it's an ASP1405i controller with Texas Instruments X95410RR (90 Amp) stages.









ASUS ROG Crosshair VIII Dark Hero Review


The ASUS ROG Crosshair VIII Dark Hero is a refresh of last year's award winning ROG Crosshair VIII Hero. With an even more powerful VRM, a sleek new look, and, most importantly, no chipset cooling fan, the ROG Crosshair VIII Dark Hero looks to be a worthy upgrade from last year's model.




www.techpowerup.com


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Kha said:


> Don't think so, it's an ASP1405i controller with Texas Instruments X95410RR (90 Amp) stages.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ASUS ROG Crosshair VIII Dark Hero Review
> 
> 
> The ASUS ROG Crosshair VIII Dark Hero is a refresh of last year's award winning ROG Crosshair VIII Hero. With an even more powerful VRM, a sleek new look, and, most importantly, no chipset cooling fan, the ROG Crosshair VIII Dark Hero looks to be a worthy upgrade from last year's model.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.techpowerup.com


That's for the vCore, the CPU.
You have to look at the power section for the memory.


----------



## Kha

ManniX-ITA said:


> That's for the vCore, the CPU.
> You have to look at the power section for the memory.


My bad, completely missed that. In CH8's defense, there are tons of reddit reports with 2000/4000+ FCLK/MCLK with it. Even with regular B550-E or B550-F, last 1401 bios seems to be a complete jackpot for Asus.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Kha said:


> My bad, completely missed that. In CH8's defense, there are tons of reddit reports with 2000/4000+ FCLK/MCLK with it. Even with regular B550-E or B550-F, last 1401 bios seems to be a complete jackpot for Asus.


The whole CH line is using quite a good solution.
I've not heard great things about the cheap X570s and nothin good about the B550s.
Couldn't really test it on the B550 TUF Gaming I bought cause the 3600XT is limited with the IF and the sticks are cheap stuff.


----------



## KedarWolf

Buildzoid breakdown of the Unify-X.


----------



## Kha

ManniX-ITA said:


> I've not heard great things about the cheap X570s and nothin good about the B550s.


Can't say I did either, but looking at the Zen Overclocking sheet, from the top 10 boards listed with max IF/MCLK, 5 of them are Asus. More precisely X570-E, 2xTUF X570, Prime X570 and B550-E. First Gigabyte is a Master, on position #22 (FCLK/MCLK wise).

Just saying.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Kha said:


> Can't say I did either, but looking at the Zen Overclocking sheet, from the top 10 boards listed with max IF/MCLK, 5 of them are Asus. More precisely X570-E, 2xTUF X570, Prime X570 and B550-E. First Gigabyte is a Master, on position #22 (FCLK/MCLK wise).
> 
> Just saying.
> View attachment 2470397


You shouldn't order it for frequency.
Reaching 4000 MHz with the latency of 3800 MHz it's pointless 
Also you don't know how much they struggled to achieve that result.
I've spent hours to get my Master to 4066 MHz in-sync... for nothing.
Same latency as 3800 MHz, waste of time.
Use the Zen2 sheet for more accurate statistics, there's not enough data yet in the Zen3 sheet.

If you order for latency you see there are 3-4 X570s not in the first positions; almost all ASRock and MSI on top.
There's one result from the Strix X570-F Gaming at 4 GHz; excellent sticks (F4-4266C19-8GTZR) but yet the 2nd worst at that speed.
Except the other worst 4 GHz result which is from a TUF Gaming X570-Pro all the others are average and below 4 GHz.

Still not enough data in this sheet but the preliminary is telling me they are indeed not so good in memory OC.
Check the Zen2 sheet and you'll se even there the picture is not much different.
There are always the same 2 users that could do something good with the Prime X570-P (they must have spitted blood to achieve it).
Otherwise is CrossHair line rolling good.


----------



## Kha

ManniX-ITA said:


> You shouldn't order it for frequency.
> Reaching 4000 MHz with the latency of 3800 MHz it's pointless


Agreed, but sadly, that's all the data we have in the basket 



ManniX-ITA said:


> Also you don't know how much they struggled to achieve that result.


Hihi, it kinda goes both ways, isn't it ? It's possible they didn't struggle much either ; I'm afraid how much they struggled isn't actually quantifiable. 



ManniX-ITA said:


> Still not enough data in this sheet but the preliminary is telling me they are indeed not so good in memory OC.
> Check the Zen2 sheet and you'll se even there the picture is not much different.


Agreed again, but in Asus' defense, I'll say that all the Asus data in sheet is almost useless since all of these are results which aren't based on the last bios version, the 1401. Which appears to be quite magical - people who couldn't boot with 1900 IF are now sporting 2000-2066 without a sweat, and mind you, it's happening also with not very good boards like B550-F X570-F etc. Something is off here.


----------



## Spectre73

KedarWolf said:


> Buildzoid breakdown of the Unify-X.





ManniX-ITA said:


> You shouldn't order it for frequency.
> Reaching 4000 MHz with the latency of 3800 MHz it's pointless
> Also you don't know how much they struggled to achieve that result.
> I've spent hours to get my Master to 4066 MHz in-sync... for nothing.
> Same latency as 3800 MHz, waste of time.
> Use the Zen2 sheet for more accurate statistics, there's not enough data yet in the Zen3 sheet.
> 
> If you order for latency you see there are 3-4 X570s not in the first positions; almost all ASRock and MSI on top.
> There's one result from the Strix X570-F Gaming at 4 GHz; excellent sticks (F4-4266C19-8GTZR) but yet the 2nd worst at that speed.
> Except the other worst 4 GHz result which is from a TUF Gaming X570-Pro all the others are average and below 4 GHz.
> 
> Still not enough data in this sheet but the preliminary is telling me they are indeed not so good in memory OC.
> Check the Zen2 sheet and you'll se even there the picture is not much different.
> There are always the same 2 users that could do something good with the Prime X570-P (they must have spitted blood to achieve it).
> Otherwise is CrossHair line rolling good.


I see no clear pattern here. B550 is almost as often at the top as x570. Also, buildzoid does not seem to be concerned with a 1 phase DRAM VRM. The results he and others achieved on B550 seem to confirm this.
Since "our" unify-x also only has a 1 phase DRAM VRM and the already achieved results on RAM overclock have been really great, I can not see a problem here. Do I miss something?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Kha said:


> Agreed, but sadly, that's all the data we have in the basket
> 
> 
> Hihi, it kinda goes both ways, isn't it ? It's possible they didn't struggle much either ; I'm afraid how much they struggled isn't actually quantifiable.
> 
> 
> 
> Agreed again, but in Asus' defense, I'll say that all the Asus data in sheet is almost useless since all of these are results which aren't based on the last bios version, the 1401. Which appears to be quite magical - people who couldn't boot with 1900 IF are now sporting 2000-2066 without a sweat, and mind you, it's happening also with not very good boards like B550-F X570-F etc. Something is off here.


Indeed it could have been easy peasy but I think ASUS is the 1st for sales.
I'd expect it to dominate the list in positions and quantity. Otherwise makes me think it's not that easy.
But it's speculation 

It's indeed too early for Zen3 due to the bugged AGESA we have to wait for all boards to get something good that can reliably boot high IF and then we'll see.



Spectre73 said:


> I see no clear pattern here. B550 is almost as often at the top as x570. Also, buildzoid does not seem to be concerned with a 1 phase DRAM VRM. The results he and others achieved on B550 seem to confirm this.
> Since "our" unify-x also only has a 1 phase DRAM VRM and the already achieved results on RAM overclock have been really great, I can not see a problem here. Do I miss something?


BuildZoid also praises the Master which I would burn on a pyre 
It's always a matter of experiences.

The problem is not the 1-phase VRM which is more than enough, 2 phases I guess maybe can help with 5000+ clocks?
What is not good with ASUS, seems, is their choice of components.
It doesn't work great for the X570 line and even worse for their B550s.

We are only talking about *ASUS* B550.
I wouldn't but a Unify-X otherwise


----------



## Kha

I don't know the X570 Master, but there was a time I was interested in the B550 Master. Price was good, on paper it rocked, 16 direct phases etc. This till I saw everything in it was fed lanes from the primary16x pcie. _Want a 2nd M.2 ? No problem buddy, your 16x graphic card will go 8x from now on. _And this is happening with everything else in it, be it 2nd pcie, m.2 sata etc.

I swear Gigabyte could've make the B550 Master without a chipset at all and wouldn't been a difference


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Kha said:


> I don't know the X570 Master, but there was a time I was interested in the B550 Master. Price was good, on paper it rocked, 16 direct phases etc. This till I saw everything in it was fed lanes from the primary16x pcie. _Want a 2nd M.2 ? No problem buddy, your 16x graphic card will go 8x from now on. _And this is happening with everything else in it, be it 2nd pcie, m.2 sata etc.
> 
> I swear Gigabyte could've make the B550 Master without a chipset at all and wouldn't been a difference


Oh my, Santa is back!

*delivery*
*DPD *- DELIVERY TO YOUR HOME
*All goods are in stock*

Proshop has it in stock now!


----------



## Kha

ManniX-ITA said:


> That's for the vCore, the CPU.
> You have to look at the power section for the memory.


Manni, I see Gigabyte uses the RT8120 for the Aorus B550 Baster, curious what you have on your Aorus X570 Master ? Can't find anywhere any mention.


----------



## Kha

Also, Unify-X uses kinda the same PWM as B550-XE, the RT8125E, probably a refresh of RT8125D.


----------



## Spectre73

ManniX-ITA said:


> Oh my, Santa is back!
> 
> *delivery*
> *DPD *- DELIVERY TO YOUR HOME
> *All goods are in stock*
> 
> Proshop has it in stock now!


I already got email that they are going to send it out today...lets hope that DPD can deliver in time.....


----------



## Kha

Spectre73 said:


> I already got email that they are going to send it out today...lets hope that DPD can deliver in time.....





ManniX-ITA said:


> Oh my, Santa is back!
> 
> *delivery*
> *DPD *- DELIVERY TO YOUR HOME
> *All goods are in stock*
> 
> Proshop has it in stock now!


Congratulations both of you ! Please tell everything as soon as you get them, I am more curious than a cat lol.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Kha said:


> Congratulations both of you ! Please tell everything as soon as you get them, I am more curious than a cat lol.


Absolutely!



Kha said:


> Also, Unify-X uses kinda the same PWM as B550-XE, the RT8125E, probably a refresh of RT8125D.


It's more about the whole design that the components.
Maybe the XE has been reworked completely and it's doing much better.
But knowing ASUS I'd say they kept the same BS as before...

The X570 line is not brilliant but there are some that can do decent without too much issues.
The B550 line is worse; probably they made some unfortunate decisions in the PCB.

If you see the Master R1.2/1.2 it can do 5000+ and works pretty well with anything.
But my R1.0, which sports the same components, is a total tragedy.
I could run the Hynix DJR at 4200 while the Samsung B-die Dual Rank can't even be reliable at 4000 with tight timings.
Going above 4000 is miserable, needs 1.6V even to train properly and it can't last a few minutes of TM5.
Can't wait to see what the Unify-X what can do.
Otherwise my G.Skill sticks are dummies and I'll start to cry


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Kha said:


> Manni, I see Gigabyte uses the RT8120 for the Aorus B550 Baster, curious what you have on your Aorus X570 Master ? Can't find anywhere any mention.











Elenco X570 con VRM


Foglio1 AMD,Creato da R3d3x Tech qp,Usa la visualizzazione filtrata per confrontare le schede madri! Come? Chipset X570,<a href="https://www.youtube.com/c/TechqpR3d3x">https://www.youtube.com/c/TechqpR3d3x</a>,1) Clicca sulla riga 8 2) In alto a sinistra vicino all'icona della st...




docs.google.com





RT8120D with OnSemi MOSFETs


----------



## Kha

ManniX-ITA said:


> If you see the Master R1.2/1.2 it can do 5000+ and works pretty well with anything.
> But my R1.0, which sports the same components, is a total tragedy.
> I could run the Hynix DJR at 4200 while the Samsung B-die Dual Rank can't even be reliable at 4000 with tight timings.
> Going above 4000 is miserable, needs 1.6V even to train properly and it can't last a few minutes of TM5.
> Can't wait to see what the Unify-X what can do.
> Otherwise my G.Skill sticks are dummies and I'll start to cry


Honestly, I am curious too what the Unify/X can do. I saw your struggles with 4000, but didn't understand the reason, since I was doing 4400 CL16 without breaking a sweat on the Aorus Pro. But yeah, soon we'll see if your sticks are truly bad or the reason behind the whole issue was just the Master.


----------



## Spectre73

Kha said:


> Honestly, I am curious too what the Unify/X can do. I saw your struggles with 4000, but didn't understand the reason, since I was doing 4400 CL16 without breaking a sweat on the Aorus Pro. But yeah, soon we'll see if your sticks are truly bad or the reason behind the whole issue was just the Master.


Do not expect me to do crazy ram overclocks. For this you should probably talk to @ManniX-ITA. He seems to be far more into this kind of thing. I am happy to run 1900 1:1. If the board (or better AGESA) can do it, I am a happy camper. Besides, with the current state the BIOS is in (every manufacturer) fclk above 1900 does not seem to yield many benefits or even regressions.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Kha said:


> Honestly, I am curious too what the Unify/X can do. I saw your struggles with 4000, but didn't understand the reason, since I was doing 4400 CL16 without breaking a sweat on the Aorus Pro. But yeah, soon we'll see if your sticks are truly bad or the reason behind the whole issue was just the Master.


It depends on the mainboard release and the sticks.
If you had an R1.1/1.2 then it was easy.
But also the R1.0 can work decently with B-die if it's single rank.
There was for sure someone having more luck than mewith same kit as mine with a Master R1.0 but it's quite random.



Spectre73 said:


> Do not expect me to do crazy ram overclocks. For this you should probably talk to @ManniX-ITA. He seems to be far more into this kind of thing. I am happy to run 1900 1:1. If the board (or better AGESA) can do it, I am a happy camper. Besides, with the current state the BIOS is in (every manufacturer) fclk above 1900 does not seem to yield many benefits or even regressions.


Yes, I managed to run 4000/4066/4133 on the Master with F31k and the latency was same or worse than 3800. Not worth it.


----------



## Kha

It's absolutely crazy, nobody else than Proshop.de has the Unify-X / Unify and bloody Proshop delivers only in a few countries. I am literally banging my head over the keyboard in frustration


----------



## Spectre73

Kha said:


> It's absolutely crazy, nobody else than Proshop.de has the Unify-X / Unify and bloody Proshop delivers only in a few countries. I am literally banging my head over the keyboard in frustration


I can completely understand it. I am not very positive to receive this before christmas, though. Seems DPD (as any postal service) is totally overwhelmed by the demand. Not surprising, considering what times we live in. 
I hope you can get yours soon. Lets see what version they are sending out....


----------



## Kha

Spectre73 said:


> I can completely understand it. I am not very positive to receive this before christmas, though. Seems DPD (as any postal service) is totally overwhelmed by the demand. Not surprising, considering what times we live in.
> I hope you can get yours soon. Lets see what version they are sending out....


Apparently I can order a Unify-X from Amazon Japan, price is decent too, around 260 Euros after conversion. Scares me a bit tho since it's quite a distance and dunno if I should risk this or not. What you guys think ?


----------



## Spectre73

Kha said:


> Apparently I can order a Unify-X from Amazon Japan, price is decent too, around 260 Euros after conversion. Scares me a bit tho since it's quite a distance and dunno if I should risk this or not. What you guys think ?


Under normal circumstances I see no problem. But if the board dies on you for whatever reason, there maybe a problem with warranty.
I know for a fact, that the so called grey imports with regards to photo equipment from taiwan or whatever are not honored by the company (nikon, canon, sony). I have no idea if it is the same with PC hardware.


----------



## Kha

Guys, problem. Unify-X has coil whine, people already writing about it on asian forums and tell it's like a "roasted chicken cry". Go google translate.






Zen3在UNIFY-X上双面Bdie简单作业 更新电流声和啸叫问题 - 电脑讨论 - Chiphell - 分享与交流用户体验


Zen3在UNIFY-X上双面Bdie简单作业 更新电流声和啸叫问题,更新电流声和啸叫问题：看到有人发帖说电流声啸叫，正好也有人问，就说说下，的确有，跟内存啥的也没关系，我是裸台刚开机，风扇还都是低转速时听到的，很明显，后来开 ...,电脑讨论,讨论区-技术与经验的讨论 ,Chiphell - 分享与交流用户体验




www.chiphell.com


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Kha said:


> Guys, problem. Unify-X has coil whine, people already writing about it on asian forums and tell it's like a "roasted chicken cry". Go google translate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Zen3在UNIFY-X上双面Bdie简单作业 更新电流声和啸叫问题 - 电脑讨论 - Chiphell - 分享与交流用户体验
> 
> 
> Zen3在UNIFY-X上双面Bdie简单作业 更新电流声和啸叫问题,更新电流声和啸叫问题：看到有人发帖说电流声啸叫，正好也有人问，就说说下，的确有，跟内存啥的也没关系，我是裸台刚开机，风扇还都是低转速时听到的，很明显，后来开 ...,电脑讨论,讨论区-技术与经验的讨论 ,Chiphell - 分享与交流用户体验
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.chiphell.com


Let's see, I usually can't detect it with my ear but I'll try.


----------



## Kha

ManniX-ITA said:


> Let's see, I usually can't detect it with my ear but I'll try.


Got it already ?


----------



## Spectre73

ManniX-ITA said:


> Let's see, I usually can't detect it with my ear but I'll try.


Probably too early to tell. In the buildzoid videos about the board he did not mention it and I was not able to hear anything. According to the translated pages it seems that changing the switching frequency helps or eliminates the problem, but not quite sure what I was reading there because of google translate.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Kha said:


> Got it already ?


I wish... no, I mean once I get it.
Still no update on the DPD tracking so I'm not sure they picked it up yet.

Indeed as @Spectre73 said there's no mention from BZ.
I can hear the fan running when it's streaming but no coil whine.
And he did change some times the PWM frequency.
Another factor involved could be the GPU.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

22.12.202017:25Flensburg (DE)In transit.

Hoping


----------



## Phynicle

Anyone receive the board yet?


----------



## Spectre73

Phynicle said:


> Anyone receive the board yet?


It is on it's way. AFAIK I will not receive it today, at least not according to the tracking data. As per FAQ they also deliver tomorrow, 24th, so we will see......


----------



## Nicked_Wicked

In NL there’s only one webshop right now that has the Unify (X) up for pre-order and they don’t even know when they will get a delivery. Guess I’ll buy one from Germany once things have calmed down at the post office.


----------



## Kha

Btw, I am hearing really bad things about the Realtek 2.5gbe NIC, as tons of disconnects totally out of blue. I am quite worried since all Unify boards have this NIC, anyone knows anything ?


----------



## Spectre73

Kha said:


> Btw, I am hearing really bad things about the Realtek 2.5gbe NIC, as tons of disconnects totally out of blue. I am quite worried since all Unify boards have this NIC, anyone knows anything ?


Don't you have the master? Should be the same NIC. I have not tested it (should have) but I have an add in card with Intel LAN lying around if anything fails.


----------



## Kha

Spectre73 said:


> Don't you have the master? Should be the same NIC. I have not tested it (should have) but I have an add in card with Intel LAN lying around if anything fails.


No I don't have the master, got the pro.


----------



## Spectre73

Kha said:


> No I don't have the master, got the pro.


If my Unify-X does not arrive tomorrow I will just use the Realtek port on my Master to test stability on F31k. Still hoping though.....


----------



## ManniX-ITA

I've used tons of Realtek NICs, they are not as good as the Intel but not bad.
The disconnect issue is a specific one, it doesn't happen with all RTL 2.5G.


----------



## Kha

ManniX-ITA said:


> I've used tons of Realtek NICs, they are not as good as the Intel but not bad.
> The disconnect issue is a specific one, it doesn't happen with all RTL 2.5G.


I read alot last night about it and people report lots of disconnects when udp packets are transmitted. On top of that, it seems the dreaded disconnect can happen outside of that, totally random and also making the other devices in lan to go totally crazy, including switches and routers. The issue appeared like 8 months ago, yet wasn't fixed, no matter how many new drivers Realtek rolled.

The best way to spot it is by downloading stuff with Qbittorrent which makes extensive use of udp protocol.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Kha said:


> I read alot last night about it and people report lots of disconnects when udp packets are transmitted. On top of that, it seems the dreaded disconnect can happen outside of that, totally random and also making the other devices in lan to go totally crazy, including switches and routers. The issue appeared like 8 months ago, yet wasn't fixed, no matter how many new drivers Realtek rolled.
> 
> The best way to spot it is by downloading stuff with Qbittorrent which makes extensive use of udp protocol.


I'll have to test on my skin now 

This little Santa's helper will hopefully swap the board tomorrow!




























The weight is quite impressive!


----------



## Spectre73

ManniX-ITA said:


> I'll have to test on my skin now
> 
> This little Santa's helper will hopefully swap the board tomorrow!
> 
> View attachment 2470876
> 
> 
> View attachment 2470877
> 
> 
> View attachment 2470878
> 
> 
> The weight is quite impressive!


Wow, congrats! I am still waiting....it at the final delivery center - no idea if they are able to load it onto the truck  Have fun testing!!!! Very jealous right now 

Just a question. What did the tracking tell you about delivery date? Just asking to rate how accurate the prediction is, because mine tells me 29./30.12.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Spectre73 said:


> Wow, congrats! I am still waiting....it at the final delivery center - no idea if they are able to load it onto the truck  Have fun testing!!!! Very jealous right now
> 
> Just a question. What did the tracking tell you about delivery date? Just asking to rate how accurate the prediction is, because mine tells me 29./30.12.


Same here but then I got yesterday a message that would have been delivered today...
And indeed this morning again a message with the exact timeframe, between 9 and 10am.

Not sure where you are but I'm in Frankfurt which is a central gateway for shipment, could have been easier to deliver.
The package is coming from Denmark.
Ugly packaging, just wrapped with paper around...


----------



## Kha

Grats man !


----------



## Spectre73

ManniX-ITA said:


> Same here but then I got yesterday a message that would have been delivered today...
> And indeed this morning again a message with the exact timeframe, between 9 and 10am.
> 
> Not sure where you are but I'm in Frankfurt which is a central gateway for shipment, could have been easier to deliver.
> The package is coming from Denmark.
> Ugly packaging, just wrapped with paper around...


Near Dortmund/Hagen it is already there, but probably too many packets all around. Doesn't help, have to wait and see. No mail, though. Keep testing


----------



## YoungChris

Can't believe I just stumbled across this thread.
Had my Unify-X for a bit over a month, sample board.


----------



## YoungChris

Here's the last screen I made with it:


----------



## KedarWolf

YoungChris said:


> Here's the last screen I made with it:
> View attachment 2470907


Is your memory synced 1/1?


----------



## Kha

YoungChris said:


> Can't believe I just stumbled across this thread.
> Had my Unify-X for a bit over a month, sample board.
> View attachment 2470906


So you're Sparky ?


----------



## t4t3r

Screw my 5900x's, I may need to get a Renoir...


----------



## Speed Potato

t4t3r said:


> Screw my 5900x's, I may need to get a Renoir...


Don't worry, Césane is comming on the desktop... as well as Zen3+ on 6nm...


----------



## KedarWolf

YoungChris said:


> Here's the last screen I made with it:
> View attachment 2470907


Can you show us an AIDA64 Extreme cache and memory benchmark, please?

Edit: And maybe Cinebench R20 and R23 benches.


----------



## YoungChris

Updated screen with bench OS.


----------



## YoungChris

Replying:
Yes, I'm Sparky. I don't have R23 or Aida on this OS. I can try R20 though.
No, you don't need Renoir. We need Cezanne.


----------



## Kha

YoungChris said:


> Replying:
> Yes, I'm Sparky. I don't have R23 or Aida on this OS. I can try R20 though.
> No, you don't need Renoir. We need Cezanne.


Sparky mate, heard that Realtek chip on the B550-Unify-X is a nightmare and disconnects like crazy, especially on torrents/udp packets. As it seems it happens with lots of other B550 boards with this Rtl 2.5gbe. Had any issue with it so far ?


----------



## YoungChris

The realtek lan? Nah, runs just fine here.


----------



## YoungChris

4350g and 4650g rebench with more aggressive memory.
















I put much less time into the 4650g because I spent a solid 4 hours getting the memory and OS dialed back in.


----------



## Phynicle

Any coil whine?

How does it go with 5000 series?


----------



## YoungChris

Don't have 5000 series yet, no noticeable coil whine so far.


----------



## Kha

Come on, @ManniX-ITA, it's been 24 hours already, give us some updates buddy. And Merry Christmas too !


----------



## Kha

@YoungChris , how big is the real difference in terms of mem overclocking between a 2 Dimm board and a 4 Dimm one ? I am more interested in lowering timings as much as possible @4000-4200 mhz, will I see any benefit with the Unify-X compared to the 4 Dimm Unify, for example ?


----------



## Phynicle

Kha said:


> @YoungChris , how big is the real difference in terms of mem overclocking between a 2 Dimm board and a 4 Dimm one ? I am more interested in lowering timings as much as possible @4000-4200 mhz, will I see any benefit with the Unify-X compared to the 4 Dimm Unify, for example ?


Same, otherwise can just get about any other board Tbh.


----------



## Kha

Phynicle said:


> Same, otherwise can just get about any other board Tbh.


Well, the formula is frequency * timing in cycles = final latency. And since at a given voltage, you can chose between a higher frequency or a lower timings, (at least theoretically) the lesser signal degradation from Unify-X improved memory traces should help with this too.

However, I could be very much wrong, hence the question.


----------



## YoungChris

Kha said:


> @YoungChris , how big is the real difference in terms of mem overclocking between a 2 Dimm board and a 4 Dimm one ? I am more interested in lowering timings as much as possible @4000-4200 mhz, will I see any benefit with the Unify-X compared to the 4 Dimm Unify, for example ?


This generation is not so clean cut. 4-dimm board have come quite a long way, and the Crosshair VIII Dark Hero is a great example of that. However, if you're really pushing tight, like 1t GDM Disabled with strong primaries and secondaries, a 2 dimm board will be easier to handle and may push clocks further.
If you're interested in overclocking and don't intend to use 4 sticks of memory, I recommend a 2-dimm board. It appears that a brand new Unify-X is less than a used Crosshair VIII Impact these days.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Kha said:


> Come on, @ManniX-ITA, it's been 24 hours already, give us some updates buddy. And Merry Christmas too !


Merry Christmas as well to you and everybody else 

I'll give a more complete feedback later, have to test stability now.

Quality of the board = top notch.

BIOS = utter trash. Full of bugs and horrible AGESA with broken CO and FCLK locked above 1900.

Coil whine: not even a shadow.

Realtek NIC, still have to test.

If you know where to find a newer BIOS or you can send it to me, I'd appreciate.

On the MSI page there's still nothing:





MSI Global English Forum


...




forum-en.msi.com





Very disappointing, this should be the top tier board and they release beta bios for entry level...



Kha said:


> Well, the formula is frequency * timing in cycles = timing in seconds, final value happening to be also the one that defines the amount of data per time unit. And since at a given voltage, you can chose between a higher frequency or a lower latency, (at least theoretically) the lesser signal degradation from Unify-X improved memory traces should help with lower timings too.
> 
> However, I could be very much wrong, hence the question.


It matters on signal integrity; IF the ram can overclock better, you need VERY good ones, you can do better than 4 x DIMMs.


----------



## Kha

YoungChris said:


> This generation is not so clean cut. 4-dimm board have come quite a long way, and the Crosshair VIII Dark Hero is a great example of that. However, if you're really pushing tight, like 1t GDM Disabled with strong primaries and secondaries, a 2 dimm board will be easier to handle and may push clocks further.
> If you're interested in overclocking and don't intend to use 4 sticks of memory, I recommend a 2-dimm board. It appears that a brand new Unify-X is less than a used Crosshair VIII Impact these days.


Yeah, my thought too, however in EU the MSI Unify(X) is as rare as a pink unicorn with golden hooves (hopefully will see more of it in the next week(s). If not, I'll probably go either Gigabyte X570 Master or B550 Master or even a CH8 (the Dark Hero appears to be even more vaporware than the MSI Unify).



ManniX-ITA said:


> BIOS = utter trash. Full of bugs and horrible AGESA with broken CO and FCLK locked above 1900.


Now that's a surprise, won't hide that I was expecting a perfect BIOS from MSI or well, at least a decent one.


----------



## YoungChris

ManniX-ITA said:


> BIOS = utter trash. Full of bugs and horrible AGESA with broken CO and FCLK locked above 1900.
> 
> If you know where to find a newer BIOS or you can send it to me, I'd appreciate.
> 
> On the MSI page there's still nothing:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MSI Global English Forum
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> forum-en.msi.com


I will be publicly releasing the Extreme Overclocking bioses I am given here:





B550 Unify-X Bios and Tools


I don't have much yet, more posts will follow. Bios A.05O: https://drive.google.com/file/d/11b96620j1yIy-8OiQXhsFW25czHiC3PI/view?usp=sharing Should allow for vdimm >2.0 and other fun. Not sure about AGESA version, will check when I can get back to my board.



community.hwbot.org




I will also be releasing any tools I use and eventually upload my benching OS there too.
I will admit that this bios was a bit odd to understand at first, but the last boards I spent significant time with were Z170 ASRock and Z390/490 EVGA, which both had very simple and straightforward bioses. Also, this is my first experience with AMD, which is a learning curve in its own right.
From what I know, bios is pretty hit or miss with basically all boards and vendors right now. I'll be able to better report my experience when my 5800x arrives.


----------



## KedarWolf

YoungChris said:


> I will be publicly releasing the Extreme Overclocking bioses I am given here:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> B550 Unify-X Bios and Tools
> 
> 
> I don't have much yet, more posts will follow. Bios A.05O: https://drive.google.com/file/d/11b96620j1yIy-8OiQXhsFW25czHiC3PI/view?usp=sharing Should allow for vdimm >2.0 and other fun. Not sure about AGESA version, will check when I can get back to my board.
> 
> 
> 
> community.hwbot.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I will also be releasing any tools I use and eventually upload my benching OS there too.
> I will admit that this bios was a bit odd to understand at first, but the last boards I spent significant time with were Z170 ASRock and Z390/490 EVGA, which both had very simple and straightforward bioses. Also, this is my first experience with AMD, which is a learning curve in its own right.
> From what I know, bios is pretty hit or miss with basically all boards and vendors right now. I'll be able to better report my experience when my 5800x arrives.


The BIOS is ComboAM4v2PI 1.1.0.0 but SMU checker can't tell which revision.


----------



## xVanilla

Hi all, while the unify- is on its way, I am breaking my head on which ram to get, pairing with a 5900x. 

any thoughts on the Flare X 3200 Cl14 32gb kit? or other recommendations?


----------



## YoungChris

xVanilla said:


> Hi all, while the unify- is on its way, I am breaking my head on which ram to get, pairing with a 5900x.
> 
> any thoughts on the Flare X 3200 Cl14 32gb kit? or other recommendations?








Team T-Force XTREEM ARGB 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 3600 (PC4 28800) Desktop Memory Model TF10D432G3600HC14CDC01 Desktop Memory - Newegg.com


Buy Team T-Force XTREEM ARGB 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 3600 (PC4 28800) Desktop Memory Model TF10D432G3600HC14CDC01 Desktop Memory with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Newegg shopping upgraded ™




www.newegg.com




It's supposed to be $220-230, if you can find it in stock, nab it.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

YoungChris said:


> I will be publicly releasing the Extreme Overclocking bioses I am given here:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> B550 Unify-X Bios and Tools
> 
> 
> I don't have much yet, more posts will follow. Bios A.05O: https://drive.google.com/file/d/11b96620j1yIy-8OiQXhsFW25czHiC3PI/view?usp=sharing Should allow for vdimm >2.0 and other fun. Not sure about AGESA version, will check when I can get back to my board.
> 
> 
> 
> community.hwbot.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I will also be releasing any tools I use and eventually upload my benching OS there too.
> I will admit that this bios was a bit odd to understand at first, but the last boards I spent significant time with were Z170 ASRock and Z390/490 EVGA, which both had very simple and straightforward bioses. Also, this is my first experience with AMD, which is a learning curve in its own right.
> From what I know, bios is pretty hit or miss with basically all boards and vendors right now. I'll be able to better report my experience when my 5800x arrives.


Nice!
Thank you, I'll check later and will let you know.

It's not only the AGESA which is the worst version around, similar as the Master F31k (but at least that was unlocked); literally riddled with bugs.

Now that's my feedback, mostly comparing to my Master Rel 1.0

_*PROS*_

*MANUFACTURING QUALITY*
Simply outstanding.
Despite not having a back-plate as the Master, its weight is probably 50% more.
The quality of the heatsinks is top notch.
After a 10 minutes run of OCCT the MOS temperature (guess it's the VRM/MOSFET) tops 67.5c.
No coil-whine detected at all by me.

*DIMM SLOTS*
This is probably what makes clear how massively Gigabyte screwed-up with the X570 Aorus line Rel. 1.0.
There's nothing different in the setup except the board and at idle the DIMMs are at about 35c; with the Master it was 40c and over.
After OCCT just 45.4c max temperature; would have been at least 51c-52c with the Master.

*M.2 SLOTS*
Another thing properly done; unlike the Master which has an heatsink only on top the Unify-X heatsink is also at the bottom.
This translates in 5-8c less in temperature.
My 970 Pro now runs normally at 53-58c while before it was around 65-68c.
After OCCT run 68c max while on the Master it was over-heating just gaming, over 75c.
The average temp for the first sensor is 46c while before it was 55c (it's the one reported by Magician).

Now (after OCCT run):









Before (almost idle):









Before the temps where mild with the 3800x, now it's hellish with the 5950x.

*CHIPSET*
Chipset temperature is amazing, only 43-46c in idle/normal usage.
Only with the OCCT run went up to 58c:










But that's only because the whole board went up to 58c.

In comparison the active cooled X570 on the Master (with Kryonaut) was idling at 59c:









Peaking at 72c under load, much more than the board.

*STABILITY*
The BIOS is buggy but without Curve Optimizer is wonderfully stable and butter smooth.
Not a single glitch, not a single stuttering or micro-lagging as with all the betas for the Master.

_*NEUTRAL*_

*FLEXIBILITY*
As ranted by BZ it lacks a bit of flexibility with the CPU mode and the 4 x M.2 slots.
Doesn't really matter to me cause that's how I'm going to use it.
Only a very few dozens people in the world will miss the 3090 SLI setup 
Also today everyone is more looking at the "style"; a PCIe raiser card for the M.2 drives would have been ugly.
Guess the decision to use less PCIe switches was cost-driven but maybe there are technical reasons.
I've given up on the x4 slot and peace of mind.

_*CONS*_

*DUAL BIOS*
As ranted by BZ, this board doesn't have a Dual BIOS and this is pretty incredible.
Very dumb and regrettable decision. That's NOT something that should have been cut to save money.

*TEMPERATURE SENSOR*
This is something I miss from the Master.
An external thermocouple to drive the fans was really useful for memory OC.
Not everyone wants to keep the fans at 100%, right?
Linking to the MOS temperature is somewhat a workaround but not the best.
Anyway doesn't really bother me cause I'm going to use a WC block for the DIMMs.
Would have been a great addition for a few cents, MSI goes cheap without much thinking.

*BIOS*
Indeed the best layout but too fancy and not enough practical.
It's quite annoying to go around with the keyboard., a real pity.
Hope there's somewhere a switch or a shortcut to disable the sluggish, slow and totally useless animations.

Didn't mess much but it's riddled of bugs; PBO settings like Limits, Boost, Scalar are not saved in the profile...
Every time the BIOS is reset you have to load the profile and re-set manually.
Voltages input is messed up; sometimes changing the SOC voltage changes the VDDP or the VDDG instead.
SOC voltage also has for some reason in the OC menu only 10mV granularity.
Sync between AMD OC menu and MSI OC menu is messed up; I'm setting all on both otherwise is booting with random stuff.
Some more minor weird stuff probably that I forgot.

The Fan management is okay but worse than GB; manual curve setup is difficult and there's no copy function, a big big miss.

Didn't have time to test much RAM overclock; more or less the same limitations as with the Master with this kit at 3800MHz.
But GB improved a lot on the recovery side in the last releases; this one was not able to recover or boot at 2133MHz even once.
ASUS still has a lead big time here, the B550 TUF Gaming can recover 9/10 without needing a clear CMOS.
I can understand BZ frustration; couldn't be worse than this and it's quite a low for a board made for memory oc.

The AGESA is quite awful; CO is unusable, had to disable it completely.
It's working on the benching Windows and crashing at boot on the main Windows install.
Not sure I want to risk to corrupt the main install.
Will test maybe with the beta version shared by @YoungChris.
FCLK is hard-locked at 1900 and in general I ran some benches and it's pretty slow.

I can live with it since it's stable.
But it's very disappointing the lack of MSI's commitment considering this should be the top tier board.

*USB*
A couple more USB ports on the back-panel would have been great.

*NIC*
Should have been an Intel 2.5G NIC not a Realtek.
Another big mistake considering the level and cost of the board.
Anyway I've just downloaded a 31GB update of War Thunder with DHT/uTP which is known to kill NICs without a single hitch.
No disconnection problems so far.
I'm starting to think it's more likely a lot of people doesn't know they have to disable the power saving, adaptive and offload settings in the driver...


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Of course with the B550 my SATA disks came back to life (fixed):










This is the X570 tragedy:










What is puzzling me is that I also ran a bench on the 970 Pro and got terrible results...










The random I/O is awful; it should be more or less like the bench run the 8th of April.

I'm not sure at this point if it's the board, the processor or some mess with Windows.
Didn't test it with the Master sadly.

Anyone else having this kind of issue with a Zen3?
This is the 1st M.2 connected to the CPU.

Same weird results also with CrystalDiskMark:










Before:










AS SSD only has issues with 4K write:


----------



## Kha

ManniX-ITA said:


> Nice!
> Thank you, I'll check later and will let you know.
> 
> It's not only the AGESA which is the worst version around, similar as the Master F31k (but at least that was unlocked); literally riddled with bugs.
> 
> Now that's my feedback, mostly comparing to my Master Rel 1.0
> 
> _*PROS*_
> 
> *MANUFACTURING QUALITY*
> Simply outstanding.
> Despite not having a back-plate as the Master, its weight is probably 50% more.
> The quality of the heatsinks is top notch.
> After a 10 minutes run of OCCT the MOS temperature (guess it's the VRM/MOSFET) tops 67.5c.
> No coil-whine detected at all by me.
> 
> *DIMM SLOTS*
> This is probably what makes clear how massively Gigabyte screwed-up with the X570 Aorus line Rel. 1.0.
> There's nothing different in the setup except the board and at idle the DIMMs are at about 35c; with the Master it was 40c and over.
> After OCCT just 45.4c max temperature; would have been at least 51c-52c with the Master.
> 
> *M.2 SLOTS*
> Another thing properly done; unlike the Master which has an heatsink only on top the Unify-X heatsink is also at the bottom.
> This translates in 5-8c less in temperature.
> My 970 Pro now runs normally at 53-58c while before it was around 65-68c.
> After OCCT run 68c max while on the Master it was over-heating just gaming, over 75c.
> The average temp for the first sensor is 46c while before it was 55c (it's the one reported by Magician).
> 
> Now (after OCCT run):
> View attachment 2471058
> 
> 
> Before (almost idle):
> View attachment 2471059
> 
> 
> Before the temps where mild with the 3800x, now it's hellish with the 5950x.
> 
> *CHIPSET*
> Chipset temperature is amazing, only 43-46c in idle/normal usage.
> Only with the OCCT run went up to 58c:
> 
> View attachment 2471060
> 
> 
> But that's only because the whole board went up to 58c.
> 
> In comparison the active cooled X570 on the Master (with Kryonaut) was idling at 59c:
> View attachment 2471061
> 
> 
> Peaking at 72c under load, much more than the board.
> 
> *STABILITY*
> The BIOS is buggy but without Curve Optimizer is wonderfully stable and butter smooth.
> Not a single glitch, not a single stuttering or micro-lagging as with all the betas for the Master.
> 
> _*NEUTRAL*_
> 
> *FLEXIBILITY*
> As ranted by BZ it lacks a bit of flexibility with the CPU mode and the 4 x M.2 slots.
> Doesn't really matter to me cause that's how I'm going to use it.
> Only a very few dozens people in the world will miss the 3090 SLI setup
> Also today everyone is more looking at the "style"; a PCIe raiser card for the M.2 drives would have been ugly.
> Guess the decision to use less PCIe switches was cost-driven but maybe there are technical reasons.
> I've given up on the x4 slot and peace of mind.
> 
> _*CONS*_
> 
> *DUAL BIOS*
> As ranted by BZ, this board doesn't have a Dual BIOS and this is pretty incredible.
> Very dumb and regrettable decision. That's NOT something that should have been cut to save money.
> 
> *TEMPERATURE SENSOR*
> This is something I miss from the Master.
> An external thermocouple to drive the fans was really useful for memory OC.
> Not everyone wants to keep the fans at 100%, right?
> Linking to the MOS temperature is somewhat a workaround but not the best.
> Anyway doesn't really bother me cause I'm going to use a WC block for the DIMMs.
> Would have been a great addition for a few cents, MSI goes cheap without much thinking.
> 
> *BIOS*
> Indeed the best layout but too fancy and not enough practical.
> It's quite annoying to go around with the keyboard., a real pity.
> Hope there's somewhere a switch or a shortcut to disable the sluggish, slow and totally useless animations.
> 
> Didn't mess much but it's riddled of bugs; PBO settings like Limits, Boost, Scalar are not saved in the profile...
> Every time the BIOS is reset you have to load the profile and re-set manually.
> Voltages input is messed up; sometimes changing the SOC voltage changes the VDDP or the VDDG instead.
> SOC voltage also has for some reason in the OC menu only 10mV granularity.
> Sync between AMD OC menu and MSI OC menu is messed up; I'm setting all on both otherwise is booting with random stuff.
> Some more minor weird stuff probably that I forgot.
> 
> The Fan management is okay but worse than GB; manual curve setup is difficult and there's no copy function, a big big miss.
> 
> Didn't have time to test much RAM overclock; more or less the same limitations as with the Master with this kit at 3800MHz.
> But GB improved a lot on the recovery side in the last releases; this one was not able to recover or boot at 2133MHz even once.
> ASUS still has a lead big time here, the B550 TUF Gaming can recover 9/10 without needing a clear CMOS.
> I can understand BZ frustration; couldn't be worse than this and it's quite a low for a board made for memory oc.
> 
> The AGESA is quite awful; CO is unusable, had to disable it completely.
> It's working on the benching Windows and crashing at boot on the main Windows install.
> Not sure I want to risk to corrupt the main install.
> Will test maybe with the beta version shared by @YoungChris.
> FCLK is hard-locked at 1900 and in general I ran some benches and it's pretty slow.
> 
> I can live with it since it's stable.
> But it's very disappointing the lack of MSI's commitment considering this should be the top tier board.
> 
> *USB*
> A couple more USB ports on the back-panel would have been great.
> 
> *NIC*
> Should have been an Intel 2.5G NIC not a Realtek.
> Another big mistake considering the level and cost of the board.
> Anyway I've just downloaded a 31GB update of War Thunder with DHT/uTP which is known to kill NICs without a single hitch.
> No disconnection problems so far.
> I'm starting to think it's more likely a lot of people doesn't know they have to disable the power saving, adaptive and offload settings in the driver...


Thanks for the review, was a very good read. Won't hide the negative bits mentioned by you are making me thinking at other options, like the B550 Master or even a X570 Master with a 1.1 or 1.2 rev. But truth to be told, now I am afraid that the B550 Master (being older than the Unify-X) has a different NIC revision, although the sheets tell both have RTL8125BG.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Kha said:


> Thanks for the review, was a very good read. Won't hide the negative bits mentioned by you are making me thinking at other options, like the B550 Master or even a X570 Master with a 1.1 or 1.2 rev.


I wouldn't go back to Gigabyte even paid big money.
When I removed the Master M.2 heatsinks I found the 970 Pro soaked in the oily slime frrm the thermal pads degradation...
Same as reported it's happening with the thermal pads on the VRM and the backplate.
Gigabyte stinks bad quality everywhere, the Unify-X smells hi-quality everywhere.

Yes there are a lot of maturity issues but that's stuff that can be fixed via BIOS updates.

The Dual BIOS is really a must have of hard-core bench OC... I'm not going to miss it.
Bad marketing decision sure, but I personally don't care for my use case. It's my 24h rig.
I've only used the 2nd BIOS on the Master once to recover the primary.
Could have done it with 5 mins more using the USB stick.

The thermocouple is a miss but a fan controller like the OCTO or an aquaero is the real thing anyway.

The NIC should have been Intel but my Master as well has a Realtek 2.5G...
Until I see otherwise, is working fine for me.

As I said; the temps are all in check and great, the system is butter smooth (let me remind you, 5950x with a Dark Rock Pro, it's looking for trouble).
That's what really matters and what I could only dream of with the Master.

BTW the on-board audio is top-notch as well, it's even better than the Master.


----------



## KedarWolf

xVanilla said:


> Hi all, while the unify- is on its way, I am breaking my head on which ram to get, pairing with a 5900x.
> 
> any thoughts on the Flare X 3200 Cl14 32gb kit? or other recommendations?












I've had really great results with these. On a 3950x.

*F4-3600C16D-32GTZN*
Trident Z Neo
DDR4-3600MHz CL16-16-16-36 1.35V
32GB (2x16GB)










F4-3600C16D-32GTZN - G.SKILL International Enterprise Co., Ltd.


Trident Z Neo DDR4-3600 CL16-16-16-36 1.35V 32GB (2x16GB) Engineered and optimized for full compatibility on the latest AMD Ryzen platforms, Trident Z Neo brings unparalleled DRAM memory performance and vibrant RGB lighting to any gaming PC or workstation with latest AMD Ryzen CPUs and AMD DDR4...




www.gskill.com





Also you can get these. They might be binned better. But they are 1.45v compared to the CL16 1.35v.

*F4-3600C14D-32GTZN*
Trident Z Neo
DDR4-3600MHz CL14-15-15-35 1.45V
32GB (2x16GB)










F4-3600C14D-32GTZN-G.SKILL International Enterprise Co., Ltd.


G.SKILL




www.gskill.com


----------



## Spectre73

ManniX-ITA said:


> Of course with the B550 my SATA disks came back to life:
> 
> View attachment 2471065
> 
> 
> This is the X570 tragedy:
> 
> View attachment 2471066
> 
> 
> What is puzzling me is that I also ran a bench on the 970 Pro and got terrible results...
> 
> View attachment 2471067
> 
> 
> The random I/O is awful; it should be more or less like the bench run the 8th of April.
> 
> I'm not sure at this point if it's the board, the processor or some mess with Windows.
> Didn't test it with the Master sadly.
> 
> Anyone else having this kind of issue with a Zen3?
> This is the 1st M.2 connected to the CPU.
> 
> Same weird results also with CrystalDiskMark:
> 
> View attachment 2471070
> 
> 
> Before:
> 
> View attachment 2471071
> 
> 
> AS SSD only has issues with 4K write:
> 
> View attachment 2471072
> 
> 
> View attachment 2471073


Just be careful with first and second benchmark. You are not comparing Q1T1 4K read here, which you should  The Samsung Magician Benchmark is troubling. Did you uninstall all AMD drivers? I suppose you did not reinstall windows? If not, at least do a DDU - it removes the chipset drivers, also, afaik. Additinally, install or reinstall the Samsung NVMe driver.

See if that helps.


----------



## Kha

ManniX-ITA said:


> I wouldn't go back to Gigabyte even paid big money.
> When I removed the Master M.2 heatsinks I found the 970 Pro soaked in the oily slime frrm the thermal pads degradation...
> Same as reported it's happening with the thermal pads on the VRM and the backplate.
> Gigabyte stinks bad quality everywhere, the Unify-X smells hi-quality everywhere.
> 
> Yes there are a lot of maturity issues but that's stuff that can be fixed via BIOS updates.
> 
> The Dual BIOS is really a must have of hard-core bench OC... I'm not going to miss it.
> Bad marketing decision sure, but I personally don't care for my use case. It's my 24h rig.
> I've only used the 2nd BIOS on the Master once to recover the primary.
> Could have done it with 5 mins more using the USB stick.
> 
> The thermocouple is a miss but a fan controller like the OCTO or an aquaero is the real thing anyway.
> 
> The NIC should have been Intel but my Master as well has a Realtek 2.5G...
> Until I see otherwise, is working fine for me.
> 
> As I said; the temps are all in check and great, the system is butter smooth (let me remind you, 5950x with a Dark Rock Pro, it's looking for trouble).
> That's what really matters and what I could only dream of with the Master.
> 
> BTW the on-board audio is top-notch as well, it's even better than the Master.


Interesting, I didn't have any issue with the M.2 pads / heat on my x570 Aorus Pro, thought the Master will be better built. Pfft, seems my options are pretty slim if I won't find the Unify soon in stocks..


----------



## xVanilla

YoungChris said:


> Team T-Force XTREEM ARGB 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 3600 (PC4 28800) Desktop Memory Model TF10D432G3600HC14CDC01 Desktop Memory - Newegg.com
> 
> 
> Buy Team T-Force XTREEM ARGB 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 3600 (PC4 28800) Desktop Memory Model TF10D432G3600HC14CDC01 Desktop Memory with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Newegg shopping upgraded ™
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newegg.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's supposed to be $220-230, if you can find it in stock, nab it.


it actually costs 290 euros in Germany at the moment, I think will stick to my 3200 CL14 for now and see how that goes. Haven't made up my mind yet if I should keep the x570 unify or go for the b550 unify, only going to use 1 GPU and 1 M2...


----------



## xVanilla

ManniX-ITA said:


> Nice!
> Thank you, I'll check later and will let you know.
> 
> It's not only the AGESA which is the worst version around, similar as the Master F31k (but at least that was unlocked); literally riddled with bugs.
> 
> Now that's my feedback, mostly comparing to my Master Rel 1.0
> 
> _*PROS*_
> 
> *MANUFACTURING QUALITY*
> Simply outstanding.
> Despite not having a back-plate as the Master, its weight is probably 50% more.
> The quality of the heatsinks is top notch.
> After a 10 minutes run of OCCT the MOS temperature (guess it's the VRM/MOSFET) tops 67.5c.
> No coil-whine detected at all by me.
> 
> *DIMM SLOTS*
> This is probably what makes clear how massively Gigabyte screwed-up with the X570 Aorus line Rel. 1.0.
> There's nothing different in the setup except the board and at idle the DIMMs are at about 35c; with the Master it was 40c and over.
> After OCCT just 45.4c max temperature; would have been at least 51c-52c with the Master.
> 
> *M.2 SLOTS*
> Another thing properly done; unlike the Master which has an heatsink only on top the Unify-X heatsink is also at the bottom.
> This translates in 5-8c less in temperature.
> My 970 Pro now runs normally at 53-58c while before it was around 65-68c.
> After OCCT run 68c max while on the Master it was over-heating just gaming, over 75c.
> The average temp for the first sensor is 46c while before it was 55c (it's the one reported by Magician).
> 
> Now (after OCCT run):
> View attachment 2471058
> 
> 
> Before (almost idle):
> View attachment 2471059
> 
> 
> Before the temps where mild with the 3800x, now it's hellish with the 5950x.
> 
> *CHIPSET*
> Chipset temperature is amazing, only 43-46c in idle/normal usage.
> Only with the OCCT run went up to 58c:
> 
> View attachment 2471060
> 
> 
> But that's only because the whole board went up to 58c.
> 
> In comparison the active cooled X570 on the Master (with Kryonaut) was idling at 59c:
> View attachment 2471061
> 
> 
> Peaking at 72c under load, much more than the board.
> 
> *STABILITY*
> The BIOS is buggy but without Curve Optimizer is wonderfully stable and butter smooth.
> Not a single glitch, not a single stuttering or micro-lagging as with all the betas for the Master.
> 
> _*NEUTRAL*_
> 
> *FLEXIBILITY*
> As ranted by BZ it lacks a bit of flexibility with the CPU mode and the 4 x M.2 slots.
> Doesn't really matter to me cause that's how I'm going to use it.
> Only a very few dozens people in the world will miss the 3090 SLI setup
> Also today everyone is more looking at the "style"; a PCIe raiser card for the M.2 drives would have been ugly.
> Guess the decision to use less PCIe switches was cost-driven but maybe there are technical reasons.
> I've given up on the x4 slot and peace of mind.
> 
> _*CONS*_
> 
> *DUAL BIOS*
> As ranted by BZ, this board doesn't have a Dual BIOS and this is pretty incredible.
> Very dumb and regrettable decision. That's NOT something that should have been cut to save money.
> 
> *TEMPERATURE SENSOR*
> This is something I miss from the Master.
> An external thermocouple to drive the fans was really useful for memory OC.
> Not everyone wants to keep the fans at 100%, right?
> Linking to the MOS temperature is somewhat a workaround but not the best.
> Anyway doesn't really bother me cause I'm going to use a WC block for the DIMMs.
> Would have been a great addition for a few cents, MSI goes cheap without much thinking.
> 
> *BIOS*
> Indeed the best layout but too fancy and not enough practical.
> It's quite annoying to go around with the keyboard., a real pity.
> Hope there's somewhere a switch or a shortcut to disable the sluggish, slow and totally useless animations.
> 
> Didn't mess much but it's riddled of bugs; PBO settings like Limits, Boost, Scalar are not saved in the profile...
> Every time the BIOS is reset you have to load the profile and re-set manually.
> Voltages input is messed up; sometimes changing the SOC voltage changes the VDDP or the VDDG instead.
> SOC voltage also has for some reason in the OC menu only 10mV granularity.
> Sync between AMD OC menu and MSI OC menu is messed up; I'm setting all on both otherwise is booting with random stuff.
> Some more minor weird stuff probably that I forgot.
> 
> The Fan management is okay but worse than GB; manual curve setup is difficult and there's no copy function, a big big miss.
> 
> Didn't have time to test much RAM overclock; more or less the same limitations as with the Master with this kit at 3800MHz.
> But GB improved a lot on the recovery side in the last releases; this one was not able to recover or boot at 2133MHz even once.
> ASUS still has a lead big time here, the B550 TUF Gaming can recover 9/10 without needing a clear CMOS.
> I can understand BZ frustration; couldn't be worse than this and it's quite a low for a board made for memory oc.
> 
> The AGESA is quite awful; CO is unusable, had to disable it completely.
> It's working on the benching Windows and crashing at boot on the main Windows install.
> Not sure I want to risk to corrupt the main install.
> Will test maybe with the beta version shared by @YoungChris.
> FCLK is hard-locked at 1900 and in general I ran some benches and it's pretty slow.
> 
> I can live with it since it's stable.
> But it's very disappointing the lack of MSI's commitment considering this should be the top tier board.
> 
> *USB*
> A couple more USB ports on the back-panel would have been great.
> 
> *NIC*
> Should have been an Intel 2.5G NIC not a Realtek.
> Another big mistake considering the level and cost of the board.
> Anyway I've just downloaded a 31GB update of War Thunder with DHT/uTP which is known to kill NICs without a single hitch.
> No disconnection problems so far.
> I'm starting to think it's more likely a lot of people doesn't know they have to disable the power saving, adaptive and offload settings in the driver...


great quick review! overall it sounds horrible, throwing a top tier flagship product on the market with such a horrendous Bios, baffles me. Maybe I should just stick with my x570 after all... what do you guys think, how long will it take then to get their **** straight and release a healthy bios?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Spectre73 said:


> Just be careful with first and second benchmark. You are not comparing Q1T1 4K read here, which you should  The Samsung Magician Benchmark is troubling. Did you uninstall all AMD drivers? I suppose you did not reinstall windows? If not, at least do a DDU - it removes the chipset drivers, also, afaik. Additinally, install or reinstall the Samsung NVMe driver.
> 
> See if that helps.


I have to check how it runs under the benching Windows.
Did not yet reinstall the Samsung drivers but I have re-installed the chipset drivers.



xVanilla said:


> great quick review! overall it sounds horrible, throwing a top tier flagship product on the market with such a horrendous Bios, baffles me. Maybe I should just stick with my x570 after all... what do you guys think, how long will it take then to get their **** straight and release a healthy bios?


Hopefully very quick 
Everybody is away for the Christmas break, I guess we'll see in the first weeks of January.
Still have to test the beta bios, could be there are improvements.


----------



## xVanilla

ManniX-ITA said:


> I have to check how it runs under the benching Windows.
> Did not yet reinstall the Samsung drivers but I have re-installed the chipset drivers.
> 
> 
> 
> Hopefully very quick
> Everybody is away for the Christmas break, I guess we'll see in the first weeks of January.
> Still have to test the beta bios, could be there are improvements.


from a layout / Sound Chip / features aspect, would this be the better choice over the x570 variant?


----------



## KedarWolf

xVanilla said:


> Hi all, while the unify- is on its way, I am breaking my head on which ram to get, pairing with a 5900x.
> 
> any thoughts on the Flare X 3200 Cl14 32gb kit? or other recommendations?


*F4-3800C14D-32GTZN*
Trident Z Neo
DDR4-3800MHz CL14-16-16-36 1.50V
32GB (2x16GB)

all the kits I listed are b-die.









F4-3800C14D-32GTZN - G.SKILL International Enterprise Co., Ltd.


Trident Z Neo DDR4-3800 CL14-16-16-36 1.50V 32GB (2x16GB) Engineered and optimized for full compatibility on the latest AMD Ryzen platforms, Trident Z Neo brings unparalleled DRAM memory performance and vibrant RGB lighting to any gaming PC or workstation with latest AMD Ryzen CPUs and AMD DDR4...




www.gskill.com


----------



## ManniX-ITA

xVanilla said:


> from a layout / Sound Chip / features aspect, would this be the better choice over the x570 variant?


Depends what you need it for.
Not sure about the sound chip, seems that both versions are using the same.
Features of course the X570 has much more but this also comes with additional troubles and higher temperatures.
The layout of the Unify-X is pretty the best, for a B550, more inclined to OC; 2 DIMMs or 4 DIMMs without the X and you get the Debug LED code.
But of course the biggest difference is the VRM, the X570 Unify is a 7 phases with 60A MOSFETs.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Ouch, pretty sure the slow 970 Pro is another BIOS bug. Hope it's not a board issue...

Thought internet got issues or the Realtek NIC started messing up.
But the pages couldn't load data from the cache, the local disk.
The NAS backup started and it's almost killing the system.
Never happened till I switched to the Unify-X, usually I don't even notice is running.

Have to test this beta bios and hope for the best...


----------



## KedarWolf

Deleted


----------



## ManniX-ITA

ManniX-ITA said:


> Ouch, pretty sure the slow 970 Pro is another BIOS bug. Hope it's not a board issue...
> 
> Thought internet got issues or the Realtek NIC started messing up.
> But the pages couldn't load data from the cache, the local disk.
> The NAS backup started and it's almost killing the system.
> Never happened till I switched to the Unify-X, usually I don't even notice is running.
> 
> Have to test this beta bios and hope for the best...


Oh man, I'm so relieved.
It's something messed up in the main Windows install.

From the benching install it's a whole different story, it's rocking hard:


----------



## Spectre73

ManniX-ITA said:


> Oh man, I'm so relieved.
> It's something messed up in the main Windows install.
> 
> From the benching install it's a whole different story, it's rocking hard:
> 
> View attachment 2471127
> 
> 
> View attachment 2471128
> 
> 
> View attachment 2471129


Haha, I completely understand you. Happy everything worked out. Thought so.


----------



## xVanilla

ManniX-ITA said:


> Depends what you need it for.
> Not sure about the sound chip, seems that both versions are using the same.
> Features of course the X570 has much more but this also comes with additional troubles and higher temperatures.
> The layout of the Unify-X is pretty the best, for a B550, more inclined to OC; 2 DIMMs or 4 DIMMs without the X and you get the Debug LED code.
> But of course the biggest difference is the VRM, the X570 Unify is a 7 phases with 60A MOSFETs.


tbh, I am just looking for a solid board, don't really need sli or multiple m2s, nor will ai really be oc for benchmarks either... but, since the unify is a recent release, I was considering it over the year older unify x570, since the built quality might be superior. 

if anyone has a straight reason why the x570 is the better board, except more pci lanes, I am very interested 

in the end, I guess it comes down to the same, the x570 will do its job


----------



## Kha

@ManniX-ITA, B550 UNIFY /UNIFY X AGESA 1190 BIOS 



http://nga.178.com/read.php?tid=24818215&rand=950



you need to make a Baidu account though, the extraction code appears to be the one under the link.


----------



## Nicked_Wicked

Kha said:


> Sparky mate, heard that Realtek chip on the B550-Unify-X is a nightmare and disconnects like crazy, especially on torrents/udp packets. As it seems it happens with lots of other B550 boards with this Rtl 2.5gbe. Had any issue with it so far ?


It shouldn’t misbehave, don’t those 2.5Gbe NIC’s auto-negotiate default to 1Gbe with 1Gbe switches anyway to avoid problems?


----------



## Kha

Nicked_Wicked said:


> It shouldn’t misbehave, don’t those 2.5Gbe NIC’s auto-negotiate default to 1Gbe with 1Gbe switches anyway to avoid problems?


Have absolutely no idea, hence my question. It however appears that the misterious disconnect is not related to the speed negotiation. Or well, at least that's what people are saying.


----------



## Yuke

I


ManniX-ITA said:


> Nice!
> Thank you, I'll check later and will let you know.
> 
> It's not only the AGESA which is the worst version around, similar as the Master F31k (but at least that was unlocked); literally riddled with bugs.
> 
> Now that's my feedback, mostly comparing to my Master Rel 1.0
> 
> _*PROS*_
> 
> *MANUFACTURING QUALITY*
> Simply outstanding.
> Despite not having a back-plate as the Master, its weight is probably 50% more.
> The quality of the heatsinks is top notch.
> After a 10 minutes run of OCCT the MOS temperature (guess it's the VRM/MOSFET) tops 67.5c.
> No coil-whine detected at all by me.
> 
> *DIMM SLOTS*
> This is probably what makes clear how massively Gigabyte screwed-up with the X570 Aorus line Rel. 1.0.
> There's nothing different in the setup except the board and at idle the DIMMs are at about 35c; with the Master it was 40c and over.
> After OCCT just 45.4c max temperature; would have been at least 51c-52c with the Master.
> 
> *M.2 SLOTS*
> Another thing properly done; unlike the Master which has an heatsink only on top the Unify-X heatsink is also at the bottom.
> This translates in 5-8c less in temperature.
> My 970 Pro now runs normally at 53-58c while before it was around 65-68c.
> After OCCT run 68c max while on the Master it was over-heating just gaming, over 75c.
> The average temp for the first sensor is 46c while before it was 55c (it's the one reported by Magician).
> 
> Now (after OCCT run):
> View attachment 2471058
> 
> 
> Before (almost idle):
> View attachment 2471059
> 
> 
> Before the temps where mild with the 3800x, now it's hellish with the 5950x.
> 
> *CHIPSET*
> Chipset temperature is amazing, only 43-46c in idle/normal usage.
> Only with the OCCT run went up to 58c:
> 
> View attachment 2471060
> 
> 
> But that's only because the whole board went up to 58c.
> 
> In comparison the active cooled X570 on the Master (with Kryonaut) was idling at 59c:
> View attachment 2471061
> 
> 
> Peaking at 72c under load, much more than the board.
> 
> *STABILITY*
> The BIOS is buggy but without Curve Optimizer is wonderfully stable and butter smooth.
> Not a single glitch, not a single stuttering or micro-lagging as with all the betas for the Master.
> 
> _*NEUTRAL*_
> 
> *FLEXIBILITY*
> As ranted by BZ it lacks a bit of flexibility with the CPU mode and the 4 x M.2 slots.
> Doesn't really matter to me cause that's how I'm going to use it.
> Only a very few dozens people in the world will miss the 3090 SLI setup
> Also today everyone is more looking at the "style"; a PCIe raiser card for the M.2 drives would have been ugly.
> Guess the decision to use less PCIe switches was cost-driven but maybe there are technical reasons.
> I've given up on the x4 slot and peace of mind.
> 
> _*CONS*_
> 
> *DUAL BIOS*
> As ranted by BZ, this board doesn't have a Dual BIOS and this is pretty incredible.
> Very dumb and regrettable decision. That's NOT something that should have been cut to save money.
> 
> *TEMPERATURE SENSOR*
> This is something I miss from the Master.
> An external thermocouple to drive the fans was really useful for memory OC.
> Not everyone wants to keep the fans at 100%, right?
> Linking to the MOS temperature is somewhat a workaround but not the best.
> Anyway doesn't really bother me cause I'm going to use a WC block for the DIMMs.
> Would have been a great addition for a few cents, MSI goes cheap without much thinking.
> 
> *BIOS*
> Indeed the best layout but too fancy and not enough practical.
> It's quite annoying to go around with the keyboard., a real pity.
> Hope there's somewhere a switch or a shortcut to disable the sluggish, slow and totally useless animations.
> 
> Didn't mess much but it's riddled of bugs; PBO settings like Limits, Boost, Scalar are not saved in the profile...
> Every time the BIOS is reset you have to load the profile and re-set manually.
> Voltages input is messed up; sometimes changing the SOC voltage changes the VDDP or the VDDG instead.
> SOC voltage also has for some reason in the OC menu only 10mV granularity.
> Sync between AMD OC menu and MSI OC menu is messed up; I'm setting all on both otherwise is booting with random stuff.
> Some more minor weird stuff probably that I forgot.
> 
> The Fan management is okay but worse than GB; manual curve setup is difficult and there's no copy function, a big big miss.
> 
> Didn't have time to test much RAM overclock; more or less the same limitations as with the Master with this kit at 3800MHz.
> But GB improved a lot on the recovery side in the last releases; this one was not able to recover or boot at 2133MHz even once.
> ASUS still has a lead big time here, the B550 TUF Gaming can recover 9/10 without needing a clear CMOS.
> I can understand BZ frustration; couldn't be worse than this and it's quite a low for a board made for memory oc.
> 
> The AGESA is quite awful; CO is unusable, had to disable it completely.
> It's working on the benching Windows and crashing at boot on the main Windows install.
> Not sure I want to risk to corrupt the main install.
> Will test maybe with the beta version shared by @YoungChris.
> FCLK is hard-locked at 1900 and in general I ran some benches and it's pretty slow.
> 
> I can live with it since it's stable.
> But it's very disappointing the lack of MSI's commitment considering this should be the top tier board.
> 
> *USB*
> A couple more USB ports on the back-panel would have been great.
> 
> *NIC*
> Should have been an Intel 2.5G NIC not a Realtek.
> Another big mistake considering the level and cost of the board.
> Anyway I've just downloaded a 31GB update of War Thunder with DHT/uTP which is known to kill NICs without a single hitch.
> No disconnection problems so far.
> I'm starting to think it's more likely a lot of people doesn't know they have to disable the power saving, adaptive and offload settings in the driver...


Thanks for the review but there is one thing i really dont understand. What tests do you run to get those temperature problems with the x570 Aorus Master? You sure its not a PC-Case problem? 

When i hammer my system with OCCT i get those temps:


----------



## ManniX-ITA

I'm not really so fond on opening a Baidu account...
Let's see if someone else will post it.

The BIOS from @YoungChris pops WHEA Code 19 like crazy.
Some bugs fixed in the BIOS UI.

Had a very good time OCing the RAM, it's awesome!
Struggling to keep the memory cooled down for CL14-16-16-14-28 but it works.
Couldn't even run TM5 for 1 minute without 70-80 errors with the Master.
The difference is impressive.



Kha said:


> Have absolutely no idea, hence my question. It however appears that the misterious disconnect is not related to the speed negotiation. Or well, at least that's what people are saying.


I still have zero problems; my guess is a configuration issue.
Not very widely known but to reduce latency on Intel NICs and avoid issues with Realtek NICs all options in the device for Offload, Interrupt Mitigation and power saving must be switched off.



Yuke said:


> I
> 
> 
> Thanks for the review but there is one thing i really dont understand. What tests do you run to get those temperature problems with the x570 Aorus Master? You sure its not a PC-Case problem?
> 
> When i hammer my system with OCCT i get those temps:
> 
> View attachment 2471152


Not a case issue, it's a Corsair 750D Airflow; same setup with the Unify-X now.
You may have a very good binning but that 40c is probably an OCCT mistake, I have seen only watercooled the X570 at that temp; check with HWInfo.
The 55c is probably right; what I missed to specify is that the OCCT run was Power mode: CPU and GPU, otherwise the chipset is not heating up.
Of course you need a GPU cooler type like my 1070 Armor, not a blower type and not WC.


----------



## Kha

@ManniX-ITA @Yuke you guys lost me completely, talking about the temperature of the X570 chipset ?!  If so, wth of transfer you guys do, mine on that crappy Aorus Pro was quite cool and I work in Premiere with hundreds of gbs and torrenting like crazy too lol.

Also, since you started the discussion, after 1 year of using it daily, I removed the ssd (1st slot above the graphic card) and it's radiator, but there wasn't any goey stuff melted or something there like you say @ManniX-ITA.


----------



## Yuke

Kha said:


> @ManniX-ITA @Yuke you guys lost me completely, talking about the temperature of the X570 chipset ?!  If so, wth of transfer you guys do, mine on that crappy Aorus Pro was quite cool and I work in Premiere with hundreds of gbs and torrenting like crazy too lol.
> 
> Also, since you started the discussion, after 1 year of using it daily, I removed the ssd (1st slot above the graphic card) and it's radiator, but there wasn't any goey stuff melted or something there like you say @ManniX-ITA.


he mentioned his SSDs hitting 70°C...thats why i asked about his temps in the first place. Hottest scenario i have is when gaming and my 2080Ti trying to initiate a meltdown...thats the only situation where i see my chipset and my ram temperatures go up too high for my liking (high 60s/low 50s)...bet i could prevent this with a more efficient card, tho.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Kha said:


> @ManniX-ITA @Yuke you guys lost me completely, talking about the temperature of the X570 chipset ?!  If so, wth of transfer you guys do, mine on that crappy Aorus Pro was quite cool and I work in Premiere with hundreds of gbs and torrenting like crazy too lol.
> 
> Also, since you started the discussion, after 1 year of using it daily, I removed the ssd (1st slot above the graphic card) and it's radiator, but there wasn't any goey stuff melted or something there like you say @ManniX-ITA.


I think the thermal pad issues are more related to the Master and Xtreme, they have the "better quality" parts...



Yuke said:


> he mentioned his SSDs hitting 70°C...thats why i asked about his temps in the first place. Hottest scenario i have is when gaming and my 2080Ti trying to initiate a meltdown...thats the only situation where i see my chipset and my ram temperatures go up too high for my liking (high 60s/low 50s)...bet i could prevent this with a more efficient card, tho.


The 970 Pro gets really hot... the controller can go up to 80-90c without any heatsink.
My fans are usually set for maximum silence not airflow.
While gaming it's hidden below the Dark Rock Pro and the GPU, there isn't much airflow there which is not hot air.
On the Master there's just a simple heatsink on top.
But the Unify has this giant heatsink on the bottom which is extending to the chipset area where there is airflow from the front intake fans.
Makes a big difference.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

xVanilla said:


> tbh, I am just looking for a solid board, don't really need sli or multiple m2s, nor will ai really be oc for benchmarks either... but, since the unify is a recent release, I was considering it over the year older unify x570, since the built quality might be superior.
> 
> if anyone has a straight reason why the x570 is the better board, except more pci lanes, I am very interested
> 
> in the end, I guess it comes down to the same, the x570 will do its job


The B550 Unify has the advantage of the much better VRM, fanless chipset and better SATA.
Even if not used for OC, I think it's much more solid than the X570 Unify and better than any other X570.
Otherwise I wouldn't have switched to it from the Master 

Even the cheap ASUS B550 TUF Gaming was much more smooth and trouble-free than my Master.
The reduced feature set, PCIe 3.0 link, lower temperature, easier PCB layout and generally being a newer revision makes the B550 a better chipset than the X570 IMO.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Unify-X is awesome, never been able to go below 270 with tRFC on the Master:










Fan on top the memory set at 1200rpm and below 50c at 1.5V is amazing:










Such a pity the BIOS is so buggy.
This profile works but on this Release BIOS it's having random training issues.
Only when rebooting, I have to switch off from PSU to get a proper training.
With A0501 didn't have training issues even with CL-14-16-16-14-28.

The BIOS layout is absolutely wonderful.
So nice to test stuff and quickly save & reload profiles.
Still have to explore most of the MSI peculiarities but I have to say, even with the poor BIOS, I'm already more than happy.


----------



## Kha

ManniX-ITA said:


> Unify-X is awesome, never been able to go below 270 with tRFC on the Master:
> 
> View attachment 2471246
> 
> 
> Fan on top the memory set at 1200rpm and below 50c at 1.5V is amazing:
> 
> View attachment 2471247
> 
> 
> Such a pity the BIOS is so buggy.
> This profile works but on this Release BIOS it's having random training issues.
> Only when rebooting, I have to switch off from PSU to get a proper training.
> With A0501 didn't have training issues even with CL-14-16-16-14-28.
> 
> The BIOS layout is absolutely wonderful.
> So nice to test stuff and quickly save & reload profiles.
> Still have to explore most of the MSI peculiarities but I have to say, even with the poor BIOS, I'm already more than happy.



Can't wait to see it live too, but sadly the B550 Unify/X (so far) is complete vaporware, the only etailer that sells continues to be this Proshop who delivers stuff only in some select countries. Tbh I am a bit concerned, since my 5900x has 3 more weeks of return / refund grace, hopefully will get it by then.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Kha said:


> Can't wait to see it live too, but sadly the B550 Unify/X (so far) is complete vaporware, the only etailer that sells continues to be this Proshop who delivers stuff only in some select countries. Tbh I am a bit concerned, since my 5900x has 3 more weeks of return / refund grace, hopefully will get it by then.


Such a pity, really :/ 
It's an era of paper launches...

Of course I had training issues... just noticed inputting the stuff in the Zen RAM sheet that I had switched RttWr and RttPark.
Not yet familiar with the MSI BIOS.
I'm surprised I only had the training issue at reboot!


----------



## Kha

Btw, I suspect that dude from the Gigabyte thread is trolling us hard. He asks for advice that he never follows, only questions everything and continue to whine, saw it happen plenty of times. Just reported him.


----------



## xVanilla

can you guys recommend me a memory oc guide for the x unify, since it should be similar to the x570 unify?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

xVanilla said:


> can you guys recommend me a memory oc guide for the x unify, since it should be similar to the x570 unify?


There's nothing specific but you can watch the BuildZoid streams, lots of good hints:


https://www.youtube.com/c/ActuallyHardcoreOverclocking/search?query=Unify



Guide from 1usmus:








AMD Ryzen Memory Tweaking & Overclocking Guide


Memory overclocking has a significant impact on performance of AMD Ryzen-powered machines, but the alleged complexity of memory tweaking on this platform, largely fueled by misinformation and lack of documentation, has kept some enthusiasts away from it. We want to change this.




www.techpowerup.com





Classic DDR4 guide:








integralfx/MemTestHelper


C# WPF to automate HCI MemTest. Contribute to integralfx/MemTestHelper development by creating an account on GitHub.




github.com


----------



## YoungChris

ManniX-ITA said:


> Unify-X is awesome, never been able to go below 270 with tRFC on the Master:
> 
> View attachment 2471246
> 
> 
> Fan on top the memory set at 1200rpm and below 50c at 1.5V is amazing:
> 
> View attachment 2471247
> 
> 
> Such a pity the BIOS is so buggy.
> This profile works but on this Release BIOS it's having random training issues.
> Only when rebooting, I have to switch off from PSU to get a proper training.
> With A0501 didn't have training issues even with CL-14-16-16-14-28.
> 
> The BIOS layout is absolutely wonderful.
> So nice to test stuff and quickly save & reload profiles.
> Still have to explore most of the MSI peculiarities but I have to say, even with the poor BIOS, I'm already more than happy.


Have you tried tighter subtimings? I believe your tRCDWR, tRP, tWTR, tWR, tCKE, and tWRRD can all go much tighter.


----------



## YoungChris

Kha said:


> @ManniX-ITA, B550 UNIFY /UNIFY X AGESA 1190 BIOS
> 
> 
> 
> http://nga.178.com/read.php?tid=24818215&rand=950
> 
> 
> 
> you need to make a Baidu account though, the extraction code appears to be the one under the link.
> 
> View attachment 2471140


Can you send me the bios in DMs or post it directly here please?


----------



## Kha

YoungChris said:


> Can you send me the bios in DMs or post it directly here please?


I don't have it, found this link on the internet and posted it here after I read it with google translate )


----------



## Yuke

ManniX-ITA said:


> Unify-X is awesome, never been able to go below 270 with tRFC on the Master:
> 
> View attachment 2471246
> 
> 
> Fan on top the memory set at 1200rpm and below 50c at 1.5V is amazing:
> 
> View attachment 2471247
> 
> 
> Such a pity the BIOS is so buggy.
> This profile works but on this Release BIOS it's having random training issues.
> Only when rebooting, I have to switch off from PSU to get a proper training.
> With A0501 didn't have training issues even with CL-14-16-16-14-28.
> 
> The BIOS layout is absolutely wonderful.
> So nice to test stuff and quickly save & reload profiles.
> Still have to explore most of the MSI peculiarities but I have to say, even with the poor BIOS, I'm already more than happy.


Is this a new pair of DIMMs? Those seem to be a pretty good bin...Id need 1.53V in BIOS for those timings.

I can run 252 tRFC with 1.49V in BIOS but CL14 is breaking my neck every time i try it out.

Also those temps man...i dunno but it seems weird to me. I dont have any dedicated fan for my DIMMs and i also run Karhu right now and sitting at 43-45°C ... and thats on the x570 Aorus Master that apparently has worse thermals.


----------



## Kha

@ManniX-ITA what do you think about CH8 ? Read alot of reviews, but you know how it is, from reviews you can't find much - they just test the board at stock settings and compare usb ports


----------



## Spectre73

Yuke said:


> Is this a new pair of DIMMs? Those seem to be a pretty good bin...Id need 1.53V in BIOS for those timings.
> 
> I can run 252 tRFC with 1.49V in BIOS but CL14 is breaking my neck every time i try it out.
> 
> Also those temps man...i dunno but it seems weird to me. I dont have any dedicated fan for my DIMMs and i also run Karhu right now and sitting at 43-45°C ... and thats on the x570 Aorus Master that apparently has worse thermals.


Regarding temps. I don't know what is normal. I can reach 50° easily With Karhu running, My case is badly ventilated, Even though I don't like them this high the temps seem not out of the ordinary.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

YoungChris said:


> Have you tried tighter subtimings? I believe your tRCDWR, tRP, tWTR, tWR, tCKE, and tWRRD can all go much tighter.


Not yet these are the timings that were working with Master.
I'll have to test again with the Unify-X.
For sure they don't like tRCD below 16.
tRDWR/tWRRD can be only 10/4 with CL14 or 4000MHz and above.



Yuke said:


> Is this a new pair of DIMMs? Those seem to be a pretty good bin...Id need 1.53V in BIOS for those timings.
> 
> I can run 252 tRFC with 1.49V in BIOS but CL14 is breaking my neck every time i try it out.
> 
> Also those temps man...i dunno but it seems weird to me. I dont have any dedicated fan for my DIMMs and i also run Karhu right now and sitting at 43-45°C ... and thats on the x570 Aorus Master that apparently has worse thermals.


It's an okay binning but not the best.
They cost half the price of the good ones...
Can run 4000 MHz at CL16 at 1.40V but they need much more voltage to go higher or tighter and then they get pretty hot quickly.
It's impossible to compare thermals with a different setup.
But I can compare 1:1 with the Master cause except the board everything else is exactly the same down to the bit.



Kha said:


> @ManniX-ITA what do you think about CH8 ? Read alot of reviews, but you know how it is, from reviews you can't find much - they just test the board at stock settings and compare usb ports


If you can stand the ASUS BIOS layout they are not bad.
The best is the Dark Hero but it's more expensive than a car 
ASUS is working a lot lately, adding features like the FMax enhancer.
Sometimes comes out they go cheap on some parts but didn't heard anything bad about the CH8.



Spectre73 said:


> Regarding temps. I don't know what is normal. I can reach 50° easily With Karhu running, My case is badly ventilated, Even though I don't like them this high the temps seem not out of the ordinary.


Thermals depends on many factors; I could run the Hynix DJR at 55-60c without issues.
But this kit B-die must be kept at or below 50c, depends on timings and voltage, otherwise drops errors.
Temperature becomes a problem earlier with high voltage and lower timings/higher clock.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

YoungChris said:


> Can you send me the bios in DMs or post it directly here please?


I asked and got it posted by MSI on the Beta BIOS page 






MSI Global English Forum


...




forum-en.msi.com


----------



## ManniX-ITA

LoL, what can I say else? 

*I LOVE THIS BOARD 








*

Still half way creating a stable profile


----------



## Kha

ManniX-ITA said:


> LoL, what can I say else?
> 
> *I LOVE THIS BOARD
> 
> View attachment 2471441
> *
> 
> Still half way creating a stable profile


Nice, what IF ? Is it coupled ?


----------



## skline00

ManniX-ITA:

Impressive! I'm trudging along with a X570 Unify housing a 3900x and a Rad VII both custom watercooled. I opted for 2 16g sticks of Gskill DDR4-3600 NEO ram and just use the XMP setting. Still very fast.

Tomorrow, I should receive a 5900x to replace the 3900x so I'll see how it reacts.


----------



## MageTank

ManniX-ITA said:


> I asked and got it posted by MSI on the Beta BIOS page
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MSI Global English Forum
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> forum-en.msi.com


May I ask which method you used to ask and get the BIOS posted to the beta BIOS page? I have the standard B550 Unify (Non-X) and noticed that the beta BIOS for my board has not yet been posted. I would like to give this AGESA 1.1.9.0 a try as well, feeling a little limited in my current testing.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

@MageTank just send a PM to *Pangolin *the moderator, he's posting the beta releases on the forum.

@skline00 Nice! Let us know how it goes, there's a lot of people here that is considering the X570 and would like to see how it goes vs the Unify-X



Kha said:


> Nice, what IF ? Is it coupled ?


Of course it's coupled!

Working really rock solid, I should have bought a better memory kit eheh
Still didn't validated it properly, only a couple of TM5 runs.
Can't get it below 53.0, mostly it's 53.1 but the bandwidth is awesome!

This A12 BIOS is super polished; couldn't find any bug yet. But I didn't check everything.
The CPU benching is not the best but ok.
Curve Optimizer works but a bit weird; negative count is limited to 30.
I think I'm running at -25/-15 with 100MHz and 10x Scalar.
There's a problem with the N-Body Physics test in Geekbench 5; it's scoring half what it should.
Have to test with FCLK 1900 but maybe it's an AGESA 1.1.9.0 bug.


----------



## Kha

ManniX-ITA said:


> @MageTank just send a PM to *Pangolin *the moderator, he's posting the beta releases on the forum.
> 
> @skline00 Nice! Let us know how it goes, there's a lot of people here that is considering the X570 and would like to see how it goes vs the Unify-X
> 
> 
> 
> Of course it's coupled!
> 
> Working really rock solid, I should have bought a better memory kit eheh
> Still didn't validated it properly, only a couple of TM5 runs.
> Can't get it below 53.0, mostly it's 53.1 but the bandwidth is awesome!
> 
> This A12 BIOS is super polished; couldn't find any bug yet. But I didn't check everything.
> The CPU benching is not the best but ok.
> Curve Optimizer works but a bit weird; negative count is limited to 30.
> I think I'm running at -25/-15 with 100MHz and 10x Scalar.
> There's a problem with the N-Body Physics test in Geekbench 5; it's scoring half what it should.
> Have to test with FCLK 1900 but maybe it's an AGESA 1.1.9.0 bug.
> 
> View attachment 2471480
> 
> 
> View attachment 2471475
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2471476
> 
> 
> View attachment 2471477
> 
> 
> View attachment 2471479


Wonderfull lol, so no WHEAs, nothing ?


----------



## MageTank

ManniX-ITA said:


> @MageTank just send a PM to *Pangolin *the moderator, he's posting the beta releases on the forum.
> 
> @skline00 Nice! Let us know how it goes, there's a lot of people here that is considering the X570 and would like to see how it goes vs the Unify-X
> 
> 
> 
> Of course it's coupled!
> 
> Working really rock solid, I should have bought a better memory kit eheh
> Still didn't validated it properly, only a couple of TM5 runs.
> Can't get it below 53.0, mostly it's 53.1 but the bandwidth is awesome!
> 
> This A12 BIOS is super polished; couldn't find any bug yet. But I didn't check everything.
> The CPU benching is not the best but ok.
> Curve Optimizer works but a bit weird; negative count is limited to 30.
> I think I'm running at -25/-15 with 100MHz and 10x Scalar.
> There's a problem with the N-Body Physics test in Geekbench 5; it's scoring half what it should.
> Have to test with FCLK 1900 but maybe it's an AGESA 1.1.9.0 bug.
> 
> View attachment 2471480
> 
> 
> View attachment 2471475
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2471476
> 
> 
> View attachment 2471477
> 
> 
> View attachment 2471479


Thank you for the information. Insane results by the way, I see you are using some dual-rank 16GB DIMM's as well. You've given me hope that when I get my hands on the Unify-X here in the states, I'll be able to make sub-50ns possible based on your results. Pushing 1.55VDIMM myself, but my DIMM's are on water and don't go above 40C so I am not too concerned, given they are rated for 1.5V by default.

Best of luck to everyone here with their overclocking!


----------



## ManniX-ITA

MageTank said:


> Thank you for the information. Insane results by the way, I see you are using some dual-rank 16GB DIMM's as well. You've given me hope that when I get my hands on the Unify-X here in the states, I'll be able to make sub-50ns possible based on your results. Pushing 1.55VDIMM myself, but my DIMM's are on water and don't go above 40C so I am not too concerned, given they are rated for 1.5V by default.
> 
> Best of luck to everyone here with their overclocking!


Let's see, I couldn't go below 53 ns and I couldn't push BCLK (everything slowed down like hell).



Kha said:


> Wonderfull lol, so no WHEAs, nothing ?


Sadly not the AGESA is still bugged, good for benching now.
As soon as you start using an M.2 drive tons of WHEA Error Code 19.


----------



## Kha

The current latency record is hold by @Veii with 50.1ns. Gogogo @ManniX-ITA ! 💪









Zen RAM OC Leaderboards


Zen 4 Sheet is sorted and verified submissions LOCKED each Thursday. Please provide proof of stability via Y-Cruncher AND a memory stability test, otherwise your submission will be removed. Refer to the FAQ for more info. MEMORY,PROCESSOR Username,Memory Latency,L3 Latency,DIMMs,Die Type,Rank,Me...




docs.google.com


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Oh no... I knew how to test it but I forgot. 

*There is massive coil whine.*

Couldn't spot it while running bench or prime or else.
But there's a quick method; AIDA64 cache benchmark.
Worst is L3 cache copy test.
It's like someone is sucking air from a straw... it's bad.
It gets much worse once PBO is enabled.






20201228-2008_Unifyx_coil_whine.wav







drive.google.com





Now what to do? Send it back? Ouch...

In the meantime I found out the max FLK without WEHA errors is 4000 MHz.


----------



## MageTank

ManniX-ITA said:


> Oh no... I knew how to test it but I forgot.
> 
> *There is massive coil whine.*
> 
> Couldn't spot it while running bench or prime or else.
> But there's a quick method; AIDA64 cache benchmark.
> Worst is L3 cache copy test.
> It's like someone is sucking air from a straw... it's bad.
> It gets much worse once PBO is enabled.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 20201228-2008_Unifyx_coil_whine.wav
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now what to do? Send it back? Ouch...
> 
> In the meantime I found out the max FLK without WEHA errors is 4000 MHz.


If it brings you any comfort, my B550 Unify (non-X) sounds exactly the same during the exact same tests. I believe someone mentioned earlier that you can to around with some of the switching frequency settings to mitigate it to some extent, but I have not personally tried this. I also ran into the same 4000mhz (2000 FCLK) limits on 1.1.0.0, so I am still pretty disappointed that this hasn't been addressed with the newest BIOS. Hopefully 1.1.9.0 alleviates some of the random training issues I was running into with my board, where it would train fine most of the time, then randomly fail to train.

If so, that alone would make the update worth it.


----------



## Kha

Well, that's pretty bad news, coil whine is a serious nono for me. If it's truly bad, I have one more reason to give a shot to the B550 Master. Hopefully it's going to be good, if not, I will return it in an instant and probably I'll try the x570 Master Rev. 1.2 or the CH8.

Question tho, @ManniX-ITA and @MageTank, regarding the coil whine: in what conditions it occurs (apart AIDA) and how strong ?

And another question for both of you: can you please download something big with Qbitorrent and see if the Realtek NIC behaves ok ? Everyone sais Qbittorrent is the way to go to test for the disc bug.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

MageTank said:


> If it brings you any comfort, my B550 Unify (non-X) sounds exactly the same during the exact same tests. I believe someone mentioned earlier that you can to around with some of the switching frequency settings to mitigate it to some extent, but I have not personally tried this. I also ran into the same 4000mhz (2000 FCLK) limits on 1.1.0.0, so I am still pretty disappointed that this hasn't been addressed with the newest BIOS. Hopefully 1.1.9.0 alleviates some of the random training issues I was running into with my board, where it would train fine most of the time, then randomly fail to train.
> 
> If so, that alone would make the update worth it.


Oh my... do you hear it doing something else other than the AIDA test?
So far I can't but I'm worried it could happen...

I had the random training issue with the previous A501 beta; not with the A00 release.
Could also run up to 4133 MHz, unstable, with the Master using 1.1.0.0.
This one seems quite stable except the WHEA Errors.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Kha said:


> Well, that's pretty bad news, coil whine is a serious nono for me. If it's truly bad, I have one more reason to give a shot to the B550 Master. Hopefully it's going to be good, if not, I will return it in an instant and probably I'll try the x570 Master Rev. 1.2 or CH8.
> 
> Question tho, @ManniX-ITA and @MageTank, regarding the coil whine: in what conditions it occurs (apart AIDA) and how strong ?
> 
> And another question for both of you: can you please download something big with Qbitorrent and see if the Realtek NIC behaves ok ? Everyone sais Qbittorrent is the way to go to test for the disc bug.


Except AIDA can't hear it.
Did some benchmarks, ran y-cruncher and P95 although not for long.
Doesn't seem to me like it's doing it with anything else but it's concerning.

I'm downloading a bunch of Linux ISO with qBittorrent, so far no issues.


----------



## Kha

One some asian forum they say "it's a screamer" and that it happens always when memory transfers are happening.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Kha said:


> One some asian forum they say "it's a screamer" and that it happens always when memory transfers are happening.


You can listen to the recording, that's how I can hear it from my chair 
No, it's like that only during AIDA cache test.
I've run endlessly TM5 and Kahru, never noticed any noise.


----------



## MageTank

ManniX-ITA said:


> Oh my... do you hear it doing something else other than the AIDA test?
> So far I can't but I'm worried it could happen...
> 
> I had the random training issue with the previous A501 beta; not with the A00 release.
> Could also run up to 4133 MHz, unstable, with the Master using 1.1.0.0.
> This one seems quite stable except the WHEA Errors.


I have not noticed it in any other application or use scenario. I believe it's related to cache and power-switching when cache is getting hammered. I believe cache speed is heavily dependent on vcore with Ryzen unlike uncore on Intel, so it shares the same voltage rails and power delivery. I highly doubt it is related to memory because I use my memory as a block-level cache for my SSD's to defer all mundane writes, meaning everything touches my RAM before it even hits my SSD, and I don't hear it at all. Whether I am playing light CPU games (Guild Wars 2, League of Legends, etc) or more GPU intensive titles (Cyberpunk 2077 benching), it doesn't manifest in those situations at all and I run on a very open test bench that is basically a cast aluminum frame with no enclosures whatsoever.

Still, it shouldn't be happening. I'll be toying around with various settings tonight and I'll let you know what I find.


----------



## Phynicle

In the chiphell link Kha posted , someone showed the gaps between the thermal pads and caps/vrm hinting that's the source of the whine.

Second pic. Clutching at straws here and I doubt this is the issue 





提示信息 - Chiphell - 分享与交流用户体验


,Chiphell - 分享与交流用户体验




www.chiphell.com


----------



## Speed Potato

Phynicle said:


> In the chiphell link Kha posted , someone showed the gaps between the thermal pads and caps/vrm hinting that's the source of the whine.
> 
> Second pic. Clutching at straws here and I doubt this is the issue
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 提示信息 - Chiphell - 分享与交流用户体验
> 
> 
> ,Chiphell - 分享与交流用户体验
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.chiphell.com


Considering that it seemss to happen in bench situations only it's not that big of a deal but it would be a strange design oversight if those choke thermal pads were to be too thin. Also this mobo is "made" for benchmarks, it even comes with "bench" feets do if it were to have coil whine while "benching" then it's strange and disappointing indeed.


----------



## KedarWolf

Phynicle said:


> In the chiphell link Kha posted , someone showed the gaps between the thermal pads and caps/vrm hinting that's the source of the whine.
> 
> Second pic. Clutching at straws here and I doubt this is the issue
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 提示信息 - Chiphell - 分享与交流用户体验
> 
> 
> ,Chiphell - 分享与交流用户体验
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.chiphell.com


Buildzoid said the VRMs on this boards are monstrous and you could run them with no heatsink on them, nada, with zero issues and they would not get hot, so I doubt that's the issue.


----------



## Speed Potato

KedarWolf said:


> Buildzoid said the VRMs on this boards are monstrous and you could run them with no heatsink on them, nada, with zero issues and they would not get hot, so I doubt that's the issue.


The VRM are not causing coil whine, it's the coils.... They physically vibrate. That is often mitigated by holding them down with a thermal pad to an adjacent heat-sink.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Phynicle said:


> In the chiphell link Kha posted , someone showed the gaps between the thermal pads and caps/vrm hinting that's the source of the whine.
> 
> Second pic. Clutching at straws here and I doubt this is the issue
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 提示信息 - Chiphell - 分享与交流用户体验
> 
> 
> ,Chiphell - 分享与交流用户体验
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.chiphell.com


I wanted to check but I was too much in a hurry


----------



## ManniX-ITA

I did validate the 4133 MHz profile:










I can hear the coil whine also while testing memory bandwidth on AIDA.
Not always and mostly on Read and Copy.
But I can't hear anything with any memtest or other memory benchmark like Sandra.

I remember years ago another board with coil whine issue that I tested with AIDA.
But on that one the coil whine was audible, even if much less, on many other heavy workloads.
I'll post on the MSI forum to ask clarifications from them...

The GB 5 low score issue was due to voltages.


----------



## Kha

new beta bios for all Unify boards, 1.1.9.0 galore


__
https://www.reddit.com/r/MSI_Gaming/comments/kmaldw


----------



## ManniX-ITA

I don't know maybe there are no WHEA errors at 2067 IF... I can't reproduce it with my benching install stressing the M.2 drive.
Maybe the root cause is the same which is crippling my 970 Pro speed.
I think I'll have to re-install everything from scratch, the board swap messed it up


----------



## Spectre73

ManniX-ITA said:


> I don't know maybe there are no WHEA errors at 2067 IF... I can't reproduce it with my benching install stressing the M.2 drive.
> Maybe the root cause is the same which is crippling my 970 Pro speed.
> I think I'll have to re-install everything from scratch, the board swap messed it up


That's what I would guess.
Regarding the coil whine issues. I would try to stress the board overnight with the workload with the most CW (AIDA cache test?). Some reported that this burn in solves the issue. I received my board monday, but due to time constrains I will test and install it properly the next days, Will report back if mine has the same whine.....


----------



## Kha

@ManniX-ITA Hey mate, no disconnect with Qbitorrent at all ? Did you check for events ?

I wonder if this issue affects everyone with this Realtek NIC or was just an unlucky batch that ended to all manufacturers...


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Kha said:


> @ManniX-ITA Hey mate, no disconnect with Qbitorrent at all ? Did you check for events ?
> 
> I wonder if this issue affects everyone with this Realtek NIC or was just an unlucky batch that ended to all manufacturers...


No issue at all.
I have tested also with default settings and it's working perfectly.
Probably there's something very specific to the B550 Aorus.


----------



## Kha

ManniX-ITA said:


> No issue at all.
> I have tested also with default settings and it's working perfectly.
> Probably there's something very specific to the B550 Aorus.


Hopefully not, mine just arrived )


----------



## Kha

Nah, is not specific to Gigabyte, but to the Realtek 8125 ; Asus, MSI and AsRock owners of boards with this chipset are also too reporting the issue.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Kha said:


> Nah, is not specific to Gigabyte, but to the Realtek 8125 ; Asus, MSI and AsRock owners of boards with this chipset are also too reporting the issue.


Then maybe it was a bad batch, can happen!


----------



## Phynicle

Still no availability of this board anywhere.
It's little brother the b550 unify has been out for a couple weeks here in Australia already


----------



## MageTank

Phynicle said:


> Still no availability of this board anywhere.
> It's little brother the b550 unify has been out for a couple weeks here in Australia already


I am in the same boat here in the US. Was able to get a normal Unify, still waiting on the Unify-X. Everything is showing pre-order or backorder until at least January 3rd.


----------



## Biggd0gg

Weirdly enough B550 Unify-X has been available at retailers for weeks here, but the Unify itself just arrived at MSI's eu warehouse on the 23rd of december. I guess they prioritized some markets with Unify, and others with Unify-X.
Using the B550 Unify here(7D13v112 bios), 1900 fclk is a no-go, but 1933, 1967 and 2000 fclk is stable enough to bench. 2033 fclk boots to windows, but usb ports struggle a fair bit. Plenty of WHEA errors though, about 1 per second at any fclk above 1867.
Are whea errors possible to eliminate by tuning vddg/soc voltages, or is it a pure bios issue?

Found an oddity in the bios - if you use the PBO settings under the OC tab they are not saved to your bios profiles, nor do they have any actual effect.
Have to access the AMD Overclocking menu from the Settings tab instead, although this limits boost offset to 200mhz and not 500mhz which is available under the OC tab.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Biggd0gg said:


> Weirdly enough B550 Unify-X has been available at retailers for weeks here, but the Unify itself just arrived at MSI's eu warehouse on the 23rd of december. I guess they prioritized some markets with Unify, and others with Unify-X.
> Using the B550 Unify here(7D13v112 bios), 1900 fclk is a no-go, but 1933, 1967 and 2000 fclk is stable enough to bench. 2033 fclk boots to windows, but usb ports struggle a fair bit. Plenty of WHEA errors though, about 1 per second at any fclk above 1867.
> Are whea errors possible to eliminite by tuning vddg/soc voltages, or is it a pure bios issue?
> 
> Found an oddity in the bios - if you use the PBO settings under the OC tab they are not saved to your bios profiles, nor do they have any actual effect.
> Have to access the AMD Overclocking menu from the Settings tab instead, although this limits boost offset to 200mhz and not 500mhz which is available under the OC tab.


I'm using the Unify-X A12 BIOS and except IF 1967 they are all stable till 2067.
But I get tons of WHEA errors above 1900.
I could run IF 2000 without WHEA but since I've redone from scratch the profile I get WHEA errors too at that frequency.
Either was random or something I missed.
Couldn't make it better with any fine tuning of voltages or C-State or else.
Unfortunately there's no AMD CBS or PBS menu in this BIOS; maybe DF C-States could have been helpful but it's missing.
They start to pop up when the CPU goes into idle voltages.
Have the same bug with PBO settings.


----------



## Spectre73

So I finally had time to install the board and reinstall windows.
I installed the newest A12 bios and gave it a go.

All in all I can second everything that @ManniX-ITA already said. The bios is still not mature but i am able now to run my ram at 3800 relative tight timings without any WHEA erros.

*LAN:*
- no problems whatsoever under normal usage conditions

*Coil Whine:*
- I was not able to hear anything. If you want me to test some special use case or stress test, just ask, I can run it today

*BIOS:*

this is the "mostly there" part. AMD overclocking menu is in two locations. They seem to be partly connected, but not in both ways, as far as i can see. Changing someting under OC Menu also changes the settings under the setup tab, but not vice versa (AFAIK) - still an improvement over the master. Either remove one menu item or connect them without any chance for error.
vSOC has two similar settings: "override" and "amd overclock override" - for me, override did nothing and only amd override did work
auto voltages are far too high for my linking. it sets vSOC an 1.2, vddp at 1.1 and both vddg at also 1.1 (if I remember correctly). you have to change that for 24/7 imho
PBO settings are weird. Setting motherboard limits changes PPT and TDC but *reduces *EDC to 130. That is even under stock 5800x (that is 140). Any setting under PBO apart from manually setting EDC reduces EDC to 130. Only way to get 140 is to disable PBO entirely (or set it manually). I have not played much with it, espescially not CO. I am taking my time here trying to figure out the intricacies of the bios.
. the amount of settings compared to the master is much reduced, but I consider that a good thing., maste had too much settings that nobody ever had a use for.

*Overall:*
I am really impressed with the board. Everything mostly just works. System is stable under 3800/1900. That is more I can say about the master. I do not specifically like the layout that much more than the master. The master suffers from some clutter because Gigabyte tried to enable everything, even if no one uses it. MSI has a leg up for the PBO menu - the linkage is nice and neccesary. With the master I never knew, which menu to use. The linking is a godsend, but still faulty, IMHO. That needs to be streamlined.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Spectre73 said:


> So I finally had time to install the board and reinstall windows.
> I installed the newest A12 bios and gave it a go.
> 
> All in all I can second everything that @ManniX-ITA already said. The bios is still not mature but i am able now to run my ram at 3800 relative tight timings without any WHEA erros.
> 
> *LAN:*
> - no problems whatsoever under normal usage conditions
> 
> *Coil Whine:*
> - I was not able to hear anything. If you want me to test some special use case or stress test, just ask, I can run it today
> 
> *BIOS:*
> 
> this is the "mostly there" part. AMD overclocking menu is in two locations. They seem to be partly connected, but not in both ways, as far as i can see. Changing someting under OC Menu also changes the settings under the setup tab, but not vice versa (AFAIK) - still an improvement over the master. Either remove one menu item or connect them without any chance for error.
> vSOC has two similar settings: "override" and "amd overclock override" - for me, override did nothing and only amd override did work
> auto voltages are far too high for my linking. it sets vSOC an 1.2, vddp at 1.1 and both vddg at also 1.1 (if I remember correctly). you have to change that for 24/7 imho
> PBO settings are weird. Setting motherboard limits changes PPT and TDC but *reduces *EDC to 130. That is even under stock 5800x (that is 140). Any setting under PBO apart from manually setting EDC reduces EDC to 130. Only way to get 140 is to disable PBO entirely (or set it manually). I have not played much with it, espescially not CO. I am taking my time here trying to figure out the intricacies of the bios.
> . the amount of settings compared to the master is much reduced, but I consider that a good thing., maste had too much settings that nobody ever had a use for.
> 
> *Overall:*
> I am really impressed with the board. Everything mostly just works. System is stable under 3800/1900. That is more I can say about the master. I do not specifically like the layout that much more than the master. The master suffers from some clutter because Gigabyte tried to enable everything, even if no one uses it. MSI has a leg up for the PBO menu - the linkage is nice and neccesary. With the master I never knew, which menu to use. The linking is a godsend, but still faulty, IMHO. That needs to be streamlined.


Nice!
Let us know about the tweaking; I have WHEA problems with anything above IF 1900 but I'm not sure if it's an AGESA problem or my Windows messed up.

For the coil whine use AIDA64 Cache & Memory Benchmark.
I can hear always the noise while testing cache, especially L3. Depending on settings also on memory.
Copy benchmarks are most though.

vSOC is weird; under some settings I noticed my vSOC was set always from a bit to a lot more than I did set with AMD Overclocking setup. With Override it's enforcing it no matter what.

The Auto voltages are mainly set by the AGESA or from the memory Try-IT setup (which is very convenient at least to check what settings you can start to test with for high IF).

Didn't play enough with the various PBO custom profiles; I'm setting them manually but they still get lost easily and not restore with the profile.

This A12 version is a bit too much trimmed down; in the A501 there was the full AMD CBS and AMD PBS menu, much better.


----------



## Spectre73

Just a little picture of my setup
















It is nothing special but I am not big into RGB and like simplicity. I moved away from my former custom loop (with soft tube) because it just gets too expensive IMHO. For me to go custom again I would only consider hard tubes but never did them before and it is just too expensive. Even as my main hobby.

The GPU is a placeholder (Vega 64) that I modded back to the bad stock configuration from my old fullcover WB until I can get my hands on either a 6800XT or 3080, depending on what is available for a decent price.


----------



## Spectre73

ManniX-ITA said:


> Nice!
> Let us know about the tweaking; I have WHEA problems with anything above IF 1900 but I'm not sure if it's an AGESA problem or my Windows messed up.


If my memory does not spit out any errors, I consider memory more or less set.
















Latency with a fresh install was down bei 1ns to 54.5 but after installing my usual apps (no boatware, maybe except razer synapse) I can not hold it that low.
I consider 1900 IF the optimum for the new Zen 3 and I do not want to increase vRAM. As I said earlier, I am not THAT much into tweaking. BTW, we are all enthusiasts here, to varying degrees and with a FCLCK of 1900 we should be well above 98% of all users, let alone your 2000+ tries....



ManniX-ITA said:


> For the coil whine use AIDA64 Cache & Memory Benchmark.
> I can hear always the noise while testing cache, especially L3. Depending on settings also on memory.
> Copy benchmarks are most though.


I just tested it one minute on my knees below the desk. Running the full aida benchmark I could hear coil whine for a split second. It was very noticable, but vanished as fast as it appeared. If there is a scenario under normal usage conditions where I could reproduce it, I would be worried, but other than this special benchmark, I was not able to reproduce it.




ManniX-ITA said:


> vSOC is weird; under some settings I noticed my vSOC was set always from a bit to a lot more than I did set with AMD Overclocking setup. With Override it's enforcing it no matter what.
> 
> The Auto voltages are mainly set by the AGESA or from the memory Try-IT setup (which is very convenient at least to check what settings you can start to test with for high IF).
> 
> Didn't play enough with the various PBO custom profiles; I'm setting them manually but they still get lost easily and not restore with the profile.
> 
> This A12 version is a bit too much trimmed down; in the A501 there was the full AMD CBS and AMD PBS menu, much better.


My next stop will be PBO tweaking, but my first try with normal PBO and basic 145/155/180 as conservative settings yielded no performance increase, not even above total stock settings with PBO disabled.
To get more out of the CPU I probably need to use CO. Under master -5 all core was already unstable, I will test it on this board to see if there are any improvements. Nevertheless I am quite sure that my CPU is a bad sample. 

The core "performance values" (event ID 55 in event viewer) are 150 for the best cores down to 127 for the worst ones.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Spectre73 said:


> If my memory does not spit out any errors, I consider memory more or less set.
> View attachment 2472470
> View attachment 2472471
> 
> 
> Latency with a fresh install was down bei 1ns to 54.5 but after installing my usual apps (no boatware, maybe except razer synapse) I can not hold it that low.
> I consider 1900 IF the optimum for the new Zen 3 and I do not want to increase vRAM. As I said earlier, I am not THAT much into tweaking. BTW, we are all enthusiasts here, to varying degrees and with a FCLCK of 1900 we should be well above 98% of all users, let alone your 2000+ tries....
> 
> 
> I just tested it one minute on my knees below the desk. Running the full aida benchmark I could hear coil whine for a split second. It was very noticable, but vanished as fast as it appeared. If there is a scenario under normal usage conditions where I could reproduce it, I would be worried, but other than this special benchmark, I was not able to reproduce it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My next stop will be PBO tweaking, but my first try with normal PBO and basic 145/155/180 as conservative settings yielded no performance increase, not even above total stock settings with PBO disabled.
> To get more out of the CPU I probably need to use CO. Under master -5 all core was already unstable, I will test it on this board to see if there are any improvements. Nevertheless I am quite sure that my CPU is a bad sample.
> 
> The core "performance values" (event ID 55 in event viewer) are 150 for the best cores down to 127 for the worst ones.


That's quite a bad sample yes...

Check the CO because I also couldn't go below -5 with some Master BIOS releases.
But I could do -35 with others.
The AGESA 1.1.9.0 seems again much different.
I can go down to -30 and -15 for the best ones.
Below -30 is locked out for some reason...

So far didn't notice the coil whine with anything else so I'm keeping my fingers crossed...


----------



## Hale59

Spectre73 said:


> View attachment 2472471


Different motherboards, but RAM is the same.

Running it at 1.40v in Bios, and HWiNFO shows at 1.42v
My motherboard ups the volts by 2 notches.


----------



## gymleader91

Does the default BIOS (7D13v10) have SAM support?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

gymleader91 said:


> Does the default BIOS (7D13v10) have SAM support?


Sorry I didn't really noticed if it was there.
But unless there's a very specific reason for not using it, the beta A12 is better on every aspect.


----------



## gymleader91

ManniX-ITA said:


> Sorry I didn't really noticed if it was there.
> But unless there's a very specific reason for not using it, the beta A12 is better on every aspect.


Thanks you for your reply. That's fine. I just found it interesting how mobo manufacturers specifically stated that SAM was in the BIOS release notes but not on Unify.

Do you think the Unify is a good board for stock operation? I know there are cheaper options but I just want a board where I do not have to worry about power delivery or boost clocks being an issue. It would also be nice to know if I want to go beyond XMP (2x16GB 3600C16) that the board will not hold me back. I already factored in the X570 Dark Hero into my cost so money really isn't an issue.

The real pro of the Unify right now is I can buy it from various places and it's in stock. The Dark Hero is just... non existsent and likely will be for another month or so. It's been a nice change to see retailers not scalping the Unify. It did make me think if this Unify is so good then why is it easily in stock? Shouldn't it be very hard to find?

The only issue with the Unify I can see is the Realtek chip where as the Dark Hero has the same Realtek chip plus Intel. Sure having 2x nvme 4.0 without restricting lanes is good on the X570 but I don't even know if I will benefit from this in games.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

gymleader91 said:


> Thanks you for your reply. That's fine. I just found it interesting how mobo manufacturers specifically stated that SAM was in the BIOS release notes but not on Unify.
> 
> Do you think the Unify is a good board for stock operation? I know there are cheaper options but I just want a board where I do not have to worry about power delivery or boost clocks being an issue. It would also be nice to know if I want to go beyond XMP (2x16GB 3600C16) that the board will not hold me back. I already factored in the X570 Dark Hero into my cost so money really isn't an issue.
> 
> The real pro of the Unify right now is I can buy it from various places and it's in stock. The Dark Hero is just... non existsent and likely will be for another month or so. It's been a nice change to see retailers not scalping the Unify. It did make me think if this Unify is so good then why is it easily in stock? Shouldn't it be very hard to find?
> 
> The only issue with the Unify I can see is the Realtek chip where as the Dark Hero has the same Realtek chip plus Intel. Sure having 2x nvme 4.0 without restricting lanes is good on the X570 but I don't even know if I will benefit from this in games.


I can say it's there in the A12 BIOS so it's not going to be a problem.
For memory sure it's not a problem, especially with the Unify-X.

The power delivery for the CPU is sure very good; I'm still a bit iffy on the coil whine but doesn't seem to be a real issue.
MSI for sure has the best BIOS; but it really matters if you like to overclock.

The Intel option is quite a nice advantage; I don't have any particular issue with the Realtek but there are compatibility issues with some Ethernet switches.

I like more, much more the B550 than the X570.
It runs cooler and being much more limited it's less prone to weird issues especially using PCIe 4.0 GPU and M.2 drives.

Also yes the X570 can run a 2nd M.2 with PCIe 4.0 but still using the X570 x4 link, it's shared.
I like more the option of sacrificing x8 lanes from the GPU to have them directly connected to the CPU.

It will not hurt the GPU but still I haven't seen a SAM benchmark x8 vs x16.
But I have the feeling is not going to change anything.

I think the hard to find is the Unify-X not the Unify.

The board with AGESA 1.1.9.0 beta it's not the best performer on the CPU (yet) but still very valid (I could get it at the same level of the Master with some tweaking) but it's damn rock solid.
Had always SATA drives corruption tweaking the CPU with the Master; I only got once this issue with IF 1933 MHz which is completely unstable for some reason.
Seems to be it's much more reliable.


----------



## gymleader91

Thanks for the info. Yeah I really think I will get the Unify. I know this isn't exactly a Unify question but do you ever think there is a chance that you cannot run an FCLK of 1800 with 3600 RAM on 5000 chips?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

gymleader91 said:


> Thanks for the info. Yeah I really think I will get the Unify. I know this isn't exactly a Unify question but do you ever think there is a chance that you cannot run an FCLK of 1800 with 3600 RAM on 5000 chips?


It can happen but I'd say it's very unlikely.
Was extremely rare with a 3000, should be even less with a 5000.


----------



## LionAlonso

ManniX-ITA said:


> That's quite a bad sample yes...
> 
> Check the CO because I also couldn't go below -5 with some Master BIOS releases.
> But I could do -35 with others.
> The AGESA 1.1.9.0 seems again much different.
> I can go down to -30 and -15 for the best ones.
> Below -30 is locked out for some reason...
> 
> So far didn't notice the coil whine with anything else so I'm keeping my fingers crossed...


I have to say that 5600X has lower number than 5800x that has lower than 5900x that has lower than 5950x (according that all the people that has posted them on reddit and other forums)
I think thats intended, its obvious better silicon should go to better cpus.
It would be interesting a thread with all people exposes there id55 performance chart for their cores.


----------



## LionAlonso

Btw @ManniX-ITA How do you detect sata corruption? I wanna see if i cause some with all my CO testings...
sfc /scannow?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

LionAlonso said:


> I have to say that 5600X has lower number than 5800x that has lower than 5900x that has lower than 5950x (according that all the people that has posted them on reddit and other forums)
> I think thats intended, its obvious better silicon should go to better cpus.
> It would be interesting a thread with all people exposes there id55 performance chart for their cores.


Indeed the binning decision is dictated by the profit they made on that specific model.
But I'm pretty sure the quality level from the tags it's not an absolute value.

Maybe it can be compared between same models but I'm not sure either about that.
My best core with quality level 216 would probably be eg. a 205 on 5900x, 195 on 5800x and 180 on 5600x.
I think it's only used to indicate the performance thresholds and wanted priority between the cores in the same CPU.
More cores you have in the CPU and more gap you need to differentiate, that's why higher counts have higher numbers.



LionAlonso said:


> Btw @ManniX-ITA How do you detect sata corruption? I wanna see if i cause some with all my CO testings...
> sfc /scannow?


You'll get a Windows notification message telling you there's something wrong on the disk and needs to be checked.
Properties on a disk, tools, check to force a chkdsk and see if needs repair.


----------



## gymleader91

ManniX-ITA said:


> It can happen but I'd say it's very unlikely.
> Was extremely rare with a 3000, should be even less with a 5000.


I was wondering if going for a 5600x/5800x meant that you had a better chance of running more than 1800/1900 since the data doesn't need to pass over to the other CCD.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

gymleader91 said:


> I was wondering if going for a 5600x/5800x meant that you had a better chance of running more than 1800/1900 since the data doesn't need to pass over to the other CCD.


Generally yes, it's much easier due to the single CCD.
But the worse binning for the CCDs and the IOD is counter balancing a bit.
Sometimes you don't get lucky and get a very bad binning.


----------



## gymleader91

Last question. Does it matter what CPU 8 pin you connect at the top left? Obviously we don't need both plugged in. My logic states it should be the right most since this is closer to the CPU, lol.

Also I don't know if anyone brought this up but I looked at the Unify and Unify-x side by side. It appears that the X has the RAM slot locations of slot 2 and 3 on the Unify. I would have thought they would have RAM slot location of 1 and 2 and just removed slot 3 and 4 for the 2 DIMM.


----------



## bwana

Spectre73 said:


> Just a little picture of my setup
> View attachment 2472469
> View attachment 2472468
> 
> 
> It is nothing special but I am not big into RGB and like simplicity. I moved away from my former custom loop (with soft tube) because it just gets too expensive IMHO. For me to go custom again I would only consider hard tubes but never did them before and it is just too expensive. Even as my main hobby.
> 
> The GPU is a placeholder (Vega 64) that I modded back to the bad stock configuration from my old fullcover WB until I can get my hands on either a 6800XT or 3080, depending on what is available for a decent price.


Is that a silent base case?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

gymleader91 said:


> Last question. Does it matter what CPU 8 pin you connect at the top left? Obviously we don't need both plugged in. My logic states it should be the right most since this is closer to the CPU, lol.
> 
> Also I don't know if anyone brought this up but I looked at the Unify and Unify-x side by side. It appears that the X has the RAM slot locations of slot 2 and 3 on the Unify. I would have thought they would have RAM slot location of 1 and 2 and just removed slot 3 and 4 for the 2 DIMM.


Guess it's the outer most as is labelled CPU_PWR1:










I have connected all three but very likely just plugging one should be enough.

The Unify-X has a different PCB without daisy-chain so it's not really relevant to compare the slots positions against the Unify.


----------



## Stag

Does 6pin power(pwr1)on motherboard supply power to pci e1?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Stag said:


> Does 6pin power(pwr1)on motherboard supply power to pci e1?


Guess so, it's not specified anywhere exactly.


----------



## Pedros

Great results Mannix-ITA...
I've been fighting to swap my x570 Unify for the Unify-x ... but with the 4x8 I have, would make me buy new memory and my budget went for a cooling project...grrrr

Did you notice if the ram needed less voltage for stability vs your last mobo?

Btw, do you have any advice on tweaks to lower tRCD on 4x8 other than dram voltage?


----------



## KedarWolf

Stag said:


> Does 6pin power(pwr1)on motherboard supply power to pci e1?


Yes, it does. Buildzoid talks about it in his Unify-X breakdown.


----------



## GamBoTron

Hey!

*First of all, i read the entire thread ,only to understand like 30% of it (im a noob when it comes to OC and motherboards in general) and still learned a lot, so thanks for all the great info. The level of knowledge here is simply stunning to a rookie like me.*

I am doing my first PC build with a 5950x (already purchased) and have been looking for the "correct" motherboard for about 1 month now. After looking at several models i found the Unify models very interesting and i also heard praise from Buildzoid on it.

So i have more or less decided to buy either the x570 Unify or the B550 Unify x(actually found both in stock). The only uncertainty i have left on what model i should go for and what model would be the easiest to build on. I already read Mannix-ITA view on the matter and the build quality being superior on the b550 x, but if there is other reasons why you would want , say , a x570 unify over the b550 unify x i would love to hear it.

if anyone could kind of bump me in the right direction, that would be great so i can take my final judgement on it.

I have some questions regarding the decision also:

I am planning on using two SSD drives simultaneously , as i want a good bunch of memory for my use (video editing and music production + gaming) . The SSD'S that i have found and considering are these models:

Samsung 970 EVO Plus 1TB *and *the Gigabyte Aourus 1TB PCie 4.0 Nvme m.2 2280

So will i be limited to only use one of this at a time with the Unify B500 X /x570 unify or can i use both at the same time?

The reason why im going for SSD is because my GPU is huge and it apparently may block one of my drive bays. any video cards over 294mm may block drive bays in my case and my GPU is around 320mm long (RTX 3080 10 GB EAGLE OC Video Card)

*Just to clarify*: i am not intending to OC hard, but it is something i find interesting and would like to learn more about, therefore the Unify seems like a great option.

Any feedback would be greatly appreciated!


----------



## KedarWolf

LionAlonso said:


> Btw @ManniX-ITA How do you detect sata corruption? I wanna see if i cause some with all my CO testings...
> sfc /scannow?





Code:


chkdsk c: /r

in an admin command prompt with c: or whatever being the drive you want to scan. Choose no when it asks if you want to dismount the drive and yes when it asks if you want to run it next time you boot. Then check Event Viewer and the logs if it found any bad sectors. Stuff it fixes is fine, if it can't fix it or reallocates it, a bad sector and dying hard disk.

Google how to use Event Viewer for chkdsk logs.

Just know on a large traditional hard drive it can take all night or longer to run. On an SSD is a lot quicker, maybe 20 minutes at most.


----------



## Biggd0gg

GamBoTron said:


> Hey!
> 
> *First of all, i read the entire thread ,only to understand like 30% of it (im a noob when it comes to OC and motherboards in general) and still learned a lot, so thanks for all the great info. The level of knowledge here is simply stunning to a rookie like me.*
> 
> I am doing my first PC build with a 5950x (already purchased) and have been looking for the "correct" motherboard for about 1 month now. After looking at several models i found the Unify models very interesting and i also heard praise from Buildzoid on it.
> 
> So i have more or less decided to buy either the x570 Unify or the B550 Unify x(actually found both in stock). The only uncertainty i have left on what model i should go for and what model would be the easiest to build on. I already read Mannix-ITA view on the matter and the build quality being superior on the b550 x, but if there is other reasons why you would want , say , a x570 unify over the b550 unify x i would love to hear it.
> 
> if anyone could kind of bump me in the right direction, that would be great so i can take my final judgement on it.
> 
> I have some questions regarding the decision also:
> 
> I am planning on using two SSD drives simultaneously , as i want a good bunch of memory for my use (video editing and music production + gaming) . The SSD'S that i have found and considering are these models:
> 
> Samsung 970 EVO Plus 1TB *and *the Gigabyte Aourus 1TB PCie 4.0 Nvme m.2 2280
> 
> So will i be limited to only use one of this at a time with the Unify B500 X /x570 unify or can i use both at the same time?
> 
> The reason why im going for SSD is because my GPU is huge and it apparently may block one of my drive bays. any video cards over 294mm may block drive bays in my case and my GPU is around 320mm long (RTX 3080 10 GB EAGLE OC Video Card)
> 
> *Just to clarify*: i am not intending to OC hard, but it is something i find interesting and would like to learn more about, therefore the Unify seems like a great option.
> 
> Any feedback would be greatly appreciated!


In general, the primary difference between X570 and B550 motherboards is that B550 motherboards generally only support one pcie 4.0 ssd(they usually support one or more pcie 3.0 ssd's as well). X570 will support several pcie 4.0 ssd's(without a compromise meaning your gpu slot runs at x8 instead of x16). As your 970 evo plus is 3.0, B550 Unify will serve you fine. B550 Unify also lets you run more of your ssd slots as pcie 4.0, but that means lowering your gpu slot from x16 to x8.

B550 Unify can be configured in multiple ways, for example:
gpu 4.0 x16
one m.2 4.0
three m.2 3.0
four sata

or

gpu 4.0 x8
three m.2 4.0
one m.2 3.0
four sata

or

gpu 4.0 x16
one m.2 4.0
two m.2 3.0
six sata

The last configuration is probably the one that suits you best.


----------



## GamBoTron

Biggd0gg said:


> In general, the primary difference between X570 and B550 motherboards is that B550 motherboards generally only support one pcie 4.0 ssd(they usually support one or more pcie 3.0 ssd's as well). X570 will support several pcie 4.0 ssd's(without a compromise meaning your gpu slot runs at x8 instead of x16). As your 970 evo plus is 3.0, B550 Unify will serve you fine. B550 Unify also lets you run more of your ssd slots as pcie 4.0, but that means lowering your gpu slot from x16 to x8.
> 
> B550 Unify can be configured in multiple ways, for example:
> gpu 4.0 x16
> one m.2 4.0
> three m.2 3.0
> four sata
> 
> or
> 
> gpu 4.0 x8
> three m.2 4.0
> one m.2 3.0
> four sata
> 
> or
> 
> gpu 4.0 x16
> one m.2 4.0
> two m.2 3.0
> six sata
> 
> The last configuration is probably the one that suits you best.


Thanks for the reply Biggd0gg!

stayed up hoping that someone would reply, and this solved it for me as it was what i was most uncertain about regarding this Motherboard.

From what i read lowering your gpu slot from x16 to x8 isnt anything too critical on performance (at least that i could find from users) so im not too worried about it.

Just placed my order of b550 unify-x and the ssd's. Now only thing need to figure out is what Ram and Cooling i should go for + PSU and im set! 😁 (hopefully i dont get too pounded by bios issues and WHEA errors, fingers crossed)

again, thanks!


----------



## PJVol

Spectre73 said:


> The core "performance values" (event ID 55 in event viewer) are 150 for the best cores down to 127 for the worst ones.


If these are at default seetings boot then they are not bad. Mine are 125 to 140 at default, though pbo "boost override" adds an offset, so that with auto OC +375 in my current setup, they are 136 to 152 now.
Anyway, my understanding is that the proper core quality might be defined as the voltage (or better power) needed for a certain unified workload at the same temperature and capped frequency, tested with fixed core affinity to eliminate other cores' impact.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Pedros said:


> Great results Mannix-ITA...
> I've been fighting to swap my x570 Unify for the Unify-x ... but with the 4x8 I have, would make me buy new memory and my budget went for a cooling project...grrrr
> 
> Did you notice if the ram needed less voltage for stability vs your last mobo?
> 
> Btw, do you have any advice on tweaks to lower tRCD on 4x8 other than dram voltage?


I have a cooling project running as well, understand 

My last board was a Master Rel. 1.0, nightmare for RAM.
The DIMMS they have a thermal sensor, they were running 5-8c hotter at the same voltage.
I had to put a fan on the top position blowing down the RAM to avoid errors at anything above 1.45V.
Couldn't go either at 3800CL-14-16 or at 4000CL16-18 stable or below 270 tRFC.
Bit more voltage and it was getting hot and impossible to stabilize.

But that was really an exception, I guess against a "normal" board the difference is less staggering.

Right now in idle the DIMMs are around 33c now and HWInfo recorded 28.3c as lowest temp.
Running at 3800 CL-14-16-16-30-34-252T at 1.52V with the fan blowing down at 1300rpm.
I could lower the fan rpm to 1100rpm.


Can't help with the tRCD sorry... that I know of the only solution is a massive injection of voltage 
Have to run as well 4000MHz and over with tRCDRD at 18.
When my cooling project is done and I'll have water cooling for the DIMMs then I'll pump the voltage.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

GamBoTron said:


> Hey!
> 
> *First of all, i read the entire thread ,only to understand like 30% of it (im a noob when it comes to OC and motherboards in general) and still learned a lot, so thanks for all the great info. The level of knowledge here is simply stunning to a rookie like me.*
> 
> I am doing my first PC build with a 5950x (already purchased) and have been looking for the "correct" motherboard for about 1 month now. After looking at several models i found the Unify models very interesting and i also heard praise from Buildzoid on it.
> 
> So i have more or less decided to buy either the x570 Unify or the B550 Unify x(actually found both in stock). The only uncertainty i have left on what model i should go for and what model would be the easiest to build on. I already read Mannix-ITA view on the matter and the build quality being superior on the b550 x, but if there is other reasons why you would want , say , a x570 unify over the b550 unify x i would love to hear it.
> 
> if anyone could kind of bump me in the right direction, that would be great so i can take my final judgement on it.
> 
> I have some questions regarding the decision also:
> 
> I am planning on using two SSD drives simultaneously , as i want a good bunch of memory for my use (video editing and music production + gaming) . The SSD'S that i have found and considering are these models:
> 
> Samsung 970 EVO Plus 1TB *and *the Gigabyte Aourus 1TB PCie 4.0 Nvme m.2 2280
> 
> So will i be limited to only use one of this at a time with the Unify B500 X /x570 unify or can i use both at the same time?
> 
> The reason why im going for SSD is because my GPU is huge and it apparently may block one of my drive bays. any video cards over 294mm may block drive bays in my case and my GPU is around 320mm long (RTX 3080 10 GB EAGLE OC Video Card)
> 
> *Just to clarify*: i am not intending to OC hard, but it is something i find interesting and would like to learn more about, therefore the Unify seems like a great option.
> 
> Any feedback would be greatly appreciated!


It's important to understand how the B550 Unify works towards the M.2 slots:










If you read the table above the important hint is that you get multiple Gen4 SSDs only in CPU mode with the GPU at x8.

In chipset mode mode you only get one Gen4 and most importantly if you use any PCIe slot the only available additional M.2 is then a Gen3 x2.
Clearly this is not a board made to use add-on PCIe cards with the GPU at x16; there are other B550s that can handle a 2nd Gen3 at x4 and in general have a better handling.
With this board if you want to use everything you have to set the GPU to use x8 lanes.

Setting a Gen4 card to x8 is not a problem; it's like running at Gen3 x16. 
Unless running at x8 is impacting the SAM/BAR but I've never seen a benchmark about it yet.

The X570 is indeed a better option if you want to use PCIe add-on cards.
But still all the additional PCIe slots and everything connected to the chipset (USB, LAN, WIFI, 2nd/3rd M.2, etc) all goes through a single Gen4 x4 link to the CPU.
Which is indeed better than going through the Gen3 x4 link for the B550 but much inferior than directly connected to the CPU.


*Beware the B550 Unify-X (and also the B550 Unify as reported) VRM is suffering from coil whine; if you are sensible to it avoid to buy.*

Got used recognize the pattern and tonality and I can spot it almost always when there's load.
It's not huge but it's there; I'm not particularly pleased but it's not annoying me too much so far.
I'm quite conflicted but I love the board otherwise.

There's coil whine every time there's some load; during POST, booting Windows, starting a benchmark...
It's a series of tiny, weird sounds, like a Notebook CD-ROMs, a mouse squeaking, etc
I guess who's really sensible would totally freak out about it. So be warned!


----------



## GamBoTron

ManniX-ITA said:


> It's important to understand how the B550 Unify works towards the M.2 slots:
> 
> View attachment 2472740
> 
> 
> If you read the table above the important hint is that you get multiple Gen4 SSDs only in CPU mode with the GPU at x8.
> 
> In chipset mode mode you only get one Gen4 and most importantly if you use any PCIe slot the only available additional M.2 is then a Gen3 x2.
> Clearly this is not a board made to use add-on PCIe cards with the GPU at x16; there are other B550s that can handle a 2nd Gen3 at x4 and in general have a better handling.
> With this board if you want to use everything you have to set the GPU to use x8 lanes.
> 
> Setting a Gen4 card to x8 is not a problem; it's like running at Gen3 x16.
> Unless running at x8 is impacting the SAM/BAR but I've never seen a benchmark about it yet.
> 
> The X570 is indeed a better option if you want to use PCIe add-on cards.
> But still all the additional PCIe slots and everything connected to the chipset (USB, LAN, WIFI, 2nd/3rd M.2, etc) all goes through a single Gen4 x4 link to the CPU.
> Which is indeed better than going through the Gen3 x4 link for the B550 but much inferior than directly connected to the CPU.
> 
> 
> *Beware the B550 Unify-X (and also the B550 Unify as reported) VRM is suffering from coil whine; if you are sensible to it avoid to buy.*
> 
> Got used recognize the pattern and tonality and I can spot it almost always when there's load.
> It's not huge but it's there; I'm not particularly pleased but it's not annoying me too much so far.
> I'm quite conflicted but I love the board otherwise.
> 
> There's coil whine every time there's some load; during POST, booting Windows, starting a benchmark...
> It's a series of tiny, weird sounds, like a Notebook CD-ROMs, a mouse squeaking, etc
> I guess who's really sensible would totally freak out about it. So be warned!


Grazie* ManniX-ITA*

the info you give in this thread is very appreciated. Also thanks to *Biggd0gg *for the earlier reply.

I dont really mind the noise to be honest (unless its absolutely horrible, but from what you said it does not seem like it).

I live alone and i am used to super loud systems with fans spinning intense and noises so its not a problem for me.

Also a friend of mine messaged me: he accidently got an extra Tomahawk x570 that he does not need and he is willing to sell it to me for very cheap, since he does not really need it.

If i buy that it means i have both the b550 Unify -X for OC experimentation and a X570 Tomahawk for compatability.

I dont know a lot about the Tomahawk, but what i read from reviews is that its pretty solid.

Overall i feel comfortable i have the Motherboards i need with these two.

I will try to OC, but very carefully because im not experienced in it and dont want to break anything.

Excited to try the B550 Unify-x , it should arrive in less than a week ! 😃

Now i only need to find a PSU, RAM and Cooling for my system and im ready to go .


----------



## Phynicle

That's a shame about the coil whine.
Do you test on an open bench or closed casing?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Phynicle said:


> That's a shame about the coil whine.
> Do you test on an open bench or closed casing?


Closed, it's a Corsair 750D Airflow.
2 x 140mm top, 2 front, 1 x 120mm back.
The CPU cooler is a beQuiet DarkRock Pro 4.

It's pretty silent yet there's a background hiss from all these fans.

The coil whine once you know which are sounds can be spotted on almost any kind of heavy load.
But it's quite thin and low volume; I didn't spot it at all at the beggining.
I started only once I heard with AIDA and when there's no noise around, early morning or late evening.

It depends on the load; sometimes is like a pump sucking water, a CD-ROM seeking, an HDD seeking, mouse squeaking, an analog modem handshaking, etc.

I can hear it briefly while is doing POST, entering the BIOS, starting a bench.
Especially with Cinebench MT starting or y-cruncher N32 running.

Not the best but for me it's bearable. Mostly.
I'll post on the MSI forum to ask if they are planning to fix it via a BIOS update but it's very unlikely.
Will also check if the VRM heatsink thermal pad has been messed up like was posted on the Chinese forum.


----------



## Pedros

ManniX-ITA said:


> I have a cooling project running as well, understand
> 
> My last board was a Master Rel. 1.0, nightmare for RAM.
> The DIMMS they have a thermal sensor, they were running 5-8c hotter at the same voltage.
> I had to put a fan on the top position blowing down the RAM to avoid errors at anything above 1.45V.
> Couldn't go either at 3800CL-14-16 or at 4000CL16-18 stable or below 270 tRFC.
> Bit more voltage and it was getting hot and impossible to stabilize.
> 
> But that was really an exception, I guess against a "normal" board the difference is less staggering.
> 
> Right now in idle the DIMMs are around 33c now and HWInfo recorded 28.3c as lowest temp.
> Running at 3800 CL-14-16-16-30-34-252T at 1.52V with the fan blowing down at 1300rpm.
> I could lower the fan rpm to 1100rpm.
> 
> 
> Can't help with the tRCD sorry... that I know of the only solution is a massive injection of voltage
> Have to run as well 4000MHz and over with tRCDRD at 18.
> When my cooling project is done and I'll have water cooling for the DIMMs then I'll pump the voltage.


What block are you using? I wanted that!!! 
Yeah, I'm at 1.50v and I can't get lower than tRCD 17 










I could try 1.55v but ... that would not be viable ...
Plus i have one of those dominator airflow thingy with 2 x 60 ( or 50 ) fans on the mems, but my sticks don't have sensors  no clue what temps they're runnig


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Pedros said:


> What block are you using? I wanted that!!!
> Yeah, I'm at 1.50v and I can't get lower than tRCD 17
> 
> View attachment 2472813
> 
> 
> I could try 1.55v but ... that would not be viable ...
> Plus i have one of those dominator airflow thingy with 2 x 60 ( or 50 ) fans on the mems, but my sticks don't have sensors  no clue what temps they're runnig


There are fan controllers with temperature sensors, like the QUADRO:






QUADRO Lüftersteuerung für PWM-Lüfter


QUADRO Lüftersteuerung für PWM-Lüfter: Mit dem QUADRO präsentiert Aqua Computer eine vierkanalige PWM-Lüftersteuerung mit hervorragendem Funktionsumfang, die gleichermaßen für wassergekühlte und luftgekühlte Computer geeignet ist. Ebenfalls integriert ist ein RGBpx-Effektcontroller für 90...




shop.aquacomputer.de





I have a couple of these blocks:









Alphacool D-RAM Cooler X4 Universal - Acetal Black Nickel


Mit den neuen Alphacool D-RAM Kühlern können nun alle beliebigen Speicherbausteine gekühlt werden. Dieser Kühlblock wird einfach auf die optional erhältlichen Kühlmodule oder auf vorhandene Heatspreader mit einem Lochabstand von 110mm...




www.alphacool.com


----------



## Pedros

ManniX-ITA said:


> There are fan controllers with temperature sensors, like the QUADRO:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> QUADRO Lüftersteuerung für PWM-Lüfter
> 
> 
> QUADRO Lüftersteuerung für PWM-Lüfter: Mit dem QUADRO präsentiert Aqua Computer eine vierkanalige PWM-Lüftersteuerung mit hervorragendem Funktionsumfang, die gleichermaßen für wassergekühlte und luftgekühlte Computer geeignet ist. Ebenfalls integriert ist ein RGBpx-Effektcontroller für 90...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> shop.aquacomputer.de
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have a couple of these blocks:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Alphacool D-RAM Cooler X4 Universal - Acetal Black Nickel
> 
> 
> Mit den neuen Alphacool D-RAM Kühlern können nun alle beliebigen Speicherbausteine gekühlt werden. Dieser Kühlblock wird einfach auf die optional erhältlichen Kühlmodule oder auf vorhandene Heatspreader mit einem Lochabstand von 110mm...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.alphacool.com


Gonna have a look at those 
Yeah I have the Octo ...
How do we install a temp sensor in the ram though?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Pedros said:


> Gonna have a look at those
> Yeah I have the Octo ...
> How do we install a temp sensor in the ram though?


Best thing of course is that you can also control the dominator fan speed based on the DIMMs temp


----------



## Pedros

ManniX-ITA said:


> Best thing of course is that you can also control the dominator fan speed based on the DIMMs temp


So you need this:
Alphacool D-RAM Cooler X4 Universal - Acetal Black Nickel | RAM - refrigerador de água | HDD/RAM - refrigerador | Refrigeração a água | Aquatuning Portugal
and this:
Alphacool D-RAM Modul (für Alphacool D-RAM Cooler) - Black 2 Stück | RAM - refrigerador de água | HDD/RAM - refrigerador | Refrigeração a água | Aquatuning Portugal 

Correct?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Pedros said:


> So you need this:
> Alphacool D-RAM Cooler X4 Universal - Acetal Black Nickel | RAM - refrigerador de água | HDD/RAM - refrigerador | Refrigeração a água | Aquatuning Portugal
> and this:
> Alphacool D-RAM Modul (für Alphacool D-RAM Cooler) - Black 2 Stück | RAM - refrigerador de água | HDD/RAM - refrigerador | Refrigeração a água | Aquatuning Portugal
> 
> Correct?


Correct!


----------



## YoungChris

Screen from Toppc's Facebook
not his result, different user


----------



## dr.Rafi

YoungChris said:


> Screen from Toppc's Facebook
> not his result, different user
> View attachment 2472820


 High vdimm voltage not 24/7.


----------



## dr.Rafi

Unify is Ausome Motherboard


----------



## bwana

New AMD user here with unify B550. I updated to the latest BIOS (7D13v112(Beta version) ) but am confused a bit. First there are two big buttons on the left whose contents seem to overlap. The 'SETTINGS' button and the 'OC' button. The manual does little to explain the differences and which settings to adjust.

Here is the 'Settings' button and its screens









[Settings->Advanced]










There is an ovelclocking choice (near the bottom of the list in the screen above)
[Settings->Advanced->AMD Overclocking ]









entering the first submenu-Manual CPU Overclocking
[Settings->Advanced->AMD Overclocking->Manual CPU Overclocking]








CPU frequency and Voltage are ZERO? What does this mean?


entering the second submenu of the Advanced Overclocking screen (DDR and Infinity Fabric Frequency/Timings)
[Settings->Advanced->AMD Overclocking->DDR and Infinity Fabric Frequency/Timings]








This is where I set my memory timings and they seem to stick.


entering the third submenu (Precision Boost OverDrive)
[Settings->Advanced->AMD Overclocking->Precision Boost OverDrive]








I have no clue what to do here


Now the second big button labeled OC has a bunch of settings that dont fit on one screen capture but here they are

















entering the Advanced CPU Configuration in the upper screen above
[OC->Advanced CPU Configuration]









Now up there is another AMD overclocking choice!
[OC->Advanced CPU Configuration-:AMD overclocking]








and up there is another PBO selection!
But we already saw a PBO selection up in
[Settings->Advanced->AMD Overclocking->Precision Boost OverDrive]



I am so confused as to which menu selections I should pick to adjust my parameters. 
What do I do first?
PBO is set to auto in both places.
From my readings, it seems that PBO is an algorithm that will intelligently OC the fastest single core the most. Since temperature is the rate limiting factor, some people have found that PBO gives higher clocks with undervolting. Where would I set that?

However, if I want maximum multicore clocks, I have read that the strategy is totally different and I should sync all cores, push the clocks up and raise vcore.

I have set my memory to 16-16-3600
My fclk is 1800 and so is UCLK but these values prob come from some auto selection. 
If I want to try higher memory speed, where would I crank up FCLK and Uclk?


----------



## bwana

When I run cinebench I get this in HWinfo










and with prime 95 smal FFT HWinfo shows










Why is prime95 running slower and at lower volts?

but with prime95 large FFT









I really dont know how to go further if my tools to measure performance give such different readings.


----------



## bwana

Aida shows this









Why is DRAM:FSB 54:3? Is this throwing off my latency?
My fclk, uclk and DRAM are all 1800. ( 1:1:1) 


sooo confused....


----------



## YoungChris

dr.Rafi said:


> High vdimm voltage not 24/7.


That's absolutely in the range of 24/7 vdimm, up to 1.7vdimm is doable for some B-Die.


----------



## dr.Rafi

bwana said:


> New AMD user here with unify B550. I updated to the latest BIOS (7D13v112(Beta version) ) but am confused a bit. First there are two big buttons on the left whose contents seem to overlap. The 'SETTINGS' button and the 'OC' button. The manual does little to explain the differences and which settings to adjust.
> 
> Here is the 'Settings' button and its screens
> View attachment 2472900
> 
> 
> [Settings->Advanced]
> View attachment 2472901
> 
> 
> 
> There is an ovelclocking choice (near the bottom of the list in the screen above)
> [Settings->Advanced->AMD Overclocking ]
> View attachment 2472902
> 
> 
> entering the first submenu-Manual CPU Overclocking
> [Settings->Advanced->AMD Overclocking->Manual CPU Overclocking]
> View attachment 2472903
> 
> CPU frequency and Voltage are ZERO? What does this mean?
> 
> 
> entering the second submenu of the Advanced Overclocking screen (DDR and Infinity Fabric Frequency/Timings)
> [Settings->Advanced->AMD Overclocking->DDR and Infinity Fabric Frequency/Timings]
> View attachment 2472904
> 
> This is where I set my memory timings and they seem to stick.
> 
> 
> entering the third submenu (Precision Boost OverDrive)
> [Settings->Advanced->AMD Overclocking->Precision Boost OverDrive]
> View attachment 2472905
> 
> I have no clue what to do here
> 
> 
> Now the second big button labeled OC has a bunch of settings that dont fit on one screen capture but here they are
> View attachment 2472906
> 
> View attachment 2472907
> 
> 
> entering the Advanced CPU Configuration in the upper screen above
> [OC->Advanced CPU Configuration]
> View attachment 2472908
> 
> 
> Now up there is another AMD overclocking choice!
> [OC->Advanced CPU Configuration-:AMD overclocking]
> View attachment 2472909
> 
> and up there is another PBO selection!
> But we already saw a PBO selection up in
> [Settings->Advanced->AMD Overclocking->Precision Boost OverDrive]
> 
> 
> 
> I am so confused as to which menu selections I should pick to adjust my parameters.
> What do I do first?
> PBO is set to auto in both places.
> From my readings, it seems that PBO is an algorithm that will intelligently OC the fastest single core the most. Since temperature is the rate limiting factor, some people have found that PBO gives higher clocks with undervolting. Where would I set that?
> 
> However, if I want maximum multicore clocks, I have read that the strategy is totally different and I should sync all cores, push the clocks up and raise vcore.
> 
> I have set my memory to 16-16-3600
> My fclk is 1800 and so is UCLK but these values prob come from some auto selection.
> If I want to try higher memory speed, where would I crank up FCLK and Uclk?


Welcome to Amd section, Mostly for overclocking you need to make changes in OC menu which mostly overide setting in Setting/advanced menue , saving overclocking profile will safe your setting except PBO setting (the limits and override boost ), I have same motherborad and cpu like yours, for me best results for performance is using PBO limits: 280, 235, 250 ,curve optimizer iam using minus valuse on all cores - 30 but most others use less minus values on best 2 cores /4 cores and more minus on rest you have to find which values work with your cpu, that is the undervolting, then choose a value for over boost start with small numbers and go up. to make your cpu stable with more minus vlause in CO, you can increase LLC for cpu or give it a small pump of vcore using offcet 0.01 to 0.03 volt ,better use vcore offcet rather than LLC because stability issue in low minus CO valuse is mrelated to idle or low thread tasks when the cpu try to boost to max and fail get enough voltage, increasing LLC in other hand will reduce your multi core performance becuse we need the maximum vdroop =less temp = more mutli core boost. dont worry about tweaking memory / fclk setting at the moment, because i find even if the rmemory is going faster with higher frquency , but increasing fclk after certain limit is reducing multicore cpu boosting and performance.


----------



## gymleader91

bwana said:


> Aida shows this
> View attachment 2472917
> 
> 
> Why is DRAM:FSB 54:3? Is this throwing off my latency?
> My fclk, uclk and DRAM are all 1800. ( 1:1:1)
> 
> 
> sooo confused....


54/3 = 18. Times 18 by the BCLK so 18 x 100 = 1800. Your FCLK/Data Rate. DDR = 1800 x 2 = 3600.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

bwana said:


> When I run cinebench I get this in HWinfo
> View attachment 2472915
> 
> 
> 
> and with prime 95 smal FFT HWinfo shows
> View attachment 2472914
> 
> 
> 
> Why is prime95 running slower and at lower volts?
> 
> but with prime95 large FFT
> View attachment 2472916
> 
> 
> I really dont know how to go further if my tools to measure performance give such different readings.


Your CPU is not throttling with P95 Large while it's in a majestic thermal overload with P95 Small


----------



## dr.Rafi

Really start falling in love with this motherboard.💓





Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MS-7D13 - Geekbench Browser


Benchmark results for a Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MS-7D13 with an AMD Ryzen 9 5950X processor.



browser.geekbench.com


----------



## ManniX-ITA

dr.Rafi said:


> Really start falling in love with this motherboard.💓
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MS-7D13 - Geekbench Browser
> 
> 
> Benchmark results for a Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MS-7D13 with an AMD Ryzen 9 5950X processor.
> 
> 
> 
> browser.geekbench.com


I just don't understand why my AES-XTS benchmark in ST is always so low:



Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MS-7D13 vs Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MS-7D13 - Geekbench Browser



It was the same also on the Master.


----------



## dr.Rafi

ManniX-ITA said:


> I just don't understand why my AES-XTS benchmark in ST is always so low:
> 
> 
> 
> Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MS-7D13 vs Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MS-7D13 - Geekbench Browser
> 
> 
> 
> It was the same also on the Master.


You using different version of GB (Geekbench 5.1.0 Tryout )


----------



## ManniX-ITA

dr.Rafi said:


> You using different version of GB (Geekbench 5.1.0 Tryout )


Oh man, thought I updated it... thanks


----------



## Pedros

Mannix, just set to high priority in the task manager and see how that turns out


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Pedros said:


> Mannix, just set to high priority in the task manager and see how that turns out


Don't usually have to, I'm using a dedicated benching Windows install which is super clean.
Did once and brought nothing.

GB5 5.3.1 is much more stressing than 5.1.0...
Found out the LLC 5 was not enough, had to switch back to 4.

Also I could do only 4015 points on AES-XTS bench:





Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MS-7D13 - Geekbench Browser


Benchmark results for a Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MS-7D13 with an AMD Ryzen 9 5950X processor.



browser.geekbench.com





Turns out VDDG CCD at 950 is not enough, had to raise it to 1000:





Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MS-7D13 - Geekbench Browser


Benchmark results for a Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MS-7D13 with an AMD Ryzen 9 5950X processor.



browser.geekbench.com






That made me go up 4399 which is decent enough.
Raising to 1050 didn't bring anything more.





Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MS-7D13 - Geekbench Browser


Benchmark results for a Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MS-7D13 with an AMD Ryzen 9 5950X processor.



browser.geekbench.com


----------



## Pedros

nice multi-score, this is mine but on x570
Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MS-7C35 - Geekbench Browser


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Pedros said:


> nice multi-score, this is mine but on x570
> Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MS-7C35 - Geekbench Browser


Nice single threaded, I can't go above 1760.


----------



## Pedros

Are you able to set your PBO power limits on the B550? On unify x570 with latest bios, I can change them in the bios but they don't do squat ...  it's like everything was on auto


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Pedros said:


> Are you able to set your PBO power limits on the B550? On unify x570 with latest bios, I can change them in the bios but they don't do squat ...  it's like everything was on auto


Yes I can set them with Advanced.
What are your limits now as displayed in Ryzen Master?
I'm using 280/175/215 now; maybe with more restrained settings it will boost ST at the expense of MT.


----------



## Pedros

the default 142/95/140


----------



## Forsaken1

Still no stock Unify X in states.MSI must have saved on shipping cost.Picked a slow boat from China.


----------



## bwana

ManniX-ITA said:


> Your CPU is not throttling with P95 Large while it's in a majestic thermal overload with P95 Small


Thanks. I reran it:

p95 small fft looks better









p95 large fft


----------



## ManniX-ITA

bwana said:


> Thanks. I reran it:
> 
> p95 small fft looks better
> View attachment 2472964
> 
> 
> p95 large fft
> View attachment 2472965


It's weird it's throttling a lot...

With Small FFT only my 2nd CCD throttles and goes down to 50c the first stays at 90c:










I wouldn't use the "msI Enhanced" latency option in the DRAM section.

I've enabled it and didn't notice any improvement or issue.
But after a while found it that is causing stuttering and brief losses of USB input while gaming.


----------



## DeletedMember558271

ManniX-ITA said:


> I wouldn't use the "msI Enhanced" latency option in the DRAM section.
> 
> I've enabled it and didn't notice any improvement or issue.
> But after a while found it that is causing stuttering and brief losses of USB input while gaming.


I've been curious about this setting, there's also just a regular "Enabled", figured I may as well use even though I'm not sure the difference, be stupid if it was somehow worse latency than Disabled. I haven't had any issues with that one, which I think should be less extreme in whatever it does to the "msi Enhanced", if its anything like MSI's Enhanced Mode1/2/3/4 PBO profiles are.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Dreamic said:


> I've been curious about this setting, there's also just a regular "Enabled", figured I may as well use even though I'm not sure the difference, be stupid if it was somehow worse latency than Disabled. I haven't had any issues with that one, which I think should be less extreme in whatever it does to the "msi Enhanced", if its anything like MSI's Enhanced Mode1/2/3/4 PBO profiles are.


I was wrong, the issue is still there.
It's just much less frequent, must be something wrong in the memory settings.


----------



## dr.Rafi

It Seams was The windows version I was using make my scores in GB bit low from multicore side, was using windows 1809 with dozens of softwares installed, fresh install with same bios setting bring new scores to the table, bios setting PBO limits 280/175(Mannix borrowed)/250 ,

CO all cores - 30 using anything less than 30 (25-15)on best cores is dropping my scores), overboost frquency 150,

All voltages for memory controller 1.1 volt (soc/vddp/vddgs both) borrowed from defult setting for xmp profile , memory 1.5 volt ,ram timing only I adjust the primryies to 16 16 16 36 52 trfc 304 and the rest auto(further tweaking later), all Digi all menue on defult no LLC adjustments, vcore defult.

CPPC both enabled improve scores

Cstate disabled,dont think will make any difference

Choose the Geekbench tweaked in bios improve scores
Thanks to ManniX to bring my attention to how clean windows is important ,especially after weeks of tweaking this cpu on Aorus master x570 and memory tweaking with 100s of times of crshes and using that windows with Unify motherboard.





__





Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MS-7D13 - Geekbench Browser


Benchmark results for a Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MS-7D13 with an AMD Ryzen 9 5950X processor.



browser.geekbench.com




Edit: seams was installing nvidia drivers not finished with previous score retest with following result.





__





Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MS-7D13 - Geekbench Browser


Benchmark results for a Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MS-7D13 with an AMD Ryzen 9 5950X processor.



browser.geekbench.com


----------



## dr.Rafi

And shame they (Motherboard vendors or Amd ) limit the CO minus limit to 30, thinking with this cpu i can go further more.


----------



## PJVol

*@dr.Rafi*
Disabling C-states lowers my ST scores. Though I haven't got 1.1.9.0 yet.


----------



## dr.Rafi

PJVol said:


> *@dr.Rafi*
> Disabling C-states lowers my ST scores. Though I haven't got 1.1.9.0 yet.


I think enabling C-states make your cpu go too low on power consumption and run alot cooler idling so starting any ST task will make it boost more for a short term, this the only explanation come to my mind, not sure though !! especially if using Air cooling on the cpu.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

dr.Rafi said:


> I think enabling C-states make your cpu go too low on power consumption and run alot cooler idling so starting any ST task will make it boost more for a short term, this the only explanation come to my mind, not sure though !! especially if using Air cooling on the cpu.


With Global C States disabled my 5950x doesn't boost over 4800 MHz


----------



## MageTank

dr.Rafi said:


> I think enabling C-states make your cpu go too low on power consumption and run alot cooler idling so starting any ST task will make it boost more for a short term, this the only explanation come to my mind, not sure though !! especially if using Air cooling on the cpu.


You nailed it.



ManniX-ITA said:


> With Global C States disabled my 5950x doesn't boost over 4800 MHz


The reason for this is due to the overall power budget allocation. PBO is designed to take advantage of a target power budget based on the total number of cores and what they are doing at a given point in time. When the rest of your cores are in various C-States, their impact on the overall power budget is reduced, allowing your active cores a higher power target for a higher boost. Disabling Global C-States forces those other cores to remain active, meaning the cores you are actively using in your single threaded tests are suffering a limited power budget as a result.

Ideally, the cores you are not using would be entering C6 while the cores you are using are getting as much power as they can. This isn't first gen Ryzen where the C6 bug plagued everyone, so ideally you'd keep this on if you were using PBO as a means of overclocking.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

MageTank said:


> You nailed it.
> 
> 
> The reason for this is due to the overall power budget allocation. PBO is designed to take advantage of a target power budget based on the total number of cores and what they are doing at a given point in time. When the rest of your cores are in various C-States, their impact on the overall power budget is reduced, allowing your active cores a higher power target for a higher boost. Disabling Global C-States forces those other cores to remain active, meaning the cores you are actively using in your single threaded tests are suffering a limited power budget as a result.
> 
> Ideally, the cores you are not using would be entering C6 while the cores you are using are getting as much power as they can. This isn't first gen Ryzen where the C6 bug plagued everyone, so ideally you'd keep this on if you were using PBO as a means of overclocking.


I'm not sure.. the difference is way too big. 200 MHz on the sustained and 400 MHz on the max boost is an abyss.
With or without Global C States my power consumption is marginally lower and the temperatures as well.
Seems to me more a "safe mechanism" due to C States disabled not really a power budget calculation.


----------



## MageTank

ManniX-ITA said:


> I'm not sure.. the difference is way too big. 200 MHz on the sustained and 400 MHz on the max boost is an abyss.
> With or without Global C States my power consumption is marginally lower and the temperatures as well.
> Seems to me more a "safe mechanism" due to C States disabled not really a power budget calculation.


I suppose the easiest way to check for certain would be to monitor what your other cores are clocking at during your single threaded runs with and without Global C States, monitoring package power consumption the entire time. I am not home to test with my 5950X right now, but when I last checked, it made just as significant of a swing as yours did, so I'd assume its working as intended.


----------



## dr.Rafi

Holly Crap !, my cpu now is boosting 5250 with C-state enabled and both single and multithread performance jump further bit, i never tried C-state enable as i read before on aorus master was causing stablity issues, with EDC 250, and hot summer in Australia.




__





Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MS-7D13 - Geekbench Browser


Benchmark results for a Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MS-7D13 with an AMD Ryzen 9 5950X processor.



browser.geekbench.com




Edit: and this with EDC 215 




__





Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MS-7D13 - Geekbench Browser


Benchmark results for a Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MS-7D13 with an AMD Ryzen 9 5950X processor.



browser.geekbench.com


----------



## ManniX-ITA

MageTank said:


> I suppose the easiest way to check for certain would be to monitor what your other cores are clocking at during your single threaded runs with and without Global C States, monitoring package power consumption the entire time. I am not home to test with my 5950X right now, but when I last checked, it made just as significant of a swing as yours did, so I'd assume its working as intended.


Don't have time now but I'll check; the thermal constraint from the air cooler could play a bigger role than I expect don't know.
Did expect much more from Core parking on 3000 and I don't see it much better on the 5000.
Maybe under the hood is really helping a lot.


----------



## dr.Rafi

MageTank said:
I suppose the easiest way to check for certain would be to monitor what your other cores are clocking at during your single threaded runs with and without Global C States, monitoring package power consumption the entire time. I am not home to test with my 5950X right now, but when I last checked, it made just as significant of a swing as yours did, so I'd assume its working as intended.



ManniX-ITA said:


> Don't have time now but I'll check; the thermal constraint from the air cooler could play a bigger role than I expect don't know.
> Did expect much more from Core parking on 3000 and I don't see it much better on the 5000.
> Maybe under the hood is really helping a lot.


If it is only playing role on ST performance, why I got multithread performance improved also!


----------



## ManniX-ITA

dr.Rafi said:


> MageTank said:
> I suppose the easiest way to check for certain would be to monitor what your other cores are clocking at during your single threaded runs with and without Global C States, monitoring package power consumption the entire time. I am not home to test with my 5950X right now, but when I last checked, it made just as significant of a swing as yours did, so I'd assume its working as intended.
> 
> 
> If it is only playing role on ST performance, why I got multithread performance improved also!


Fair point, it's more likely an enabler for a bigger power budget. 
Whatever are the actual real conditions.


----------



## PJVol

ManniX-ITA said:


> it's more likely an enabler


Since it mostly enabled by default on every board, I tend to believe that when disabled, it acts more as a negative contributing factor to the estimated boost opportunity, be it ST or MT, it's just more noticable when pbo2(boost ovverride) pushes it to the limits, whereas auto (or enabled) was initially part of default budget.


----------



## dr.Rafi

Crazy boost records but not stable ,not sure what to do to keep these boosting clocks with stability.


----------



## YoungChris

Score looks pretty good to me








If I had the cooling to push core a couple hundred mhz higher, I think I could break 9800 gb3 mem score with only 3733c12 single rank


----------



## ManniX-ITA

dr.Rafi said:


> Crazy boost records but not stable ,not sure what to do to keep these boosting clocks with stability.
> View attachment 2473152


Higher LLC is probably the less costly.
Otherwise you have to try with the scalar.


----------



## PJVol

dr.Rafi said:


> not sure what to do to keep these boosting clocks with stability


I'm afraid not much (if at all), very unlikely those would be stable with convenient cooling, but if you'll manage to stabilize it by dropping max boost a notch(or two), it'd still be a nice try.


----------



## YoungChris

did some very brief testing with the A12 beta bios
It performs ~50-100 points worse in Geek 3 compared to A05.O1
using same settings as earlier screen


----------



## dr.Rafi

ManniX-ITA said:


> Higher LLC is probably the less costly.
> Otherwise you have to try with the scalar.


Iam confused with msi LLC mode 1 to 8 which one give more Vdroop the smaller numbers or bigger ones ?
with 2cores on 5300 running cpuz on 4 threads stress test was boosting 5000 most of the time LLC auto but if i leave the computer with nothing running for awhile is reseting.


----------



## dr.Rafi

YoungChris said:


> did some very brief testing with the A12 beta bios
> It performs ~50-100 points worse in Geek 3 compared to A05.O1
> using same settings as earlier screen


Can you boot with the older bios without Whea ?


----------



## Spectre73

I want to share some strange observation. I am not even sure I am not imagining things, here. I am running with 1900 FCLK (as shown some pages back) and overall, the system runs flawlessly. I THINK that under special conditions, I get some slight mouse (usb) stutter, for very brief amounts of time. It mostly seems to happen while task switching from a game to the windows desktop. It is barely noticeable. I probably should compare it with 3200/1600 settings, to rule out my imagination, but any other tips here? No sound stutter with my USB sound card, though.


----------



## mongoled

ManniX-ITA said:


> Higher LLC is probably the less costly.
> Otherwise you have to try with the scalar.


Until you get some baseline results recorded with how CO works with regards to LLC/Scaler/CPU Boost override along with PPT/TDC/EDC function you are all running blind.

For example, using 300mhz override compared to 250mhz will result in a different CO curve!

On my processor LLC set at 6 and Scaler 10X is bringing me the best results.

But you have to test and get some baseline figures...


----------



## mongoled

dr.Rafi said:


> Iam confused with msi LLC mode 1 to 8 which one give more Vdroop the smaller numbers or bigger ones ?
> with 2cores on 5300 running cpuz on 4 threads stress test was boosting 5000 most of the time LLC auto but if i leave the computer with nothing running for awhile is reseting.


MSI
8 is maximum vdroop i.e. vCore will be substantially lower than what is set in BIOS


----------



## dr.Rafi

PJVol said:


> I'm afraid not much (if at all), very unlikely those would be stable with convenient cooling, but if you'll manage to stabilize it by dropping max boost a notch(or two), it'd still be a nice try.





Spectre73 said:


> I want to share some strange observation. I am not even sure I am not imagining things, here. I am running with 1900 FCLK (as shown some pages back) and overall, the system runs flawlessly. I THINK that under special conditions, I get some slight mouse (usb) stutter, for very brief amounts of time. It mostly seems to happen while task switching from a game to the windows desktop. It is barely noticeable. I probably should compare it with 3200/1600 settings, to rule out my imagination, but any other tips here? No sound stutter with my USB sound card, though.


Try to keep Soc voltage 1.12 minimum ,and VDDGIOD 1.1 VOlt if you already too much lower than these two values you can start with these values and then go down and test untill you have the issue appear again so keep safe margin above the minimum of 0.02 volt if you already on these vlues start with higher voltages and go down, if you change bothe and the problem still there, I assume is your imagination, me personaly i start dream in Whea errors while sleeping.(lol just kidding).


----------



## dr.Rafi

mongoled said:


> MSI
> 8 is maximum vdroop i.e. vCore will be substantially lower than what is set in BIOS


Great thanks Msi is opposite in labling LLC to other brands like Asus and Gigabyte.


----------



## Spectre73

dr.Rafi said:


> Try to keep Soc voltage 1.12 minimum ,and VDDGIOD 1.1 VOlt if you already too much lower than these two values you can start with these values and then go down and test untill you have the issue appear again so keep safe margin above the minimum of 0.02 volt if you already on these vlues start with higher voltages and go down, if you change bothe and the problem still there, I assume is your imagination, me personaly i start dream in Whea errors while sleeping.(lol just kidding).


The difference between vSOC and VDDGIOD would be too low, though. It should be at least 0,40v, shouldn't it?. Other than that, I will try it, thanks!


----------



## ManniX-ITA

dr.Rafi said:


> Great thanks Msi is opposite in labling LLC to other brands like Asus and Gigabyte.


With my most aggressive CO counts i get random resets with LLC 4 which I can fix with LLC 3.
The cores in ST will run at 10-20mV higher an hopefully avoid resets.
That was for me the less "costly" option for frequency than Scalar or limiting the Boost clock.



mongoled said:


> Until you get some baseline results recorded with how CO works with regards to LLC/Scaler/CPU Boost override along with PPT/TDC/EDC function you are all running blind.
> 
> For example, using 300mhz override compared to 250mhz will result in a different CO curve!
> 
> On my processor LLC set at 6 and Scaler 10X is bringing me the best results.
> 
> But you have to test and get some baseline figures...


Of course I got baselines 

I'm trying to organize it instead of a bunch of text files:








Curve Optimizer AGESA 1.1.9.0


Foglio1 BoostTester Core,Count,VID,CPU-z,Perf Clock,Eff Clock,PPT,TDC,EDC,AGESA 1.2.0.0,BIOS A10,PPT,TDC,EDC 0,-30,1.358,685.5,4999,4987,280,175,215,Boost 200 MHz,280,175,220 1,-20,1.367,687.3,5025,5022,Core,Sustained,Max 2,-30,1.291,677.0,4937,4927,GB5 ST,1697,0,5010,5033 3,-30,1.286,678.1,494...




docs.google.com







Spectre73 said:


> I want to share some strange observation. I am not even sure I am not imagining things, here. I am running with 1900 FCLK (as shown some pages back) and overall, the system runs flawlessly. I THINK that under special conditions, I get some slight mouse (usb) stutter, for very brief amounts of time. It mostly seems to happen while task switching from a game to the windows desktop. It is barely noticeable. I probably should compare it with 3200/1600 settings, to rule out my imagination, but any other tips here? No sound stutter with my USB sound card, though.


I have a similar issue found out with World War Z...
Still investigating what could be the root cause.
I've also reverted to A00 but it still happens.

Tehre's a random stutter, lag, USB input stall. It's no the same as USB vdroop from VDDG, my G13 screen doesn't flicker.
Walking/running under WWZ sometimes you just stutter and stops walking.
Forward key "W" whatever is on the Keyboard or on the G13 while being kept pressed the character stops.
I have to press it again to start walking again. Easiest way to reproduce but I've seen this issue with other games too, it's just more subtle.

I didn't have it with the Master. I'm checking now if my main Windows install is completely messed up or not.
I'm installing WWZ on the benching install to double check and exclude it.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Spectre73 said:


> The difference between vSOC and VDDGIOD would be too low, though. It should be at least 0,40v, shouldn't it?. Other than that, I will try it, thanks!


1.12V is too low, at least 1.15v for VDDG 1000


----------



## MyUsername

Thanks to AMD messing up their logistics and changing the delivery of the 5000 series chips to the UK, I've decided to swap my motherboard this weekend. I received my Unify X about a week ago, but thought I'd wait for my 5950x to arrive and do it all in one. Gonna do the last mission in Cyberpunk then get me screwdriver out.


----------



## Spectre73

ManniX-ITA said:


> I have a similar issue found out with World War Z...
> Still investigating what could be the root cause.
> I've also reverted to A00 but it still happens.
> 
> Tehre's a random stutter, lag, USB input stall. It's no the same as USB vdroop from VDDG, my G13 screen doesn't flicker.
> Walking/running under WWZ sometimes you just stutter and stops walking.
> Forward key "W" whatever is on the Keyboard or on the G13 while being kept pressed the character stops.
> I have to press it again to start walking again. Easiest way to reproduce but I've seen this issue with other games too, it's just more subtle.
> 
> I didn't have it with the Master. I'm checking now if my main Windows install is completely messed up or not.
> I'm installing WWZ on the benching install to double check and exclude it.


I am quite certain that the windows install has nothing to do with it because I am runnning a completely fresh win10 with latest patches and drivers. All brand new without any remnants.
Have you checked if lower fclk eliminates it? Have not done it until now.



ManniX-ITA said:


> 1.12V is too low, at least 1.15v for VDDG 1000


General rule of thumb was: vsoc >= vddg +0,05, if I remember correctly. So vsoc 1,10 / vddg 1,05 or lower - no?


----------



## bwana

mongoled said:


> Until you get some baseline results recorded with how CO works with regards to LLC/Scaler/CPU Boost override along with PPT/TDC/EDC function you are all running blind.
> 
> For example, using 300mhz override compared to 250mhz will result in a different CO curve!
> 
> On my processor LLC set at 6 and Scaler 10X is bringing me the best results.
> 
> But you have to test and get some baseline figures...


Please help understand what you are saying with a clear, stepwise plan on how you did ur oc. There are so many knobs today with an oc, and they all interact in undocumented ways. I agree - I don't know what I am doing. It's like trying to build a sandcastle with a toddler- and I am the toddler while the bios is trying to 'intelligently' overclock despite my sloppy changes.


----------



## mongoled

ManniX-ITA said:


> Of course I got baselines
> 
> I'm trying to organize it instead of a bunch of text files:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Curve Optimizer AGESA 1.1.9.0
> 
> 
> Foglio1 BoostTester Core,Count,VID,CPU-z,Perf Clock,Eff Clock,PPT,TDC,EDC,AGESA 1.2.0.0,BIOS A10,PPT,TDC,EDC 0,-30,1.358,685.5,4999,4987,280,175,215,Boost 200 MHz,280,175,220 1,-20,1.367,687.3,5025,5022,Core,Sustained,Max 2,-30,1.291,677.0,4937,4927,GB5 ST,1697,0,5010,5033 3,-30,1.286,678.1,494...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> docs.google.com


Sorry ManniX, that didnt come out right



That message was meant to be for all the other peeps who want quick fix instant results without investing the time to achieve these.

Im sure you have your baselines

 



bwana said:


> Please help understand what you are saying with a clear, stepwise plan on how you did ur oc. There are so many knobs today with an oc, and they all interact in undocumented ways. I agree - I don't know what I am doing. It's like trying to build a sandcastle with a toddler- and I am the toddler while the bios is trying to 'intelligently' overclock despite my sloppy changes.


Dude, you wish me to write you a thesis ??

🤣🤣

Here I wrote all that is needed along with skill, experience and time (lots of time)

Now you must invest your time and do these things and learn what your hardware/CPU likes dislikes or stick to regular PBO


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Spectre73 said:


> I am quite certain that the windows install has nothing to do with it because I am runnning a completely fresh win10 with latest patches and drivers. All brand new without any remnants.
> Have you checked if lower fclk eliminates it? Have not done it until now.
> 
> 
> General rule of thumb was: vsoc >= vddg +0,05, if I remember correctly. So vsoc 1,10 / vddg 1,05 or lower - no?


So sad... I have to send back this board.
Don't know if it's only mine or it's a general issue but there are USB vdroops.

I've tested everything and even at default optimized BIOS settings with 2133 MHz memory it does it.
It's the same as VDDG IOD too low, my G13 screen resets.
But it's just happening no matter what are the voltages settings

I've tested literally 99% of what could be.
Played like an automata World War Z endlessly; it's always 100% reproducible in the first 20 minutes.

If you have the game, start a Horde mode match and it's going to happen.

So unbelievably pissed off I have to put back the Master...



mongoled said:


> Sorry ManniX, that didnt come out right
> 
> 
> 
> That message was meant to be for all the other peeps who want quick fix instant results without investing the time to achieve these.
> 
> Im sure you have your baselines
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dude, you wish me to write you a thesis ??
> 
> 🤣🤣
> 
> Here I wrote all that is needed along with skill, experience and time (lots of time)
> 
> Now you must invest your time and do these things and learn what your hardware/CPU likes dislikes or stick to regular PBO


Trying my best but sometimes I'm too messy and disappoint myself 
Don't worry I love being criticized (with reason of course)!


----------



## Forsaken1

Bummer manni. Appears board was a dud from start.


----------



## Spectre73

ManniX-ITA said:


> So sad... I have to send back this board.
> Don't know if it's only mine or it's a general issue but there are USB vdroops.
> 
> I've tested everything and even at default optimized BIOS settings with 2133 MHz memory it does it.
> It's the same as VDDG IOD too low, my G13 screen resets.
> But it's just happening no matter what are the voltages settings
> 
> I've tested literally 99% of what could be.
> Played like an automata World War Z endlessly; it's always 100% reproducible in the first 20 minutes.
> 
> If you have the game, start a Horde mode match and it's going to happen.
> 
> So unbelievably pissed off I have to put back the Master...


Sad to hear it. But how do you really test it? If it is just one game, it is difficult to verify the problem for the rest of us Unify-X owners....
BTW have you - just to be sure - disabled energy savings in device manager? It does not work for the AMD USB 3.1 devices, but for the rest it does.
And finally - are you on a fresh windows install? Last time I remember you changed your master for the unify without a new w10 installation?


----------



## MageTank

ManniX-ITA said:


> So sad... I have to send back this board.
> Don't know if it's only mine or it's a general issue but there are USB vdroops.
> 
> I've tested everything and even at default optimized BIOS settings with 2133 MHz memory it does it.
> It's the same as VDDG IOD too low, my G13 screen resets.
> But it's just happening no matter what are the voltages settings
> 
> I've tested literally 99% of what could be.
> Played like an automata World War Z endlessly; it's always 100% reproducible in the first 20 minutes.
> 
> If you have the game, start a Horde mode match and it's going to happen.
> 
> So unbelievably pissed off I have to put back the Master...
> 
> 
> 
> Trying my best but sometimes I'm too messy and disappoint myself
> Don't worry I love being criticized (with reason of course)!


I may have to grab this game to test, but I've not experienced anything like this on the standard B550 Unify. I'll let you know what I find out just in case, but that is definitely an odd issue. Considering I still want a Unify X, I appreciate you letting us know, might save me a headache in advance.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Spectre73 said:


> Sad to hear it. But how do you really test it? If it is just one game, it is difficult to verify the problem for the rest of us Unify-X owners....


I guess you can test with any game but this is the best.
Didn't try many as I don't have much time right now.

But I noticed these random stuttering with Elite Dangerous.
Very hard to notice but I'm picky.
Didn't thought about a USB vdroop at the beginning cause usually my G13 screen is flickering.
But on the benching install I don't have the software installed so I see the G13 re-initializing like it was re-connected.

I use a flight stick with Elite Dangerous and so I thought the weird behavior was due to the stuttering.
But with an FPS game when you keep pressed a key to move you just stop moving; it's blatant.

There are 2 things these games have in common; the low CPU usage.
I'll see if I can find another free game which is so obvious with this issue.

Of course both games were totally butter smooth for hours with the 5950x and the Master.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Spectre73 said:


> Sad to hear it. But how do you really test it? If it is just one game, it is difficult to verify the problem for the rest of us Unify-X owners....
> BTW have you - just to be sure - disabled energy savings in device manager? It does not work for the AMD USB 3.1 devices, but for the rest it does.
> And finally - are you on a fresh windows install? Last time I remember you changed your master for the unify without a new w10 installation?


No it's not fresh but I have the benching install which is quite fresh and crystal clean.

Good point about the Power Saving, I didn't disabled it for the new devices installed with the Unify-X.
But I kind have the feeling it's not connected to this.

Still testing some other stuff, if you have suggestions let me know.


----------



## PJVol

ManniX-ITA said:


> I have a similar issue found out with World War Z...


Cmon! Lets shred some zekes


----------



## ManniX-ITA

PJVol said:


> Cmon! Lets shred some zekes


Ahahha I'm fed up shredding, it's being a chore 
Tried now Dirty Bomb which is a free game on Steam but it did it only once.
WWZ for some reason is definitely the best to test stability.
Was using it also on the Master with the 3800x and it's incredibly fast and accurate to uncover instabilities.


----------



## bwana

ManniX-ITA said:


> WWZ for some reason is definitely the best to test stability.


World War Zero? This game doesnt look that demanding








World War Zero on Steam


The World War began in August 1914. It is now March 1964, and war still wages on. The Russian October Revolution has taken place, but the Bolsheviks were crushed by the mad Baron Ugenberg. He plans to build a huge Russo-Mongolian empire that stretches from the Atlantic to Vladivostok, crushing...




store.steampowered.com


----------



## PJVol

Lol "Russo-Mongolian empire"


----------



## ManniX-ITA

bwana said:


> World War Zero? This game doesnt look that demanding
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> World War Zero on Steam
> 
> 
> The World War began in August 1914. It is now March 1964, and war still wages on. The Russian October Revolution has taken place, but the Bolsheviks were crushed by the mad Baron Ugenberg. He plans to build a huge Russo-Mongolian empire that stretches from the Atlantic to Vladivostok, crushing...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> store.steampowered.com


Ouch no what is that 









World War Z (2019 video game) - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org





WWZ is quite demanding, depends on your configuration.
It's rendering hundreds of zekes on screen without dropping a frame.
Unless you have USB vdroops of course...

The engine is one of the few heavily multi-threaded and that's why it's so prone to uncover instabilities.
It's so damn optimized that it's not wasting any cpu cycles.
When there's need some cores, there are 4 threads handling the big stuff, they sky rocket to 100% in blink.
I guess this is what makes it so peculiar.

This is the game starting, you can see all the 32 threads being initialized:











This is the benchmark running but it's nothing compared to the load from a Horde mission:










The 4 main threads are jumping to 100% and then go down.
While playing they do it much more often and this up & down is very though.


----------



## rjeftw

What version of the master? B550/X570?


ManniX-ITA said:


> Ahahha I'm fed up shredding, it's being a chore
> Tried now Dirty Bomb which is a free game on Steam but it did it only once.
> WWZ for some reason is definitely the best to test stability.
> Was using it also on the Master with the 3800x and it's incredibly fast and accurate to uncover instabilities.


----------



## Forsaken1

Is anyone with this board actually going to push it to its limits and post?


----------



## Phynicle

Arghh, my order for this board in Australia got pushed out to Feb now, the supplier was originally indicating they will have stock soon.
This board should've been easier to manufacture


----------



## YoungChris

Only my second day with this chip 















If anyone here has any Vermeer chip, even 5600x, with a very strong FCLK, please hmu


----------



## ManniX-ITA

rjeftw said:


> What version of the master? B550/X570?


X570 Master Rel.1.0



YoungChris said:


> Only my second day with this chip
> View attachment 2473306
> View attachment 2473307
> 
> If anyone here has any Vermeer chip, even 5600x, with a very strong FCLK, please hmu


My 5950x can run up to 2067 IF with the Unify-X-


----------



## gymleader91

With all the issue around coil whine and stuff would the Unify still be an option to roll the dice on buying?


----------



## YoungChris

ManniX-ITA said:


> X570 Master Rel.1.0
> 
> 
> 
> My 5950x can run up to 2067 IF with the Unify-X-


What could you do on AGESA 1.1.0.0? Also, how's the core doing?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

YoungChris said:


> What could you do on AGESA 1.1.0.0? Also, how's the core doing?


Could do the same 2067 IF but with mem de-sync, same lots of WHEA errors.

The cores were doing a bit better than the Unify-X.


----------



## dr.Rafi

Phynicle said:


> Arghh, my order for this board in Australia got pushed out to Feb now, the supplier was originally indicating they will have stock soon.
> This board should've been easier to manufacture


Before getting Unify I checked everywhere for Unify-x in Australian market was sold out even no pre order, Unify is doing good too same as Unify-x with retail bios but for Unify-x i seen crazy result with this bios 
@ ManniX you have to try this bios not sure you may be already did


----------



## ManniX-ITA

dr.Rafi said:


> Before getting Unify I checked everywhere for Unify-x in Australian market was sold out even no pre order, Unify is doing good too same as Unify-x with retail bios but for Unify-x i seen crazy result with this bios
> @ ManniX you have to try this bios not sure you may be already did


I'm using A12, this A11 didn't see published anywhere.

My problem right now are the USB voltage drops.
Still looking for a solution.
Otherwise I'd love the board even with the coil whine.
It's a bit weak on the CPU versus the Master but rock solid on memory.


----------



## dr.Rafi

ManniX-ITA said:


> I'm using A12, this A11 didn't see published anywhere.
> 
> My problem right now are the USB voltage drops.
> Still looking for a solution.
> Otherwise I'd love the board even with the coil whine.
> It's a bit weak on the CPU versus the Master but rock solid on memory.


It can be your keyborad not compatible, Iam using cheap Logiteck keyborad and i test it on WWZ for 2 hours in high setting and low setting and the mode you mention i dont have any issues with unify is butter smooth with thousands of charchters on screen.
will try to find this bios and back soon.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

dr.Rafi said:


> It can be your keyborad not compatible, Iam using cheap Logiteck keyborad and i test it on WWZ for 2 hours in high setting and low setting and the mode you mention i dont have any issues with unify is butter smooth with thousands of charchters on screen.
> will try to find this bios and back soon.


It's not just the keyboard, it's a Logitech G15, it's also the Gamepad G13.
Definitely not a device issue; have replaced just the board and it was all working fine.

The Unify is similar but not the same board, maybe different enough.
Could also be this Unify-X is broken, not a general issue.
I'm probably going to send it back in RMA and see if I have the same issue with a new one.


----------



## dr.Rafi

This is the bios 





MEG B550 UNIFY-XA05O1.zip







drive.google.com


----------



## dr.Rafi

ManniX-ITA said:


> It's not just the keyboard, it's a Logitech G15, it's also the Gamepad G13.
> Definitely not a device issue; have replaced just the board and it was all working fine.
> 
> The Unify is similar but not the same board, maybe different enough.
> Could also be this Unify-X is broken, not a general issue.
> I'm probably going to send it back in RMA and see if I have the same issue with a new one.


I had Sound stutering issue on Asus x570 itx with latest agessa 1190 bios and just adjusting VDDGIOD voltage solved the problem .the problem was present even on stock setting (bios defult).


----------



## dr.Rafi

Iam testing Again x570 aorus master with new latest f31 bios and seams alot of improvment regard stabilty and i feels is performing now similar to Unify with exact setting used on unify, Aorus master get me better single scores and worse multi core in geekbench but by small margin.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

dr.Rafi said:


> This is the bios
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MEG B550 UNIFY-XA05O1.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


That's A05, works quite bad with my 5950x.
Lots of WHEA errors above IF 1600 and USB stuff re-connecting continuously.



dr.Rafi said:


> I had Sound stutering issue on Asus x570 itx with latest agessa 1190 bios and just adjusting VDDGIOD voltage solved the problem .the problem was present even on stock setting (bios defult).


Tested every combination.
If it's the IOD then testing with AIDA, CB, Geekbench, etc at some point the G13 display resets.
Doesn't happen, perfectly stable.
This is similar but not the same.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

dr.Rafi said:


> Iam testing Again x570 aorus master with new latest f31 bios and seams alot of improvment regard stabilty and i feels is performing now similar to Unify with exact setting used on unify, Aorus master get me better single scores and worse multi core in geekbench but by small margin.


Didn't test as much as with the Unify-X, the Master was quite good anyway with the CPU scores.
It's the memory which is a tragedy.


----------



## dr.Rafi

ManniX-ITA said:


> Didn't test as much as with the Unify-X, the Master was quite good anyway with the CPU scores.
> It's the memory which is a tragedy.


on 1900 fclk 3800 memory No whea with latest bios


----------



## dr.Rafi

But not sure why only Gigabyte not releasing Agessa 1190 for their boards?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

dr.Rafi said:


> But not sure why only Gigabyte not releasing Agessa 1190 for their boards?


I guess it's because the CO still works better in 1.1.0.0 D.
Since 1.1.9.0 is still not better with IF above 1900 doesn't really makes sense to release it.
Guess we'll have to see in 1-2 weeks from now.


----------



## PJVol

*ManniX-ITA*
I was wondering why asrock released 1190 betas just for x570 series. When I asked them, the answer was they need to validate it. But as things stand, I'm better stay away from those 1900+ fclk.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

PJVol said:


> *ManniX-ITA*
> I was wondering why asrock released 1190 betas just for x570 series. When I asked them, the answer was they need to validate it. But as things stand, I'm better stay at 1900 fclk.


Let's see if AMD can really deliver this fix.
I'd really love to run at IF 2067, the performance gap was pretty impressive.
Not a big difference at 2000/2033 but at 2067 the user profile was loading noticeably faster.


----------



## Phynicle

dr.Rafi said:


> Before getting Unify I checked everywhere for Unify-x in Australian market was sold out even no pre order, Unify is doing good too same as Unify-x with retail bios but for Unify-x i seen crazy result with this bios
> @ ManniX you have to try this bios not sure you may be already did


Hey I found 1 store with supposed stock at their warehouse, which is a bit suspicious given every other store is saying Feb eta.

Any how's it called ishoptech.com.au
I've ordered one last night, but like I said highly sceptical


----------



## dr.Rafi

Phynicle said:


> Hey I found 1 store with supposed stock at their warehouse, which is a bit suspicious given every other store is saying Feb eta.
> 
> Any how's it called ishoptech.com.au
> I've ordered one last night, but like I said highly sceptical


I always ring them up to be sure they have the stock , some claim stock while they order from overseas, and some claim "we get it in 2 days" but take weeks.


----------



## Phynicle

dr.Rafi said:


> I always ring them up to be sure they have the stock , some claim stock while they order from overseas, and some claim "we get it in 2 days" but take weeks.


I just checked with them, guy said it's getting dispatched tomorrow and they have heaps of stock. Will keep you posted if it eventuates


----------



## MyUsername

Put the new Unify-X board in yesterday, pretty painless and went straight in no problems and booted first time awesome. Dialled in 1900/3800 with mirrored settings from my Master from memory and went straight in, probably a little bit too easy. Setup my 3 x NVMe raid and boom instantly recognized, I thought this is too good saved me downloading my 1.8TB games again. Windows 10 did it's setup and I reactivated Windows. I updated the bios to a12, overclocks the same but NVMe raid is broken. M.2a is online but b and c are offline and it thinks the array has failed. Flashed the previous bios A0 again and the raid came back to life.

So far I love this board, seems rock solid stable with my 3900x no whea's @1900/3800, RAM stays really cool 26'C idle 42'C load, about 8'C cooler, NVMe stay cooler even though this time I took the heatsinks off and used the board heatsinks and found MSI have put two layers of thermal pad on the board and a thick pad on the shell cover, good idea MSI really cool.

3xMP600 in raid 0 I'm getting 12GB/s read and write, just insane. On the Master I was getting 9.8GB/s read and 9.2GB/s write. PCI-e @ 8x for the GPU I'm not noticing much of a hit with my 2070 Super, I ran 3dmark and was 300 points down and various game are perhaps 1 or 2 frames down. I'll do more testing when I get time.


----------



## Spectre73

MyUsername said:


> So far I love this board, seems rock solid stable with my 3900x no whea's @1900/3800, RAM stays really cool 26'C idle 42'C load, about 8'C cooler, NVMe stay cooler even though this time I took the heatsinks off and used the board heatsinks and found MSI have put two layers of thermal pad on the board and a thick pad on the shell cover, good idea MSI really cool.


The two layers are for single sided m.2 drives. If your NVME SSD has chips on both sides you should remove ONE layer.


----------



## MyUsername

Spectre73 said:


> The two layers are for single sided m.2 drives. If your NVME SSD has chips on both sides you should remove ONE layer.


Yeah assumed so, I took one layer off. I like that MSI sandwich the NVMe with thermal pads as it works well and is better than the factory heat spreader, Gigabyte Master only had a thermal pad on the cover so I chose not to use it.


----------



## Joeking78

Ordered a Unify which should be with me on Wednesday


----------



## bwana

Why does PBO cut L3 cache read speed in half? I cleared cmos , left the advanced OC menu as PBO on auto, and set DDR speed and main timings. Ran AIDA. I'll spare you the pix but I tested at DDR 3600, 3800, and 4000. L3 cache read was >700. Then I went back and set the PBO menu to enhanced 1 and reran AIDa. Finally I went back and set PBO to manual and specified motherboard control. Whenever the PBO selection is changed from auto, the L3 speed is way down. ~400s. Does anyone else see this?


----------



## PJVol

It depends on what actual EDC value is set. You can see it in main HWInfo window clicking processor info in left menu.


----------



## Biggd0gg

Gave A86 a spin, to see if the new agesa would help fclk/whea issues. It did not, nothing changed for me. Lots of WHEA errors on any fclk above 1900. 1900 itself still doesn't boot. Aida reports full L3 speeds with PBO now though, which is nice.


----------



## Pedros

Same here ...


----------



## bwana

PJVol said:


> It depends on what actual EDC value is set. You can see it in main HWInfo window clicking processor info in left menu.


I do not see an EDC parameter


----------



## PJVol

I said in main window, not summary


----------



## gymleader91

I just want a top tier AM4 board that isn't going to hold me back if I do try overclocking. Is the Unify a good choice? I was lookign X570 but really I can't stand chipset fans.


----------



## Spectre73

So I tested UEFI A13 for the unify-x. Not for max fclk but general changes and I did not find any (which is a good thing, IMHO). The EDC bug seems to be gone. I mean the bug where setting PBO to auto does not set basic CPU values for PPT/TDC/EDC but sets EDC 10 too low (from 140 default to 130).
This is gone. Performance seems to have regressed all so slightly. For my 5800x on default it went from CB R20 MC 6035 to 6012. It is repeatable, but sub 1% difference. I am still testing stability at 1900 fclk right now, which means at least an overnight run of karhu with my old stable settings.
After that, maybe I am tweaking with CO.


----------



## DeletedMember558271

Biggd0gg said:


> Gave A86 a spin, to see if the new agesa would help fclk/whea issues. It did not, nothing changed for me. *Lots of WHEA errors on any fclk above 1900. 1900 itself still doesn't boot*. Aida reports full L3 speeds with PBO now though, which is nice.


It would be cool if we could at least get MSI to fix this, since unlike WHEA errors 1933+ which might be an AMD AGESA issue I think this is on their end. I've tried reporting it as a bug, I'm on a B550 Tomahawk, would be nice if I could get 1900 instead of 1867 if 1933+ is going to be forever WHEA plagued.

Edit: They did tell me "Thank you for reporting this issue, we will forward this to the BIOS software team."


----------



## PJVol

*@ManniX-ITA*
Hey! Wanna share what I have found chasing that damned CPU RESETs at the bench start. It turned out that CO count for the best cores was too low (not for the worse ones, which usually are not spike too high), and since dropping them to 7-6 (10-8 previously), haven't encounter any resets in 2 days testing. Amen.

PS: and btw, for maintain stability when at low load spikes vdroop occured on modest cores due to low LLC, I use scalar x3 now instead of Vcore +10mv offset.


----------



## MyUsername

Just had a scary moment. Tried a13 to see if raid was fixed, short answer no I have to rebuild, weekend job. Flashing a00, went through the process and stopped at 50%, left it until the usb stick stopped flashing. Kinda like s#it what do I do? Cycled the power and a00 had successfully worked. I thought I killed it and it's only 4 days old. 

Is this common, and does flashrom support this board? I don't feel comfortable turning the power off at 50%


----------



## KedarWolf

I'm buying a Unify-X online here in Canada this Friday, still in preorder status, but I can wait.

Oh, and about my 5950x I preordered launch day Nov. 5th at a store here locally.

A guy who ordered the same day at the same store got his two days ago, but no word on mine yet.

He ordered early in the afternoon, I ordered just before the store closed at 6:30 p.m.

When I called the store a month ago, there were 16 peeps ahead of me on the preorder list.

I hope soon. But it might be good I waited.

I heard a rumour the first batch of the 5000 series CPUs were not very good and those that RMA'd them and got a new one, the new ones were much better.


----------



## MyUsername

KedarWolf said:


> I hope soon. But it might be good I waited.
> 
> I heard a rumour the first batch of the 5000 series CPUs were not very good and those that RMA'd them and got a new one, the new ones were much better.


Fingers crossed I'm thinking the same. It's been a long two months waiting for my 5950x, I just want it now


----------



## bwana

PJVol said:


> I said in main window, not summary


Sorry if I am a little dense, this is the main HwInfo screen









and this is the only place I see EDC, in the sensors list









Can you show me yours and then I'll show you mine?


----------



## bwana

after setting PBO in ryzen master and doing a stress test edc show 99% of 215A, cpu will be at 145w

returning to default and during stress test, edc will be at 140A and cpu will max at 105w.


----------



## PJVol

next post


----------



## Joeking78

Unify arrives in a few hours, looking forward to trying out some improved RAM settings and overclocking


----------



## PJVol

@bwana
PBO limits set to "Motherboard"








PBO limits set to "Manual"








Here are reported L3 latencies:


----------



## ManniX-ITA

KedarWolf said:


> I'm buying a Unify-X online here in Canada this Friday, still in preorder status, but I can wait.
> 
> Oh, and about my 5950x I preordered launch day Nov. 5th at a store here locally.
> 
> A guy who ordered the same day at the same store got his two days ago, but no word on mine yet.
> 
> He ordered early in the afternoon, I ordered just before the store closed at 6:30 p.m.
> 
> When I called the store a month ago, there were 16 peeps ahead of me on the preorder list.
> 
> I hope soon. But it might be good I waited.
> 
> I heard a rumour the first batch of the 5000 series CPUs were not very good and those that RMA'd them and got a new one, the new ones were much better.


Maybe not a rumor... 
Swapped the Unify-X to the Master and the USB voltage drops are still there.
Have to send back in RMA the 5950x.

Waiting also an answer from MSI about the coil whine.
They told me straight to send back the board in RMA.
When I asked if they were sure that I'd get back one without coil whine, otherwise I'd kept as it is, they told me that they'll let me know.


----------



## LionAlonso

ManniX-ITA said:


> Maybe not a rumor...
> Swapped the Unify-X to the Master and the USB voltage drops are still there.
> Have to send back in RMA the 5950x.
> 
> Waiting also an answer from MSI about the coil whine.
> They told me straight to send back the board in RMA.
> When I asked if they were sure that I'd get back one without coil whine, otherwise I'd kept as it is, they told me that they'll let me know.


Wow really? 
You couldnt get rid of them touching Voltage values? When did you experienced the Vdroops?
If I remember well you had a good 5950X, atleast in scores and FCLK


----------



## ManniX-ITA

LionAlonso said:


> Wow really?
> You couldnt get rid of them touching Voltage values? When did you experienced the Vdroops?
> If I remember well you had a good 5950X, atleast in scores and FCLK


Yes it's an issue similar to a wrong VDDG IOD but not quite the same...
It was a very good one sigh 

Only happens when the GPU is in use.
Seems to be linked to the PCIe lanes for the GPU.
Otherwise it runs perfectly. Not a single hiccup running any benchmark or stress test.
Yesterday I was on Discord and just loading a game the USB got crazy.
The wireless headphones got silent and muted.
Even after the power cycle they couldn't hear me, had to disconnect from the voice channel and re-connect.
Just to explain the weirdness of the effect.


----------



## Joeking78

She arrived, now for some fun


----------



## MyUsername

ManniX-ITA said:


> Yes it's an issue similar to a wrong VDDG IOD but not quite the same...
> It was a very good one sigh
> 
> Only happens when the GPU is in use.
> Seems to be linked to the PCIe lanes for the GPU.
> Otherwise it runs perfectly. Not a single hiccup running any benchmark or stress test.
> Yesterday I was on Discord and just loading a game the USB got crazy.
> The wireless headphones got silent and muted.
> Even after the power cycle they couldn't hear me, had to disconnect from the voice channel and re-connect.
> Just to explain the weirdness of the effect.


Weird issue indeed. What USBs are playing up? The four USB 3 on the rear come from the CPU and the rest come from the chipset I think. I did read there has been USB stuttering with these boards.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

MyUsername said:


> Weird issue indeed. What USBs are playing up? The four USB 3 on the rear come from the CPU and the rest come from the chipset I think. I did read there has been USB stuttering with these boards.


All USB ports regardless; it's the CPU freezing and the impact is first on the USB devices.
But also everything else stutter when it's bad, including audio and video.
Not a board problem, does it on both the Unify-X and Master.


----------



## Stag

Previously had similar issues as manni.
RMA cpu no issues since then.


----------



## Joeking78

Booted 3866mhz 16-16-16-16-32 with 1.5v...something I tried and was not able to achieve on the Aorus Pro, happy...now need to tweak and test for stability.

Love the MSI bios and the cmos reset switch is a god send.


----------



## bwana

@PJVol Thank you for showing me where to look. I appreciate you taking the time to participate here, esp since your sig shows you have an asrock board. The unify PBO settings are mysterious. They give you a choice of auto, disable, enable,4 enhanced settings, 3 eco settings, and an advanced setting. When I pick enhanced then you get to choose manual or motherboard. I chose motherboard and the results I mentioned above were at that setting. But yours are waaay higher! I guess ASROCK is liberal w the voltage. I cannot find where I can input the EDC numbers in the bios so I'll keep looking. I submitted a ticket to MSI a week ago about documentation to clarify the PBO settings but they never replied.


----------



## MyUsername

bwana said:


> @PJVol Thank you for showing me where to look. I appreciate you taking the time to participate here, esp since your sig shows you have an asrock board. The unify PBO settings are mysterious. They give you a choice of auto, disable, enable,4 enhanced settings, 3 eco settings, and an advanced setting. When I pick enhanced then you get to choose manual or motherboard. I chose motherboard and the results I mentioned above were at that setting. But yours are waaay higher! I guess ASROCK is liberal w the voltage. I cannot find where I can input the EDC numbers in the bios so I'll keep looking. I submitted a ticket to MSI a week ago about documentation to clarify the PBO settings but they never replied.


You have two places to enter PBO settings AMD CBS(AMD Overclocking) and AMD Overclocking. They apply the settings either before or after the PSP handover, they pretty much do the same thing.

The enhance mode 1-4 adjust the PBO scaler and CPU boost clock override under AMD Overclocking in settings\advanced. The eco modes simply limits the CPU watts PPT.


----------



## Joeking78

I love this board!

Still lots of stress testing and tweaking to do tomorrow but 3866mhz C16 1.45v seems fine and getting there with 4000mhz C16 1.5v also.

Couldn't get anywhere near these frequency with the Aorus Pro.


----------



## dr.Rafi

ManniX-ITA said:


> Maybe not a rumor...
> Swapped the Unify-X to the Master and the USB voltage drops are still there.
> Have to send back in RMA the 5950x.
> 
> Waiting also an answer from MSI about the coil whine.
> They told me straight to send back the board in RMA.
> When I asked if they were sure that I'd get back one without coil whine, otherwise I'd kept as it is, they told me that they'll let me know.


Just for another Idea, I had 3900 x in past, and had some pins contaminated by thermal past while taking the cpu out of socket was giving me problem detecting on ram channel some times when boot dual chanels and sometimes single, i used electronic borad cleaner spray to wash the whole cpu and the whole socket, let it dry, and problem solved, I know the pain of waiting for RMA.


----------



## PJVol

bwana said:


> The unify PBO settings are mysterious


Yeah, I see it)).
You know, ASRock BIOS was just as much a mess until AGESA v2 1.x.x.x based versions were released. They finally got rid of those annoying duplicate settings and cleaned up the menu, so that it now looks like it should have been back in the X370 Taichi days.


----------



## glnn_23

Testing memory @ 3800c14 with TM5 on the unify-x


----------



## MyUsername

I would have taken anything over 4000MT/s to be honest.


----------



## YoungChris

Joeking78 said:


> I love this board!
> 
> Still lots of stress testing and tweaking to do tomorrow but 3866mhz C16 1.45v seems fine and getting there with 4000mhz C16 1.5v also.
> 
> Couldn't get anywhere near these frequency with the Aorus Pro.
> 
> View attachment 2474006


How much higher fclk can you boot/run?


----------



## Joeking78

YoungChris said:


> How much higher fclk can you boot/run?


Haven't tried yet, will give it a go when I get home from work.


----------



## HavannaInvestrosClub

Hey Guys... i run the unify-x with a 5950x and Crucial BL16G32C16U4B.M16FE1 with a 5700x Nitro+ SE
I watsh some OCs and thats run the IF with 2000 MHz and get it not run on my own.

1900Nhz runs cute and well.... is ther s solusion to get it work with 2000mhz... The Ram on its selfs run with 4000mhz very well but get not the IF up to 2000MHz

Thanks for help...


----------



## Joeking78

HavannaInvestrosClub said:


> Hey Guys... i run the unify-x with a 5950x and Crucial BL16G32C16U4B.M16FE1 with a 5700x Nitro+ SE
> I watsh some OCs and thats run the IF with 2000 MHz and get it not run on my own.
> 
> 1900Nhz runs cute and well.... is ther s solusion to get it work with 2000mhz... The Ram on its selfs run with 4000mhz very well but get not the IF up to 2000MHz
> 
> Thanks for help...


Try raising IOD and CCD...mine struggled at 2000 IF but raising them to 1.075 and keeping DRAM at 1.5v got it going well.

Could also try increasing procodt, i have dual rank and it works better at 43.6 at higher frequency.

Higher VSOC could improve performance at higher clocks too, mine is 1.125


----------



## ManniX-ITA

dr.Rafi said:


> Just for another Idea, I had 3900 x in past, and had some pins contaminated by thermal past while taking the cpu out of socket was giving me problem detecting on ram channel some times when boot dual chanels and sometimes single, i used electronic borad cleaner spray to wash the whole cpu and the whole socket, let it dry, and problem solved, I know the pain of waiting for RMA.


For sure can't be thermal paste but I'll check.
Did a quick visual inspection when I replaced the board and didn't notice anything wrong.
Maybe fine dust around a pin, there's a slim chance.

BTW also the Master has coil whine while running AIDA64 benchmark; just much less noisy.


----------



## bwana

@MyUsername @PJVol Thank you. Taking the time to answer naive questions from one person will also help others when this board becomes widely used which I am certain it will. It does memory so well and reproducibly. But back to the point of EDC limiting my L3 cache read speed, my default settings with PBO off are PPT 142A(85%=120.7A) used TDC 95(100%=95A) and EDC 140(89%=124.6A). vCore under p95 load is 0.931v Of course my all core boost only hits ~3gHz. But my L3 cache speed is great even with sloppy secondary timings.









Setting PBO auto gets me to 3.325 gHz. And the power readings are all the same. What? No increase?? (Is there any way to change the display of current from % to actual amps?) L3 speed is a little less but not much. 623 GB/s. I know you are cringing at those sloppy secondary timings so I did a run with them tighter. It gets me an extra ~1 GB/s bandwidth and 1 ns less latency. I dont know why PBO auto is affecting L3 cache speed.










Now PJVol posted that nice pic on page 22 where increasing EDC gave better L3 cache speeds.

When I set PBO to enabled (again leaving all the other settings to auto for consistency) I get an all core of 4.025 gHz. Power limits are PPT 500w(43%used=215A)) TDC 245w(68%used=166.6A) EDC 215 w(99%used=213A) vCore is 1.094 under load.
But my L3 score tanks









Tightening the secondaries doesnt do much again

So unlike PJVol , my L3 cache speed decreases with increasing EDC limit.

My cpu temp under p95 load is 80 degrees- the rad is in the open and the board is on a bench. memory temps are always under 40 degrees. I can even push my cpu further with setting boost to +100mHz, scalar 10x, and Curve Optimizer to -23,-25,-28 for the three best cores and -30 for all the others.








but memory speed is still bad










As you can see I have not touched any of the voltages. I really dont know what to do there because I still cannot figure out why memory speed seems to vary inversely with CPU speed. Should I set vCore to something specific? and those 4 memory voltages are also a black box to me. I know they affect the infinity fabric stability but I have had no WHEA errors.

I know it's not another process causing this because I get the same effect when I run windows in safe mode as I showed in the spreadsheet I posted above


----------



## ManniX-ITA

bwana said:


> @MyUsername @PJVol Thank you. Taking the time to answer naive questions from one person will also help others when this board becomes widely used which I am certain it will. It does memory so well and reproducibly. But back to the point of EDC limiting my L3 cache read speed, my default settings with PBO off are PPT 142A(85%=120.7A) used TDC 95(100%=95A) and EDC 140(89%=124.6A). vCore under p95 load is 0.931v Of course my all core boost only hits ~3gHz. But my L3 cache speed is great even with sloppy secondary timings.
> View attachment 2474138
> 
> 
> Setting PBO auto gets me to 3.325 gHz. And the power readings are all the same. What? No increase?? (Is there any way to change the display of current from % to actual amps?) L3 speed is a little less but not much. 623 GB/s. I know you are cringing at those sloppy secondary timings so I did a run with them tighter. It gets me an extra ~1 GB/s bandwidth and 1 ns less latency. I dont know why PBO auto is affecting L3 cache speed.
> View attachment 2474140
> 
> 
> 
> Now PJVol posted that nice pic on page 22 where increasing EDC gave better L3 cache speeds.
> 
> When I set PBO to enabled (again leaving all the other settings to auto for consistency) I get an all core of 4.025 gHz. Power limits are PPT 500w(43%used=215A)) TDC 245w(68%used=166.6A) EDC 215 w(99%used=213A) vCore is 1.094 under load.
> But my L3 score tanks
> View attachment 2474139
> 
> 
> Tightening the secondaries doesnt do much again
> 
> So unlike PJVol , my L3 cache speed decreases with increasing EDC limit.
> 
> My cpu temp under p95 load is 80 degrees- the rad is in the open and the board is on a bench. memory temps are always under 40 degrees. I can even push my cpu further with setting boost to +100mHz, scalar 10x, and Curve Optimizer to -23,-25,-28 for the three best cores and -30 for all the others.
> View attachment 2474142
> 
> but memory speed is still bad
> View attachment 2474143
> 
> 
> 
> As you can see I have not touched any of the voltages. I really dont know what to do there because I still cannot figure out why memory speed seems to vary inversely with CPU speed. Should I set vCore to something specific? and those 4 memory voltages are also a black box to me. I know they affect the infinity fabric stability but I have had no WHEA errors.
> 
> I know it's not another process causing this because I get the same effect when I run windows in safe mode as I showed in the spreadsheet I posted above


The Unify-X, mine at least, is very wobbly on the L3 results.
Try repeating the test by double clicking on the results (eg. on the 420.15 GB/s text); it could give you scores 100 or 200 GB/s higher.

You need to fix the VSOC is at 1.0813V which means is set at 1.100V.
It should be at least above 50mV from VDDG; set it at 1.150V.

Also the VDDG at 1.100V seems a bit too high for IF 1800.
I'd try with CCD 1000mV and IOD at 1050mV.

If you want to check some good timings look at the spreadsheet:









Zen RAM OC Leaderboards


Zen 4 Sheet is sorted and verified submissions LOCKED each Thursday. Please provide proof of stability via Y-Cruncher AND a memory stability test, otherwise your submission will be removed. Refer to the FAQ for more info. MEMORY,PROCESSOR Username,Memory Latency,L3 Latency,DIMMs,Die Type,Rank,Me...




docs.google.com





Usually in the screenshot of proof there's a ZenTimings snapshot with all you need.


----------



## bwana

I thought the L3 cache was AMD's secret weapon that allow them to overcome the latency of their infinity fabric. Cutting that speed would seem to be very bad. Besides AIDA is there another benchmark that would be useful in seeing the effect of L3 speed?


----------



## bwana

@ManniX-ITA Thank you for that spreadsheet link. BTW, I used to watch Mannix when it was a TV series. From the spreadsheet I see similar L3 latencies to mine but it occurred to me that when I set PBO and my L3 speed drops, the latency does not change. Is that not a problem with AIDA?

I can also see in the screenshot of yours, that your cpu speed seems stock, in other words no PBO. What happens when you set PBO to enabled?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

bwana said:


> I thought the L3 cache was AMD's secret weapon that allow them to overcome the latency of their infinity fabric. Cutting that speed would seem to be very bad. Besides AIDA is there another benchmark that would be useful in seeing the effect of L3 speed?





bwana said:


> @ManniX-ITA Thank you for that spreadsheet link. BTW, I used to watch Mannix when it was a TV series. From the spreadsheet I see similar L3 latencies to mine but it occurred to me that when I set PBO and my L3 speed drops, the latency does not change. Is that not a problem with AIDA?


Ahah I didn't even knew that was a show or that someone actually had the name Mannix when I picked it, was a child and there was no internet at the time just BBS 

The L3 speed can also vary according to the AGESA but it looks weird in your case.
Try setting PBO Advanced and Manual limits to 280/175/215.

L3 speed it's not the same as its efficiency; even when it scores 300 GB/s the CPU can be more efficient than at 700 GB/s.
I guess that more is efficient less is relevant the top speed.


----------



## YoungChris

Can you send pictures as to where in bios you set your EDC and all that? @bwana


----------



## Joeking78

Got 4000mhz stable at C16 with 1.48v...would like to get tRDCD down to 16 but not stable at 1.48v. Will try some tweaks today, maybe up to 1.5v.


----------



## KedarWolf

MSI MEG B550 UNIFY-X AM4 ATX Motherboard


Buy MSI MEG B550 UNIFY-X AM4 ATX Motherboard featuring ATX Form Factor, AMD B550 Chipset, AM4 Socket, 2 x Dual-Channel DDR4 DIMM Slots, 6 x SATA III, 4 x M.2 PCIe Slots, 1 x PCIe 4.0/3.0 x16 Slot, 1 x PCIe 3.0 x16 Slot, 2 x PCIe 3.0 x1 Slots, 1 x RJ45 2.5 Gigabit Ethernet Port, Windows 10...




www.bhphotovideo.com





Pre-order, but B&H Photo are pretty decent, and delays not too bad.

STILL haven't gotten my 5950x and but I'll quite likely have it by the time I get the board. Guy that ordered from the same store as me the same day got his four days ago. 


















Wayfair Canada - Online Home Store for Furniture, Decor, Outdoors & More - Wayfair Canada


Shop Wayfair Canada for A Zillion Things Home across all styles and budgets. 5,000 brands of furniture, lighting, cookware, and more. Free Shipping on most items.




www.wayfair.ca





THE desk WILL fit my 49" ultra-wide screen and my second 28" one as well. Super cheap too at $162 Canadian dollars including tax. 

It's 63" wide and 22" on the desktop width.


----------



## Spectre73

Ok. Time for a rather unconventional question that does only relate indirectly to the Unify-X. 
I really would like to control some case fans based on RAM temp, because in the current environment and with the focus shifting from CPU to RAM overclock, I really would like to have the ability to control fan speed base on this metric. Reason is, that I can see around 5° less RAM temp if I increase my 2 front case fans speed. Since this is not possible in the UEFI (and quite a niche use, probably), is there a software, that can do this? I heard good things of ARGUS monitor but have no idea if it would be possible there?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Spectre73 said:


> Ok. Time for a rather unconventional question that does only relate indirectly to the Unify-X.
> I really would like to control some case fans based on RAM temp, because in the current environment and with the focus shifting from CPU to RAM overclock, I really would like to have the ability to control fan speed base on this metric. Reason is, that I can see around 5° less RAM temp if I increase my 2 front case fans speed. Since this is not possible in the UEFI (and quite a niche use, probably), is there a software, that can do this? I heard good things of ARGUS monitor but have no idea if it would be possible there?


If your DIMMs have thermal sensors and Argus supports them yes.
It's a wonderful software, worth the money. But it's not free.
There's a 30-days evaluation, try it.

If your DIMMs doesn't have a thermal sensor then it'd be better to buy a fan controller.

If it was in stock this one:





QUADRO fan controller for PWM fans


QUADRO fan controller for PWM fans: The QUADRO made by Aqua Computer is a four channel PWM fan controller with outstanding functionality, equally suited for water cooled or air cooled computers. Additionally, it features an RGBpx effect controller for 90 addressable LEDs. Key features of the...




shop.aquacomputer.de





You can stick the thermal probe on the DIMMs and regulate the fans based on it (and all the other sensors if you run the software suite).

Even better and available but more expensive:






aquaero 5 LT USB Fan-Controller


aquaero 5 LT USB Fan-Controller: Schon seit dem Verkaufsstart im Jahr 2004 steht der Name "aquaero" für die absolute Oberklasse unter den Lüftersteuerungen. Der Begriff der "Lüftersteuerung" kann dem riesigen Funktionsumfang des aquaeros nicht gerecht werden. Die wichtigsten Funktionen im...




shop.aquacomputer.de


----------



## MyUsername

Spectre73 said:


> Ok. Time for a rather unconventional question that does only relate indirectly to the Unify-X.
> I really would like to control some case fans based on RAM temp, because in the current environment and with the focus shifting from CPU to RAM overclock, I really would like to have the ability to control fan speed base on this metric. Reason is, that I can see around 5° less RAM temp if I increase my 2 front case fans speed. Since this is not possible in the UEFI (and quite a niche use, probably), is there a software, that can do this? I heard good things of ARGUS monitor but have no idea if it would be possible there?


Argus is a good bit of software, almost considered getting it myself with this board. But as I like minimal background software, I use the MOS temp sensor for the chassis fans as that ranges from 30'C to 45-50'C normal or 60'C stress testing, so I set different fans at different stages and it seems effective. I like the way this board slowly raises the fan speed instead of instant full speed, I found that to be annoying on the GB Master hearing the fans ramp up if the temp spiked for a second.


----------



## Speed Potato

KedarWolf said:


> MSI MEG B550 UNIFY-X AM4 ATX Motherboard
> 
> 
> Buy MSI MEG B550 UNIFY-X AM4 ATX Motherboard featuring ATX Form Factor, AMD B550 Chipset, AM4 Socket, 2 x Dual-Channel DDR4 DIMM Slots, 6 x SATA III, 4 x M.2 PCIe Slots, 1 x PCIe 4.0/3.0 x16 Slot, 1 x PCIe 3.0 x16 Slot, 2 x PCIe 3.0 x1 Slots, 1 x RJ45 2.5 Gigabit Ethernet Port, Windows 10...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.bhphotovideo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pre-order, but B&H Photo are pretty decent, and delays not too bad.
> 
> STILL haven't gotten my 5950x and but I'll quite likely have it by the time I get the board. Guy that ordered from the same store as me the same day got his four days ago.
> 
> View attachment 2474269
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wayfair Canada - Online Home Store for Furniture, Decor, Outdoors & More - Wayfair Canada
> 
> 
> Shop Wayfair Canada for A Zillion Things Home across all styles and budgets. 5,000 brands of furniture, lighting, cookware, and more. Free Shipping on most items.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.wayfair.ca
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> THE desk WILL fit my 49" ultra-wide screen and my second 28" one as well. Super cheap too at $162 Canadian dollars including tax.
> 
> It's 63" wide and 22" on the desktop width.
> 
> View attachment 2474270


That desk look super cheap, I expect your monitors to wooble like crazy. Also, that cheap furniture is sold at canadian tire and walmart also so you might be able to see it there before it's too late.

Also, you did a second pre-order for the UnifyX ? NCDS told me that Fev-05 was the expected shipping date, is B&H supposed to be sooner ?


----------



## Paddydapro

So, do you guys think L3 speed is EDC dependant? I have seen a 5900x aida bench where he reaches 1200gb/s L3 speed I reach measly 300gb/s


http://imgur.com/wurcenq


----------



## KedarWolf

Speed Potato said:


> That desk look super cheap, I expect your monitors to wooble like crazy. Also, that cheap furniture is sold at canadian tire and walmart also so you might be able to see it there before it's too late.
> 
> Also, you did a second pre-order for the UnifyX ? NCDS told me that Fev-05 was the expected shipping date, is B&H supposed to be sooner ?


No, first order, finally pulled the string last night.

B&H Photo is really reliable, but I don't have an actual timeline. Maybe I can talk with their chat. bbiab.

Oh, their chat not open right now.

The website says 2-4 weeks.

With the USD exchange and paying through PayPal attached to my VISA debit it was cheaper than NCDS with free shipping.


----------



## bwana

YoungChris said:


> Can you send pictures as to where in bios you set your EDC and all that? @bwana





















I picked cores 0 and 2 as my strongest cores because those were the ones that cinebench was using--meaning the OS was told they were the best. However in HWinfo there is this pecking order:










I dont know if that means anything because everything else on that page seemed like defaults and might not have been specific to this chip. After all, does AMD actually benchmark each core on a chip?


----------



## KedarWolf

Speed Potato said:


> That desk look super cheap, I expect your monitors to wooble like crazy. Also, that cheap furniture is sold at canadian tire and walmart also so you might be able to see it there before it's too late.
> 
> Also, you did a second pre-order for the UnifyX ? NCDS told me that Fev-05 was the expected shipping date, is B&H supposed to be sooner ?


Actually, even though PayPal said it was cheaper in Canadian dollars, I think because I had it linked to my bank card, it was $6 more than NCDS as my bank exchange for USD is worse than PayPal's.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

bwana said:


> View attachment 2474396
> 
> 
> View attachment 2474397
> 
> 
> I picked cores 0 and 2 as my strongest cores because those were the ones that cinebench was using--meaning the OS was told they were the best. However in HWinfo there is this pecking order:
> 
> View attachment 2474398
> 
> 
> I dont know if that means anything because everything else on that page seemed like defaults and might not have been specific to this chip. After all, does AMD actually benchmark each core on a chip?


Those 2 lines should be equal, at least on mine is.
Did you install the chipset drivers?

There's a nice article about CPPC on Anandtech:








AMD Clarifies "Best Cores" vs "Preferred Cores" Discrepancies For Ryzen CPUs







www.anandtech.com


----------



## PJVol

bwana said:


> I dont know if that means anything


That's the core numbers (starting from 1) in descending performance order.



ManniX-ITA said:


> Those 2 lines should be equal


I 've yet to see why my best 2 cores were also swaped in HWInfo CPPC report (despite the best one is noticably faster), unless balancing the load between them.









As to why bwana's CPPC core 6 (not 16) is ranked 8th, it was cleared in that very article.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

PJVol said:


> That's the core numbers (starting from 1) in descending performance order.
> 
> 
> I 've yet to see why my best 2 cores were also swaped in HWInfo CPPC report (despite the best one is noticably faster), unless balancing the load between them.
> View attachment 2474410
> 
> 
> As to why bwana's CPPC core 6 (not 16) is ranked 8th, it was cleared in that very article.


I've read it a while ago, I may have to read it again.

I thought the above was the old RM ordering and it was put in sync with CPPC by AMD.


----------



## PJVol

Basically it was, I suppose, except when a rearrangement is required so that no core from the best octet crosses the CCD(previously CCX) boundary.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

PJVol said:


> Basically it was, I suppose, except when a rearrangement is required so that no core from the best octet crosses the CCD(previously CCX) boundary.


Indeed, thought that API was not available anymore.
Seems mine identical was by pure chance then.
It could be helpful knowing which is the real binning quality/oc potential, not sure for what but you never know


----------



## MyUsername

Updated to a13 again to figure out this raid not working. In cpu mode m.2 a, b and c are online in the bios but doesn't boot even though I can choose to boot from it. Booted off usb windows to go, installed the raid drivers and found m.2 b c are offline again in raidexpert2. If I chose chipset mode the array works, so cpu mode broken and chipset mode works.


----------



## PJVol

*ManniX-ITA*

Btw, do you have an idea, what's limiting single core boost in zen2/3 and where those could be seen (if exists), similarly to pbo or temp limits for allcore boost? I'm curious what it might be


----------



## bwana

ManniX-ITA said:


> Those 2 lines should be equal, at least on mine is.
> Did you install the chipset drivers?
> 
> There's a nice article about CPPC on Anandtech:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AMD Clarifies "Best Cores" vs "Preferred Cores" Discrepancies For Ryzen CPUs
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.anandtech.com


Yes, the chipset drivers are installed. I read the article and now I'm a little more confused. CPPC2 tells the OS which are the best cores. Where does it get that info? AGESA? But HwInfo also lists Core Performance Order(CPO) - obviously it gets this from somewhere else.

In the first HwInfo chart 8 cores are listed with their performance rating in parentheses. Based on these 'parenthetical' numbers, the core order in his CPO list (that page from HwInfo is not shown) should be 4,3,2,6,5,0,7,1. From the article, I get that Ryzen Master marks cores with a star and dot-the gold star is on core 5, the silver star on core 4 and dots go to cores 3 and 7. So this is also the SMU ranking. This data is 'fused to the chip' by AMD.

Then he shows the HwInfo for the single core stress test with cores 2 and 3 bearing the load. Obviously the OS thinks the cores 2 and 3 are the best. This matches with the CPPC2 ranking he lists in 'Andrei's 3700x example' table. He says he can derive the CPPC2 ranking from the event log but I lost him there and did not see that connection.

In my case, the often used cores (0 and2) match up well with the HwInfo listing. So, CPO and CPPC2 match up pretty well for the top performing cores, unlike Andrei's example.

He says 'AMD’s firmware “lies” about the CPPC2 data to the OS in order to better optimize the schedulers behavior and attempting to achieve better overall performance.' I assume this is to avoid the latency penalty of rotating processes between cores that happen to be on different chiplets (CCXs) because that would involve the slow infinity fabric.


----------



## bwana

There is a new bios





MSI USA


Welcome to the MSI USA website. MSI designs and creates Mainboard, AIO, Graphics card, Notebook, Netbook, Tablet PC, Consumer electronics, Communication, Barebone, Server, industrial computing, Multimedia, Clean Machine and Car Infotainment.




us.msi.com





7D13v113(Beta version)
Description

Update to ComboAM4PIV2 1.2.0.0
Support S.A.M technology (Re-size BAR function) to enhance GPU performance for AMD Radeon RX 6000 series.

I had flashed 1.1.9.0 and already had SAM. Does this bios work better?


----------



## Speed Potato

bwana said:


> There is a new bios
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MSI USA
> 
> 
> Welcome to the MSI USA website. MSI designs and creates Mainboard, AIO, Graphics card, Notebook, Netbook, Tablet PC, Consumer electronics, Communication, Barebone, Server, industrial computing, Multimedia, Clean Machine and Car Infotainment.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> us.msi.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 7D13v113(Beta version)
> Description
> 
> Update to ComboAM4PIV2 1.2.0.0
> Support S.A.M technology (Re-size BAR function) to enhance GPU performance for AMD Radeon RX 6000 series.
> 
> I had flashed 1.1.9.0 and already had SAM. Does this bios work better?


When they post a beta bios, they remove all precedent beta bios and only leave the most recent. That's why the change-log include everything from the last "stable" bios.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

bwana said:


> Yes, the chipset drivers are installed. I read the article and now I'm a little more confused. CPPC2 tells the OS which are the best cores. Where does it get that info? AGESA? But HwInfo also lists Core Performance Order(CPO) - obviously it gets this from somewhere else.
> 
> In the first HwInfo chart 8 cores are listed with their performance rating in parentheses. Based on these 'parenthetical' numbers, the core order in his CPO list (that page from HwInfo is not shown) should be 4,3,2,6,5,0,7,1. From the article, I get that Ryzen Master marks cores with a star and dot-the gold star is on core 5, the silver star on core 4 and dots go to cores 3 and 7. So this is also the SMU ranking. This data is 'fused to the chip' by AMD.
> 
> Then he shows the HwInfo for the single core stress test with cores 2 and 3 bearing the load. Obviously the OS thinks the cores 2 and 3 are the best. This matches with the CPPC2 ranking he lists in 'Andrei's 3700x example' table. He says he can derive the CPPC2 ranking from the event log but I lost him there and did not see that connection.
> 
> In my case, the often used cores (0 and2) match up well with the HwInfo listing. So, CPO and CPPC2 match up pretty well for the top performing cores, unlike Andrei's example.
> 
> He says 'AMD’s firmware “lies” about the CPPC2 data to the OS in order to better optimize the schedulers behavior and attempting to achieve better overall performance.' I assume this is to avoid the latency penalty of rotating processes between cores that happen to be on different chiplets (CCXs) because that would involve the slow infinity fabric.


They both come from AGESA but the CPPC2 are indeed ordered to avoid jumping to a 2nd CCX.
RM is now listing them as it does for the CPPC2 tags.


PJVol said:


> *ManniX-ITA*
> 
> Btw, do you have an idea, what's limiting single core boost in zen2/3 and where those could be seen (if exists), similarly to pbo or temp limits for allcore boost? I'm curious what it might be


Should be the same; silicon and temp.
Maybe I don't understand the question.

The decision is based on different factors and variables but is more or less the same.
For ST the CPU looks more at localized sensors around that core for temperature and power.
But also takes into consideration the same global view as for all-core.


----------



## PJVol

Yeah, i should have been clear, I mean, are we able to control those thresholds the same way, as we can set ppt or edc limits for an allcore boost? I even failed to see whether those limits(st) are exposed through some api or etc.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

PJVol said:


> Yeah, i should have been clear, I mean, are we able to control those thresholds the same way, as we can set ppt or edc limits for an allcore boost? I even failed to see whether those limits(st) are exposed through some api or etc.


No it's the same, there are no specific controls or limits for ST except the Boost Clock and the Scalar. 
With Zen3 there's the CO where you can "alter" the balance; it's the most direct one.


----------



## KedarWolf

I'm buying this with my tax refund in March.






Welcome - Canada Computers & Electronics


Canadacomputers.com offers the best prices on Computers, Computer Parts, Laptops, Hard Drives, PC Hardware & Accessories with fast shipping and top-rated customer service.




www.canadacomputers.com














And a class-action lawsuit here in Canada I am eligible for just passed and I'll get $20,000 from it. And no, it's not a phishing scam, actual class-action lawsuit.

I pre-ordered and paid in full already a 5950x, 3090 in March with my tax refund. I pre-ordered and paid for an MSI B550 Unify-X already.

Only two things I want with the lawsuit money are these.









49 inch CRG9 Dual QHD Curved QLED Gaming Monitor Monitors - LC49RG90SSNXZA | Samsung US


Discover the latest features and innovations available in the 49 inches CRG9 Dual QHD Curved QLED Gaming Monitor. Find the perfect Monitors for you!




www.samsung.com














and

Trident Z Neo DDR4-4000 CL16-19-19-39 32GB (16GBx2) b-die









G.SKILL Updates Trident Z Neo DDR4 Specs Up To DDR4-4000 CL16 16GBx2 for AMD Ryzen 5000


G.SKILL International Enterprise Co., Ltd., the world's leading manufacturer of extreme performance memory and gaming peripherals, is announcing new DDR4 memory specifications under the Trident Z Neo series, optimized for the new AMD Ryzen 5000 processors. Featuring ultra-high speeds of up to...




www.techpowerup.com


----------



## ManniX-ITA

@KedarWolf

Nice!

I have that G.Skill kit; it's not bad but I'd buy this one instead now (if it'd be available which is the main issue):









F4-4266C17D-32GTZRB - Specification - G.SKILL International Enterprise Co., Ltd.


Trident Z RGB DDR4-4266 CL17-18-18-38 1.50V 32GB (2x16GB)




www.gskill.com





Main reason is that you can forget with that kit to run at 4000 MHz with tRDCRD below 17, and above below 18.
Thought the low VDIMM at 1.45V meant something like better binning but nope.

I'd take this instead cause I have the feeling could run at 4000MHz @ 1.5V with 16-16-16-32-48.


----------



## Paddydapro

ManniX-ITA said:


> @KedarWolf
> 
> Nice!
> 
> I have that G.Skill kit; it's not bad but I'd buy this one instead now (if it'd be available which is the main issue):
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> F4-4266C17D-32GTZRB - Specification - G.SKILL International Enterprise Co., Ltd.
> 
> 
> Trident Z RGB DDR4-4266 CL17-18-18-38 1.50V 32GB (2x16GB)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.gskill.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Main reason is that you can forget with that kit to run at 4000 MHz with tRDCRD below 17, and above below 18.
> Thought the low VDIMM at 1.45V meant something like better binning but nope.
> 
> I'd take this instead cause I have the feeling could run at 4000MHz @ 1.5V with 16-16-16-32-48.


I have the 2x8 3600c15 kit and two of em and can run 4000c16 at 1,47V. I have run stresstest and ram test but am not 100% sure it's stable because it wasn't insanely long test but I am really satisfied with the kit thus far


----------



## MageTank

ManniX-ITA said:


> @KedarWolf
> 
> Nice!
> 
> I have that G.Skill kit; it's not bad but I'd buy this one instead now (if it'd be available which is the main issue):
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> F4-4266C17D-32GTZRB - Specification - G.SKILL International Enterprise Co., Ltd.
> 
> 
> Trident Z RGB DDR4-4266 CL17-18-18-38 1.50V 32GB (2x16GB)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.gskill.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Main reason is that you can forget with that kit to run at 4000 MHz with tRDCRD below 17, and above below 18.
> Thought the low VDIMM at 1.45V meant something like better binning but nope.
> 
> I'd take this instead cause I have the feeling could run at 4000MHz @ 1.5V with 16-16-16-32-48.


I actually have the 4266 C17 kit, I do highly recommend it. Currently testing an obnoxious OC on it at 3600 C12:









It is far from stable at the moment, but it scales well with voltage at the "stock" XMP volts of 1.5V. Most of my other dual rank B-die kits didn't scale this well with voltage, so I assume these were binned better in general.

It can also do 4000 C14, but I've found that I can't get the latency quite as low (52ns on that profile). Anyone know if the reduction in memory latency is worth the tradeoff in fabric speed? I can't really think of a way to test that just yet, short of finally stabilizing this profile and testing it under "real world" conditions.

Still waiting on the B550 Unify-X to show up in the US, would love to see if the slightly better trace topology will yield better results with these DIMM's and potentially lower latency/improved bandwidth.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

MageTank said:


> I actually have the 4266 C17 kit, I do highly recommend it. Currently testing an obnoxious OC on it at 3600 C12:
> View attachment 2474799
> 
> 
> It is far from stable at the moment, but it scales well with voltage at the "stock" XMP volts of 1.5V. Most of my other dual rank B-die kits didn't scale this well with voltage, so I assume these were binned better in general.
> 
> It can also do 4000 C14, but I've found that I can't get the latency quite as low (52ns on that profile). Anyone know if the reduction in memory latency is worth the tradeoff in fabric speed? I can't really think of a way to test that just yet, short of finally stabilizing this profile and testing it under "real world" conditions.
> 
> Still waiting on the B550 Unify-X to show up in the US, would love to see if the slightly better trace topology will yield better results with these DIMM's and potentially lower latency/improved bandwidth.


Awesome latency 
Thanks for the info about the module.

In general no, the tradeoff is not worth. Unless you really target some specific workloads that are more efficient with lower latency than higher bandwidth.
But it's quite uncommon nowadays; some codecs, scientific computation, some game engines (Assassin Creed, Tomb Raider, etc).

Also cause the higher IF bandwidth has more advantages than just the memory itself.
Everything else will have more bandwidth; CCD to IOD and inter-CCD communications.

Didn't see much difference between 3800 MHz and 4000/4066 but at 4133 it was looking like it was starting to be noticeably faster just loading the desktop.
And that was with tons of WHEA errors in the background.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

BTW for the time being I gave up trying to find out why my USB is getting crazy.

It's not the 5950x and not the board.
I literally swapped out and disconnected almost everything excluding the PSU (I have checked with the DMM and it's rock stable), the M.2 drives (can't be that, seriously) and the RAM (would have noticed with something else).

Still have to test bypassing the power strip but I'm not confident.
At this point my best guess is I have spiteful tiny green extra-terrestrial aliens under my desk joking with me


----------



## Paddydapro

MageTank said:


> I actually have the 4266 C17 kit, I do highly recommend it. Currently testing an obnoxious OC on it at 3600 C12:
> View attachment 2474799
> 
> 
> It is far from stable at the moment, but it scales well with voltage at the "stock" XMP volts of 1.5V. Most of my other dual rank B-die kits didn't scale this well with voltage, so I assume these were binned better in general.
> 
> It can also do 4000 C14, but I've found that I can't get the latency quite as low (52ns on that profile). Anyone know if the reduction in memory latency is worth the tradeoff in fabric speed? I can't really think of a way to test that just yet, short of finally stabilizing this profile and testing it under "real world" conditions.
> 
> Still waiting on the B550 Unify-X to show up in the US, would love to see if the slightly better trace topology will yield better results with these DIMM's and potentially lower latency/improved bandwidth.


Hoooly **** dude, that's the lowest Zen3 latency I have seen on the whole Internet! Actually insane  are you running 1T on that? it must be, right? Also are you running 1T on that 4000c14? could you share zentiming of those two profiles? Would really like to try that one too. 4000c14 might be that high of a latency because it's on edge that's what I noticed with mine..

I suggest you run a defined benchmark pass from one location to another in let's say witcher 3 with CapFrameX it's a really great tool.

Just download, install, set hotkey (F11) launch game until overlay shows, sometimes pressing alt key once helps and then do a pass with stock speed, 3600c12 and 4000c14 and see what gets better fps in comparison tab on CapFrameX, just doubleklick all runs in the list on the left and the bar chart will be generated.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

I have updated my power profiles if you are interested:









Ryzen Custom Power Plans for Windows 10/11 (Snappy...


CPUDoc now features a custom dynamic power plan with ultra low power in standby: https://github.com/mann1x/CPUDoc/releases/latest These are the custom power plans I've made for my 5950x. I have tested them as well on a 3800X and 5600G (not very thoroughly). They should not interfere with PBO...




www.overclock.net


----------



## MageTank

Paddydapro said:


> Hoooly **** dude, that's the lowest Zen3 latency I have seen on the whole Internet! Actually insane  are you running 1T on that? it must be, right? Also are you running 1T on that 4000c14? could you share zentiming of those two profiles? Would really like to try that one too. 4000c14 might be that high of a latency because it's on edge that's what I noticed with mine..
> 
> I suggest you run a defined benchmark pass from one location to another in let's say witcher 3 with CapFrameX it's a really great tool.
> 
> Just download, install, set hotkey (F11) launch game until overlay shows, sometimes pressing alt key once helps and then do a pass with stock speed, 3600c12 and 4000c14 and see what gets better fps in comparison tab on CapFrameX, just doubleklick all runs in the list on the left and the bar chart will be generated.


Yeah, 1T on both. When I get home I'll get you some screenshots of ZenTimings. Be mindful that neither profile is stable yet. Also be mindful that these are done on water in my basement with an ambient room temperature of 60F or 15.5C. My DIMM's never exceed 28C under load.

























(messy desk on this last one, moved in to a new home while also building this rig)

This is my first personal Ryzen rig, though I've been memory overclocking on Intel for a very, very long time. Most of what I understood on Intel translated quite well over here with the exception of the Proc ODT settings and Ryzen's extreme sensitivity to these values. That, and not having values like RTL/IO-L to help guide my training endeavors was a bit of a learning curve in and of itself.

Also, thank you for the benchmark and tool recommendation, I'll definitely give that a shot!



ManniX-ITA said:


> Awesome latency
> Thanks for the info about the module.
> 
> In general no, the tradeoff is not worth. Unless you really target some specific workloads that are more efficient with lower latency than higher bandwidth.
> But it's quite uncommon nowadays; some codecs, scientific computation, some game engines (Assassin Creed, Tomb Raider, etc).
> 
> Also cause the higher IF bandwidth has more advantages than just the memory itself.
> Everything else will have more bandwidth; CCD to IOD and inter-CCD communications.
> 
> Didn't see much difference between 3800 MHz and 4000/4066 but at 4133 it was looking like it was starting to be noticeably faster just loading the desktop.
> And that was with tons of WHEA errors in the background.


That actually makes a lot of sense, especially with the 5950X being a multi-CCD CPU. Once I get my hands on a B550 Unify-X, I plan to do away with the soft tubing and finish my copper hard tube build. Once that is done, I'll give 4000 C14 another try and see if the new board aids in stability at all.


----------



## Paddydapro

MageTank said:


> Yeah, 1T on both. When I get home I'll get you some screenshots of ZenTimings. Be mindful that neither profile is stable yet. Also be mindful that these are done on water in my basement with an ambient room temperature of 60F or 15.5C. My DIMM's never exceed 28C under load.
> 
> View attachment 2474804
> 
> View attachment 2474805
> 
> View attachment 2474806
> 
> (messy desk on this last one, moved in to a new home while also building this rig)
> 
> This is my first personal Ryzen rig, though I've been memory overclocking on Intel for a very, very long time. Most of what I understood on Intel translated quite well over here with the exception of the Proc ODT settings and Ryzen's extreme sensitivity to these values. That, and not having values like RTL/IO-L to help guide my training endeavors was a bit of a learning curve in and of itself.
> 
> Also, thank you for the benchmark and tool recommendation, I'll definitely give that a shot!
> 
> 
> 
> That actually makes a lot of sense, especially with the 5950X being a multi-CCD CPU. Once I get my hands on a B550 Unify-X, I plan to do away with the soft tubing and finish my copper hard tube build. Once that is done, I'll give 4000 C14 another try and see if the new board aids in stability at all.


Those coolers look nice, maybe I have to get some too, could easily include them into my loop 

Sadly I was pretty missinformed with ram.. everyone said it doesn't matter too much in my earlier days but I have definitely been missing out a lot and am missing experience now in tightening, do you have 2 or 3 tips maybe what to consider or what the most influential timings are for latency?

I guess for under 50ns 1T is a must.. will try that today but last time it didn't even boot xD Also what would you say about procODT now with some experience?

is VDDP and cldo VDDP the same btw.?

My ram sicks reach up to 38C in my rig, maybe for the time beeing a fan over them will help enough for a little more stability and headroom.

Thanks in advance for the ZenTimings screenshots will be a good guidance for what could be


----------



## Spectre73

Paddydapro said:


> Those coolers look nice, maybe I have to get some too, could easily include them into my loop
> 
> Sadly I was pretty missinformed with ram.. everyone said it doesn't matter too much in my earlier days but I have definitely been missing out a lot and am missing experience now in tightening, do you have 2 or 3 tips maybe what to consider or what the most influential timings are for latency?
> 
> I guess for under 50ns 1T is a must.. will try that today but last time it didn't even boot xD Also what would you say about procODT now with some experience?
> 
> is VDDP and cldo VDDP the same btw.?
> 
> My ram sicks reach up to 38C in my rig, maybe for the time beeing a fan over them will help enough for a little more stability and headroom.
> 
> Thanks in advance for the ZenTimings screenshots will be a good guidance for what could be


I found this quite helpful:



http://imgur.com/R66nc4U


----------



## Paddydapro

Spectre73 said:


> I found this quite helpful:
> 
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/R66nc4U


Ah yes, I've seen this before, thanks it's pretty good sadly am already as tight or tigher than this xD But it's interesting that 1T didn't do a whole lot for him for latency.
But I actually noticed the same thing with My Ryzen 3000 cpu.. I think it's because its hitting a wall that isn't there with Ryzen 5000 but I will have to verify this claim myself


----------



## MageTank

Paddydapro said:


> Those coolers look nice, maybe I have to get some too, could easily include them into my loop
> 
> Sadly I was pretty missinformed with ram.. everyone said it doesn't matter too much in my earlier days but I have definitely been missing out a lot and am missing experience now in tightening, do you have 2 or 3 tips maybe what to consider or what the most influential timings are for latency?
> 
> I guess for under 50ns 1T is a must.. will try that today but last time it didn't even boot xD Also what would you say about procODT now with some experience?
> 
> is VDDP and cldo VDDP the same btw.?
> 
> My ram sicks reach up to 38C in my rig, maybe for the time beeing a fan over them will help enough for a little more stability and headroom.
> 
> Thanks in advance for the ZenTimings screenshots will be a good guidance for what could be


Much like on Intel platforms, tRFC goes a very long way in reducing latency. Command Rate is definitely helpful and should be kept at 1T if you can help it at all. I keep GDM disabled as well for multiple reasons, including the fact that it seems to break odd CAS latencies entirely. tREFI was also pretty huge on Intel in terms of latency impact (extending the time before your caps need a recharge) however I've been unable to locate a means of adjusting tREFI on AMD platforms as of yet. These MSI boards have a "latency enhancer" setting that has done nothing of value for me so I advise keeping it off. I do not like dealing with variables that may impact my memory training, same with MRC Fast Boot (though this one is a bit more subjective).

Voltages is an area I am still struggling with, as I have yet to find stability and I am quite confident voltage is going to be key here. On Intel, VCCIO/VCCSA were key to stability and having too much/too little of these two values resulted in instability or overall poor performance and I imagine this goes the same for AMD's IMC voltages.

As for Proc ODT, I've been lurking in the memory stability thread on this forum to view what others have been using for their profiles, and studying their results to try to determine where mine should be. There is one person in particular that seemed to be quite educated on the subject named @Veii and his insight has been pretty helpful thus far: [Official] AMD Ryzen DDR4 24/7 Memory Stability Thread. Until I am better educated on this subject, I wouldn't feel comfortable trying to teach others as of yet. Once I achieve stability and can prove it under replicable conditions, then I'd be far more confident to provide that kind of guidance.

That said, I am happy to share what values I do have, just as long as you understand they are quite unstable and still under testing and refinement. For me, memory overclocking is less of a fine art and more of a trial & error kind of thing, banging ones head against a wall until it starts to make sense. I like to start by pushing each component to their limits (IMC, individual DIMMs, board) then slowly work my way down until I find something the three of them agree on. That 45ns run, while great on paper, may end up looking like 50+ by the time stability is achieved. Or, who knows, the better traces on the Unify X might buy me just enough headroom to stabilize a sub-50 profile, we'll see when the board arrives in the US and my understanding of Ryzen's IMC improves


----------



## KedarWolf

ManniX-ITA said:


> @KedarWolf
> 
> Nice!
> 
> I have that G.Skill kit; it's not bad but I'd buy this one instead now (if it'd be available which is the main issue):
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> F4-4266C17D-32GTZRB - Specification - G.SKILL International Enterprise Co., Ltd.
> 
> 
> Trident Z RGB DDR4-4266 CL17-18-18-38 1.50V 32GB (2x16GB)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.gskill.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Main reason is that you can forget with that kit to run at 4000 MHz with tRDCRD below 17, and above below 18.
> Thought the low VDIMM at 1.45V meant something like better binning but nope.
> 
> I'd take this instead cause I have the feeling could run at 4000MHz @ 1.5V with 16-16-16-32-48.


The kit I posted is 1.4v so it actually might be a better bin and is designed for 5000 series CPUs.

Edit: And the new kit isn't even available yet I don't think. But should be soon.

So I think you're thinking of a similar but different kit.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

KedarWolf said:


> The kit I posted is 1.4v so it actually might be a better bin and is designed for 5000 series CPUs.


Yeah, that's what I thought as well, so I bought it but I don't think it's so better binned now that I've tested it 
Actually doesn't seem to like or scale up with VDIMM as well as others.
The other one at 4266 seems better as confirmed by @MageTank


----------



## MageTank

ManniX-ITA said:


> Yeah, that's what I thought as well, so I bought it but I don't think it's so better binned now that I've tested it
> Actually doesn't seem to like or scale up with VDIMM as well as others.
> The other one at 4266 seems better as confirmed by @MageTank


I can't confidently say mine is better as I haven't tested the one linked by @KedarWolf, however I can say that I don't believe in memory being "designed for Ryzen" or Intel. RAM is dumb, it doesn't know what it is doing, that is the job of the memory controller. The SPD profiles (XMP/DOCP) might be tuned to be less aggressive in order to load on Ryzen IMC's, but the DRAM IC's themselves won't manually OC any better because they do not differ from any other IC's binned in their class. I can absolutely say that there is no chance in loading the XMP on my DIMM's, at least not with my CPU/board combo, so the kit linked by KedarWolf might fare better in that regard.

I might buy a spare kit that KedarWolf linked just to test it, mostly because I am curious to see what the DOCP profile looks like on it. Either way, I think both kits would be fine as long as thermals are kept in check and you have a solid board/IMC to back it up.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

MageTank said:


> I can't confidently say mine is better as I haven't tested the one linked by @KedarWolf, however I can say that I don't believe in memory being "designed for Ryzen" or Intel. RAM is dumb, it doesn't know what it is doing, that is the job of the memory controller. The SPD profiles (XMP/DOCP) might be tuned to be less aggressive in order to load on Ryzen IMC's, but the DRAM IC's themselves won't manually OC any better because they do not differ from any other IC's binned in their class. I can absolutely say that there is no chance in loading the XMP on my DIMM's, at least not with my CPU/board combo, so the kit linked by KedarWolf might fare better in that regard.
> 
> I might buy a spare kit that KedarWolf linked just to test it, mostly because I am curious to see what the DOCP profile looks like on it. Either way, I think both kits would be fine as long as thermals are kept in check and you have a solid board/IMC to back it up.


From what you said yours is way better with tRCD than this kit; I can't set with the Unify-X tRCDRD [email protected] even with 1.6V.
I'd save the money for something else honestly.

Yes the Ryzen optimized stuff is mostly marketing, technically it's nothing.
Means that you have a better chance to find it in the QVL lists for Ryzen boards (if and when the manufacturer decides to update it).


----------



## KedarWolf

MageTank said:


> I can't confidently say mine is better as I haven't tested the one linked by @KedarWolf, however I can say that I don't believe in memory being "designed for Ryzen" or Intel. RAM is dumb, it doesn't know what it is doing, that is the job of the memory controller. The SPD profiles (XMP/DOCP) might be tuned to be less aggressive in order to load on Ryzen IMC's, but the DRAM IC's themselves won't manually OC any better because they do not differ from any other IC's binned in their class. I can absolutely say that there is no chance in loading the XMP on my DIMM's, at least not with my CPU/board combo, so the kit linked by KedarWolf might fare better in that regard.
> 
> I might buy a spare kit that KedarWolf linked just to test it, mostly because I am curious to see what the DOCP profile looks like on it. Either way, I think both kits would be fine as long as thermals are kept in check and you have a solid board/IMC to back it up.


If you buy that kit and test it over the other, let me know.

My 3600 16-16-16-26 kit does NOT scale well with voltage and it won't work well over 1.48v I find, so @ManniX-ITA may have a point.

I likely won't have the cash for the new kit for a few months so can wait to see how other peeps fare with them.


----------



## KedarWolf

ManniX-ITA said:


> From what you said yours is way better with tRCD than this kit; I can't set with the Unify-X tRCDRD [email protected] even with 1.6V.
> I'd save the money for something else honestly.
> 
> Yes the Ryzen optimized stuff is mostly marketing, technically it's nothing.
> Means that you have a better chance to find it in the QVL lists for Ryzen boards (if and when the manufacturer decides to update it).


Any advantage of getting the Trident Z Royal over the Trident Z RGB with that 4266 kit?


----------



## Spectre73

Paddydapro said:


> Ah yes, I've seen this before, thanks it's pretty good sadly am already as tight or tigher than this xD But it's interesting that 1T didn't do a whole lot for him for latency.
> But I actually noticed the same thing with My Ryzen 3000 cpu.. I think it's because its hitting a wall that isn't there with Ryzen 5000 but I will have to verify this claim myself


It is not about the absolute timings but about the relative gains and it was intended to answer the question which timings are the most important. And after consulting the chart I would consider trrds trrdl and tfaw to be quite influential. It is with Zen 2, so may not be applicable as much to Zen 3, but still one of the best charts for timing influence, imho.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

KedarWolf said:


> Any advantage of getting the Trident Z Royal over the Trident Z RGB with that 4266 kit?


That's a good question I have no idea... my guess is just aesthetics.
For my liking the Royal is simply awful...


----------



## Spectre73

ManniX-ITA said:


> That's a good question I have no idea... my guess is just aesthetics.
> For my liking the Royal is simply awful...


I am quite certain that these kits only differ in aesthetics. G.skill even introduced three new low latency kits, each for a different series with more or less identical timings (probably the ones you are talking about, they have so many kits now, with only marginal differences).


----------



## KedarWolf

KedarWolf said:


> That's a good question I have no idea... my guess is just aesthetics.
> For my liking the Royal is simply awful...


Both kits have the ten layer PCB so I'm thinking the PCB layout is identical. And I like the RGB over the Royal as well for looks.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Spectre73 said:


> It is not about the absolute timings but about the relative gains and it was intended to answer the question which timings are the most important. And after consulting the chart I would consider trrds trrdl and tfaw to be quite influential. It is with Zen 2, so may not be applicable as much to Zen 3, but still one of the best charts for timing influence, imho.


Yes it's still the best chart; sometimes you find out you have to sacrifice a timing to lower another one so it's a good indicator on what to test first.

But timings are a "whole"; some are tightly connected (eg RRDS/RRDL/FAW) others less but that you get +2% it's just an indication.
You could get +10% with the same change with everything else in check or -10% if going down is messing up the cycle.
Best way is too look at timings that works and adapt it to your module; some sets much much lax than others very tight can give you better latency because there are no delays introduced by wrong timings.

With GDM it's a bit more random cause it's auto adjusting almost all timings, sometimes wrong or crazy timings can give very good results.
But it's unlikely you ever reach the low latency you can get with the right timings for the module.


----------



## xVanilla

hi all, 

I am very interested in the PBO settings of the 5900x owners here, as well as your voltage settings (cpu/chipset)! mainly for 24/7 and gaming usage... 

could you guys perhaps share them with us?!

thanks!


----------



## Veii

I'll drop that link here, till i find the time to answer each and everyone individually 





极致发挥5800X－ZEN3内存提升10%变得如此简单！带你跑入50ns！ - 电脑讨论 - Chiphell - 分享与交流用户体验


极致发挥5800X－ZEN3内存提升10%变得如此简单！带你跑入50ns！,说明：本贴调试适用于1.100版BIOS，后续1.200版BIOS巨大差异，请留着新贴1.200版。ZEN内存控制器的拉胯留下不好口碑，随着一代代的提升，到了锐龙四代后发现内存性能也有 ...,电脑讨论,讨论区-技术与经验的讨论 ,Chiphell - 分享与交流用户体验




chiphell.com




use bing translate or yandex translate, they are better for "eastern type of languages"

This korean one is made by a user here and going through all the pages A, B, C should teach you close to everything
Just again do not use Google Translate, it's dumb








쿨엔조이,쿨앤조이 coolenjoy, cooln, 쿨엔, 검은동네


출처 Veii 님https://www.overclock.net/forum/28385690-post3279.htmlhttps://www.overclock.net/forum/28385



coolenjoy.net




* OCN finally fixed my old "dead" links to valuable written information

My CL16 sets beat psone's 15-15 set , but he uses a different method
I have learned recently a lot from him
Here are both so you guys have some orientation


Spoiler: Easy to run, needs less than 1.5v for 4000MT/s / AGESA 1.1.0.0 Patch B

















Spoiler: psone - 1x tFAW style of timings, equally fast to my 4170 results but needs 1.6v 














On the 2nd set i utilized new knowledge i learned from him about 1x tFAW,, CAD_BUS Timings and the tRAS+1= tRC burst refresh method 
But this again same written korean writeup, should have CAD_BUS timings better explained








쿨엔조이,쿨앤조이 coolenjoy, cooln, 쿨엔, 검은동네


출처:https://blog.asset-intertech.com/test_data_out/2014/11/memory-training-testing-and-margining.ht



coolenjoy.net




Happy Tweaking 

tCKE does something on Vermeer without GDM
CAD_BUS examples that work are
60-20-40-20
120-20-20-20
40-20-30-20
both 30 and 40 fix memory training issues on Vermeer, 24 is not enough anymore
Except if you use CAD_BUS Timings, then put these at 20-20-20 only 

706 instead of 705 is beneficial for unstable Kits (A0 for example) under higher than 1.5v
702 is for 2x16gb dual rank kits , example here:


Spoiler: Bloax is the user - from Hardware Numb3rs Discord [Youtuber]














he learned the tCKE CAD_BUS timings method
tCKE Sleep-State is different by set Frequency
This set is decent, not great but surely decent
It's on Patch-D
EDIT:
tRP 12 would be better with lower 6* tRFC
But he could not run it, soo tRP 14 "cheating" method was used

Currently work in benchmark
4x A2 user with decent kits on Daisy Chain layout
wonderful A2 hell - will update with settings once there is something valueable out of the testing (AGESA 1.2.0.0)

About voltages,
Orient to this post here








AMD max overclocking voltage


Hello, I'm new to overclocking and I'm not shure about the max "safe" voltages on an amd 5000 platform. I have a 5950x a asus crossfire dark hero and a gskill 4000 cl16 kit. I have a kind of stable profile where i did only memory, soc, and fclk overclocking. memory voltage = 1.51 v, soc = 1.3 v...




www.overclock.net




Probably the whole thread is useful 

EDIT2:
This doc has a complicated but usable calculator
Although i suggest rather reading the information first
What is certainly usable, is the writeup of TM5 1usmus_V3 preset - ERROR's
To make your life easier
DATA section








Ryzen Google Calculator!


Change Note 0.7b 10-8-2021,- v0.7b.6c TM5 -,#ADD anta777_ABSOLUT 7-13-2021,- v0.7b.6b Layout -,#CHANGE some position and color TM5 -,#ADD some ex Voltage -,#CHANGE "VDDG CCD" multiplier min value to 0 5-1-2021,- v0.7b.6a tRFC -,#FIX "N/A" Error, when shoud show "tRTP_ERROR #2" 4-30-2021,- v0.7b.5c




docs.google.com






Happy Overclocking


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Thanks @Veii you are always a gold mine


----------



## Veii

ManniX-ITA said:


> Thanks @Veii you are always a gold mine


Never stop working 
But currently a bit is paused
2 CCD research on christmas Vermeer units is on Work in Progress ~ custom bioses probably WIP
(2 CCD 5600/5800 users should not update to 1.1.9.0 or 1.2.0.0)
CAD_BUS Timing is a very open new topic to me
Psone's "intel type" of mem OC is very new and hard to understand (but both linked sets from me are stable)
AGESA 1.2.0.0 voltages are work in progress and very awkward (they need two reboots, AMD broke cold boot bios settings) lol ~ needs two reboots to fully apply a setting as it only warm boots
Idle State powerplan is also still in progress ~ but i update recently on twitter

Pause because i'm changing country, and a new home
Getting my  finally together ~trying~ , and focusing into Streaming Setup's
The start of the next month everything should be done, but we'll see 
Ryzen is sleeping in the travel suitecase for now~


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Veii said:


> Never stop working
> But currently a bit is paused
> 2 CCD research on christmas Vermeer units is on Work in Progress ~ custom bioses probably WIP
> (2 CCD 5600/5800 users should not update to 1.1.9.0 or 1.2.0.0)
> CAD_BUS Timing is a very open new topic to me
> Psone's "intel type" of mem OC is very new and hard to understand (but both linked sets from me are stable)
> AGESA 1.2.0.0 voltages are work in progress and very awkward (they need two reboots, AMD broke cold boot bios settings) lol ~ needs two reboots to fully apply a setting as it only warm boots
> Idle State powerplan is also still in progress ~ but i update recently on twitter
> 
> Pause because i'm changing country, and a new home
> Getting my  finally together ~trying~ , and focusing into Streaming Setup's
> The start of the next month everything should be done, but we'll see
> Ryzen is sleeping in the travel suitecase for now~


Wish you the best!
Know the hurdles myself being an expat as well.
Didn't you move to Germany? Changing again or still settling down?


----------



## Veii

ManniX-ITA said:


> Wish you the best!
> Know the hurdles myself being an expat as well.
> Didn't you move to Germany? Changing again or still settling down?


Changing again
The 11th week in quarantine and probably 2-3 more
My little savings got melted as i couldn't work much

Moved over as i got a good home/roommate offer
But i'm not happy with him, although the change did me well
Living in germany is sustainably cheap, sadly without work options ~ you'll have a harder time
I'll settle back in a bigger flat, try there to save up again a bit and later fully change continents 
It's just temporary, till i get a more stable living
The time here did me well and i needed that change, just the money and lockdown side is an issue
Soo i'll move away for now. Didn't regret to be here at all 
The lockdown timing just was a very very bad unfortunate event ~ exactly when savings melted


----------



## KedarWolf

Speed Potato said:


> That desk look super cheap, I expect your monitors to wooble like crazy. Also, that cheap furniture is sold at canadian tire and walmart also so you might be able to see it there before it's too late.
> 
> Also, you did a second pre-order for the UnifyX ? NCDS told me that Fev-05 was the expected shipping date, is B&H supposed to be sooner ?


B&H Photo chat support told me today they'll ship my motherboard Jan. 29th in 9 days.


----------



## MageTank

KedarWolf said:


> B&H Photo chat support told me today they'll ship my motherboard Jan. 29th in 9 days.


I have a strong, anti pre-ordering philosophy, but man this is tempting if true. This board is the final piece for my build before I can start finishing the hard loop.


----------



## KedarWolf

MageTank said:


> I have a strong, anti pre-ordering philosophy, but man this is tempting if true. This board is the final piece for my build before I can start finishing the hard loop.


I ordered Jan. 15th.

I can't promise if you order now you'll get it that date. Open up a chat on the website and ask.


----------



## gymleader91

Veii said:


> 2 CCD research on christmas Vermeer units is on Work in Progress ~ custom bioses probably WIP
> (2 CCD 5600/5800 users should not update to 1.1.9.0 or 1.2.0.0)


In your initial testing do you think the 2 ccd designs are inferior performance and reliability wise? Is it worth waiting till supply isn't as bad for AMD to start shipping normal 1 ccd chips to be safe?


----------



## Speed Potato

Veii said:


> (2 CCD 5600/5800 users should not update to 1.1.9.0 or 1.2.0.0)


How do we find out if we have 2 ccd or just one ? Please don't ask for an X-Ray.


----------



## Forsaken1

^^^^
Yuri is working on a CCD ID tool.


----------



## Veii

gymleader91 said:


> In your initial testing do you think the 2 ccd designs are inferior performance and reliability wise? Is it worth waiting till supply isn't as bad for AMD to start shipping normal 1 ccd chips to be safe?


2 CCD units where mostly christmas units - who passed the first validation, while failing the frequency validation at the end
They where locked down units ~ without actually removed CCDs
Potentially , they are faster
as they can utilize a bigger cache spectrum and so also the higher bandwidth
The downside is, logically the 2nd CCD eats into the PPT target a bit
Technically speaking, they are slightly slower than pure 1CCD units on stock.
(as the 2nd CCD eats into the powercap)

1usmus and Team, did let AMD know about a potential fix
In the current state it's "no perf difference to slight negative perf difference" for 2CCD users
There also seems to be a set of units which are PSP Firmware locked, and one which are not.
Overall i would not update till the units are unlockable ~ as the perf difference exists

It's in question how AMD will/did react by this.
Lock down the cores via PSP firmware and let users utilize the higher cache bandwidth.
Introduce random Cache differences in benchmarks titling them as "bugs" 
Or maybe option 3,
AMD could be evil and artificially slow down GMI/DPM links from the IOD/2nd CCD
Soo neverless what you got, it will equally perform worse or well ~ up to viewpoint
But i shouldn't give them bad ideas 

EDIT:


gymleader91 said:


> Is it worth waiting till supply isn't as bad for AMD to start shipping normal 1 ccd chips to be safe?


At this point it's too late
These gimped units where only a handful, which only happened, as part of the team was rushing to meet demand
Be it rushing for reviewers, or rushing to meet the holidays.
Anywho ~ the chance to get such a sample is very low at this point
The 2nd batch was about to be shipped before the start of this year.
Only the first batch was affected , and again the chance to get such a "special" unit is close to zero at this point.
No one would like to gift you a whole CCD worth of 200$ for nothing 

Downside effects, no none
Well kinda
My specific sample had issues with allcore frequency beyond 4.5, as it was waking up the 2nd CCD
While PBO at the time could hit 4.95 on the first CCD (PBO 1.0)
The only real issue, was it being a hotter chip overall and on stock a tiny bit slower performing chip ~ till you adjust PBO powertargets (lift them up a subtle bit)
I maybe am a bit slower on memory cache tests (latency) but this is at this point only pure speculation.
There is no difference for normal behavior. My FCLK limits are in the 2167 range.
No reason for panicking and i hope, no reason for "evil AMD" behavior, on locking down stuff again. Simply as the sample size of such units is tiny, to no existent


Speed Potato said:


> How do we find out if we have 2 ccd or just one ? Please don't ask for an X-Ray.


You can grab the zentimings tool and just run the "debug"








ZenTimings


ZenTimings is a simple and lightweight app for monitoring memory timings on Ryzen platform.




zentimings.protonrom.com




The values are not wrong. I know there has been some conflicting missmessaging around both devs.


----------



## Joeking78

xVanilla said:


> hi all,
> 
> I am very interested in the PBO settings of the 5900x owners here, as well as your voltage settings (cpu/chipset)! mainly for 24/7 and gaming usage...
> 
> could you guys perhaps share them with us?!
> 
> thanks!


Hey,

I have 5900x and b550 unify.

I spent some time testing pbo settings purely for timespy cpu scores for now, my log attached and my best settings below using 280mm AIO for cooling:

Boost +75 mhz
Core Optimisation -30 all cores
Power Limits - Motherboard
Scalar x 3

I see single core boost up to 5150mhz and around 4550mhz under all core tests.

3732mhz mem speed, anything like 3866 or 4000 with 1:1 gives too many WHEA

This gave me 22674 in Cine R23.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

I've updated my custom power plans:









Ryzen Custom Power Plans for Windows 10/11 (Snappy...


CPUDoc now features a custom dynamic power plan with ultra low power in standby: https://github.com/mann1x/CPUDoc/releases/latest These are the custom power plans I've made for my 5950x. I have tested them as well on a 3800X and 5600G (not very thoroughly). They should not interfere with PBO...




www.overclock.net


----------



## YoungChris

Veii said:


> 2 CCD units where mostly christmas units - who passed the first validation, while failing the frequency validation at the end
> They where locked down units ~ without actually removed CCDs
> Potentially , they are faster
> as they can utilize a bigger cache spectrum and so also the higher bandwidth
> The downside is, logically the 2nd CCD eats into the PPT target a bit
> Technically speaking, they are slightly slower than pure 1CCD units on stock.
> (as the 2nd CCD eats into the powercap)
> 
> 1usmus and Team, did let AMD know about a potential fix
> In the current state it's "no perf difference to slight negative perf difference" for 2CCD users
> There also seems to be a set of units which are PSP Firmware locked, and one which are not.
> Overall i would not update till the units are unlockable ~ as the perf difference exists
> 
> It's in question how AMD will/did react by this.
> Lock down the cores via PSP firmware and let users utilize the higher cache bandwidth.
> Introduce random Cache differences in benchmarks titling them as "bugs"
> Or maybe option 3,
> AMD could be evil and artificially slow down GMI/DPM links from the IOD/2nd CCD
> Soo neverless what you got, it will equally perform worse or well ~ up to viewpoint
> But i shouldn't give them bad ideas
> 
> EDIT:
> 
> At this point it's too late
> These gimped units where only a handful, which only happened, as part of the team was rushing to meet demand
> Be it rushing for reviewers, or rushing to meet the holidays.
> Anywho ~ the chance to get such a sample is very low at this point
> The 2nd batch was about to be shipped before the start of this year.
> Only the first batch was affected , and again the chance to get such a "special" unit is close to zero at this point.
> No one would like to gift you a whole CCD worth of 200$ for nothing
> 
> Downside effects, no none
> Well kinda
> My specific sample had issues with allcore frequency beyond 4.5, as it was waking up the 2nd CCD
> While PBO at the time could hit 4.95 on the first CCD (PBO 1.0)
> The only real issue, was it being a hotter chip overall and on stock a tiny bit slower performing chip ~ till you adjust PBO powertargets (lift them up a subtle bit)
> I maybe am a bit slower on memory cache tests (latency) but this is at this point only pure speculation.
> There is no difference for normal behavior. My FCLK limits are in the 2167 range.
> No reason for panicking and i hope, no reason for "evil AMD" behavior, on locking down stuff again. Simply as the sample size of such units is tiny, to no existent
> 
> You can grab the zentimings tool and just run the "debug"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ZenTimings
> 
> 
> ZenTimings is a simple and lightweight app for monitoring memory timings on Ryzen platform.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> zentimings.protonrom.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The values are not wrong. I know there has been some conflicting missmessaging around both devs.


Don't update what? Agesa? Also, to what version?


----------



## Veii

YoungChris said:


> Don't update what? Agesa? Also, to what version?


Scroll up 
Agesa 1.1.0.0 Patch D should have the current ABL which some Beta bioses have
AGESA 1.1.9.0 should also be safe and i think do indeed have working PBO 2.0
(although negative mode works since AGESA 1.1.0.0 Patch B, not Patch C which had an FCLK lockdown)
AGESA 1.2.0.0 only the very early alpha is safe, but got taken down because of realtek 2.5Gbit issues causing random reboots, usb crashes, all sorts of whea errors

Around public 1.2.0.0 release,we do get "dLDO injection" mode (yes yes i know)
And apparently per core frequency should be a thing since 1.1.8.0
Overall, i don't trust 1.2.0.0 at all ~ as 1usmus shared a method to "fix" our christmas units.
There is nothing to fix ~ they work as intentional 

EDIT:
Doublecheck your L3 cache performance on Aida64
There is a bug with recent 3 Beta MSI bioses, which pushes 4.4ghz voltage at max boost
Causing clock stretching to appear under default function mode (stock)
if you have higher than 10.9ns = 4.65ghz boost (for example 12.4)
then something with PBO2.0 is broken and you need to readjust couple of voltages or go away auto settings


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Aahah "dLDO injection" is marketing genius.
I'll keep my shoulders on the wall flashing that firmware 

BTW I'm still waiting an answer from MSI about the coil whine...
Last message the 15th: "OK, please wait for us. Thanks!"

This weekend I'll give up and prepare the board with coating for sub-zero.

I have removed the VRM heatsink and the thermal pad is properly applied covering all the MOSFETs and inductors.
_BUT _when I removed the heatsink I've found out the screws on the back of the mainboard very quite loose.
Have to see if tightening them changed something about the coil whine.


----------



## LionAlonso

ManniX-ITA said:


> BTW for the time being I gave up trying to find out why my USB is getting crazy.
> 
> It's not the 5950x and not the board.
> I literally swapped out and disconnected almost everything excluding the PSU (I have checked with the DMM and it's rock stable), the M.2 drives (can't be that, seriously) and the RAM (would have noticed with something else).
> 
> Still have to test bypassing the power strip but I'm not confident.
> At this point my best guess is I have spiteful tiny green extra-terrestrial aliens under my desk joking with me


So your 5950X isnt falty? 
Though the error was when engaging the gpu


----------



## ManniX-ITA

LionAlonso said:


> So your 5950X isnt falty?
> Though the error was when engaging the gpu


Indeed it's not.
I switched back to the 3800x for a while and have the same issue.
Replaced almost every component and still the same...
No idea what could be yet.

Today I've switched back to the old power strip but it wasn't that too.
I'm fishing... I've lost so much time trying to figure it out that for now I have to put on hold the investigation.
So much stuff to do, can't spend more time on it.
Maybe I'll figure it out with the new build, could be there are multiple chained root causes and I'm circling around it.

In the meantime I've found out for sure that the USB-C M.2 10GBps SSD that I'm using now for the benching install it's not working properly.
I've ordered a new one that will arrive tomorrow; if you use the USB-C port connected to the CPU you need at least VDDG at 1100mV otherwise USB3_DRIVER BSODs can happen...
I think this enclosure with the Realtek SOC has same issues as the JMS583 A0 SOCs; they are not compatible with AMD.
The new one should have a newer JMS583 A2 SOC, hopefully.

But it's not the root cause of my issue as it happens also without it.
It does happen also just with another pair of backup keyboard and mouse I have for spare.


----------



## Paddydapro

ManniX-ITA said:


> Indeed it's not.
> I switched back to the 3800x for a while and have the same issue.
> Replaced almost every component and still the same...
> No idea what could be yet.
> 
> Today I've switched back to the old power strip but it wasn't that too.
> I'm fishing... I've lost so much time trying to figure it out that for now I have to put on hold the investigation.
> So much stuff to do, can't spend more time on it.
> Maybe I'll figure it out with the new build, could be there are multiple chained root causes and I'm circling around it.
> 
> In the meantime I've found out for sure that the USB-C M.2 10GBps SSD that I'm using now for the benching install it's not working properly.
> I've ordered a new one that will arrive tomorrow; if you use the USB-C port connected to the CPU you need at least VDDG at 1100mV otherwise USB3_DRIVER BSODs can happen...
> I think this enclosure with the Realtek SOC has same issues as the JMS583 A0 SOCs; they are not compatible with AMD.
> The new one should have a newer JMS583 A2 SOC, hopefully.
> 
> But it's not the root cause of my issue as it happens also without it.
> It does happen also just with another pair of backup keyboard and mouse I have for spare.


Does changing the switching frequency have an effect on whine?


----------



## Forsaken1

Upon 1st power up of unify non x.While in bios all USB ports dropped.Update bios.Go back in bios.Set defaults/xmp and or bios tweaks .No usb drops for a couple days.
While in windows desktop.When mouse pointer is placed on a app.I hear faint coil whine from vrm area.No coil whine when mouse pointer not placed on a app in desks top.”Coil whine” possibly a capacitor.
Bright side memory 4000/2000 cl14 will pass several rounds of mem test.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Paddydapro said:


> Does changing the switching frequency have an effect on whine?


Yes but very small, not much significant. PWM and LLC will change it.
Also with my 5950x with CO negative counts going below 800 will make the CPU crash loading Windows.
So not really a solution...


----------



## KedarWolf

Good news and bad news. B&H Photo is shipping my Unify-X Jan. 29th according to the chat customer service.

Bad news. The 5950x I pre-ordered from Canada Computers. Well, we are on lockdown here, can only leave our houses for work, groceries and medical appointments.

I emailed them, told them I AM an essential worker in a health agency doing tech support and should be allowed to go pick it up. But if not, can they send it to my house or my work.

This was a week ago I emailed them, no answer. And someone, just before the lockdown, that ordered the CPU the launch day, Nov. 5th, the same day I did, got theirs three weeks ago.

I know it's COVID and stuff, but I don't think I'll even pre-order from Canada Computers again. I think I'll just stick to B&H Photo.


----------



## Forsaken1

Can get VRM noise to go away or atleast hidden. My noise is coming from the small vrm/heatsink closer to post display.I pushed firmly down on it while also pushing forward and back.Which tells me i need to bend heat pipe and tighten screws on back of mobo more.


----------



## Spectre73

Maybe someone here has an idea for a error I recently experienced. Probably better suited for another thread, but these are overcrowed.

I am running the system stress test stable with 1900 FCLK (AGESA 1.2.0.0). Everything works exactly as expected. No WHEA errors, no memtest, TM5, OCCT, AIDA, p95 small errors at all. Can run the system all day, even with furmark and p95 small in parallel.
But once or twice every other day - only when playing games (ONI, WH:TW3) the system just black screens and either reboots or crashes. Error log is not helpful, since I supppose the system has no time to react.

Has anyone experienced something similar? No OC besides IF 1900, no CO either.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Spectre73 said:


> Maybe someone here has an idea for a error I recently experienced. Probably better suited for another thread, but these are overcrowed.
> 
> I am running the system stress test stable with 1900 FCLK (AGESA 1.2.0.0). Everything works exactly as expected. No WHEA errors, no memtest, TM5, OCCT, AIDA, p95 small errors at all. Can run the system all day, even with furmark and p95 small in parallel.
> But once or twice every other day - only when playing games (ONI, WH:TW3) the system just black screens and either reboots or crashes. Error log is not helpful, since I supppose the system has no time to react.
> 
> Has anyone experienced something similar? No OC besides IF 1900, no CO either.


I had this issue with CO... maybe try setting LLC Higher.

There's also an issue with the Over Current Protection and the 5000.
It's not working as expected, maybe it's that.
So far I could only trigger it with CO or high FCLK 2000+ but maybe it's hitting you also with these settings.
I can reproduce it both with the Unify-x and the Master.
You have to set OCP limits to 400mV and the protection to Medium, in the middle; I think it's Level 3 in the MSI BIOS.
Lower or higher level can trigger sudden reboots.


----------



## Spectre73

ManniX-ITA said:


> I had this issue with CO... maybe try setting LLC Higher.
> 
> There's also an issue with the Over Current Protection and the 5000.
> It's not working as expected, maybe it's that.
> So far I could only trigger it with CO or high FCLK 2000+ but maybe it's hitting you also with these settings.
> I can reproduce it both with the Unify-x and the Master.
> You have to set OCP limits to 400mV and the protection to Medium, in the middle; I think it's Level 3 in the MSI BIOS.
> Lower or higher level can trigger sudden reboots.


Interesting. Thank you for the response. Will try it when back at home. I tried to increase VDDG CCD to 1000 (from 950) because I thought maybe it is a instability with the CPU and the IF clock, but it is hard to test for this since it takes some time to trigger the behaviour and I can not "force" it. Besides, I do not believe this to be the cause.
I also increased the CPU VRM switching frequency to 1000 khz, temperatures stay in check, it seems, so should not be detrimental. But as you can see I am fishing in the dark here.Will try out your suggestions once I am home from work.

The thing with OCP is intrigueing since I thought about my PSU but since it is a brand new Seasonic 750 Titanium unit, I dismissed it nearly instantly. Maybe my thought wasn't that far off, after all....


----------



## Joeking78

Does anyone have any tips to fix WHEA? or is it silicon lottery?

I have memory at 1:1:1 4000mhz, 1.48v CL 16...passes all memory tests but WHEA reported in HWINFO. I get the same at 3866 but no WHEA at 3733 C14


----------



## Veii

Joeking78 said:


> Does anyone have any tips to fix WHEA? or is it silicon lottery?
> 
> I have memory at 1:1:1 4000mhz, 1.48v CL 16...passes all memory tests but WHEA reported in HWINFO. I get the same at 3866 but no WHEA at 3733 C14


put CPU VDDP to 900 or 880mV (880 rec)
VDDG CCD beyond 950mV causes issues , 940 works
VDDG IOD needs to move near 1060mV unless you undervolt
Vermeer loves SOC voltage, 1.100 (read out in ZT) and higher

3800 needs 34ohm proc
4000 can work with 36, but also 34
2100 FCLK needs 1.1875-1.25vSOC @ proc 36 and must run low CPU VDDP (930mV stock)

tCKE is used even with GDM off, run 1 till you have settled for the MCLK of choice
Be y-cruncher all tests stable , if you fail the first 3 , it's a too open PBO and needs EDC limiting
if you fail on FFT, it's the memory controller and the voltages around it
cLDO_VDDP and CPU VDDP are different

at worst you can match cLDO_VDDP = VDDG CCD , both as 900mV or 950mV (skip that one unless you really have to)

Voltage presets you can gather here








AMD max overclocking voltage


Hello, I'm new to overclocking and I'm not shure about the max "safe" voltages on an amd 5000 platform. I have a 5950x a asus crossfire dark hero and a gskill 4000 cl16 kit. I have a kind of stable profile where i did only memory, soc, and fclk overclocking. memory voltage = 1.51 v, soc = 1.3 v...




www.overclock.net




Score Presets you can gather here








Zen RAM OC Leaderboards


Zen 4 Sheet is sorted and verified submissions LOCKED each Thursday. Please provide proof of stability via Y-Cruncher AND a memory stability test, otherwise your submission will be removed. Refer to the FAQ for more info. MEMORY,PROCESSOR Username,Memory Latency,L3 Latency,DIMMs,Die Type,Rank,Me...




docs.google.com


----------



## Joeking78

Veii said:


> put CPU VDDP to 900 or 880mV (880 rec)
> VDDG CCD beyond 950mV causes issues , 940 works
> VDDG IOD needs to move near 1060mV unless you undervolt
> Vermeer loves SOC voltage, 1.100 (read out in ZT) and higher
> 
> 3800 needs 34ohm proc
> 4000 can work with 36, but also 34
> 2100 FCLK needs 1.1875-1.25vSOC @ proc 36 and must run low CPU VDDP (930mV stock)
> 
> tCKE is used even with GDM off, run 1
> Be y-cruncher all tests stable , if you fail the first 3 , it's a too open PBO and needs EDC limiting
> if you fail on FFT, it's the memory controller and the voltages around it
> cLDO_VDDP and CPU VDDP are different
> 
> at worst you can match cLDO_VDDP = VDDG CCD , both as 900mV or 950mV (skip that one unless you really have to)
> 
> Voltage presets you can gather here
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AMD max overclocking voltage
> 
> 
> Hello, I'm new to overclocking and I'm not shure about the max "safe" voltages on an amd 5000 platform. I have a 5950x a asus crossfire dark hero and a gskill 4000 cl16 kit. I have a kind of stable profile where i did only memory, soc, and fclk overclocking. memory voltage = 1.51 v, soc = 1.3 v...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Score Presets you can gather here
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Zen RAM OC Leaderboards
> 
> 
> Zen 4 Sheet is sorted and verified submissions LOCKED each Thursday. Please provide proof of stability via Y-Cruncher AND a memory stability test, otherwise your submission will be removed. Refer to the FAQ for more info. MEMORY,PROCESSOR Username,Memory Latency,L3 Latency,DIMMs,Die Type,Rank,Me...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> docs.google.com


Brilliant! 

I'll check this out, tyvm


----------



## Spectre73

ManniX-ITA said:


> You have to set OCP limits to 400mV and the protection to Medium, in the middle; I think it's Level 3 in the MSI BIOS.
> Lower or higher level can trigger sudden reboots.


What is the protection setting you are talking about? Can not find it in the UEFI. I just set OCP limit to 400mv, there is only one more realated setting. But I can only switch some kind of protection to advanced..


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Spectre73 said:


> What is the protection setting you are talking about? Can not find it in the UEFI. I just set OCP limit to 400mv, there is only one more realated setting. But I can only switch some kind of protection to advanced..


I don't remember the Unify-X BIOS... can you post a screenshot of the menu with the LLC settings?


----------



## KedarWolf

Spectre73 said:


> What is the protection setting you are talking about? Can not find it in the UEFI. I just set OCP limit to 400mv, there is only one more realated setting. But I can only switch some kind of protection to advanced..


I think they mean LLC settings at Level 3, but I find on my Unify X570 board Level 2 works quite well.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

KedarWolf said:


> I think they mean LLC settings at Level 3, but I find on my Unify X570 board Level 2 works quite well.


No I mean the OCP protection level; I remember it can be configured also on the Unify-X, I'm using the Master now.
Am I wrong?


----------



## Spectre73

ManniX-ITA said:


> No I mean the OCP protection level; I remember it can be configured also on the Unify-X, I'm using the Master now.
> Am I wrong?


CPU OCP can only be set to enhanced, though. I have no idea what this does.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Spectre73 said:


> CPU OCP can only be set to enhanced, though. I have no idea what this does.
> 
> View attachment 2475846


So it's either Auto or Enhanced?


----------



## Joeking78

Hey Guys

Looking at some new ram and want to make sure its compatible with the unify.

For example on msi site it says F4-4000C15Q-32GTZR is compatible, but on the right of the compatible list it has tick marks against 1 and 2 dimm but not 4 dimm yet the above mentioned kit is 4 x 8gb which will obviously full 4 dimm...any clue if this is compatible?


----------



## Joeking78

Veii said:


> put CPU VDDP to 900 or 880mV (880 rec)
> VDDG CCD beyond 950mV causes issues , 940 works
> VDDG IOD needs to move near 1060mV unless you undervolt
> Vermeer loves SOC voltage, 1.100 (read out in ZT) and higher
> 
> 3800 needs 34ohm proc
> 4000 can work with 36, but also 34
> 2100 FCLK needs 1.1875-1.25vSOC @ proc 36 and must run low CPU VDDP (930mV stock)
> 
> tCKE is used even with GDM off, run 1 till you have settled for the MCLK of choice
> Be y-cruncher all tests stable , if you fail the first 3 , it's a too open PBO and needs EDC limiting
> if you fail on FFT, it's the memory controller and the voltages around it
> cLDO_VDDP and CPU VDDP are different
> 
> at worst you can match cLDO_VDDP = VDDG CCD , both as 900mV or 950mV (skip that one unless you really have to)
> 
> Voltage presets you can gather here
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AMD max overclocking voltage
> 
> 
> Hello, I'm new to overclocking and I'm not shure about the max "safe" voltages on an amd 5000 platform. I have a 5950x a asus crossfire dark hero and a gskill 4000 cl16 kit. I have a kind of stable profile where i did only memory, soc, and fclk overclocking. memory voltage = 1.51 v, soc = 1.3 v...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Score Presets you can gather here
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Zen RAM OC Leaderboards
> 
> 
> Zen 4 Sheet is sorted and verified submissions LOCKED each Thursday. Please provide proof of stability via Y-Cruncher AND a memory stability test, otherwise your submission will be removed. Refer to the FAQ for more info. MEMORY,PROCESSOR Username,Memory Latency,L3 Latency,DIMMs,Die Type,Rank,Me...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> docs.google.com


Tried everything you mentioned and more and I just can't get rid of WHEA or no boot...

3800/1900 - no boot no matter what the voltages

3866/1933, 3933/1966, 4000/2000 with various settings and voltages WHEA 

Tried both Unify BIOS and the same issue.

Is there anyone here who can get 1:1:1 at or above 1900mhz on unify? 

Hoping a bios update will help in the future or possibly my cpu is a dud in terms of fabric clock frequency


----------



## Spectre73

ManniX-ITA said:


> So it's either Auto or Enhanced?


Exactly


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Joeking78 said:


> Tried everything you mentioned and more and I just can't get rid of WHEA or no boot...
> 
> 3800/1900 - no boot no matter what the voltages
> 
> 3866/1933, 3933/1966, 4000/2000 with various settings and voltages WHEA
> 
> Tried both Unify BIOS and the same issue.
> 
> Is there anyone here who can get 1:1:1 at or above 1900mhz on unify?
> 
> Hoping a bios update will help in the future or possibly my cpu is a dud in terms of fabric clock frequency


It's the same for almost everyone.
Totally WHEA error free above 1900 is really hard and at 2000 and above almost impossible.
Tried as well all the suggestions from @Veii with the Master F33a BIOS, which is 1.2.0.0.
Didn't help, still get a couple of errors every now and then.
What really helped was to lower the VSOC and VDDG voltages just before it goes unstable.
With the Unify-X my 5950x doesn't POST at all with low voltages at FCLK 2000.
Another big help was setting the OCP to Medium.

There are a lot of CPUs that for some reason can't boot 1900, it's an AGESA bug for sure.
It's hopefully going to be fixed soon.



Spectre73 said:


> Exactly


Didn't remember it.
Best is probably to left it to Auto instead of setting it Enhanced.


----------



## LionAlonso

Veii said:


> put CPU VDDP to 900 or 880mV (880 rec)
> VDDG CCD beyond 950mV causes issues , 940 works
> VDDG IOD needs to move near 1060mV unless you undervolt
> Vermeer loves SOC voltage, 1.100 (read out in ZT) and higher
> 
> 3800 needs 34ohm proc
> 4000 can work with 36, but also 34
> 2100 FCLK needs 1.1875-1.25vSOC @ proc 36 and must run low CPU VDDP (930mV stock)
> 
> tCKE is used even with GDM off, run 1 till you have settled for the MCLK of choice
> Be y-cruncher all tests stable , if you fail the first 3 , it's a too open PBO and needs EDC limiting
> if you fail on FFT, it's the memory controller and the voltages around it
> cLDO_VDDP and CPU VDDP are different
> 
> at worst you can match cLDO_VDDP = VDDG CCD , both as 900mV or 950mV (skip that one unless you really have to)
> 
> Voltage presets you can gather here
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AMD max overclocking voltage
> 
> 
> Hello, I'm new to overclocking and I'm not shure about the max "safe" voltages on an amd 5000 platform. I have a 5950x a asus crossfire dark hero and a gskill 4000 cl16 kit. I have a kind of stable profile where i did only memory, soc, and fclk overclocking. memory voltage = 1.51 v, soc = 1.3 v...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Score Presets you can gather here
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Zen RAM OC Leaderboards
> 
> 
> Zen 4 Sheet is sorted and verified submissions LOCKED each Thursday. Please provide proof of stability via Y-Cruncher AND a memory stability test, otherwise your submission will be removed. Refer to the FAQ for more info. MEMORY,PROCESSOR Username,Memory Latency,L3 Latency,DIMMs,Die Type,Rank,Me...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> docs.google.com


Hi veii! 
Could you tell the difference between CLDO VDPP and CPU VDPP, what is the one inside AMD overclocking? 
Also, is it bad to have vddg ccd = vdpp (the one inside amd overclocking) 
Also, what benefits brings lowering the proc odt (for example i have 40 at 3800, is better to lower to 34?) 
Thanks in advance!!


----------



## ManniX-ITA

LionAlonso said:


> Hi veii!
> Could you tell the difference between CLDO VDPP and CPU VDPP, what is the one inside AMD overclocking?
> Also, is it bad to have vddg ccd = vdpp (the one inside amd overclocking)
> Also, what benefits brings lowering the proc odt (for example i have 40 at 3800, is better to lower to 34?)
> Thanks in advance!!


For reference there's always the 1usmus article about memory tweaking, it also has a convenient glossary:








AMD Ryzen Memory Tweaking & Overclocking Guide


Memory overclocking has a significant impact on performance of AMD Ryzen-powered machines, but the alleged complexity of memory tweaking on this platform, largely fueled by misinformation and lack of documentation, has kept some enthusiasts away from it. We want to change this.




www.techpowerup.com


----------



## LionAlonso

ManniX-ITA said:


> For reference there's always the 1usmus article about memory tweaking, it also has a convenient glossary:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AMD Ryzen Memory Tweaking & Overclocking Guide
> 
> 
> Memory overclocking has a significant impact on performance of AMD Ryzen-powered machines, but the alleged complexity of memory tweaking on this platform, largely fueled by misinformation and lack of documentation, has kept some enthusiasts away from it. We want to change this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.techpowerup.com


Thanks I see....
I have always thought VDPP was CLDO VDPP so i have that at 900mv, same as my CCD voltage.
How do you see it, should i lower my CLDO VDDP down from 900 if its the same as Vddg CCD? 
I have had no problems of stability


----------



## ManniX-ITA

LionAlonso said:


> Thanks I see....
> I have always thought VDPP was CLDO VDPP so i have that at 900mv, same as my CCD voltage.
> How do you see it, should i lower my CLDO VDDP down from 900 if its the same as Vddg CCD?
> I have had no problems of stability


No those were recommendations for FCLK 2000.
There's no need otherwise to match them
VDDP is generally better at 900mV or below.

VDDG CCD an IOD depends on the CPU and the IF speed/memory OC.

My 5950x works with CCD/IOD at 900mV.
Only up to IF 1600.
For IF 1800 it needs 950mV.
And this is without PBO maxed, CO or tight memory timings.

For IF 1900 needs IOD at 1000mV at least or I get USB issues and audio crackling.
PBO maxed and tight timings needs at least 1050mV.

CCD at 950mV gives me sub-par results in benchmarks; AES-NI in Geekbench 5 scores lower, need at least 1050mV to score proper, only in ST.

VSOC same, more stressful are the settings more is needed or it'll be unstable.
I can run 1100mV only with relaxed settings.
All maxed out it struggles at 1125mV, I need at least 1150mV to be perfectly stable.


----------



## Veii

@ManniX-ITA Our little group figured another method aside from MCE+Y-Cruncher+Aida64 , to analyze when Vermeer starts to missbehave and autocorrect
It needs a bit more testing, but seems to be a good detector of wrong voltages


Spoiler



Stable








Fabric 💣💥








More messages:










1060 IOD pretty much remains to be stability champion for FCLK beyond 2000
(AGESA 1200 can run 2000FCLK, but higher is still a hardlock since 1190)


Spoiler



Work slowly improves, but it's nothing advertisable/recommendable yet 










Once research is done, i'll update and credit all the people in charge on this
Both came to the same conclusion with different testing methodology (i'm 2x8 , he 2*16GB)
That IOD 1060mV is prefect, for 1900 and 2000 FCLK
He pushes SOC to 1.18v tho with VDDG CCD down to 850 IOD

We'll see, work is in good progress 
cLDO_VDDP = VDDG CCD is an easy fix against WHEA and high FCLK
- but unclear yet if performance doesnt suffer a bit from it
Sub 950mV CCD still remains beneficial if not mandatory for high FCLK


----------



## LionAlonso

Veii said:


> @ManniX-ITA Our little group figured another method aside from MCE+Y-Cruncher+Aida64 , to analyze when Vermeer starts to missbehave and autocorrect
> It needs a bit more testing, but seems to be a good detector of wrong voltages
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Stable
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fabric 💣💥
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More messages:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1060 IOD pretty much remains to be stability champion for FCLK beyond 2000
> (AGESA 1200 can run 2000FCLK, but higher is still a hardlock since 1190)
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Work slowly improves, but it's nothing advertisable/recommendable yet
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Once research is done, i'll update and credit all the people in charge on this
> Both came to the same conclusion with different testing methodology (i'm 2x8 , he 2*16GB)
> That IOD 1060mV is prefect, for 1900 and 2000 FCLK
> He pushes SOC to 1.18v tho with VDDG CCD down to 850 IOD
> 
> We'll see, work is in good progress
> cLDO_VDDP = VDDG CCD is an easy fix against WHEA and high FCLK
> - but unclear yet if performance doesnt suffer a bit from it
> Sub 950mV CCD still remains beneficial if not mandatory for high FCLK


So if for me VDDG CCD is stable at 1900 FCLK at 900mV (IOD at 950) , and i have cLDO_VDPP at 900 (same as cpu vddp) its better to go down to 880 or so with cldo vdpp in order that is not the same as ccd (900) 
Thanks in advance!!


----------



## Kha

Guys, I just returned my B550 Master and ordered the Unify-X, so I'm back here for good. Anything I should know about the Unify or all is good so far ?

@ManniX-ITA how's yours so far ?


----------



## Veii

LionAlonso said:


> So if for me VDDG CCD is stable at 1900 FCLK at 900mV (IOD at 950) , and i have cLDO_VDPP at 900 (same as cpu vddp) its better to go down to 880 or so with cldo vdpp in order that is not the same as ccd (900)
> Thanks in advance!!


CPU VDDP is different from cLDO_VDDP
Many boards including current MSI , even with the CBS/PBS ,still lack for this voltage menu 
900-940-1060-1100 , was what worked well so far (40mV stepping)
But if you think 950-950-1050-1100 runs, that's fine too 

It needs close analysis


----------



## Joeking78

Joeking78 said:


> Hey Guys
> 
> Looking at some new ram and want to make sure its compatible with the unify.
> 
> For example on msi site it says F4-4000C15Q-32GTZR is compatible, but on the right of the compatible list it has tick marks against 1 and 2 dimm but not 4 dimm yet the above mentioned kit is 4 x 8gb which will obviously full 4 dimm...any clue if this is compatible?
> 
> View attachment 2475869


Anyone can help with this pls? Eager to order some ram  maybe a stupid question but don't want to order incompatible ram as I'm selling my current ram to part fund


----------



## LionAlonso

Veii said:


> CPU VDDP is different from cLDO_VDDP
> Many boards including current MSI , even with the CBS/PBS ,still lack for this voltage menu
> 900-940-1060-1100 , was what worked well so far (40mV stepping)
> But if you think 950-950-1050-1100 runs, that's fine too
> 
> It needs close analysis


Yeah, but i was talking about cldo_vddp, i have it at 900 same as CCD, for better perfomance is better to tune it down or to let it the same as VDDG CCD? 
In my case i have 1900FCLK stable since 1.1.0.0 at
1.05 Vsoc
950 IOD
900 CCD
900 Cldo_Vddp 
36 Ohm 
3800 Cl16 dual rank Bdies at 1,4V

Thanks in advance !!


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Veii said:


> @ManniX-ITA Our little group figured another method aside from MCE+Y-Cruncher+Aida64 , to analyze when Vermeer starts to missbehave and autocorrect
> It needs a bit more testing, but seems to be a good detector of wrong voltages
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Stable
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fabric 💣💥
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More messages:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1060 IOD pretty much remains to be stability champion for FCLK beyond 2000
> (AGESA 1200 can run 2000FCLK, but higher is still a hardlock since 1190)
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Work slowly improves, but it's nothing advertisable/recommendable yet
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Once research is done, i'll update and credit all the people in charge on this
> Both came to the same conclusion with different testing methodology (i'm 2x8 , he 2*16GB)
> That IOD 1060mV is prefect, for 1900 and 2000 FCLK
> He pushes SOC to 1.18v tho with VDDG CCD down to 850 IOD
> 
> We'll see, work is in good progress
> cLDO_VDDP = VDDG CCD is an easy fix against WHEA and high FCLK
> - but unclear yet if performance doesnt suffer a bit from it
> Sub 950mV CCD still remains beneficial if not mandatory for high FCLK


Thanks for the info!
Didn't thought about using LatencyMon, nice tip.

I can't go below CCD 1000mV with the 5950x otherwise the performances will drop. At 950mV audio and USB issues.

With the Master F33a on AGESA 1.2.0.0 FCLK 2033 works; still WHEA errors like at 2000.



Kha said:


> Guys, I just returned my B550 Master and ordered the Unify-X, so I'm back here for good. Anything I should know about the Unify or all is good so far ?
> 
> @ManniX-ITA how's yours so far ?


Last time I checked, was fine 
Still running with the Master, had no time this weekend to prepare the Unify-X with the coating.


----------



## Forsaken1

Joeking78 said:


> Anyone can help with this pls? Eager to order some ram  maybe a stupid question but don't want to order incompatible ram as I'm selling my current ram to part fund


4 sticks are capable of 3800/1900 cl14 24/7with luck.Let’s us know how 4 sticks 4000/2000 works out.I will soon test 4 sticks of patriot 4400.

Agesa are immature at this time.In other words garbage!!!!!!! Especially if you run a 5800x.


----------



## dr.Rafi

Veii said:


> @ManniX-ITA Our little group figured another method aside from MCE+Y-Cruncher+Aida64 , to analyze when Vermeer starts to missbehave and autocorrect
> It needs a bit more testing, but seems to be a good detector of wrong voltages
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Stable
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Fabric 💣💥
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More messages:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1060 IOD pretty much remains to be stability champion for FCLK beyond 2000
> (AGESA 1200 can run 2000FCLK, but higher is still a hardlock since 1190)
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Work slowly improves, but it's nothing advertisable/recommendable yet
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Once research is done, i'll update and credit all the people in charge on this
> Both came to the same conclusion with different testing methodology (i'm 2x8 , he 2*16GB)
> That IOD 1060mV is prefect, for 1900 and 2000 FCLK
> He pushes SOC to 1.18v tho with VDDG CCD down to 850 IOD
> 
> We'll see, work is in good progress
> cLDO_VDDP = VDDG CCD is an easy fix against WHEA and high FCLK
> - but unclear yet if performance doesnt suffer a bit from it
> Sub 950mV CCD still remains beneficial if not mandatory for high FCLK


Did you test 5950x ?, 5600x and 5800x is very different with voltages required to get higher fclk.
5950x need higher voltages with high fclk and also slower alot over 2000 , the only way your voltages start making sense for me by disabling one ccd and disable 2 cores ,so only active left was 6 cores to emulate 5600x like yours. hope that can be helpfull.


----------



## Veii

dr.Rafi said:


> Did you test 5950x ?, 5600x and 5800x is very different with voltages required to get higher fclk.
> 5950x need higher voltages with high fclk and also slower alot over 2000 , the only way your voltages start making sense for me by disabling one ccd and disable 2 cores ,so only active left was 6 cores to emulate 5600x like yours. hope that can be helpfull.


Not yet, i wish i had a real dual CCD and not only a gimped one 
5800X and 5600X we do actively test
5600X seems to work for 1CCD and 2CCD gimped units ~ although i have to double-confirm on the 3rd 5600X person, if he was a gimped or non gimped unit

Singe AGESA 1.1.0.0 Patch D, Internal Link speed changed
Or some limits got lifted. I can see how voltages logically would change
But as for our testing, we don't get any WHEA at all , idk ~ we can not relate at all to them
It's either hard power-off ,y-cruncher fail with usable but laggy OS, or full stability. Nothing in between

1060 IOD was/is atm in testing purposes for a 5950X, same as ManniX's powerplans
Two 5900X and 5950X users struggle (logically) with 4x A2 on the Daisy chain board
One X570 Unify with the bios mod, one Asus Dark Hero (dark hero person struggling more ~ although irrelevant)

The biggest difference between newer AGESAs, is mostly the required SOC voltage
And the huge autocorrection steps


Spoiler














No finding so far of dLDO_injection, behavior - and no findings of per-core C-State behavior
AGESA 1.2.0.0 needs further testing,but 4000MT/s 4 dimm , is possible
We'll see, i can not comment with more recommendations
Minimum voltages change up to procODT state
This is currently usable as a preset, but it can be done better.


Spoiler














I think my voltages where fine listed here








AMD max overclocking voltage


Hello, I'm new to overclocking and I'm not shure about the max "safe" voltages on an amd 5000 platform. I have a 5950x a asus crossfire dark hero and a gskill 4000 cl16 kit. I have a kind of stable profile where i did only memory, soc, and fclk overclocking. memory voltage = 1.51 v, soc = 1.3 v...




www.overclock.net




More information is work in progress


----------



## dr.Rafi

Veii said:


> Not yet, i wish i had a real dual CCD and not only a gimped one
> 5800X and 5600X we do actively test
> 5600X seems to work for 1CCD and 2CCD gimped units ~ although i have to double-confirm on the 3rd 5600X person, if he was a gimped or non gimped unit
> 
> Singe AGESA 1.1.0.0 Patch D, Internal Link speed changed
> Or some limits got lifted. I can see how voltages logically would change
> But as for our testing, we don't get any WHEA at all , idk ~ we can not relate at all to them
> It's either hard power-off ,y-cruncher fail with usable but laggy OS, or full stability. Nothing in between
> 
> 1060 IOD was/is atm in testing purposes for a 5950X, same as ManniX's powerplans
> Two 5900X and 5950X users struggle (logically) with 4x A2 on the Daisy chain board
> One X570 Unify with the bios mod, one Asus Dark Hero (dark hero person struggling more ~ although irrelevant)
> 
> The biggest difference between newer AGESAs, is mostly the required SOC voltage
> And the huge autocorrection steps
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No finding so far of dLDO_injection, behavior - and no findings of per-core C-State behavior
> AGESA 1.2.0.0 needs further testing,but 4000MT/s 4 dimm , is possible
> We'll see, i can not comment with more recommendations
> Minimum voltages change up to procODT state
> This is currently usable as a preset, but it can be done better.
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think my voltages where fine listed here
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AMD max overclocking voltage
> 
> 
> Hello, I'm new to overclocking and I'm not shure about the max "safe" voltages on an amd 5000 platform. I have a 5950x a asus crossfire dark hero and a gskill 4000 cl16 kit. I have a kind of stable profile where i did only memory, soc, and fclk overclocking. memory voltage = 1.51 v, soc = 1.3 v...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> More information is work in progress


Thank you for your hard work to help the comunity, Iam happy to use my computers to subject tests, i have 3 motherboards ,x570 master rev 1.2, b550 unify, and asus itx x570 strix, and 3 sets of gskill ram, 2x8 3800 cl14, 2x16 3200 cl15, 2x16 4000 cl16, all that to figure what is best and sell the rest in future, iam advanced user but nothing close to your knowledge, and have plenty of free time to help out, if you send me organized set of settings to test ,happy to give you feedback with all results in short time.


----------



## dr.Rafi

@ Veii or we can open new thread with fund raising so you can get 5950x soon which will be better option, and please dont take it in any offensive way. if you like the idea.


----------



## Veii

Do you guys by any chance know who "Kars Gottschal" is ?
The person who does most of the MSI CBS/PBS Bios mods ?





Bios Mods - Google Drive







drive.google.com




We usually stay on Hardware Numb3rs Discord recently (youtuber)
But jump between couple of them.


dr.Rafi said:


> @ Veii or we can open new thread with fund raising so you can get 5950x soon which will be better option, and please dont take it in any offensive way. if you like the idea.


Hahaha, i don't deserve it yet ~ can not 100% focus my time on the research
I mean, i'm moving this week ~ and plan next week to dissect a bit this AGESA 1.2.0.0 and look if we can get that fantastic ABL boost bump from 1.1.0.0 Patch D, down to Patch B without loosing the open FCLK till 2167 ~ or 🖍 AMD fix

That's next weeks work, also X370/X470 Taichi experiments
But i dont want to update to 1.2.0.0 , not without being sure that AMD won't lock our nice Dual CCD units
As since 1.1.9.0 , we have again a 2000 FCLK lock - where 2033 adds 6ns again
I don't feel like following AMDs attempts to permanently forbid us 2100FCLK. Even more when i know it's possible and can be/got it rock-stable (aside from this artificial package throttle)

Anywho, anyone knows who this modder is ?
I have that open FCLK ABL saved for future modding - just need to 100% focus on this research
Next week ~ probably also live, soo i'm not the only one who beats their head on a wall 
For now, my gimped 5600X is in a suitcase, waiting to move over ~ and we just research in his discord 
I think he is a great youtuber & Overclocker 
~ definitely deserves more attention, soo kinda took over his discord for now


----------



## dr.Rafi

Veii said:


> Do you guys by any chance know who "Kars Gottschal" is ?
> The person who does most of the MSI CBS/PBS Bios mods ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bios Mods - Google Drive
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We usually stay on Hardware Numb3rs Discord recently (youtuber)
> But jump between couple of them.
> 
> Hahaha, i don't deserve it yet ~ can not 100% focus my time on the research
> I mean, i'm moving this week ~ and plan next week to dissect a bit this AGESA 1.2.0.0 and look if we can get that fantastic ABL boost bump from 1.1.0.0 Patch D, down to Patch B without loosing the open FCLK till 2167 ~ or 🖍 AMD fix
> 
> That's next weeks work, also X370/X470 Taichi experiments
> But i dont want to update to 1.2.0.0 , not without being sure that AMD won't lock our nice Dual CCD units
> As since 1.1.9.0 , we have again a 2000 FCLK lock - where 2033 adds 6ns again
> I don't feel like following AMDs attempts to permanently forbid us 2100FCLK. Even more when i know it's possible and can be/got it rock-stable (aside from this artificial package throttle)
> 
> Anywho, anyone knows who this modder is ?
> I have that open FCLK ABL saved for future modding - just need to 100% focus on this research
> Next week ~ probably also live, soo i'm not the only one who beats their head on a wall
> For now, my gimped 5600X is in a suitcase, waiting to move over ~ and we just research in his discord
> I think he is a great youtuber & Overclocker
> ~ definitely deserves more attention, soo kinda took over his discord for now


Good Luck with everything you deserve the best. 
I found this youtuber and seams have these channels in the list and i can tell he is programmer ,assume he is the person you looking for .not sure though.


----------



## Veii

dr.Rafi said:


> Good Luck with everything you deserve the best.
> I found this youtuber and seams have these channels in the list and i can tell he is programmer ,assume he is the person you looking for .not sure though.
> View attachment 2475968


https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCVTvrgSgjmEruGyyTclpq2w this guy i ment 
Well anywho , Karl seems to be an OCN member here - but i don't know his nick
He does a lot of bios modding for MSI
I see B550 Unify/-X one miss
And there are quite interesting things already inside AMD CBS - also included this annoying autocorrection
It would be useful to take a peak at it
Useful for the community

EDIT:
ShimizuOC, or Shimi-Labs [Japanese]
Is a partnered by MSI Overclocker, who helps on the newer boards and tests them through
I haven't seen much of him - but he seems to know his way around XOC
Sadly as for english content, i don't know any MSI Rep here
I do like their boards, B350 Toma still leads with the 1700X (Mosfets where hot tho)

But i don't know who maintains the bioses and modifications for them
At least not for English media
What i certainly don't like is the restrictive AMD CBS , and the fully missing AMD PBS
Wastes soo much potential for OC Records


----------



## Forsaken1

A starting point.4x8gb B-die.


----------



## Kha

Veii said:


> https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCVTvrgSgjmEruGyyTclpq2w this guy i ment
> Well anywho , Karl seems to be an OCN member here - but i don't know his nick
> He does a lot of bios modding for MSI
> I see B550 Unify/-X one miss
> And there are quite interesting things already inside AMD CBS - also included this annoying autocorrection
> It would be useful to take a peak at it
> Useful for the community
> 
> EDIT:
> ShimizuOC, or Shimi-Labs [Japanese]
> Is a partnered by MSI Overclocker, who helps on the newer boards and tests them through
> I haven't seen much of him - but he seems to know his way around XOC
> Sadly as for english content, i don't know any MSI Rep here
> I do like their boards, B350 Toma still leads with the 1700X (Mosfets where hot tho)
> 
> But i don't know who maintains the bioses and modifications for them
> At least not for English media
> What i certainly don't like is the restrictive AMD CBS , and the fully missing AMD PBS
> Wastes soo much potential for OC Records


@Veii, there is a bios modder on the MSI X570 Unify thread, his named is Eder I think. Maybe he's your guy, check him out.









Eder







www.overclock.net


----------



## Kha

@ManniX-ITA did you solve the coil whine issue ? Maybe you can give a sign on Discord today, need to ask you so many questions 



Forsaken1 said:


> Can get VRM noise to go away or atleast hidden. My noise is coming from the small vrm/heatsink closer to post display.I pushed firmly down on it while also pushing forward and back.Which tells me i need to bend heat pipe and tighten screws on back of mobo more.


So, did you succeded to fix it ?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Kha said:


> @ManniX-ITA did you solve the coil whine issue ? Maybe you can give a sign on Discord today, need to ask you so many questions
> 
> 
> 
> So, did you succeded to fix it ?


Have to see if tightening the screws is helping or not.

Have contacted the MSI support again and it seems I had to contact the German support, misuderstanding.
So I've opened a new request to the local support and waiting an answer.


----------



## Veii

ManniX-ITA said:


> Have to see if tightening the screws is helping or not.
> 
> Have contacted the MSI support again and it seems I had to contact the German support, misuderstanding.
> So I've opened a new request to the local support and waiting an answer.


Usually those caps are fixable with hotglue, at least from the gpu side of things
But it could be difficult to make a good hotglue seal while not covering the little pwm/mosfets 

Could be difficult to seal them without affecting thermals
usually once one part whines, the whole lineup is an issue
But maybe you are lucky while being unlucky - and your model is just an exception


----------



## Kha

Veii said:


> Usually those caps are fixable with hotglue, at least from the gpu side of things
> But it could be difficult to make a good hotglue seal while not covering the little pwm/mosfets
> 
> Could be difficult to seal them without affecting thermals
> usually once one part whines, the whole lineup is an issue
> But maybe you are lucky while being unlucky - and your model is just an exception


Veii, please give me your personal advice regarding this issue. I had the B550 Master, which was a fine board but had the dreaded RTL 8125 controller that was disconnecting constanly and blow up the router too. I sent it back, got the refund already and now I am interested in this B550 Unify-X, but this coil whine thing scares the sh! t out of me.

What's your take on the current boards, are there any other really good choices apart the Unify-X ?


----------



## Veii

Kha said:


> Veii, please give me your personal advice regarding this issue. I had the B550 Master, which was a fine board but had the dreaded RTL 8125 controller that was disconnecting constantly and blow up the router too. I sent it back, got the refund already and now I am interested in this B550 Unify-X, but this coil whine thing scares the sh! t out of me.
> 
> What's your take on the current boards, are there any other really good choices apart the Unify-X ?


The Realtek 2.5gbit issues where across the whole manufacture lineup
All boards had the same issue - it was Realtek telling everyone that they did not follow the specs
While later they fixed their EFI module and pushed a driver update
This issue should have been fixed about 2-3 weeks ago.

A good board 🤔
On specs i can recommend some. On bios progress - actually i don't know
I don't know any board, or manufacture out there who do "flawless" work in the current state
ASRock was known for open bioses and good developement. Their engineer changed or something happened
MSI has a good overclocker on hand, but the bios developement team is slow
Gigabyte has one person who tries to strongly take about bioses, stasio ~ but he plays more the middle man role.
Asus currently the Dark Hero,has memory OC issues and the typical bios bugs - i can not praise it right now

Actually i don't know.
EVGA wanted "soonTM" to release an AM4 board, someday somewhen.
Probably all ITX boards are fine, but all the bioses are not fine.
I think the unify-X is PCB wise, next to the DTX impact (misses display-out) and X570/B550 ITX/AX (misses bios support) one of the better boards out there
Biostar likely is interesting, but rather for bios modders.
I can not recommend anything atm
Am not happy with any of the existing companies work. It's half hearted & the people who actively work with the community, only have a low position without much talk.
Representatives of companies, don't do a good enough job. They only market well but don't help the developement

EDIT, 
We need an Unify-Z ITX, or Unify-Y mATX 
something smaller but 2 dimm
Or a fly-by design mATX board with individual Dimm channel voltage control (4 dimms) 
Well or just use T-Topology again under a better PCB 
No idk, i miss small 2 dimm boards from MSI 
Something with pure 90A States, not 60 or 50A ones in masses


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Veii said:


> Usually those caps are fixable with hotglue, at least from the gpu side of things
> But it could be difficult to make a good hotglue seal while not covering the little pwm/mosfets
> 
> Could be difficult to seal them without affecting thermals
> usually once one part whines, the whole lineup is an issue
> But maybe you are lucky while being unlucky - and your model is just an exception


It's a common issue and not only on the Unify-X, same for the Unify.

If MSI can't fix it I'm thinking about alternatives solutions.
Have to check the tolerances but maybe a 3D printed staff to connect all caps could be effective.
Hot glue I'm not sure, could work but since is so huge the coil whine I feel it's too soft to absorb the vibrations.
I have that thermal resistant UHU black glue that I use for die-lidding; it gets quite rigid when dry maybe a few drops in between the caps could work and not affect thermals.


----------



## Kha

Veii said:


> The Realtek 2.5gbit issues where across the whole manufacture lineup
> All boards had the same issue - it was Realtek telling everyone that they did not follow the specs
> While later they fixed their EFI module and pushed a driver update
> This issue should have been fixed about 2-3 weeks ago.


Sorry but from what I experienced, the problem isn't fixed at all. I tried the last driver you talk about, with the last Gigabyte bios too. The NDIS error indeed is gone, but after some hours (anything between 1h and 10h) it blows the router due to some ARP / STP loop that shouldn't happen.

@ManniX-ITA apprently don't have this issue on his Unify-X and didn't hear about other B550 Unify/X owners reporting it so far, maybe MSI followed Realtek specs because Unify-X was really late to the party and they implement it right ?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Kha said:


> Sorry but from what I experienced, the problem isn't fixed at all. I tried the last driver you talk about, with the last Gigabyte bios too. The NDIS error indeed is gone, but after some hours (anything between 1h and 10h) it blows the router due to some ARP / STP loop that shouldn't happen.
> 
> @ManniX-ITA apprently don't have this issue on his Unify-X and didn't hear about other B550 Unify/X owners reporting it so far, maybe MSI followed Realtek specs because Unify-X was really late to the party ?


Indeed I have never experienced issues and neither heard anyone having it with the Unify-X.
But I'm also not directly connected to the switch, I'm going through a MOCA adapter; it could be an important difference.


----------



## Kha

@Forsaken1 hows your network stability and coil whine ? did you experience any issue with the RTL 8125 ?


----------



## Spectre73

Kha said:


> @Forsaken1 hows your network stability and coil whine ? did you experience any issue with the RTL 8125 ?


I also have no issues. I am connecting through a dumb (unmanaged) realtek switch with no UI.


----------



## Kha

Spectre73 said:


> I also have no issues. I am connecting through a dumb (unmanaged) realtek switch with no UI.


No coil whine whatsoever ? Can you also please me the model of your realtek switch, just in case ?


----------



## Kha

Veii said:


> On specs i can recommend some.


Yes please, do recommend some, specs wise.


----------



## Spectre73

Kha said:


> No coil whine whatsoever ? Can you also please me the model of your realtek switch, just in case ?


I have coil whine. No issues with the realtek LAN. But I can not hear the whine out of my case (bequiet 802 mesh). Router is a Netgear GS108 if I remember correctly.


----------



## Kha

Spectre73 said:


> I have coil whine. No issues with the realtek LAN. But I can not hear the whine out of my case (bequiet 802 mesh). Router is a Netgear GS108 if I remember correctly.


But you said you are connecting through a Realtek switch that you have between you and router ? Can you please tell what model it is ?

Also, the GS108 is a switch, not router from what I can see.


----------



## Spectre73

Kha said:


> But you said you are connecting through a Realtek switch that you have between you and router ? Can you please tell what model it is ?
> 
> Also, the GS108 is a switch, not router from what I can see.


Yeah, sorry, apologies. It is a Netgear switch. I did not catch my error. It is the netgear GS108. I said that I use a switch, didn't I?

So again. Hopefully right now: I am using a Netgear switch, the GS108. This switch connects most of my gear and feeds into my cable router (AVM Fritz!box). The Fritz!box acts as my internet access and DHCP server and also as WLAN router (hope I get the terminology right).
But regarding your problem, I did not read it correctly, it seems. So you are going directly into your router that manages your internet access and connects your devices with each other? Even though I have no problems there always is the possibility that the realtek LAN messes with the complexity of your router but leaves an unmanaged switch untouched. My PC is never directly connected to the router, because of the switch.


----------



## Kha

Spectre73 said:


> Yeah, sorry, apologies. It is a Netgear switch. I did not catch my error. It is the netgear GS108. I said that I use a switch, didn't I?
> 
> So again. Hopefully right now: I am using a Netgear switch, the GS108. This switch connects most of my gear and feeds into my cable router (AVM Fritz!box). The Fritz!box only acts as my internet access modem and DHCP server and also as WLAN router (hope I get the terminology right).
> But regarding your problem, I did not read it correctly, it seems. So you are going directly into your router that manages your internet access and connects your devices with each other?


Yup, it's a router that has a 4 port switch integrated in it. I also see you have same router as @ManniX-ITA while also having something in between. You - the switch, while he has the Moca adapter.


----------



## Forsaken1

Kha said:


> @Forsaken1 hows your network stability and coil whine ? did you experience any issue with the RTL 8125 ?


Network stability is fine so far.
Coil whine gone after mod.
RTL 8125 no issues.
Returning board for other QC issues.New board arrives shortly. Agesa 1.2 is rubbish.Capped boost to 5025.
CPU runs 5c or so warmer idle/load.Double reboots to lock all bios settings at times.It’s almost a alpha agesa.


----------



## Kha

Forsaken1 said:


> Network stability is fine so far.
> Coil whine gone after mod.
> RTL 8125 no issues.
> Returning board for other QC issues.New board arrives shortly. Agesa 1.2 is rubbish.Capped boost to 5025.
> CPU runs 5c or so warmer idle/load.Double reboots to lock all bios settings at times.It’s almost a alpha agesa.


Can you please tell what router / network setup you have ?

Also, what mod are you talking about and can you expand a bit the reasons you ended returning the board ?

Thanks.


----------



## Kha

Spectre73 said:


> I have coil whine. No issues with the realtek LAN. But I can not hear the whine out of my case (bequiet 802 mesh). Router is a Netgear GS108 if I remember correctly.


So while normal browsing / windows stuff/ gaming you don't hear the coil whine, right ?


----------



## MyUsername

I have extremely faint coil whine on unify-x, but the fan on my amp is louder so I'm not concerned, even my mini dehumidifier is louder lol. Network has been solid, streaming on Amazon prime etc fine, downloading off qbittorrent has downloaded flat out no dropouts. Only complaint is m.2 raid on CPU mode is broken on later bioses.


----------



## Kha

MyUsername said:


> I have extremely faint coil whine on unify-x, but the fan on my amp is louder so I'm not concerned, even my mini dehumidifier is louder lol. Network has been solid, streaming on Amazon prime etc fine, downloading off qbittorrent has downloaded flat out no dropouts. Only complaint is m.2 raid on CPU mode is broken on later bioses.


Can you please tell in what conditions you hear the coil whine ? Is it constant, like there no matter what you are doing or is it only at load ? Also, do you mind telling your network setup, like router model, switches and other devices connected etc ? Cheers.


----------



## Spectre73

Kha said:


> So while normal browsing / windows stuff/ gaming you don't hear the coil whine, right ?


Sry, but you are trying the impossible. To be good informed is one thing, but you are actually trying to eliminate every risk of brand new tech. Look at the forums. There is no one brand that gets only praise from its customers. But you should always remember that first: dissatisfied customers are the loudest and second: NEARLY everyone with problems is running their systems somewhat out of spec. Be it fclk 1900 which was only rarely achieved with ryzen 3000 series and is still not easy to run error free even on zen 3. Or toying with CO or PBO settings. Nothing is standard here.
What I want to say is, that problems are overblown in the echo chamber that is the internet. Of course there are problems, but not everyone has them.

For the record, I do not hear anything out of my system at all (coil whine, that is).. I was only able to reproduce @ManniX-ITA observations by opening my case, moving the mouse while holding my ear next to my mainboard (you do not want to know how it looked like at my desk, lol). My hearing is SLIGHTLY below average for someone my age, so make of it what you will, but I have a Vega 64 and it also has mandatory coil whine while idling in some game start screens with above 500 fps or whatever (that is what frame limiters are for).

So really no offense here. I really think, the kind of research you do is justified. I just think that you are overanalysing. Sometimes you just have to make a decision based on your gut, because even if you don't there are things you could either not have foreseen or that are happenig even though no one has mentioned them before. There just is a risk and I believe it to be higher with state of the art tech and new technologies.


----------



## Kha

Spectre73 said:


> Sry, but you are trying the impossible. To be good informed is one thing, but you are actually trying to eliminate every risk of brand new tech. Look at the forums. There is no one brand that gets only praise from its customers. But you should always remember that first: dissatisfied customers are the loudest and second: NEARLY everyone with problems is running their systems somewhat out of spec. Be it fclk 1900 which was only rarely achieved with ryzen 3000 series and is still not easy to run error free even on zen 3. Or toying with CO or PBO settings. Nothing is standard here.
> What I want to say is, that problems are overblown in the echo chamber that is the internet. Of course there are problems, but not everyone has them.
> 
> For the record, I do not hear anything out of my system at all (coil whine, that is).. I was only able to reproduce @ManniX-ITA observations by opening my case, moving the mouse while holding my ear next to my mainboard (you do not want to know how it looked like at my desk, lol). My hearing is SLIGHTLY below average for someone my age, so make of it what you will, but I have a Vega 64 and it also has mandatory coil whine while idling in some game start screens with above 500 fps or whatever (that is what frame limiters are for).
> 
> So really no offense here. I really think, the kind of research you do is justified. I just think that you are overanalysing. Sometimes you just have to make a decision based on your gut, because even if you don't there are things you could either not have foreseen or that are happenig even though no one has mentioned them before. There just is a risk and I believe it to be higher with state of the art tech and new technologies.


You obviously have a point, but... 

I just passed through a quite tragic experience with the B550 Master, which was an astonishing board, yet it suffered by the dreaded Realtek disconnect issue. With help from ManniX-Ita, tried everything humanly possible to solve it, yet to no avail. So now, when I sent the B550 Master back and now I am again on the market looking for options, yes, of course I am trying to eliminate as much as possible issues (would be stupid to not to).

I really want this "quest" to stop and find myself a good board that function well and .. without any massive coil whine that some are reporting. Especially since I happen to have a quite good hearing and coil whine for me is... hell.

Thanks big time for the coil whine review.


----------



## KedarWolf

Kha said:


> You obviously have a point, but...
> 
> I just passed through a quite tragic experience with the B550 Master, which was an astonishing board, yet it suffered by the dreaded Realtek disconnect issue. With help from ManniX-Ita, tried everything humanly possible to solve it, yet to no avail. So now, when I sent the B550 Master back and now I am again on the market looking for options, yes, of course I am trying to eliminate as much as possible issues (would be stupid to not to).
> 
> I really want this "quest" to stop and find myself a good board that function well and .. without any massive coil whine that some are reporting. Especially since I happen to have a quite good hearing and coil whine for me is... hell.
> 
> Thanks big time for the coil whine review.


I'm so insensitive to noise. I have something like 18 fans in my system, mostly 3000 RPM, keep them at 60% all the time, have two 10000 RPM RAM fans, keep them at 6800 RPM because I have a really cutting edge overclock on my RAM, unheard of for a 3950x, but need to keep them really cool.

I wear a headset all the time, can just hear my fans over the volume of my game and Twitch running, but barely. Doesn't bother me at all.

And I'll have Twitch on my second screen, a PC game running AND my TV on sports to keep track of the games' score, and don't faze me.

Don't faze me, bro. 

Edit: And usually motherboard manufacturers are aware of such things as network adaptor issues and will use newer revisions of the hardware that was causing the issues on new boards or even the second revision of the problematic boards etc.

I'd be really surprised if when I get my Unify-X early next week that the network adaptor is problematic.


----------



## Kha

KedarWolf said:


> Don't faze me, bro.


I honestly envy you.



KedarWolf said:


> I'd be really surprised if when I get my Unify-X early next week that the network adaptor is problematic.


So help us God.


----------



## Veii

LionAlonso said:


> Yeah, but i was talking about cldo_vddp, i have it at 900 same as CCD, for better perfomance is better to tune it down or to let it the same as VDDG CCD?
> In my case i have 1900FCLK stable since 1.1.0.0 at
> 1.05 Vsoc
> 950 IOD
> 900 CCD
> 900 Cldo_Vddp
> 36 Ohm
> 3800 Cl16 dual rank Bdies at 1,4V
> 
> Thanks in advance !!


You really need to test this
SOC is usually required
I heard that CPU VDDP 830, clDO_VDDP 830 and VDDG CCD all at 830mV also work up till 2000MT/s with a lot of SOC voltage
The CPU will autocorrect. You have to benchmark and benchmark, to really see if there are positive or negative latency differences
Proc is fine for you

I run 880mV CPU VDDP and 900 cLDO_VDDP
But i'll need to push it through an DPC analyze too
Soo maybe there is room to improve. And there is a lot to test still. Don't want to upgrade to 1.2.0.0 with my unit ~ till i find out where the telemetry fix from AMD is , to wipe it away.


ManniX-ITA said:


> It's a common issue and not only on the Unify-X, same for the Unify.
> 
> If MSI can't fix it I'm thinking about alternatives solutions.
> Have to check the tolerances but maybe a 3D printed staff to connect all caps could be effective.
> Hot glue I'm not sure, could work but since is so huge the coil whine I feel it's too soft to absorb the vibrations.
> I have that thermal resistant UHU black glue that I use for die-lidding; it gets quite rigid when dry maybe a few drops in between the caps could work and not affect thermals.


Usually coil whine happens, as they are vibrating at very high frequency and are a bit lose
Anything that can fill the space, be it silicon - will help. But i am not sure if you can manage to fill them with anything, without interfering with the heatsink mount and you'd need to check how warm they actually get.
UHU or 2 components glue usually is stiff. The high freq vibration (fast) will break that thing
It's better to get something elastic and fill them
It's not about noise dampening but about filling the gaps on some of the models, which is why they coil whine.
They just have too much space to move inside their little cap and act as a speaker which vibrates at a high frequency


Kha said:


> Yes please, do recommend some, specs wise.


They all will have the same Realtek behavior (if not Intel 2.5gbit) ,
but here are some purely from the specs side:

MSI X570/B550 Unify
ASRock B550 ITX/AX (nothing else from the B550 lineup)
Gigabyte B550i Aorus Pro AX (AC is bad, B550M even worse)
MSI B550 Gaming Carbon WiFi
Asus DTX Impact
Asus B550 STRIX-E
some more X570 boards, but that's it

Check this 








B550 VRM DB sheet (Ver 1.8)


시트1 Feedback : [email protected] Don't requst permission / You can leave comment :) Rec. 56X,Product,Price,Config,Phase Type,VRM Type,MOSFET (Vcore),PWM Controller,LAN,Wireless LAN,Audio ASUS ROG STRIX B550-XE Gaming WiFi,$ 330,14+2,Dual-Output,DrMOS,TI X95410RR 90A,ASP1405i (7+1),Intel I2...




docs.google.com





Waiting for a new gen 2 impact , with display out
Or just something better on the market
Something that doesn't run (OnSemi, Vishay [Renesas low end], SM) MOSFETs ~ something better than this with switching frequency access.
As Truephase of if Doubler , at least something Renesas ISL lineup but not uPxxxx
PWM Renesas RAA are a bit better than UPI uP xxxx
ASUS ASP ones are anyways Renesas Rebrands

At best would be Infineon Gear, but that might make the board too expensive
Texas Instruments has also some low ripple stuff, depends really
EDIT:
BIOSTAR ones look very appealing, but i don't trust the bios yet
Although from the specs side of things, i really want one to play around with


----------



## KedarWolf

Here is the latest Unify-X BIOS with the below updated.






B550Unify-X_Modded_A1_BIOS1-26-2021.zip







drive.google.com





When I get my Unify-X next week I'm going to pay a modder to unlock the newest BIOS for us, tons of extra BIOS menu options that are very helpful.

I want to wait to make sure a new BIOS isn't released by then.
Even though he'll do it for free, it's a couple of hours of work and I don't feel right just asking him to do it for nothing, so I give him $20 USD.

MSI MEG B550 Unify-X

Disk Controller
[Current version]
EFI AMD RAIDXpert2-Fxx - 9.3.0-00221
EFI AMD RAIDXpert2-Fxx - 9.3.0-00221
OROM AMD RAIDXpert2-Fxx - 8.1.0-00046

* [Available versions for replacement]*
*1 - EFI AMD RAIDXpert2-Fxx - 9.3.0-00221*
*2 - OROM AMD RAIDXpert2-Fxx - 8.1.0-00064*

Video OnBoard
[Current version]
EFI AMD GOP Driver - 2.15.0.17.10_signed
EFI AMD GOP Driver - 2.15.0.17.10_signed
OROM VBIOS Cezanne - 017.010.000.028.000000
OROM VBIOS Renoir - 017.010.000.028.000000
OROM VBIOS Raven - 016.002.000.012.000000
OROM VBIOS Raven 2 - 016.002.000.012.000000
OROM VBIOS Picasso - 016.002.000.012.000000

* [Available version]*
* EFI AMD GOP Driver - 3.0.0_signed
EFI AMD GOP Driver - 2.15.0.17.10_signed
EFI AMD GOP Driver - 1.69.0.15.50_signed
OROM VBIOS Cezanne - 017.010.000.028.000000
OROM VBIOS Renoir - 017.010.000.028.000000
OROM VBIOS Picasso - 016.002.000.012.000000
OROM VBIOS Raven 2 - 016.002.000.012.000000*
* OROM VBIOS Raven - 016.002.000.012.000000*

Network
[Current version]
EFI Realtek UNDI Driver - 2.052
EFI Realtek UNDI Driver - 2.052
OROM Realtek 2.5 Gb PXE - 3.01
OROM Realtek 2.5 Gb PXE - 3.01

* [Available version]*

* EFI Realtek UNDI Driver - 2.054
OROM Realtek 2.5 Gb PXE - 3.01*

╔═════════════════════════════════════════════════════╗
║ AMD ║
╟──┬────────┬────────┬──────────┬──────┬─────────┬────╢
║# │ CPUID │Revision│ Date │ Size │ Offset │Last║
╟──┼────────┼────────┼──────────┼──────┼─────────┼────╢
║1 │00800F82│0800820D│2019-04-16│0xC80 │ 0x449000│Yes ║
╟──┼────────┼────────┼──────────┼──────┼─────────┼────╢
║2 │00800F12│08001250│2019-04-16│0xC80 │ 0x449D00│ No ║
╟──┼────────┼────────┼──────────┼──────┼─────────┼────╢
║3 │00800F11│08001138│2019-02-04│0xC80 │ 0x44AA00│Yes ║
╟──┼────────┼────────┼──────────┼──────┼─────────┼────╢
║4 │00800F10│0800100C│2017-01-31│0xC80 │ 0x44B700│Yes ║
╟──┼────────┼────────┼──────────┼──────┼─────────┼────╢
║5 │00800F00│0800002A│2016-10-06│0xC80 │ 0x44C400│Yes ║
╟──┼────────┼────────┼──────────┼──────┼─────────┼────╢
║6 │00810F10│08101016│2019-04-30│0xC80 │ 0x5CA500│Yes ║
╟──┼────────┼────────┼──────────┼──────┼─────────┼────╢
║7 │00820F01│08200103│2019-04-17│0xC80 │ 0x5CB200│Yes ║
╟──┼────────┼────────┼──────────┼──────┼─────────┼────╢
║8 │00810F00│08100004│2016-11-20│0xC80 │ 0x5CBF00│Yes ║
╟──┼────────┼────────┼──────────┼──────┼─────────┼────╢
║9 │00810F80│08108002│2018-06-05│0xC80 │ 0x5CCC00│Yes ║
╟──┼────────┼────────┼──────────┼──────┼─────────┼────╢
║10│00810F81│08108109│2019-04-17│0xC80 │ 0x5CD900│Yes ║
╟──┼────────┼────────┼──────────┼──────┼─────────┼────╢
║11│00810F11│08101102│2018-11-06│0xC80 │ 0x5CE600│ No ║
╟──┼────────┼────────┼──────────┼──────┼─────────┼────╢
║12│00A20F10│0A201009│2020-08-21│0x15C0│0x1321B00│Yes ║
╟──┼────────┼────────┼──────────┼──────┼─────────┼────╢
║13│00A20F00│0A200025│2020-01-21│0x15C0│0x1323100│Yes ║
╟──┼────────┼────────┼──────────┼──────┼─────────┼────╢
║14│00870F10│08701021│2020-01-25│0xC80 │0x1334200│Yes ║
╟──┼────────┼────────┼──────────┼──────┼─────────┼────╢
║15│00870F00│08700004│2018-12-06│0xC80 │0x1334F00│Yes ║
╟──┼────────┼────────┼──────────┼──────┼─────────┼────╢
║16│00860F00│0860000E│2020-01-27│0xC80 │0x14B1F00│Yes ║
╟──┼────────┼────────┼──────────┼──────┼─────────┼────╢
║17│00860F01│08600106│2020-06-19│0xC80 │0x14B2C00│Yes ║
╟──┼────────┼────────┼──────────┼──────┼─────────┼────╢
║18│00A50F00│0A50000B│2020-08-21│0x15C0│0x1631F00│Yes ║
╚══╧════════╧════════╧══════════╧══════╧═════════╧════╝

* [Replacement]*
*CPUID 00800F00 Ver 0800002A - already exists
CPUID 00800F10 Ver 0800100C - already exists
CPUID 00800F11 Ver 08001138 - already exists
CPUID 00800F12 Ver 08001250 - 0800126C - mCode replaced
CPUID 00800F82 Ver 0800820D - already exists
CPUID 00810F00 Ver 08100004 - already exists
CPUID 00810F10 Ver 08101016 - already exists
CPUID 00810F11 Ver 08101102 - 08101103 - mCode replaced
CPUID 00810F80 Ver 08108002 - already exists
CPUID 00810F81 Ver 08108109 - already exists
CPUID 00820F01 Ver 08200103 - already exists
CPUID 00860F00 Ver 0860000E - already exists
CPUID 00860F01 Ver 08600106 - already exists
CPUID 00870F00 Ver 08700004 - already exists
CPUID 00870F10 Ver 08701021 - already exists
CPUID 00A20F00 Ver 0A200025 - already exists
CPUID 00A20F10 Ver 0A201009 - already exists
CPUID 00A50F00 Ver 0A50000B - already exists*
*MCE found 18 mCodes - Processed 18 mCodes*


----------



## KedarWolf

Deleted


----------



## Joeking78

MSI MEG B550 UNIFY AMD AM4 DDR4 CF M.2 USB 3.2 Gen 2 Wi-Fi 6 HDMI ATX Gaming Motherboard


Powered by AMD Ryzen AM4 processors, the MSI MEG B550 UNIFY begins its dark conquest with a design made to accomplish any task with cruel efficiency. Connect to ultra-fast networks with 2.5G LAN and Wi-Fi AX. Move bulky files faster with USB 3.2 Gen 2. On




www.msi.com





Unify non beta bios available...oops didn't see the post above


----------



## KedarWolf

Joeking78 said:


> MSI MEG B550 UNIFY AMD AM4 DDR4 CF M.2 USB 3.2 Gen 2 Wi-Fi 6 HDMI ATX Gaming Motherboard
> 
> 
> Powered by AMD Ryzen AM4 processors, the MSI MEG B550 UNIFY begins its dark conquest with a design made to accomplish any task with cruel efficiency. Connect to ultra-fast networks with 2.5G LAN and Wi-Fi AX. Move bulky files faster with USB 3.2 Gen 2. On
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.msi.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unify non beta bios available...oops didn't see the post above


That's the same release I modded for the Unify-X.

If anyone wants a modded Unify BIOS, let me know. The updated firmwares will be the same list as I posted for the Unify-X.


----------



## Kha

Veii said:


> Usually coil whine happens, as they are vibrating at very high frequency and are a bit lose
> Anything that can fill the space, be it silicon - will help. But i am not sure if you can manage to fill them with anything, without interfering with the heatsink mount and you'd need to check how warm they actually get.
> UHU or 2 components glue usually is stiff. The high freq vibration (fast) will break that thing
> It's better to get something elastic and fill them
> It's not about noise dampening but about filling the gaps on some of the models, which is why they coil whine.
> They just have too much space to move inside their little cap and act as a speaker which vibrates at a high frequency


If that's so and we need something elastic, transparent and which can sustain high temperatures, then how about :

*SILICONE SEALING COMPOUND*
High-quality and easy-to-use silicone-based sealing compound. The automatic cartridge removes the need for a cartridge gun when processing. With outstanding resistance to cold, heat and aging. Stays permanently elastic and is resistant to chemicals, oils, etc. Can withstand temperatures from -40 °C to 150 °C, short periods up to 250 °C.









Home


Motor oil, additives and car care from LIQUI MOLY, the lubricant specialist from Ulm, Germany. With more than 4000 items for every vehicle in the world




products.liqui-moly.com


----------



## Joeking78

My PBO overclock no longer stable on the new bios, get reboots during 3DMark Timespy, settings below.

Power Limits - Motherboard
Scalar - 3
Core Optimisation - Negative 30 All Core
Boost - 75mhz

Adjusted to negative 28 all cores and its fine so far. Will test further.


----------



## Forsaken1

Joeking78 said:


> My PBO overclock no longer stable on the new bios, get reboots during 3DMark Timespy, settings below.
> 
> Power Limits - Motherboard
> Scalar - 3
> Core Optimisation - Negative 30 All Core
> Boost - 75mhz
> 
> Adjusted to negative 28 all cores and its fine so far. Will test further.


PBO boost still capped at 200 effective on new bios b550?
Enhancements 1-4 work?Have not since release.
My x570 unify will run circles around the b550 in cpu department.
PBO Unify 5800x
B550 5025
X570 5175


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Forsaken1 said:


> PBO boost still capped at 200 effective on new bios b550?
> Enhancements 1-4 work?Have not since release.
> My x570 unify will run circles around the b550 in cpu department.
> PBO Unify 5800x
> B550 5025
> X570 5175


Indeed annoying... we should put some pressure on MSI to get them spend more effort on the Unify-X.

I'm curious, what were the other quality issues you had with the U-X?


----------



## Kha

Spectre73 said:


> I have coil whine. No issues with the realtek LAN. But I can not hear the whine out of my case (bequiet 802 mesh). Router is a Netgear GS108 if I remember correctly.











This is yours, right ?


----------



## Joeking78

Forsaken1 said:


> PBO boost still capped at 200 effective on new bios b550?
> Enhancements 1-4 work?Have not since release.
> My x570 unify will run circles around the b550 in cpu department.
> PBO Unify 5800x
> B550 5025
> X570 5175


I can select 500mhz but never tested it, most of my testing has been done at 75mhz so far which sees 5025 boost.

I'll play around some more tonight.

EDIT, tested 125mhz boost at x 2 Scalar, 25 all core and it boosted to 5073mhz


----------



## Joeking78

Something up with smart access memory imo..

With the new bios my settings under the previous (stable) bios crash 3dmark, previous stable settings;

X3 scalar
+75mhz boost
-30 all core
2468-2668 gpu clock
2120 mem clock

The above settings crash 3dmark now under new bios but if I dial back the GPU mem clock from 2120 to 2100 it passes fine and gives better or similar results. Seems something has been tweaked in regards to SAM since the beta bios.

It seems the higher you raise your PBO boost you must lower your GPU mem clock, when using SAM.


----------



## Forsaken1

ManniX-ITA said:


> Indeed annoying... we should put some pressure on MSI to get them spend more effort on the Unify-X.
> 
> I'm curious, what were the other quality issues you had with the U-X?


Hey ManniX
Currently playing with unify non X.I may grab a X when you and others are smashing it on 5000 series.Have not been above 2x8gb 4133 1:1 with sane voltages.

Issues with 1st board:
IO plate area buckled.
VRM heat sink not flush/square.
VRM Extremely noisy.Open bench.
Two of the m2 slot attachment points.Bent so far drive would not rest on top.One of those missing threads to secure drive.

Life moves along.New board arrives today?


----------



## Forsaken1

Joeking78 said:


> I can select 500mhz but never tested it, most of my testing has been done at 75mhz so far which sees 5025 boost.
> 
> I'll play around some more tonight.
> 
> EDIT, tested 125mhz boost at x 2 Scalar, 25 all core and it boosted to 5073mhz


Thank you Joeking
I leave Sam off on 3D.Takes more juice for clocks.Sam does nothing for me in 3D.


----------



## Joeking78

Forsaken1 said:


> Thank you Joeking
> I leave Sam off on 3D.Takes more juice for clocks.Sam does nothing for me in 3D.


Its odd and gonna test some more but it seems increase PBO = lower GPU mem clock when SAM is activated. Will test with SAM deactivated too.


----------



## Spectre73

Kha said:


> View attachment 2476249
> 
> This is yours, right ?


Exactly. Just looked under my desk to be sure. Very old model but works for what its needed. I always want to lay more cables in my house but I have to open many walls for it. So I am hesitant because it is practically a renovation just for ethernet......but if I decide to do it I will replace it with a smart managed switch. atm the GS108 is all I need....


----------



## Kha

Spectre73 said:


> Exactly. Just looked under my desk to be sure. Very old model but works for what its needed. I always want to lay more cables in my house but I have to open many walls for it. So I am hesitant because it is practically a renovation just for ethernet......but if I decide to do it I will replace it with a smart managed switch. atm the GS108 is all I need....


Sweet, I will order one in case the NIC of Unify-X will start to play games with me.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Forsaken1 said:


> Hey ManniX
> Currently playing with unify non X.I may grab a X when you and others are smashing it on 5000 series.Have not been above 2x8gb 4133 1:1 with sane voltages.
> 
> Issues with 1st board:
> IO plate area buckled.
> VRM heat sink not flush/square.
> VRM Extremely noisy.Open bench.
> Two of the m2 slot attachment points.Bent so far drive would not rest on top.One of those missing threads to secure drive.
> 
> Life moves along.New board arrives today?


Wow definitely not a lucky one...

I'm back with the Unify-X.
The coil whine it's still there but much reduced.
Tightening the screws helps a lot.
Now instead of being 10x more than the Master is 2-3x times louder.


----------



## dr.Rafi

ManniX-ITA said:


> Wow definitely not a lucky one...
> 
> I'm back with the Unify-X.
> The coil whine it's still there but much reduced.
> Tightening the screws helps a lot.
> Now instead of being 10x more than the Master is 2-3x times louder.


I did some crazy mode in past with graphic card had so noisy inductors,I took the inductors off (desoldering), souck them in heat resistant glue, soldering them back and the noise disappear.


----------



## MyUsername

YAAASSS! M.2 raid is working now on Unify-X with cpu mode on, bios A10.

Might have to examine the vrm when my 5950x arrives some time this year hopefully if ever. I get a little squeak when I run aida benchmark and only aida though, normal use I don't hear a thing.

@Kha I connect through a Virginmedia Hub 3, zero problems so far during the 2 and half weeks I've been using this board.


----------



## KedarWolf

Speed Potato said:


> That desk look super cheap, I expect your monitors to wooble like crazy. Also, that cheap furniture is sold at canadian tire and walmart also so you might be able to see it there before it's too late.
> 
> Also, you did a second pre-order for the UnifyX ? NCDS told me that Fev-05 was the expected shipping date, is B&H supposed to be sooner ?


I got the desk, put it together, zero wobble, it's actually decently built. I mean I can grab the desk and try to shake it and no wobble. 

Edit: And B&H was supposed to ship my motherboard Jan. 29th, but now saying due to manufacturer delays it's delayed until mid-February.


----------



## Forsaken1

KedarWolf said:


> I got the desk, put it together, zero wobble, it's actually decently built. I mean I can grab the desk and try to shake it and no wobble.
> 
> Edit: And B&H was supposed to ship my motherboard Jan. 29th, but now saying due to manufacturer delays it's delayed until mid-February.


Did not want to burst your bubble on arrival time line.All warehouse/s in states show mid Feb availability since late 2020.Actually means they have no clue at the time.So I went with non x for now.Maybe a dark hero soon or back to unify x570.
Z590 value gaming king possibility.

Everyone have a drink for me.....
Third board will be here Saturday.


----------



## mongoled

Joeking78 said:


> My PBO overclock no longer stable on the new bios, get reboots during 3DMark Timespy, settings below.
> 
> Power Limits - Motherboard
> Scalar - 3
> Core Optimisation - Negative 30 All Core
> Boost - 75mhz
> 
> Adjusted to negative 28 all cores and its fine so far. Will test further.


Please test your CO settings with Y-Cruncher test 15 & 16.

I highly doubt such aggressive CO values are stable.

Just to clarify, using a "All Core" value is not the same as using the same value on each core independantly.

Can somebody else confirm this ?

Once CO is set for each core independantly than Y-Cruncher (test 15/16) will error out/crash PC on particular cores, where as when its "All Core" it will not


----------



## Joeking78

mongoled said:


> Please test your CO settings with Y-Cruncher test 15 & 16.
> 
> I highly doubt such aggressive CO values are stable.
> 
> Just to clarify, using a "All Core" value is not the same as using the same value on each core independantly.
> 
> Can somebody else confirm this ?
> 
> Once CO is set for each core independantly than Y-Cruncher (test 15/16) will error out/crash PC on particular cores, where as when its "All Core" it will not


Never used Y-Cruncher...please share a guide, I have it downloaded but where is test 15/16?

EDIT, got it and running tests now


----------



## ManniX-ITA

mongoled said:


> Please test your CO settings with Y-Cruncher test 15 & 16.
> 
> I highly doubt such aggressive CO values are stable.
> 
> Just to clarify, using a "All Core" value is not the same as using the same value on each core independantly.
> 
> Can somebody else confirm this ?
> 
> Once CO is set for each core independantly than Y-Cruncher (test 15/16) will error out/crash PC on particular cores, where as when its "All Core" it will not


Yes, I can confirm. Not the same.

I'm testing the new A10 (@KedarWolf modded version, thanks mate)

Really hope in the future they'll improve CO and remove this nasty limitation of count to 30.
Performances are not great but ok; still can't use a neg count of 25 on my best core otherwise the main Windows install will BSOD at boot.

The Platform Throttle Limit is still broken; not throttling on ST but causing a reboot.
Had to settle for 99c and 125 MHz max boost for an all-around acceptable compromise.

Memory OC is still awesome and maybe even better, DIMMs temperature is astonishingly low.

Running this profile:










Didn't go above 50.6c after 6900% Kahru with 1.53 VDIMM, amazing.
Couldn't even POST on the Master with these settings.

Any FCLK above 1900 suffers from WHEA errors as usual.


----------



## mongoled

Joeking78 said:


> Never used Y-Cruncher...please share a guide, I have it downloaded but where is test 15/16?
> 
> EDIT, got it and running tests now


Start Y-Cruncher

Press, 1 --> 8 --> 15 --> 16 --> 0


----------



## Joeking78

mongoled said:


> Start Y-Cruncher
> 
> Press, 1 --> 8 --> 15 --> 16 --> 0


Thanks, got it.

I had the wrong version initially and wouldn't start the app properly. 

Didn't pass 15/16 with -30 all core so tweaking now per core...thanks for the tip...normally use P95.


----------



## Joeking78

mongoled said:


> Start Y-Cruncher
> 
> Press, 1 --> 8 --> 15 --> 16 --> 0


How many times should I run 15/16?


----------



## Forsaken1

ManniX-ITA said:


> Yes, I can confirm. Not the same.
> 
> I'm testing the new A10 (@KedarWolf modded version, thanks mate)
> 
> Really hope in the future they'll improve CO and remove this nasty limitation of count to 30.
> Performances are not great but ok; still can't use a neg count of 25 on my best core otherwise the main Windows install will BSOD at boot.
> 
> The Platform Throttle Limit is still broken; not throttling on ST but causing a reboot.
> Had to settle for 99c and 125 MHz max boost for an all-around acceptable compromise.
> 
> Memory OC is still awesome and maybe even better, DIMMs temperature is astonishingly low.
> 
> Running this profile:
> 
> View attachment 2476353
> 
> 
> Didn't go above 50.6c after 6900% Kahru with 1.53 VDIMM, amazing.
> Couldn't even POST on the Master with these settings.
> 
> Any FCLK above 1900 suffers from WHEA errors as usual.


Any performance score/s for settings?Timings look based of off skill 3800 cl14 sticks tweaked.


----------



## mongoled

Joeking78 said:


> How many times should I run 15/16?


I loop for an hour, keep in mind once you work your way through the cores independently and run the full y-cruncher suite of tests you will probably have to tweak some of the cores again. Using just 15/16 gives you a faster way to weed out instability.


----------



## Joeking78

mongoled said:


> I loop for an hour, keep in mind once you work your way through the cores independently and run the full y-cruncher suite of tests you will probably have to tweak some of the cores again. Using just 15/16 gives you a faster way to weed out instability.


Yep this is a great tool...

I figured I had not much left to tweak on my PC, now I have something to do over the weekend...tweaking cores individually 

Noob question...One of my logical cores (16) failed during a test, how do identify logical core 16? Its assigned to which physical core?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Forsaken1 said:


> Any performance score/s for settings?Timings look based of off skill 3800 cl14 sticks tweaked.


It's just some random timings for now 
Timings I couldn't run with the Master without a massive amount of errors or trouble with POST.
Have to check what else I can do and then make some bench.
But this AGESA 1.2.0.0 has a 0.5ns penalty versus the 1.9.0.0.


----------



## mongoled

Joeking78 said:


> Yep this is a great tool...
> 
> I figured I had not much left to tweak on my PC, now I have something to do over the weekend...tweaking cores individually
> 
> Noob question...One of my logical cores (16) failed during a test, how do identify logical core 16? Its assigned to which physical core?


Cpuz report


----------



## Joeking78

mongoled said:


> Cpuz report


Thank you


----------



## Joeking78

mongoled said:


> Cpuz report


So far stable after a lot of fine tuning...started at -10 for best cores and -20 all other cores then worked my way through the errors and reducing the values.

2, 6, 9, 11 are my best cores as per Ryzen Master.

Core 3 i may be able to go higher than 20, as its stable now.

C0 - 17
C1 - 16
C2 - 6
C3 - 20
C4 - 19
C5 - 19
C6 - 6
C7 - 19
C8 - 14
C9 - 6
C10 - 18
C11 - 7


----------



## Forsaken1

ManniX-ITA said:


> It's just some random timings for now
> Timings I couldn't run with the Master without a massive amount of errors or trouble with POST.
> Have to check what else I can do and then make some bench.
> But this AGESA 1.2.0.0 has a 0.5ns penalty versus the 1.9.0.0.


Love when random timings stick.....Think 1st angle I will shoot for is the memory oc difference between x and unify.Similar all around settings as possible.I’ll try your posted 2x16gb results with my 4x8gb kit.
By no means a competition more about data for me at least.

New standard for 1900+ memory oc.Handful of whea a minute stable.More then 100 whea a minute unstable


----------



## Joeking78

Passed an hour of Y-Cruncher test 15/16 with below CO, Motherboard power limits, +75mhz, x3 Scalar. Will tune some more later, maybe more boost or scalar.

C0 - 17
C1 - 16
C2 - 6
C3 - 21
C4 - 19
C5 - 19
C6 - 6
C7 - 19
C8 - 14
C9 - 6
C10 - 18
C11 - 7


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Forsaken1 said:


> Love when random timings stick.....Think 1st angle I will shoot for is the memory oc difference between x and unify.Similar all around settings as possible.I’ll try your posted 2x16gb results with my 4x8gb kit.
> By no means a competition more about data for me at least.
> 
> New standard for 1900+ memory oc.Handful of whea a minute stable.More then 100 whea a minute unstable


I've settled for this now as I don't have time to play with it 










But it should do better on latency:










This profile on A00 (with messed up CAD settings):










Was doing better and with more or less same bandwidth:


----------



## Joeking78

Joeking78 said:


> Passed an hour of Y-Cruncher test 15/16 with below CO, Motherboard power limits, +75mhz, x3 Scalar. Will tune some more later, maybe more boost or scalar.
> 
> C0 - 17
> C1 - 16
> C2 - 6
> C3 - 21
> C4 - 19
> C5 - 19
> C6 - 6
> C7 - 19
> C8 - 14
> C9 - 6
> C10 - 18
> C11 - 7
> 
> View attachment 2476366
> View attachment 2476367
> View attachment 2476368


30 minutes into another Y-Cruncher test with +175mhz boost, single core boosting to 5125mhz...Will see if it passes


----------



## mongoled

Veii said:


> Easy to run, needs less than 1.5v for 4000MT/s / AGESA 1.1.0.0 Patch B
> View attachment 2474935
> [/SPOILER]


How do you have such low latency result in AIDA64 with the settings you are using, as Sandra does not reflect the same results?

Also, why do you have a CPU-Z below the CPU-Z you are showing that has single/all core results that cant be obtained from a 5600x ?

Here is my best result at 4000/2000, Cannot reach that latency, though Sisoft shows better results than your screen shot


----------



## mongoled

Joeking78 said:


> 30 minutes into another Y-Cruncher test with +175mhz boost, single core boosting to 5125mhz...Will see if it passes


Using the method you are testing I have had no crashes, either under load or idle.

Test 15/16 was the perfect test to narrow down what stable and what isnt

@ManniX-ITA thanks for confirming the CO question



And AIDA64 latency test is not very reliable when pushing to the limit, many time results are not consistent in same session and across reboots...


----------



## ManniX-ITA

mongoled said:


> Using the method you are testing I have had no crashes, either under load or idle.
> 
> Test 15/16 was the perfect test to narrow down what stable and what isnt
> 
> @ManniX-ITA thanks for confirming the CO question


You're welcome 

Anyway there's no test better than trying to boot the main Windows install sadly...
Not even OCCT + Geekbench 5 can guarantee CO is stable more than a normal boot.

Testing with OCCT, y-cruncher or single cores with OCCT it's not enough, the real workload is much more critical.

In the screenshot posted by Veii BCLK is 102 and the CPU-z score below is not the standard benchmark, you can select others in the drop down.


----------



## mongoled

ManniX-ITA said:


> You're welcome
> 
> Anyway there's no test better than trying to boot the main Windows install sadly...
> Not even OCCT + Geekbench 5 can guarantee CO is stable more than a normal boot.
> 
> Testing with OCCT, y-cruncher or single cores with OCCT it's not enough, the real workload is much more critical.
> 
> In the screenshot posted by Veii BCLK is 102 and the CPU-z score below is not the standard benchmark, you can select others in the drop down.


I saw the BCLK, but the CPU frequency is way too low for 50 ns as well as the timings, 

ahh re CPUz, that explains it


----------



## ManniX-ITA

mongoled said:


> I saw the BCLK, but the CPU frequency is way too low for 50 ns as well as the timings,
> 
> ahh re CPUz, that explains it


For sure some trick under the sleeve...
He can do magic with that ASRock which we can only dream of 

I've never seen that high bandwidth with that range of data blocks on a 5000.
My 5950x on Sandra looks more like the one posted by Veii, yours is more similar to a 3000.


----------



## Joeking78

mongoled said:


> Using the method you are testing I have had no crashes, either under load or idle.
> 
> Test 15/16 was the perfect test to narrow down what stable and what isnt
> 
> @ManniX-ITA thanks for confirming the CO question
> 
> 
> 
> And AIDA64 latency test is not very reliable when pushing to the limit, many time results are not consistent in same session and across reboots...


Thanks again, I feel better now I know its stable and it gave me something to do today whilst hungover 🙃


----------



## mongoled

ManniX-ITA said:


> For sure some trick under the sleeve...
> He can do magic with that ASRock which we can only dream of
> 
> I've never seen that high bandwidth with that range of data blocks on a 5000.
> My 5950x on Sandra looks more like the one posted by Veii, yours is more similar to a 3000.


Yes, but the Sandra scores do not reflect the AIDA64 latency results.

Mine is more like a 3950x not a 3600x



For a 5600x its very high bandwidth


----------



## ManniX-ITA

mongoled said:


> Yes, but the Sandra scores do not reflect the AIDA64 latency results.
> 
> Mine is more like a 3950x not a 3600x
> 
> 
> 
> For a 5600x its very high bandwidth


For what I understood AIDA64 is an average of the latency of each core accessing the RAM (according to their method).
While Sandra is an average of the inter-core latency memory access.
They should be two different things and probably affected by different settings.


----------



## Joeking78

+175mhz passed 60 mins of Y-Cruncher and got me a decent boost in CB


----------



## Veii

mongoled said:


> How do you have such low latency result in AIDA64 with the settings you are using, as Sandra does not reflect the same results?
> 
> Also, why do you have a CPU-Z below the CPU-Z you are showing that has single/all core results that cant be obtained from a 5600x ?
> 
> Here is my best result at 4000/2000, Cannot reach that latency, though Sisoft shows better results than your screen shot
> 
> View attachment 2476378


Because you are on a new AGESA
Your curve looks way better in a technical sense
The same curve i would also be able to get, if i update to the newer AGESA - something Patch D and higher
Or succeed in modding the ABL down / up

4 things separate us

 You utilize 100% of your L3 cache, i could not with my gimped unit. Not on the old AGESA
_(ASRock please give me a bios inally. We are stuck at broken Patch-C)
I stay on Patch-B with open FCLK limit_
I run 4148 MT/s at these timings. We are 75Mhz FCLK apart
I exploit the boosting cache speedup on a sleeping -> waking up powerstate ~ as custom powerplan
_which's tests you can notice on the ierent curve peaks_.
Each of my cores has optimized Curve's, soo all are hitting target boost

But i am kind of blind. The bottom result is AVX2 testing
Usually it's visible, but seems like tabbed stupidly out and hid the exact corner.
If you compare that to my 2 screenshots-of-proof on the Zen Ram OC Sheet, then you can see why i overlap them that way
Just run out of screenspace - no malicious intentions behind & no safe-mode shenanigans 
Current result has a bit better efficiency (IPC) than the public top result ~ but i'm yet not happy with it

Overall your MCE ns are better as you can see. Your PBO 2.0v2 is better. Mine was stock with a subtle BLCK OC to try and break this st*pid 50ns i can't break on Patch B. All just comes from the timings efficiency and curve optimizer. No boost extend shenanigans either ~yet~
My dimms are not well optimize yet & i am EDC bios bug-lock limited on it too.
A0 PCB makes me big issues beyond 4100 😐


----------



## Nitefly

Hi guys - I had a query on this motherboard and can’t seem to find the answer anywhere so I was hoping someone could help me.

I’ve orders a new M2 drive with a heatsink and the Unify-x. I’m intending to put the drive in the m2 slot closest to the cpu to use pcie 4.0.

I’ve noticed that each m2 slot had a top heatsink, two thermal pads and then an m2 base plate. The manual for the motherboard suggests that the base plate can never be removed.... in which case the heatsink equipped nvme drive might not actually fit....?

Do you think I’ll have issues with this or am I worrying unnecessarily?

Cheers!


----------



## Forsaken1

Nitefly said:


> I worrying unnecessarily?


Yes



Veii said:


> No boost extend shenanigans either


Thanks for the laugh.


----------



## dr.Rafi

KedarWolf said:


> I got the desk, put it together, zero wobble, it's actually decently built. I mean I can grab the desk and try to shake it and no wobble.
> 
> Edit: And B&H was supposed to ship my motherboard Jan. 29th, but now saying due to manufacturer delays it's delayed until mid-February.


I seen your desk look flemzzy but i can tell is tough especially braced because its corner L shape.


----------



## KedarWolf

dr.Rafi said:


> I seen your desk look flemzzy but i can tell is tough especially braced because its corner L shape.


Yeah, I can actually grab it, shake it, it don't wiggle or move at all.


----------



## dr.Rafi

mongoled said:


> How do you have such low latency result in AIDA64 with the settings you are using, as Sandra does not reflect the same results?
> 
> Also, why do you have a CPU-Z below the CPU-Z you are showing that has single/all core results that cant be obtained from a 5600x ?
> 
> Here is my best result at 4000/2000, Cannot reach that latency, though Sisoft shows better results than your screen shot
> 
> View attachment 2476378


He is running Older Ageesa, and fclk 2033, and the cpuz result underneath he chose different Benchmark version in the drop menu of cpuZ


----------



## dr.Rafi

mongoled said:


> Using the method you are testing I have had no crashes, either under load or idle.
> 
> Test 15/16 was the perfect test to narrow down what stable and what isnt
> 
> @ManniX-ITA thanks for confirming the CO question
> 
> 
> 
> And AIDA64 latency test is not very reliable when pushing to the limit, many time results are not consistent in same session and across reboots...


Disabling Windows explorer can make it more consistant .


----------



## mongoled

Veii said:


> Because you are on a new AGESA
> Your curve looks way better in a technical sense
> The same curve i would also be able to get, if i update to the newer AGESA - something Patch D and higher
> Or succeed in modding the ABL down / up
> 
> 4 things separate us
> 
> You utilize 100% of your L3 cache, i could not with my gimped unit. Not on the old AGESA
> _(ASRock please give me a bios inally. We are stuck at broken Patch-C)
> I stay on Patch-B with open FCLK limit_
> I run 4148 MT/s at these timings. We are 75Mhz FCLK apart
> I exploit the boosting cache speedup on a sleeping -> waking up powerstate ~ as custom powerplan
> _which's tests you can notice on the ierent curve peaks_.
> Each of my cores has optimized Curve's, soo all are hitting target boost
> But i am kind of blind. The bottom result is AVX2 testing
> Usually it's visible, but seems like tabbed stupidly out and hid the exact corner.
> If you compare that to my 2 screenshots-of-proof on the Zen Ram OC Sheet, then you can see why i overlap them that way
> Just run out of screenspace - no malicious intentions behind & no safe-mode shenanigans
> Current result has a bit better efficiency (IPC) than the public top result ~ but i'm yet not happy with it
> 
> Overall your MCE ns are better as you can see. Your PBO 2.0v2 is better. Mine was stock with a subtle BLCK OC to try and break this st*pid 50ns i can't break on Patch B. All just comes from the timings efficiency and curve optimizer. No boost extend shenanigans either ~yet~
> My dimms are not well optimize yet & i am EDC bios bug-lock limited on it too.
> A0 PCB makes me big issues beyond 4100 😐


Utilsation of L3 is done by using EDC value of 500A, unsure if the same thing works for you on old AGESA.

We are 75 mhz apart, though the timings I am using should more than make up for that in the latency department. I can only guess that the CPU frequency shown in AIDA64 is not correct.

Is this powerplan in the public domain ?

Ive have tweaked my curves for maximum stability with highest performance.

Re CPUs, now malicious intent was intended, just did not understand why that was showing as it was.

I also dropped to BIOS version A73 (AGESA 1.1.0.0, did not say the patch level in BIOS release notes and I forgot to check to see with other method what the patch level is) on my Unify, there was no difference in the results with regards to latency.

Could not run 2033 mhz stably to test latency drop.

May give it another go today!




dr.Rafi said:


> He is running Older Ageesa, and fclk 2033, and the cpuz result underneath he chose different Benchmark version in the drop menu of cpuZ


As explained above, I tried also with older AGESA, did not effect latency result. Of course this could be down to difference in BIOS



dr.Rafi said:


> Disabling Windows explorer can make it more consistant .


Will test this out, thanks


----------



## dr.Rafi

Veii majic and also another thing he is using ITX motherboard which is good in memory traces using 2 dimms only and very close to cpu socket.


----------



## mongoled

dr.Rafi said:


> Veii majic and also another thing he is using ITX motherboard which is good in memory traces using 2 dimms only and very close to cpu socket.


Shorter traces will effect the latency for sure.


----------



## dr.Rafi

mongoled said:


> Shorter traces will effect the latency for sure.


50.6 too easy with 5950x but only 1ccd and 6 cores







enabled.


----------



## mongoled

This makes sense to me as you are hitting 5150+ mhz


----------



## dr.Rafi

mongoled said:


> This makes sense to me as you are hitting 5150+ mhz


yes but didnt tweak sub timing alot so read write copy are slow but chek this one without pbo :








I will try later with positive CO or over vcore to bring boost down and see how it go.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

The Unify-X is a joy for RAM OC but probably I suck at it 

Tried to beat the 54.1 ns with static OC and 54.4 ns with PBO at 3800MHz with CL16 and GDM.
Failed miserably...

Made another profile mixed CL14:










Same results more or less...










Managed to run at 2T and it's worse, almost 56 ns.

After some testing I could run mixed CL14 at 1T and I hoped to get at least a bit below 54 ns instead I couldn't get it below 55.1 ns.
Impressive anyway, I've never been able to run stable 1T with this kit on the Master.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Oh my AMD really screwed up CO in AGESA 1.2.0.0.

Have exactly the same weird issues had with the Master F33a BIOS.
Even worst had to recover corrupt configuration files for programs running in background from the backup.
They got corrupted even without a crash.

Went back to an all-core, hope it works or I'll roll back. 
Make a backup before you use per-core CO on A10.


----------



## LionAlonso

ManniX-ITA said:


> Oh my AMD really screwed up CO in AGESA 1.2.0.0.
> 
> Have exactly the same weird issues had with the Master F33a BIOS.
> Even worst had to recover corrupt configuration files for programs running in background from the backup.
> They got corrupted even without a crash.
> 
> Went back to an all-core, hope it works or I'll roll back.
> Make a backup before you use per-core CO on A10.


What issues have un noticed asides hard black screen reboots? 
And its for sure ur program got corrupted due to CO? Thats kinda interesting becauseif its the case this can kill our system wuth important data...


----------



## ManniX-ITA

LionAlonso said:


> What issues have un noticed asides hard black screen reboots?


BSOD at Windows boot and data corruption.

Works perfectly for a while and then it starts out of the blue.

Much lower per core negative counts can pass every all core and per core compute and thermal stress on the benching install.
Also those lower negative counts works perfectly with AGESA 1.1.9.0.


----------



## Cidious

ManniX-ITA said:


> BSOD at Windows boot and data corruption.
> 
> Works perfectly for a while and then it starts out of the blue.
> 
> Much lower per core negative counts can pass every all core and per core compute and thermal stress on the benching install.
> Also those lower negative counts works perfectly with AGESA 1.1.9.0.


I experience the same for the X570 Unify. between 1.1.9.0 and 1.2.0.0 something went wrong!

For B550 they actually just gave us (I also got a B550M Mortar) the renamed beta as an official. still SMU 56.44 while SMU 56.45 is the official 1.2.0.0 Agesa. I am betting they are under employed at the moment at MSI. Their bios development efforts have been just the bare minimum of implementing what AMD offerered them and now with this weird 'Official release' for 1.2.0.0 that gets confirmed.. 400 series are behind on schedule also. I really think some of their lead developers walked and they are just pushing out what they can but don't have the capacity or knowledge to really do bug hunting themselves... because it's just a ****SHOW currently. 3.5 months after launch we still deal with launch day bugs...


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Cidious said:


> I experience the same for the X570 Unify. between 1.1.9.0 and 1.2.0.0 something went wrong!
> 
> For B550 they actually just gave us (I also got a B550M Mortar) the renamed beta as an official. still SMU 56.44 while SMU 56.45 is the official 1.2.0.0 Agesa. I am betting they are under employed at the moment at MSI. Their bios development efforts have been just the bare minimum of implementing what AMD offerered them and now with this weird 'Official release' for 1.2.0.0 that gets confirmed.. 400 series are behind on schedule also. I really think some of their lead developers walked and they are just pushing out what they can but don't have the capacity or knowledge to really do bug hunting themselves... because it's just a ****SHOW currently. 3.5 months after launch we still deal with launch day bugs...


I don't see much better from any other board manufacturer honestly.
Maybe it's the difficulties from the virus, I don't know.
But the root issue is for sure AMD lacking in development.
I was hoping that the 6 months of zero progress on the 3000 meant they were working hard on the 5000.
Doesn't look like it.


----------



## dr.Rafi

ManniX-ITA said:


> The Unify-X is a joy for RAM OC but probably I suck at it
> 
> Tried to beat the 54.1 ns with static OC and 54.4 ns with PBO at 3800MHz with CL16 and GDM.
> Failed miserably...
> 
> Made another profile mixed CL14:
> 
> View attachment 2476505
> 
> 
> Same results more or less...
> 
> View attachment 2476504
> 
> 
> Managed to run at 2T and it's worse, almost 56 ns.
> 
> After some testing I could run mixed CL14 at 1T and I hoped to get at least a bit below 54 ns instead I couldn't get it below 55.1 ns.
> Impressive anyway, I've never been able to run stable 1T with this kit on the Master.


You can try this one , done by domdtxdissar on other forum.


----------



## Forsaken1

New board.Almost 0 vrm/coil wine.Started at 4133.Quickly dropped lower lol.Working 4000 down.Any pointers?Non X board.


----------



## Veii

Forsaken1 said:


> Thanks for the laugh.


Hm ?

@ManniX-ITA you look for SMU 56.30 on ABL 90xxxxx instead of 94xxxx


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Veii said:


> Hm ?
> 
> @ManniX-ITA you look for SMU 56.30 on ABL 90xxxxx instead of 94xxxx


LoL, always a downgrade to get something working properly...
Did they hired Windows engineers?
Can we run Windows 3.1.1 for Workgroups instead of the AGESA? 
That was a good one


----------



## dr.Rafi

ManniX-ITA said:


> LoL, always a downgrade to get something working properly...
> Did they hired Windows engineers?
> Can we run Windows 3.1.1 for Workgroups instead of the AGESA?
> That was a good one


Yes Veii always right I downgrade the bios to Ageesa 1180D or 1100D not sure. and used the "domdtxdissar" ram setting got better latency even than him, but seams read and write is bit worse, i related to not well tweaked CO and iam using very cheap power supply 300 watt for test on open bench.also noticed with new Agessa 1200 using boost tester all the cores boost to 4950+ minimum but with this one the second ccd cores are not boosting well. 
for both tests i used exact bios setting c-state disabled.








with the new ageesa 1200 minimum i can get for memory latency is 54.4


----------



## YoungChris

@Forsaken1 tRDWR 8, lower tRP, tRRD_L/S 6/4, tWTR_L/S 8/4, tFAW 16, tWR 12*, *tWRRD 1, tCKE 1, lower tRTP, lower SCLs
You could probably run like tRAS 28/tRC 34, gdm off might be tough. I could see tRFC around 240 being doable but also likely tough. tRCDRD possible to tweak, a bit easier than GDM Off.


----------



## mongoled

Finally!

It needed a different 5600x 



This 5600x hits the FCLK bottleneck at 1950 mhz, I have not yet tested jumping 2 straps to see if it posts.

The other CPU which I was going to keep does over 2000 mhz but its a weaker CPU. 

Im in a dilemma which to keep!

The CPU that ran the 50.6ns has core0 as the strongest core.

I am guessing the "good FCLK" 5600x has the other CCD in use which may be reason for the slightly lower latency (roughly 1.4-1.8 ns).


----------



## Veii

ManniX-ITA said:


> LoL, always a downgrade to get something working properly...
> Did they hired Windows engineers?
> Can we run Windows 3.1.1 for Workgroups instead of the AGESA?
> That was a good one



You can try your luck how well it scales
But i don't know about this new PBO 2.0v2 thing

It's fishy,
On one hand they surely increased interconnect speed
On the other, i see pretty much nothing in the inner-core latency bandwidth region
And out of nothing CPUs could boost beyond 5.2ghz ~ while AMDs decision was at first to lower clock but increase IPC in exchange
Wonder if 5ghz mindset war still goes on

But yep , you look for SMU 56.30, ABL 09084010 ~ to have open scaling till 2167 FCLK
Although bugs will limit what you can get out beyond 2100. Either by Package throttle or by the "non existing" artificial slowdowns


----------



## Veii

mongoled said:


> Finally!
> 
> It needed a different 5600x
> 
> 
> 
> This 5600x hits the FCLK bottleneck at 1950 mhz, I have not yet tested jumping 2 straps to see if it posts.
> 
> The other CPU which I was going to keep does over 2000 mhz but its a weaker CPU.
> 
> Im in a dilemma which to keep!
> 
> The CPU that ran the 50.6ns has core0 as the strongest core.
> 
> I am guessing the "good FCLK" 5600x has the other CCD in use which may be reason for the slightly lower latency (roughly 1.4-1.8 ns).
> 
> View attachment 2476740


701 👏
How's your CPPC score looking (HWInfo)
Or Win-Perf % scaling index , maximum ACPI value between cores


----------



## mongoled

Veii said:


> 701 👏
> How's your CPPC score looking (HWInfo)
> Or Win-Perf % scaling index , maximum ACPI value between cores


It can hit 705+



Where is this CPPC score? I can't see anything in Hwinfo64

Funny, Ryzen master tells me different information regards the best core. It says it's core3, where as Hwinfo64 says its core0


----------



## Nitefly

Are people are experiencing the coil whine all the time or just when benching / stress testing? Kind of a big turn off for the board


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Nitefly said:


> Are people are experiencing the coil whine all the time or just when benching / stress testing? Kind of a big turn off for the board


I can compare directly with the Gigabyte X570 Aorus Master with a 5950x.

The screws that holds the heatsink they get loose with transport, they needs to be tightened.
Once they are fixed the coil whine is surely louder than the Master but not that much.

Except a faint click-clak or a quiet beeping or buzzing every now and then. it's only doing it while benchmarking or a really massive load.
AIDA64 is louder than anything else. it can be heard with any board with high frequency switching PWM.
Geekbench 5 is quite noticeable when it's switching tests.
With CB23 you can ear a very faint buzzing while it starts, that's all.

After all, I can say it's absolutely fine.
Not a sound while moving the mouse or idling or opening a browser.


----------



## Nitefly

ManniX-ITA said:


> I can compare directly with the Gigabyte X570 Aorus Master with a 5950x.
> 
> The screws that holds the heatsink they get loose with transport, they needs to be tightened.
> Once they are fixed the coil whine is surely louder than the Master but not that much.
> 
> Except a faint click-clak or a quiet beeping or buzzing every now and then. it's only doing it while benchmarking or a really massive load.
> AIDA64 is louder than anything else. it can be heard with any board with high frequency switching PWM.
> Geekbench 5 is quite noticeable when it's switching tests.
> With CB23 you can ear a very faint buzzing while it starts, that's all.
> 
> After all, I can say it's absolutely fine.
> Not a sound while moving the mouse or idling or opening a browser.


Thanks for the reply, much appreciated.

This is going to be a new build for me so I’m just a bit nervous 😅

Also have a 5950x and will have no idea what I’m doing with ram timings so thanks for posting yours earlier


----------



## Nitefly

ManniX-ITA said:


> I can compare directly with the Gigabyte X570 Aorus Master with a 5950x.
> 
> The screws that holds the heatsink they get loose with transport, they needs to be tightened.
> Once they are fixed the coil whine is surely louder than the Master but not that much.
> 
> Except a faint click-clak or a quiet beeping or buzzing every now and then. it's only doing it while benchmarking or a really massive load.
> AIDA64 is louder than anything else. it can be heard with any board with high frequency switching PWM.
> Geekbench 5 is quite noticeable when it's switching tests.
> With CB23 you can ear a very faint buzzing while it starts, that's all.
> 
> After all, I can say it's absolutely fine.
> Not a sound while moving the mouse or idling or opening a browser.


Sorry this is outrageously nooby and I’m really cringing to have to ask, but is the heatsink the park with the dragon on it or the bulky park that’s immediately above the cpu?

Very embarrassing to ask... I did try looking at the manual  😳


----------



## Kha

Nitefly said:


> Sorry this is outrageously nooby and I’m really cringing to have to ask, but is the heatsink the park with the dragon on it or the bulky park that’s immediately above the cpu?


Both need to be tightened (all 4 back screws). Just be sure you don't overdo it and break something.

(photo thanks to @ManniX-ITA)


----------



## Nitefly

Kha said:


> Both need to be tightened (all 4 back screws). Just be sure you don't overdo it and break something
> 
> View attachment 2476764


Thank you very much - I was looking all over the front of the board!

I will report how I get on in the next few days.

Again, thanks


----------



## YoungChris

@mongoled If that 5600x is doing >2000fclk without perf degradation I'd work out a trade for a 5800x 
especially if it's a weird dual ccd chip


----------



## KedarWolf

B&H Photo told me they are shipping my Unify-X mid-February.

But then again, they told me they were shipping it on Jan. 29th, then changed their tune, so remains to be seen.


----------



## PJVol

mongoled said:


> Where is this CPPC score?


It's in the HWInfo main window, under the processors tab, though it's the order, not score. The scores are in the event manager, events that dispatched at boot under "kernel-processor-power (55) 47" name.


----------



## Forsaken1

[


Veii said:


> Hm ?



You said "No boost extend shenanigans either" That was the lol moment.

Seeing little difference at this time X vs non X unless a G processor is in the mix.
Working on 4200/2200 holy whea.Do not think it will happen at this time.

Anyone able to post at cl12 3800+?No go so far.


----------



## Forsaken1

YoungChris said:


> @Forsaken1 tRDWR 8, lower tRP, tRRD_L/S 6/4, tWTR_L/S 8/4, tFAW 16, tWR 12*, *tWRRD 1, tCKE 1, lower tRTP, lower SCLs
> You could probably run like tRAS 28/tRC 34, gdm off might be tough. I could see tRFC around 240 being doable but also likely tough. tRCDRD possible to tweak, a bit easier than GDM Off.


Thanks YC.
Tweaked some of recommended settings.


----------



## Veii

Forsaken1 said:


> You said "No boost extend shenanigans either" That was the lol moment.


I just ment it as a joke, not in an offensive way
Using boost extender does shift the voltage-boosting curve ~ soo you need to adjust aside from voltage and curve optimizer, on more than one part to retain "stock" behavior
That type of "shenanigans" - not comparable to safe mode boot , or explorer shutdown while testing shenanigans

We know that higher boost results in better mem-ns results
It purely was fun related


----------



## KedarWolf

Forsaken1 said:


> Thanks YC.
> Tweaked some o
> 
> 
> Forsaken1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks YC.
> Tweaked some of recommended settings.
> 
> View attachment 2476785
Click to expand...




Forsaken1 said:


> Thanks YC.
> Tweaked some of recommended settings.
> 
> View attachment 2476785


Nice, but can you run an hour of OCCT at default settings without getting WHEA errors.

I don't take much stock in people posting benchmarks with no indication of whether or not they are getting them, and/or random reboots.

Best SuperPi I've gotten so far was under 5m 43s and this on a WHEA free system. On a 5950x.

I passed an hour of OCCT last night.

Nice latency though, I get a bit over 55ns on my memory overclock.

Here are some multithreaded benches, I know you can't compare, different CPUs, but I get a nice multi-core with Curve Optimizer.


----------



## Cidious

ManniX-ITA said:


> I don't see much better from any other board manufacturer honestly.
> Maybe it's the difficulties from the virus, I don't know.
> But the root issue is for sure AMD lacking in development.
> I was hoping that the 6 months of zero progress on the 3000 meant they were working hard on the 5000.
> Doesn't look like it.


I hoped the same... I thought: same IOD, same chipsets, same memory kits to validate, same boards this will be a walk in the park for em to get it right... boy how was I wrong. It's way worse then the Zen 2 release so far. Zen 2 was relatively stable and overclockable by 1.0.0.3 ABBA that released 2 months after launch. 1.0.0.4 B was kind of the end line.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

@KedarWolf

I'm not sure it does make sense to specify if it's WHEA error free at this point.

I can run OCCT with FCLK 2067 free of WHEA.
But it only works with the benching install with a minimalistic set of drivers and super clean.
So far I've not seen anyone running WHEA free on a real Windows install with FCLK 2000+.

Therefore it's quite pointless...
WHEA free on FCLK 1933/1967 depends on motherboard and BIOS.

I can't run WHEA free at 1967 either on the Master or the Unify-X.
I can get close to zero WHEA at 1967 on the Main install with IOD 1050/1060mV and VSOC 1.1/1.125V.

We need to wait for AMD to fix it and then we'll see.


----------



## Cidious

Did you guys check which SMU you got in your 'official' bios? My B550M Mortar only got the renamed beta and re-released as official. SMU 56.44 instead of the official 56.45 that Gigabyte and Asus have released.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Cidious said:


> Did you guys check which SMU you got in your 'official' bios? My B550M Mortar only got the renamed beta and re-released as official. SMU 56.44 instead of the official 56.45 that Gigabyte and Asus have released.
> View attachment 2476809


We got 56.44 as well


----------



## Cidious

ManniX-ITA said:


> We got 56.44 as well


Pretty sure MSI is currently not having the team capacity to deal with it properly. Because the reports about 56.45 are good so far in the other forums. more stable. So what's left for a reason to do this copy paste thing is not having the manpower currently to deal with it unless breaking the promised release schedule. Which they have broken for X570 (which pleases me, I just hope they get it right).


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Cidious said:


> Pretty sure MSI is currently not having the team capacity to deal with it properly. Because the reports about 56.45 are good so far in the other forums. more stable. So what's left for a reason to do this copy paste thing is not having the manpower currently to deal with it unless breaking the promised release schedule. Which they have broken for X570 (which pleases me, I just hope they get it right).


Don't know but there could be also different reasons.
MSI has more unique features in their BIOS that could be incompatible or require more effort to adapt to a new SMU.
And as an example, on the Master static multiplier with my 5950x is broken while it works with the Unify-X.


----------



## Cidious

ManniX-ITA said:


> Don't know but there could be also different reasons.
> MSI has more unique features in their BIOS that could be incompatible or require more effort to adapt to a new SMU.
> And as an example, on the Master static multiplier with my 5950x is broken while it works with the Unify-X.


It's an interesting thought but then I still think they are not having enough manpower. or specialized manpower to be more specific.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Cidious said:


> It's an interesting thought but then I still think they are not having enough manpower. or specialized manpower to be more specific.


About that I think they had enough manpower till they decided to support the x470 line at any cost.
Other brands are not putting the same effort on it and it's huge.


----------



## Cidious

ManniX-ITA said:


> About that I think they had enough manpower till they decided to support the x470 line at any cost.
> Other brands are not putting the same effort on it and it's huge.


Sounds probable. I went for MSI because they made a point about bios updates for their whole line and Zen 2 has been great mostly. But I'm currently far from satisfied. But what's the alternative. I'm on 2 MSI boards.. Asus has only 2 M.2 slots on their high-end boards and similar problems.. My last Gigabyte X570 was a piece of **** bios support wise and not doing much better this round I read..

So all to do is wait...


----------



## Joeking78

Has anyone got a 5900x and tried disabling the extra 4 cores? I was thinking about trying tonight to see if it assisted with WHEA on high infinity fabric clocks or even allowing higher cpu overclock.


----------



## Veii

ManniX-ITA said:


> We got 56.44 as well


Both Unify's looks to have flashback , correct ?
Anyone who doesn't have a gimped 5600X or 5800X wants to play testing rabbit for SMU 56.45 ~ for me ?

I might mess it up, soo only if you have a 2nd machine or 2nd usb for bios restoration


----------



## mongoled

YoungChris said:


> @mongoled If that 5600x is doing >2000fclk without perf degradation I'd work out a trade for a 5800x
> especially if it's a weird dual ccd chip


Regards performance degradation, who is going to quantify what that is, lol ?

What do I mean (you probably already worked it out), this is going to be motherboard dependent.

On my X570 Unify, I can get into windows @ 2033/4066, but I cannot get the "degradation" to stop, i.e. AIDA64 latency gets very bad !

@ 2000/4000, AIDA64 latency is where it is expected to be but with WHEA warnings.

On the CPU side of things, I have posted my 24/7 settings in a screenshot on one of these threads (I think its in the X570 Unify motherboard thread).

With my tweaked CO and custom water cooling I get

12200/1600+ in CB23
5200/685-7+ in CPU-Z
TM5 hits 5900 mhz all core
Prime95 Small FFTs is 4380-4430 mhz.

If this interests you then send me a PM as its looking like I will be keeping the 1933/1866 mhz CPU in the hope that later BIOS will let it run at a higher FCLK and so will need to shift the 2000/4000 5600x



PJVol said:


> It's in the HWInfo main window, under the processors tab, though it's the order, not score. The scores are in the event manager, events that dispatched at boot under "kernel-processor-power (55) 47" name.


Cheers for the info

@Veii this is what HWInfo64 shows

Core 0 #1/1
Core 1 #2/3
Core 2 #4/5
Core 3 #3/4
Core 4 #1/2
Core 5 #5/6



Spoiler: Kernel Processor Power States



Core 0/1
Nominal Frequency (MHz): 3700
Maximum performance percentage: 152
Minimum performance percentage: 47
Minimum throttle percentage: 15

Core 2/3
Performance state type: ACPI Collaborative Processor Performance Control
Nominal Frequency (MHz): 3700
Maximum performance percentage: 148
Minimum performance percentage: 47
Minimum throttle percentage: 15

Core 4/5
Performance state type: ACPI Collaborative Processor Performance Control
Nominal Frequency (MHz): 3700
Maximum performance percentage: 140
Minimum performance percentage: 47
Minimum throttle percentage: 15

Core 6/7
Performance state type: ACPI Collaborative Processor Performance Control
Nominal Frequency (MHz): 3700
Maximum performance percentage: 144
Minimum performance percentage: 47
Minimum throttle percentage: 15

Core 8/9
Performance state type: ACPI Collaborative Processor Performance Control
Nominal Frequency (MHz): 3700
Maximum performance percentage: 152
Minimum performance percentage: 47
Minimum throttle percentage: 15

Core 10/11
Performance state type: ACPI Collaborative Processor Performance Control
Nominal Frequency (MHz): 3700
Maximum performance percentage: 136
Minimum performance percentage: 47
Minimum throttle percentage: 15


----------



## Kha

Joeking78 said:


> Has anyone got a 5900x and tried disabling the extra 4 cores?


There is no 8+4, but 6+6.


----------



## Veii

Ty @mongoled
Yes that, just for comparison,
Your best cores are 1, and 5
your worst one is the last one
and core 3 and 4 could need a stronger CO to balance out things

What i see is that your cores don't suspend at all
Give ManniX's powerplan a try, else try what i uploaded there too

The SMU Porting makes progress - but i'm softstuck for today 😴
SMU 56.45 is too big
It needs a whole rearrangement of modules
No wonder they delayed the release - it just has no space to fit 
EDIT:
MSI seems to waste somewhere 400 (hex) offset for something 
Once that is figured out , it shouldn't be hard - somewhere some spacing exists


----------



## Joeking78

Kha said:


> There is no 8+4, but 6+6.


Ah ty, I thought 8+4.

I have the opportunity to buy a decent price 5800x so may go with that. Any way to determine if its a good chip? I remember years ago you could reference the batch number.

BG2040 is the code on one of them so guessing 2020 40th week, so an early chip from Sep 28th.


----------



## DaLoona

I've got a quick question about the B550 Unify X. I'm currently looking to buy this board and I wanted to know if it support offset Vcore, since the first AM4 board I had from MSI didn't support it. 
The negative Vcore offset I really want, because AMD sets its auto Vcore to stupid levels like 1.55V and those make my already hothead 5800X run even hotter.
I think MSI now implements it to most if not all AM4 boards, but I just want to be sure, before buying. 
Thanks in advance


----------



## MageTank

KedarWolf said:


> Nice, but can you run an hour of OCCT at default settings without getting WHEA errors.
> 
> I don't take much stock in people posting benchmarks with no indication of whether or not they are getting them, and/or random reboots.
> 
> Best SuperPi I've gotten so far was under 5m 43s and this on a WHEA free system. On a 5950x.
> 
> I passed an hour of OCCT last night.
> 
> Nice latency though, I get a bit over 55ns on my memory overclock.
> 
> Here are some multithreaded benches, I know you can't compare, different CPUs, but I get a nice multi-core with Curve Optimizer.
> 
> View attachment 2476803
> 
> 
> View attachment 2476804
> 
> 
> View attachment 2476805


I think the problem with stability is that there is a somewhat subjective nature to it. Everyone has their own standards for stability that can differ dramatically. I personally do not consider myself stable unless every aspect of my system can handle every possible instruction set without crashing or throttling under a thermal/power load. On my Intel platforms, this meant being able to pass Linpack MKL for several hours under the hottest AVX stress I could find while hammering cache and RAM. That said, I do not expect others to meet my standards of stability either, especially if they do not use their systems as I use my own, it would be silly to expect otherwise.

I am also conscious of the fact that stability is fleeting. Stability follows one very simple rule: You are stable until you are not. All overclocks fall victim to time, it's only a matter of when. Some may never see instability as they change parts frequently, some may encounter stability issues the moment they tackle an instruction set or workload they've yet to test, change environments (different climates, hotter ambient, etc) but the simple truth is, they were stable until they weren't. Applying arbitrary rules to stability only muddies the waters and will leave us all chasing a proverbial carrot on a stick.

That said, I do get your point and understand why you might be frustrated by potentially "unrealistic" overclocks being posted as if they are stable, as it can potentially breed misinformation and give others the impression that said overclock is possible to achieve under everyday normal circumstances. My posting of a temporary 45ns result in this thread could have been viewed as that as well, though not by my intention either. However, it is important to also understand that some people may in fact have overclocks that do work for them, even if it seems unlikely on paper. Factoring in IMC quality, IC/DIMM PCB quality and the quality of traces on a board as well as noise isolation (motherboard binning is a thing, contrary to popular belief), you may stumble across a very unique overclock every now and then.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Veii said:


> Both Unify's looks to have flashback , correct ?
> Anyone who doesn't have a gimped 5600X or 5800X wants to play testing rabbit for SMU 56.45 ~ for me ?
> 
> I might mess it up, soo only if you have a 2nd machine or 2nd usb for bios restoration


Yeah... but seems I got my flash corrupted and I have to send back the board to RMA 

I'm not sure it just bricked, if it was due to flashrom (which would be very weird) or it was the A10 BIOS.

Anyway I decided to flash again after some weird issues try FCLK 2000 which ended up with all profiles gone from flash.
Found out then that flashrom was not able to read anymore the flash type....
Went back to the BIOS and tried M-Flash.
Power off, reboot, no M-Flash UI, power off, exiting M-Flash.

Tried then USB flashback and it works. Could switch back to A00.
But M-Flash is dead... it doesn't work anymore.
I could switch back to A10 and back to A00.

What is fishy is that with A00 flashrom works!
I could also flash A12 which I'm running now.
But it doesn't work running A10...

So I'm wondering first if there's something wrong with A10 and also if it's because I used flashrom or not.

Would appreciate if someone running A10 could test if their M-Flash is still working.


----------



## DaLoona

Veii said:


> Both Unify's looks to have flashback , correct ?
> Anyone who doesn't have a gimped 5600X or 5800X wants to play testing rabbit for SMU 56.45 ~ for me ?
> 
> I might mess it up, soo only if you have a 2nd machine or 2nd usb for bios restoration


Be careful when downgrading BIOS with a different AGESA version, cause that may screw up the bios too.
On my current board I had to downgrade too and went from AGESA 1.2.0.0 back to 1.8.0.0 and after that my settings wouldn't stick after a cold boot and settings became scrambled after every reboot.

Luckily I could revert to a stable bios with 1.2.0.0 and after that settings would stick again like normal.

And it wasn't due to a bad biosfile, cause I had used the bios I downgraded to for months without issues and haven't changed anything before or after flashing.


----------



## MyUsername

ManniX-ITA said:


> Yeah... but seems I got my flash corrupted and I have to send back the board to RMA
> 
> I'm not sure it just bricked, if it was due to flashrom (which would be very weird) or it was the A10 BIOS.
> 
> Anyway I decided to flash again after some weird issues try FCLK 2000 which ended up with all profiles gone from flash.
> Found out then that flashrom was not able to read anymore the flash type....
> Went back to the BIOS and tried M-Flash.
> Power off, reboot, no M-Flash UI, power off, exiting M-Flash.
> 
> Tried then USB flashback and it works. Could switch back to A00.
> But M-Flash is dead... it doesn't work anymore.
> I could switch back to A10 and back to A00.
> 
> What is fishy is that with A00 flashrom works!
> I could also flash A12 which I'm running now.
> But it doesn't work running A10...
> 
> So I'm wondering first if there's something wrong with A10 and also if it's because I used flashrom or not.
> 
> Would appreciate if someone running A10 could test if their M-Flash is still working.


Working here. I did use flashrom and a modded bios I did myself, just raid and network drivers.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

MyUsername said:


> Working here. I did use flashrom and a modded bios I did myself, just raid and network drivers.


Thanks a lot, does flashrom detect properly the flash type now?
Cause while running A10 mine can't.
If yours does it then my flash is definitely broken.


----------



## MyUsername

ManniX-ITA said:


> Thanks a lot, does flashrom detect properly the flash type now?
> Cause while running A10 mine can't.
> If yours does it then my flash is definitely broken.


Yeah everything looked fine, just as it did on the Master. Took a long time though, but verified.
Bios that I flashed BIOS UNIFY-X A10


----------



## ManniX-ITA

MyUsername said:


> Yeah everything looked fine, just as it did on the Master. Took a long time though, but verified.
> Bios that I flashed BIOS UNIFY-X A10


Mine flashed properly as well but flashrom doesn't work if A10 is running already.
Pretty sure it's the flash wrecked...


----------



## KedarWolf

ManniX-ITA said:


> Thanks a lot, does flashrom detect properly the flash type now?
> Cause while running A10 mine can't.
> If yours does it then my flash is definitely broken.


I found out flashrom, when trying to downgrade from the newest BIOS to the previous one gave me a write error. But if I use M-Flash or USB Flaskback I can downgrade, then I could upgrade to the newest BIOS again with flashrom. The newest BIOS has some kind of wrote protection built-in so it'll only work downgrade or upgrade with M-Flash or USB Flashback, not flashrom.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

KedarWolf said:


> I found out flashrom, when trying to downgrade from the newest BIOS to the previous one gave me a write error. But if I use M-Flash or USB Flaskback I can downgrade, then I could upgrade to the newest BIOS again with flashrom. The newest BIOS has some kind of wrote protection built-in so it'll only work downgrade or upgrade with M-Flash to USB Flashback, not flashrom.


Ok thanks so there is something weird in A10.
But my M-Flash is broken dead sadly and I have weird issues like failed POST and black screen while entering the BIOS.
Definitely the flash messed up.


----------



## MyUsername

KedarWolf said:


> I found out flashrom, when trying to downgrade from the newest BIOS to the previous one gave me a write error. But if I use M-Flash or USB Flaskback I can downgrade, then I could upgrade to the newest BIOS again with flashrom. The newest BIOS has some kind of wrote protection built-in so it'll only work downgrade or upgrade with M-Flash or USB Flashback, not flashrom.


That's what I've just found out a10 has a write protect, you can't even read, that's a pain. Just downgraded to a00 with M-flash and it stops at 50% why, just why? Flashrom works again though.


----------



## Veii

ManniX-ITA said:


> Ok thanks so there is something weird in A10.
> But my M-Flash is broken dead sadly and I have weird issues like failed POST and black screen while entering the BIOS.
> Definitely the flash messed up.


You can restore it from someone's backup package, if you haven't made a backup in the first place
I don't think MSI would do it, but there is a possibility, that on M-Flash, the whole romchip never gets.
Like on a typical update procedur rival brands starting with G ~ with their broken dual bios on lower end boards, implementation

Flashrom cleans pretty much everything
Soo unless this thing the special case, the problem maker should be the PSP Firmware
(if there really was an upgrade to begin with)

I've had that when upgrading too big steps, that the post might be successful and the upgrade works
But on a bigger downgrade jump, voltage scaling, boosting tables and everything that usually sits in PSP Firmware
~ was taken down to the old BIOS

Soo you had to downgrade strongly and then step by step upgrade the normal way, or it it restore
Downgrade strongly, in the sense of making a big AGESA Jump, and not just hotfixes on the same AGESA
Probably also what @DaLoona experienced
Had events where the CPU will fully fail memory training and refuse to post - if the jump is far to big
Soo it needed to be put on a system with never bios as "first boot" in order for the PSP Firmware inside to repair and update


----------



## MyUsername

ManniX-ITA said:


> Ok thanks so there is something weird in A10.
> But my M-Flash is broken dead sadly and I have weird issues like failed POST and black screen while entering the BIOS.
> Definitely the flash messed up.


20 years odd messing with PC's and flashing still gets me nervous just in case it goes fubar


----------



## Veii

MyUsername said:


> That's what I've just found out a10 has a write protect, you can't even read, that's a pain. Just downgraded to a00 with M-flash and it stops at 50% why, just why? Flashrom works again though.


How, where did you try ?
Might be fixable


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Veii said:


> You can restore it from someone's backup package, if you haven't made a backup in the first place
> I don't think MSI would do it, but there is a possibility, that on M-Flash, the whole romchip never gets.
> Like on a typical update procedur rival brands starting with G ~ with their broken dual bios on lower end boards, implementation
> 
> Flashrom cleans pretty much everything
> Soo unless this thing the special case, the problem maker should be the PSP Firmware
> (if there really was an upgrade to begin with)
> 
> I've had that when upgrading too big steps, that the post might be successful and the upgrade works
> But on a bigger downgrade jump, voltage scaling, boosting tables and everything that usually sits in PSP Firmware
> ~ was taken down to the old BIOS
> 
> Soo you had to downgrade strongly and then step by step upgrade the normal way, or it it restore
> Downgrade strongly, in the sense of making a big AGESA Jump, and not just hotfixes on the same AGESA
> Probably also what @DaLoona experienced
> Had events where the CPU will fully fail memory training and refuse to post - if the jump is far to big
> Soo it needed to be put on a system with never bios as "first boot" in order for the PSP Firmware inside to repair and update


There are literally 4 bios releases for the Unify-X, not much to play with...
I've already tried to go back to A00 which has the lowest AGESA.
M-Flash should have been repaired with USB Flashback, my guess is the flash is corrupt.
Can still try with the 3800x but I'm not really hoping too much out of it.



MyUsername said:


> That's what I've just found out a10 has a write protect, you can't even read, that's a pain. Just downgraded to a00 with M-flash and it stops at 50% why, just why? Flashrom works again though.


So I'm not the only one having issues with M-Flash after flashing A10...


----------



## MyUsername

ManniX-ITA said:


> There are literally 4 bios releases for the Unify-X, not much to play with...
> I've already tried to go back to A00 which has the lowest AGESA.
> M-Flash should have been repaired with USB Flashback, my guess is the flash is corrupt.
> Can still try with the 3800x but I'm not really hoping too much out of it.
> 
> 
> 
> So I'm not the only one having issues with M-Flash after flashing A10...


No, my M-Flash is fine, it's what I used to go back to a00. The 50% started after I flashed a12 which flashed to 100%, after that now it's always 50%


----------



## ManniX-ITA

MyUsername said:


> No, my M-Flash is fine, it's what I used to go back to a00.





MyUsername said:


> Just downgraded to a00 with M-flash and it stops at 50%


What do you mean with that?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

MyUsername said:


> No, my M-Flash is fine, it's what I used to go back to a00. The 50% started after I flashed a12 which flashed to 100%, after that now it's always 50%


So if I understand correctly; M-Flash stops at 50% now that you flashed to A12?


----------



## MyUsername

ManniX-ITA said:


> What do you mean with that?


Exactly what it says, the god damn thing stops at 50%, I have little faith with MSI bios atm, great board

Edit, Got board with A00 bios, flashed a12 broken raid. Flashed back to A00 and it stopped at 50%, been like that since, haven't a f'in clue. Even using flashrom and it's still the same lol


----------



## ManniX-ITA

MyUsername said:


> Exactly what it says, the god damn thing stops at 50%, I have little faith with MSI bios atm, great board


Mine was working perfectly fine till I flashed A10.
Wonder if this weird write protection issue with flashrom, which seems common to everyone, is messing up the flash.


----------



## MyUsername

ManniX-ITA said:


> Mine was working perfectly fine till I flashed A10.
> Wonder if this weird write protection issue with flashrom, which seems common to everyone, is messing up the flash.


Give me a minute


----------



## ManniX-ITA

MyUsername said:


> Give me a minute


in the meantime I've sent an email to MSI support asking if there are known issues with the A10...


----------



## MyUsername

ManniX-ITA said:


> in the meantime I've sent an email to MSI support asking if there are known issues with the A10...


It's weird why MSI would put a write protect on, anti roll back I get, but write protect? A12 and a13 don't so I don't understand what that 50% thing is. A10 is definitely different to a12 or a13 apart from AGESA as raid works in cpu mode on a10 and it's not due to the raidxpert driver in the bios.


----------



## PJVol

mongoled said:


> It can hit 705+


It definitely can  , though mine is at 1900 IF lock still ... And it's hard to make core0 boost higher when its not the best core, mine is 4th out of six. Lowering its CO value helps a bit, but kinda risky as its v/f is too close to stability edge that way.
And this core 0 load is a strange thing, always do something, as if it was hard for cpu-z or aida64 not to ignore what windows offer as best cores.


----------



## YoungChris

@mongoled for me, performance degradation is when geekbench 3 overall score goes down instead of up with higher fclk or higher memory ratio
IDGAF about wheas personally, I'm more of a competitive oc guy than a daily user


----------



## YoungChris

I'd still say a 2000fclk chip without performance degradation that's also a dual CCD 5600x interests me, if you're interested in a 5800x.
PM sent


----------



## dr.Rafi

ManniX-ITA said:


> Ok thanks so there is something weird in A10.
> But my M-Flash is broken dead sadly and I have weird issues like failed POST and black screen while entering the BIOS.
> Definitely the flash messed up.


Failed post and black screen i have it even when i was trying to update bios on b550 unify, but reset and try M-flash couple times finally worked and enter to M-flash screen.


----------



## Veii

I've analyzed the recent bioses a bit - but there is still a lot to explore
A10 = A13 while A13 had updated PBO, updated CCX connectivity, tried to update and change DAC Drivers (NCT3933)
Changed M-Flash behavior, Updated AMD CBS & PSP Firmware, also worked on XDPE132G5 PWM ~ soo Loadline behavior should be a bit different. Oh Nuvoton NCT6687D-R HW/Sensor controller also got updated

It mostly was moving modules back and forth as SMU 56.45 is huge
They felt back to 56.43, because of couple interconnect issues and to resolve bugs (around the time when you had random reboots because of the 2.5gbit ethernet port and also as 56.44-56.45 had SATA dropout/crash issues)

Sadly A13 , is still on the old "schematic" - let's call it "module order"
56.45 still doesn't fit there
Optimally when i figure this out 
(ASRock, Asus, Gigabyte all have unique spacing ~ there is no anchor point to copy)
It should boost better ~ but i don't think A13 is safe for gimped 2CCD units
A12 probably is the last one to modify , or work with A04 and port the old ABL Patch-B
(no FCLK lock till 2167) 
with SMU 54.40 (to utilize that L3 speed bump)









Digged around as answer to your quote


ManniX-ITA said:


> There are literally 4 bios releases for the Unify-X, not much to play with...
> I've already tried to go back to A00 which has the lowest AGESA.


That's all you have right now to play - maybe PatchB could be findable, but A00 is Patch C and not even a good one
A04 probably would have modding potential and A12 would
(but i'd need to analyze if PSP Firmware changed on 1190)

A10 very likely , nearly 98% was broken to begin with.
But on several parts, as A12 was a fallback and A10 got taken down

EDIT:
Considering Engineers would need to restructure or recompile the foundation from scratch to fit in 56.45
I don't see much hope in a release near 7-10 days from now
No MSI board is on 56.45 yet , and only transplanting it takes time
A4 was the last Bios which had duplicated modules and compatibility for old CPUs ~ to fill the space
A10 got completely reconstructed and it is no wonder that they messed it up
(same thing that needs to happen for 56.45 to fit, a full reconstruction ~ soo expect A15 to happen)
Also A10 onwards has Lucien/Cezanne Support
(but start with A12 as foundation for the APUs)


----------



## Joeking78

Got an odd problem going on since installing some new fans (3x Lian Li UniFan).

I wanted to boost my overclock some more so increased boost frequency and ran Y-Cruncher but the app stopped immediately, no core error given, just stopped, tried again multiple times with the same problem.

At the same time the usb connection noise is happening and my mouse is disconnecting as well as the fans on my aio (plugged into jusb) changing colours on its own.

If I remove the fans, controller, etc the system is perfectly fine a Y-Cruncher works.

Has anyone had issues with JUSB ports on the Unify or MSI in general? I used a corsair hub with JUSB before switching to the unifans and had no issues


----------



## Nitefly

With all of this talk on the bios issues, is it worth flashing the bios to the latest version (1.2.0.0) straight out of the box using a USB the update bios flash button (before installing the CPU etc)? Or should this be avoided like the plague?

I’m not intending on any CPU overclocks, but interesting in tight RAM timings.

As said earlier by someone else, it’s a little nerve wracking - particularly for my first ever build.

Many thanks in advance.


----------



## Kha

@Veii I have a 5900x which boosts to 5ghz+ on almost all cores, while being also able to reach 2066 IF. With WHEA, ofc, highest with no WHEA being 1866.

However I can't boot at 1900 IF, no matter what settings I do. I can go 1933, 1966, 2000, 2033, 2066, but not 1900.
Do you know what's happening and can I do anything to boot at 1900 ?

For the records, I didn't try the 5900x yet with Unify-X (should be here in the following days) but with a B550 Aorus Master.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Veii said:


> I've analyzed the recent bioses a bit - but there is still a lot to explore
> A10 = A13 while A13 had updated PBO, updated CCX connectivity, tried to update and change DAC Drivers (NCT3933)
> Changed M-Flash behavior, Updated AMD CBS & PSP Firmware, also worked on XDPE132G5 PWM ~ soo Loadline behavior should be a bit different. Oh Nuvoton NCT6687D-R HW/Sensor controller also got updated
> 
> It mostly was moving modules back and forth as SMU 56.45 is huge
> They felt back to 56.43, because of couple interconnect issues and to resolve bugs (around the time when you had random reboots because of the 2.5gbit ethernet port and also as 56.44-56.45 had SATA dropout/crash issues)
> 
> Sadly A13 , is still on the old "schematic" - let's call it "module order"
> 56.45 still doesn't fit there
> Optimally when i figure this out
> (ASRock, Asus, Gigabyte all have unique spacing ~ there is no anchor point to copy)
> It should boost better ~ but i don't think A13 is safe for gimped 2CCD units
> A12 probably is the last one to modify , or work with A04 and port the old ABL Patch-B
> (no FCLK lock till 2167)
> with SMU 54.40 (to utilize that L3 speed bump)
> View attachment 2476883
> 
> 
> Digged around as answer to your quote
> 
> That's all you have right now to play - maybe PatchB could be findable, but A00 is Patch C and not even a good one
> A04 probably would have modding potential and A12 would
> (but i'd need to analyze if PSP Firmware changed on 1190)
> 
> A10 very likely , nearly 98% was broken to begin with.
> But on several parts, as A12 was a fallback and A10 got taken down
> 
> EDIT:
> Considering Engineers would need to restructure or recompile the foundation from scratch to fit in 56.45
> I don't see much hope in a release near 7-10 days from now
> No MSI board is on 56.45 yet , and only transplanting it takes time
> A4 was the last Bios which had duplicated modules and compatibility for old CPUs ~ to fill the space
> A10 got completely reconstructed and it is no wonder that they messed it up
> (same thing that needs to happen for 56.45 to fit, a full reconstruction ~ soo expect A15 to happen)
> Also A10 onwards has Lucien/Cezanne Support
> (but start with A12 as foundation for the APUs)


Thanks, where to download the A04?
I'm missing it.

There are also those shared by @YoungChris:






B550 Unify-X Bios and Tools


I don't have much yet, more posts will follow. Bios A.05O: https://drive.google.com/file/d/11b96620j1yIy-8OiQXhsFW25czHiC3PI/view?usp=sharing Should allow for vdimm >2.0 and other fun. Not sure about AGESA version, will check when I can get back to my board.



community.hwbot.org





Which have PBS and CBS full menu.

@YoungChris did you get anything new in the meantime?


----------



## Joeking78

Kha said:


> @Veii I have a 5900x which boosts to 5ghz+ on almost all cores, while being also able to reach 2066 IF. With WHEA, ofc, highest with no WHEA being 1866.
> 
> However I can't boot at 1900 IF, no matter what settings I do. I can go 1933, 1966, 2000, 2033, 2066, but not 1900.
> Do you know what's happening and can I do anything to boot at 1900 ?
> 
> For the records, I didn't try the 5900x yet with Unify-X (should be here in the following days) but with a B550 Aorus Master.


I have the same issue with 5900x

Below 1866IF stable and no WHEA
1900IF no boot with any settings 
1933+ boot and stable but WHEA chaos


----------



## Kha

Joeking78 said:


> I have the same issue with 5900x
> 
> Below 1866IF stable and no WHEA
> 1900IF no boot with any settings
> 1933+ boot and stable but WHEA chaos


Yeah, pretty much same thing happening here.


----------



## Joeking78

Joeking78 said:


> Got an odd problem going on since installing some new fans (3x Lian Li UniFan).
> 
> I wanted to boost my overclock some more so increased boost frequency and ran Y-Cruncher but the app stopped immediately, no core error given, just stopped, tried again multiple times with the same problem.
> 
> At the same time the usb connection noise is happening and my mouse is disconnecting as well as the fans on my aio (plugged into jusb) changing colours on its own.
> 
> If I remove the fans, controller, etc the system is perfectly fine a Y-Cruncher works.
> 
> Has anyone had issues with JUSB ports on the Unify or MSI in general? I used a corsair hub with JUSB before switching to the unifans and had no issues


Fixed this issue but the only way was to completely remove the RGB hub, power cables, ARGB header...the only way to get the Lian Li fans to work without making the system unstable is to only connect the fan connector to a SYSFAN header so only the fans spin with no rgb...any combination of JUSB, ARGB, sata power makes the system unstable and other usb devices start acting up.

Must be an issue with Lian Li as I've tried populating both JUSB with a Corsair and Thermaltake controller without issues


----------



## Phynicle

Kha said:


> Yeah, pretty much same thing happening here.


Me too. Only just got the board and comp setup. First upgrade in over 7 years.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

dr.Rafi said:


> Failed post and black screen i have it even when i was trying to update bios on b550 unify, but reset and try M-flash couple times finally worked and enter to M-flash screen.


Today I just tried again M-Flash and it worked.
I'm wondering now if it's just normal that it's unreliable or not...
The few times I tried before to launch it was working always fine.
But then I mostly used flashrom.

Are there long-time MSI users that can confirm is a common issue that M-Flash doesn't boot?

Still have some weird issues with random failed POST but I'm also on A12 right now so I can't exclude it's the BIOS.


----------



## Joeking78

ManniX-ITA said:


> Today I just tried again M-Flash and it worked.
> I'm wondering now if it's just normal that it's unreliable or not...
> The few times I tried before to launch it was working always fine.
> But then I mostly used flashrom.
> 
> Are there long-time MSI users that can confirm is a common issue that M-Flash doesn't boot?
> 
> Still have some weird issues with random failed POST but I'm also on A12 right now so I can't exclude it's the BIOS.


Not really a long term user of MSI but I flashed bios with M-Flash multiple times on B450 Gaming Plus Max and B550 Unify without any major issues...Once or twice after selecting M-Flash the system hangs on restart after selecting the option and have to press the reset button manually


----------



## dr.Rafi

ManniX-ITA said:


> Today I just tried again M-Flash and it worked.
> I'm wondering now if it's just normal that it's unreliable or not...
> The few times I tried before to launch it was working always fine.
> But then I mostly used flashrom.
> 
> Are there long-time MSI users that can confirm is a common issue that M-Flash doesn't boot?
> 
> Still have some weird issues with random failed POST but I'm also on A12 right now so I can't exclude it's the BIOS.


That issue happen to me when was running first factory bios, dont remember which one was, after flashing never happen again, even downgrading, but never used flashrom on Unify.


----------



## Kha

Official Realtek Lan driver available today. Labeled same 10.046 appears to be a different release, this time from 19-Jan-21. Hopefully it's the real deal.






Realtek PCIe FE / GBE / 2.5G / Gaming Ethernet Family Controller Software - REALTEK







www.realtek.com


----------



## Nitefly

Kha said:


> Both need to be tightened (all 4 back screws). Just be sure you don't overdo it and break something.
> 
> (photo thanks to @ManniX-ITA)
> 
> View attachment 2476764


Well what a mixed bag this turned out to be!!!

So all the screws were definitely loose. Surprisingly loose. I tightened all of them very carefully / diligently, so I thought, and on the last screw there was a snap, the screw came out and won’t screw back in!! Noooooo! What a shocker. I swear it felt like it could have been tightened more, didn’t feel remotely tight.

The other three will hopefully keep it in place.

What a fail!


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Nitefly said:


> Well what a mixed bag this turned out to be!!!
> 
> So all the screws were definitely loose. Surprisingly loose. I tightened all of them very carefully / diligently, so I thought, and on the last screw there was a snap, the screw came out and won’t screw back in!! Noooooo! What a shocker. I swear it felt like it could have been tightened more, didn’t feel remotely tight.
> 
> The other three will hopefully keep it in place.
> 
> What a fail!


Ouch... that was my fear indeed. 
They have a vey thin thread indeed, don't know what they thought in MSI when they choose it. Bad design....


----------



## Kha

ManniX-ITA said:


> Ouch... that was my fear indeed.
> They have a vey thin thread indeed, don't know what they thought in MSI when they choose it. Bad design....


The screws get fixed in the radiators, right ? If so, no biggie, you can replace them with ones with bigger thread.


----------



## MikeS3000

Receiving B550 Unify tomorrow. I'm coming from x570 Aorus Pro Wifi. I have 2 separate Gen3 M.2 PCIe drives and my graphics card as the only item using a PCIe slot. I just want to make sure I am installing things correctly for maximum bandwidth. OS M.2 drive in M2_1 and 2nd M.2 in M2_4. Keep bandwidth mode to "chipset". This should give my RTX 3080 full PCIe 4.0 x16 and my M.2 drives should run at PCIe 3.0 x4. I want to make sure I don't drop down to x2 speeds. Thanks!


----------



## Kha

MikeS3000 said:


> Receiving B550 Unify tomorrow. I'm coming from x570 Aorus Pro Wifi. I have 2 separate Gen3 M.2 PCIe drives and my graphics card as the only item using a PCIe slot. I just want to make sure I am installing things correctly for maximum bandwidth. OS M.2 drive in M2_1 and 2nd M.2 in M2_4. Keep bandwidth mode to "chipset". This should give my RTX 3080 full PCIe 4.0 x16 and my M.2 drives should run at PCIe 3.0 x4. I want to make sure I don't drop down to x2 speeds. Thanks!


Yes, you should be good to go.


----------



## Nitefly

@ManniX-ITA Do you think it’s worth continuing with the build? I mean, it surely must be tighter than it ever was.

Damn!

Only was to tell is to proceed I guess!!


----------



## MikeS3000

Also what's up with BIOS versions? Someone linked that MSI Beta Bios site and I see that version 1.13 is dated 1/12/21 whereas version 1.1 on the motherboard download site is dated 1/26/21 in the included text files. Is 1.13 actually a newer build vs. 1.1 even though it is dated earlier? Either one recommended over the other? I have no clue what AGESA the version 1.0 is on. I'm guessing that is the BIOS that will ship with my board. AGESA 1.1.0.0 patch D?


----------



## MyUsername

Kha said:


> Official Realtek Lan driver available today. Labeled same 10.046 appears to be a different release, this time from 19-Jan-21. Hopefully it's the real deal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Realtek PCIe FE / GBE / 2.5G / Gaming Ethernet Family Controller Software - REALTEK
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.realtek.com


Same driver, however the UEFI driver has been updated. Flashed it and works okay.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Nitefly said:


> @ManniX-ITA Do you think it’s worth continuing with the build? I mean, it surely must be tighter than it ever was.
> 
> Damn!
> 
> Only was to tell is to proceed I guess!!


Honestly I'd try to sit another screw or send it back to RMA.
But if it's one of the internal screws (2 or 3) from my photo, it could work anyway.
You have to hear it to and check how strong is the coil whine, if it's too much then it's too loose.


----------



## Nitefly

ManniX-ITA said:


> Honestly I'd try to sit another screw or send it back to RMA.
> But if it's one of the internal screws (2 or 3) from my photo, it could work anyway.
> You have to hear it to and check how strong is the coil whine, if it's too much then it's too loose.


Yeah it’s screw 3. So the one on the vrm... 🥺

Here’s a photo... looks torn to me!










BUT the other screws are nice and tight. They were shockingly loose before, went round several times.


----------



## Cidious

Veii said:


> I've analyzed the recent bioses a bit - but there is still a lot to explore
> A10 = A13 while A13 had updated PBO, updated CCX connectivity, tried to update and change DAC Drivers (NCT3933)
> Changed M-Flash behavior, Updated AMD CBS & PSP Firmware, also worked on XDPE132G5 PWM ~ soo Loadline behavior should be a bit different. Oh Nuvoton NCT6687D-R HW/Sensor controller also got updated
> 
> It mostly was moving modules back and forth as SMU 56.45 is huge
> They felt back to 56.43, because of couple interconnect issues and to resolve bugs (around the time when you had random reboots because of the 2.5gbit ethernet port and also as 56.44-56.45 had SATA dropout/crash issues)
> 
> Sadly A13 , is still on the old "schematic" - let's call it "module order"
> 56.45 still doesn't fit there
> Optimally when i figure this out
> (ASRock, Asus, Gigabyte all have unique spacing ~ there is no anchor point to copy)
> It should boost better ~ but i don't think A13 is safe for gimped 2CCD units
> A12 probably is the last one to modify , or work with A04 and port the old ABL Patch-B
> (no FCLK lock till 2167)
> with SMU 54.40 (to utilize that L3 speed bump)
> View attachment 2476883
> 
> 
> Digged around as answer to your quote
> 
> That's all you have right now to play - maybe PatchB could be findable, but A00 is Patch C and not even a good one
> A04 probably would have modding potential and A12 would
> (but i'd need to analyze if PSP Firmware changed on 1190)
> 
> A10 very likely , nearly 98% was broken to begin with.
> But on several parts, as A12 was a fallback and A10 got taken down
> 
> EDIT:
> Considering Engineers would need to restructure or recompile the foundation from scratch to fit in 56.45
> I don't see much hope in a release near 7-10 days from now
> No MSI board is on 56.45 yet , and only transplanting it takes time
> A4 was the last Bios which had duplicated modules and compatibility for old CPUs ~ to fill the space
> A10 got completely reconstructed and it is no wonder that they messed it up
> (same thing that needs to happen for 56.45 to fit, a full reconstruction ~ soo expect A15 to happen)
> Also A10 onwards has Lucien/Cezanne Support
> (but start with A12 as foundation for the APUs)


VERY MUCH THANKS! for this long elaborate post. I'll be honest that I don't follow every bit but it makes kind of clear why it has been such a ****show of weird releases. And why they just can't seem to get it right. They have been pushing 400 series at the same time. Rushing X570 and B550 in. Resulting in hopeless release quality.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Nitefly said:


> Yeah it’s screw 3. So the one on the vrm... 🥺
> 
> Here’s a photo... looks torn to me!
> 
> View attachment 2477125
> 
> 
> BUT the other screws are nice and tight. They were shockingly loose before, went round several times.


Ouch... it took away the whole seating. The heatsink is too fragile.
Those screws looks "nice" but their material is too rigid; they should have used the same as all the other PC screws, more soft.
The screw threading should have been damaged without wasting the seating; instead since they have both the same hardness it won against the heatsink.

The other 3 can compensate but you have to judge.
I'd send it back to RMA honestly...


----------



## Hale59

Cidious said:


> VERY MUCH THANKS! for this long elaborate post. I'll be honest that I don't follow every bit but it makes kind of clear why it has been such a ****show of weird releases. And why they just can't seem to get it right. They have been pushing 400 series at the same time. Rushing X570 and B550 in. Resulting in hopeless release quality.


----------



## Kha

@ManniX-ITA (and everyone else too) was there any seal on the Unify-X box, when you received yours ?

My B550 Master didn't have one, couldn't possibly tell if it was truly new or not.


----------



## KedarWolf

Kha said:


> @ManniX-ITA (and everyone else too) was there any seal on the Unify-X box, when you received yours ?
> 
> My B550 Master didn't have one, couldn't possibly tell if it was truly new or not.


Most motherboards these days DON'T come in sealed boxes. Last several I bought were not sealed and I've gotten maybe 6 in the last few years.


----------



## Cidious

Hale59 said:


> View attachment 2477127
> 
> 
> View attachment 2477131


You think this is the only issue ? HAHAHAHAH


----------



## Veii

Hale59 said:


> View attachment 2477131
Click to expand...

I like and respect a lot his work, but this is funny 
You first have Variable FCLK and MCLK on Matisse.
Then you disable it, because with the first early open ABL beyond 1900, people got consistent issues with the chipset and I/O within it, crashing
Soo we lost 15-18W of powersaving to fix bugs which should've never been a thing.
Bios bugs on XMP loading beyond 3600MT/s , pushed procODT to 60ohm and overvolted VDDP = couple of dead chips
Soo we got another fix, this time UncoreOC mode which has to be enforced to be enabled, soo voltages you set actually stick and the CPU doesn't autocorrect
And of course that came with a 1900FCLK hardlock

Now we are on Vermeer, proofen that the same identical IMC can run 2167 if you work long enough on it with slowed down PCIe generation (2700X waves back)
~as again, FCLK beyond 2000 causes gen 4 hardcrashes, similar reason why Renoir and mobile lost couple of lanes~
Patch C got us back to the 1900FCLK, while apparently "adding" PCIe downgrade support
(blank marketing lie, it was all there since patch B but hidden ~ just to push back people into FCLK locked Bios)

Many people upgraded, but luckily (sadly) Patch-C got an even worse memory training for B-die. They broke it further
At this time, near patch-D
(which had barely any influence except working on autocorrection a bit and changing hardcrashes to WHEA Errors ~ annoying)
Gigabyte bios maintainer Stasio, gladly figured out that the new ABL that was to come with 1.1.9.0 and 1.2.0.0 actually got a huge L3 cache boost, and interconnect link speed boost ~ well a bit of an IPC boost too
Some could say it ~ this would destabilize FCLK probably, but it was contineously proofen by the community that 2000FCLK is absolutely runnable on

Soo after couple of "gladly" blowing up pressure posts , with apparently "no lockdowns whatsoever" (haha suure)
They seems like removed the pure "refusale" to boot up higher than 2000FCLK after 1.1.9.0 ABL (still same PatchC/D SMU 56.34)
~ but shrunk the "package throttle limit" from 2100 FCLK now down to 2000 FCLK
Well "it would be laughable if you overclocker can not get beyond 2000 FCLK good scores because of our package throttle"
^ masking this scenario even more, because now you apparently "can" boot beyond 2000 FCLK
Not that it brings much with the throttle set that way down, but hey ~you can try and fall deeper into the autocorrection rabbit-hole~

Overall what a clownfiesta to begin with. . . 
I know the main point of all this nonsense is to keep up PCIe 4.0 stability, and mask that inter-connect IPC bump vs the competition
All with the intention to give a more stable system to the users.
But currently AMD is rather making us look like id*ots, which i can't stand.
Hopefully somebody someday will understand that locking us down, for stability ~ vs working with us to increase maximum boundries is not thaat inteligent to begin with and just asks for confused users and stacking trouble


----------



## Kha

Veii said:


> Hopefully somebody someday will understand that locking us down, for stability ~ vs working with us to increase maximum boundries is not thaat inteligent to begin with and just asks for confused users and stacking trouble


In your place I would write a cleaner version of this to Rober Hallock on Twitter and force a discussion with him. Or well, at least make him know that we know what's happening and there is really no need of shenanigans.


----------



## Kha

KedarWolf said:


> Most motherboards these days DON'T come in sealed boxes. Last several I bought were not sealed and I've gotten maybe 6 in the last few years.


So no way to know if someone else tried it before, no small paper seal on the bag inside, nothing ?


----------



## Veii

Kha said:


> In your place I would write a cleaner version of this to Rober Hallock on Twitter and force a discussion with him. Or well, at least make him know that we know what's happening and there is really no need of shenanigans.


I did , and his responses where rather business talk
Even stating that a pure 6 phase 90A setup, running at mildly 15% ~ would be a potential risk of not being able to power the weak 5600X

Any talk about variable FCLK, VSOC is answered with pure silence for the 3rd time
It's a lost case to ask for a response
The only thing the community can do, is proof him wrong and acknowledge that beyond 2000FCLK is purely stable
Well and show that package throttle exists on 2100, as so far i'm one of the few , a minority 

At least my "maxed out zen 3" tweet (maxed to my bios capabilities)
made him decide 2 weeks later to also dive in the memOC world a bit and 1190 AGESA got an updated ABL

Some progress is being made by the push
But i remain a tiny minority , vs all other scores
My gimped sample can never run beyond 4.95 and ASRock is proactively skipping my board for bios updates
Unless i figure and just frankenstein my own bios - there won't be a chance to explore PBO 2.0v2 and anything higher than SMU 56.34

What people would need to do, is downgrade to Patch B , SMU 56.30 and poof them that their 2000 FCLK throttle is useless & the limit for daily stable is 2133 Mhz (2167 being the current wall)
Just it's a bit hard when you package throttle beyond 2100 on this old bios and older ABL
(it needs an SMU upgrade from patch-B, or an ABL downgrade with current bioses ~ from 1190)
In Unify's case, you guys only have SMU 56.34 to begin with
Maybe if somebody finds a Patch-B pre 00 version, it would be a better option
else SMU downgrade it is


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Kha said:


> @ManniX-ITA (and everyone else too) was there any seal on the Unify-X box, when you received yours ?
> 
> My B550 Master didn't have one, couldn't possibly tell if it was truly new or not.


No seal, maybe the antistatic bag containing the board but I'm not sure at all.


----------



## Kha

And finally got my Unify-X. Along with some small coil whine but didn't yet pay attention to the legendary screws. Yet.

Can you guys brief me if the 1.2.0.0 bios from MSI is decent and safe to flash ?


----------



## MyUsername

Kha said:


> And finally got my Unify-X. Along with some small coil whine but didn't yet pay attention to the legendary screws. Yet.
> 
> Can you guys brief me if the 1.2.0.0 bios from MSI is decent and safe to flash ?


I checked the screws last night, well the two I could get to on the cpu cutout and they were/are more or less finger tight.

A10 is safe and works well with a 3900x no random reboots or failed posts or anything, I have only got a choice of a00 or a10 that'll work with m.2 raid though.

I had to roll back to a00 to flash a10 with the updated realtek uefi driver, everything's fine. Made a discovery that while flashing the bios with m-flash in csm mode goes to 100%, uefi mode m-flash gets stuck at 50%. Is it supposed to do that? Seems stupid to me.


----------



## Kha

The coil whine is much worse than I thought. I am literally having it everywhere, even while moving the mouse, totally atrocious - worst coil whine I ever experienced in my whole life.

Returning the board.


----------



## KedarWolf

Kha said:


> The coil whine is much worse than I thought. I am literally having it everywhere, even while moving the mouse, totally t's atrocious - worst coil whine I ever experienced in my whole life.
> 
> Returning the board.


Did you try carefully tightening the screws on the heatsink?


----------



## Kha

KedarWolf said:


> Did you try carefully tightening the screws on the heatsink?


Yes, was even assisted by mighty ManniX-Ita on Discord. But no change, as a matter of fact, the whine was even worse after that.


----------



## LionAlonso

Kha said:


> Yes, was even assisted by mighty ManniX-Ita on Diacord. But no change, as a matter of fact, the whine was even worse after that.


I guess the master was not bad after all... 
Im also a bit sensitive, and in the master i only heard it at copy test in aida.
What about the dark hero as your next board? 
Maybe give it a try....


----------



## Veii

Has anybody just tried to lower switching frequency ?


----------



## KedarWolf

Have you tried grabbing a five-pound sledgehammer, whacking your motherboard repeatedly, then buying a new one?

I help as I can.


----------



## KedarWolf

LionAlonso said:


> I guess the master was not bad after all...
> Im also a bit sensitive, and in the master i only heard it at copy test in aida.
> What about the dark hero as your next board?
> Maybe give it a try....


Dark Hero a good board for sure.


----------



## Joeking78

FYI gents



https://www.amd.com/en/support/chipsets/amd-socket-am4/b550


----------



## Spectre73

Veii said:


> Has anybody just tried to lower switching frequency ?


I increased it for (supposedly) added stability - but you are referring to reducing coil whine, aren't you?


----------



## Manuru

I have Gaming Edge and 5900x, and my CPU was underperforming a little in multi-core with Dark Rock Pro 4 cooler. I decided to get AIO and Unify X, since this motherboard has far superior VRM and great memory overclokcing capabilities.

Got everything yesterday:
AIO turned out to be defective so I stayed on the air cooler.
Unify X shows even worse performance results than Gaming Edge.

For example, I get from 9000 to 9300 in CPU-Z (~4100-4300Mhz at 66C). With Gaming Edge I could get over 9700.


----------



## Spectre73

Kha said:


> The coil whine is much worse than I thought. I am literally having it everywhere, even while moving the mouse, totally atrocious - worst coil whine I ever experienced in my whole life.
> 
> Returning the board.


Thats sad to hear. Did you try some stress test overnight that stresses the VRM components of the board? A little burn in could go a long way. I just tested my coil whine again with AIDA ram test and coud hear brief periods of whine mainly on the L2 cache test. But it was so minimal that I was barely able to hear it out of the case. Am I just lucky?


----------



## Kha

LionAlonso said:


> I guess the master was not bad after all...


The B550 Master was the best board I ever played with and by far. Minus the Lan issues with that Realtek 8125 horror.



Veii said:


> Has anybody just tried to lower switching frequency ?


Nope, Mannix said that it won't be stable if I'll do it (or that's what I understood) so I didn't give it a try. 



Spectre73 said:


> Thats sad to hear. Did you try some stress test overnight that stresses the VRM components of the board? A little burn in could go a long way. I just tested my coil whine again with AIDA ram test and coud hear brief periods of whine mainly on the L2 cache test. But it was so minimal that I was barely able to hear it out of the case. Am I just lucky?


Well, dunno, if you are lucky or not, but the coil noise from my board is so violent I honestly don't think it will ever fade away via running it in. Guess my crap luck, as always...


----------



## Joeking78

Had stability issues for the past week, random restarts, apps crashing, etc and I finally solved it today.

My previously stable PBO overclock with tuned CO kept failing Y-Cruncher until the point i had some cores on -2...

Decided to change the power limits from "Motherboard" to "Manual" and assigned 250/175/175 and now completely stable again with -5 on best cores and -15 on all others.

Motherboard limits sets 220EDC and that appears to be the cause of the instability, lowering it to 175 and no issues whatsoever.

Will see if I can further raise the CO numbers with the new power limits.


----------



## Spectre73

Joeking78 said:


> Had stability issues for the past week, random restarts, apps crashing, etc and I finally solved it today.
> 
> My previously stable PBO overclock with tuned CO kept failing Y-Cruncher until the point i had some cores on -2...
> 
> Decided to change the power limits from "Motherboard" to "Manual" and assigned 250/175/175 and now completely stable again with -5 on best cores and -15 on all others.
> 
> Motherboard limits sets 220EDC and that appears to be the cause of the instability, lowering it to 175 and no issues whatsoever.
> 
> Will see if I can further raise the CO numbers with the new power limits.


Yeah, I had the same experience. The moment I set PBO limits to MB I got crashes. I think that this is "intentional" in the way that too low limits defeat the purpose of CO, no? AMD recommends MB limits for using CO. But I never tried it with lower limits. Maybe I should do it. Because at MB limits, I immediately got crashes. I was wondering why, at the same time, CTR reported me having a silver/golden sample.


----------



## mongoled

Can confirm the same thing for a 5600x on the X570 Unify.

Too aggressive EDC can cause instability, but its dependent on the CPU sample


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Joeking78 said:


> Had stability issues for the past week, random restarts, apps crashing, etc and I finally solved it today.
> 
> My previously stable PBO overclock with tuned CO kept failing Y-Cruncher until the point i had some cores on -2...
> 
> Decided to change the power limits from "Motherboard" to "Manual" and assigned 250/175/175 and now completely stable again with -5 on best cores and -15 on all others.
> 
> Motherboard limits sets 220EDC and that appears to be the cause of the instability, lowering it to 175 and no issues whatsoever.
> 
> Will see if I can further raise the CO numbers with the new power limits.


With AGESA 1.2.0.0 it's acting quite weird... 
At default 142/95/140 and scalar 1x now the L3 is unconstrained with over 600 GB/s and the performances are quite similar to much higher limits.



Spectre73 said:


> Thats sad to hear. Did you try some stress test overnight that stresses the VRM components of the board? A little burn in could go a long way. I just tested my coil whine again with AIDA ram test and coud hear brief periods of whine mainly on the L2 cache test. But it was so minimal that I was barely able to hear it out of the case. Am I just lucky?


I think so, mine is not that mild.
I can hear some buzzing every now and then and always on almost all AIDA64 tests (not so loud after tightening the screws but still much more than the Master).



KedarWolf said:


> Dark Hero a good board for sure.


According to many (I think @Veii too confirmed?) the memory OC is messed up.



Veii said:


> Has anybody just tried to lower switching frequency ?


Not a viable option; coil whine reduction is minimal and already at 700 kHz with CO it doesn't even boot into Windows.


----------



## Kha

Honestly I am tired and dunno what to get anymore...

Tempted somehow by the B550-XE from Asus. Has an insanely strong VRM with 90A stages and Intel Lan - on paper it looks pretty good, but I am scared about Asus' memory OC issues. What do you think @ManniX-ITA ?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Kha said:


> Honestly I am tired and dunno what to get anymore...
> 
> Tempted somehow by the B550-XE from Asus. Has an insanely strong VRM with 90A stages and Intel Lan - on paper it looks pretty good, but I am scared about Asus' memory OC issues. What do you think @ManniX-ITA ?


I don't know, there's not much to read about it.
Doesn't seems to be popular, at all.

From this quick review, which maybe could be questionable, didn't come out great:









Overclocking - Seite 2 - Hardwareluxx


Wir haben das ASUS ROG Strix B550-XE Gaming WiFi einem Kurztest unterzogen.




www.hardwareluxx.de





I'd check the forums to see how's performing for real users.


----------



## MikeS3000

I think my B550 Unify is getting returned. I bought it to prove to myself that my 5900x truly has a defective core. Same failure on core #1 with both my Gigabyte and MSI board. CPU was approved via AMD for RMA so it's going back. I like the design of the Unify but it's definitely way more finicky than my Gigabyte board. First, a good portion of the time when I boot to the BIOS everything is frozen (keyboard and mouse no response). I have to clear CMOS just to get into a working BIOS. Also, not digging the redundancy especially with AMD Overclocking in 2 places. I have no idea which one I should use so I end up setting the same settings in 2 places. Finally, the system hangs a lot after minimal BIOS changes and requires multiple resets to get it to boot. My RAM is super stable and boots every time on the Gigabyte board with the same settings. I don't know why the MSI board has issues.

Something strange that I do like on the Unify is that changing EDC to lower values from "Motherboard Limits of 220A" keeps all of the cores on the 5900x running at the same speed. The Gigabyte X570 board when you start dropping EDC then a strange phenomenon occurs where CCD1 will start creeping up in frequency and CCD2 will start dropping down. So at like EDC 140 with PBO on the 5900x will show like 4600 mhz on CCD1 and 4375 mhz on CCD2. The unify will just drop both CCDs evenly. Benchmark scores between both boards are similar so not sure if it's just a reporting error on the Gigabyte board.


----------



## Veii

Spectre73 said:


> I increased it for (supposedly) added stability - but you are referring to reducing coil whine, aren't you?
> 
> 
> ManniX-ITA said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not a viable option; coil whine reduction is minimal and already at 700 kHz with CO it doesn't even boot into Windows.
Click to expand...

Lower Switching frequency has less noise 
PWM switching frequency should be high , but Mosfet switching frequency should be low
Higher causes the signal to be higher, but not always perform better ~ usually transient noise is higher

On SOC i always run a high switching freq, but on vCore nearly always a lower one ~ depends on the range of your Infineon's

Yes Spectre, though about coil whine 
700khz sounds a lot ~ sure Mosfet brands differ but i would give it at least a try 
How low is your lowest 300 or 600 ?
300 it is for me, 700 is the highest ~ i run 400 for vcore and 500 for SOC and still with a strong vDroop on both. 
Stronger droop on vCore

VDroop and Spread Spectrum are a good thing, if used correctly 
Nearly no droop causes more issues and is more affected by random subtle changes. Same goes for high switching freq


----------



## Veii

Kha said:


> Honestly I am tired and dunno what to get anymore...
> 
> Tempted somehow by the B550-XE from Asus. Has an insanely strong VRM with 90A stages and Intel Lan - on paper it looks pretty good, but I am scared about Asus' memory OC issues. What do you think @ManniX-ITA ?


On core OC , it's neat
on 4x A2 memOC - it's a suffer and a half 


Spoiler














4x A2, can not get tRCD 14 to run so far
If you dont need 4 dimm slots, skip 4 dimm boards altogether
Don't think the XE is better than the dark hero , but B550 instead of X570 could help a bit


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Veii said:


> Lower Switching frequency has less noise
> PWM switching frequency should be high , but Mosfet switching frequency should be low
> Higher causes the signal to be higher, but not always perform better ~ usually transient noise is higher
> 
> On SOC i always run a high switching freq, but on vCore nearly always a lower one ~ depends on the range of your Infineon's
> 
> Yes Spectre, though about coil whine
> 700khz sounds a lot ~ sure Mosfet brands differ but i would give it at least a try
> How low is your lowest 300 or 600 ?
> 300 it is for me, 700 is the highest ~ i run 400 for vcore and 500 for SOC and still with a strong vDroop on both.
> Stronger droop on vCore
> 
> VDroop and Spread Spectrum are a good thing, if used correctly
> Nearly no droop causes more issues and is more affected by random subtle changes. Same goes for high switching freq


Didn't play much with VSOC PWM and LLC.
But LLC below 3 and PWM below 800 makes my 5950x unstable with PBO and CO counts maxed.
Otherwise almost everything works fine.
The Unify-X switching frequency goes from 500 to 1000 in 100 increments.
I keep PWM at 1000 and LLC 3 both for vCore and VSOC.


----------



## Veii

ManniX-ITA said:


> Didn't play much with VSOC PWM and LLC.
> But LLC below 3 and PWM below 800 makes my 5950x unstable with PBO and CO counts maxed.
> Otherwise almost everything works fine.
> The Unify-X switching frequency goes from 500 to 1000 in 100 increments.
> I keep PWM at 1000 and LLC 3 both for vCore and VSOC.


Soo probably 700 for the CPU with a more drooping loadline and 900 for the SOC with a less drooping loadline
A rule of thumb is always 1 under flat for SOC ~ because flat will overshoot
Sometimes only the 3rd one is really flat, and increasements go in +10mV, +20mV 
Really depends

But the CPU would need a stronger drooping loadline to begin with
Unless you run a per CCX OC
Curve optimizer will for sure change when the voltage ranges between frequencies<->voltage change, because of the LLC
same logically would go for the peak overshoot which changes by switching freq

Would coil whine be more bearable at 600Khz switching Freq ?


----------



## LionAlonso

ManniX-ITA said:


> Didn't play much with VSOC PWM and LLC.
> But LLC below 3 and PWM below 800 makes my 5950x unstable with PBO and CO counts maxed.
> Otherwise almost everything works fine.
> The Unify-X switching frequency goes from 500 to 1000 in 100 increments.
> I keep PWM at 1000 and LLC 3 both for vCore and VSOC.


How much scalar you run?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

LionAlonso said:


> How much scalar you run?


Always 10x


----------



## LionAlonso

ManniX-ITA said:


> Always 10x


Does scalar gives also stability when using CO? Or it just adds more voltage and sustain them more?
I always had it at auto (which is 1x if im not wrong) and i dont know if i should get it up and try to get even better scores...


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Veii said:


> Soo probably 700 for the CPU with a more drooping loadline and 900 for the SOC with a less drooping loadline
> A rule of thumb is always 1 under flat for SOC ~ because flat will overshoot
> Sometimes only the 3rd one is really flat, and increasements go in +10mV, +20mV
> Really depends
> 
> But the CPU would need a stronger drooping loadline to begin with
> Unless you run a per CCX OC
> Curve optimizer will for sure change when the voltage ranges between frequencies<->voltage change, because of the LLC
> same logically would go for the peak overshoot which changes by switching freq
> 
> Would coil whine be more bearable at 600Khz switching Freq ?


700 with LLC 4 (more vdroop) will not even boot Windows.
Anything below 800 and LLC 3 is detrimental for CO, have to use higher negative counts.
Only PBO works with 800 and LLC 4 but already at LLC 5 starts crashing.
The 5950x is very needy 

I have to experiment with VSOC but more or less eats anything.
Going down a lot is detrimental for scores.
But I didn't really defined thresholds yet.
The Unify-X keeps a very high feeding voltage for VSOC, about 40mV higher than SVI2.
And it doesn't drop going down with LLC. Much higher than the Master which I remember was just a bit higher than SVI2.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

LionAlonso said:


> Does scalar gives also stability when using CO? Or it just adds more voltage and sustain them more?
> I always had it at auto (which is 1x if im not wrong) and i dont know if i should get it up and try to get even better scores...


Could give instability but that's because it's a massive increase in performances.
It's not only added voltage, is defining the curve.
From 1x to 10x there's a delta of 10-40 CPU-z ST score and 100-200 in MT, at least.


----------



## Kha

Veii said:


> On core OC , it's neat
> on 4x A2 memOC - it's a suffer and a half
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4x A2, can not get tRCD 14 to run so far
> If you dont need 4 dimm slots, skip 4 dimm boards altogether
> Don't think the XE is better than the dark hero , but B550 instead of X570 could help a bit


But is the B550-XE ok for a 5900x with 2x B-dies @3733 Mhz cl16 or so ? Don't think my FCLK will go higher than that without WHEAs.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Kha said:


> But is the B550-XE ok for a 5900x with 2x B-dies @ 3866 cl16 or so ?


Should be ok indeed, it's probably not "the best".
Maybe would be limiting on stressing the timings or maxing the frequency of memory.
But for a normal usage should be more than well equipped.


----------



## Veii

ManniX-ITA said:


> Always 10x


did you follow AMDs section or figured it out yourself
I never exceed X3-X4 ,maaybe at worst X6
It's not only telling FIT to skip healthy check limits, but also boosts the maximum supplied boost voltage
I see you pretty much go the opposite way of what i run 
Maybe i took the wrong path
But i wonder why you run it that high 🤔

Curves you can finetune in post without problems, doesn't matter if positive vcore negative curves
or negative vcore positive curves and positive scalar
Both methods work well 
Never had good success with Scalar at high or beyond X6, mostly negative results


----------



## Kha

ManniX-ITA said:


> Should be ok indeed, it's probably not "the best".
> Maybe would be limiting on stressing the timings or maxing the frequency of memory.
> But for a normal usage should be more than well equipped.


Well, what other options do I have ?

The Unify-X has coil whine;
The B550 Master has a NIC that blows up all the network in the house;
The X570 Unify has the same NIC that blows up all the network in the house;
The X570 Master 1.2 is nowhere to be found;
The CHT is too expensive.

Am I missing something ?


----------



## Kha

I am also tempted by the B550 Taichi Razer Edition, dunno why. But I know virtually nothing of it, happen to know the board @Veii , @ManniX-ITA ?


----------



## Veii

Kha said:


> I am also tempted by the B550 Taichi Razer Edition, dunno why. But I know virtually nothing of it, happen to know the board @Veii , @ManniX-ITA ?


Kinda, but ASRock's current bios dev team strongly prefers the X570 lineup and then the Phantom Gaming & Extreme 4 series








B550 VRM DB sheet


시트1 Feedback : [email protected] Don't requst permission / You can leave comment :) Product,Price,Config,Phase Type,VRM Type,MOSFET (Vcore),PWM Controller,LAN,Wireless LAN,Audio ASUS ROG STRIX B550-XE Gaming WiFi,$ 330,14+2,Dual-Output,DrMOS,TI X95410RR 90A,ASP1405i (7+1),Intel I225-V (2.5...




docs.google.com




here pick something 

Although we both X570 and B550 ITX/AX don't get any WHEA, they dont exist
we get hard crashes and force shutdowns,or slowed down autocorrecting instability
but not a single WHEA
Idk what to think about this - even more when ASRock actively doesn't update my board and global ASRock distributor might have blacklisted me (Japan one likes me) 
But I would suggest 2 dimm boards over everything so far
Even am tempted to give Biostar a try , just to troll a bit 
Their specs look great to me


----------



## Kha

@Veii looking at Elenco's spreadheets, I see the B550-XE and Dark Hero VRM share the Core and Vsoc Mosfets, both having Texas Instruments CSD95410RR.

But Dark Hero has ASP 1103 PWM VDram 2 phases and NikoS VDram Mosfet,
while B550-XE has Richtek RT8125D 1 phase.and Vishay VDram Mosfet.

So my question is:

Will the B550-XE overclock ram really bad compared to, let's say, a X570 /B550 Master from Gigabyte or X570 Pro/Ultra ? 

From what I saw so far, the B550 Master overclocked my 2 dimms kinda the same as the Aorus X570 Pro / Ultra I tested, but have no idea about how is the newer Asus boards compared to these two.


----------



## Gerd_Gerdsen

Kha said:


> Well, what other options do I have ?
> 
> The Unify-X has coil whine;
> The B550 Master has a NIC that blows up all the network in the house;
> The X570 Unify has the same NIC that blows up all the network in the house;
> The X570 Master 1.2 is nowhere to be found;
> The CHT is too expensive.
> 
> Am I missing something ?


Is the non x unify a bit less noisey? Growing a bit tired of my rev 1.0 x570 Masters shenanigans lately


----------



## Veii

Kha said:


> @Veii looking at Elenco's spreadheets, I see the B550-XE and Dark Hero VRM share the Core and Vsoc Mosfets, both having Texas Instruments CSD95410RR.
> 
> But Dark Hero has ASP 1103 PWM VDram 2 phases and NikoS VDram Mosfet,
> while B550-XE has Richtek RT8125D 1 phase.and Vishay VDram Mosfet.
> 
> So my question is:
> 
> Will the B550-XE overclock ram really bad compared to, let's say, a X570 /B550 Master from Gigabyte or X570 Pro/Ultra ?
> 
> From what I saw so far, the B550 Master overclocked my 2 dimms kinda the same as the Aorus X570 Pro / Ultra I tested, but have no idea about how is the newer Asus boards compared to these two.


Let me answer this question with results after Tuesday 
Got two systems on a dark hero @ 5900X with quite good ram to play with

Maybe you can find a bit more information on the ASUS Maximus XII Formula
They share a very very similar design with an ASP1103 (ASUS ASP are always rebrands of something wild out there)
I really dislike Vishay, as they are the mid-range set of ones that couldn't be pure Renesas 70-90A stages
Vishay = Renesas

Renesas low end wasn't known to perform well at all
and the whole B550 lineup nearly all of them using Vishay SiC or even worse OnSemi 4C
(which where used on A320 boards back when ryzen launched)
I don't have high hopes for the method of "stacking quantity" over "using less phases but quality VRMs"

The old X370/X470 Taichi was on 12+12 40A Texas Instrument CSD87350Q5D Mosfets
Sure it was cool to the touch and could easily hold the powerhungry 2700X ~ pulling over 260W
But it never changed the fact that it was a quantity over quality setup
and that is strongly noticable on the voltage accuracy and lack of switching frequency control

I'm really not happy with the B550 lineup whatsoever - everyone goes the easy way of quantity over quality
Only a very few boards use actual quality Renesas 70A+ stages or Infineon ones
And the whole Biostar lineup , which makes it interesting to me as potential bios modder
Their bioses are very ~special~ , but once you have AMD CBS , there is not much you need anymore
On the specs they are top and the price too ~ and that's what makes me want to get one to fool around and troll with (on the leaderboards)

Really dont know what to recommend, 2 dimm boards it is
The Unify-x should be the best of the best ~ but the hardware issues are more than unfortunate
Try if this fixes your NIC crash issues:








The gigabyte lineup is now only considerable, because Stasio there does a great job on bios maintenance
Else they would currently take the crown for the worst bios for OC out there without him 
~ that person needs a loan raise . . .
ASRock takes the crown for the least updates ~ but at least many of them run 
MSI is quite silent on the beta bios section , they are average
ASUS is fast, but only if you check their links for bios updates manually ~ on community feedback they are equally slow /silent like MSI
Biostar is really tempting, but they have nothing but bad bios engineering reputation. From the hardware side, their boards where always over the average and very cheap to get


----------



## Phynicle

Had setup the new rig for a week now but hadn't had time to run any benches.
However running into prime95 issues where, everything is on stock but the test would fail instantly and crash the comp, tried small large and custom. 
Specs
5900x
B550 unify x, bios v1.2
32gb b-die rated 4266 c17 @1.5v, currently running 3600, c16 and fclk at 1800mhz
Ftw3 3080
And everything is under water, temps seems normal, idle and load with the mo-ra3. 

Just frustrating, have only played around with memory,but prime always fails instantly with custom. Tried lower speed, playing with voltages and increasing latency, always the same outcome.


----------



## KedarWolf

Phynicle said:


> Had setup the new rig for a week now but hadn't had time to run any benches.
> However running into prime95 issues where, everything is on stock but the test would fail instantly and crash the comp, tried small large and custom.
> Specs
> 5900x
> B550 unify x, bios v1.2
> 32gb b-die rated 4266 c17 @1.5v, currently running 3600, c16 and fclk at 1800mhz
> Ftw3 3080
> And everything is under water, temps seems normal, idle and load with the mo-ra3.
> 
> Just frustrating, have only played around with memory,but prime always fails instantly with custom. Tried lower speed, playing with voltages and increasing latency, always the same outcome.


Small FFTs will crash Ryzen, and temps are super hot.

Try 1344 FFTs, Run In Place. Let it run overnight, if the icon in the taskbar isn't red, you're good, no crashed cores.

Temps will always be under 70C as well this test.

Edit: If your PC is crashing Prime95 at stock settings, something is defective, likely the CPU, maybe the memory. You can try again with only one stick of RAM in at a time to rule out the memory though.


----------



## Phynicle

Thanks, just tried again.
Instant failure again. 
Rounding errors. 
I will try mem test first.


----------



## Phynicle

Update,
Had everything back to stock and it was no errors but ram was running at 2133.
Bumped it to 3600 and everything else was on stock but it failed with errors throughout in memtest86. 
Lowered it to 3200 and seems to be ok, no errors so far.

Disappointed. 
Any ideas, looks like I can't do much with this set of ram


----------



## Joeking78

Picked up my 5800x today after searching high and low for a certain batch (2036SUS, the same batch reviewers received)...I found batch 2040SUS.

So far so good with no WHEA at 2000 Infinity Fabric (5900x got instant WHEA and 100s of them) but won't post 1900 Infinity Fabric the same as my 5900x, going to try and tweak the timings and voltages to get 1900 to work.

Going to overclock and see how this performs...saw some 2036SUS to 2044SUS batches get 4.7ghz all core with 1.275v so will start off there and also try PBO


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Veii said:


> did you follow AMDs section or figured it out yourself
> I never exceed X3-X4 ,maaybe at worst X6
> It's not only telling FIT to skip healthy check limits, but also boosts the maximum supplied boost voltage
> I see you pretty much go the opposite way of what i run
> Maybe i took the wrong path
> But i wonder why you run it that high 🤔
> 
> Curves you can finetune in post without problems, doesn't matter if positive vcore negative curves
> or negative vcore positive curves and positive scalar
> Both methods work well
> Never had good success with Scalar at high or beyond X6, mostly negative results


At the beginning followed AMD's recommendation but then I saw a lot of people suggesting to stay below 6x/4x.
So I've decided to figure it out myself with a few hundreds hours of testing 

It's not skipping FIT healthy checks, I'd say it's more "stretching" it.
If it works better or not with 10x is very sample specific; so far I've seen very few cases where it wasn't better.
I can tell from the Core VIDs and the vCore SVI2; if with proper PBO limits is going well over 1.5v then it's probably going to have a negative effect.

With my 3800x except the newest AGESA I've always used a strong circa -0.4V offset.
Set with scalar 10x has always been more performant than any lower scalar with zero offset or lower offset.

On the newer AGESAs I didn't need the offset at all and I don't need it either with the 5950x.
If you don't exceed 1.5V on VIDs and don't get caught in thermal constraints the performance gain is always linear (5950x tops vCore at 1.5V straight).
I've seen also some having still gains going up to 1.55V but it's quite rare, usually bad samples that are voltage hungry.

If I set scalar 6x on my 5950x my best core on CPU-z with CO tuned can't go above 685 something.
With 10x scalar it goes above 695, almost 700, and at the same time I get 50 points and more in MT.

There are 2 main effects I see from the scalar; voltage bump and frequency curve modulation.

The voltage bump is evident, it adds a small amount on all-core eg. 25mV and a bigger on on single-core eg. 75mV.
Bigger is the scalar and bigger is the delta; if the PBO limits are well set you get the best MT and ST scores are the same time.
You don't have to sacrifice one or the other.

The frequency curve modulation is more subtle; still have to test it thoroughly with the 5950x but I see the same behavior using CO instead of offset.
If you are able to achieve a specific voltage with a specific workload, you should see the difference.
eg CPU-z stress test in ST and MT running at same voltage adjusting with offset or CO.

Did it in the past with the 3800x, the 5950x is more though to test due to the 2nd CCD and all those cores.
But you should see the scores and frequencies dropping going down with the scalar.
Same MT workload, same target voltages, circa scalar 1x 4350 MHz, 4-6x 4400 MHz, 10x 4450 MHz.
Not only a factor because it's adding voltage but also contributing as a factor to alter the frequency curve.
It's the same as the the negative count in CO (but it's a positive count), applied to the whole CPU.
Balancing the added voltage with CO negative count you get a double frequency curve factor, both from the count and the scalar at the same time.
If you set a lower scalar you loose a bit of the frequency curve modulation, it's not much but something.
For me, thermally constrained, for what I remember I've tested, means in ST 5080-5100 MHz vs 5130-5150 MHz max boost and 25-50 MHz in sustained.

When I'll have time will try to do some comparison benchmarks disabling the 2nd CCD.



Phynicle said:


> Update,
> Had everything back to stock and it was no errors but ram was running at 2133.
> Bumped it to 3600 and everything else was on stock but it failed with errors throughout in memtest86.
> Lowered it to 3200 and seems to be ok, no errors so far.
> 
> Disappointed.
> Any ideas, looks like I can't do much with this set of ram


Smells like Auto is setting somewhere ProcODT, CAD, RTT wrong...
Post a Taiphoon Burner report and Zentimings screenshot, maybe there's a clue there.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Nitefly said:


> @ManniX-ITA Do you think it’s worth continuing with the build? I mean, it surely must be tighter than it ever was.
> 
> Damn!
> 
> Only was to tell is to proceed I guess!!


How's going with the build?


----------



## MikeS3000

Phynicle said:


> Had setup the new rig for a week now but hadn't had time to run any benches.
> However running into prime95 issues where, everything is on stock but the test would fail instantly and crash the comp, tried small large and custom.
> Specs
> 5900x
> B550 unify x, bios v1.2
> 32gb b-die rated 4266 c17 @1.5v, currently running 3600, c16 and fclk at 1800mhz
> Ftw3 3080
> And everything is under water, temps seems normal, idle and load with the mo-ra3.
> 
> Just frustrating, have only played around with memory,but prime always fails instantly with custom. Tried lower speed, playing with voltages and increasing latency, always the same outcome.


I had the same issue on my 5900x. One bad core would fail prime and Occt non-Avx single thread at stock on 2 different mobos. AMD just approved my cpu rma. You can troubleshoot with a single stick of RAM but likely the issue is the cpu.


----------



## Joeking78

Unify is such a pain sometimes...

If I got to the OC menu then to PBO and Curve Optimiser I only see 6 cores.








But if I go to Settings, Advanced, AMD Overclocking, PBO it shows all 8...









I don't know which settimgs are being applied, will my CO values save and be applied? 

All but one of my cores boost to 5025mhz and completely WHEA free at 2000IF, going to try some higher mem clocks


----------



## MyUsername

How's the 3.3v reporting on your boards? On my previous board GB Master the 3.3v would gradually drop to 3.18v while idle and 3.12v while memory stress test or gaming etc, pull the atx 24pin cable and reseat it and it would bounce back to 3.25v, thought it was just the board not reporting it correctly. Unify is doing the same, first built it was at 3.26v but now 3.20v, now I'm currently doing a memory stress test and it's at 3.184v but the meter is 3.28v. I've checked with a multimeter on all 4 3.3v pins and they're fine. I just want to know what the hell, as two boards reading the same can't be coincidence can it?

Edit: Fixed, loose connection psu end, now 3.26v under load


----------



## Joeking78

2033 IF WHEA free and stable so far, will run some other mem stress programs overnight


----------



## YoungChris

@Joeking78 What's your max boot fclk? >2133? Very impressive!


----------



## Joeking78

YoungChris said:


> @Joeking78 What's your max boot fclk? >2133? Very impressive!


I'll do some more tests and let you know 👍


----------



## Phynicle

I can't boot when I have 1t enabled or gear down mode enabled (which I assume is 1t and gear down enabled on this mobo)
Ram is 4266mhz c17 v1.5.....and I'm only trying to get to 3800c16 with v1.5 too.


----------



## KedarWolf

Phynicle said:


> I can't boot when I have 1t enabled or gear down mode enabled (which I assume is 1t and gear down enabled on this mobo)
> Ram is 4266mhz c17 v1.5.....and I'm only trying to get to 3800c16 with v1.5 too.


I've been hearing 3800 is bugged on these boards, try one notch higher or lower. And GDM Enabled will be 2T unless you go to the RAM settings in the BIOS in Advanced and change it to 1T.


----------



## Phynicle

KedarWolf said:


> I've been hearing 3800 is bugged on these boards, try one notch higher or lower. And GDM Enabled will be 2T unless you go to the RAM settings in the BIOS in Advanced and change it to 1T.


Thanks, any time I touch the command rates with 1t, the gear down selection becomes greyed out down below. That plus it will also lock up once I reboot up and then I have to clear cmos.

I will try lower or slightly higher. But from memory I think it's the same issues, just locks any time I touch 1t. 2T is fine can pass memtest86


----------



## KedarWolf

Phynicle said:


> Thanks, any time I touch the command rates with 1t, the gear down selection becomes greyed out down below. That plus it will also lock up once I reboot up and then I have to clear cmos.
> 
> I will try lower or slightly higher. But from memory I think it's the same issues, just locks any time I touch 1t. 2T is fine can pass memtest86


No, you don't change the 1T in the main menu DRAM settings or whatever, you change it in the Advanced menu, I can't boot into BIOS, show, need to wait until TM5 is done in 20 minutes or so.

Edit: Where it has the GDM option with 1T or 2T right above it. Not in DRAM settings on Main Page.


----------



## KedarWolf

Phynicle said:


> Thanks, any time I touch the command rates with 1t, the gear down selection becomes greyed out down below. That plus it will also lock up once I reboot up and then I have to clear cmos.
> 
> I will try lower or slightly higher. But from memory I think it's the same issues, just locks any time I touch 1t. 2T is fine can pass memtest86


----------



## KedarWolf

@Eder I'm getting my Unify-X in mid-February.

If I gave you $20 USD, when the next BIOS releases, not the current one, could you unlock it for us?


----------



## dr.Rafi

KedarWolf said:


> @Eder I'm getting my Unify-X in mid-February.
> 
> If I gave you $20 USD, when the next BIOS releases, not the current one, could you unlock it for us?


Wonder what to unlock ? I am happy to pay for Unify not x.


----------



## KedarWolf

dr.Rafi said:


> Wonder what to unlock ? I am happy to pay for Unify not x.


The PBS menu and everything in it, and some hidden options in the CBS menu and other menus etc.

Edit: Someone on the X570 Unify thread might be able to post screenshots, @Eder unlocked that one and probably not different.


----------



## KedarWolf

This is what I'm getting on my X570 Godlike.

I expect better when I get my Unify-X.

TM5 1usmus_v3 but at 2500% instead of 100% and one cycle.


----------



## Phynicle

KedarWolf said:


> View attachment 2477646
> 
> 
> View attachment 2477644





KedarWolf said:


> View attachment 2477646
> 
> 
> View attachment 2477644



Thanks kendar, I made the adjustment there and same result, would not boot upon saving bios if I touched the command rate or enable gear down mode. I'm using a10 bios if there's any difference....


----------



## Nitefly

So I finally built my pc.... very pleased with the way it looks! You’ll have to forgive the rainbow as I need to disable it!










Sadly, the coil whine is atrocious. I did mention that due to ‘user error / design flaw’ I broke the screw by tightening it, but I still think that those screws would be tighter than before.

I get a constant high pitched whine when scrolling or moving the mouse. It’s actually dead silent when running cinebench or other stress tests. Only when relatively under-utilised does the coil whine persist - it’s quite maddening.

So yeah, not very impressed 

On another note, running the latest bios with my 5950x, I can’t hit a 1900 infinity clock either... and I have mega cl14 3800 gskill ram. So lowest latency I have got is 63ns.

All suggestions to fix the above issues would be most welcome.


----------



## KedarWolf

Phynicle said:


> Thanks kendar, I made the adjustment there and same result, would not boot upon saving bios if I touched the command rate or enable gear down mode. I'm using a10 bios if there's any difference....


Oh, if you enable Gear Down Mode stuff with numbers like 15 will round off to 16 and you need to adjust tRDWR and tWRRD. Try 9-3 or 10-3, should boot then.


----------



## MyUsername

KedarWolf said:


> This is what I'm getting on my X570 Godlike.
> 
> I expect better when I get my Unify-X.
> 
> TM5 1usmus_v3 but at 2500% instead of 100% and one cycle.
> 
> View attachment 2477691
> 
> 
> View attachment 2477690
> 
> 
> View attachment 2477692


Man , I feel like the last person in the world to get my 5950x.

Nice numbers though, memory's got good voltage for what you're asking


----------



## Speed Potato

I just realised that my 5600X is one of those elusive dual chiplet with an inactive ccd2. I guess that explain the crap CO performance and maybe even the explorer crashes after wake up.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Nitefly said:


> So I finally built my pc.... very pleased with the way it looks! You’ll have to forgive the rainbow as I need to disable it!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sadly, the coil whine is atrocious. I did mention that due to ‘user error / design flaw’ I broke the screw by tightening it, but I still think that those screws would be tighter than before.
> 
> I get a constant high pitched whine when scrolling or moving the mouse. It’s actually dead silent when running cinebench or other stress tests. Only when relatively under-utilised does the coil whine persist - it’s quite maddening.
> 
> So yeah, not very impressed
> 
> On another note, running the latest bios with my 5950x, I can’t hit a 1900 infinity clock either... and I have mega cl14 3800 gskill ram. So lowest latency I have got is 63ns.
> 
> All suggestions to fix the above issues would be most welcome.


Can you post a Zentimings screenshot?
Memory at 63ns means it's in de-sync.

You have same issue as @Kha; I'm not having any coil whine issue while moving the mouse.
Try disabling the Spread Spectrum and setting BCLK at 100.0 MHz instead of Auto.
Also on DIGITALL PWM to 1000 kHz and LLC 3 for CPU and PWM to 900 and LLC 4 for SOC.

The FCLK 1900 locked could be the same common issue with many samples, you'll have to wait for a new AGESA to fix it.
Did you try selecting a profile from Memory Try It?
Didn't work for Kha but why not to try.


----------



## YoungChris

I learn something new every time I boot up my system.








Still full ambient cooling, limited core clocks for efficiency comparison.


----------



## Nitefly

ManniX-ITA said:


> Can you post a Zentimings screenshot?
> Memory at 63ns means it's in de-sync.
> 
> You have same issue as @Kha; I'm not having any coil whine issue while moving the mouse.
> Try disabling the Spread Spectrum and setting BCLK at 100.0 MHz instead of Auto.
> Also on DIGITALL PWM to 1000 kHz and LLC 3 for CPU and PWM to 900 and LLC 4 for SOC.
> 
> The FCLK 1900 locked could be the same common issue with many samples, you'll have to wait for a new AGESA to fix it.
> Did you try selecting a profile from Memory Try It?
> Didn't work for Kha but why not to try.


Hi mate - thanks for being so kind to respond. Have a look below for timings. Clearly I'm doing something wrong.... FYI temps in Cinebench (R23) multi were ~60 degrees so I don't feel like it's thermal throttling. Also, in the Cinebench (R23) single core, the core boosts didn't seem to want to go higher typically than 4825hz.

This is my third windows install (first unstable, second fine but I installed dragon centre and it just seemed easier to do a clear install than deal with uninstalling the crap.

I'm positive my core clocks were higher previously - what is going on lol....

CPU clock looks low in AIDA64 too.

I will confess that I don't really have any idea what I'm doing. I've been sat in front of PC all day playing with it but not really getting anywhere, so all advice is much appreciated. I am yet to try your suggestions above as I have been busy this evening but will do so and will report back


----------



## Nitefly

Edited above to include the AIDA64 screenshot (which I forgot to add in the first instance).


----------



## KedarWolf

Nitefly said:


> Hi mate - thanks for being so kind to respond. Have a look below for timings. Clearly I'm doing something wrong.... FYI temps in Cinebench (R23) multi were ~60 degrees so I don't feel like it's thermal throttling. Also, in the Cinebench (R23) single core, the core boosts didn't seem to want to go higher typically than 4825hz.
> 
> This is my third windows install (first unstable, second fine but I installed dragon centre and it just seemed easier to do a clear install than deal with uninstalling the crap.
> 
> I'm positive my core clocks were higher previously - what is going on lol....
> 
> CPU clock looks low in AIDA64 too.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> I will confess that I don't really have any idea what I'm doing. I've been sat in front of PC all day playing with it but not really getting anywhere, so all advice is much appreciated. I am yet to try your suggestions above as I have been busy this evening but will do so and will report back


This is what I get, my Unify-X on pre-order i hope to have Mid-February.


----------



## KedarWolf

Nitefly said:


> Edited above to include the AIDA64 screenshot (which I forgot to add in the first instance).


----------



## Nitefly

Well exactly, my results are rubbish


----------



## KedarWolf

ManniX-ITA said:


> The Unify-X is a joy for RAM OC but probably I suck at it
> 
> Tried to beat the 54.1 ns with static OC and 54.4 ns with PBO at 3800MHz with CL16 and GDM.
> Failed miserably...
> 
> Made another profile mixed CL14:
> 
> View attachment 2476505
> 
> 
> Same results more or less...
> 
> View attachment 2476504
> 
> 
> Managed to run at 2T and it's worse, almost 56 ns.
> 
> After some testing I could run mixed CL14 at 1T and I hoped to get at least a bit below 54 ns instead I couldn't get it below 55.1 ns.
> Impressive anyway, I've never been able to run stable 1T with this kit on the Master.


I tried RDSCs and WRSDs at 4-3 6-5 and my latency was 54.7ns. at 4-4 6-6 it's 54.2ns.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

KedarWolf said:


> I tried RDSCs and WRSDs at 4-3 6-5 and my latency was 54.7ns. at 4-4 6-6 it's 54.2ns.


Thx, have to try.
Tried to go down a while ago and was unstable but I was using different timings.


----------



## Phynicle

Having no luck trying to enable 1T.
Tried everything and all the advice previously but everytime I touch flip on 1t, it just refuses to boot and I have to clear cmos.
Tried
Cold boots after adjusting voltages 
Loosened timings, tighter timings
Played around with voltages, ram at 1.5v
3200,3600,3800 etc tried a bunch 
But always as soon as I try to get to 1T, it fails to boot.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Phynicle said:


> Having no luck trying to enable 1T.
> Tried everything and all the advice previously but everytime I touch flip on 1t, it just refuses to boot and I have to clear cmos.
> Tried
> Cold boots after adjusting voltages
> Loosened timings, tighter timings
> Played around with voltages, ram at 1.5v
> 3200,3600,3800 etc tried a bunch
> But always as soon as I try to get to 1T, it fails to boot.


Sounds like you have to work on ProcODT, CAD, RTT


----------



## ManniX-ITA

KedarWolf said:


> I tried RDSCs and WRSDs at 4-3 6-5 and my latency was 54.7ns. at 4-4 6-6 it's 54.2ns.


Even with your timings, can't go below 54.3 every now and then 

@Veii 
Big failure changing VSOC PWM and LLC; went back to 1000 and 3.
CO gets really unstable, especially at first boot in the morning.

Playing now with a small BCLK OC, 100.1250; decent results with scores but no latency improvement.


----------



## Phynicle

ManniX-ITA said:


> Sounds like you have to work on ProcODT, CAD, RTT


Currently have 
ProcODT 43.6
Nom Off
Rtt_wr 3
Rtt_park 1

Cad 24,20,24,24

Any other combo?


----------



## dr.Rafi

ManniX-ITA said:


> Even with your timings, can't go below 54.3 every now and then
> 
> @Veii
> Big failure changing VSOC PWM and LLC; went back to 1000 and 3.
> CO gets really unstable, especially at first boot in the morning.
> 
> Playing now with a small BCLK OC, 100.1250; decent results with scores but no latency improvement.


 KedarWolf is using high Vsoc and Vddg's me personaly not worth it for 0.1 ns for daily use.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

dr.Rafi said:


> KedarWolf is using high Vsoc and Vddg's me personaly not worth it for 0.1 ns for daily use.


I don't remember an improvement in latency increasing VSOC and VDDG but I'll test it.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Phynicle said:


> Currently have
> ProcODT 43.6
> Nom Off
> Rtt_wr 3
> Rtt_park 1
> 
> Cad 24,20,24,24
> 
> Any other combo?


Maybe @Veii can suggest some.
I think I've used for 1T ProcODT 32-37, CAD 60-30-20-20, Timings 60-60-60


----------



## Kha

ManniX-ITA said:


> You have same issue as @Kha; I'm not having any coil whine issue while moving the mouse.
> Try disabling the Spread Spectrum and setting BCLK at 100.0 MHz instead of Auto.
> Also on DIGITALL PWM to 1000 kHz and LLC 3 for CPU and PWM to 900 and LLC 4 for SOC.


Dunno how its for others, but in my case I don't think any screw tightening or bios setting in the world could make it go away. It was simply too strong.

The coil whone of mouse movement ? Was the worst of them all and to experience such high bloody pitch every single ****ing time you move the mouse, was pure torture.

But well, it's time for a new experience.


----------



## Kha

Gonna need some voltage advices soon


----------



## Nitefly

@Kha hi mate I can see you’re looking at the Taichi Razer edition - I’ve just ordered it so will let you know how I get on 

edit - oh you ordered it and have it before me! Haha

did you go for the b550?


----------



## MyUsername

Phynicle said:


> Having no luck trying to enable 1T.
> Tried everything and all the advice previously but everytime I touch flip on 1t, it just refuses to boot and I have to clear cmos.
> Tried
> Cold boots after adjusting voltages
> Loosened timings, tighter timings
> Played around with voltages, ram at 1.5v
> 3200,3600,3800 etc tried a bunch
> But always as soon as I try to get to 1T, it fails to boot.


Somethings up with the memory or cpu I reckon if you can't do 3600 gear down mode 1T, even 3800 should be easy if you're chucking 1.5v at it.
If you can't do this something might be holding it back. My daily nothing fancy.








1.5v should be this territory


----------



## Kha

Nitefly said:


> @Kha hi mate I can see you’re looking at the Taichi Razer edition - I’ve just ordered it so will let you know how I get on
> 
> edit - oh you ordered it and have it before me! Haha
> 
> did you go for the b550?


Yes I already have it, the B550. Pure silence, no issues, perfectly stable (or so it appears so far to be). 

Bios is insanely nice, high resolution, snappy, responsive, never seen before something like this. 
Killer NIC appears to be strong, tested both Wifi and Gigabit Ethernet and they work perfectly (or so they appear). 
Audio is very good, if you go for the ASRock driver package. Funny thing is that I tried to install the Realtek base driver and it didn't let me. Guess the board is too new.

The only thing bad about it would be the price, which is complete bollocks. Paid for it 340 Euros, but after the previous crappy experiences, I was happy to do it.


----------



## Nitefly

Kha said:


> Yes I already have it, the B550. Pure silence, no issues, perfectly stable (or so it appears so far to be).
> 
> Bios is insanely nice, high resolution, snappy, responsive, never seen before something like this.
> Killer NIC appears to be strong, tested both Wifi and Gigabit Ethernet and they work perfectly (or so they appear).
> Audio is very good, if you go for the ASRock driver package. Funny thing is that I tried to install the Realtek base driver and it didn't let me. Guess the board is too new.
> 
> The only thing bad about it would be the price, which is complete bollocks. Paid for it 340 Euros, but after the previous crappy experiences, I was happy to do it.


Cool, great to hear! I saw you posted on the Asrock forum and recognised your username 

Mmmm a silent board.... _drool_


----------



## dr.Rafi

Kha said:


> Dunno how its for others, but in my case I don't think any screw tightening or bios setting in the world could make it go away. It was simply too strong.
> 
> The coil whone of mouse movement ? Was the worst of them all and to experience such high bloody pitch every single ****ing time you move the mouse, was pure torture.
> 
> But well, it's time for a new experience.
> 
> View attachment 2477900


Congratulation 🙂Please let us know how the benchmarks, memory frequency ... go with your new motherboard.


----------



## Phynicle

MyUsername said:


> Somethings up with the memory or cpu I reckon if you can't do 3600 gear down mode 1T, even 3800 should be easy if you're chucking 1.5v at it.
> If you can't do this something might be holding it back. My daily nothing fancy.
> View attachment 2477919
> 
> 1.5v should be this territory
> 
> View attachment 2477921


It's just baffling, it's passed stress tests and benchmarks. Unfortunately as soon as I touch 1t with or without gear down mode it refuses to boot and then I go through clearing cmos etc. 

I have the whole setup under water., dreading if I have to test another ram.... 😭😭😭


----------



## weleh

Hey gys,

I had an MSI B450 Gaming Pro Carbon AC on my 5800X. 1.1.0.0 did 1900 fCLK no issues on my bdie 1:1 with insanely tight timings true 1T (52ns on my daily OS).
My 5800X fully tunned with CO/PBO Tweaks did 5.125Ghz single core (705+ CPU-Z, 1680+ CBR23).

1.2.0.0 allowed higher fCLK but WHEA city and I'm not going to be running 1.3VSOC to get 2000 fCLK stable. Managed to get 1933 fCLK stable on OCCT AVX Mem test / AntaExtreme for 1h but failed miserably after loading all cores with AVX2 so I reverted back to 1900 fCLK np.

I "upgraded" to an Asus Rog Strix B550-F Gaming and performance is abismal, PBO boost is hardcapped at 5025 Mhz no matter the settings and fCLK has the same issues as any other board, can't do higher than 2000 fCLK without WHEA or without insane voltages (VDDG/VSOC).

So, I'm returning the ASUS and I'm inclined for this board. How's the status atm? Can it at least handle 1900 fCLK WHEAless? Also, I've never had any USB disconection issues or PCI-E 4.0 issues like I've seen on many other boards so I'm not sure it's something board related to system related. Does this board have issues? 

Another thing I want to ask, I keep hearing about coil whine on this board? I've never had a board coil whine on me, good or bad... Any input on this?

Thanks in advance.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

It can handle 1900 FCLK without WHEA.
The USB issues are mostly related to the CPU; can't say about PCIe 4.0.
Coil whine is there, depends on your sensibility. It is higher than other boards and seems some samples are worse than others.
I've just run SOTR benchmark and there was quite a heavy buzzing all the time.
No issue with PBO capped, I can run 5175 MHz. But in the last BIOS seems setting above 200 doesn't work.


----------



## KedarWolf

ManniX-ITA said:


> It can handle 1900 FCLK without WHEA.
> The USB issues are mostly related to the CPU; can't say about PCIe 4.0.
> Coil whine is there, depends on your sensibility. It is higher than other boards and seems some samples are worse than others.
> I've just run SOTR benchmark and there was quite a heavy buzzing all the time.
> No issue with PBO capped, I can run 5175 MHz. But in the last BIOS seems setting above 200 doesn't work.


When I get my Unify-X my 15 fans running 24/7 at 60% and my two RAM fans at 6800 RPM, coil whine really isn't going to be an issue for me.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

KedarWolf said:


> When I get my Unify-X my 15 fans running 24/7 at 60% and my two RAM fans at 6800 RPM, coil whine really isn't going to be an issue for me.


LoL indeed 
I'm usually wearing headphones so it doesn't really matter for me as well.
But I was running the bench and it was unusually quiet around, I could hear it very loud.


----------



## KedarWolf

Oh, a totally unrelated question.

Even though I blow out my fans and rads with a DataVac electric blower which pushes out a ton of air, my fans and rads have dust pretty much baked on now, even the blower won't touch.

What's the best way to clean the rads and the fans?

Edit: The hoses on the rad with the GPU has quick disconnects, so I can completely remove the rad from the video card. The CPU block hoses don't though on a separate second rad.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

KedarWolf said:


> Oh, a totally unrelated question.
> 
> Even though I blow out my fans and rads with a DataVac electric blower which pushes out a ton of air, my fans and rads have dust pretty much baked on now, even the blower won't touch.
> 
> What's the best way to clean the rads and the fans?


That kind of dust I can only remove it with paper towels and water (not soaking of course).

Of course after the paint brush.


----------



## weleh

ManniX-ITA said:


> It can handle 1900 FCLK without WHEA.
> The USB issues are mostly related to the CPU; can't say about PCIe 4.0.
> Coil whine is there, depends on your sensibility. It is higher than other boards and seems some samples are worse than others.
> I've just run SOTR benchmark and there was quite a heavy buzzing all the time.
> No issue with PBO capped, I can run 5175 MHz. But in the last BIOS seems setting above 200 doesn't work.


Thanks. 

Got it. Will sort it tomorrow.
I've never had USB issues with any of the boards so I guess Im fine.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

So yesterday I did run some testing to see if PBO could be optimized specifically for gaming with my 5950x and the effect of boost clock, scalar, EDC limit.

But I had hard crashes again at first power up in the morning.
The day before thought it was the slight BCLK OC but it wasn't it.
Had to disable CO to boot properly.

But then I started noticing USB weirdness and 3DMark crashing the GPU driver randomly while starting a benchmark.
After a while found out setting the VSOC with AMD Overclocking option is bugged with AGESA 1.2.0.0.
You need to set it as Override or it's unstable; had the same issue with the Master but didn't thought about it.
Never had again a 3DMark crash and this morning no issues at boot with CO.

Was able to run quite some tests afterwards, mainly focused on gaming and light threaded workloads (4 to 12 threads).
I've tested limiting EDC to 180A but without CO.
A 5950x with less thermal constraints could behave differently of course.

Boost clock matters, it's a factor on the whole curve, impacts sustained clocks not only a barrier for max
12 threads CPU-z 50MHz vs 125MHz = 4362 vs 4382 MHz = 7296.7 vs 7339.1
Adding up to 10mV to VIDs for 20-50 MHz clock gain for 75 MHz delta (50MHz vs 125MHz)

Scalar behaves mostly like the 3800x, higher scalar = higher the performances, with a quirk about EDC
Biggest jump going from 1x to 4x
With EDC limited at 180A the scalar at 4x is winning over 10x in very specific benchmarks
3DMark TimeSpy Extreme CPU
GB5 SQL ST, Rigid Body ST & MT

With EDC at 215A the 10x scalar always win vs 4x
Small but consistent margin, CPU-z ST 5-10 pts, MT 50-130 pts (eg. MT 13093 vs 12958)
The most "relevant" gain is pushing toward and over 700 CPU-z ST; eg. Core 4 ST 697.1 vs 688.3
Hard to judge temperatures as it gets really hot with anything above 8 threads


Limiting EDC to 180A is improving light-threaded performances
There's about 100-130 points CPU-z gap between 8 and 20 threads
Above 20 threads the 180A is hitting hard performances

In summary limiting to EDC 180A and using a 4x scalar can give a very thin benefit on gaming/light threaded workloads.
Pretty sure it's not worth considering all the drawbacks in ST and highly-threaded MT. 

Gaming wise so far I've benchmarked with 3DMark, AOTS, SOTR, WWZ, RE6.
Basically almost nothing made a difference which wasn't marginal.
With the exception of CPU score in 3DMark but that's a CPU bench.

The only "almost relevant" difference was using 10x scalar with SOTR:










While at 4x:










It's a small but consistent difference, the rest of the CPU renderer curve is almost identical.
But in that moment of stress with 10x the CPU can keep the frametime very low.
Almost relevant because it's a CPU bound scenario at over 600 fps...

At the end, it's 99% for benchmarking.
The 5950x is so powerful that hardly matters, all these optimizations have a marginal effect for gaming.
Maybe there are some edge cases but probably not so many.
A good cooling that can keep up a very high static OC it's probably the best for gaming.


----------



## LionAlonso

ManniX-ITA said:


> So yesterday I did run some testing to see if PBO could be optimized specifically for gaming with my 5950x and the effect of boost clock, scalar, EDC limit.
> 
> But I had hard crashes again at first power up in the morning.
> The day before thought it was the slight BCLK OC but it wasn't it.
> Had to disable CO to boot properly.
> 
> But then I started noticing USB weirdness and 3DMark crashing the GPU driver randomly while starting a benchmark.
> After a while found out setting the VSOC with AMD Overclocking option is bugged with AGESA 1.2.0.0.
> You need to set it as Override or it's unstable; had the same issue with the Master but didn't thought about it.
> Never had again a 3DMark crash and this morning no issues at boot with CO.
> 
> Was able to run quite some tests afterwards, mainly focused on gaming and light threaded workloads (4 to 12 threads).
> I've tested limiting EDC to 180A but without CO.
> A 5950x with less thermal constraints could behave differently of course.
> 
> Boost clock matters, it's a factor on the whole curve, impacts sustained clocks not only a barrier for max
> 12 threads CPU-z 50MHz vs 125MHz = 4362 vs 4382 MHz = 7296.7 vs 7339.1
> Adding up to 10mV to VIDs for 20-50 MHz clock gain for 75 MHz delta (50MHz vs 125MHz)
> 
> Scalar behaves mostly like the 3800x, higher scalar = higher the performances, with a quirk about EDC
> Biggest jump going from 1x to 4x
> With EDC limited at 180A the scalar at 4x is winning over 10x in very specific benchmarks
> 3DMark TimeSpy Extreme CPU
> GB5 SQL ST, Rigid Body ST & MT
> 
> With EDC at 215A the 10x scalar always win vs 4x
> Small but consistent margin, CPU-z ST 5-10 pts, MT 50-130 pts (eg. MT 13093 vs 12958)
> The most "relevant" gain is pushing toward and over 700 CPU-z ST; eg. Core 4 ST 697.1 vs 688.3
> Hard to judge temperatures as it gets really hot with anything above 8 threads
> 
> 
> Limiting EDC to 180A is improving light-threaded performances
> There's about 100-130 points CPU-z gap between 8 and 20 threads
> Above 20 threads the 180A is hitting hard performances
> 
> In summary limiting to EDC 180A and using a 4x scalar can give a very thin benefit on gaming/light threaded workloads.
> Pretty sure it's not worth considering all the drawbacks in ST and highly-threaded MT.
> 
> Gaming wise so far I've benchmarked with 3DMark, AOTS, SOTR, WWZ, RE6.
> Basically almost nothing made a difference which wasn't marginal.
> With the exception of CPU score in 3DMark but that's a CPU bench.
> 
> The only "almost relevant" difference was using 10x scalar with SOTR:
> 
> View attachment 2478259
> 
> 
> While at 4x:
> 
> View attachment 2478260
> 
> 
> It's a small but consistent difference, the rest of the CPU renderer curve is almost identical.
> But in that moment of stress with 10x the CPU can keep the frametime very low.
> Almost relevant because it's a CPU bound scenario at over 600 fps...
> 
> At the end, it's 99% for benchmarking.
> The 5950x is so powerful that hardly matters, all these optimizations have a marginal effect for gaming.
> Maybe there are some edge cases but probably not so many.
> A good cooling that can keep up a very high static OC it's probably the best for gaming.


Havent tried with lower EDC (150 or so) 
Do you think lower EDC is better only for gaming or there is a cap when lowering it?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

LionAlonso said:


> Havent tried with lower EDC (150 or so)
> Do you think lower EDC is better only for gaming or there is a cap when lowering it?


Lower EDC is better for any light workloads, gaming or else.
The curve will be optimized for more "desktop" usage.
That's why by default even the 5950x is set to 105W TDP at 142/95/140 and it doesn't perform that badly.
Unless you try to unleash all the power, then the cap will hit hard.
But higher is the limit and lesser is the efficiency, you don't get 3x times the performances with 3x the power consumption.


----------



## weleh

Ok,

Installed the Unify-X, fCLK wise as expected, WHEA city above 1900, not concerning.

What's concerning is the fact that AMD must have gimped the boosting algorithim on newest AGESA because this board suffers from the same issues my ASUS did which is, hardcap on boost at 5025 Mhz.

Again, my MSI B450 board on 1.1.0.0 AGESA boosted no problem to +5100 Mhz.

This is very annoying. Anyone with a 5800X can test this for me?

Another question, is there any tool for messing with bios settings you recommend/exists, something like Asus TurboVCore


----------



## LionAlonso

weleh said:


> Ok,
> 
> Installed the Unify-X, fCLK wise as expected, WHEA city above 1900, not concerning.
> 
> What's concerning is the fact that AMD must have gimped the boosting algorithim on newest AGESA because this board suffers from the same issues my ASUS did which is, hardcap on boost at 5025 Mhz.
> 
> Again, my MSI B450 board on 1.1.0.0 AGESA boosted no problem to +5100 Mhz.
> 
> This is very annoying. Anyone with a 5800X can test this for me?
> 
> Another question, is there any tool for messing with bios settings you recommend/exists, something like Asus TurboVCore


It was said before, boost have been optimized, prob before u boosted till that without being effective and prob if sustained u would have get a lot of errors.


----------



## weleh

LionAlonso said:


> It was said before, boost have been optimized, prob before u boosted till that without being effective and prob if sustained u would have get a lot of errors.


It was effective clockspeed, I lost over 50 points on CBR23 ST... From 1690 to 1640ish...
Also on CPU-Z from 705 to 685. Huge difference.
GB5 same deal.

Also, I had curve set up on all boards and tested. It's not a matter of being unstable, it's a matter of having a HARDCAP on boost even when some of your best cores can do it.


----------



## LionAlonso

weleh said:


> It was effective clockspeed, I lost over 50 points on CBR23 ST... From 1690 to 1640ish...
> Also on CPU-Z from 705 to 685. Huge difference.
> GB5 same deal.
> 
> Also, I had curve set up on all boards and tested. It's not a matter of being unstable, it's a matter of having a HARDCAP on boost even when some of your best cores can do it.


So u mean hardcap in the bios boost override? Now you can only select +200? 
if is that yes, they will add it again in later BIOS i guess.
If its with the same override as before, then is stability, try ti lower more the CO in your best cores and test them with OCCT beta


----------



## KedarWolf

LionAlonso said:


> So u mean hardcap in the bios boost override? Now you can only select +200?
> if is that yes, they will add it again in later BIOS i guess.
> If its with the same override as before, then is stability, try ti lower more the CO in your best cores and test them with OCCT beta


I think you can still choose +500 but it no longer boosts more than +200.


----------



## LionAlonso

KedarWolf said:


> I think you can still choose +500 but it no longer boosts more than +200.


Ye ye, if that is the case yes, happens to all vendors.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

weleh said:


> It was effective clockspeed, I lost over 50 points on CBR23 ST... From 1690 to 1640ish...
> Also on CPU-Z from 705 to 685. Huge difference.
> GB5 same deal.
> 
> Also, I had curve set up on all boards and tested. It's not a matter of being unstable, it's a matter of having a HARDCAP on boost even when some of your best cores can do it.


It's currently broken the cap above 200.
You can check in HWInfo main window:










That's with 125 MHz, setting 200 will bring it to 5250 but with higher values it will still be capped at 5250.

I think in BIOS A12 or A501 it was working.


----------



## Manuru

weleh said:


> What's concerning is the fact that AMD must have gimped the boosting algorithim on newest AGESA because this board suffers from the same issues my ASUS did which is, hardcap on boost at 5025 Mhz.


Do you use the same cooler? Same thermal paste?
I also experienced performance loss after I installed Unify-X, but it my case it was a bad thermal paste.


----------



## Phynicle

Good News, i left the board at auto for most settings and got 1T timings.
Stable at 1900 FCLK at almost any timing and voltages i set. However at 1933 FCLK or more i get WHEA immediately.

Tried to play with timings, voltages, terminations , copied other profiles etc, no go, even if its just 1933 at loose timings, i get WHEA, is this a bios limitation? 

anything about my current settings i should improve on?

BTW coil whine is real.....and annoyingly high pitched its quite apparent.


----------



## mongoled

Phynicle said:


> Good News, i left the board at auto for most settings and got 1T timings.
> Stable at 1900 FCLK at almost any timing and voltages i set. However at 1933 FCLK or more i get WHEA immediately.
> 
> Tried to play with timings, voltages, terminations , copied other profiles etc, no go, even if its just 1933 at loose timings, i get WHEA, is this a bios limitation?
> 
> anything about my current settings i should improve on?
> 
> BTW coil whine is real.....and annoyingly high pitched its quite apparent.
> View attachment 2478580


You are better off with GDM disabled and 2T if your setup can handle it.

Over 1900 mhz WHEA warnings are "normal".

If you play around with your setup enough time, you should be able to get it to occasionally boot and run memtests without any WHEA warnings, but this is just triggering a bug which we are hoping will be turned into not being a bug but an actually working correct post training procedure for allowing peeps to run above 1900 mhz without WHEA warnings.

On my motherboard, using vDDP @0.905v, vDDG CCD @1.015v, vDDG IOD CCD @1.025v, vSOC @auto (I left this at Auto as on my setup vSOC does not do anything for WHEA warnings, but you need it for your RAM to be stable!) gives me the fewest WHEA warnings without inducing the "bug".

Quick test for WHEA warnings (if you are not getting them at boot time) is to run the AIDA64 L3 cache test, this will trigger the WHEA warning in Windows system log instantly.


----------



## weleh

mongoled said:


> You are better off with GDM disabled and 2T if your setup can handle it.
> 
> Over 1900 mhz WHEA warnings are "normal".
> 
> If you play around with your setup enough time, you should be able to get it to occasionally boot and run memtests without any WHEA warnings, but this is just triggering a bug which we are hoping will be turned into not being a bug but an actually working correct post training procedure for allowing peeps to run above 1900 mhz without WHEA warnings.
> 
> On my motherboard, using vDDP @0.905v, vDDG CCD @1.015v, vDDG IOD CCD @1.025v, vSOC @auto (I left this at Auto as on my setup vSOC does not do anything for WHEA warnings, but you need it for your RAM to be stable!) gives me the fewest WHEA warnings without inducing the "bug".
> 
> Quick test for WHEA warnings (if you are not getting them at boot time) is to run the AIDA64 L3 cache test, this will trigger the WHEA warning in Windows system log instantly.


Stabilizing 1900 fCLK is easy on any board. It's above that, that becomes concerning and requires a lot of VSOC / VDDG play which is just not worth it.
If people have to run 1.3VSOC load (probably 1.35VSOC on bios) to get higher fCLK, it is just not worth it.

I've done it on 3 different boards (b450 and b550), all it takes is VSOC at 1.1 and higher IOD voltage than stock.

I can boot 2200 fCLK easy on my 5800X but the performance degradation is surreal.










This passed 1h of OCCT memtest on my old board B450. Loaded up all core AVX2 and it started spitting WHEAs. I very much doubt there are people running WHEA free stable higher than 1900 fCLK on sane voltages.


----------



## Joeking78

weleh said:


> Stabilizing 1900 fCLK is easy on any board. It's above that, that becomes concerning and requires a lot of VSOC / VDDG play which is just not worth it.
> If people have to run 1.3VSOC load (probably 1.35VSOC on bios) to get higher fCLK, it is just not worth it.
> 
> I've done it on 3 different boards (b450 and b550), all it takes is VSOC at 1.1 and higher IOD voltage than stock.
> 
> I can boot 2200 fCLK easy on my 5800X but the performance degradation is surreal.
> 
> View attachment 2478590
> 
> 
> This passed 1h of OCCT memtest on my old board B450. Loaded up all core AVX2 and it started spitting WHEAs. I very much doubt there are people running WHEA free stable higher than 1900 fCLK on sane voltages.
> 
> View attachment 2478591


I can get 2000 and 2066 1:1 WHEA free and stable, 2066 saw less performance and 2100 i can't get to boot yet.

My 5900x has WHEA at 2000, only WHEA free below that.

I think its very much CPU/IMC dependent...I went out of my way to find a very early 5800x (2040SUS) because many reviews used 2036SUS and i figured they would be given good samples...mine seems very good.

I'm using 1.48v dram and 1.1375 vsoc.


----------



## weleh

Ignore subtimings was just testin 1:1

This passed 40min of OCCT mem test and then after this photo, it started spitting WHEAs.



http://imgur.com/a/u2qRJHD


----------



## KedarWolf

Manuru said:


> Do you use the same cooler? Same thermal paste?
> I also experienced performance loss after I installed Unify-X, but it my case it was a bad thermal paste.


Anyone want to get some Thermaltake TFX really cheap?

On Aliexpress you can get it for under $6, just rebranded as Thermagic ZF-EX for Vietnam. And you can Google a $4 off new user coupon or just see it if you register with a new email.

Just takes a month to get to North America is all.


----------



## weleh

Joeking78 said:


> I can get 2000 and 2066 1:1 WHEA free and stable, 2066 saw less performance and 2100 i can't get to boot yet.
> 
> My 5900x has WHEA at 2000, only WHEA free below that.
> 
> I think its very much CPU/IMC dependent...I went out of my way to find a very early 5800x (2040SUS) because many reviews used 2036SUS and i figured they would be given good samples...mine seems very good.
> 
> I'm using 1.48v dram and 1.1375 vsoc.


Can yous show us the proof? I'm very much interested.


----------



## Joeking78

weleh said:


> Can yous show us the proof? I'm very much interested.


What do you want to see? Let me know which tests to run for you.


----------



## weleh

Joeking78 said:


> What do you want to see? Let me know which tests to run for you.



Well you're running 1:1 @2000 fCLK you must have done stability testing? Got anything regarding that? Also, wouldn't mind your Zen Timings to look at voltages.

Also, which bios/board do you have?


----------



## Joeking78

weleh said:


> Well you're running 1:1 @2000 fCLK you must have done stability testing? Got anything regarding that? Also, wouldn't mind your Zen Timings to look at voltages.
> 
> Also, which bios/board do you have?


I'll run OCCT for an hour and post it once done.

Zentimings attached for 4000mhz and a quick test done at 4066

Board is Unify (non X) with the latest bios


----------



## weleh

Thanks, that would be appreciated.
The bios you're using is from MSI right? not the beta ones?
Did you manually chage any voltage besides VDIM.


----------



## Joeking78

weleh said:


> Thanks, that would be appreciated.
> The bios you're using is from MSI right? not the beta ones?
> Did you manually chage any voltage besides VDIM.


Yep bios 7D13v11

DRAM volts 1.48v in bios but in ZenTimings shows as 1.49v
Also changed...
IOD 1.080
VDDG 0.94
VDDP 0.94
VSOC 1.1375 in bios but in ZenTimings 1.125v


----------



## weleh

Just noticed my 5800X is 2051SUS.


Joeking78 said:


> Yep bios 7D13v11
> 
> DRAM volts 1.48v in bios but in ZenTimings shows as 1.49v
> Also changed...
> IOD 1.080
> VDDG 0.94
> VDDP 0.94
> VSOC 1.1375 in bios but in ZenTimings 1.125v


Thanks.

This is WHEA free even on OCCT AVX2 Large testing? 

If it is I will be impressed really.


----------



## Joeking78

weleh said:


> Just noticed my 5800X is 2051SUS.
> 
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> This is WHEA free even on OCCT AVX2 Large testing?
> 
> If it is I will be impressed really.


I've never used OCCT...its running 25mins on SSE so far, does it switch to AVX automatically or i should run the test again choose only AVX?


----------



## weleh

Joeking78 said:


> I've never used OCCT...its running 25mins on SSE so far, does it switch to AVX automatically or i should run the test again choose only AVX?


It doesn't switch. You have to do it manually.

The reason why I'm asking this is because TM5/OCCT memtest can be free of errors and then when you hit the CPU with AVX2 Large which hammers memory controller, you start getting WHEAs. If you're stable through AVX2 Large on OCCT then hats off, you've got a golden sample memory wise.


----------



## Joeking78

Look in these reviews, every review of 5800x has 2036SUS in the image, that's what got me thinking I need to find one...took me 4 hours of visiting local shops to find 2040SUS, most of the 5800x were much later like 2050+

www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-7-5800x-zen-3-review&ved=2ahUKEwjXwoD81ebuAhXLQUEAHdPRCK8QFjAAegQIARAB&usg=AOvVaw31b339L2ZgTjm550M01-A4









AMD Ryzen 7 5800X review


The Ryzen 7 5800X impresses with its performance, but stumbles on value.




www.pcgamer.com













AMD Ryzen 7 5800X review


It's time for already our 4th ZEN3 review, yes the much anticipated Ryzen 5 5800X. This is the processor that is on the watchlist of many with 8 cores and 16 threads if offers a bit more flexibility ... Introduction




www.guru3d.com













AMD Ryzen 7 5800X review


Ryzen to the top




www.techradar.com


----------



## Joeking78

weleh said:


> It doesn't switch. You have to do it manually.
> 
> The reason why I'm asking this is because TM5/OCCT memtest can be free of errors and then when you hit the CPU with AVX2 Large which hammers memory controller, you start getting WHEAs. If you're stable through AVX2 Large on OCCT then hats off, you've got a golden sample memory wise.


Running AVX in OCCT now


----------



## mongoled

So many peeps in denial mode 😄 😄


----------



## Phynicle

Oh well it must be the silicon lottery then.
Didn't imagine going 1900 to 1933 would be an instant invisible wall regardless of what I do. 

Much of a waste for this board then


----------



## weleh

mongoled said:


> So many peeps in denial mode 😄 😄


Care to elaborate?


----------



## mongoled

Phynicle said:


> Oh well it must be the silicon lottery then.
> Didn't imagine going 1900 to 1933 would be an instant invisible wall regardless of what I do.
> 
> Much of a waste for this board then


We just have to sit tight and hope AMD want to resolve this, this is for all manufacturers X570, B550 boards....


----------



## Joeking78

Here's OCCT AVX2 Large for 10 mins so far, WHEA free, will let it run an hour.









PBO enabled, 185/125/165 power settings, 200mhz boost, x1 Scalar, Curve Optimiser below:

C0, 1, 2 -14
C3 -11
C4 -15
C5 -13
C6 -14
C7 -15

2000mhz RAM, 1:1, 1.48v 16-17-16-16-32-48


----------



## mongoled

weleh said:


> Care to elaborate?


Very simple,

those who have been monitoring this situation for a very long time have seen that the number of people who can run over FCLK 1900 stable without the use a hard to trigger obscure bug is almost zero, zilch.

I have also have WHEA free TM5 screenshot completed 25 cycles with 4066/2033, does this mean it is WHEA free, hell no, why, because it is not reproducible across multiple reboots.

Have tested 5 different 5600x CPUs and where there is a difference in what the can achieve WHEA free, as well as what FCLK ranges they can post at, the one common denominator is that almost 99% can only archive WHEA free reliable, reproducible results something between FCLK of 1866-1933.

Anything else is a rarity, not the norm, just there are many peeps not understanding this point, hence my chuckle with the "denial" joke


----------



## weleh

What is this obscure bug you talk about?

And yea, it feels like 2000 fCLK will be another 1900 fCLK fiasco from Zen 2 days.

We will see.,


----------



## Joeking78

weleh said:


> What is this obscure bug you talk about?
> 
> And yea, it feels like 2000 fCLK will be another 1900 fCLK fiasco from Zen 2 days.
> 
> We will see.,


1hr passed OCCT Large AVX2 Extreme at 2000IF, going to try 2033 now.

FYI, I've never had a WHEA on this chip (owned for a week or more now) in any scenario, any stress test, idle or full load.


----------



## weleh

Are there AGESA 1.1 bios available for this board?


----------



## weleh

Joeking78 said:


> 1hr passed OCCT Large AVX2 Extreme at 2000IF, going to try 2033 now.
> 
> FYI, I've never had a WHEA on this chip (owned for a week or more now) in any scenario, any stress test, idle or full load.
> 
> View attachment 2478605


Nice one! Out of curiosity, does Windows Event viewer show any errors?


----------



## Joeking78

weleh said:


> Nice one! Out of curiosity, does Windows Event viewer show any errors?


Nothing there apart from some recent errors whilst trying to get into Windows with 2033IF...both HWINFO and OCCT report zero WHEA at 2000IF.

In Windows now at 4066 1.51v 1.1375v SOC...going to run memtest 400% then onto OCCT.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

weleh said:


> Are there AGESA 1.1 bios available for this board?


BIOS A00 should be 1.1 but it's missing CO.


----------



## Joeking78

2033IF for 30 mins of OCCT no WHEA...2100IF I can't get to boot and tired now  Will try tomorrow...may order some new RAM this week as I'm at the limit I think, seen some C16 4400 Gskill I might buy.


----------



## weleh

ManniX-ITA said:


> BIOS A00 should be 1.1 but it's missing CO.


Are there any other bioses besides the bios on the official page?
There's only 2 bios on MSI page.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

weleh said:


> Are there any other bioses besides the bios on the official page?
> There's only 2 bios on MSI page.


There's the Beta bios page on MSI forums:






MSI Global English Forum


...




forum-en.msi.com





And those shared by Sparky:






B550 Unify-X Bios and Tools


I don't have much yet, more posts will follow. Bios A.05O: https://drive.google.com/file/d/11b96620j1yIy-8OiQXhsFW25czHiC3PI/view?usp=sharing Should allow for vdimm >2.0 and other fun. Not sure about AGESA version, will check when I can get back to my board.



community.hwbot.org


----------



## weleh

I see Sparky shared 1.1.0.0 based BIOses.
I'll test tonight, see if hardcap is present. If it's not and 1900 fCLK works fine I'll just use that until something better comes.


----------



## KedarWolf

ManniX-ITA said:


> There's the Beta bios page on MSI forums:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MSI Global English Forum
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> forum-en.msi.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And those shared by Sparky:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> B550 Unify-X Bios and Tools
> 
> 
> I don't have much yet, more posts will follow. Bios A.05O: https://drive.google.com/file/d/11b96620j1yIy-8OiQXhsFW25czHiC3PI/view?usp=sharing Should allow for vdimm >2.0 and other fun. Not sure about AGESA version, will check when I can get back to my board.
> 
> 
> 
> community.hwbot.org


This BIOS page more up to date.









[Übersicht] - Ultimative AM4 UEFI/BIOS/AGESA Übersicht


Inhaltsverzeichnis: UEFI Collection | Hersteller Support Links | UEFI Mods | Weiterführende Links Keine weiteren Updates mehr geplant! AM5 UEFI/BIOS/AGESA Übersicht ASRock ASUS Biostar Gigabyte MSI EVGA NZXT B350 B450 B550 X370 X470 X570 B350 B450 B550 X370 X470 X570 B350 B450...




www.hardwareluxx.de


----------



## YoungChris

@ManniX-ITA btw I am Sparky, for those who do not know


AMD Whea - Google Drive


I was sent a link for some more bioses, for B550/X570 Unify and X. Based on filenames, these appear to be further versions of the existing 1.2.0.0 AGESA bioses. The folder name is just "AMD Whea" so I bet it addresses that.


----------



## weleh

I'll test the Unify-X one. 

Also will test your older versions for no hardcap PBO boost override.


----------



## YoungChris

Btw, can any of you who have 5600Xs and 5800Xs post a screenshot of your ZenTimings debug info?








Here is mine.


----------



## YoungChris

I'm trying to gather more information on the supposed dual CCD 5600X and 5800X chips. Link with pictures and info for reference:

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1348662985540186113Other info that may be relevant are a picture of the heatspreader (contains batch number), maybe something else.


----------



## YoungChris

If I can find one that reports a second CCD, I intend to work with MSI to try to figure out if that second CCD is possible to unlock.
I'd also like to delid one, to confirm if the second CCD actually exists on the package, and isn't just a software misreport. Though that may prove to be a difficult task, especially without damaging the chip, I know people who have done it before. This is like, end stage data though.


----------



## Speed Potato

YoungChris said:


> Btw, can any of you who have 5600Xs and 5800Xs post a screenshot of your ZenTimings debug info?


Here is mine, still waiting on my Unify-X preorder with the "backup" mobo. In case anyone was wondering, this strix mobo is awefull for mem OC compared to the X570 Unify I had before.


----------



## YoungChris

@Speed Potato Can you post/DM a picture of your CPU heatspreader? Seems you might have a 2 CCD chip.


----------



## Speed Potato

YoungChris said:


> @Speed Potato Can you post/DM a picture of your CPU heatspreader? Seems you might have a 2 CCD chip.


According to HWInfo and Clock Tuner 2.0 I definitely have a dual CCD chip.
I dont' plan of posting my serial here but I can tell you that my chip is from week37: "BG 2037SUS"


----------



## YoungChris

Speed Potato said:


> According to HWInfo and Clock Tuner 2.0 I definitely have a dual CCD chip.
> I dont' plan of posting my serial here but I can tell you that my chip is from week37: "BG 2037SUS"


Have you tried any manual mem OC on this chip?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

YoungChris said:


> @ManniX-ITA btw I am Sparky, for those who do not know
> 
> 
> AMD Whea - Google Drive
> 
> 
> I was sent a link for some more bioses, for B550/X570 Unify and X. Based on filenames, these appear to be further versions of the existing 1.2.0.0 AGESA bioses. The folder name is just "AMD Whea" so I bet it addresses that.


I know you are Sparky 
Unfortunately no luck with this BIOS, WHEA seems to be just slightly less frequent.


----------



## Speed Potato

YoungChris said:


> @Speed Potato Can you post/DM a picture of your CPU heatspreader? Seems you might have a 2 CCD chip.


According to HWInfo and Clock Tuner 2.0 I definitely have a dual CCD chip.
I dont' plan of posting my serial here but I can tell you that my chip is from week37: "BG 2037SUS"


YoungChris said:


> Have you tried any manual mem OC on this chip?


Yes, I used to run 3766 cl14-14-14-36 using the Viper Steel 4400Mt. That was with a different mobo though. I switched mobo and using a different memory kit in the interim time. I would say that mem OC seemed somewhat sub-par compared to what I saw here.


----------



## weleh

Tried the 10T bios and can confirmt, still WHEAs above 1900 fCLK using sane voltages (below 1.2VSOC and decent VDDGs).

Tried the A.051 bios based on AGESA 1.1 and can confrim hardcap on override is gone which allows for this without CO on my 5800X.
Wanted to daily this BIOS until seomthing else comes but unfortunately, it cannot handle 1900 fCLK either.
So far, only retail bios seems stable in terms of fCLK <= 1900.

Seems like AGESA1.2 is artificially capping CPUs for whatever reason. My Silicon quality is super high and I can't take advantage of that.


----------



## Phynicle

Awesome score!
I doubt I have a good silicon with the 5900x but without taking everything apart, how do I check what my batch number is? 
I know my serial number


----------



## weleh

Phynicle said:


> Awesome score!
> I doubt I have a good silicon with the 5900x but without taking everything apart, how do I check what my batch number is?
> I know my serial number


Don't think you can, it's engraved on the IHS only.
Mine's a 2051SUS.

It's funny that my best attempt at higher fCLK came from my B450 MSI board. 1966 Stable for 1h on OCCT memtest only to fail instantly on AVX2 OCCT with WHEAs.


----------



## Joeking78

weleh said:


> Don't think you can, it's engraved on the IHS only.
> Mine's a 2051SUS.
> 
> It's funny that my best attempt at higher fCLK came from my B450 MSI board. 1966 Stable for 1h on OCCT memtest only to fail instantly on AVX2 OCCT with WHEAs.
> 
> View attachment 2478778


Do you want a 5800x 2040SUS? I know of one for sale


----------



## weleh

Joeking78 said:


> Do you want a 5800x 2040SUS? I know of one for sale


I'm fine, I got 5950X quality CCD


----------



## KedarWolf

Joeking78 said:


> Do you want a 5800x 2040SUS? I know of one for sale


My 5950x is a 2048PGS, so, 48th week of 2020, not sure what PGS means.


----------



## Joeking78

KedarWolf said:


> My 5950x is a 2048PGS, so, 48th week of 2020, not sure what PGS means.


PGT/PGS means fabricated in Penang Malaysia.

SUS/SUT means fabricated in Suzhou China.

I'm not sure what the difference in T and S in Malaysia means or S and T in China

EDIT, apparently S = Saratoga and T = Texas, where the dies are diffused.


----------



## KedarWolf

If you flashed from an older BIOS to the newest write-protected one with flashrom, open AIDA64 and run the memory and cache test and read what the BIOS version says it is there. Seems like it's not fully flashing right and it says it's the older BIOS before the flashrom one.

It says it's the newest BIOS IN the BIOS, but in AIDA64 it wasn't fixed until I never used flashrom and flashed the BIOS from within the BIOS in the BIOS Flash module.


----------



## Whatisthisfor

Would'nt i get better performance with 4 ranks rather than with 2 ranks in principle? In order to achieve this on the Unify-X, i would need dual rank dimms as far as i understand. Or, for the Unify, use 4 single rank dimms. Maybe i am wrong, but i wonder, what is the point - performance wise - to run 2 single ranked dimms on the Unify-X?


----------



## Whatisthisfor

Joeking78 said:


> Here's OCCT AVX2 Large for 10 mins so far, WHEA free, will let it run an hour.
> View attachment 2478596
> 
> 
> PBO enabled, 185/125/165 power settings, 200mhz boost, x1 Scalar, Curve Optimiser below:
> 
> C0, 1, 2 -14
> C3 -11
> C4 -15
> C5 -13
> C6 -14
> C7 -15
> 
> 2000mhz RAM, 1:1, 1.48v 16-17-16-16-32-48


Nice one! Are your 2 dimms dual or single ranked? Would you mind to share their product number?


----------



## Joeking78

Whatisthisfor said:


> Nice one! Are your 2 dimms dual or single ranked? Would you mind to share their product number?


Hi

These ones > F4-3200C14D-32GTZR-G.SKILL International Enterprise Co., Ltd.

Dual ranked


----------



## Forsaken1

4th board arrived lol.First 3 standard unify revsion 1.0.Unify X revision 2.1.Look on board for revision not cpuz.
0 Zero Zero Zero coil whine.Flawless board in early testing.
New board fun time.4800 ram.2x8gb b die.Pushing max ram mhz only.
24/7 clocks are so 1990.LOL.


----------



## Phynicle

I wonder if I can press my retailer to change my board?
I have annoying coil whine


----------



## Whatisthisfor

deleted


----------



## dr.Rafi

weleh said:


> Ignore subtimings was just testin 1:1
> 
> This passed 40min of OCCT mem test and then after this photo, it started spitting WHEAs.
> 
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/a/u2qRJHD


After 40 min can be memory temp issue.


----------



## dr.Rafi

Joeking78 said:


> Look in these reviews, every review of 5800x has 2036SUS in the image, that's what got me thinking I need to find one...took me 4 hours of visiting local shops to find 2040SUS, most of the 5800x were much later like 2050+
> 
> www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-7-5800x-zen-3-review&ved=2ahUKEwjXwoD81ebuAhXLQUEAHdPRCK8QFjAAegQIARAB&usg=AOvVaw31b339L2ZgTjm550M01-A4
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AMD Ryzen 7 5800X review
> 
> 
> The Ryzen 7 5800X impresses with its performance, but stumbles on value.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.pcgamer.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AMD Ryzen 7 5800X review
> 
> 
> It's time for already our 4th ZEN3 review, yes the much anticipated Ryzen 5 5800X. This is the processor that is on the watchlist of many with 8 cores and 16 threads if offers a bit more flexibility ... Introduction
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.guru3d.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AMD Ryzen 7 5800X review
> 
> 
> Ryzen to the top
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.techradar.com


they sold out yes 36 to 38 is the reviewers sample are the best and till week 44 is good one but then AmD start selling rubish. you have to find used or ebay with week 36.


----------



## KedarWolf

My Unify-X pre-order is now delayed again from B&H Photo, was supposed to be on Jan. 31st, then mid-February, now end of February.

Maybe that is good though and I'll get a second revision board, not the first revision.


----------



## dr.Rafi

Phynicle said:


> Oh well it must be the silicon lottery then.
> Didn't imagine going 1900 to 1933 would be an instant invisible wall regardless of what I do.
> 
> Much of a waste for this board then


Ageesa related , with early bioses and ageesa even 1866 was with whea then they fix it in latest releases.


----------



## KedarWolf

Phynicle said:


> Oh well it must be the silicon lottery then.
> Didn't imagine going 1900 to 1933 would be an instant invisible wall regardless of what I do.
> 
> Much of a waste for this board then


Try this BIOS, but never worked for me, still at 3800MHz. 






MEG B550 UNIFY-XA10T.zip







drive.google.com


----------



## dr.Rafi

Joeking78 said:


> 2033IF for 30 mins of OCCT no WHEA...2100IF I can't get to boot and tired now  Will try tomorrow...may order some new RAM this week as I'm at the limit I think, seen some C16 4400 Gskill I might buy.
> View attachment 2478614


Great result bro.


----------



## dr.Rafi

ManniX-ITA said:


> There's the Beta bios page on MSI forums:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MSI Global English Forum
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> forum-en.msi.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And those shared by Sparky:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> B550 Unify-X Bios and Tools
> 
> 
> I don't have much yet, more posts will follow. Bios A.05O: https://drive.google.com/file/d/11b96620j1yIy-8OiQXhsFW25czHiC3PI/view?usp=sharing Should allow for vdimm >2.0 and other fun. Not sure about AGESA version, will check when I can get back to my board.
> 
> 
> 
> community.hwbot.org


I tried to clone that windows image by Sparky to my drive, installed acronis and made bootable usb with acronis but I get lost and it is not working not sure what to do ?


----------



## dr.Rafi

weleh said:


> I see Sparky shared 1.1.0.0 based BIOses.
> I'll test tonight, see if hardcap is present. If it's not and 1900 fCLK works fine I'll just use that until something better comes.


Sparky bioses have whea even with 1900/3800
Edit: I meant the earlier one not the one with google drive link not tested those yet.


----------



## dr.Rafi

YoungChris said:


> If I can find one that reports a second CCD, I intend to work with MSI to try to figure out if that second CCD is possible to unlock.
> I'd also like to delid one, to confirm if the second CCD actually exists on the package, and isn't just a software misreport. Though that may prove to be a difficult task, especially without damaging the chip, I know people who have done it before. This is like, end stage data though.


You can try to push the IHS on all directions by turning the cpu 90 dgree each time slightly in each dirction so the caps stay intact.


----------



## dr.Rafi

Speed Potato said:


> Here is mine, still waiting on my Unify-X preorder with the "backup" mobo. In case anyone was wondering, this strix mobo is awefull for mem OC compared to the X570 Unify I had before.
> View attachment 2478682


If you get it unlocked to 5950x 16 cores you will be super lucky.


----------



## dr.Rafi

Forsaken1 said:


> 4th board arrived lol.First 3 standard unify revsion 1.0.Unify X revision 2.1.Look on board for revision not cpuz.
> 0 Zero Zero Zero coil whine.Flawless board in early testing.
> New board fun time.4800 ram.2x8gb b die.Pushing max ram mhz only.
> 24/7 clocks are so 1990.LOL.
> 
> View attachment 2479021


Where is written on board?can't find it


----------



## Forsaken1

dr.Rafi said:


> Where is written on board?can't find it


Revision is located below PCIE1 slot.Not sure if 2.1 is new.Only noted others saying boards are 2.0.Board shipped with current bios.All other boards received where on launch bios.

Boards finally hit the states.Boards for sale at MSI USA store for a week or so.Good prices also.


----------



## MyUsername

Forsaken1 said:


> 4th board arrived lol.First 3 standard unify revsion 1.0.Unify X revision 2.1.Look on board for revision not cpuz.
> 0 Zero Zero Zero coil whine.Flawless board in early testing.
> New board fun time.4800 ram.2x8gb b die.Pushing max ram mhz only.
> 24/7 clocks are so 1990.LOL.


That's interesting, I have rev 2.1 and thought that may have been the first revision as I've had mine a month now. I've encountered coil whine once while moving the mouse in Windows setup, it was a constant coil whine, rebooted and I haven't heard it since. I get a little coil whine chirp while doing memory tests too. But same here, flawless board and I really want to try a 5950x on it.

What voltage do you need for 4800? I get nervous above 1.6volts with my 2x8 b-dies, but still fun to try.


----------



## Joeking78

MyUsername said:


> That's interesting, I have rev 2.1 and thought that may have been the first revision as I've had mine a month now. I've encountered coil whine once while moving the mouse in Windows setup, it was a constant coil whine, rebooted and I haven't heard it since. I get a little coil whine chirp while doing memory tests too. But same here, flawless board and I really want to try a 5950x on it.
> 
> What voltage do you need for 4800? I get nervous above 1.6volts with my 2x8 b-dies, but still fun to try.


Same here with my board, not sure which revision, I only get coil whine and just a little chirp when running Aida64.


----------



## weleh

I haven't checked my revision but I only have coil whine during specific testing, daily usage I can't hear anything.


----------



## Spectre73

I hate these revision things, got already burned by the Aorus Master rev thingie. That's the early adopter problem, I suppose.


----------



## Forsaken1

MyUsername said:


> That's interesting, I have rev 2.1 and thought that may have been the first revision as I've had mine a month now. I've encountered coil whine once while moving the mouse in Windows setup, it was a constant coil whine, rebooted and I haven't heard it since. I get a little coil whine chirp while doing memory tests too. But same here, flawless board and I really want to try a 5950x on it.
> 
> What voltage do you need for 4800? I get nervous above 1.6volts with my 2x8 b-dies, but still fun to try.


1.55v on ram.Did not try lower.

Confirmed as of this time.
Unify X.Two revisions in public’s hands.
2.0 & 2.1
Standard Unify.One revision.1.0


----------



## dr.Rafi

Forsaken1 said:


> 1.55v on ram.Did not try lower.
> 
> Confirmed as of this time.
> Unify X.Two revisions in public’s hands.
> 2.0 & 2.1
> Standard Unify.One revision.1.0


Confirm that, Had Unify 1.0 returned had coil whine but never bother me, returned to get Unify-x after become available locally ,this one is 2.1 no coil whine even with testing overclocking nothing ,turned all fans off and run Aida memory test and nothing, Also noticed the updated bios but I think the bios thing depend on retailer or supplier.
The main change i noticed comparing to Unify rev 1.0, is they fixed the M-flash not running sometimes and black screen with reset to fix it, also I had issue with my moniter and certain hdmi cable wont detect the display but with this new Unify-X is fixed no display detection problem anymore.


----------



## weleh

Where do you see the rev? Phyisically is there any inscription?


----------



## MageTank

KedarWolf said:


> My Unify-X pre-order is now delayed again from B&H Photo, was supposed to be on Jan. 31st, then mid-February, now end of February.
> 
> Maybe that is good though and I'll get a second revision board, not the first revision.


I ordered mine on January 22nd, just now received tracking information from FedEx saying it will arrive this Friday. Apparently B&H was ordering it directly from MSI and shipping it directly from them to their customers. Makes sense, given this coincides with MSI's stores also offering the board simultaneously in the states around the time this was sent out.

Hopefully you get an update with your tracking information soon. Can't wait to get my custom loop ready with this board and see if my DIMM's perform any better on the Unify X compared to the standard Unify.


----------



## YoungChris

Forsaken1 said:


> 1.55v on ram.Did not try lower.
> 
> Confirmed as of this time.
> Unify X.Two revisions in public’s hands.
> 2.0 & 2.1
> Standard Unify.One revision.1.0


How do I identify the revision?


----------



## Forsaken1

YoungChris said:


> How do I identify the revision?


Below PCIE1 slot.To the upper right of battery.If GPU installed may need to remove.

If a X board it will read
MS-7D13 VER 2.x


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Well the coil whine is not strictly related to the Revision and the 2.1 is not new since I got mine late December:










So if they fixed it, getting a 2.1 doesn't guarantee that you don't get coil whine at all.


----------



## MyUsername

Took me an hour and a half but here we go, nearly gave up.


----------



## dr.Rafi

ManniX-ITA said:


> Well the coil whine is not strictly related to the Revision and the 2.1 is not new since I got mine late December:
> 
> View attachment 2479111
> 
> 
> So if they fixed it, getting a 2.1 doesn't guarantee that you don't get coil whine at all.


Oh, so seams they fixed in latest batchs, sneaky MSI change things without notice as they did with MSI ventus 3080 graphic cards they changed the caps to MLCC without notice.


----------



## Forsaken1

MyUsername said:


> Took me an hour and a half but here we go, nearly gave up.
> View attachment 2479129


Not bad at all.
4600 cl18 & 4400 cl16 a option with roughly the same parameters.
5000 has eluded me so far.Will keep pushin.


----------



## MyUsername

Forsaken1 said:


> Not bad at all.
> 4600 cl18 & 4400 cl16 a option with roughly the same parameters.
> 5000 has eluded me so far.Will keep pushin.


I don't know how 5000 would be possible, I found 4666 easy, 4800 a bit tricky on my 3900x. I tried 4866 and F9 even at 1.65V

I've gone a bit silly with my dual rank cl12 1.75 volts in bios, not for daily of course.


----------



## Forsaken1

MyUsername said:


> I don't know how 5000 would be possible, I found 4666 easy, 4800 a bit tricky on my 3900x. I tried 4866 and F9 even at 1.65V
> 
> I've gone a bit silly with my dual rank cl12 1.75 volts in bios, not for daily of course.
> 
> View attachment 2479135


Now your talking.Excellent.Trying 3800/12 with no luck.Now I see why.
In windows at 4866.On the edge.


----------



## YoungChris

Finally figured out how to run 2000fclk without performance degradation, even unlinked! Was just a matter of finding the one or two vsoc settings that worked.








Brand new, barely stripped OS. Still on an older OC bios. Gotta love when training mem settings is harder than running Geek 3 lol.


----------



## KedarWolf

YoungChris said:


> Finally figured out how to run 2000fclk without performance degradation, even unlinked! Was just a matter of finding the one or two vsoc settings that worked.
> View attachment 2479151
> 
> Brand new, barely stripped OS. Still on an older OC bios. Gotta love when training mem settings is harder than running Geek 3 lol.


I wouldn't run 2.0v VDIMM though.


----------



## YoungChris

KedarWolf said:


> I wouldn't run 2.0v VDIMM though.


then don't
I've had maybe 5000 benching hours on about 13 different sets of b-die, on 3 Intel platforms and 1 AMD
nothing has degraded on any of them, of course this isn't stable for stuff like daily, but I have no fear doing this with the same hardware I daily


----------



## YoungChris

ManniX-ITA said:


> Well the coil whine is not strictly related to the Revision and the 2.1 is not new since I got mine late December:
> 
> View attachment 2479111
> 
> 
> So if they fixed it, getting a 2.1 doesn't guarantee that you don't get coil whine at all.


My Unify-X was a sample, sent to me in early November. It's also a 2.1 revision. It has coil whine during the L3$ test in Aida, in Rocket League when I uncap the framerate, and when I have it try to stream unrealistic settings in OBS through CPU Encoding. Seems volume is proportional to load? Doesn't bother me all that much though.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

YoungChris said:


> My Unify-X was a sample, sent to me in early November. It's also a 2.1 revision. It has coil whine during the L3$ test in Aida, in Rocket League when I uncap the framerate, and when I have it try to stream unrealistic settings in OBS through CPU Encoding. Seems volume is proportional to load? Doesn't bother me all that much though.


Yes it's more or less proportional to load.
Doesn't bother me much cause I normally use headphones.
But I'd like to reduce it, bothers me it could be lower


----------



## Forsaken1

Good to see fellow benchers posting results.
All the 24/7 stability posts is getting old.

Still 0 coil whine on board.


----------



## Whatisthisfor

YoungChris said:


> Finally figured out how to run 2000fclk without performance degradation, even unlinked! Was just a matter of finding the one or two vsoc settings that worked.
> View attachment 2479151
> 
> Brand new, barely stripped OS. Still on an older OC bios. Gotta love when training mem settings is harder than running Geek 3 lol.


Great numbers, Aida seems to recognize that kit as dual channel, but it seems its single rank only


----------



## YoungChris

Whatisthisfor said:


> Great numbers, Aida seems to recognize that kit as dual channel, but it seems its single rank only


It is single rank only, unlinked memory scores significantly worse in Aida. Both in bandwidth and latency. Not really sure why.


----------



## KedarWolf

Forsaken1 said:


> Oh Kendra.
> 
> Your actions for over a year in x570 unify thread where turd like and the diarrhea continues in this thread.
> 
> There are many different disciplines in overclocking.Your idea overclocking may not be the same as others.There’s also progression of a overclock.
> 
> Sit back.Read all you can.Your currently ignorant on above 4000 memory overclocking.Close your mouth until then.Do not care about what your current board can do.Mostly the B550 unify should be talked about in this thread.Hence the title.
> 
> Keep pushin


I'm pretty sure @Forsaken1 and @Cidious are the same people. Joined around the same time. Similiar number of posts, and they both like flaming me and calling me vile names and stuff.

If you guys don't like what I post, feel free to use the ignore function on overclock.net.

And I've already ordered the Unify-X on Jan. 15th, so I do just fine commenting here until I get it. Just waiting for B&H Photo to actually ship it is all.

Oh, and I'm going to take my own advice, ignoring you both.


----------



## dr.Rafi

MyUsername said:


> I don't know how 5000 would be possible, I found 4666 easy, 4800 a bit tricky on my 3900x. I tried 4866 and F9 even at 1.65V
> 
> I've gone a bit silly with my dual rank cl12 1.75 volts in bios, not for daily of course.
> 
> View attachment 2479135


Love it , Buildzoid went 2.0 volt on Air to push to nearly 6000, you can try if you want to get rid of uneeded kit laying around


----------



## dr.Rafi

YoungChris said:


> Finally figured out how to run 2000fclk without performance degradation, even unlinked! Was just a matter of finding the one or two vsoc settings that worked.
> View attachment 2479151
> 
> Brand new, barely stripped OS. Still on an older OC bios. Gotta love when training mem settings is harder than running Geek 3 lol.


Managed 2000 1:1 with no degradation on U-X , and 4133/ 2066 with slight degradation, vsoc 1.21 , Vddgiod 1.125 sweet spot, tested 1.13 and 1.12 performance declined, but noticed sweet spot for vddp and Vddgccd is very sensitive on that speed, sweet spot was 0.980 for ccd and 0.880 for vddp even using 20 milli volt extre got insane latency penalty of 50 ns on memory test aida ,dual rank memory.


----------



## YoungChris

dr.Rafi said:


> Managed 2000 1:1 with no degradation on U-X , and 4133/ 2066 with slight degradation, vsoc 1.21 , Vddgiod 1.125 sweet spot, tested 1.13 and 1.12 performance declined, but noticed sweet spot for vddp and Vddgccd is very sensitive on that speed, sweet spot was 0.980 for ccd and 0.880 for vddp even using 20 milli volt extre got insane latency penalty of 50 ns on memory test aida ,dual rank memory.


You should make yourself a bench os and get to posting scores! I'd like to see where you can push dual rank


----------



## gymleader91

One interesting thing while reading this thread is the lack of discussion on usb disconnects, in a good way ofcourse. It seems like every b550/x570 has the "pcie4 issue" but I don't read anything about it on these boards? This is a big plus in my eyes.


----------



## Speed Potato

gymleader91 said:


> One interesting thing while reading this thread is the lack of discussion on usb disconnects, in a good way ofcourse. It seems like every b550/x570 has the "pcie4 issue" but I don't read anything about it on these boards? This is a big plus in my eyes.


Some people on reddit have solved the usb problem by uninstalling usb devices, like all root usb hubs. It might be a driver problem, who knows.


----------



## dr.Rafi

YoungChris said:


> You should make yourself a bench os and get to posting scores! I'd like to see where you can push dual rank


Coming soonand it is 5950x not 5800x with 1ccd is easier to get better scores with one ccd.


----------



## dr.Rafi

YoungChris said:


> You should make yourself a bench os and get to posting scores! I'd like to see where you can push dual rank


Dual rank same bios you used 2000/4000








Dual rank 2066/4133 perfornace slowing on latency but gaining in read & copy.








Single Rank single CCD 2000/4000


----------



## mongoled

KedarWolf said:


> I'm pretty sure @Forsaken1 and @Cidious are the same people. Joined around the same time. Similiar number of posts, and they both like flaming me and calling me vile names and stuff.
> 
> If you guys don't like what I post, feel free to use the ignore function on overclock.net.
> 
> And I've already ordered the Unify-X on Jan. 15th, so I do just fine commenting here until I get it. Just waiting for B&H Photo to actually ship it is all.
> 
> Oh, and I'm going to take my own advice, ignoring you both.


Ive not seen anybody call you "vile" names or flaming you. Some negative comments towards you is not "flaming", its par for the course, just like everything else in life.

Thats unless your one of those people who cant take critisism, be it correct or incorrect.

Maybe you should look to see why the manner of your posts irks some people and do your best to undersand why by looking at the situation from outside of your own "eyes".

My one experience with you through PM tells me its your inability to accept criticism be it constructive or not.

Oh and your comment about not being able to afford to replace something if you break it, do you really mean that ??

In my books if you can afford to buy a GTX 3090, then you have more than enough disposable income to replace something that may get broken !

And not to be totally negative towards you, alot of the things you post here is useful to many people, but its perfectly normal that not everyone will like you !

So all in all, you can decide to take on board the critisism and use to become a better person, or you can continue to exist in your "hole" by threatening to "block/ignore" people.

Im sure you are a great fan of Dr Jordan Peterson


----------



## KedarWolf

I made a benching Windows 10 O/S install ISO with everything not needed from it stripped using a PowerShell tool, including printing not working (be warned), network still enabled though.

As well, I have a backup of my Autorun settings with all unnecessary services disabled and any other thing that may run on boot and slow things. You can load it in Autoruns, compare and disable the same things.

I could use a script to disable at least the services on a clean install but that's so much work and Autoruns is much easier.

What I did is backup my current Windows with the awesome Macrium Reflect Free, swear by that program, just need to make a boot USB with it. Then I installed the benching O/S, ran Autoruns, installed chipset drivers, disabled all the crap, and backed it up as well.

Now I can switch back and forth whenever I want.

If anyone wants to try it, let me know. Can upload everything to a superfast file share for you peeps.

I got just under 12400 with Cinebench R20 on that O/S with a static CCX overclock.

Going to bed now. Will get back to you all tomorrow after work if anyone wants it.


----------



## dr.Rafi

KedarWolf said:


> I made a benching Windows 10 O/S install ISO with everything not needed from it stripped using a PowerShell tool, including printing not working (be warned), network still enabled though.
> 
> As well, I have a backup of my Autorun settings with all unnecessary services disabled and any other thing that may run on boot and slow things. You can load it in Autoruns, compare and disable the same things.
> 
> I could use a script to disable at least the services on a clean install but that's so much work and Autoruns is much easier.
> 
> What I did is backup my current Windows with the awesome Macrium Reflect Free, swear by that program, just need to make a boot USB with it. Then I installed the benching O/S, ran Autoruns, installed chipset drivers, disabled all the crap, and backed it up as well.
> 
> Now I can switch back and forth whenever I want.
> 
> If anyone wants to try it, let me know. Can upload everything to a superfast file share for you peeps.
> 
> I got just under 12400 with Cinebench R20 on that O/S with a static CCX overclock.
> 
> Going to bed now. Will get back to you all tomorrow after work if anyone wants it.


Please share i love to try.


----------



## MyUsername

dr.Rafi said:


> Love it , Buildzoid went 2.0 volt on Air to push to nearly 6000, you can try if you want to get rid of uneeded kit laying around


He did use Micron's though and outside in minus ambient temps lol. Perhaps next time Igo to Scotland during winter I'll take my rig and some crucial ballistix's 5100 @ £900 a kit 😳


----------



## Forsaken1

MyUsername said:


> He did use Micron's though and outside in minus ambient temps lol. Perhaps next time Igo to Scotland during winter I'll take my rig and some crucial ballistix's 5100 @ £900 a kit 😳


Thinking similar thoughts.Ryzen G processor
N die plus cold could be fun.Only $740 US which is pocket change.Until then mostly interest in b die results.Thinning the ddr4 herd as prices are good and the end may be near.

Cannot get back into windows above 4800 with b die.4600 cl16-18is showing decent results.
Very Similar to 4800.


----------



## Forsaken1

YoungChris said:


> Finally figured out how to run 2000fclk without performance degradation, even unlinked! Was just a matter of finding the one or two vsoc settings that worked.
> View attachment 2479151
> 
> Brand new, barely stripped OS. Still on an older OC bios. Gotta love when training mem settings is harder than running Geek 3 lol.


Great pushin.Never fail to impress.


----------



## YoungChris

the system is rigged








no 11k gb3 me score for me yet sadge


----------



## weleh

No maxmem, daily OS.






Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MS-7D13 - Geekbench Browser


Benchmark results for a Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MS-7D13 with an AMD Ryzen 7 5800X processor.



browser.geekbench.com


----------



## weleh

10.6K






Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MS-7D13 - Geekbench Browser


Benchmark results for a Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MS-7D13 with an AMD Ryzen 7 5800X processor.



browser.geekbench.com


----------



## dr.Rafi

Speed Potato said:


> Some people on reddit have solved the usb problem by uninstalling usb devices, like all root usb hubs. It might be a driver problem, who knows.


to my knowledge,Cpu directly connected Usb only had issues can be solved by increasing Soc/Vddgiod voltages or disable global c-state, it is 5000 series related but not on every motherboard, unlucky cpu with unlucky motherboard cause the issue but personaly I never have this issues tested so far with extended usage on each on defult and overclocked, Aorusmaster x570 rev1.2, Asus itx strix x570, unify b550, unify-x b550 and aorus extreme x570 never encounter any issues with any beta or final bioses, testing one 5900x and 3 5950x on them. 
worth to mention too never had issue with dead fclk straps(not booting on certain fclk), pci e4 no issues, only issue I encounter when push fclk too high with not enough vddgiod is audio sound distortion but fixed with adjusting the iod voltage.


----------



## Forsaken1

MyUsername said:


> I don't know how 5000 would be possible, I found 4666 easy, 4800 a bit tricky on my 3900x. I tried 4866 and F9 even at 1.65V
> 
> I've gone a bit silly with my dual rank cl12 1.75 volts in bios, not for daily of course.
> 
> View attachment 2479135


Thanks for a couple of hours fun.
I tip my hat to you.
Now its time for a drink.Probably should of had a few before attempting. 🍻


----------



## YoungChris

MyUsername said:


> I don't know how 5000 would be possible, I found 4666 easy, 4800 a bit tricky on my 3900x. I tried 4866 and F9 even at 1.65V
> 
> I've gone a bit silly with my dual rank cl12 1.75 volts in bios, not for daily of course.
> 
> View attachment 2479135


3800 c12 with tRCDRD 12 or 11 and tRP 10 or 9 should be possible. SCLs at 2 shouldn't be an issue, also GDM Disabled shouldn't either. tRAS/tRC 21/29 and much lower tRFC should be good to go. Couple other subs could probably go lower as well.
If you feel adventurous, you could set a decent maxmem, crank vdimm, and go for cl11


----------



## MyUsername

YoungChris said:


> 3800 c12 with tRCDRD 12 or 11 and tRP 10 or 9 should be possible. SCLs at 2 shouldn't be an issue, also GDM Disabled shouldn't either. tRAS/tRC 21/29 and much lower tRFC should be good to go. Couple other subs could probably go lower as well.
> If you feel adventurous, you could set a decent maxmem, crank vdimm, and go for cl11


I should have and we know it can. I was just shocked dual rank could do cl12 3800 as I don't see many cl12 3800 so I thought it was impossible or very hard, it certainly was on the GB Master ver 1.0, this board set timings chuck volts at it and it works, love it.

And er, I'll leave the adventuring to you as people like you put 2 volts in your memory, you're a madman. I was crapping it at 1.75V just doing AIDA


----------



## dr.Rafi

MyUsername said:


> I should have and we know it can. I was just shocked dual rank could do cl12 3800 as I don't see many cl12 3800 so I thought it was impossible or very hard, it certainly was on the GB Master ver 1.0, this board set timings chuck volts at it and it works, love it.
> 
> And er, I'll leave the adventuring to you as people like you put 2 volts in your memory, you're a madman. I was crapping it at 1.75V just doing AIDA


I will give it try, not sure though if 2volts with ambient wont kill it imeadiatly?


----------



## Forsaken1

The juice was worth the squeeze.Ive seen every possible display code possible with this one.








Set cl11 in bios with settings above.Reports cl12 in software?


----------



## YoungChris

Forsaken1 said:


> The juice was worth the squeeze.Ive seen every possible display code possible with this one.
> View attachment 2479450
> 
> Set cl11 in bios with settings above.Reports cl12 in software?


GDM On will not allow odd tCL


----------



## YoungChris

dr.Rafi said:


> I will give it try, not sure though if 2volts with ambient wont kill it imeadiatly?


even on 40°C+ ambient, running Geekbench 3 on loop, 2vdimm should not even degrade B-die


----------



## KedarWolf

dr.Rafi said:


> Please share i love to try.


Sorry, the Autoruns file is wrong, but I need to go to bed. Will fix everything later today.


----------



## MyUsername

This is the best I can do with single rank, if I squeeze any tighter something will pop 😁
Aida read 59558 write 59736, latency 63.1


----------



## weleh

Does anyone have all the BIOS versions that were available for this board?

Trying to find an AGESA 1.1 based version with CO and stable1900 fCLK.


----------



## MyUsername

weleh said:


> Does anyone have all the BIOS versions that were available for this board?
> 
> Trying to find an AGESA 1.1 based version with CO and stable1900 fCLK.


Unify


https://download.msi.com/bos_exe/mb/7D13v10.zip


7D13v11 bios AGESA 1.2.0.0


https://download.msi.com/bos_exe/mb/7D13v11.zip




https://download.msi.com/bos_exe/mb/7D13v112.zip




https://download.msi.com/bos_exe/mb/7D13v113.zip



Unify-X
https://download.msi.com/bos_exe/mb/7D13vA0.zip7D13vA1 bios AGESA 1.2.0.0 https://download.msi.com/bos_exe/mb/7D13vA1.ziphttps://download.msi.com/bos_exe/mb/7D13vA04.ziphttps://download.msi.com/bos_exe/mb/7D13vA12.ziphttps://download.msi.com/bos_exe/mb/7D13vA13.zip


----------



## Speed Potato

AMD Ryzen™ Master Utility for Overclocking Control | AMD
Dual-CCD 5600X and 5800X are now supported it would seems. I can confirm my dual CCD 5600X now show it's best cores.
Release notes: AMD Ryzen™ Master Release Notes (2.6.1.1797) | AMD


----------



## Forsaken1

What a b it c h.On the edge with a ram oc.Cleared cmos.All saved profiles gone.
Difficult to break 50ns in aidia memory on dual ccd.Pretty easy on my 5800x.PB with 5900x 50.3ns


----------



## Joeking78

Speed Potato said:


> AMD Ryzen™ Master Utility for Overclocking Control | AMD
> Dual-CCD 5600X and 5800X are now supported it would seems. I can confirm my dual CCD 5600X now show it's best cores.
> Release notes: AMD Ryzen™ Master Release Notes (2.6.1.1797) | AMD


Finally, thank you


----------



## KedarWolf

dr.Rafi said:


> Please share i love to try.


Added Win10ISO only links, Benching O/S only and a file with everything in it.

Link to stripped benching O/S. Testing as working today. Windows install ISO you need to set up with Autoruns and an already set up preconfigured Macrium image, no Autoruns, nothing needed, install the image, run Benchmate, select benchmark. Macrium Free, RUFUS and Autoruns included. Tested as working with no sound, no printing, all unneeded services disabled etc. Has Internet access though.

*Read the InstructionsREADME!!!!!.txt included in the zip!!*

Oh, and if you need to install MSI Afterburner and I think I might have missed video card drivers, Run the included Autoruns64.exe as Admin, uncheck all the Hide options in Options, go to Services, enable TrustedInstaller, reboot, install Afterburner and/or your GPU drivers.






Benching - Google Drive







drive.google.com





See attached .txt file for what is removed from Windows.


----------



## dr.Rafi

MyUsername said:


> Unify
> 
> 
> https://download.msi.com/bos_exe/mb/7D13v10.zip
> 
> 
> 7D13v11 bios AGESA 1.2.0.0
> 
> 
> https://download.msi.com/bos_exe/mb/7D13v11.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://download.msi.com/bos_exe/mb/7D13v112.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://download.msi.com/bos_exe/mb/7D13v113.zip
> 
> 
> 
> Unify-X
> https://download.msi.com/bos_exe/mb/7D13vA0.zip7D13vA1 bios AGESA 1.2.0.0 https://download.msi.com/bos_exe/mb/7D13vA1.ziphttps://download.msi.com/bos_exe/mb/7D13vA04.ziphttps://download.msi.com/bos_exe/mb/7D13vA12.ziphttps://download.msi.com/bos_exe/mb/7D13vA13.zip


Never seen that A04 for unify-x !!?


----------



## dr.Rafi

Forsaken1 said:


> What a b it c h.On the edge with a ram oc.Cleared cmos.All saved profiles gone.
> Difficult to break 50ns in aidia memory on dual ccd.Pretty easy on my 5800x.PB with 5900x 50.3ns


Pressing clear CMos many times on Msi delete the saved profiles you have to save them in usb,or press only one time clear cmos.


----------



## dr.Rafi

KedarWolf said:


> Link to stripped benching O/S. Testing as working today. Windows install ISO you need to set up with Autoruns and an already set up preconfigured Macrium image, no Autoruns, nothing needed, install the image, run Benchmate, select benchmark. Macrium Free, RUFUS and Autoruns included. Tested as working with no sound, no printing, all unneeded services disabled etc. Has Internet access though.
> 
> *Read the InstructionsREADME!!!!!.txt included in the zip!!*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Share Anything with pCloud
> 
> 
> With pCloud's unique Download Link feature you can share files with everyone. Click to download. Join pCloud.com and get up to 20GB FREE cloud storage.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> u.pcloud.link
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> See attached .txt file for what is removed from Windows.


Thank you


----------



## YoungChris

Boom goes the dynamite.















11k in Geekbench 3 memory score, both for single and frequency-capped multi core. Also, 7.8k in single core overall score. Not bad for some static cpu, single rank, and a Scythe Fuma 2.


----------



## KedarWolf

YoungChris said:


> Boom goes the dynamite.
> View attachment 2479605
> View attachment 2479606
> 
> 11k in Geekbench 3 memory score, both for single and frequency-capped multi core. Also, 7.8k in single core overall score. Not bad for some static cpu, single rank, and a Scythe Fuma 2.


This is me at my 24/7 overclock completely WHEA free and TM5 6+ hours stable.


----------



## KedarWolf

MyUsername said:


> Unify
> 
> 
> https://download.msi.com/bos_exe/mb/7D13v10.zip
> 
> 
> 7D13v11 bios AGESA 1.2.0.0
> 
> 
> https://download.msi.com/bos_exe/mb/7D13v11.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://download.msi.com/bos_exe/mb/7D13v112.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://download.msi.com/bos_exe/mb/7D13v113.zip
> 
> 
> 
> Unify-X
> https://download.msi.com/bos_exe/mb/7D13vA0.zip7D13vA1 bios AGESA 1.2.0.0 https://download.msi.com/bos_exe/mb/7D13vA1.ziphttps://download.msi.com/bos_exe/mb/7D13vA04.ziphttps://download.msi.com/bos_exe/mb/7D13vA12.ziphttps://download.msi.com/bos_exe/mb/7D13vA13.zip


What about the X570 Godlike BIOS? I have the E7C34AMS.1C8T but is there more?

My Unify-X is on hold until at least until the start of March. 

Edit: I tried https://download.msi.com/bos_exe/mb/7C34v1C8.zip but nada.


----------



## Forsaken1

KedarWolf said:


> My Unify-X is on hold until at least until the start of March.


What a GD shame.

Anyone playing in HWBOT
*Challenger 2021 Div II round 1 XXXXXXXX*


----------



## aussie7

without reading through the whole thread, has anyone got 2000IF stable on this board ?
TIA


----------



## Joeking78

aussie7 said:


> without reading through the whole thread, has anyone got 2000IF stable on this board ?
> TIA


Yep, 2000 and 2066 stable.

1900 won't boot though and still slowly working on 2100+


----------



## aussie7

Joeking78 said:


> Yep, 2000 and 2066 stable.


Awesome, well done 
got a zentimings screen shot ? (never mind I found your screen shot post)


----------



## MyUsername

KedarWolf said:


> My Unify-X is on hold until at least until the start of March.


That's crazy, cclonline.com where I got mine still have them in stock in the UK, but I'm still waiting for my 5950x from DinoPc. It's been three months now since I placed my order absolutely none in the UK at any cost, just ridiculous and frustrating.


----------



## Speed Potato

KedarWolf said:


> My Unify-X is on hold until at least until the start of March.


I sent you a PM yesterday about the fact that the UNIFY-X is availlable/in stock on Newegg.ca

Shipped and sold by Newegg. I bought one, shipping estimate was next week.


----------



## YoungChris

KedarWolf said:


> This is me at my 24/7 overclock completely WHEA free and TM5 6+ hours stable.
> 
> View attachment 2479607
> 
> 
> View attachment 2479608


Do you have Geekbench 3 for Steam? Shoot jfpoole an email and he can get you a replacement key.


----------



## YoungChris

aussie7 said:


> without reading through the whole thread, has anyone got 2000IF stable on this board ?
> TIA


I think I might have it, need to try more daily OC.


----------



## Manuru

Why does Unify-X apply DRAM voltage higher than set in BIOS?
1.5 in BIOS -> 1.52 real voltage.
1.48 in BIOS -> 1.5 real voltage.


----------



## Joeking78

Manuru said:


> Why does Unify-X apply DRAM voltage higher than set in BIOS?
> 1.5 in BIOS -> 1.52 real voltage.
> 1.48 in BIOS -> 1.5 real voltage.


Same in unify but by 0.01

1.48 = 1.49
1.5 = 1.51


----------



## MyUsername

Manuru said:


> Why does Unify-X apply DRAM voltage higher than set in BIOS?
> 1.5 in BIOS -> 1.52 real voltage.
> 1.48 in BIOS -> 1.5 real voltage.





Joeking78 said:


> Same in unify but by 0.01
> 
> 1.48 = 1.49
> 1.5 = 1.51


Sensors are being misread by some software, surprised RM is too. Go by whatever value DDR voltage is being read in the bios or by hwinfo. I don't think vdimm is being increased but there's no measuring points so can't check which is stupid for an OCers board.


----------



## Forsaken1

Efficiency appears poor with some benchmarks unify x.A10 bios.
Cpu test it holds it own.
Noticed in 7-Zip & PYPrime.


----------



## Serchio

Hi guys!

I'm going to buy Unify-X within a few days. Currently running 3900X on CH6 but I want to switch to Unify-X with 5900X. I have some issue deciding what RAM should I buy cause it is super hard to get any decent 2x16 b-die right now. What would you recommend from the following list:

F4-4000C16D-32GVK (370e)
F4-3600C14D-32GVK (425e)
F4-3600C14D-32GTRS (462e)
F4-4000C16D-32GTZR (521e)

Up to this date I always preferred Trident variant rather than Ripjaws but prices are crazy right now. I really wanted to get F4-3800C14D-32GTZN or F4-4266C17D-32GTZRB but can't find these anywhere in stock...


----------



## KedarWolf

Speed Potato said:


> I sent you a PM yesterday about the fact that the UNIFY-X is availlable/in stock on Newegg.ca
> 
> Shipped and sold by Newegg. I bought one, shipping estimate was next week.


Yeah, saw your PM. Thank you.

But I'm just going to wait for B&H Photo to ship. It would take several days to get a refund, and they say by the end of Feb.


----------



## KedarWolf

YoungChris said:


> Do you have Geekbench 3 for Steam? Shoot jfpoole an email and he can get you a replacement key.


TY!!


----------



## dr.Rafi

MyUsername said:


> Sensors are being misread by some software, surprised RM is too. Go by whatever value DDR voltage is being read in the bios or by hwinfo. I don't think vdimm is being increased but there's no measuring points so can't check which is stupid for an OCers board.


You can try the memory vrm mosfet out reading.


----------



## Phynicle

Serchio said:


> Hi guys!
> 
> I'm going to buy Unify-X within a few days. Currently running 3900X on CH6 but I want to switch to Unify-X with 5900X. I have some issue deciding what RAM should I buy cause it is super hard to get any decent 2x16 b-die right now. What would you recommend from the following list:
> 
> F4-4000C16D-32GVK (370e)
> F4-3600C14D-32GVK (425e)
> F4-3600C14D-32GTRS (462e)
> F4-4000C16D-32GTZR (521e)
> 
> Up to this date I always preferred Trident variant rather than Ripjaws but prices are crazy right now. I really wanted to get F4-3800C14D-32GTZN or F4-4266C17D-32GTZRB but can't find these anywhere in stock...


I got the 4266 kit, nothing wrong with them, it's the 5900x I have. Had I known I would've tried to search for a better batch. The imc is just limiting, any setting above 1933 and it won't boot and I need to clear cmos again. Makes getting this board redundant,could've got anything and still get to the 1900 if at the same setting no issue.


----------



## Manuru

Joeking78 said:


> Same in unify but by 0.01
> 
> 1.48 = 1.49
> 1.5 = 1.51





MyUsername said:


> Sensors are being misread by some software, surprised RM is too. Go by whatever value DDR voltage is being read in the bios or by hwinfo. I don't think vdimm is being increased but there's no measuring points so can't check which is stupid for an OCers board.


My RAM overclock is stable only on 1.5V (read as 1.51-1.52 in BIOS). That's also an XMP voltage for my kit.
But I am a little afraid to run it 24/7 since Samsung B-Die datasheet specifies 1.5V as an absolute maximum. RAM just can degrade over time if the voltage is really above 1.5V


----------



## weleh

Manuru said:


> My RAM overclock is stable only on 1.5V (read as 1.51-1.52 in BIOS). That's also an XMP voltage for my kit.
> But I am a little afraid to run it 24/7 since Samsung B-Die datasheet specifies 1.5V as an absolute maximum. RAM just can degrade over time if the voltage is really above 1.5V


I have dailied my bdie kit at 1.6V for over a year on my old Zen 2 system and have had 0 signs of degradation on the CPU/RAM side.
Using the same kit now on my 5800X and still no issues whatsoever.


----------



## RemoteSpecialist

Hello guys! It's a pretty long thread here.
Can you tell me - is MSI B550 Unify\Unify X worth it in comparison to MSI B550 Carbon\Asus Strix B550-E?
What are the best memory kits for this motherboard and 5950x\5900x? 

Thx!


----------



## weleh

There's no reason to get this board at 300€ over a 150€ board unless you want to do XOC RAM OC. 
The best kits are arguable, for synced performance bdie is king due to how tight it can go, for XOC RAM OC, Rev E or something is much better.

3200 flat 14s, 3600 flat 16's are good cheap bdie bins for 16GB and 3200 flat 14's decent for 32GB too.


----------



## MyUsername

Manuru said:


> My RAM overclock is stable only on 1.5V (read as 1.51-1.52 in BIOS). That's also an XMP voltage for my kit.
> But I am a little afraid to run it 24/7 since Samsung B-Die datasheet specifies 1.5V as an absolute maximum. RAM just can degrade over time if the voltage is really above 1.5V


If it was or not I really wouldn't worry about it, it's 0.02v, if it was 0.1v then yeah I would get concerned. I'm leaning on hwinfo being accurate as it fluctuates, aida, cpuid hwmonitor also report the same. Just have a Google and see how many people have actually degraded b-die and there's none. Just get your memory stable, keep an eye on the temps, crack on and enjoy and stop giving yourself anxiety it's perfectly safe


----------



## Joeking78

RemoteSpecialist said:


> Hello guys! It's a pretty long thread here.
> Can you tell me - is MSI B550 Unify\Unify X worth it in comparison to MSI B550 Carbon\Asus Strix B550-E?
> What are the best memory kits for this motherboard and 5950x\5900x?
> 
> Thx!


Unify is nice if you want debug led, codes, cmos reset button, excellent overclocking ability, not sure if the other motherboard have these.

I went from a Gigabyte Aorus B550 Pro and the difference was noticeable, I could clock my memory higher and more stable.

The board is buggy imo, sometimes won't boot properly, gets into a loop and only starts to windows after pressing on button multiple times, even with no overclock. PBO settings don't save to bios profiles for some reason. It shows pbo settings in two different places in the bios, one place with only 6 cores when I have 8.

I have gskill 3200 c14 2x16gb kit that easily overclocks to 4000 and 4066 c16 with 1.48 to 1.5v


----------



## RemoteSpecialist

Joeking78 said:


> I went from a Gigabyte Aorus B550 Pro and the difference was noticeable, I could clock my memory higher and more stable.


Thx for the answer. 
Can you tell what was stable numbers for memory with Gigabyte Aorus B550 Pro in comparison to 4000c16 with Unify?
Are you able to run the IF on 2000 with Unify board? Did you run some benchmarks (synthetic\games) - is there some noticeable advantage after switching to Unify?


----------



## Joeking78

RemoteSpecialist said:


> Thx for the answer.
> Can you tell what was stable numbers for memory with Gigabyte Aorus B550 Pro in comparison to 4000c16 with Unify?
> Are you able to run the IF on 2000 with Unify board? Did you run some benchmarks (synthetic\games) - is there some noticeable advantage after switching to Unify?


If I remember correctly 3733 C14 was the highest I got on the Aorus. 4000mhz was not possible but it may be that I just learned some tricks or things about other voltage tweaking since I got the unify and joined this thread.

I can get 2000 and 2033 IF stable and WHEA free.

1900IF won't boot at all on my 5800x and exactly the same on my 5900x on the unify also so appears to be a board limitation for me at least.

I don't have any benchmarks from Aorus, I kept it for 5 days and sold it after getting frustrated with the memory overclocking; the guy I bought the ram from used it in a x570 unify and was able to get 4000mhz...couldn't reach that with Aorus.


----------



## Forsaken1

Never been this low on _tRFC_ .A joy to oc memory on this board.What is it indicating when tRFC is being lowered but no gains in performance?
Static OC competition on HWBOT.Most likely not a chance of catching intel system.PB at 3800/1900.


----------



## RemoteSpecialist

Guys, I'm still considering this board for buying - What can you tell as the owners - are there any known issues? Stability, USB, Random reboots, Long booting time, Network, M2 speed, Sound, Noise, Bios - does everything work fine?
And one more question - any other good alternative for this board? Asus B550-XE\Gygabyte B550 Master\Asrock B550 Taichi - smth else?


----------



## Forsaken1

RemoteSpecialist said:


> Guys, I'm still considering this board for buying - What can you tell as the owners - are there any known issues? Stability, USB, Random reboots, Long booting time, Network, M2 speed, Sound, Noise, Bios - does everything work fine?
> And one more question - any other good alternative for this board? Asus B550-XE\Gygabyte B550 Master\Asrock B550 Taichi - smth else?


First thing i noticed was weight of board.Hefty.Second was onboard audio is superb.Head phones.
If you get a good board smooth sailing.All boards boot slow to me.


----------



## Hale59

KedarWolf said:


> Link to stripped benching O/S. Testing as working today. Windows install ISO you need to set up with Autoruns and an already set up preconfigured Macrium image, no Autoruns, nothing needed, install the image, run Benchmate, select benchmark. Macrium Free, RUFUS and Autoruns included. Tested as working with no sound, no printing, all unneeded services disabled etc. Has Internet access though.
> 
> *Read the InstructionsREADME!!!!!.txt included in the zip!!*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Share Anything with pCloud
> 
> 
> With pCloud's unique Download Link feature you can share files with everyone. Click to download. Join pCloud.com and get up to 20GB FREE cloud storage.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> u.pcloud.link
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> See attached .txt file for what is removed from Windows.


I was waiting for this. 
Bench.zip - (10.6 GB)?? Why so huge?

I have been using Windows 10 Debloater 








GitHub - Sycnex/Windows10Debloater: Script to remove Windows 10 bloatware.


Script to remove Windows 10 bloatware. Contribute to Sycnex/Windows10Debloater development by creating an account on GitHub.




github.com





And a video to explain how its done





But I have to try your offering.
Thanks


----------



## KedarWolf

Hale59 said:


> I was waiting for this.
> Bench.zip - (10.6 GB)?? Why so huge?
> 
> I have been using Windows 10 Debloater
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> GitHub - Sycnex/Windows10Debloater: Script to remove Windows 10 bloatware.
> 
> 
> Script to remove Windows 10 bloatware. Contribute to Sycnex/Windows10Debloater development by creating an account on GitHub.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> github.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And a video to explain how its done
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But I have to try your offering.
> Thanks


Because it has a 3GB Windows install ISO AND a fully configured backed up Macrium Reflect Windows image in the zip file.

Did you even read the description I included in the post?

Edit: And I use this. 









Optimize-Offline Guide - Windows Debloating Tool, Windows 1803, 1903, 19H2, 1909, 20H1 and LTSC 2019


All credit goes to GodHand and who wrote and maintains this script. And to @gdeliana who created the fork of Godhand' s Script we are using for...




forums.mydigitallife.net


----------



## KedarWolf

KedarWolf said:


> Link to stripped benching O/S. Testing as working today. Windows install ISO you need to set up with Autoruns and an already set up preconfigured Macrium image, no Autoruns, nothing needed, install the image, run Benchmate, select benchmark. Macrium Free, RUFUS and Autoruns included. Tested as working with no sound, no printing, all unneeded services disabled etc. Has Internet access though.
> 
> *Read the InstructionsREADME!!!!!.txt included in the zip!!*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Share Anything with pCloud
> 
> 
> With pCloud's unique Download Link feature you can share files with everyone. Click to download. Join pCloud.com and get up to 20GB FREE cloud storage.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> u.pcloud.link
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> See attached .txt file for what is removed from Windows.


Oh, and if you need to install MSI Afterburner and I think I might have missed video card drivers, Run the included Autoruns64.exe as Admin, uncheck all the Hide options in Options, go to Services, enable TrustedInstaller, reboot, install Afterburner and/or your GPU drivers.


----------



## Hale59

KedarWolf said:


> Because it has a 3GB Windows install ISO AND a fully configured backed up Macrium Reflect Windows image in the zip file.
> 
> Did you even read the description I included in the post?
> 
> Edit: And I use this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Optimize-Offline Guide - Windows Debloating Tool, Windows 1803, 1903, 19H2, 1909, 20H1 and LTSC 2019
> 
> 
> All credit goes to GodHand and who wrote and maintains this script. And to @gdeliana who created the fork of Godhand' s Script we are using for...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> forums.mydigitallife.net


Yes, I saw the description above.
And I can only download from the 1rst of March - not enough data at moment.
But I will try it soon.
Thanks


----------



## KedarWolf

Hale59 said:


> Yes, I saw the description above.
> And I can only download from the 1rst of March - not enough data at moment.
> But I will try it soon.
> Thanks


I can upload just the Macrium image for you if you want. It's the full O/S you install with Macrium Reflect Free.

Or just the 3GB Windows install ISO, read the instruction in the .txt file on how to set it up after a clean install though.

The bench O/S alone though is still 7GB. The ISO alone is 3.3GB


----------



## Hale59

KedarWolf said:


> I can upload just the Macrium image for you if you want. It's the full O/S you install with Macrium Reflect Free.
> 
> Or just the 3GB Windows install ISO, read the instruction in the .txt file on how to set it up after a clean install though.


Yes, leave the bench zip of 10GB, but add this option you just mentioned for download also.
Many thanks


----------



## KedarWolf

Hale59 said:


> Yes, leave the bench zip of 10GB, but add this option you just mentioned for download also.
> Many thanks


Added Win10ISO only links, Benching O/S only and a file with everything in it.

Link to stripped benching O/S. Testing as working today. Windows install ISO you need to set up with Autoruns and an already set up preconfigured Macrium image, no Autoruns, nothing needed, install the image, run Benchmate, select benchmark. Macrium Free, RUFUS and Autoruns included. Tested as working with no sound, no printing, all unneeded services disabled etc. Has Internet access though.

*Read the InstructionsREADME!!!!!.txt included in the zip!!*

Oh, and if you need to install MSI Afterburner and I think I might have missed video card drivers, Run the included Autoruns64.exe as Admin, uncheck all the Hide options in Options, go to Services, enable TrustedInstaller, reboot, install Afterburner and/or your GPU drivers.






Benching - Google Drive







drive.google.com


----------



## Hale59

KedarWolf said:


> Added Win10ISO only links, Benching O/S only and a file with everything in it.
> 
> Link to stripped benching O/S. Testing as working today. Windows install ISO you need to set up with Autoruns and an already set up preconfigured Macrium image, no Autoruns, nothing needed, install the image, run Benchmate, select benchmark. Macrium Free, RUFUS and Autoruns included. Tested as working with no sound, no printing, all unneeded services disabled etc. Has Internet access though.
> 
> *Read the InstructionsREADME!!!!!.txt included in the zip!!*
> 
> Oh, and if you need to install MSI Afterburner and I think I might have missed video card drivers, Run the included Autoruns64.exe as Admin, uncheck all the Hide options in Options, go to Services, enable TrustedInstaller, reboot, install Afterburner and/or your GPU drivers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Benching - Google Drive
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


Thanks.
'BenchOSOnly.rar (7.2GB) and Windows10ISOOnly.rar (3.1GB)?
Well, windows 10 only, is w10 only.
But what is included in 'BenchOSOnly.rar'?


----------



## KedarWolf

Hale59 said:


> Thanks.
> 'BenchOSOnly.rar (7.2GB) and Windows10ISOOnly.rar (3.1GB)?
> Well, windows 10 only, is w10 only.
> But what is included in 'BenchOSOnly.rar'?


It's Windows 10, but a full Windows 10 backup image made with Macrium Reflect Free. This one takes zero-configuration except for installing Notepad++ and your video card drivers.

The Windows 10 ISO is for a clean install of Windows and you need to follow the included instructions to set it up for benching.

Everything you need to know is in the included ReadMe.txt files.

For example, the Windows 10 ISO ReadMe.

Unzip File.
Burn a Windows install GPT USB with the included RUFUS. It'll fit on a 4GB USB.
Install Macrium with the included file. Run Macrium, in Other Tasks make a boot USB. The USB Needs to be MBR FAT32. 
You can make that with RUFUS as well.

Backup your current Windows on a spare drive or seconday rive, preferably an M.2 or SSD.
With the Windows install disk you made, boot from it UEFI. Install Windows.

Install Notepad++.

In Windows, install your chipset drivers. https://www.amd.com/en/products/chipsets-am4 and video card drivers with NVCleaninstall. 








NVCleanstall (v1.14.0) Download


NVCleanstall lets you customize the NVIDIA GeForce Driver package by removing components that you don't need (or want). This not only keeps things ti




www.techpowerup.com




See the picture links for how to use NVCleaninstall.








Untitle


Image Untitle hosted in ImgBB




ibb.co












Untitled


Image Untitled hosted in ImgBB




ibb.co












Untitled2


Image Untitled2 hosted in ImgBB




ibb.co





Unzip the Autoruns.zip. Run Autoruns64.exe as Admin. In Options uncheck all the Hide options. 
Go to Autoruns File/Compare and load the included DESKTOP.arn.
Uncheck everything that matches in the file that is not disabled. The Services are the most important.
Reboot. Run your benchmarks. Profit.

If you need to install MSI Afterburner and I think I might have missed video card drivers, Run the included Autoruns64.exe as Admin, uncheck all the Hide options in Options, go to Services, enable TrustedInstaller, reboot, install Afterburner and/or your GPU drivers.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

weleh said:


> I have dailied my bdie kit at 1.6V for over a year on my old Zen 2 system and have had 0 signs of degradation on the CPU/RAM side.
> Using the same kit now on my 5800X and still no issues whatsoever.


It's almost impossible to degrade a DIMM; the ICs are rated up to 85c.
You don't even get close to that with 2.0V.
Either you fry it or it works.
And frying as well it's hard, especially B-die.
It's a bunch of capacitors and transistors, not the same as a silicon die.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Forsaken1 said:


> Never been this low on _tRFC_ .A joy to oc memory on this board.What is it indicating when tRFC is being lowered but no gains in performance?


Me too, never thought I could go so low 
If it's bandwidth, probably you are at the limit of the DDR4 BUS for that frequency, hence no gain.


----------



## Forsaken1

ManniX-ITA said:


> Me too, never thought I could go so low
> If it's bandwidth, probably you are at the limit of the DDR4 BUS for that frequency, hence no gain.


Was hoping for a magic bullet.Double digit tRFC at times is crazy.Appreciate response.


----------



## YoungChris

these settings are possible to daily, safe voltages and conservative timings








unfortunately my CPU struggles to bench 4000/2000, let alone daily 
need better sample


----------



## KedarWolf

The Unify-X A10T test BIOS is dated newer than the non-beta A1 on the website. Same for the Godlike BIOS, the test has a newer date. 

Is it a newer BIOS release?


----------



## weleh

KedarWolf said:


> The Unify-X A10T test BIOS is dated newer than the non-beta A1 on the website. Same for the Godlike BIOS, the test has a newer date.
> 
> Is it a newer BIOS release?


I flashed that bios once no changes regarding stability, then when I tried to flash it later, it bricked, had to bios flashback twice.
Dunno why.


----------



## CfYz

That coil whine is HUGE.  2.1 rev here... It's even whistles! on every copy test in Cache and Memory Benchmark on AIDA64 (those whistles is almost funny). It's bearable on desktop but really loud in games even in Dark Base 900 fully closed doors. Crazy, it's just crazy. Will return this board and I'm not sure at all will I take another chance with Unify-X...


----------



## Speed Potato

In stock at B&H USA


----------



## KedarWolf

B&H Photo has the Unify-X in stock. Hoping to get mine end of this week, I ordered it on Jan. 15th. 

Edit: Just saw the post above mine.


----------



## KedarWolf

weleh said:


> I flashed that bios once no changes regarding stability, then when I tried to flash it later, it bricked, had to bios flashback twice.
> Dunno why.


I get exactly one WHEA error with the release BIOS on OCCT Extreme preset, Large Data.

Get none with the test BIOS.


----------



## YoungChris

AGESA 1.2.0.1


1.2.0.1 PatchA - Google Drive


also has bioses for the other high-end MSI boards


----------



## Joeking78

YoungChris said:


> AGESA 1.2.0.1
> 
> 
> 1.2.0.1 PatchA - Google Drive
> 
> 
> also has bioses for the other high-end MSI boards


These are beta bios? Been refreshing the unify bios page daily for weeks 🤣


----------



## YoungChris

Joeking78 said:


> These are beta bios? Been refreshing the unify bios page daily for weeks 🤣


something like that, beta or test
link posted on Toppc's Facebook


----------



## weleh

Tested the latest bios on Unify-X posted by Young.

2000 fCLK 1:1 still WHEAS but much less than any other bios. Another thing I noticed is 2000 fCLK is more stable than 1933 or 1966.

VSOC on my specific kit/board doesn't scale past 1.15V, VDDG IOD on this BIOS stops scalling past 1V and scales only between 0.9 and 1V. Higher or lower either doesn't boot/post or introduces more instability. Same for SOC. Boots at 1.1V albeit slow, lower takes too long and introduces instability, past 1.15V instability increases and at 1.2V+ it's worse.

More and more convinced this is down to chip silicon rather than AGESA.

Also on this AGESA, still hardcapped at 200 MHz on PBO however, this time, it works fine at adds 200 Mhz over 4.85 Ghz normal boost of the 5800X so that means it now boosts to 5050 Mhz instead of 5025 previously.

Same CO settings seem to apply, from my testing. Scoring +700 points on CPU-Z single thread on my daily OS.


----------



## weleh

My 3800c14 true 1T still stable with the same voltages and settings.

1.1V SOC and 1.05V IOD.


----------



## Hale59

KedarWolf said:


> It's Windows 10, but a full Windows 10 backup image made with Macrium Reflect Free. This one takes zero-configuration except for installing Notepad++ and your video card drivers.
> 
> The Windows 10 ISO is for a clean install of Windows and you need to follow the included instructions to set it up for benching.
> 
> Everything you need to know is in the included ReadMe.txt files.
> 
> For example, the Windows 10 ISO ReadMe.
> 
> Unzip File.
> Burn a Windows install GPT USB with the included RUFUS. It'll fit on a 4GB USB.
> Install Macrium with the included file. Run Macrium, in Other Tasks make a boot USB. The USB Needs to be MBR FAT32.
> You can make that with RUFUS as well.
> 
> Backup your current Windows on a spare drive or seconday rive, preferably an M.2 or SSD.
> With the Windows install disk you made, boot from it UEFI. Install Windows.
> 
> Install Notepad++.
> 
> In Windows, install your chipset drivers. https://www.amd.com/en/products/chipsets-am4 and video card drivers with NVCleaninstall.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> NVCleanstall (v1.14.0) Download
> 
> 
> NVCleanstall lets you customize the NVIDIA GeForce Driver package by removing components that you don't need (or want). This not only keeps things ti
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.techpowerup.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> See the picture links for how to use NVCleaninstall.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Untitle
> 
> 
> Image Untitle hosted in ImgBB
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ibb.co
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Untitled
> 
> 
> Image Untitled hosted in ImgBB
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ibb.co
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Untitled2
> 
> 
> Image Untitled2 hosted in ImgBB
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ibb.co
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unzip the Autoruns.zip. Run Autoruns64.exe as Admin. In Options uncheck all the Hide options.
> Go to Autoruns File/Compare and load the included DESKTOP.arn.
> Uncheck everything that matches in the file that is not disabled. The Services are the most important.
> Reboot. Run your benchmarks. Profit.
> 
> If you need to install MSI Afterburner and I think I might have missed video card drivers, Run the included Autoruns64.exe as Admin, uncheck all the Hide options in Options, go to Services, enable TrustedInstaller, reboot, install Afterburner and/or your GPU drivers.


Is the Windows 10 ISO 64 or 32 bit?
I have heard the 32 bit version is better for OC.


----------



## KedarWolf

Hale59 said:


> Is the Windows 10 ISO 64 or 32 bit?
> I have heard the 32 bit version is better for OC.


64 bit.


----------



## Hale59

KedarWolf said:


> 64 bit.


If I get a W10 PRO 32 bit, will those attached programs in on your download link, work?


----------



## KedarWolf

Hale59 said:


> If I get a W10 PRO 32 bit, will those attached programs in on your download link, work?


Not 100% sure to be honest.

Edit: Autoruns, the most important one, has a 32-bit version you can download.

Well, the .zip file you download from Microsoft contains a 32-bit version

I can make you a 32-bit version of the stripped Windows 10 Pro if you want. but you'd need to do the Autoruns stuff I suggest yourself, not going to make a Macrium image.


----------



## Hale59

KedarWolf said:


> Not 100% sure to be honest.
> 
> Edit: Autoruns, the most important one, has a 32-bit version you can download.


Can you find out from where you got your stuff, please.


----------



## Forsaken1

YoungChris said:


> these settings are possible to daily, safe voltages and conservative timings
> View attachment 2479985
> 
> unfortunately my CPU struggles to bench 4000/2000, let alone daily
> need better sample


Any luck 4000/2000 cl12?

5800x benchable at FCLK 4200 1:1.Peformance in the tank.
New beta bios nothing special.
Need full boost back on 5800x.


----------



## YoungChris

Forsaken1 said:


> Any luck 4000/2000 cl12?
> 
> 5800x benchable at FCLK 4200 1:1.Peformance in the tank.
> New beta bios nothing special.
> Need full boost back on 5800x.


I'll def give it a shot soon, should be good for like SuperPi
Unlinked is better for Geekbench 3


----------



## KedarWolf

Hale59 said:


> Can you find out from where you got your stuff, please.


Just use Google, easy to find. But the script I use to strip Windows doesn't work on 32 bit ISO's, so can't do that for you.


----------



## Joeking78

Testing new bios now.

Can see that PBO menu is fixed (not the Advanced menu) and it shows 8 cores in curve optimizer now instead of the 6 previously shown. On older bios I had 8 cores in one pbo menu and 6 in the other, both 8 now.

Boosts to 5050mhz now where previous limit was 5025 with 200mhz boost selected.

I needed more vsoc to get into windows, was 1.1375v selected in bios (1.175v in ZenTimings), now 1.1625v bios (1.1375v in ZenTimings) for 4000mhz C16 1:1...still WHEA free so far.


----------



## Joeking78

Joeking78 said:


> Testing new bios now.
> 
> Can see that PBO menu is fixed (not the Advanced menu) and it shows 8 cores in curve optimizer now instead of the 6 previously shown. On older bios I had 8 cores in one pbo menu and 6 in the other, both 8 now.
> 
> Boosts to 5050mhz now where previous limit was 5025 with 200mhz boost selected.
> 
> I needed more vsoc to get into windows, was 1.1375v selected in bios (1.175v in ZenTimings), now 1.1625v bios (1.1375v in ZenTimings) for 4000mhz C16 1:1...still WHEA free so far.


Just a quick update...

Seems a bit unstable with previously solid settings.

My PC shut down once and when powering down it reset instead of shutting down.

Sometimes takes a while to boot, cycling.

I think it maybe something to do with having PBO settings applied in the Advanced CPU Config menu rather than the AMD Overclocking menu...Will try tonight by disabling PBO in Advanced CPU Config and applying in AMD menu, this was the way I did it before and no stability issues on the other bios.


----------



## Serchio

Hale59 said:


> Is the Windows 10 ISO 64 or 32 bit?
> I have heard the 32 bit version is better for OC.


If you have only 4 GB of RAM then maybe because 32-bit systems do not support more than 4 GB of RAM.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

The last A21 BIOS has severe USB issues; my USB SSD couldn't work reliably even with VDDG 1125.

I'm done for a while testing new BIOS releases, it's already exhausting setting again and again PBO and the 32 options for the CO per-core.
But it's been a while also that the saved profiles on USB doesn't get recognized when you switch back to the same version.
Wouldn't be a big issue missing Dual BIOS but if the profile management is so messed up it's not acceptable.
If MSI really wants to target overclockers should start delivering releases with at least bare minimum quality.


----------



## Joeking78

Joeking78 said:


> Just a quick update...
> 
> Seems a bit unstable with previously solid settings.
> 
> My PC shut down once and when powering down it reset instead of shutting down.
> 
> Sometimes takes a while to boot, cycling.
> 
> I think it maybe something to do with having PBO settings applied in the Advanced CPU Config menu rather than the AMD Overclocking menu...Will try tonight by disabling PBO in Advanced CPU Config and applying in AMD menu, this was the way I did it before and no stability issues on the other bios.


System appears to be a lot more stable when disabling PBO in Advanced CPU Config then enabling through AMD Overclocking...no idea why buy boots up without cycling, shuts down immediately without restarting.

One other thing I noticed...

On previous bios my AIO rgb fans used to sporadically turn from white (chosen colour) to RGB, like some interference or something would reset the profiles. Plugged into a JUSB port on the motherboards, the latest bios I haven't seen this issue yet and it normally appeared within 5 mins of booting up.


----------



## Joeking78

1 hour OCCT AVX2, Large, Extreme on new bios with PBO in the AMD Overclocking menu 2000IF...no crashes, no WHEA


----------



## jvidia

Joeking78 said:


> 1 hour OCCT AVX2, Large, Extreme on new bios with PBO in the AMD Overclocking menu 2000IF...no crashes, no WHEA
> View attachment 2480191


What is the year / week number of you cpu?


----------



## Forsaken1

ManniX-ITA said:


> The last A21 BIOS has severe USB issues; my USB SSD couldn't work reliably even with VDDG 1125.
> 
> I'm done for a while testing new BIOS releases, it's already exhausting setting again and again PBO and the 32 options for the CO per-core.
> But it's been a while also that the saved profiles on USB doesn't get recognized when you switch back to the same version.
> Wouldn't be a big issue missing Dual BIOS but if the profile management is so messed up it's not acceptable.
> If MSI really wants to target overclockers should start delivering releases with at least bare minimum quality.


Save bios feature needs some work for sure.

OC board should be stripped of all non oc essentials.RGB headers everywhere on this board.Corsair plug in crap.Drop that crap.Give me more fan headers.Dual bios & memory try if it’s possible.Less is more.


----------



## Joeking78

jvidia said:


> What is the year / week number of you cpu?


2040SUS

I also had a WHEA free 2046SUS at 2000/2066 but sold now.

2066IF was stable/WHEA free on previous bios, need to test that tonight on new bios


----------



## Joeking78

They definitely fixed something in the new bios to do with JUSB ports, not a single glitch with RGB on my AIO in probably 3 hours of PC up time, normally glitches out after 5 mins.


----------



## Joeking78

Joeking78 said:


> 2040SUS
> 
> I also had a WHEA free 2046SUS at 2000/2066 but sold now.
> 
> 2066IF was stable/WHEA free on previous bios, need to test that tonight on new bios


Issues with 2066 so far, need to play around tomorrow when less drunk 🥴


----------



## YoungChris

I see many of you have nice memory and cpus, could y'all give a try at this competition?





Overclocking, overclocking, and much more! Like overclocking.


HWBOT is a site dedicated to overclocking. We promote overclocking achievements and competitions for professionals as well as enthousiasts with rankings and a huge hardware database.




hwbot.org


----------



## Phynicle

Hey YoungChris, could you post up your Zen timings and or your pbo settings?


----------



## KedarWolf

My MSI MEG B550 Unify-X was sent out from B&H Photo today by FedEx!

Hope to have it by Tuesday, USA to Canada though, so we'll see.

And I have no trouble with coil whine, I wear a headset all the time and my 16 fans and 2 RAM fans at 6800 RPM will drown out any coil whine I may or may not have.


----------



## Forsaken1

^^^^^^
Thanks for the play by play. Going to update the world every stop it makes?


----------



## Forsaken1

YoungChris said:


> I see many of you have nice memory and cpus, could y'all give a try at this competition?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Overclocking, overclocking, and much more! Like overclocking.
> 
> 
> HWBOT is a site dedicated to overclocking. We promote overclocking achievements and competitions for professionals as well as enthousiasts with rankings and a huge hardware database.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hwbot.org


Big boy league. Have to eat my wheaties........................


----------



## Joeking78

For the first time in UAE I found a nice memory kit with same day delivery.

4400mhz 19-19-19-19-39 1.45v

Nice price too, will be my ram kit to abuse and bench.

Anyone had good experience with this kit on unify?


----------



## mongoled

Joeking78 said:


> For the first time in UAE I found a nice memory kit with same day delivery.
> 
> 4400mhz 19-19-19-19-39 1.45v
> 
> Nice price too, will be my ram kit to abuse and bench.
> 
> Anyone had good experience with this kit on unify?


You havnt posted the memory kit!


----------



## KedarWolf

Joeking78 said:


> For the first time in UAE I found a nice memory kit with same day delivery.
> 
> 4400mhz 19-19-19-19-39 1.45v
> 
> Nice price too, will be my ram kit to abuse and bench.
> 
> Anyone had good experience with this kit on unify?


Is it b-die and 2x16GB? These two things are important.


----------



## Joeking78

mongoled said:


> You havnt posted the memory kit!











Patriot Viper Steel Series Ddr4 16Gb (2 X 8Gb) 4400Mhz Performance Memory Kit - Pvs416G440C9K: Buy Online at Best Price in UAE - Amazon.ae


Buy Patriot Viper Steel Series Ddr4 16Gb (2 X 8Gb) 4400Mhz Performance Memory Kit - Pvs416G440C9K online on Amazon.ae at best prices. ✓ Fast and free shipping ✓ free returns ✓ cash on delivery available on eligible purchase.



www.amazon.ae





This is the one


----------



## Joeking78

KedarWolf said:


> Is it b-die and 2x16GB? These two things are important.


2x 8gb pretty sure its bdie.

I already have a 2x 16gb bdie kit 3200 C14 but was thinking this patriot kit is single rank so might be able to push it a bit harder.


----------



## KedarWolf

Yeah, it's b-die, it'll be good, just 2x16GB a tad bit better for X570 and B550 boards, it's the way the memory controller works. Daisy Chain and dual-rank RAM have this thing where it can execute more instructions or something like that. It'll still be good though.


----------



## mongoled

Joeking78 said:


> 2x 8gb pretty sure its bdie.
> 
> I already have a 2x 16gb bdie kit 3200 C14 but was thinking this patriot kit is single rank so might be able to push it a bit harder.


Start reading here


----------



## Joeking78

mongoled said:


> Start reading here


Ah same kit 👌 

I see you got a lot of volts in it, was my plan to just abuse it and push it as high and hard as I can and leave my other kit for gaming.


----------



## mongoled

Joeking78 said:


> Ah same kit 👌
> 
> I see you got a lot of volts in it, was my plan to just abuse it and push it as high and hard as I can and leave my other kit for gaming.


Ive been through several kits. There is variance to what each kit can do as with most hardware, will be interesting to see how your kit plays with B550


----------



## Joeking78

mongoled said:


> Ive been through several kits. There is variance to what each kit can do as with most hardware, will be interesting to see how your kit plays with B550


What's the differences? I see you have A2 in your profile.


----------



## mongoled

Joeking78 said:


> What's the differences? I see you have A2 in your profile.


A2 is just the PCB type, difference is what timings they can do with a certain amount of voltage. Better kits need less voltage. The variance with the four kits ive used has been around 0.06v between the best and worse kit.


----------



## weleh

Easiest way to buy DR 32GB at 16x2 kit is to buy bdie to avoid lottery?


----------



## MyUsername

KedarWolf said:


> Is it b-die and 2x16GB? These two things are important.


That I would like to see, 2x16 b-die 4400 at any timing. I don't think that's possible and/or insanely hard. Max I can get is 4266 with 2x16 then I hit a wall.


----------



## MageTank

KedarWolf said:


> Yeah, it's b-die, it'll be good, just 2x16GB a tad bit better for X570 and B550 boards, it's the way the memory controller works. *Daisy Chain and dual-rank RAM have this thing where it can execute more instructions or something like that.* It'll still be good though.


It has less to do with the topology of the board and more to do with the aspects of rank interleaving itself. True rank interleaving (dual rank DIMM's) grant the ability to read from one rank while simultaneously writing to another rank. You cannot achieve this with the lockstep rank interleaving granted by using quad-single rank configurations without sacrificing half the capacity of your DIMM's as interleaving across the banks, not the ranks. With 4 SR DIMM's, they all operate in parallel as 8 groups, 4 sticks, 4 ranks, and recharging will halt the entire stack. With DR DIMM's, you have 2 DIMM's, 8 groups, 2 sticks, 4* ranks, they do not operate in parallel, they operate interleaved, and when one is recharging, the CPU can still use the other. It's complicated but I hope this makes a little sense.

That said, the topology of the board will play a significant role when using 4 DIMM's vs 2 DIMM's so it's important to factor that in when planning to buy a board for OCing and you have a target DIMM capacity in mind.


----------



## YoungChris

Phynicle said:


> Hey YoungChris, could you post up your Zen timings and or your pbo settings?


I've already posted all my ZenTimings, check some of my older posts. I run PBO Disabled, static OC only so far


----------



## YoungChris

KedarWolf said:


> Is it b-die and 2x16GB? These two things are important.


2x16 is cool but unlinked is too


----------



## YoungChris

weleh said:


> Easiest way to buy DR 32GB at 16x2 kit is to buy bdie to avoid lottery?


HWBot Marketplace
be prepared to pony up some big boy cash tho


----------



## Joeking78

Got the new ram and initial results seem good.

Previous stable ram overclock with Gskill 3200 C14 was 4000 16-17-16-16-32 1.48v

Patriot Viper now at 4000 16-16-16-16-32 1.47v

Couldn't get tRCDRD to 16 stable on the Gskill chips but Patriot seems OK so far, maybe something to with them being single rank?

Running OCCT for 30 mins for initial testing and going to play around some more then some stronger stress tests overnight.


----------



## Joeking78

Boot into windows at 4133 16-16-16-16-32 1.55v (just to start with) 1:1 Infinity Fabric...wouldn't boot with these settings on G.Skill. tRFC settings didn't save for some reason.

Will do a bit of stress testing.


----------



## mongoled

Nice

😁😁

Regards tRFC, did the gskills not do that when you change the mclk frequency.?

Because that's what my vipers do when I change the mclk frequency. Now when I change the mclk frequency before exiting the bios I go to the tRFC settings and simply change each tRFC setting and then return it to its original value, then F10

If you can't do 1T GDM disabled your better off using 2T. Looking forward to your stability results and then seeing what you can push them to 😁


----------



## Joeking78

mongoled said:


> Nice
> 
> 😁😁
> 
> Regards tRFC, did the gskills not do that when you change the mclk frequency.?
> 
> Because that's what my vipers do when I change the mclk frequency. Now when I change the mclk frequency before exiting the bios I go to the tRFC settings and simply change each tRFC setting and then return it to its original value, then F10
> 
> If you can't do 1T GDM disabled your better off using 2T. Looking forward to your stability results and then seeing what you can push them to 😁


Yep Gskills did the same, fixed now.

Quick stability test and Aida in Safe Mode...4133 16-16-16-16-32 1.54v, WHEA free.


















Also in Windows at 4266 1:1, 1.59v (bios) and a tweak to VSOC...going to stress it out now.


----------



## MyUsername

Joeking78 said:


> Also in Windows at 4266 1:1, 1.59v (bios) and a tweak to VSOC...going to stress it out now.
> View attachment 2480325


Yass that's more like it, give it some power. GDM disabled not possible?


----------



## Joeking78

MyUsername said:


> Yass that's more like it, give it some power. GDM disabled not possible?


Messing around with 1T now at 3866 C14.

This memory is quite fun to play with


----------



## YoungChris

currently hate 1:1 tbh
tRCDRD 10 boots with another kit but that kit is unstable in general, tRP 8 boots but immediate Preparing Automatic Repair, tRFC 160 boots but bluescreen in GB3, 3800 boots but won't pass Dijkstra and is a ***** to even train at these settings.
4000c12 refuses to pass GB3 rn for some reason, 4000c12 tRCDRD 11 doesn't want to train, tCWL 9 and tRDWR 10 gets really close to training but then no go.
On the plus side, >9800 mem score at 3733 1:1 without dual rank or high cpu freq is funky.








tRCDRD 10/tRP 8/tRFC 160 would be above 9900 and below 49ns with all else same.
Lower tWTRL may be possible on a different board or set.
Next up for testing is the A21 bios, with Agesa 1201. I'm curious if the higher reported L3$ bandwidth would actually improve GB3 score. I don't know if I can push core freq or vdimm much higher, as my air cooler won't allow for actively cooled mem and ambients are getting much warmer.


----------



## YoungChris

Joeking78 said:


> Yep Gskills did the same, fixed now.
> 
> Quick stability test and Aida in Safe Mode...4133 16-16-16-16-32 1.54v, WHEA free.
> 
> View attachment 2480323
> 
> View attachment 2480324
> 
> 
> Also in Windows at 4266 1:1, 1.59v (bios) and a tweak to VSOC...going to stress it out now.
> View attachment 2480325


2066 1:1 without whea is very impressive, what are you using for cooling?


----------



## Joeking78

YoungChris said:


> 2066 1:1 without whea is very impressive, what are you using for cooling?


CPU cooler is a 280mm AIO with push/pull fans.

No cooling for RAM but have 6 120mm case intake fans pulling air around the sticks.

So far 4000, 4066, 4133, 4266 all 1:1 WHEA free with the new sticks, 4400 a no go so far, can't get it to boot properly

Still got to leave a stress test overnight though.

4000 15-15-15-15-45 1T (GDM off) at 1.48v looks like my new daily overclock though.


----------



## YoungChris

Joeking78 said:


> CPU cooler is a 280mm AIO with push/pull fans.
> 
> No cooling for RAM but have 6 120mm case intake fans pulling air around the sticks.
> 
> So far 4000, 4066, 4133, 4266 all 1:1 WHEA free with the new sticks, 4400 a no go so far, can't get it to boot properly


4266 1:1 no whea, sheesh
Have you tested for performance regression at each step?
I have found GB3 to be a good check of this, if FCLK is too high then Integer and sometimes Float scores will nosedive, even when mem scores improve.


----------



## Joeking78

YoungChris said:


> 4266 1:1 no whea, sheesh
> Have you tested for performance regression at each step?
> I have found GB3 to be a good check of this, if FCLK is too high then Integer and sometimes Float scores will nosedive, even when mem scores improve.


Aida below, does show worse latency the higher it goes.

4000 C15
Read - 58988
Write - 31708
Latency - 51.2

4133 C16
Read - 60730
Write - 32982
Latency - 51.4

4266 C16
Read - 62108
Write - 33243
Latency - 52.9

I ran timespy a few times too, I get a big drop off in CPU score when running 4266 compared to 4000.

4000 C15 CPU Score 12945
4266 C16 CPU Score 12408

First test at 4266 CPU score was sub 12k but I found winding back GPU mem clock helped to boost CPU score back above 12k, maybe something to with Smart Access Memory but still a big dive compared to 4000C15


----------



## YoungChris

Joeking78 said:


> Aida below, does show worse latency the higher it goes.
> 
> 4000 C15
> Read - 58988
> Write - 31708
> Latency - 51.2
> 
> 4133 C16
> Read - 60730
> Write - 32982
> Latency - 51.4
> 
> 4266 C16
> Read - 62108
> Write - 33243
> Latency - 52.9
> 
> I ran timespy a few times too, I get a big drop off in CPU score when running 4266 compared to 4000.
> 
> 4000 C15 CPU Score 12945
> 4266 C16 CPU Score 12408
> 
> First test at 4266 CPU score was sub 12k but I found winding back GPU mem clock helped to boost CPU score back above 12k, maybe something to with Smart Access Memory but still a big dive compared to 4000C15


Have you seen lower timespy CPU score at 4133 as well? I forgot that bench was sensitive too.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

If you want to have a good laugh read the thread I opened on the MSI forum about the coil whine:






MSI Global English Forum


...




forum-en.msi.com





There's this absurd moderator trying to bully people in not calling coil whine as coil whine blabbing about non-sense pseudo technical explanations.
That the VRM heatsink is the reason of the noise because it's vibrating at high frequency is a true gem.

So miserable, still thinking if it's worth to answer him and get banned.


----------



## Phynicle

Yeh, I sent my retailer a request for refund. The noise vs my friends pc is night and day. It's high pitched and cuts through everything


----------



## Forsaken1

Always stirring the pot ManniX.
Thanks for a chuckle.Return that turd of a mobo!!!

4th time for me was the charm.Chose your vendor wisely purchasing this mobo in current state.Free return/s is key not going upside down on purchase.

Current wall in SPI32M. 5.43.xxx.


----------



## gymleader91

He says something about mid January manufactured boards being fixed. Is there anyway to tell on the outer box what the production date is via a code or something?

e.g. code ERT-FTY has coil whine but code ERT-FTZ does not.


----------



## KedarWolf

gymleader91 said:


> He says something about mid January manufactured boards being fixed. Is there anyway to tell on the outer box what the production date is via a code or something?
> 
> e.g. code ERT-FTY has coil whine but code ERT-FTZ does not.


I know someone with a third revision 2.1 that has horrible coil whine. There was 1.0, 2.0, and 2.1 so far I think.


----------



## Joeking78

YoungChris said:


> Have you seen lower timespy CPU score at 4133 as well? I forgot that bench was sensitive too.


I'll check now and let you know.


----------



## dr.Rafi

@ *Joeking78 *
Did you notice any improvement using the latest bios Agessa 1.2.0.1 on Unify ?especially regard Whea.


----------



## Joeking78

dr.Rafi said:


> @ *Joeking78 *
> Did you notice any improvement using the latest bios Agessa 1.2.0.1 on Unify ?especially regard Whea.


No changes regarding WHEA...I didn't get them on previous bios either.

Thing I noticed on new bios is higher boost with same 200mhz selected (5025mhz to 5050mhz) and the PBO curve optimizer menu is fixed (shows 8 cores now instead of 6)


----------



## Joeking78

YoungChris said:


> Have you seen lower timespy CPU score at 4133 as well? I forgot that bench was sensitive too.


There definitely appears to be negative scaling in CPU score with Timespy and I think it has something to do with VSOC; GPU settings are unchanged in each test, only DRAM and VSOC is changed the higher I go in MLCK/FLCK (apart from the drop in CL at 4000mhz). Once above 2100 FLCK CPU scores tank and get worse.

There is instability/crashing in Timespy with 2100 and 2133 IF with VSOC lower than 1.175v in BIOS.

It appears that 4133/2066 is a sweet spot.

I'll do some tests in Cinebench too.

4000mhz/2000mhz, C15, 1.48v, 1.1625 VSOC
CPU Score > 12945
AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT video card benchmark result - AMD Ryzen 7 5800X,Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MEG B550 UNIFY (MS-7D13) (3dmark.com)

4133mhz/2066mhz, C16, 1.54v, 1.1625 VSOC
CPU Score > 13191
AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT video card benchmark result - AMD Ryzen 7 5800X,Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MEG B550 UNIFY (MS-7D13) (3dmark.com)

4200mhz/2100mhz, C16, 1.57v, 1.175 VSOC
CPU Score > 12611
AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT video card benchmark result - AMD Ryzen 7 5800X,Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MEG B550 UNIFY (MS-7D13) (3dmark.com)

4266mhz/2133mhz, C16, 1.59v, 1.175 VSOC
CPU Score > 12408
AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT video card benchmark result - AMD Ryzen 7 5800X,Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MEG B550 UNIFY (MS-7D13) (3dmark.com)


----------



## KedarWolf

Hale59 said:


> Is the Windows 10 ISO 64 or 32 bit?
> I have heard the 32 bit version is better for OC.


I got the script working on 32 bit ISO's, can make a stripped version, but do you really want an O/S limited to 4GB of available RAM though. 

Edit:

"It is correct but even worse than that.

All 32-bit client versions of Windows (not just XP/Vista/7/8/10) have a
4GB address space (64-bit versions can use much more). That's the
theoretical upper limit beyond which you can not go.

But you can't use the entire address space. Even though you have a 4GB address space, most people can only use _around_ 3.1GB of RAM. That's because some of that space is used by hardware and is not available to the operating system and applications. The amount you can
use varies, depending on what hardware you have installed, but can range from as little as 2GB to as much as 3.5GB. It's usually around 3.1GB.
Note that the hardware is using the address _space_, not the actual RAM itself. If you have a greater amount of RAM, the rest of the RAM goes unused because there is no address space to map it to."


----------



## dr.Rafi

The Changes in Agessa 1.2.0.1, 
number 3 confirmed


----------



## Joeking78

MyUsername said:


> Yass that's more like it, give it some power. GDM disabled not possible?


My new daily use, 4000C15 GDM disabled 1T, 1.48v. 









Going to try GDM disabled on some of the higher clocks now.


----------



## KedarWolf

Joeking78 said:


> My new daily use, 4000C15 GDM disabled 1T, 1.48v.
> View attachment 2480409
> 
> 
> Going to try GDM disabled on some of the higher clocks now.


Can that pass OCCT Large Data Set, Extreme preset?


----------



## Joeking78

KedarWolf said:


> Can that pass OCCT Large Data Set, Extreme preset?


Will give it a try soon, just ploughing through testmem for now and moving onto higher clocks.

Will share OCCT soon.


----------



## Joeking78

Nice result...

4133/2066, 16-16-16-16-32, GDM off (2T), 1.56v DRAM, 1.175v SOC


----------



## MyUsername

Joeking78 said:


> Nice result...
> 
> 4133/2066, 16-16-16-16-32, GDM off (2T), 1.56v DRAM, 1.175v SOC


Very nice result, I would be happy for that to be my daily. If y-cruncher passes a couple of rounds then it's a winner.


----------



## weleh

Joeking78 said:


> There definitely appears to be negative scaling in CPU score with Timespy and I think it has something to do with VSOC; GPU settings are unchanged in each test, only DRAM and VSOC is changed the higher I go in MLCK/FLCK (apart from the drop in CL at 4000mhz). Once above 2100 FLCK CPU scores tank and get worse.
> 
> There is instability/crashing in Timespy with 2100 and 2133 IF with VSOC lower than 1.175v in BIOS.
> 
> It appears that 4133/2066 is a sweet spot.
> 
> I'll do some tests in Cinebench too.
> 
> 4000mhz/2000mhz, C15, 1.48v, 1.1625 VSOC
> CPU Score > 12945
> AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT video card benchmark result - AMD Ryzen 7 5800X,Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MEG B550 UNIFY (MS-7D13) (3dmark.com)
> 
> 4133mhz/2066mhz, C16, 1.54v, 1.1625 VSOC
> CPU Score > 13191
> AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT video card benchmark result - AMD Ryzen 7 5800X,Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MEG B550 UNIFY (MS-7D13) (3dmark.com)
> 
> 4200mhz/2100mhz, C16, 1.57v, 1.175 VSOC
> CPU Score > 12611
> AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT video card benchmark result - AMD Ryzen 7 5800X,Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MEG B550 UNIFY (MS-7D13) (3dmark.com)
> 
> 4266mhz/2133mhz, C16, 1.59v, 1.175 VSOC
> CPU Score > 12408
> AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT video card benchmark result - AMD Ryzen 7 5800X,Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MEG B550 UNIFY (MS-7D13) (3dmark.com)


Your time spy performance is pretty terrible at those RAM speeds...

My 3800C14 daily does over 13.6k on Time Spy CPU.

Still impressive you can run such high fCLK stable. Very nice.


----------



## Joeking78

weleh said:


> Your time spy performance is pretty terrible at those RAM speeds...
> 
> My 3800C14 daily does over 13.6k on Time Spy CPU.
> 
> Still impressive you can run such high fCLK stable. Very nice.


Do you run pbo or all core overclock?

I run pbo but so far all my Timespy runs have been with only x1 scalar, going to increase that once I get the memory stable so I should see a bit of an increase in cpu score.


----------



## weleh

Joeking78 said:


> Do you run pbo or all core overclock?
> 
> I run pbo but so far all my Timespy runs have been with only x1 scalar, going to increase that once I get the memory stable so I should see a bit of an increase in cpu score.


Tweaked PBO, 1x Scallar and curve optimizer.
I think you might be hitting performance regression at those fCLK but you can test this easily by doing 3800c14 tight and retest. 
GB3 is also very sensitive so you can test there as well.


----------



## Joeking78

@weleh 
I'll give that a go, thank you


----------



## weleh

Curve optimizer is a must to squeeze the last bit of performance from these CPU's.
Seriously, it's insane how much Mhz you can gain multi core and single core by taking some hours to test each core.


----------



## Joeking78

weleh said:


> Curve optimizer is a must to squeeze the last bit of performance from these CPU's.
> Seriously, it's insane how much Mhz you can gain multi core and single core by taking some hours to test each core.


I'm pretty much there with curve optimizer, a couple of cores i think I can raise.

My best core is -11 and the rest between -13 and -15...the two on -15 I'm going to try and raise up and test.


----------



## Forsaken1

Pat 4400 vs Skill 3800 with YC 4000 profile as a base.1 CCD. Pat needs .01 more volts in bench marks and .02 more in daily. Pats binned. Skill are not.
Current price in US. PAT $143 Skill $329.L0L


----------



## Joeking78

weleh said:


> Tweaked PBO, 1x Scallar and curve optimizer.
> I think you might be hitting performance regression at those fCLK but you can test this easily by doing 3800c14 tight and retest.
> GB3 is also very sensitive so you can test there as well.


Can't do 1900IF

Was the same with my 5900x on this board and the same with my gskill sticks on this board...just will not boot.

Going to try 3866 C14


----------



## Joeking78

KedarWolf said:


> Can that pass OCCT Large Data Set, Extreme preset?


OCCT Large Data Set, Extreme AVX2, 1 hour.


----------



## YoungChris

Joeking78 said:


> Nice result...
> 
> 4133/2066, 16-16-16-16-32, GDM off (2T), 1.56v DRAM, 1.175v SOC
> View attachment 2480414
> 
> View attachment 2480415


Looks pretty impressive, I'll give some subtiming recommendations. Don't necessarily try all of these at once.
Base:
tRCDWR down to 8, tRRDL to 6, tWTR S/L 4/12, tWR 16, tRTP 8, tCKE 8, tRDWR 10, SCLs at 3.
Further:
tRP 14, tRAS 28, tRC 42 or 46?, tRFC 280, tRRDS further down to 4, tWTRS/L tightened to 4/8 or lower, tWR to 10 or 12, tRTP 5 or 6, tCKE 1, SCLs at 2. Can try GDM Disabled 1t.
If any of the "Further" settings end up still being stable no Wheas, I'd be pretty darn impressed.


----------



## YoungChris

Figuring out AMD's equivalent to RTL and IOL (RDL and MRL)


I'm looking into AMD's equivalent of RTL and IOL, which are RDL and MRL. I remember @chew* and @I.nfraR.ed mentioning these were configurable in OS on K10. I have now found evidence of two sets of memory, when training the exact same configurable timings and voltages, reporting different RDL and ...



community.hwbot.org




Calling anyone who may be able to provide input or is curious.


----------



## Forsaken1

YoungChris said:


> Figuring out AMD's equivalent to RTL and IOL (RDL and MRL)
> 
> 
> I'm looking into AMD's equivalent of RTL and IOL, which are RDL and MRL. I remember @chew* and @I.nfraR.ed mentioning these were configurable in OS on K10. I have now found evidence of two sets of memory, when training the exact same configurable timings and voltages, reporting different RDL and ...
> 
> 
> 
> community.hwbot.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Calling anyone who may be able to provide input or is curious.


Interesting.Will look into it.


----------



## Forsaken1

B die kit max ram mhz pushing.Check 71k read off list.5000 memory so close yet.................










EDIT: 5006 memory complete.21c ambient air.
@MyUsername 5000+ possible😀


----------



## gymleader91

Long shot but anyone got any idea why the B550 Unify has RAM compatibility issues with the Dark Rock Pro 4? It has a yellow thing stating usability of ram slots limited. The Unify-x does not have this and has a normal green tick. Every normal atx board such as B550 Tomahawk, X570 Crosshair, Gigabyte Master is also a green tick. I don't understand why it is yellow. Dimensions should be pretty close for the top boards I would have thought.

Secondly, in the opinion of people here is a big massive air cooler for 5000 series needed? I want to have easy access to RAM slots so I'm trying to guess if I can get away with a Dark Rock Slim. AMD states it should be fine for any AMD processor but I don't know the difference between that and say a Dark Rock Pro 4 in regards to temps. The reviews are all for Intel cpu.

Unify:


http://imgur.com/GGO8ozq

Unify-x:


http://imgur.com/3mvKvQ7

B550 Aorus Master (basically every other board):


http://imgur.com/cSeQRbS


----------



## KedarWolf

gymleader91 said:


> Long shot but anyone got any idea why the B550 Unify has RAM compatibility issues with the Dark Rock Pro 4? It has a yellow thing stating usability of ram slots limited. The Unify-x does not have this and has a normal green tick. Every normal atx board such as B550 Tomahawk, X570 Crosshair, Gigabyte Master is also a green tick. I don't understand why it is yellow. Dimensions should be pretty close for the top boards I would have thought.
> 
> Secondly, in the opinion of people here is a big massive air cooler for 5000 series needed? I want to have easy access to RAM slots so I'm trying to guess if I can get away with a Dark Rock Slim. AMD states it should be fine for any AMD processor but I don't know the different between that and say a Dark Rock Pro 4 in regards to temps. The reviews are all for Intel cpu.
> 
> Unify:
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/GGO8ozq
> 
> Unify-x:
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/3mvKvQ7
> 
> B550 Aorus Master (basically every other board):
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/cSeQRbS





https://pcpartpicker.com/list/jPGy7X



Says it's compatible.


----------



## MyUsername

Forsaken1 said:


> B die kit max ram mhz pushing.Check 71k read off list.5000 memory so close yet.................
> 
> View attachment 2480551
> 
> 
> EDIT: 5006 memory complete.21c ambient air.
> @MyUsername 5000+ possible😀
> 
> View attachment 2480552


Clap clap clap well done.

So err, I copied your timings. I wasn't expecting it to boot on a 3900x to be honest, I was gob smacked. Not stable at all though


----------



## Forsaken1

Thanks.
Strong 3900xRaise clock drive?Next divider is 5100.
2 sticks not a chance for me.Maybe 1 stick.


----------



## gymleader91

KedarWolf said:


> https://pcpartpicker.com/list/jPGy7X
> 
> 
> 
> Says it's compatible.


Interesting. It should work as you say but just my luck the board and cpu cooler combo I want to try is the only atx board that isn't listed as properly compatible for some reaosn by the manufacturer. ocd and all that kicking in. I sent a support ticket to bequiet I'll see what they say about it.


----------



## KedarWolf

gymleader91 said:


> Interesting. It should work as you say but just my luck the board and cpu cooler combo I want to try is the only atx board that isn't listed as properly compatible for some reaosn by the manufacturer. ocd and all that kicking in. I sent a support ticket to bequiet I'll see what they say about it.


According to PC Part Picker, they say it depends on how tall the heatsinks on the RAM are at the warning on the bottom.


----------



## mongoled

Do you guys need such high vdimm for 2500 mclk??


----------



## mongoled

Joeking78 said:


> Nice result...
> 
> 4133/2066, 16-16-16-16-32, GDM off (2T), 1.56v DRAM, 1.175v SOC
> View attachment 2480414
> 
> View attachment 2480415


Sub 50ns !



Are you peeps using optimised OS for such low latency results ?


----------



## Forsaken1

^^^^^^^
Currently nope on both posts.
Full blown OS tweaks are the norm on hwbot top contenders.Not my cup of tea.
Different strokes for different folks.

Here’s a popular tweak.OCX SPI.
Legal in HWBOT.


----------



## MyUsername

mongoled said:


> Do you guys need such high vdimm for 2500 mclk??


I was literally on the edge of what my 3900x could do, I was quite astonished it could even do 2500uclk on b-die.


Forsaken1 said:


> ^^^^^^^
> Currently nope on both posts.
> Full blown OS tweaks are the norm on hwbot top contenders.Not my cup of tea.
> Different strokes for different folks.
> 
> Here’s a popular tweak.OCX SPI.
> Legal in HWBOT.


What vdimm did you need?


----------



## Veii

Joeking78 said:


> Nice result...
> 
> 4133/2066, 16-16-16-16-32, GDM off (2T), 1.56v DRAM, 1.175v SOC
> View attachment 2480414
> 
> View attachment 2480415





Spoiler



















Same timings


Welcome to the Club of the sub 50s ! 🍻
Fantastic Job 
Wonder how high it does boost-

I figured, the architecture starts to be on their limits - without significant changes.
As "higher frequency" just turns into package throttling.
Higher BLCK OCs cache well enough. Seems that the CPU at this point is a bottleneck for sub 50ns
At least without significant changes

Try to focus on 4000 more
Got it down to 50.3 @ stock 4.65 (10.9ns) 150MT/s less at the same latency
Less throttling, less strain on memory. It should be possible to go even further, but i think it needs significant cache changes to reach that 46ns that was reached
4133C16 @ same latency under 1.56v ,seems to be easier than 4000C14 @ 1.66v


----------



## Joeking78

Veii said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Same timings
> 
> 
> Welcome to the Club of the sub 50s ! 🍻
> Fantastic Job
> Wonder how high it does boost-
> 
> I figured, the architecture starts to be on their limits - without significant changes.
> As "higher frequency" just turns into package throttling.
> Higher BLCK OCs cache well enough. Seems that the CPU at this point is a bottleneck for sub 50ns
> At least without significant changes
> 
> Try to focus on 4000 more
> Got it down to 50.3 @ stock 4.65 (10.9ns) 150MT/s less at the same latency
> Less throttling, less strain on memory. It should be possible to go even further, but i think it needs significant cache changes to reach that 46ns that was reached
> 4133C16 @ same latency under 1.56v ,seems to be easier than 4000C14 @ 1.66v


Going to play around some more this week, came down with a virus so no messing around on pc until I feel better.

Need to follow up on the recent posts here too.


----------



## YoungChris

getting below 50ns on memory didn't seem that hard for me, was able to do it at 3733 using bench timings and low clocks
daily stable at 50ns is another deal altogether


----------



## Babamoth

Hello there !
Just wanted to say I chose the unify x for my new build. Not sure if it's one produced recently but it's a bit noisy, whistling a little on heavy work. I decided to keep it because it's perfect beside that. I'll either RMA for a fix or do the thermal pad thing if the noise becomes too annoying.

I also ordered a crazy memory kit ... One would most certainly say it's overkill for my ryzen 5600x but maybe I'll upgrade the cpu later on.
F4-4000C16D-32GTZR

Anyone using this kit ?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Babamoth said:


> Hello there !
> Just wanted to say I chose the unify x for my new build. Not sure if it's one produced recently but it's a bit noisy, whistling a little on heavy work. I decided to keep it because it's perfect beside that. I'll either RMA for a fix or do the thermal pad thing if the noise becomes too annoying.
> 
> I also ordered a crazy memory kit ... One would most certainly say it's overkill for my ryzen 5600x but maybe I'll upgrade the cpu later on.
> F4-4000C16D-32GTZR
> 
> Anyone using this kit ?


Yes that's the kit I'm using.
Good performer considering the price but at least with mine tRCDRD can't be tightened.
At 3800 MHz min is 16 and at 4000 is 17.


----------



## KedarWolf

Just got this from B&H Photo. It's a Revision 2.1, I checked. 

B&H is shipping directly from MSI I heard, so makes sense.


----------



## Babamoth

ManniX-ITA said:


> Yes that's the kit I'm using.
> Good performer considering the price but at least with mine tRCDRD can't be tightened.
> At 3800 MHz min is 16 and at 4000 is 17.


Wait isn't it supposed to be cl16 at 4000? Was hoping to do 14 at 3800.

I guess tRCDRD is something else sry me noob haha a lot to learn it seems


----------



## Biggd0gg

ManniX-ITA said:


> Yes that's the kit I'm using.
> Good performer considering the price but at least with mine* tRCDRD* can't be tightened.
> At 3800 MHz min is (*tRCDRD*)16 and at 4000 is (*tRCDRD*)17.


----------



## MyUsername

Babamoth said:


> Wait isn't it supposed to be cl16 at 4000? Was hoping to do 14 at 3800.
> 
> I guess tRCDRD is something else sry me noob haha a lot to learn it seems


They can at 1.5 volts. Memory's happy running at this 24/7


----------



## ManniX-ITA

MyUsername said:


> They can at 1.5 volts. Memory's happy running at this 24/7
> View attachment 2480811


Damn, I have to try again but I think my kit can't do that... can you go below 17 at 4000+?


----------



## Joeking78

YoungChris said:


> Looks pretty impressive, I'll give some subtiming recommendations. Don't necessarily try all of these at once.
> Base:
> tRCDWR down to 8, tRRDL to 6, tWTR S/L 4/12, tWR 16, tRTP 8, tCKE 8, tRDWR 10, SCLs at 3.
> Further:
> tRP 14, tRAS 28, tRC 42 or 46?, tRFC 280, tRRDS further down to 4, tWTRS/L tightened to 4/8 or lower, tWR to 10 or 12, tRTP 5 or 6, tCKE 1, SCLs at 2. Can try GDM Disabled 1t.
> If any of the "Further" settings end up still being stable no Wheas, I'd be pretty darn impressed.


Will be trying these settings tonight and let you know how it goes.


----------



## YoungChris

AMD - Google Drive







drive.google.com




New XOC bioses based on AGESA 1201 for X570 Godlike and B550 Unify/Unify-X! Get your unlocked voltages and L3$ fix here


----------



## Joeking78

YoungChris said:


> AMD - Google Drive
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> New XOC bioses based on AGESA 1201 for X570 Godlike and B550 Unify/Unify-X! Get your unlocked voltages and L3$ fix here


What is the XOC?


----------



## Forsaken1

X-Treme over clock.Voltage cap removed.

Who’s up for fun?HWBOT low clock challenge.
SPI32M.Current leader on ITX does not count.
2nd FGI 5:41:782
3rd Unify X .5:41:809 Takuko.






Overclocking, overclocking, and much more! Like overclocking.


HWBOT is a site dedicated to overclocking. We promote overclocking achievements and competitions for professionals as well as enthousiasts with rankings and a huge hardware database.




hwbot.org


----------



## Hale59

Forsaken1 said:


> X-Treme over clock.Voltage cap removed.
> 
> Who’s up for fun?HWBOT low clock challenge.
> SPI32M.Current leader on ITX does not count.
> 2nd FGI 5:41:782
> 3rd Unify X .5:41:809 Takuko.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Overclocking, overclocking, and much more! Like overclocking.
> 
> 
> HWBOT is a site dedicated to overclocking. We promote overclocking achievements and competitions for professionals as well as enthousiasts with rankings and a huge hardware database.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hwbot.org


Hey, I am there too. Look for the Ryzen 3100. Probably the only one.


----------



## Hale59

YoungChris said:


> AMD - Google Drive
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> New XOC bioses based on AGESA 1201 for X570 Godlike and B550 Unify/Unify-X! Get your unlocked voltages and L3$ fix here


Nothing for the MSI X570 Unify?


----------



## YoungChris

Hale59 said:


> Nothing for the MSI X570 Unify?


I will ask


----------



## MyUsername

ManniX-ITA said:


> Damn, I have to try again but I think my kit can't do that... can you go below 17 at 4000+?


I FRICKEN LOVE THIS MOTHERBOARD, I DID IT YASSSSSSSS









I have a super power muhahaha 4400 is not possible before


----------



## Forsaken1

Someone call the law.AIDA64 just got raped!!!!!!!!
1 CCD ish.











Dirty work for bot SPI32M runs.9th in th current standings.I want MOAR.


----------



## Scoty

YoungChris said:


> I will ask


hope coming for x570 Unify too.


----------



## BluePaint

Can't find a way around 5950X performance degradation of 10% or more on any FCLK > 1900 (tested in CB15 but affects all CPU benchmarks, AIDA is fine). Haven't had that on my 5800X which is running up to 2033 fclk without CPU performance loss.

The higher the vCore, the higher the performance loss (no powerlimits hit). Even 4000Mhz fixed with 1.1v vCore throttles 10%. [email protected] will throttle like 15% and PBO is completely broken, will show normal frequencies but performance is like 20% lower than 4000 fixed. It seems to be even worse on Unify-X with latest agesa/bios compared to my X570 tomahawk.

Got the Unify-X for testing from Amazon.de as new but was opened before (seems to not have been in use though). Rev. 2.1 with coil when under heavier load like AIDA and CB. Varies with voltage settings. No coil whine under light load. 

RAM OC seems good and slightly better than on the X570 Tomahawk (managed 4400 with 2x16GB b-die with desynced fclck). WHEAs seems to be somewhat better controlled than on X570.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

MyUsername said:


> They can at 1.5 volts. Memory's happy running at this 24/7


Should have tried harder with the Unify-X, love this board ram oc 

Can go down to tRCDRD 15 with your settings but, at least so far, didn't bring any improvement.
Had to relax lots of tertiary timings and, not sure, think it's failing at 1.51V.
At the end didn't improve latency and got 200 MB/s less in read bw.
But it's an interesting setup since it's borderline stable; nice to test changes in CAD BUS.


----------



## Babamoth

By the way to those who consider their unify x not affected by the "coil whine issue", is the problem totally solved? Or is there still a noise on load?


----------



## Forsaken1

Coil whine solved for me.

Looking for A502 bios?


----------



## Joeking78

Another nice result, WHEA free.

4266/4133, 1.6v (bios), 16-16-16-16-32, 2T....going to try later with lower VDIMM and some tweaks to procodt, maybe get sub 50ns.


----------



## YoungChris

BluePaint said:


> Can't find a way around 5950X performance degradation of 10% or more on any FCLK > 1900 (tested in CB15 but affects all CPU benchmarks, AIDA is fine). Haven't had that on my 5800X which is running up to 2033 fclk without CPU performance loss.
> 
> The higher the vCore, the higher the performance loss (no powerlimits hit). Even 4000Mhz fixed with 1.1v vCore throttles 10%. [email protected] will throttle like 15% and PBO is completely broken, will show normal frequencies but performance is like 20% lower than 4000 fixed. It seems to be even worse on Unify-X with latest agesa/bios compared to my X570 tomahawk.
> 
> Got the Unify-X for testing from Amazon.de as new but was opened before (seems to not have been in use though). Rev. 2.1 with coil when under heavier load like AIDA and CB. Varies with voltage settings. No coil whine under light load.
> 
> RAM OC seems good and slightly better than on the X570 Tomahawk (managed 4400 with 2x16GB b-die with desynced fclck). WHEAs seems to be somewhat better controlled than on X570.


The solution is just run 1866 with tight AF timings and accept the L
know I've posted this screen here before, but you can still get solid perf when fclk limited








I'd recommend going with the A05O1 bios, as that seemed like the best performance for the same settings.


----------



## weleh

Joeking78 said:


> Another nice result, WHEA free.
> 
> 4266/4133, 1.6v (bios), 16-16-16-16-32, 2T....going to try later with lower VDIMM and some tweaks to procodt, maybe get sub 50ns.
> View attachment 2481024
> 
> View attachment 2481025


Impressive but one thing I've wondered about all your screenshots is the fact that your clockspeed on Aida is absolute dog ****.
Is it because it is misreporting or are you downclocking for stability?


----------



## Joeking78

weleh said:


> Impressive but one thing I've wondered about all your screenshots is the fact that your clockspeed on Aida is absolute dog ****.
> Is it because it is misreporting or are you downclocking for stability?


I'm running aida in safe mode.

I got fed up closing background services/apps and running aida so decided in safe mode I would get more consistent results without interference from apps/services.

This weekend I'm planning to look at how to make a bench OS and start all my benchmarks again on that.


----------



## weleh

Joeking78 said:


> I'm running aida in safe mode.
> 
> I got fed up closing background services/apps and running aida so decided in safe mode I would get more consistent results without interference from apps/services.
> 
> This weekend I'm planning to look at how to make a bench OS and start all my benchmarks again on that.


I see, but you're testing stability on normal boot right?


----------



## Veii

weleh said:


> Impressive but one thing I've wondered about all your screenshots is the fact that your clockspeed on Aida is absolute dog ****.
> Is it because it is misreporting or are you downclocking for stability?


It's the powerplan, the best latency you get with cache being sleeping and waking up 
Vermeer is a dynamic system, and auto adjusts constantly 

A good score happens when the powerplan wakes the sleeping cores up to load, as each test of Aida64 has different types of load
some load 3 cores, some load only cores and no threads, some a single core and some are allcore related

The result will be slower if you only test memory or only test cache
It's normal to be that visible. real clocksleep you notice on L3 cache latency 
Which the overclocker should run as "press start"
else the cpu wont turbo properly up - if he only selectively tests


----------



## weleh

Veii said:


> It's the powerplan, the best latency you get with cache being sleeping and waking up
> Vermeer is a dynamic system, and auto adjusts constantly
> 
> A good score happens when the powerplan wakes the sleeping cores up to load, as each test of Aida64 has different types of load
> some load 3 cores, some load only cores and no threads, some a single core and some are allcore related
> 
> The result will be slower if you only test memory or only test cache
> It's normal to be that visible. real clocksleep you notice on L3 cache latency
> Which the overclocker should run as "press start"
> else the cpu wont turbo properly up - if he only selectively tests


He's running safe mode which means no chipset drivers are loaded and PBO doesn't work.


----------



## Joeking78

weleh said:


> I see, but you're testing stability on normal boot right?


Yep stability in regular windows with occt, Y-Cruncher, testmem, etc, aida only in safe mode


----------



## weleh

Well if that is trully stable you sir have an incredible chip regarding fCLK.
Can't wait until you test the cores too.


----------



## Veii

weleh said:


> He's running safe mode which means no chipset drivers are loaded and PBO doesn't work.


Also yes, but u don't need chipset drivers. Vermeer doesn't need powerplans or software/drivers to function
well if he can not turbo up (which he should notice on L3 cache being higher than 10.9ns = 4.65Ghz ) then his memory latency results will be worse

EDIT:
The same optimization part goes for Curve optimizer
Cores have to be able to turbo up and hit equal "effective frequency", while CPPC is enabled
else the results will be worse
Running safemode only hides issues, but is no requirement in hitting the 50ns mark

If we speak about the leaderboards at least
You lose more, if cache doesn't boost up properly and cores do not hibernate fully


----------



## Joeking78

weleh said:


> Well if that is trully stable you sir have an incredible chip regarding fCLK.
> Can't wait until you test the cores too.


So far 4000C15, 4133 and 4266C16 are stable in OCCT large data set/AVX2 and 1h+ testmem5.

Plan this weekend is to test further with more time available in Y-Cruncher....may see some instability there but I don't think much tweaking will be needed at this stage hopefully


----------



## Joeking78

Does anyone have any guide or link for setting up an OS for benching purposes?


----------



## MyUsername

I made a little recording while running aida memory benchmark, safe to play at full volume no loud noises until the end @1:59. The background noise is a 6TB harddrive humming to gauge the whine.

Unify-x whine.wav - Google Drive


----------



## Hale59

Joeking78 said:


> Does anyone have any guide or link for setting up an OS for benching purposes?








B550 Unify-X Bios and Tools


I don't have much yet, more posts will follow. Bios A.05O: https://drive.google.com/file/d/11b96620j1yIy-8OiQXhsFW25czHiC3PI/view?usp=sharing Should allow for vdimm >2.0 and other fun. Not sure about AGESA version, will check when I can get back to my board.



community.hwbot.org


----------



## KedarWolf

Joeking78 said:


> Does anyone have any guide or link for setting up an OS for benching purposes?











[Official] AMD Ryzen DDR4 24/7 Memory Stability Thread


Should be between 54,1 and 55 With 2x8 gb I have 54.7 with 1900 Mhz and 16-16-16-16-32 2T 32 gb Cl 14 1T could be lower I guess




www.overclock.net


----------



## gymleader91

Ridiculous prices now.

Unify can be had for £189. The Unify-x is £199.

Both at scan.co.uk

Is this a play by MSI to offload coil whine boards before jacking the price back up when the nov/dec stock dries up? The Unify-x for £199 cements it as the AM4 standard imo.


----------



## KedarWolf

MyUsername said:


> I made a little recording while running aida memory benchmark, safe to play at full volume no loud noises until the end @1:59. The background noise is a 6TB harddrive humming to gauge the whine.
> 
> Unify-x whine.wav - Google Drive


I turned all my fans off in BIOS, put my two water pumps at 30%, zero coil whine, I mean none at all while running AIDA. And I put my ear next to my test bench open case.

It's kinda sad though because I keep my fans way too loud and would have been nice someone more sensitive to noise got this board.


----------



## KedarWolf

gymleader91 said:


> Ridiculous prices now.
> 
> Unify can be had for £189. The Unify-x is £199.
> 
> Both at scan.co.uk
> 
> Is this a play by MSI to offload coil whine boards before jacking the price back up when the nov/dec stock dries up? The Unify-x for £199 cements it as the AM4 standard imo.


Still $299 USD in the states for the Unify-X. Prices haven't changed there.


----------



## dr.Rafi

ManniX-ITA said:


> It's almost impossible to degrade a DIMM; the ICs are rated up to 85c.
> You don't even get close to that with 2.0V.
> Either you fry it or it works.
> And frying as well it's hard, especially B-die.
> It's a bunch of capacitors and transistors, not the same as a silicon die.


May be one day they will make fire and voltage proof computers, no mater we do will servive.


----------



## gymleader91

I'm looking at the Unify-x now. Seems like a better choice than the X570 Tomahawk for the same price.

I know it probably doesn't matter but I was looking at the QVL for the Unify-X and the RAM section is well... basically empty when it comes to the normal bread and butter. The only 3200C14 kits are some quad channel offerings and 3600C16 is about the same besides F4-3600C16D-16GVK. I really need 32GB though so dual rank modules are needed.

I just find it off that they would test F4-3600C16D-32GTZN on Unify but not on the Unify-x.


----------



## BluePaint

YoungChris said:


> The solution is just run 1866 with tight AF timings and accept the L
> I'd recommend going with the A05O1 bios, as that seemed like the best performance for the same settings.


Thanks, yes, tight timings seems to be the way if the CPU doesn't have a super IMC for higher fclks.
Already returned the Unify-X since it doesn't really make a difference with CPU IMC fclk problems and I can probably do 95% RAM OC with the X570 Tomahawk which I already own and it doesn't have any coil whine 

Quick & dirty result from Tomahawk


----------



## MyUsername

KedarWolf said:


> I turned all my fans off in BIOS, put my two water pumps at 30%, zero coil whine, I mean none at all while running AIDA. And I put my ear next to my test bench open case.
> 
> It's kinda sad though because I keep my fans way too loud and would have been nice someone more sensitive to noise got this board.


Excellent. I'm happy with mine, you need bat ears to hear it with fans running and side panels on, but then it only does it with Aida so not an issue. I'm no spring chicken either with slight tinnitus. Should have mentioned the volume is boosted 2x, no fans running, just 2 harddrives 6TB which you can hear and 2.5 1TB which is quiet running.


----------



## Paddydapro

Joeking78 said:


> Another nice result, WHEA free.
> 
> 4266/4133, 1.6v (bios), 16-16-16-16-32, 2T....going to try later with lower VDIMM and some tweaks to procodt, maybe get sub 50ns.
> View attachment 2481024
> 
> View attachment 2481025


this is the dream i want to be living ;_;


----------



## Joeking78

Paddydapro said:


> this is the dream i want to be living ;_;


Its this 5800x (2040SUS)...seems to be strong on the memory side/fabric clock.

I can get one more with the same batch if you (or anyone else) wanted.


----------



## mongoled

Paddydapro said:


> this is the dream i want to be living ;_;


Then you need to have better dreams!


----------



## YoungChris

Joeking78 said:


> Its this 5800x (2040SUS)...seems to be strong on the memory side/fabric clock.
> 
> I can get one more with the same batch if you (or anyone else) wanted.


if you can get another with the same OC properties, I'll take.
even a 5600x that could match your fclk


----------



## Joeking78

YoungChris said:


> if you can get another with the same OC properties, I'll take.
> even a 5600x that could match your fclk


My friend still has 5800x (2040SUS), 2000 AED (540$)...not good price here in UAE.


----------



## DaLoona

gymleader91 said:


> I'm looking at the Unify-x now. Seems like a better choice than the X570 Tomahawk for the same price.
> 
> I know it probably doesn't matter but I was looking at the QVL for the Unify-X and the RAM section is well... basically empty when it comes to the normal bread and butter. The only 3200C14 kits are some quad channel offerings and 3600C16 is about the same besides F4-3600C16D-16GVK. I really need 32GB though so dual rank modules are needed.
> 
> I just find it off that they would test F4-3600C16D-32GTZN on Unify but not on the Unify-x.


I have the G-Skill Flare X 3200 C14 running with 0 problems on my Unify-X and it is a good overclocking kit (at least the one I have).
It does 3733MHz 14-15-15-15-31-46, 1T @1.48V

Edit: nvm, just saw you need a 32GB kit.....


----------



## BluePaint

My F4-3600C16D-32GTZN kit was working fine on Unify x as it is on 570 tomahawk


----------



## Babamoth

F4-4000C16D-32GTZR works perfectly fine at xmp with my ryzen 5600x.
Haven't done any test though my guess is I have to downclock it to match infinity fabric.
Btw anyone can suggest a few reads to do that I'm a bit lost in this msi bios.
Thanks


----------



## CfYz

MyUsername said:


> I made a little recording while running aida memory benchmark, safe to play at full volume no loud noises until the end @1:59. The background noise is a 6TB harddrive humming to gauge the whine.
> 
> Unify-x whine.wav - Google Drive


I got *exactly same* "whistles" on AIDA64 bench and more loud "whine" in games (WZ tested and SnowRunner) than on win desktop. And I got refund for this board and ban on official MSI forum for that 🤣

You can look here - the "global moderator" advise to replace thermal pads and states that aluminum heatsink "rattles" and VRM not whines at all. You can try this solutions, idk will it help - but maybe it will?






MSI Global English Forum


...




forum-en.msi.com


----------



## ManniX-ITA

CfYz said:


> I got *exactly same* "whistles" on AIDA64 bench and more loud "whine" in games (WZ tested and SnowRunner) than on win desktop. And I got refund for this board and ban on official MSI forum for that 🤣
> 
> You can look here - the "global moderator" advise to replace thermal pads and states that aluminum heatsink "rattles" and VRM not whines at all. You can try this solutions, idk will it help - but maybe it will?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MSI Global English Forum
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> forum-en.msi.com


This guy is a total psycho.
Still wondering if it's worth to answer him and get banned as well


----------



## mongoled

ManniX-ITA said:


> This guy is a total psycho.
> Still wondering if it's worth to answer him and get banned as well


Guys on an ego trip

🤣🤣


----------



## Forsaken1

If the mod on msi forum was my employee.
I would spank him.Maybe a off couple days.
If you get a board that sings.Keep returning it.


----------



## Forsaken1

BluePaint said:


> Thanks, yes, tight timings seems to be the way if the CPU doesn't have a super IMC for higher fclks.
> Already returned the Unify-X since it doesn't really make a difference with CPU IMC fclk problems and I can probably do 95% RAM OC with the X570 Tomahawk which I already own and it doesn't have any coil whine
> 
> Quick & dirty result from Tomahawk
> View attachment 2481110


Tomahawk looks like the best sub $200 board on market.

Get into the 42’s.Take a peek at results:
Hats off to* I.NFRAR.ED.3rd on unify X.*





Overclocking, overclocking, and much more! Like overclocking.


HWBOT is a site dedicated to overclocking. We promote overclocking achievements and competitions for professionals as well as enthousiasts with rankings and a huge hardware database.




hwbot.org


----------



## MyUsername

That MSI guy's a complete tool. If he's a genius as he claims, then he would know the inductors are vibrating. Buildzoid covered this explaining the difference between the two types of inductors.


----------



## gymleader91

Does anyone have any experience with the secure erase+ feature? I can't find any videos or screenshots showing the menu. Page 65 of the manual just says "Enables or disables Secure Erase+ function. Secure Erase+ is the best way to effectively wipe all data from a SSD. Please note that data of SSD will be erased after enabling Secure Erase+."

Is it even for nvme or normal ssd?


----------



## MyUsername

gymleader91 said:


> Does anyone have any experience with the secure erase+ feature? I can't find any videos or screenshots showing the menu. Page 65 of the manual just says "Enables or disables Secure Erase+ function. Secure Erase+ is the best way to effectively wipe all data from a SSD. Please note that data of SSD will be erased after enabling Secure Erase+."
> 
> Is it even for nvme or normal ssd?


Both I think, but I only have nvme. It's a low level format sort of thing for ssd, it writes zeros. I would just delete a partition and create a new one and not touch secure erase+ unless you really need to.


----------



## Hale59

gymleader91 said:


> Does anyone have any experience with the secure erase+ feature? I can't find any videos or screenshots showing the menu. Page 65 of the manual just says "Enables or disables Secure Erase+ function. Secure Erase+ is the best way to effectively wipe all data from a SSD. Please note that data of SSD will be erased after enabling Secure Erase+."
> 
> Is it even for nvme or normal ssd?


I do on both (nvme and ssd) when there is a need to do so.


----------



## Hale59

MyUsername said:


> That MSI guy's a complete tool. If he's a genius as he claims, then he would know the inductors are vibrating. Buildzoid covered this explaining the difference between the two types of inductors.


I also had an argument with him. I complain as a costumer about my unhappiness regarding my mobo. He tried to impose himself. He banned me but before that I had the chance to call him a *ussy on the forum.


----------



## MyUsername

I decided to investigate the dreaded whine today, as well as cable tidy, clean dust etc, I did just throw this board in when I got it LOL. I took the vrm heatsink off and found the original thermal pad had dried a little, I have some grizzly pad somewhere. While running aida benchmark I applied pressure with my finger to each inductor. It didn't take me long to find that two were causing the two chirps on memory copy and level 3 cache copy. What doesn't help is the forth one along sits about 0.5mm higher reducing pressure on the suspect inductors. I had some old thermal pad, so I doubled the thickness, which is not a good idea as the board is quite flexible and like a god damn banana so I removed it.
It's reduced the whine a little bit with the fresh grizzly 2mm stuff on, but without putting pressure on with my finger I don't think it can be easily fixed. Luckily for me it's not loud and the PC runs fine.


----------



## Babamoth

I asked Msi about that whine issue they told me no such thing has been reported... And that nothing was changed production wise between 4 month ago and now...
I decided to send back the whiny one because I found a shop with a recent stock . The new one is pure silence, I can sleep now.


----------



## YoungChris

Forsaken1 said:


> Tomahawk looks like the best sub $200 board on market.
> 
> Get into the 42’s.Take a peek at results:
> Hats off to* I.NFRAR.ED.3rd on unify X.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Overclocking, overclocking, and much more! Like overclocking.
> 
> 
> HWBOT is a site dedicated to overclocking. We promote overclocking achievements and competitions for professionals as well as enthousiasts with rankings and a huge hardware database.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hwbot.org


he has plans to go sub 5.41, I'm providing him with some advice
If I can get a capable chip, I'll try to go for #1


----------



## dr.Rafi

MyUsername said:


> I decided to investigate the dreaded whine today, as well as cable tidy, clean dust etc, I did just throw this board in when I got it LOL. I took the vrm heatsink off and found the original thermal pad had dried a little, I have some grizzly pad somewhere. While running aida benchmark I applied pressure with my finger to each inductor. It didn't take me long to find that two were causing the two chirps on memory copy and level 3 cache copy. What doesn't help is the forth one along sits about 0.5mm higher reducing pressure on the suspect inductors. I had some old thermal pad, so I doubled the thickness, which is not a good idea as the board is quite flexible and like a god damn banana so I removed it.
> It's reduced the whine a little bit with the fresh grizzly 2mm stuff on, but without putting pressure on with my finger I don't think it can be easily fixed. Luckily for me it's not loud and the PC runs fine.
> View attachment 2481426


If was me I will simply reflow that higher inductor to make it level or even bit lower, after thermaly insulating the caps and mosfets with aluminuim sheet, but I was lucky got new unify-x locally and returned the unify with coil whine issue.


----------



## KedarWolf

Pretty happy with this multicore.


----------



## YoungChris

About a year ago, I began my competitive OC journey with SuperPi 32m.








Today, I return to my roots.








#7 in the hwbot competition, more to come hopefully


----------



## KedarWolf




----------



## Babamoth

YoungChris said:


> About a year ago, I began my competitive OC journey with SuperPi 32m.
> View attachment 2481538
> 
> Today, I return to my roots.
> View attachment 2481537
> 
> #7 in the hwbot competition, more to come hopefully


Very nice. I see you reached fclk 2000 is it more doable now ? I wonder if it will work on my 5600x... Should I manually increase voltages to achieve it?
I'm on a 2x16 4000 cl16 kit btw


----------



## YoungChris

Babamoth said:


> Very nice. I see you reached fclk 2000 is it more doable now ? I wonder if it will work on my 5600x... Should I manually increase voltages to achieve it?
> I'm on a 2x16 4000 cl16 kit btw


For benching purposes, it may be much more viable now. I haven't tried using lower voltages, more just set some generous volts and let it rip.


----------



## KedarWolf

The 12351 is with a static CCX overclock, the 11902 is with Curve Optimizer.


----------



## KedarWolf

KedarWolf said:


> Pretty happy with this multicore.
> 
> View attachment 2481480


Scaler 10 instead of Scaler 4.


----------



## Forsaken1

YoungChris said:


> he has plans to go sub 5.41, I'm providing him with some advice
> If I can get a capable chip, I'll try to go for #1


Impressive run for each of you.Cheers.

For me at the edge of cliff. Go all in with tweaks available or let it ride.........


----------



## YoungChris

Forsaken1 said:


> Impressive run for each of you.Cheers.
> 
> For me at the edge of cliff. Go all in with tweaks available or let it ride.........


There are more tweaks as well. 32 bit OS matters, as well as which Win 10 version you run. I think I'll test 1709 next, as I'm still a ways behind my goal.


----------



## Hale59

Serchio said:


> If you have only 4 GB of RAM then maybe because 32-bit systems do not support more than 4 GB of RAM.











MSI B550 Unify / Unify-X Overclocking & Discussions...


he has plans to go sub 5.41, I'm providing him with some advice If I can get a capable chip, I'll try to go for #1 Impressive run for each of you.Cheers. For me at the edge of cliff. Go all in with tweaks available or let it ride.........




www.overclock.net


----------



## ImmutableState

Hey guys. I’ve bought recently my unify-x mobo. It seems it has coil whine sounds as well. Made a short video with sound example. What i tried to do:
1) tightened screws of heatsinks
2) detached heatsinks and checked that all thermal pads are aligned correctly.
Where can I check a mobo revision and date of production? What options do I have? RMA only?


----------



## MyUsername

ImmutableState said:


> Hey guys. I’ve bought recently my unify-x mobo. It seems it has coil whine sounds as well. Made a short video with sound example. What i tried to do:
> 1) tightened screws of heatsinks
> 2) detached heatsinks and checked that all thermal pads are aligned correctly.
> Where can I check a mobo revision and date of production? What options do I have? RMA only?


RMA if you're unhappy with the noise. I actually consider it normal operation, annoying perhaps if it was screaming like a screaming banshee when moving the mouse, but there's nothing wrong with it. It may reduce over time, maybe.


----------



## KedarWolf

My Unify-X much better on Curve Optimizer than my X570 Godlike was. I'm running 20 on top 6 cores. 25 on next 4, 30 on last 6. Scaler 10, Boost 200.

My Godlike I did like 12-12-15-15-20-20-20-20-25-25-25-25-30-30-30-30, Scaler 4, Boost 200.

Edit: Is it a sin I sold my Godlike for $300 Canadian more than what I paid for my Unify-X? 

Ram overclock is exactly the same.


----------



## Hale59

KedarWolf said:


> Ram overclock is exactly the same.


So, now you have this board with 2 ram slots. Are you going to OC your ram or you going with same timings and MHz forever?


----------



## weleh

Were you on the same AGESA on both?

1201 is very different than 1200, CO wise.

Another thing, I've been using OCCT to test Curve, and my latest setup passed hours of SingleCore SSE small Extreme 1T and nT AVX2, SSE, etc, and it passed with flying colors.

Yesterday I decided to use the P95 Core tested posted on this forum somewhere and it instantly caught several unstable cores.


----------



## mongoled

Hale59 said:


> So, now you have this board with 2 ram slots. Are you going to OC your ram or you going with same timings and MHz forever?


😂 😂

Does the B550 have "CPU VDDP" voltage available? 

Don't understand why MSI don't have this voltage available for tweaking on x570 platform. 

It's mentioned so often on other motherboards but on MSI it's hidden. 

What gives MSI?


----------



## YoungChris

Joeking78 said:


> View attachment 2481126
> View attachment 2481127
> 
> My friend still has 5800x (2040SUS), 2000 AED (540$)...not good price here in UAE.


Are there any 5600x of this batch?
Even if only 5800x
if it can bench (not even daily) 2066 1:1, if possible above, without gdm or high fabric caused performance regression
I will pay the price


----------



## YoungChris

the ultimate dream is 2100 or 2133 1:1 without ANY performance regression
I know 2100 has been done before, if I could get that, the 5g SuperPi Vermeer record will go into the 5.39.XXX


----------



## KedarWolf

Hale59 said:


> So, now you have this board with 2 ram slots. Are you going to OC your ram or you going with same timings and MHz forever?


I couldn't get the RAM timings even a bit better without it throwing WHEA or TM5 errors.

I never spent a lot of time on it, but any changes I made, no good.

And I had to figure out it undervolts SOC by .025 to even get the same timings stable.

3866, 4000. anything, nada. Even 3800 with better timings, not working.


----------



## KedarWolf

weleh said:


> Were you on the same AGESA on both?
> 
> 1201 is very different than 1200, CO wise.
> 
> Another thing, I've been using OCCT to test Curve, and my latest setup passed hours of SingleCore SSE small Extreme 1T and nT AVX2, SSE, etc, and it passed with flying colors.
> 
> Yesterday I decided to use the P95 Core tested posted on this forum somewhere and it instantly caught several unstable cores.


I'm running P95, 1344 FFTs In Place, so far, no cores crashing. I like those settings as temps stay really low and eventually cores will crash if the least bit unstable.

I'm NOT going to run Prime 95 Small FFTs or something and watch my CPU jump to 90+C.


----------



## Joeking78

YoungChris said:


> Are there any 5600x of this batch?
> Even if only 5800x
> if it can bench (not even daily) 2066 1:1, if possible above, without gdm or high fabric caused performance regression
> I will pay the price


I'm going into town on Friday, I'll check out some of the local suppliers and ask to their 5600x stock and check the manufacturing codes.

Will let you know what I find.


----------



## gymleader91

In regards to the QVL situation of the Unify-X, I've not known if motherboard makers do this but say I was running pure stock performance via enabling XMP only.

Would a 3600C16 Neo kit (not on QVL) perform the same as a 3600C16 Ripjaws kit (on the QVL)? Both would have 16-16-16-36 timings. I ask because I am not sure if board makers tune memory for better secondary and tertiary timings based on being on the QVL and it's able to know that a kit on QVL is inserted. Additionally, would a kit on the QVL overclock better?

Also the Unify-x is £189.99 at Amazon UK on pre order (they had units today but sold out). It's basically the same price as an Asus B550-F. Crazy price.


----------



## ernorator

Did someone had problems with buzzing/static noise coming from motherboard (more or less from mobo vrm) when You move Your mouse?

I did some internet digging. 

Disconnecting front panel did not work
Disabling c-state in BIOS did not work
Using any other USB for mouse did not work
Changing power plans in win10 did not work
Changing mouse polling rate did not work (bit quieter with 125 than with 500/1000)
Changing mouse did not work, but all wire mouses

No buzzing in BIOS 
5800x
Unify-X
Razer Viper/Steelseries Rival 600/Logitech 502
Seasonic Focus Gold Plus 750W


Tomorrow I'll be changing CPU block so I'll check all mobo screws and block mount. Plus I'll take all nicely packed and managed psu cables and spread them as far as I can from each other. Wonder If any of this will work.


----------



## dr.Rafi

ernorator said:


> Did someone had problems with buzzing/static noise coming from motherboard (more or less from mobo vrm) when You move Your mouse?
> 
> I did some internet digging.
> 
> Disconnecting front panel did not work
> Disabling c-state in BIOS did not work
> Using any other USB for mouse did not work
> Changing power plans in win10 did not work
> Changing mouse polling rate did not work (bit quieter with 125 than with 500/1000)
> Changing mouse did not work, but all wire mouses
> 
> No buzzing in BIOS
> 5800x
> Unify-X
> Razer Viper/Steelseries Rival 600/Logitech 502
> Seasonic Focus Gold Plus 750W
> 
> 
> Tomorrow I'll be changing CPU block so I'll check all mobo screws and block mount. Plus I'll take all nicely packed and managed psu cables and spread them as far as I can from each other. Wonder If any of this will work.


It is known issue with certain batches of B550 Unify and Unify-x , if you check the previous pages, and me too had this issue RMA the motherboard if you can. it is the VRM of the motherboard.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

@gymleader91 
I don't think it'll overclock better: if it's on the QVL there's a better chance it'll work since it should have been tested.
If you get and Samsung B-Die kit there's a lesser chance something will go wrong.

@ernorator 
If it's so bad chances you'll have a hard time fixing it.
Probably better to return it or send it back in RMA if you can't cope with it.
You can try tightening the VRM heatsink screws, bending a bit the heat pipe, replacing the thermal pad with a thicker one.
But even that is not always fully fixing it for those which doesn't have coil whine moving the mouse.


----------



## ernorator

I will return it, still have time till 26th march to return with no reason and still have my old b550 Tomahawk in the box. 

If a had air cooled system I would try my luck with next one but as I have custom water loop it is too much hassle switching motherboards just to see if it's buzzing or not.


----------



## Babamoth

I updated to the latest bios and just set fclk to 2000 with my ddr4000 xmp activated.
I had 1 whea error code 20 while not doing anything special ( that I know of).
Did cpuid stress test for few minutes to see if more wheas but no. Then had time for a time spy before leaving, no wheas and cpu score 8848. I know it's not crazy and that I did not do enough stress test but it's encouraging.

About that single whea, code 20, that happened very soon after the windows boot, do you think it could be dealt with by adjusting something?


----------



## Hale59

KedarWolf said:


> I couldn't get the RAM timings even a bit better without it throwing WHEA or TM5 errors.
> 
> I never spent a lot of time on it, but any changes I made, no good.
> 
> And I had to figure out it undervolts SOC by .025 to even get the same timings stable.
> 
> 3866, 4000. anything, nada. Even 3800 with better timings, not working.


As I said before, its time to sell that CPU and get a new one. No excuses.


----------



## weleh

Yesterday I decided to mess a bit with fCLK again on my 5800X and Unify X @A21 bios agesa 1201.

So I can boot any fCLK up to 2200 by just messing with CLDO_VDDP, on 2x8GB Bdie.
There's 0 change to fCLK instability by messing with other voltages.

1.1 VSOC
0.850 CCD
1V IOD

CLDO_VDDP needs to be higher than 0.9V to boot any fCLK past 1900. I need like 0.92V to boot any fCLK past 1900.

Also, SOC voltage introduces wheas faster the higher it goes. At this point I believe fCLK is 100% silicon lottery and no amount of AGESAs will help > 1900 fCLK.

Didn't test lower IOD but pretty sure it will just work fine. VSOC actually dropps to 1.08V on load since I'm not using LLC.


----------



## KedarWolf

For your Curve Optimizer overclock, try this.

I can find the GitHub now, but with the attachment, change .txt to .zip and unzip.

Here. Download from the Code link. 









GitHub - jasonpoly/per-core-stability-test-script: Test script developed for for easier testing of Zen 3 curve offsets


Test script developed for for easier testing of Zen 3 curve offsets - GitHub - jasonpoly/per-core-stability-test-script: Test script developed for for easier testing of Zen 3 curve offsets




github.com





You can change the main test duration to 60 seconds for a quick test, then to 1200 seconds for a 8 hour overnight test.

The below is about eight hours.

I got +30 on all cores except my best two at 19-23 with this test Cinebench R20 and R23 stable. Boost 200, Scaler 10, voltages on Motherboard setting.



Code:


$p95path="p95v304b9.win64.zip"; # path to p95 .zip you want to extract and use

# adjust the following to customize length of time to run
$core_loop_test=$true;    # Default=$true.  Basic test to loop around all cores.  Set to $falue to disable.
$loops=1;                 # Default=1. Number of times to loop around all cores.
$cycle_time=1200;          # Default=60.  Approx time in s to run on each core.
$cooldown=1;             # Default=1.  Time in s to cool down between testing each core.

$core_jumping_test=$true;      # Default=$true.  Test to move process from core to core.  Set to $falue to disable.
$core_jumping_loops=5;         # Default=5. Number of loops to run.
$core_jumping_cycle_time=120;   # Default=10.  Approx time in s to run on each core.

# adjust next two values to limit testing to a specific range of cores
$first_core=0;   # First core to test in each loop.  Default=0.  Any cores lower than this number will not be tested.
$last_core=31;   # Last core to test in each loop.  Any cores (that exist) higher than this number will not be tested.
                 # Will automaticlly get adjusted down to the actual number of detected cores.
                 # Default and MAX value=31.  Cores 32 or higher will result in an Error: "Arithmetic operation resulted in an overflow."

# additional settings
$stop_on_error=$false; # Default=$false.  $true will stop if an error is found, otherwise skip to the next core.
$timestep=1;           # Minimum time to run stress test.  Will check for errors every this many seconds.
$use_smt=$true;        # Default=$true.  $false will only enable one thread on each physical core even if SMT (Hyperthreading) is enabled on the system.

$fatal_error=$false;   # Default=$false.  Script sets this to true if there is an unrecoverable error.  Any subsequent tests will then be skipped.


----------



## KedarWolf




----------



## Phynicle

The new 1201 bios that's been on headlines, is that in reference to the beta 1201 seen on msi support page? 

I can't find any other 1201.


----------



## YoungChris

I've posted the XOC version of that bios here and hwbot
I'd personally recommend that one


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Phynicle said:


> The new 1201 bios that's been on headlines, is that in reference to the beta 1201 seen on msi support page?
> 
> I can't find any other 1201.


The one making headlines now is the AGESA 1.2.0.2 w/ USB fix which is not yet released.
Latest available is the one shared by @YoungChris


----------



## weleh

This 1201 AGESA kinda killed MT performance for my 5800X.

I get better benches with PBO default than with PBO tweaked + curve optimizer fully tested.

This is reproduceable on many benchmarks.

On the other hand... Managed this beauty. 296 average FPS on lowest settings+lowest res.
Not even fully tunned 10900K I've seen with DR RAM beat this and I'm on SR.


----------



## BluePaint

weleh said:


> On the other hand... Managed this beauty. 296 average FPS on lowest settings+lowest res.
> Not even fully tunned 10900K I've seen with DR RAM beat this and I'm on SR.


As mentioned in other thread, would be interesting to test with NVIDIA GPU since it's driver requires more CPU resource compared to AMD.
The CPU game part of TR benchmark is essentially a CPU limited scenario where performance is impacted by load caused by GPU driver.
It could be that Intel CPUs don't have much (if any) of an advantage for AMD GPUs because there isn't so much switching between game engine and driver is required (which would be positively influenced by Intels lower latency architecture).


Spoiler


----------



## weleh

Shouldn't matter for high end CPUs.
There's a reason HWUB didn't test R7/R9 and I7/I9 CPU's.


----------



## BluePaint

weleh said:


> Shouldn't matter for high end CPUs.


Every bit of CPU load counts when u do a CPU benchmark (which the TR CPU game benchmark is). 

You could actually simulate the additional load from NVIDIA driver by running a light multi-threaded CPU load in the background when doing the TR benchmark. Would be interesting whether there is any difference between how AMD and Intel CPUs deal with that situation.


----------



## weleh

BluePaint said:


> Every bit of CPU load counts when u do a CPU benchmark (which the TR CPU game benchmark is).
> 
> You could actually simulate the additional load from NVIDIA driver by running a light multi-threaded CPU load in the background when doing the TR benchmark. Would be interesting whether there is any difference between how AMD and Intel CPUs deal with that situation.


They deal the same way I guess because KingFaris tested a 5950X and 10900K fully tuned with a 3090.


----------



## gymleader91

I was checking this guide: Overclocking Guide for DDR4 RAM

"A2: JEDEC stock PCB for DDR4-2666. Commonly used with RGB RAM kits. A good PCB that has some issues with 2 DIMM motherboards."

Put me off the Unify-x since I know all good kits are A2 these days. How true is it?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

gymleader91 said:


> I was checking this guide: Overclocking Guide for DDR4 RAM
> 
> "A2: JEDEC stock PCB for DDR4-2666. Commonly used with RGB RAM kits. A good PCB that has some issues with 2 DIMM motherboards."
> 
> Put me off the Unify-x since I know all good kits are A2 these days. How true is it?


I think it's outdated.
Have a couple of B2, Trident Z RGB, and they works like a charm on the Unify-X.
Guess many here are using A2 without any issue.


----------



## KedarWolf

ManniX-ITA said:


> I think it's outdated.
> Have a couple of B2, Trident Z RGB, and they works like a charm on the Unify-X.
> Guess many here are using A2 without any issue.


I believe B2 is just Dual Rank A2.


----------



## Speed Potato

I get P6 post code when rebooting in pcie gen4 mode but not when I cold boot. When I as a seconf nvme ssd into the board I get even weirder problems like 5A. I like the board but I geel like it's not playing well with my drives


----------



## KedarWolf

Speed Potato said:


> I get P6 post code when rebooting in pcie gen4 mode but not when I cold boot. When I as a seconf nvme ssd into the board I get even weirder problems like 5A. I like the board but I geel like it's not playing well with my drives


I run a 3090 Gen 4, two Gen 4 M.2s in CPU mode, and a SATA disk drive, 0 issues.


----------



## weleh

My UnifyX just bricked after a bios flash.

Code 22, bios flashback doesn't work, turns the PC, stops blinking and shuts off.

gg MSI


----------



## ManniX-ITA

weleh said:


> My UnifyX just bricked after a bios flash.
> 
> Code 22, bios flashback doesn't work, turns the PC, stops blinking and shuts off.
> 
> gg MSI


Did you tried before flashback?
Cause that's also one of the behaviors when it doesn't like a particular stick.
I use a cheap Kingston 32GB; others wouldn't work.


----------



## weleh

Flashback turns PC on and off doesn't do anything.

Also I've tried 3 different pen drives including the drive I usually do flashes with.

Unpluged CPU, same story.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

weleh said:


> Flashback turns PC on and off doesn't do anything.
> 
> Also I've tried 3 different pen drives including the drive I usually do flashes with.
> 
> Unpluged CPU, same story.


I'd say there's a good chance it's bricked...

But I'm quite sure had this behavior with Sandisk USB sticks.
It would think a while, maybe few minutes not sure, then turn off.
Did you try without USB stick at all? Is it different?
Cause I think I remember that when I've found out it was the same behavior as nil plugged in, then I tried more sticks.
Not sure at all, it was a while ago.
With an old Verbatim 2GB would stay on for 10-15 minutes and then shuts off.
Then a 7 € Kingston 32GB did the trick, loves it and works every time.


----------



## gymleader91

Is is recommended to install the UWD versons of the drivers? It seems bluetooth and wifi have the options.

Also is this nahimic driver packaged with audio needed to be installed or just extra?


----------



## weleh

RMA'ed the board.

Got a cheap b550 bazooka to replace it meanwhile.

Let's see what MSI says/does.


----------



## MyUsername

weleh said:


> RMA'ed the board.
> 
> Got a cheap b550 bazooka to replace it meanwhile.
> 
> Let's see what MSI says/does.


Did the flash fail during m-flash or flashrom? 

I don't like m-flash, many times it only gets to 50% and fan graphics disappear, I don't know why. But when it does 100% the graphics stay on, weird. So my preferred way is flashrom, but there's a write protect on newer bioses so you can't use flashrom.


----------



## weleh

No fails, nothing out of the ordinary.

I flashed via bios and it failed. I then tried with bios flashback and it worked but the PC didn't turn on like usual. It gave me code 22 then. Tried flashback again multiple times with multiple tricks and same 22 code. Removed all hardware same issue, flashback tries to launch and then fails and pc shuts off.


----------



## YoungChris

all small or ~16gb drives formatted in fat32?


----------



## MyUsername

weleh said:


> No fails, nothing out of the ordinary.
> 
> I flashed via bios and it failed. I then tried with bios flashback and it worked but the PC didn't turn on like usual. It gave me code 22 then. Tried flashback again multiple times with multiple tricks and same 22 code. Removed all hardware same issue, flashback tries to launch and then fails and pc shuts off.


It's pretty simple to know whether the flashback works as it takes 1-2 minutes and flashes continually. That really sucks, gotta love dual bios.



YoungChris said:


> all small or ~16gb drives formatted in fat32?


Any should work, it just has to be MBR and fat32.


----------



## weleh

It didn't work, flashback would start but instead of flashing it would just shut the PC off straight away.

Sucks.

Now to wait for MSI, money or new board.


----------



## MyUsername

weleh said:


> It didn't work, flashback would start but instead of flashing it would just shut the PC off straight away.
> 
> Sucks.
> 
> Now to wait for MSI, money or new board.


What's bugging me is you're getting a code, a corrupt bios wouldn't give a code it'll be a paper weight. It's a weird one, it'll interesting to see what MSI finds or you'll hear nothing and get a new board.


----------



## weleh

MyUsername said:


> What's bugging me is you're getting a code, a corrupt bios wouldn't give a code it'll be a paper weight. It's a weird one, it'll interesting to see what MSI finds or you'll hear nothing and get a new board.


With CPU I got code 22, without I got 00.


----------



## PJVol

code 22 used to mean wrong memory settings for me, usually too high clock, or too low vdimm, or messed timings. Might mean too high fclk coupled with wrong mem settings as well


----------



## weleh

Yea it's memory related but I assure you it wasn't the case on my board. 

Took the sticks out first thing.


----------



## YoungChris

Sparky's 32M and Geekbench 3 OSs for AMD.7z







drive.google.com




My current newest bench OSs are now available for download, the ones used in the results above. The 64 bit one should be about on par if not better than the current HWBot gold cup holders for AMD in Geek/Cine. The 32 bit OS should be matching the top ranks in the HWBot AMD 5G SuperPi 32m competition here:





Overclocking, overclocking, and much more! Like overclocking.


HWBOT is a site dedicated to overclocking. We promote overclocking achievements and competitions for professionals as well as enthousiasts with rankings and a huge hardware database.




hwbot.org




Get to benching! I wanna see some results!


----------



## KedarWolf

YoungChris said:


> View attachment 2482782
> 
> View attachment 2482783
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sparky's 32M and Geekbench 3 OSs for AMD.7z
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My current newest bench OSs are now available for download, the ones used in the results above. The 64 bit one should be about on par if not better than the current HWBot gold cup holders for AMD in Geek/Cine. The 32 bit OS should be matching the top ranks in the HWBot AMD 5G SuperPi 32m competition here:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Overclocking, overclocking, and much more! Like overclocking.
> 
> 
> HWBOT is a site dedicated to overclocking. We promote overclocking achievements and competitions for professionals as well as enthousiasts with rankings and a huge hardware database.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hwbot.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Get to benching! I wanna see some results!


What have you chang


MyUsername said:


> Did the flash fail during m-flash or flashrom?
> 
> I don't like m-flash, many times it only gets to 50% and fan graphics disappear, I don't know why. But when it does 100% the graphics stay on, weird. So my preferred way is flashrom, but there's a write protect on newer bioses so you can't use flashrom.


You can flash the first release BIOS with M-Flash, then flash the newest with flashrom. The first BIOS does not have write protect.

That's what I did to get around it.


----------



## YoungChris

KedarWolf said:


> What have you chang
> 
> 
> You can flash the first release BIOS with M-Flash, then flash the newest with flashrom. The firsUOTE]


both are just new installs entirely
stripped a little further, using better software versions


----------



## ManniX-ITA

MyUsername said:


> Any should work, it just has to be MBR and fat32.


No, it's *very *picky.
Tried a lot of sticks and mostly doesn't work.
Especially Sandisk (from cheap ones to Extreme Pro) and Lexar; I have quite some and different types, all fails.
Also my master USB stick for flashing, an old 2GB Verbatim didn't work.
But a very cheap Kingston 32GB works like a charm.
Not sure but I think works with ExFAT as well.


----------



## MyUsername

KedarWolf said:


> What have you chang
> 
> 
> You can flash the first release BIOS with M-Flash, then flash the newest with flashrom. The first BIOS does not have write protect.
> 
> That's what I did to get around it.


Yeah, I don't like it, too much faffing LOL. I lost my confidence after m-flash only reached 50% a week after having this board and it keeps on doing it on newer versions. Gets me nervous.


----------



## MyUsername

ManniX-ITA said:


> No, it's *very *picky.
> Tried a lot of sticks and mostly doesn't work.
> Especially Sandisk (from cheap ones to Extreme Pro) and Lexar; I have quite some and different types, all fails.
> Also my master USB stick for flashing, an old 2GB Verbatim didn't work.
> But a very cheap Kingston 32GB works like a charm.
> Not sure but I think works with ExFAT as well.


I hope I never find out, but I did use flashback on the master and it worked first time. I have an old SanDisk 8GB usb2 stick about 15 years old, it's my go to flash stick that always works. I have a 32 GB usb3 SanDisk that's reliable for normal flashes.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

MyUsername said:


> I hope I never find out, but I did use flashback on the master and it worked first time. I have an old SanDisk 8GB usb2 stick about 15 years old, it's my go to flash stick that always works. I have a 32 GB usb3 SanDisk that's reliable for normal flashes.


Trust me, give it a try ASAP.
If you find out the stick doesn't work when you are in need, it can be excruciating.
I had zero luck with any Sandisk stick...
My golden stick, the Verbatim 2GB, works with any Set-Top Box, even the worst.
But it doesn't with MSI flashback...


----------



## gymleader91

Anyone got a 1.35v xmp kit and noticed it states 1.352v in BIOS?


----------



## Paddydapro

gymleader91 said:


> Anyone got a 1.35v xmp kit and noticed it states 1.352v in BIOS?


no but I have seen 1.35000001V once. Is that deadly??? it's out of spec right? it only states 1.35V. I am sad!!11


----------



## weleh

This board either over reports or has a 0.01V overvolt on pretty much all voltages.

I've noticed this behaviour on VDIM, VDDG IOD/CDD and VDPP.


----------



## mongoled

ManniX-ITA said:


> No, it's *very *picky.
> Tried a lot of sticks and mostly doesn't work.
> Especially Sandisk (from cheap ones to Extreme Pro) and Lexar; I have quite some and different types, all fails.
> Also my master USB stick for flashing, an old 2GB Verbatim didn't work.
> But a very cheap Kingston 32GB works like a charm.
> Not sure but I think works with ExFAT as well.


Almost every time I have had problem with usb for bios recovery not working a zeroing of drive with something like killdisk and then partitioning works


----------



## ManniX-ITA

mongoled said:


> Almost every time I have had problem with usb for bios recovery not working a zeroing of drive with something like killdisk and then partitioning works


Tried it as well. It just doesn't like some USB sticks.
Same happens very often with many embedded platforms, eg Set-Top Box
The Flashback is not handled by the BIOS.
There's a micro kernel with a very reduced and bare support for USB and filesystems.
Let me say that I've seen bad stuff but this one sourced by MSI is amongst the worst ever.
In comparison what GB runs is a Rolls-Royce.


----------



## weleh

mongoled said:


> Almost every time I have had problem with usb for bios recovery not working a zeroing of drive with something like killdisk and then partitioning works


Well you're lucky then because I've tried Rufus and other tools to no avail.


----------



## YoungChris

Collection of OC bios for various MSI 500 series


https://drive.google.com/drive/mobile/folders/1HFekj6cGZlLn2EHtbTKkTPjPWVRhjgcC Included are XOC bioses for the: B550 Tomahawk/Unify/X/Gaming Edge Wifi, B550M Mortar/Wifi, X570 Ace/Unify/Godlike It's likely that these are older bioses, probably AGESA 1100D or older. Still pretty cool that XOC bio...



community.hwbot.org


----------



## gymleader91

Something I just noticed. Anyone shed light on this? Choosing either xmp profile 1 or 2 in BIOS drastically changes the CPU's behavior in soc, vddp and vddg.

XMP Profile 1










XMP Profile 2


----------



## weleh

Interesting, is it reproduceable?


----------



## gymleader91

weleh said:


> Interesting, is it reproduceable?


Yip. After multiple restarts the voltages stay. They only change after an XMP profile change from 1 to 2 or vice versa. Can anyone confirm this also? I have tended to have higher cinebench scores on profile 2 (by say 35 points in mc). Probably the lower auto voltages on profile 2 are leading to miniscule but better boosts due to the cpu having a lower temp.

I need to do more testing but initial is, profile 1 is slightly more erratic in ddr voltage.


----------



## weleh

Makes sense, profile 2 has lower VSOC which gives more power headroom to the core package.


----------



## gymleader91

The thing is I don't know which I should run as stock operation. I remember reading all this stuff about "oh your ccd voltage should always be (arbitrary number here) mv lower than your vsoc" or stuff like that. No motherboard I know of correctly adjusts voltages like this.

I'm probably worrying about this too much. Literally millions of MSI boards have shipped and I'm the only one to discover this. If you actually input this into google search terms like "msi xmp profile 1 or 2" the usual reply is just people stating "they are the same"...

99% of people probably don't care and I shouldn't either. I just got the Unify because it was basically the same price as other recommended B550 boards like the B550-F from Asus (£189.99) but better VRM and layout design if I ever did want to get into overclocking.

Can anyone with G. SKill Neo/TeamGroup see if you have 2 xmp profiles? If anyone has access to MSI BIOS engineer I would really be interested in why these voltages are changing.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

gymleader91 said:


> Can anyone with G. SKill Neo/TeamGroup see if you have 2 xmp profiles? If anyone has access to MSI BIOS engineer I would really be interested in why these voltages are changing.


AFAIK all motherboards offers at least 2 XMP profiles.
That's because only the primaries and a few other parameters are defined in the profile.
The 2nd profile is usually tweaking some tertiary, like a mild overclock.
At least on ASUS and GigaByte is the same.

The SOC, VDDP and VDDG voltages are usually "negotiated" by the AGESA but there's always the "magic sprinkle" from the motherboard manufacturer.
It's pretty common they get adjusted by the board upon other settings eg. by selecting a Memory Try It profile or a PBO profile

The only dubious thing I see is that with XMP profile both VDDG and SOC are set at 1.1V; that's really wrong.
But it could be the default behavior of the AGESA which is pretty messed up as always.
Was the same with the Master, next BIOS with another AGESA will probably change completely the behavior.
The 2nd profile is probably enforcing some hard-coded values by MSI and keeps the right distance between SOC and VDDG.


----------



## MyUsername

gymleader91 said:


> The thing is I don't know which I should run as stock operation. I remember reading all this stuff about "oh your ccd voltage should always be (arbitrary number here) mv lower than your vsoc" or stuff like that. No motherboard I know of correctly adjusts voltages like this.
> 
> I'm probably worrying about this too much. Literally millions of MSI boards have shipped and I'm the only one to discover this. If you actually input this into google search terms like "msi xmp profile 1 or 2" the usual reply is just people stating "they are the same"...
> 
> 99% of people probably don't care and I shouldn't either. I just got the Unify because it was basically the same price as other recommended B550 boards like the B550-F from Asus (£189.99) but better VRM and layout design if I ever did want to get into overclocking.
> 
> Can anyone with G. SKill Neo/TeamGroup see if you have 2 xmp profiles? If anyone has access to MSI BIOS engineer I would really be interested in why these voltages are changing.


Yes mine does the same

















VDDG CCD and IOD can not be the same or higher than SoC voltage, it's impossible. As CCD and IOD derive power from the SoC it reduces by 50mV. XMP memory carry two xmp profiles, 1 for normal operation and 2 for overclocking. The XMP profiles are the same here so use profile 1.

Pc Gamer;
Why are there *two profiles*? *XMP* supported modules contain *two* memory *profiles* labeled "*Profile* 1" and "*Profile 2*". The first *profile* contains enthusiast settings; these allow your memory to run at the rated speed advertised on the box. These settings enable only a modest overclock and are also the most stable


----------



## gymleader91

ManniX-ITA said:


> The 2nd profile is usually tweaking some tertiary, like a mild overclock.
> 
> The 2nd profile is probably enforcing some hard-coded values by MSI and keeps the right distance between SOC and VDDG.


I thought about the second profile doing this but doesn't the zentimings screenshot show they are all identical? I do not know if there are hidden values I cannot see from zentimings. So basically you would recommend xmp profile 2 as stock operation until other agesa (e.g. 1.2.0.2 in April). The soc at 1.0375v and vddg 1.05v is ok?

@MyUsername Both my screenshots have vddg higher than soc so I guess I did the impossible at pure stock operation? Also you can guess I'm confused with all this. It appears Mannix says to have profile 2 because it keeps the right distance and you say profile 1. Ahh!!!


----------



## MyUsername

gymleader91 said:


> I thought about the second profile doing this but doesn't the zentimings screenshot show they are all identical? I do not know if there are hidden values I cannot see from zentimings. So basically you would recommend xmp profile 2 as stock operation until other agesa (e.g. 1.2.0.2 in April). The soc at 1.0375v and vddg 1.05v is ok?
> 
> @MyUsername Both my screenshots have vddg higher than soc so I guess I did the impossible at pure stock operation? Also you can guess I'm confused with all this. It appears Mannix says to have profile 2 because it keeps the right distance and you say profile 1. Ahh!!!


You can set ccd and iod to whatever ever value you want over soc and it will show that value, it will be 50mv lower than soc, it's the law.

You can't have current coming out higher than going in. The regulators in the soc for ccd iod costs 50mv lower than soc, so 1.100V goes to soc, 1.050 goes to ccd and iod. However if you put 1.100v to soc and have 1.000v for ccd and iod, you will still have 1.000v for ccd and iod as the regulators have 0.1v to play with.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

gymleader91 said:


> I thought about the second profile doing this but doesn't the zentimings screenshot show they are all identical? I do not know if there are hidden values I cannot see from zentimings. So basically you would recommend xmp profile 2 as stock operation until other agesa (e.g. 1.2.0.2 in April). The sov 1.0375v and vddg 1.05v?
> 
> @MyUsername Both my screenshots have vddg higher than soc so I guess I did the impossible at pure stock operation? Also you can guess I'm confused with all this. It appears Mannix says to have profile 2 because it keeps the right distance and you say profile 1. Ahh!!!


No there are no other timings; with your kit the 2nd profile it's not doing anything.
I guess there's a logic somewhere and for some reason it's not changing anything.
I know for sure it does change something with my B-die (not sure, maybe the tRFC?) and maybe also with the Hynix DJR.

No it's not keeping the right distance either with the 2nd profile, I've read it wrong; the SOC has the same voltage as VDDG as well.
You should set it manually, it's probably the AGESA doing weird stuff.
The voltages gets auto-corrected but it's risky cause it's set to the very bare minimum; very often under load they get too close and the system becomes unstable.
If you want to be on the safe side set them at least 60mV apart.


----------



## gymleader91

MyUsername said:


> You can set ccd and iod to whatever ever value you want over soc and it will show that value, it will be 50mv lower than soc, it's the law.


So basically the voltages in ryzen master aren't actually the voltages my chip is being supplied? I guess you're right because I know for a fact the VDDIO voltage in master is wrong (as you also showed iny our screenshot (1.3600v). I will do some checking with hwinfo and see what vsoc supplies me.


----------



## gymleader91

Decided to try the beta 1.2.0.1. Same behavior and verified with hwinfo vsoc sensor. I did however encounter some interesting stuff. Booting in with non XMP.










I then decided to just try 3,200 speed.










The 3,200 is very close to being auto good right?

So basically I have to choose between potentially killing my CPU and motherboard with unsafe 3,600 voltages that every single YouTuber has recommended for years (due to not actually being able to see the correct values) or dial back to 3,200 and lose performance.


----------



## MyUsername

gymleader91 said:


> Decided to try the beta 1.2.0.1. Same behavior and verified with hwinfo vsoc sensor. I did however encounter some interesting stuff. Booting in with non XMP.
> 
> So basically I have to choose between potentially killing my CPU and motherboard with unsafe 3,600 voltages that every single YouTuber has recommended for years (due to not actually being able to see the correct values) or dial back to 3,200 and lose performance.


Why do you think xmp 3600 speed is dangerous? I would run that and some, more speed, more volts and tight timings so tight it would make our eye pop out.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

MyUsername said:


> Why do you think xmp 3600 speed is dangerous? I would run that and some, more speed, more volts and tight timings so tight it would make our eye pop out.


Agree, I don't see anything dangerous in the voltages.
Set proper voltages manually, it's always better and safest for stability, and XMP profile either 1 or 2 since doesn't really change the timings.
SOC voltage at 1.15V, VDDG IOD at 1060, CCD 1000 and VDDP at 900 will give you more than enough for that you need up to IF 1900.
From these voltages you can scale down IOD and CCD till the performances or stability doesn't suffer; SOC as well, wouldn't go below 1.1V, just keep 60mV distance.
High voltages as above are not going to hurt, they give a small bump in speed.
Sometimes CCD and IOD too high can cause USB issues and audio stuttering but it's more likely at 1100 and over.


----------



## gymleader91

MyUsername said:


> Why do you think xmp 3600 speed is dangerous? I would run that and some, more speed, more volts and tight timings so tight it would make our eye pop out.


Well I mean if I can't see what actual voltages are being supplied at 3600 in a scenario where the vddg is somehow higher than the soc in voltage reporting which you say is impossible, obviously something is terribly wrong? If I run 3,200 it seems to make sense in that now vddg voltages are below soc. I just found this on a forum. This is agesa 1.1.0.0 also showing impossible values:


http://imgur.com/lN7PMTJ


Even if you look on newegg at the first review of a 3600 32gb kit it's such a mess in voltages:


http://imgur.com/2cJDaWU


I just can't believe for atleast 2 bios versions (i cba testing previous bios versions and since 1.1.0.0 suffers what's the point of checking) of all MSI boards someone didn't look at 3600 ram speed in msi testing area and say "mmmm you know what Kevin this vddg voltage is literally impossibe to get maybe we should look into it?. "Gee whiz Steve I don't know that could be risky better to just leave it"... is probably how the conversation went.

@ManniX-ITA Thank you for your suggestions. I may try this but again as a typical end user buying into marketing of these MSI products this is a joke. An end user should not have to go on specific pc forums and manually configure voltages to make sure they aren't killing the cpu on stock operation. All the end user knows is that Linus tech tips and other reviewers said to buy a 3600 kit with as low latency as you can get.

I know this is turning into a bit of a rant but it's kind of infuriating to have purchased pretty expensive hardware on the guidance of YouTubers with millions of subscribers that are trusted in the community to having it not do simple stuff such as telling me voltages. Now you could argue your average end user literally doesn't care if the cpu is being fed 15 quintillion volts as long as they can play fortnite but doing some extra testing seems reasonable.


----------



## MyUsername

gymleader91 said:


> Well I mean if I can't see what actual voltages are being supplied at 3600 in a scenario where the vddg is somehow higher than the soc in voltage reporting which you say is impossible, obviously something is terribly wrong? If I run 3,200 it seems to make sense in that now vddg voltages are below soc. I just found this on a forum. This is agesa 1.1.0.0 also showing impossible values:
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/lN7PMTJ
> 
> 
> Even if you look on newegg at the first review of a 3600 32gb kit it's such a mess in voltages:
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/2cJDaWU
> 
> 
> I just can't believe for atleast 2 bios versions (i cba testing previous bios versions and since 1.1.0.0 suffers what's the point of checking) of all MSI boards someone didn't look at 3600 ram speed in msi testing area and say "mmmm you know what Kevin this vddg voltage is literally impossibe to get maybe we should look into it?. "Gee whiz Steve I don't know that could be risky better to just leave it"... is probably how the conversation went.
> 
> I know this is turning into a bit of a rant but it's kind of infuriating to have purchased pretty expensive hardware on the guidance of YouTubers with millions of subscribers that are trusted in the community to having it not do simple stuff such as telling me voltages. Now you could argue your average end user literally doesn't care if the cpu is being fed 15 quintillion volts as long as they can play fortnite but doing some extra testing seems reasonable.


It's something that auto corrects but it's invisible to the user, we don't worry about that. You can be sure that if you choose xmp it will not fry anything, as long the soc voltage is not out of spec in excess of 1.2V and memory is at or below 1.5V you're safe. VDDP, VDDG CCD and IOD will be fine and the motherboard will do its best to make the system stable and keeps things safe, there are safeguards and rules in place that AMD puts there. Optimally you want manual settings and find the absolute minimum voltages that your system will run at, as more volts through the cpu equals more heat which causes performance loss. Your memory will be happy to take 1.5V as that's Jedec standard, whether your memory is happy to run at 1.5V is another matter but it won't blow up.


----------



## gymleader91

So basically in summary if I am going for a stock system with xmp while trusting MSI is internally doing stuff I can't see:

1: 3600 RAM is fine.
2: I should technically use profile 2 because this sets vsoc lower according to the hwinfo64 sensor thus lower temps (1.0375 vs 1.0875)
3: Ryzen Master is basically just misreporting voltages to ZenTimings like it is VDIMM for whatever reason
4. I should just keep 3600 as a safe ram speed with a safe fclk and see what updated msi bios/ryzen master install/zen timings updates do to show proper readings?


----------



## MyUsername

gymleader91 said:


> So basically in summary if I am going for a stock system with xmp while trusting MSI is internally doing stuff I can't see:
> 
> 1: 3600 RAM is fine.
> 2: I should technically use profile 2 because this sets vsoc lower according to the hwinfo64 sensor thus lower temps (1.0375 vs 1.0875)
> 3: Ryzen Master is basically just misreporting voltages to ZenTimings like it is VDIMM for whatever reason
> 4. I should just keep 3600 as a safe ram speed with a safe fclk and see what updated msi bios/ryzen master install/zen timings updates do to show proper readings?


1:3600 is 100% fine
2:Won't make a difference, both are 100% safe. 1.0875V SoC is more 1866-1900 FCLK speeds, but totally safe whatever.
3:It does reports these values, it just does.
4:Yes run at default settings xmp etc. No update will fix the readings, it's always been like this.

Auto settings have to run at or within AMD spec. When you run manual settings, that's the only way to run your system out of spec.


----------



## gymleader91

Thanks I'll keep 3600 for now and just see what happens. As you said it would be pretty ridiculous if running stock/auto settings would have issues. I'll report back when I get my G. Skill Neo 32GB kit to see if anything changes.

Last question. When the PC is in Windows is it normal for the clear cmos button on the back to always be on (red in colour)?


----------



## MyUsername

gymleader91 said:


> Thanks I'll keep 3600 for now and just see what happens. As you said it would be pretty ridiculous if running stock/auto settings would have issues. I'll report back when I get my G. Skill Neo 32GB kit to see if anything changes.
> 
> Last question. When the PC is in Windows is it normal for the clear cmos button on the back to always be on (red in colour)?


Yes, don't press it. Only use it if it doesn't post and gets stuck, never press while the pc is on.


----------



## weleh

It's not an MSI issue.

Asus boards also yeet voltages at stock.

It's down to AGESA+BOARD PARTNERS.

You can literally do 1900 IF at stock/below stock voltages.

Both my Unify X and Bazooka B550's do 1900 FCLK on bdie at stock VSOC 1.07V after droop, 0.93 VDDP (only voltage I need to adjust to boot it needs to be higher than 0.9V), CCD as low as 0.87 and IOD at 0.9V because I cba test lower.

Literally the only setting I noticed that messes with FCLK boot is VDDP which needs to be higher than 0.9, around 0.93V to be completely stable.


----------



## gymleader91

MyUsername said:


> Yes, don't press it. Only use it if it doesn't post and gets stuck, never press while the pc is on.


While troubleshooting I pressed cmos when the computer was off but still had power at the wall. Should I switch it off at the wall to be safe then do it in future?


----------



## MyUsername

gymleader91 said:


> While troubleshooting I pressed cmos when the computer was off but still had power at the wall. Should I switch it off at the wall to be safe then do it in future?


You should do really, unplug or turn the switch off on the psu. I don't know about other unify's, but my board gets upset if I press the cmos clear without turning off the power, I get d6 code every time and have to drain the board then power on.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

MyUsername said:


> You should do really, unplug or turn the switch off on the psu. I don't know about other unify's, but my board gets upset if I press the cmos clear without turning off the power, I get d6 code every time and have to drain the board then power on.


Yes it's recommended but I never do it.
Too much time wasted if you are trying settings.
My advice is to turn on ErP; just wait a few seconds the board power light goes off and then press Clear CMOS.
Once you finished testing you can disable it again if you don't want it.

The random mess happening when clearing CMOS with power still on is due to the AGESA.
These settings are not clear by the button but at the first boot when the BIOS detects the button press.
That's where things get nasty; you need always to check if also the AMD Overclocking and/or CBS settings have been cleared when the system is acting weird after a clear.
If they have not been cleared it's better to reset again the settings with Load Optimized, reboot and enter again the BIOS.
Then set again everything or load again he saved profile.
Except with the Unify-X since MSI still did not fix the restore of AMD AGESA settings loading a profile...


----------



## tefla

Hey all, got a question that may not have a real answer. I'm considering changing out my x470 Crosshair Hero VII for the b550 unify-x. My main reason is that I like tinkering and want a board with built-in wifi (I have the non-wifi hero). Realistically, will the Unify-X actually OC memory noticeably better than the Hero VII? 

I know in theory a 2 dimm setup + better traces etc _should_ result in better overclocking potential, but I'd love to hear from people who've made similar upgrades. I know that none of this really matters in the "real-world" I'll never actually notice the difference between 54.2ns and 52.2ns, but it's just a fun hobby.


----------



## KedarWolf

tefla said:


> Hey all, got a question that may not have a real answer. I'm considering changing out my x470 Crosshair Hero VII for the b550 unify-x. My main reason is that I like tinkering and want a board with built-in wifi (I have the non-wifi hero). Realistically, will the Unify-X actually OC memory noticeably better than the Hero VII?
> 
> I know in theory a 2 dimm setup + better traces etc _should_ result in better overclocking potential, but I'd love to hear from people who've made similar upgrades. I know that none of this really matters in the "real-world" I'll never actually notice the difference between 54.2ns and 52.2ns, but it's just a fun hobby.


My Unify-X overclocks my memory with EXACTLY the same speeds and timings as my four DIMM X570 Godlike did.

I can't get any better with it, I mean not at all, performs exactly the same for memory. The Godlike is the MSI top tier board though, might be why.

However, my Curve Optimiser per cores offsets are much better on my Unify-X then they were on my Godlike, so there is that.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

tefla said:


> Hey all, got a question that may not have a real answer. I'm considering changing out my x470 Crosshair Hero VII for the b550 unify-x. My main reason is that I like tinkering and want a board with built-in wifi (I have the non-wifi hero). Realistically, will the Unify-X actually OC memory noticeably better than the Hero VII?
> 
> I know in theory a 2 dimm setup + better traces etc _should_ result in better overclocking potential, but I'd love to hear from people who've made similar upgrades. I know that none of this really matters in the "real-world" I'll never actually notice the difference between 54.2ns and 52.2ns, but it's just a fun hobby.


Comparing with my previous Aorus Master Rel 1.0, the Unify-X is simply eons better on memory OC.
But the Rel. 1.0 is quite terrible compared to the average and the Master Rel. 1.1/1.2, where the fixed it.
The 2 slots configuration is for sure giving an edge but probably only in extreme conditions, high frequency and voltage.

About CPU OC the Master was slightly better despite the lower spec VRM.
But this could change with future BIOS releases.


----------



## MageTank

tefla said:


> Hey all, got a question that may not have a real answer. I'm considering changing out my x470 Crosshair Hero VII for the b550 unify-x. My main reason is that I like tinkering and want a board with built-in wifi (I have the non-wifi hero). Realistically, will the Unify-X actually OC memory noticeably better than the Hero VII?
> 
> I know in theory a 2 dimm setup + better traces etc _should_ result in better overclocking potential, but I'd love to hear from people who've made similar upgrades. I know that none of this really matters in the "real-world" I'll never actually notice the difference between 54.2ns and 52.2ns, but it's just a fun hobby.


I've owned both the B550 Unify and B550 Unify X, so I have experienced with both the 4 DIMM and 2 DIMM flavors of the exact same board. So far, the Unify X is able to do exactly what the B550 Unify was able to do, but at about 1 strap higher. On the B550 Unify, I topped out at 3600 C12, on the Unify X, I could push the exact same timings at 3733 C12, so exactly 1 strap higher. The same is said when pushing for higher clocks (4133 on my dual rank DIMM's vs 4000 on the standard Unify). This might differ depending on your configuration as I run 2x16GB DR DIMM's, but for my specific configuration, the difference was roughly a single strap on the memory frequency. 

You might also run into issues if you push 2DPC and have to compromise a little if you intend to keep dual rank as well (real dual rank, not lock-step dual rank with 4x SR).


----------



## ManniX-ITA

MageTank said:


> I've owned both the B550 Unify and B550 Unify X, so I have experienced with both the 4 DIMM and 2 DIMM flavors of the exact same board. So far, the Unify X is able to do exactly what the B550 Unify was able to do, but at about 1 strap higher. On the B550 Unify, I topped out at 3600 C12, on the Unify X, I could push the exact same timings at 3733 C12, so exactly 1 strap higher. The same is said when pushing for higher clocks (4133 on my dual rank DIMM's vs 4000 on the standard Unify). This might differ depending on your configuration as I run 2x16GB DR DIMM's, but for my specific configuration, the difference was roughly a single strap on the memory frequency.
> 
> You might also run into issues if you push 2DPC and have to compromise a little if you intend to keep dual rank as well (real dual rank, not lock-step dual rank with 4x SR).


Thanks, good info.
What I really like is the low temperature and high stability for the given voltage with this board.
I noticed most people with 2x16GB DR starts getting errors above 50c.
Even at 1.55V and tight timings my kit is reaching thermal balance at 56-57c and doesn't flinch.


----------



## MageTank

ManniX-ITA said:


> Thanks, good info.
> What I really like is the low temperature and high stability for the given voltage with this board.
> I noticed most people with 2x16GB DR starts getting errors above 50c.
> Even at 1.55V and tight timings my kit is reaching thermal balance at 56-57c and doesn't flinch.


Haven't had any thermal issues with my DIMM's yet, I run them on water (though my loop is down at the moment, swapping over to a copper themed build)









I do enjoy this board tremendously and strongly recommend it, even over the standard B550 Unify for those that are looking to push traditional dual-rank DIMM's as far as they can get them. If capacity is important, the standard B550 Unify isn't a bad compromise at all, and for most people, would likely be the safer bet. My only gripe so far with these boards is the hit or miss AGESA support when it comes to memory overclocking. Seems like every BIOS update is a random step forwards/backwards when it comes to this series and it's a gamble to update the BIOS. I don't really push high FCLK so I don't have to worry about some of the other issues people come across, but even at my super tight 3733 config, a bad BIOS update can severely impact stability. That said, that's probably common across all board partners and not really exclusive to MSI, but this is my first time going AMD since the FX 8350, so I can't say I am too experienced with this platform.


----------



## tefla

Really great info guys, I appreciate it. Seems like this is definitely a top-tier board--at $300 I'd definitely hope so. 😁

I've got 2x16 3600c16 b-die @ 3800 c14/15 and they get toasty at 1.55v. I see you're one of the top 2x16 results on the Zen OC gsheet @ManniX-ITA! Would def appreciate being able to run more conservative voltages. I do worry that having the dimms next to each other will make heat dissipation worse. Long term, I do see myself doing a custom loop like you @MageTank so I suppose it's moot.

I'll def miss the ASUS bios, MSI's doesn't seem quite as intuitive, but I'm sure it's just an adjustment.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

tefla said:


> Really great info guys, I appreciate it. Seems like this is definitely a top-tier board--at $300 I'd definitely hope so. 😁
> 
> I've got 2x16 3600c16 bide @ 3800 c14/15 and they get toasty at 1.55v. I see you're one of the top 2x16 results on the Zen OC gsheet @ManniX-ITA! Would def appreciate being able to run more conservative voltages. I do worry that having the dimms next to each other will make heat dissipation worse. Long term, I do see myself doing a custom loop like you @MageTank so I suppose it's moot.
> 
> I'll def miss the ASIS bios, MSI's doesn't seem quite as intuitive, but I'm sure it's just an adjustment.


I was worried too but the heat dissipation is much less of a problem now than before with the Master with 4 slots.
Not sure you can use more conservative voltages but probably you'll get lower temperatures than now.
Try to record temps at idle and after 1h30m of TM5 before switching to the Unify-X, will be interesting to compare.
I'll switch as well to water cooling soon and I'm definitely going to do some crazy stuff then


----------



## weleh

Are you doing any XOC memory OC for epeen/hwbot/fun?
Do you need the features?

Because on Ryzen you're fCLK capped anyway so any board can do the same ****. Trust me, I've been there. I've had a B450, a B550 Asus, a B550 MSI and now another B550 MSI and they all do the same timings, same voltage, exactly the same ****, no difference at all.

For 3800 MT/s any board will do even a **** B450 for 50€ will do.


----------



## Darkstaryan

Hi, I really only registered to ask this question, as I’ve been lurking here for a while, as this is the only place I can find ongoing discussion regarding the Unify/Unify-X. 

I’ve had my eye on the Unify since it was leaked back in August, and am finally getting around to purchasing the various parts for my upcoming build. However, I’ve noticed scattered reports of real bad VRM coil whine. I’ve asked a few people around the net who have this board if they’ve experienced any issues and the responses are hit and miss. It seems discussion here has mostly moved past the coil whine issue, so I hate to derail the discussion, but I’m really just trying to gauge how common the issue still is, and if it’s affecting everybody here. 

I have both a Z490 Unify and a B550 Unify on hand, and I’m holding off on grabbing a CPU and cooler for the moment until I decide which platform would be best. I’m leaning toward the B550 Unify since I prefer the power efficiency and PCIe 4.0 support of the Ryzen platform, but if the coil whine is a widespread issue with no fix in site, I won’t hesitate going with Intel.

Thank you in advance for any responses, and sorry to derail discussion!


----------



## Hale59

Darkstaryan said:


> Hi, I really only registered to ask this question, as I’ve been lurking here for a while, as this is the only place I can find ongoing discussion regarding the Unify/Unify-X.
> 
> I’ve had my eye on the Unify since it was leaked back in August, and am finally getting around to purchasing the various parts for my upcoming build. However, I’ve noticed scattered reports of real bad VRM coil whine. I’ve asked a few people around the net who have this board if they’ve experienced any issues and the responses are hit and miss. It seems discussion here has mostly moved past the coil whine issue, so I hate to derail the discussion, but I’m really just trying to gauge how common the issue still is, and if it’s affecting everybody here.
> 
> I have both a Z490 Unify and a B550 Unify on hand, and I’m holding off on grabbing a CPU and cooler for the moment until I decide which platform would be best. I’m leaning toward the B550 Unify since I prefer the power efficiency and PCIe 4.0 support of the Ryzen platform, but if the coil whine is a widespread issue with no fix in site, I won’t hesitate going with Intel.
> 
> Thank you in advance for any responses, and sorry to derail discussion!


I would go for the Unify-X for OC. When you purchase, ask them you want the latest revision. I think if I'm not mistaken, its 1.2 revision.


----------



## Darkstaryan

Hale59 said:


> I would go for the Unify-X for OC. When you purchase, ask them you want the latest revision. I think if I'm not mistaken, its 1.2 revision.


Yeah, I actually RMA’d the board I bought from Amazon back in late February. It’s a Rev. 1.0 and I asked for 2.1 since it seems as though that revision fixed the issue for some people. Waiting on getting it by the end of this month, hopefully.
I’m going with Unify non-x because I want four sticks of the Patriot Viper Steel, should be able to get a decent OC with tight timings.


----------



## ImmutableState

Where do you guys check the revision of Unify-X sample? Is it written on the box or motherboard itself?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

ImmutableState said:


> Where do you guys check the revision of Unify-X sample? Is it written on the box or motherboard itself?


It's below the first PCIe slot:


----------



## ImmutableState

My revision is 2.1 and production 2020 December, and I have huge coil whine:-/


----------



## ManniX-ITA

@YoungChris 

Can you ask MSI the XOC version for A22?






MSI MPG B550 UNIFY-X AMD AM4 DDR4 CF M.2 USB 3.2 Gen 2 Wi-Fi 6 HDMI ATX Gaming Motherboard


Powered by AMD Ryzen AM4 processors, the MSI MEG B550 UNIFY-X begins its dark conquest with a design made to accomplish any task with cruel efficiency. Exclusive 2 DIMM solution deliver the world class memory performance. Connect to ultra-fast networks wi




www.msi.com


----------



## gymleader91

ManniX-ITA said:


> @YoungChris
> 
> Can you ask MSI the XOC version for A22?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MSI MPG B550 UNIFY-X AMD AM4 DDR4 CF M.2 USB 3.2 Gen 2 Wi-Fi 6 HDMI ATX Gaming Motherboard
> 
> 
> Powered by AMD Ryzen AM4 processors, the MSI MEG B550 UNIFY-X begins its dark conquest with a design made to accomplish any task with cruel efficiency. Exclusive 2 DIMM solution deliver the world class memory performance. Connect to ultra-fast networks wi
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.msi.com


What does 1.2.0.1 Patch A do over 1.2.0.1?


----------



## weleh

I think it's the USB fix patch.


----------



## KedarWolf

A22 BIOS I get 300+ TM5 RAM errors with the same settings I get none on in A21. 

No USB errors at all for me, so sticking with A21.


----------



## gymleader91

Ok so I actually figured it out (the voltage reporting in zentimings/ryzen master). Kind of interesting and I don't think people knew about this. I do think this is actually a bug in the BIOS.

So as you all know in the main part of the BIOS you have digi voltage or whatever it's called where you can set vsoc, dram voltage etc. It all states auto voltages.

However, if we delve in deeper we find something I did not expect. Under AMD Overclocking:



















The BIOS does actually somehow have "manual" voltages applied... on the automatic setting. Ryzen Master/ZenTimings has these forced values it seems. The funny thing is, if you set these to auto and go to save settings, the BIOS acts as if no change was made. However, Ryzen Master and ZenTimings now work as they should.

This also confirmed my findings earlier about xmp profile 1 (1.0875 vsoc) vs profile 2 (1.0375v soc). Profile 1 will set the soc manually to 1100:










Profile 2 will set 1050. Very strange but interesting. I do wonder if this is maybe a solution to some instability problems people have in which the BIOS is like "oh set this auto voltage" and then the lookup table is like "but this manual voltage is set" and the CPU gets confused and just errors. Might be worth trying?


----------



## ImmutableState

gymleader91 said:


> Ok so I actually figured it out (the voltage reporting in zentimings/ryzen master). Kind of interesting and I don't think people knew about this. I do think this is actually a bug in the BIOS.
> 
> So as you all know in the main part of the BIOS you have digi voltage or whatever it's called where you can set vsoc, dram voltage etc. It all states auto voltages.
> 
> However, if we delve in deeper we find something I did not expect. Under AMD Overclocking:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The BIOS does actually somehow have "manual" voltages applied... on the automatic setting. Ryzen Master/ZenTimings has these forced values it seems. The funny thing is, if you set these to auto and go to save settings, the BIOS acts as if no change was made. However, Ryzen Master and ZenTimings now work as they should.
> 
> This also confirmed my findings earlier about xmp profile 1 (1.0875 vsoc) vs profile 2 (1.0375v soc). Profile 1 will set the soc manually to 1100:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Profile 2 will set 1050. Very strange but interesting. I do wonder if this is maybe a solution to some instability problems people have in which the BIOS is like "oh set this auto voltage" and then the lookup table is like "but this manual voltage is set" and the CPU gets confused and just errors. Might be worth trying?


I can't confirm this stuff. I've kept "OC" voltages on auto and specified them through "AMD Overclocking", they changed respectively. But when I specified them in "OC", they overwrote "AMD Overclocking" values. This means that at least for my BIOS (24 Feb 2021) OC values have priority over "AMD Overclocking" counterparts


----------



## MyUsername

ImmutableState said:


> I can't confirm this stuff. I've kept "OC" voltages on auto and specified them through "AMD Overclocking", they changed respectively. But when I specified them in "OC", they overwrote "AMD Overclocking" values. This means that at least for my BIOS (24 Feb 2021) OC values have priority over "AMD Overclocking" counterparts



They're the same. On the XOC bios you have AMD OVERCLOCKING and AMD CBS with VDDP and VDDG, AMD OC will always have priority. AMD CBS is hidden on the non xoc bios as it's not needed.


----------



## dr.Rafi

gymleader91 said:


> What does 1.2.0.1 Patch A do over 1.2.0.1?


It really fix my issue with USB, I had issue with usb, all the devices keep discoonecting and conecting every second ,the windows ding sound like party, the issue only rise when mining using niceahsh XMrig miner for cpu, with defult bios setting, overclocking the cpu no issue, running all other benchmarks no issue, with patch A it fix usb with defult bios and xmrig miner too.


----------



## YoungChris

ManniX-ITA said:


> @YoungChris
> 
> Can you ask MSI the XOC version for A22?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MSI MPG B550 UNIFY-X AMD AM4 DDR4 CF M.2 USB 3.2 Gen 2 Wi-Fi 6 HDMI ATX Gaming Motherboard
> 
> 
> Powered by AMD Ryzen AM4 processors, the MSI MEG B550 UNIFY-X begins its dark conquest with a design made to accomplish any task with cruel efficiency. Exclusive 2 DIMM solution deliver the world class memory performance. Connect to ultra-fast networks wi
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.msi.com


I didn't even notice there was an A22 yet XD


----------



## ManniX-ITA

YoungChris said:


> I didn't even notice there was an A22 yet XD


Quite crappy for me, can't boot with FCLK above 1900.
Hope somehow the XOC can be better...


----------



## deehoC

I was wondering if there's a way to enable USB power when the PC is shut down? I think my old Crosshair Vi Hero had this enabled by default. I looked around the BIOS and didn't see anything that seemed to be directly related to the issue.


----------



## EniGma1987

So my friend got the Unify B550 board and some 3600 RAM. I spent maybe 10 minutes helping him set the timings and dram voltage to the xmp settings but he said it keeps crashing with windows BSOD quite a lot with an error about memory subsystem. VDDG CCD, VDDG IOD, VDDP, and Soc Voltage are all at auto right now as I didnt have time to get really into it yet. Does anyone know the general area these should be set to as a starting place on this board for 3600 memory?


----------



## deehoC

EniGma1987 said:


> So my friend got the Unify B550 board and some 3600 RAM. I spent maybe 10 minutes helping him set the timings and dravm voltage to the xmp settings but it keeps crashing with windows BSOD quite a lot with an error about memory subsystem. VDDG CCD, VDDG IOD, VDDP, and Soc Voltage are all at auto right now as I didnt have time to get really into it yet. Does anyone know the general area these should be set to as a starting place on this board for 3600 memory?


These might be higher than necessary for running 3600 but I'm at 1.1v SoC, 0.9v VDDP, 1.050v IOD and CCD for my current 3800 setup. I'm sure someone else can give you more accurate numbers eventually.


----------



## MyUsername

deehoC said:


> I was wondering if there's a way to enable USB power when the PC is shut down? I think my old Crosshair Vi Hero had this enabled by default. I looked around the BIOS and didn't see anything that seemed to be directly related to the issue.


ERP seems to be constantly enabled, so power is turned off🤷‍♂️



EniGma1987 said:


> So my friend got the Unify B550 board and some 3600 RAM. I spent maybe 10 minutes helping him set the timings and dravm voltage to the xmp settings but it keeps crashing with windows BSOD quite a lot with an error about memory subsystem. VDDG CCD, VDDG IOD, VDDP, and Soc Voltage are all at auto right now as I didnt have time to get really into it yet. Does anyone know the general area these should be set to as a starting place on this board for 3600 memory?


I have a 3900x that needs 1.05V SOC, VDDG CCD/IOD 0.9 for 1800/3600, pretty much auto settings. Check if the auto settings are too low maybe. Only when I push to 1900FCLK it prefers split ccd 0.95V and IOD 1.050 with SOC @1.125V. VDDP may need playing with if DOCP doesn't work, for me VDDP on one 4000 kit needs .9V and on another 3600 kit needs 1.0V so that can vary depending what's being used, both are dual rank kits. VDDG CCD/IOD reduce voltage by 50mV or thereabouts by the regulators in the SOC, so if you put 1.1V on the SOC and set VDDG CCD/IOD 1.1V, VDDG will actually be 1.050V even if VDDG the value is higher in Ryzen Master or ZenTimings etc.


----------



## deehoC

MyUsername said:


> ERP seems to be constantly enabled, so power is turned off🤷‍♂️
> 
> 
> 
> I have a 3900x that needs 1.05V SOC, VDDG CCD/IOD 0.9 for 1800/3600, pretty much auto settings. Check if the auto settings are too low maybe. Only when I push to 1900FCLK it prefers split ccd 0.95V and IOD 1.050 with SOC @1.125V. VDDP may need playing with if DOCP doesn't work, for me VDDP on one 4000 kit needs .9V and on another 3600 kit needs 1.0V so that can vary depending what's being used, both are dual rank kits. VDDG CCD/IOD reduce voltage by 50mV or thereabouts by the regulators in the SOC, so if you put 1.1V on the SOC and set VDDG CCD/IOD 1.1V, VDDG will actually be 1.050V even if VDDG the value is higher in Ryzen Master or ZenTimings etc.


Turns out enabling Wake on USB provides power to the ports when the system is turned off. TIL


----------



## MyUsername

deehoC said:


> Turns out enabling Wake on USB provides power to the ports when the system is turned off. TIL


So it does.


----------



## Hale59

KedarWolf said:


> I got the script working on 32 bit ISO's, can make a stripped version, but do you really want an O/S limited to 4GB of available RAM though.
> 
> Edit:
> 
> "It is correct but even worse than that.
> 
> All 32-bit client versions of Windows (not just XP/Vista/7/8/10) have a
> 4GB address space (64-bit versions can use much more). That's the
> theoretical upper limit beyond which you can not go.
> 
> But you can't use the entire address space. Even though you have a 4GB address space, most people can only use _around_ 3.1GB of RAM. That's because some of that space is used by hardware and is not available to the operating system and applications. The amount you can
> use varies, depending on what hardware you have installed, but can range from as little as 2GB to as much as 3.5GB. It's usually around 3.1GB.
> Note that the hardware is using the address _space_, not the actual RAM itself. If you have a greater amount of RAM, the rest of the RAM goes unused because there is no address space to map it to."


Is this offer still up?

I really want a 32 bit ISO stripped version. I need to try specific benches on it.
If possible, make the 32 bit ISO like you did for the 64 bit, plus the autoruns/and macrium. And break them for download.
Thanks


----------



## KedarWolf

Hale59 said:


> Is this offer still up?
> 
> I really want a 32 bit ISO stripped version. I need to try specific benches on it.
> If possible, make the 32 bit ISO like you did for the 64 bit, plus the autoruns/and macrium. And break them for download.
> Thanks


Yeah, I can do that. Give me a bit though.


----------



## Hale59

KedarWolf said:


> Yeah, I can do that. Give me a bit though.


I sent you PM


----------



## NDS322

other MSI B550


----------



## jollydet

Just picked up a non X from amazon, and noticed its a revision 1.0 i cant find any info on the differences between the revisions, is the 1.0 gimped in performance compared to the later versions like the x570 master? i know some use report coil whine across some of the versions, and is version 2.1 the latest for the non X or only the X? Wondering if its worth trying to seek out a later revision before i even set this up.


----------



## KedarWolf

jollydet said:


> Just picked up a non X from amazon, and noticed its a revision 1.0 i cant find any info on the differences between the revisions, is the 1.0 gimped in performance compared to the later versions like the x570 master? i know some use report coil whine across some of the versions, and is version 2.1 the latest for the non X or only the X? Wondering if its worth trying to seek out a later revision before i even set this up.


Basically, just the coil whine issue which some found wasn't fixed on revisions 2.1 etc.


----------



## ImmutableState

Yup, mine is 2.1 and coil whine is still there


----------



## jollydet

ImmutableState said:


> Yup, mine is 2.1 and coil whine is still there


Update, Just set this board up on my testbench can confirm no real coil whine issues, a tiny bit of coil noise during aida cache tests as almost all boards do but its almost inaudiable. Still limited to same clocks as on my Master ( 1900fclk without hitting massive whea errors and [email protected] C16/15 on my 4x8 B die kit with my 5950x). Most likely will be returning the Unify as my X570 master 1.0 has been a rock for the past year running 24/7 and has better connectivity. Unify runs nice and cool on chipset and dram though.


----------



## Cadek

I also bought non-X version and got rev MS-7D13 VER 1.0, one month ago I was using it with Ryzen 3600 for one week overclocked to all core 4350 on 1.25vCore so it has to be very good sample and I didnt had any coil whine on fix vCore voltage, on auto there was a little whining but bearly noticable-not at all when I was using headset than I received my 5900X and on auto with PBO+CurveOptimizer I can hear a little coil whine probably bigger than it was on 3600 but not much, Ill have to work/play with my head inside chasis to hear/bother this, now I use Clock Tuner for Hybrid OC and coil whine is even smaller, I can tell it is only anoying when I start game and durning loading screen when FPS are between 4000-5000 I can hear whistling for one to three second - it depends on title, on AIDA, blender or other programs like I said before it is almost not hearable and I checked coil whine is from VRM not GPU or PSU.

I didnt try much RAM OC but I achive 14T without problems on G Skillz Royal Z and 3600







.


----------



## Nicked_Wicked

jollydet said:


> Update, Just set this board up on my testbench can confirm no real coil whine issues, a tiny bit of coil noise during aida cache tests as almost all boards do but its almost inaudiable. Still limited to same clocks as on my Master ( 1900fclk without hitting massive whea errors and [email protected] C16/15 on my 4x8 B die kit with my 5950x). Most likely will be returning the Unify as my X570 master 1.0 has been a rock for the past year running 24/7 and has better connectivity. Unify runs nice and cool on chipset and dram though.


Can you boot with 4000Mhz? My Aorus Master straight up refuses. And it’s still not playing nice with Noctua fans after all this time.

Feeling rather tempted to finally switch over to the Unify-X.


----------



## Cadek

maybe it was two weeks ago, for sure before Suez Canal blockade because of which I had a lot of work  I tried RAM speed 4000 timings 16 Infinity Fabric 2000 so it was 1:1 and in games I had no problems but in AIDA and Memtest I got few errors but it was one from profiles for fast OC included by MSI in UEFI so probably if I will do some fixes here and there all could be stable, next BIOS update should help achive 4000/2000 easier but on this moment I dont want go with timing above 16 and I dont know much about RAM OC because I just started having fun with this but from what I read 3800-16 4000-18 are the same to 3600-14, I would like to hear opinion about it from somebody who have much more experience from me.


----------



## jollydet

Nicked_Wicked said:


> Can you boot with 4000Mhz? My Aorus Master straight up refuses. And it’s still not playing nice with Noctua fans after all this time.
> 
> Feeling rather tempted to finally switch over to the Unify-X.


I can boot 2000 on both the master and the unify with my 5950x but rediculous amount of WHEA errors on both boards. i have also had some issues with the fan control on my master with some noctuas, specifically after waking from sleep they would not turn on, rebooting the machine will get them spinning again but its been an ongoing issue, one of the reasons i grabbed the unify to play with.


----------



## KedarWolf

@Eder Can you unlock an A22 BIOS for the Unify-X and maybe the Unify, please?

It would help a ton. I'm WHEA free with it at 4000MHz with 16-16-10-16-32 2T.

Never could get 4000 WHEA free with any earlier BIOS.

You can PM me for arrangements like we've made in the past for doing it.


----------



## uzi1

Hi, wondering if anyone can help me about m.2 configuration just finding it hard to understand my question is can I run 2 PCIe 4.0 SSDs in slots 1 and 2 at gen 4 and still have the GPU at x16 ?

Thanks


----------



## KedarWolf

Deleted.


----------



## EniGma1987

uzi1 said:


> Hi, wondering if anyone can help me about m.2 configuration just finding it hard to understand my question is can I run 2 PCIe 4.0 SSDs in slots 1 and 2 at gen 4 and still have the GPU at x16 ?
> 
> Thanks


I believe I saw the option to select whether the 2nd and 3rd nvme run off chipset at lower lanes and pcie 3, or run off CPU at full lanes and pcie 4. When using cpu for nvme the first graphics must run at x8 since those lanes are now routed to the nvmes.
So you should be able to select to run gpu at x16 and still use all the slots, but then extra slots will be like any other board and be trash bandwidth.


----------



## uzi1

EniGma1987 said:


> I believe I saw the option to select whether the 2nd and 3rd nvme run off chipset at lower lanes and pcie 3, or run off CPU at full lanes and pcie 4. When using cpu for nvme the first graphics must run at x8 since those lanes are now routed to the nvmes.
> So you should be able to select to run gpu at x16 and still use all the slots, but then extra slots will be like any other board and be trash bandwidth.


I think I understand now, so I can have GPU at Gen4 x16 and also have slot 1 M.2 at Gen 4.0 speed, but If I set slot 2 m.2 to CPU so it also has gen 4.0 it will set the GPU to Gen 3.0 x8 

I was wanting to know if could have slots 1 and 2 m.2 slots running at Gen 4.0 while keeping the GPU at Gen 4.0 x16 which I think it doesnt 

Thanks


----------



## EniGma1987

uzi1 said:


> I think I understand now, so I can have GPU at Gen4 x16 and also have slot 1 M.2 at Gen 4.0 speed, but If I set slot 2 m.2 to CPU so it also has gen 4.0 it will set the GPU to Gen 3.0 x8
> 
> I was wanting to know if could have slots 1 and 2 m.2 slots running at Gen 4.0 while keeping the GPU at Gen 4.0 x16 which I think it doesnt
> 
> Thanks


There just isnt enough lanes on the CPU to run everything at max. Neither AMD nor Intel have enough lanes on mainstream platforms for this.


When setting the CPU to power the extra nvme slots, the GPU will stay in pcie 4 though, just at x8 lanes.


----------



## KedarWolf

uzi1 said:


> I think I understand now, so I can have GPU at Gen4 x16 and also have slot 1 M.2 at Gen 4.0 speed, but If I set slot 2 m.2 to CPU so it also has gen 4.0 it will set the GPU to Gen 3.0 x8
> 
> I was wanting to know if could have slots 1 and 2 m.2 slots running at Gen 4.0 while keeping the GPU at Gen 4.0 x16 which I think it doesnt
> 
> Thanks


You only lose at most 3% of your benchmark scores running 8x, this is well documented.

If I'm running benchmarks, I run the GPU 16x, if I'm just gaming, 8x is fine.

Edit: PCIe 4.0 and PCIe 3.0 - Difference between x8 and x16 with the fastest cards - Where does the bottleneck begin? | igor´sLAB


----------



## Cadek

@uzi1 I think MSI description on their page is pretty good, you can also use below link and go LIGHTNING GEN 4->OPTIMIZED STORAGE DESIGN to check options, I now have one M2 on first slot but its PATRIOT Viper gen3 so I dont even use GEN 4 speed  and have second in slot 4 ADATA X8200Pro which is also Gen 3 and for now it's enough for me, maybe later when I decide to have more M2 I will use lanes from chipset on M2_2 and M2_3 slot so I will have PCIe 3.0 x2 on both slots and if what @KedarWolf said it's right losing 3% on graphics card is really not much for going 3xslot Gen 4 so if I will choose something better and more expensive than Gen 3 on next buy I will go for this option.






MSI MEG B550 UNIFY AMD AM4 DDR4 CF M.2 USB 3.2 Gen 2 Wi-Fi 6 HDMI ATX Gaming Motherboard


Powered by AMD Ryzen AM4 processors, the MSI MEG B550 UNIFY begins its dark conquest with a design made to accomplish any task with cruel efficiency. Connect to ultra-fast networks with 2.5G LAN and Wi-Fi AX. Move bulky files faster with USB 3.2 Gen 2. On




www.msi.com





4x M.2 slots (Key M)
M2_1 slot (from CPU)
Supports PCIe 4.0/ 3.0 x43
Supports SATA 6Gb/s
Supports 2280/ 22110 storage devices

M2_2 slot
Chipset support mode (default, from Chipset ) - supports PCIe 3.0 x2
CPU support mode (From CPU) - supports PCIe 4.0/ 3.0 x4 3
Supports 2280 storage devices

M2_3 slot
Chipset support mode (default, from Chipset ) - supports PCIe 3.0 x2
CPU support mode (From CPU) - supports PCIe 4.0/ 3.0 x4 3
Supports SATA 6Gb/s
Supports 2280/ 22110 storage devices

M2_4 slot
Supports PCIe 3.0 x4
Supports 2280 storage devices




The SATA5 port will be unavailable when installing M.2 SATA SSD into M2_3.
The SATA5 and SATA6 ports will be unavailable when installing M.2 PCIe SSD into M2_3
M.2 specifications may vary depending on the CPU installed.


----------



## KedarWolf

I swear by this PWM fan controller. It uses a SATA power connector, not a crappy Molex one, has a cable to a single PWM header for fan speed control.

You can add up to eight fans, it's cheap, it's tiny and it has a sticky pad on the bottom of it for placing it in a convenient spot in your case.

Silverstone 8-Port PWM Fan Hub/Splitter for 4-Pin & 3-Pin Fans in Black SST-CPF04-USA (Newest Version)



https://www.amazon.ca/gp/product/B07N3HP8S5/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o06_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1


----------



## YoungChris

I think my 5800x is just barely not strong enough to handle this:








Anyone here think they have a chip that could?
Yes, I know my procODT/other values are wack, just the last setting I tried before going back to my 2x8.


----------



## degenn

Hey all, just curious... what is the limiting factor in the ability to run at 1:1 2000mhz+ FCLK? Is it CPU? RAM? Motherboard? A combination of all three?

Have a 5900x and B550 Unify-X here but having trouble getting stable beyond 3800mhz/1900mhz. Using a G.Skill F4-4000C17-32GVKB 2x16GB kit of Samsung B-Die. Does it usually require a lot of tweaking and tuning to get there even in the best case scenario or if you have hardware capable of doing it is it as simple as setting XMP @ 4000+mhz?

I have an Asus X570 Dark Hero sitting here unopened but if FCLK is more limited by CPU/RAM then I'm not sure it's worth opening and trying my luck with FCLK on that board. Have about 3 weeks left to return the Dark Hero... decisions, decisions...


----------



## YoungChris

NVM I got 4000c12 gdm off passing on 2x16, needed more clkdrvstren and ckedrvstren. Lower derived voltages helped too (for like the first time ever)


----------



## KedarWolf

YoungChris said:


> NVM I got 4000c12 gdm off passing on 2x16, needed more clkdrvstren and ckedrvstren. Lower derived voltages helped too (for like the first time ever)


Is it WHEA free in OCCT and if it is, can you share a Zen Timings screenshot?


----------



## YoungChris

KedarWolf said:


> Is it WHEA free in OCCT and if it is, can you share a Zen Timings screenshot?


Does 4000c12 sound like a setting that I would care about WHEA free or run daily?
can get a zentimings screenshot when I'm on my computer again tho


----------



## degenn

What BIOS are you guys using? Seeing some Zen Timings screenshots in here has me wondering if I'm using the wrong BIOS (I'm on the latest official bios released late March). I thought I may have read about an unofficial XOC bios or something?


----------



## KedarWolf

YoungChris said:


> Does 4000c12 sound like a setting that I would care about WHEA free or run daily?
> can get a zentimings screenshot when I'm on my computer again tho


I never saw the CL12 until you answered me. I just saw 4000 and can't get above 3800 WHEA free.


----------



## degenn

KedarWolf said:


> I never saw the CL12 until you answered me. I just saw 4000 and can't get above 3800 WHEA free.


Join the club, seems we have a boatload of members! I've gotten real close to error-free 3866 but still no dice. 4000 gives me thousands of WHEA, 3866 I only had about a dozen errors after a few hours in Windows, still errors nonetheless...


----------



## EniGma1987

degenn said:


> Hey all, just curious... what is the limiting factor in the ability to run at 1:1 2000mhz+ FCLK? Is it CPU? RAM? Motherboard? A combination of all three?
> 
> Have a 5900x and B550 Unify-X here but having trouble getting stable beyond 3800mhz/1900mhz. Using a G.Skill F4-4000C17-32GVKB 2x16GB kit of Samsung B-Die. Does it usually require a lot of tweaking and tuning to get there even in the best case scenario or if you have hardware capable of doing it is it as simple as setting XMP @ 4000+mhz?
> 
> I have an Asus X570 Dark Hero sitting here unopened but if FCLK is more limited by CPU/RAM then I'm not sure it's worth opening and trying my luck with FCLK on that board. Have about 3 weeks left to return the Dark Hero... decisions, decisions...


Mostly CPU that is limit, and the AGESA for the CPU.
Trying to clock up to 2GHz FCLK means you are pushing the bus signals inside the chip past something like 30 GHz and it just doesnt seem to like that without some serious tweaks by AMD to make the bus like it. Good silicon, the voltage it wants, and low temperatures all help.


----------



## Arni90

EniGma1987 said:


> Mostly CPU that is limit, and the AGESA for the CPU.
> Trying to clock up to 2GHz FCLK means you are pushing the bus signals inside the chip past something like 30 GHz and it just doesnt seem to like that without some serious tweaks by AMD to make the bus like it. Good silicon, the voltage it wants, and low temperatures all help.


30 GHz?!? That must be serial transfers of some kind? Why would they do that?


----------



## EniGma1987

Arni90 said:


> 30 GHz?!? That must be serial transfers of some kind? Why would they do that?


Sorry, I was mistaken. I was only half remembering the info I had found and posted before. There are indeed available SerDes pushing 30GHz nowadays of course and there have been for about 5 years now and this is what I was remembering on the new generation limits. But the ones AMD uses with the FCLK are not that fast. At 2GHz FCLK it would make the bus run at 16GHz. Big difference. lol. But still it has to be designed and rated for those speeds, which the ones AMD has designed are typically pushing at their very upper limits at that frequency.

But yes it is for high speed serial data transfer. AMD has one bus for them for communication between chiplets and another bus of them for communication to memory and other sockets.

Think of the issue like you are overclocking by raising the base clock instead of a multiplier. If you raise that base clock, everything goes up. Pretty soon you run into stability problems because the PCIE bus is told to run too fast and even though the CPU was fine gaining an extra 50MHz, but PCIE was not and is the thing holding you back. Raising the FCLK is the same way. Sure the scalable data fabric in the CPU can handle the extra 100MHz, but the bus links that also get their speed from FCLK are not liking it.


----------



## Arni90

EniGma1987 said:


> Sorry, I was mistaken. I was only half remembering the info I had found and posted before. There are indeed available SerDes pushing 30GHz nowadays of course and there have been for about 5 years now and this is what I was remembering on the new generation limits. But the ones AMD uses with the FCLK are not that fast. At 2GHz FCLK it would make the bus run at 16GHz. Big difference. lol. But still it has to be designed and rated for those speeds, which the ones AMD has designed are typically pushing at their very upper limits at that frequency.
> 
> But yes it is for high speed serial data transfer. AMD has one bus for them for communication between chiplets and another bus of them for communication to memory and other sockets.
> 
> Think of the issue like you are overclocking by raising the base clock instead of a multiplier. If you raise that base clock, everything goes up. Pretty soon you run into stability problems because the PCIE bus is told to run too fast and even though the CPU was fine gaining an extra 50MHz, but PCIE was not and is the thing holding you back. Raising the FCLK is the same way. Sure the scalable data fabric in the CPU can handle the extra 100MHz, but the bus links that also get their speed from FCLK are not liking it.


And here I thought AMD used a parallell interface, that explains why FCLK above 1900 MHz has so many problems. I imagine a 128+64 pin link to each CCD would have taken up too much space on the I/O die.

Really makes you wonder what they're going to do on AM5 with DDR5, increase link width perhaps?

EDIT: this also explains why higher PLL voltage can help push higher FCLK, as there has to be a PLL at each end of the interconnect.


----------



## YoungChris

I heard something about bios A24 having just released? I saw one user running it, had decent improvement to (all!) Aida bandwidth, a 4ns decrease in Aida latency, a good boost to GB3 multicore subscores, and a huge boost to GB3 single core memory score, using a Cezanne ES and all same subtimings.
















Their overall score looks to be of _questionable_ efficiency, though I'd have to see for myself whenever I can grab a 5700g.
Also to note, I have seen this user run his Cezanne ES with 5800x-like L3$ bandwidth.


----------



## mongoled

YoungChris said:


> Does 4000c12 sound like a setting that I would care about WHEA free or run daily?
> can get a zentimings screenshot when I'm on my computer again tho


😂😂


----------



## EniGma1987

Arni90 said:


> And here I thought AMD used a parallell interface, that explains why FCLK above 1900 MHz has so many problems. I imagine a 128+64 pin link to each CCD would have taken up too much space on the I/O die.
> 
> Really makes you wonder what they're going to do on AM5 with DDR5, increase link width perhaps?
> 
> EDIT: this also explains why higher PLL voltage can help push higher FCLK, as there has to be a PLL at each end of the interconnect.


I believe internally in just about everything chip related they are parallel/wide interfaces. For instance, the fabric in the AMD chiplets is 128-bit wide data path. However, it takes a lot of resources if someone were to make 128-bit wide transmission bus in the silicon and keep all of them impedance balanced and error free across all traces. Most modern processing uses serializer/deserializer tech that takes those wide busses and converts them into a very high speed serial data stream so that a fraction of the bus lines have to be made. AMD uses two different bus links: a 32-bit for internal to the CPU package (between chiplets) that runs at a 1:4 frequency ratio with the fabric clock, and 16-bit external bus links that run 1:8 with the fabric clock.
This isnt an AMD specific thing, just about every modern chip uses these sorts of things. Wide bus internally, to high speed serial links for transmission.

My theories for what AMD will do with AM5 socket/chip tech is that either AMD will simply use a newer generation SerDes that is capable of past 30GHz, which is somewhat likely. It sounds crazy fast, but Ethernet tech has actually been pushing these sorts of speeds for many years now (56gbps Ethernet uses 28GHz SerDes). These are what you find in those 100+ gbps fiber links in datacenter Ethernet. Another option is to simply design AM5 to have the FCLK either entirely decoupled from the mem clock, or designed to minimize as much as possible the latency hit by running FCLK=UCLK/2 by default. Just because AM4 gets a 10ns latency hit by doing that when overclocking doesnt mean AM5 has to. Im sure AMD could find ways to minimize the penalty, which would be offset by the much faster memory clock anyway.

Another option would be to switch all their bus encoding to PAM4, which would double their bandwidth at the same frequency. This is the same change PCIE5 is going to have. I have a feeling AMD will make use of this as it seems the way forward for everyone. Ethernet did it first, GDDR6X did it second, PCIE 5 looks to be third, and so Im sure AMD and Intel will follow suit sooner or later.
Edit: it appears PCIE 5 will actually not use PAM4. I had thought I read it would but it seems the new tech will retain older encoding style. It is PCIE 6 that will make the change to PAM4 encoding. So that is actually a good ways out then.


----------



## YoungChris

KedarWolf said:


> Is it WHEA free in OCCT and if it is, can you share a Zen Timings screenshot?











Here are the settings that passes Geekbench 3 consistently, without instability or fclk-related performance regression. 4000c12, very tight subtimings, dual rank, true 1t with GDM Disabled. Worked with maxmem set to about 9gb useable, more not tested.


----------



## weleh

Do we have a tool like Asus Turbo VCore to change voltages on Windows?


----------



## YoungChris

weleh said:


> Do we have a tool like Asus Turbo VCore to change voltages on Windows?


Yes





B550 Unify-X Bios and Tools


I don't have much yet, more posts will follow. Bios A.05O: https://drive.google.com/file/d/11b96620j1yIy-8OiQXhsFW25czHiC3PI/view?usp=sharing Should allow for vdimm >2.0 and other fun. Not sure about AGESA version, will check when I can get back to my board.



community.hwbot.org




there may be a newer version as well, will have to dig


----------



## weleh

Command center allows to change vdimm? Never knew..


----------



## Hale59

YoungChris said:


> ...
> Here are the settings that passes Geekbench 3 consistently, without instability or fclk-related performance regression. 4000c12, very tight subtimings, dual rank, true 1t with GDM Disabled. Worked with maxmem set to about 9gb useable, more not tested.


Here is mine.
This little road runner cpu is the top ryzen 3000s on the superpi 32m amd zen low clock challenge. Just 2 seconds behind a 5800X.

I need better weather/ambient temps. And chilled water.


----------



## degenn

YoungChris said:


> I heard something about bios A24 having just released? I saw one user running it, had decent improvement...


I tried it last weekend and it made my system less stable than A22 -- couldn't even get 3800mhz/1900mhz FCLK stable. Rolled back to A22 and bam, no problem.


----------



## KedarWolf

degenn said:


> I tried it last weekend and it made my system less stable than A22 -- couldn't even get 3800mhz/1900mhz FCLK stable. Rolled back to A22 and bam, no problem.


I got A24 stable, but Cinebench R20 multicore and SuperPi 32M were quite a bit slower. AIDA64 was a bit better though. I went back to A21O though.

I have no USB issues with A21O.

Edit: I had to raise RAM voltage from 1.48 to 1.49 to get it stable on A24.


----------



## MyUsername

At last, after 5 and a half months ordering in November I will actually get to play with my 5950x next week, yes I did a happy dance 😁

Got my memory stable as tight as possible 1.48V, literally hanging off the edge with little finger nail but it's stable. Going 1 digit tighter on anything will error in TM5. Been the same over the last few bioses.









And now 2T, slight voltage bump and some changes to the cad bus, it'll do until Tuesday.


----------



## KedarWolf

MyUsername said:


> At last, after 5 and a half months ordering in November I will actually get to play with my 5950x next week, yes I did a happy dance 😁
> 
> Got my memory stable as tight as possible 1.48V, literally hanging off the edge with little finger nail but it's stable. Going 1 digit tighter on anything will error in TM5. Been the same over the last few bioses.
> View attachment 2486683


I can run tRFC 247 as well, but I find a get better AIDA64 results with tRFC 252 for some reason. I run 14-8-16-19-21 42 though. I know, weird tRP and tRAS but after a suggestion by someone I find it benches better and easier to get stable than 14-28. Technically I should run it at 21-21 but 19-21 a bit better in benches. This at 1.2v VSOC. I think 1.250 might be a bit too high but I dunno for sure. The rest is almost identical to yours except I'm at 4-4 6-6 SD DD. I'm 12 tCWL too.

I'm WHEA free and TM5 stable running usmus at 300% for 7+ hours.

Back on A21O though as I find R20 multicore and SuperPi 32M are better. 1.48v on memory only change from the screenshot on A21O.

No USB issues at all.

Edit: Can't run SCLs lower than 4 or I get errors.


----------



## KedarWolf

Deleted


----------



## KedarWolf

MyUsername said:


> At last, after 5 and a half months ordering in November I will actually get to play with my 5950x next week, yes I did a happy dance 😁
> 
> Got my memory stable as tight as possible 1.48V, literally hanging off the edge with little finger nail but it's stable. Going 1 digit tighter on anything will error in TM5. Been the same over the last few bioses.
> View attachment 2486683


And if you're running GDM enabled I think your tRCDRD is actually running at 16.


----------



## MyUsername

KedarWolf said:


> I can run tRFC 247 as well, but I find a get better AIDA64 results with tRFC 252 for some reason. I run 14-8-16-19-21 42 though. I know, weird tRP and tRAS but after a suggestion by someone I find it benches better and easier to get stable than 14-28. Technically I should run it at 21-21 but 19-21 a bit better in benches. This at 1.2v VSOC. I think 1.250 might be a bit too high but I dunno for sure. The rest is almost identical to yours except I'm at 4-4 6-6 SD DD. I'm 12 tCWL too.
> 
> I'm WHEA free and TM5 stable running usmus at 300% for 7+ hours.
> 
> Back on A21O though as I find R20 multicore and SuperPi 32M are better. 1.48v on memory only change from the screenshot on A21O.
> 
> No USB issues at all.
> 
> Edit: Can't run SCLs lower than 4 or I get errors.
> 
> 
> View attachment 2486684


I have a 3600 cl16 kit and they struggle with cl14 and tight tertiary timings, the 4000 cl16 kit is quite different and both kits cost about the same.


KedarWolf said:


> And if you're running GDM enabled I think your tRCDRD is actually running at 16.


I thought and read only tcl and tcwl are effected by gdm and auto corrects up if uneven, trcd can be uneven.


----------



## KedarWolf

MyUsername said:


> I have a 3600 cl16 kit and they struggle with cl14 and tight tertiary timings, the 4000 cl16 kit is quite different and both kits cost about the same.
> 
> 
> I thought and read only tcl and tcwl are effected by gdm and auto corrects up if uneven, trcd can be uneven.


You'd have to ask @Veii but I'm really sure all the main timings round off if they are an odd number.


----------



## Veii

MyUsername said:


> I thought and read only tcl and tcwl are effected by gdm and auto corrects up if uneven, trcd can be uneven.


GDM stupidly speaking and visualized are 2.5T turns
While 2T is also a 2nd turn but MUX chips run at fullspeed, where on GDM MUX chips do run at half speed
Positive on it is around 60-65% strain, compared to 100% on 2T & that tRFCns can go lower than with GDM on

But as there are two loops, rounding happens twice internally
The first stage, tCL , tWR, tRTP, tCWL get rounded up
The 2nd stage primaries get rounded up in the hidden

There is no x-T on GDM, it's just GDM or not GDM
But it's significantly slower than 2T , while requiring the same memory voltage
Just with a change in powering
Meaning a change in RTT and CAD_BUS values & maybe a stability additive with tCKE up to frequency

CAD_BUS should move in the scale of 40-x-30-x
40-X-40-X
60-X-40-X
60-20-20-24
120-20-20-24
* CsOdtDrvStr (3rd value) needs to stay beyond 30 in order to combat broken memory training since AGESA 1.1.0.0A
*** an exception to all these rules is the usage of CAD_BUS SETUP timings , which require a starting point of X-20-20-20 (40-20-20-20, or 60-20-20-20).
As you shape by MCLK the delay with "setup timings". But this is more advanced stuff, soo follow the above patterns first 

Beyond ClkDrvStr 60 is rarely required
Keep in mind that changing ClkDrvStr higher, will require to lower procODT and weaken RTT_PARK
** weaken in the technical term to increase the divider of RTTs, soo the ohm value you get out - is "lower"

Better do the work and get GDM off
Sadly can't remember my main post link, but


Spoiler: This reupload [GDM, 1T, 2T] should do justice














Keep again in mind, the stated 2.5T is as wrong as the commonly spread 1.5T terminology.
But for visualization purposes, it's making it clear, that it absolutely is not 1 pass but 2+


----------



## MyUsername

Veii said:


> GDM stupidly speaking and visualized are 2.5T turns
> While 2T is also a 2nd turn but MUX chips run at fullspeed, where on GDM MUX chips do run at half speed
> Positive on it is around 60-65% strain, compared to 100% on 2T & that tRFCns can go lower than with GDM on
> 
> But as there are two loops, rounding happens twice internally
> The first stage, tCL , tWR, tRTP, tCWL get rounded up
> The 2nd stage primaries get rounded up in the hidden
> 
> There is no x-T on GDM, it's just GDM or not GDM
> But it's significantly slower than 2T , while requiring the same memory voltage
> Just with a change in powering
> Meaning a change in RTT and CAD_BUS values & maybe a stability additive with tCKE up to frequency
> 
> CAD_BUS should move in the scale of 40-x-30-x
> 40-X-40-X
> 60-X-40-X
> 60-20-20-24
> 120-20-20-24
> * CsOdtDrvStr (3rd value) needs to stay beyond 30 in order to combat broken memory training since AGESA 1.1.0.0A
> *** an exception to all these rules is the usage of CAD_BUS SETUP timings , which require a starting point of X-20-20-20 (40-20-20-20, or 60-20-20-20).
> As you shape by MCLK the delay with "setup timings". But this is more advanced stuff, soo follow the above patterns first
> 
> Beyond ClkDrvStr 60 is rarely required
> Keep in mind that changing ClkDrvStr higher, will require to lower procODT and weaken RTT_PARK
> ** weaken in the technical term to increase the divider of RTTs, soo the ohm value you get out - is "lower"
> 
> Better do the work and get GDM off
> Sadly can't remember my main post link, but
> Keep again in mind, the stated 2.5T is as wrong as the commonly spread 1.5T terminology.
> But for visualization purposes, it's making it clear, that it absolutely is not 1 pass but 2+


I get what you're saying. I found a write up on gear down mode on futureplus systems, I didn't realise gdm was so limited compared to 2T, almost the placebo effect with the 1.5T being thrown about. It's almost like with my basic understanding, the memory operates at half-rate(rising edge of the clock) plus 2T, but how it keeps latency and bandwidth now has made me even more confused LOL I'm a mechanical engineer not a computer scientist


----------



## Veii

MyUsername said:


> but how it keeps latency and bandwidth now has made me even more confused LOL I'm a mechanical engineer not a computer scientist


I'm neither one of these , just a school-dropout 

It made no sense to me. The results and the spread information made no sense ~ didn't align
Reading psone's research on chiphell , made everything more clear 
Both are stupid terminology , but GDM is clearly slower than 2T

Well, technically it's subtle bit faster on Copy and Read ~ 1% to 0.5%
But the access latency difference is too big to ignore
The benefit GDM disabled gives ~ the full control on timings , just outperforms GDM
Also it shows instantly if you have powering issues, as all goes to  once memory is not powered correctly, haha

The good thing is, 2T vs GDM need no voltage change
It forces you to redo RTTs which also can allow you to daily 1.66vDIMM while having cold dimms
DRAM Calculator spread RTTs that "just work" but they are too aggressive 
It can even fry A0 kits beyond 1.535-1.54v. Stability can only be kept up till 1.51v with them


----------



## gymleader91

Looking between these 2 kits for Unify. F4-3600C14D-32GTZN and F4-3600C16D-32GTZN

The C16 is 1.35v and is on both MSI and G. Skill QVL. The C14 1.45v is not on either. C14 is approx $25 more expensive (currently on offer at Newegg).

@KedarWolf It seems like you have the C16 kit. What voltage is required for a good but safe 3600C14 profile? 1.42v? I don't want to try anything over 3,600.


----------



## KedarWolf

gymleader91 said:


> Looking between these 2 kits for Unify. F4-3600C14D-32GTZN and F4-3600C16D-32GTZN
> 
> The C16 is 1.35v and is on both MSI and G. Skill QVL. The C14 1.45v is not on either. C14 is approx $25 more expensive (currently on offer at Newegg).
> 
> @KedarWolf It seems like you have the C16 kit. What voltage is required for a good but safe 3600C14 profile? 1.42v? I don't want to try anything over 3,600.


I've never tried to run it at CL14 3600 but run CL14 3800 at 1.48v 1.2 VSOC 1.1/1.15 VDDGs.


----------



## degenn

gymleader91 said:


> Looking between these 2 kits for Unify. F4-3600C14D-32GTZN and F4-3600C16D-32GTZN
> 
> The C16 is 1.35v and is on both MSI and G. Skill QVL. The C14 1.45v is not on either. C14 is approx $25 more expensive (currently on offer at Newegg).
> 
> @KedarWolf It seems like you have the C16 kit. What voltage is required for a good but safe 3600C14 profile? 1.42v? I don't want to try anything over 3,600.


The Unify-X? I can't find that F4-3600C16D-32GTZN on the QVL for the Unify-X.


----------



## weleh

Why not run true 1T?

All you need is magic RTT and DrvStr. 

Always ran true 1T on my 3600c16 Dark Pros since Zen 2.


----------



## YoungChris

Veii said:


> I'm neither one of these , just a school-dropout
> 
> It made no sense to me. The results and the spread information made no sense ~ didn't align
> Reading psone's research on chiphell , made everything more clear
> Both are stupid terminology , but GDM is clearly slower than 2T
> 
> Well, technically it's subtle bit faster on Copy and Read ~ 1% to 0.5%
> But the access latency difference is too big to ignore
> The benefit GDM disabled gives ~ the full control on timings , just outperforms GDM
> Also it shows instantly if you have powering issues, as all goes to  once memory is not powered correctly, haha
> 
> The good thing is, 2T vs GDM need no voltage change
> It forces you to redo RTTs which also can allow you to daily 1.66vDIMM while having cold dimms
> DRAM Calculator spread RTTs that "just work" but they are too aggressive
> It can even fry A0 kits beyond 1.535-1.54v. Stability can only be kept up till 1.51v with them


Never once heard of an A0 kit frying, or really B-Die in general below 2.3vdimm (besides one isolated instance on Zen 1), got a source for that?


----------



## gymleader91

degenn said:


> The Unify-X? I can't find that F4-3600C16D-32GTZN on the QVL for the Unify-X.


Normal Unify. They for some reason neglected to test any top modules on the Unify-x for some reason.


----------



## MyUsername

After messing with memory yesterday getting F9s and cmos resets, it's happened before on previous bioses, the front panel power button and the power button on the board doesn't work in Windows to shutdown, slightly inconvenient. I've completely powered down, removed the battery, same. I did have an error with zentimings saying it couldn't find a power table then aborted finding power table and then opened, the button worked, but after resetting the bios again the error disappeared and the power button stopped working. Is it related I don't know? The only fix I know is to flash the bios again.

Another bug I found that had me going for a minute, I have raid setup 1 TB m.2 for windows, 3x1TB m.2 raid for games and a 6TB hard drive setup as volume. The m.2s worked fine, but the AHCI/raid switch in the hidden CBS under settings was set to AHCI and the raid setup obviously didn't work for the sata 6TB hard drive and was seen as MBR, complete pain in the ass as I've got desktop, downloads and documents linked to that hard drive and Windows freaked when it had disappeared. I set it up as volume as I wanted to experiment and it seems to work more efficient than using Windows drivers when using raid. Resetting the bios and loading a profile fixed it and the hard drive came back and was seen as a volume again.


----------



## mongoled

YoungChris said:


> Never once heard of an A0 kit frying, or really B-Die in general below 2.3vdimm (besides one isolated instance on Zen 1), got a source for that?


I am one of the sources !

Two times, both occured when pairing the A0 set with A2 set.

Was using 1.53v set in BIOS that gets 1.55/56v.

Both times was using RZQ/1 for RttPark, and both times the issue occured while I was stress testing the memory modules 3800/1900 flat 14s.

Not a temperature issue as I had active air cooling over the dimm slots.


----------



## weleh

Nvm


----------



## weleh

Also this board came from RMA, still 2.1 written on the board. 
Can confirm every single screw comes loose out of the box.
The SN is only 2 numbers above my first board.

Haven't tested for coil whine.


----------



## uzeh

Hi,

I've just got the b550 Unify (non-X) today.. actually, I'll have a second by the end of the day due to a cancellation not working - have to send one back. I'm wondering if I've picked the wrong board as I'm not going to be going for extreme memory overclocks and I've read a lot of issues cropping up in this thread :/

Is there more than one revision of the Unify (non-X)? - is there anything I should be looking for to ensure I've got a "good board" - especially as I'll have 2 to choose from. Or.. have I just made a mistake and should I go for something else which better meets my needs?

I basically wanted all of the board features like the higher-end audio, wifi + 2.5G LAN and the ability to run 4x8gb safely (I've got some 3600 CL16 single rank sticks as there's nothing else in stock right now) and the Unify was pretty much the same price or cheaper than my other options.

Thanks for any help!


----------



## weleh

There's no issues with the board besides some coil whine. Every other issue reported are outliers that will also happen on other board vendors.

What other issues concern you at the moment? 

It's one of the best AM4 boards, if not, the best board out there for AM4 socket at the moment.


----------



## uzeh

Thanks for the reassurance - any ideas on different revisions of the non-X?

The thing which concerns me most is the coil whine - I know it'll drive me nuts. Aside from that, I noticed a lot of posts about inconsistent booting and instability, although it may be that those are from people pushing their memory to the very limit and that's why. I tend to second-guess myself a lot, so I guess I should just wait for the last part to arrive later and build the thing


----------



## weleh

There aren't any new revisions of these boards (X and non X).

They are all the same. Also some people don't experience coil whine others experience in varying degrees. My first board had lots of coil whine during benchmarks but for everyday usage it was fine.

I noticed all back of the PCB screws were at last 1,5 turns untighten so that might help.

I haven't noticed any inconsistent booting or similar, my first board did "die" after just a handful of reflashes so there's that.

All in all, in terms of features and quality, it's one of the best boards to get. However, issues ineherently to AMD are still possible to happen.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Did anyone had some success with A24?
Worth to try it?


----------



## EniGma1987

uzeh said:


> The thing which concerns me most is the coil whine - I know it'll drive me nuts. Aside from that, I noticed a lot of posts about inconsistent booting and instability, although it may be that those are from people pushing their memory to the very limit and that's why. I tend to second-guess myself a lot, so I guess I should just wait for the last part to arrive later and build the thing


Have you tried changing the switching frequency and voltage going through the VRMs? That can sometimes fix the whine sound of the chokes. Also try lowering your CPU overclock and setting the current draw back down and see if it goes away. More current through the VRM often makes the whine louder.

the noise wont necessarily cause instability. But people who have it are often pushing their systems extremely hard and are simply not stable.




I have never actually tried this, but maybe you can dampen the vibration by getting some electrical insulating putty and pressing it onto the board and surround the chokes to provide some damping to the coil vibration causing the whine.


----------



## weleh

ManniX-ITA said:


> Did anyone had some success with A24?
> Worth to try it?


Define success.
I'm testing it atm, it's just like previous bios.


----------



## weleh

My last board had some coil whine this one that came from RMA is better overall but... does coil whine when I move the mouse 

MSI ****ed up so hard on this....


----------



## jollydet

weleh said:


> There aren't any new revisions of these boards (X and non X).
> 
> They are all the same. Also some people don't experience coil whine others experience in varying degrees. My first board had lots of coil whine during benchmarks but for everyday usage it was fine.
> 
> I noticed all back of the PCB screws were at last 1,5 turns untighten so that might help.
> 
> I haven't noticed any inconsistent booting or similar, my first board did "die" after just a handful of reflashes so there's that.
> 
> All in all, in terms of features and quality, it's one of the best boards to get. However, issues ineherently to AMD are still possible to happen.





weleh said:


> My last board had some coil whine this one that came from RMA is better overall but... does coil whine when I move the mouse
> 
> MSI ****ed up so hard on this....



About that quality you speak of lol. I wouldn't say the Unify is a good quality board it has issues with its VRM component quality control(coil whine) the edges of the pcb has break marks where they are snapping the pcbs off a big sheet and dont even finish the edge of the board they are knocking them out so quick. all the screws are loose on the board from factory and you yourself report a dead board, and coil whine issues. 

What i would say is the Unify is a great looking board with fantastic electrical and thermal performance and generally good components. almost all boards have some kind of issues when you get deep into them so nothing new. The main thing i noticed about the Unify was its cheap build. The lack of dual bios and safe mode/retry switches kinda sucks for a mem oc dedicated board however. Hopefully we get a new I/O die with warhol and we can actually push some decent Fabric speed 1:1.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

@Waleh 
Success meaning if there are any notable defects of improvements respect the previous A22.
Not sure I want to reconfigure again everything from scratch...

@jollydet 
Didn't notice sharp PCB edges on mine, will check.
Indeed the QA is not the best and the VRM heatsink issues are quite shameful for a board supposedly high-end.
Dead boards are a normal issue and it's going to be worse, for everything, in the future.
Tolerances and QA for every component are worsening due to the silicon crisis; parts that were trashed yesterday are being used today.
There are still many design details that make me love this board.

What really ****s the whole experience it's not the missing Dual Bios but the poor quality of the BIOS.
It's terrible that I can't quick load anymore the profile with Alt+Fx; 2/3 times I end up in a black screen and I have to clear CMOS again.
And anyway have to re-set all PBO settings and touch all overclocking menu settings to be sure they are properly restored.
It's awful and makes testing and overclocking very annoying and stressful.
It'd be so easy and quick to do a proper QA once and for all and fixes these issues, it's all software.
But it's been months and it's not happening. 
Big thumbs down for MSI, they got worse than GigaByte (which is really something).


----------



## ernorator

Bought one unify-x, which had coil whine especially when moving my mouse.

Was not supposed to do that but I bought second one after returning first. Second one had coolwine even louder than the first one and ram oc was very unstable. 

Ain't going to try 3rd time


----------



## EniGma1987

ManniX-ITA said:


> What really ****s the whole experience it's not the missing Dual Bios but the poor quality of the BIOS.
> It's terrible that I can't quick load anymore the profile with Alt+Fx; 2/3 times I end up in a black screen and I have to clear CMOS again.


That is funny because while setting up my friends new PC with this MB I was thinking how the bios is infinitely better than my Gigabyte X570 Ultra.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

EniGma1987 said:


> That is funny because while setting up my friends new PC with this MB I was thinking how the bios is infinitely better than my Gigabyte X570 Ultra.


The layout is amazing, it's the main reason I started looking into it.
But it's plagued by stupid bugs that MSI is not fixing. It's even getting worse.


----------



## uzeh

Well I tried the board, unfortunately it was making a buzzing noise even in the bios and it just got worse under load. In some cases it was a loud buzzing, in others it was making chirping noises. This was before I tried overclocking 

I checked the VRM heatsink but couldn't see any gaps. All of the m.2 heatsinks rattled - no way to tighten them up. Still I don't think it accounts for the chirping and crackling under load.

I think I'll look elsewhere.. the Asus b550-f WiFi seems to tick all my boxes tbh, so gonna give that a try.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

@uzeh
Yes sadly MSI spends more energy on aggressive and unethical marketing than improving QA...
Seems the only way to effectively reduce coil whine is to replace the thermal pad on the caps with one with double the height.
Really unfair to have to rework a brand new pricey motherboard to solve stupid QA mistakes.
Had to do the same with the Gigabyte Master to replace the Chipset pad.

Both MSI and Gigabyte were quite a pain on this regard, have to say the cheap ASUS B550 TUF Gaming was the less problematic of the bunch.


----------



## weleh

Where can you buy thermal pads for the VRM heatsinks so I can do the mod on my own board? What's the height size?
The coil whine while moving the mouse is very annoying.

Even the cheapo 100€ MSI Bazooka I bought as replacement for the RMA was troubleless to work with.

I've had the B550-F, it's a nice board being a Strix you also get some benefits from the high end Asus boards. It's a nice board but the Ethernet is trash on it.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

weleh said:


> Where can you buy thermal pads for the VRM heatsinks so I can do the mod on my own board?


On Amazon, GELID (should be better, higher thermal conductivity) or Thermal Grizzly.
I think you need 1mm height, the standard should be 0.5mm.









Gelid Solutions GP-Extreme – Thermal Pad 80x40x0.5mm. Ausgezeichnete Wärmeleitung, Idealer Lückenfüller. Einfache Installation Wärmeleitfähigkeit 12W: Amazon.de: Computer & Zubehör


Gelid Solutions GP-Extreme – Thermal Pad 80x40x0.5mm. Ausgezeichnete Wärmeleitung, Idealer Lückenfüller. Einfache Installation Wärmeleitfähigkeit 12W - Kostenloser Versand ab 29€. Jetzt bei Amazon.de bestellen!



www.amazon.de







https://www.amazon.de/dp/B00ZJS8RWQ/


----------



## weleh

Thanks mate! Local store has Thermal Grizzly in stock 1mm pads.

Thanks thanks thanks! Will report back


----------



## weleh

Now has anyone done this mod so I can take a look?


----------



## MyUsername

weleh said:


> Now has anyone done this mod so I can take a look?


I did the mod about a month ago. It made no difference, whether I used 2 layers of 1.5mm old stuff which bent the PCB quite badly, I removed a layer, or some new 1.5mm Grizzly stuff. Temperatures are great, but the chirp is still there while benching.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

I wouldn't recommend to go over double the height on the pad on the inductors; it should be sufficient to fix it and higher than that could loosen the grip of the heatsink on the PWM chips.

There are a couple of extreme issues which could render it ineffective that you need to take care of.
The most critical inductors are those on the inner side versus the DIMM sockets, the smaller part of the heatsink on the side of the board.
It was confirmed earlier and you can check it yourself pushing on the heatsink while benching AIDA; my coil whine is greatly reduced if I push on that spot.

First issue is the heatsink could be bent; you need to check if the alignment is flat.
I'd bend it a very little bit on the inward to keep a slightly higher pressure on the outlier caps.

Second issue is the caps height; some posted a photo were one of his cap was 0.5mm taller than the rest.
This of course is disrupting pressure on all the others; if that's the case you need to compensate with different thermal pad heights.

And last but not least, I'd recommend a bit of hot glue in between the caps.
It's an old and proven method and should help reduce the whine a lot.


----------



## weleh

My main issue atm is not when the board is being benched or anything, it's just that when I move the mouse I hear scrapping noise coming from the board 
This is ok while gaming because headphones but for daily usage it's very annoying.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

weleh said:


> My main issue atm is not when the board is being benched or anything, it's just that when I move the mouse I hear scrapping noise coming from the board
> This is ok while gaming because headphones but for daily usage it's very annoying.


Start trying to figure out if there's a pressure spot on the VRM heatsink that is reducing more the whine.


----------



## MyUsername

Man, I was supposed to get my 5950x today, but some imbecile got the orders mixed up and I was a lucky receiver of a 5900x. They phoned me at midday panicking telling me about the problem and all delivery's were getting sent back for a stock check, I said okay fine, but I still got mine 2 hours later. I'm thinking now how many people that ordered a 5900x got a 5950x instead? Lucky mofo's because she told they where all sent out LOL


----------



## gymleader91

Not that anyone here besides TeamGroup would know the answer to this question but I just want to know if the logic makes sense.

So on the Unify and Unify-x QVL, if you type in C14 you get a ridiculous amount of 3600 C14 memory from TeamGroup... some where the SKUs literally don't exist.

One of the SKUs that does is the Xtreem ARGB 3600 C14 2x16GB kit: TF10D432G3600HC14CDC01 

I was after this kit because the single rank one was really highly binned.

Unfortunately it seems like TeamGroup abandoned this kit (last in stock 5 months ago) in favor of producing the white xtreem version which is: TF13D432G3600HC14CDC01 (basically just change 10 to 13 and you get the white sku code).

Does anyone think this is basically the same exact pcb layout and chips as the non white version but with a different colored heatspreader slapped on? I don't want to wait another couple of months for the non white to come in stock (if it ever does) so think it's a safe bet? I looked at the qvl for the white but it was made October 13th so about a month before Unify came out: https://www.teamgroupinc.com/en/catalog/act.php?act=1&index_id=337

I actually crc checksummed the spreadsheets for both qvls and they are identical.


----------



## Speed Potato

I have that exact kit. Since it's the same bin I would expect it to work well.


----------



## degenn

Are those of you hearing coil-whine hearing it when running Cinebench, OCCT etc etc?

I have not heard a peep of whine from my board yet, maybe I got a lucky. _knock on wood_


----------



## ManniX-ITA

degenn said:


> Are those of you hearing coil-whine hearing it when running Cinebench, OCCT etc etc?


Not a strong whine but yes, with a silent case.
If you don't hear anything you are indeed lucky.


----------



## brunomarques93

weleh said:


> Thanks mate! Local store has Thermal Grizzly in stock 1mm pads.
> 
> Thanks thanks thanks! Will report back


Any news? Also have the b550 unify, thanks.


----------



## gymleader91

Was gonna get the G. Skill 3600C16 32GTZN kit that people have here but read this review. Anyone got any info on this? I expected every b die 3600C16 kit to run 3600C14 if overlocked voltage wise.






Leistungstest - Seite 2 - Hardwareluxx







www.hardwareluxx.de





Translated: "Unfortunately, it was not possible to get the CL14 stable at 3600 MHz even with a voltage of 1.45 V or more, so we opted for optimized CL16 main timings"

I know technically 3600C14 is still faster than 4000C16 as they got in the review but still this is interesting to me. Is this just the memory or cpu imc? Actually will every Zen 3 IMC be able to handle 3600C14? Did the review just get a really bad kit that barely passed binning?


----------



## KedarWolf

gymleader91 said:


> Was gonna get the G. Skill 3600C16 32GTZN kit that people have here but read this review. Anyone got any info on this? I expected every b die 3600C16 kit to run 3600C14 if overlocked voltage wise.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Leistungstest - Seite 2 - Hardwareluxx
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hardwareluxx.de
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Translated: "Unfortunately, it was not possible to get the CL14 stable at 3600 MHz even with a voltage of 1.45 V or more, so we opted for optimized CL16 main timings"
> 
> I know technically 3600C14 is still faster than 4000C16 as they got in the review but still this is interesting to me. Is this just the memory or cpu imc? Actually will every Zen 3 IMC be able to handle 3600C14? Did the review just get a really bad kit that barely passed binning?


Here is my CL16 3600 G.Skill Neo kit. WHEA free and TM5 7+ hours stable.


----------



## BluePaint

gymleader91 said:


> Translated: "Unfortunately, it was not possible to get the CL14 stable at 3600 MHz even with a voltage of 1.45 V or more, so we opted for optimized CL16 main timings"


Not sure what their problem was, maybe IMC but I have 2 of these kits and have 4 DIMMs running @ 3600 CL14 @ 1.45v just fine. Before, I was running 2 DIMMS @ 3800 CL14 with 1.52v. 2 DIMMs also run @ 4066 CL16 TM 5 error free, but CPU throws WHEAs.


----------



## weleh

3600c16 bdie will definitely do 3800c14 at decent voltage...


----------



## MyUsername

Gently does it. Wow this chip doesn't like high volts, early days testing but so far it's looking good, not crashing so that's a good sign. Occt is whea free currently running, probably prove me wrong it's at 20 minutes record so far for me, looking promising.


----------



## weleh

1V SOC?

Below 1.05V I get RAM errors which are 100% eliminated by increasing VSOC to at least 1.08V (after droop).


----------



## MyUsername

weleh said:


> 1V SOC?
> 
> Below 1.05V I get RAM errors which are 100% eliminated by increasing VSOC to at least 1.08V (after droop).


I know crazy right, y-cruncher is hard and usually gives me 1 or 2 whea, testing right now. 3733 can do 1.0 soc ccd/iod 0.875 stable, 0.850 has a lot of whea errors.

Tricky finding it's sweet spot, I went in way too aggressive at first and getting whea all over the place. 2000fclk was easy, just need to tweak that now for whea if it'll let me now I'm getting an idea how this thing behaves.


----------



## gymleader91

BluePaint said:


> Not sure what their problem was, maybe IMC


So basically even if I buy a 3600C14 XMP kit it might fail because the IMC can't handle it?


----------



## weleh

Yes but I haven't seen any Zen 2 or Zen 3 IMC that can't do 3800c14...


----------



## lmfodor

Hi! I’d like some reference about the Unify X. I’m coming from an asus CH8 Wifi and I think my VRMs and asus settings would not be enough to handle the new GSkill TridentZ Neo 3800CL14 2x6 Dual Rank. In fact, some guys could perform easily on the Dark Hero version as it has a bigger VRMs, however Asus lacks of the VTT controllers. I’m trying to have a 3800-14 flat and I couldn’t do it with my mobo and neither I could with 4000-16-16-16.. for that reason the natural upgrade would be the dark Hero but reading about the unify-x with only two dimms, more strong VRMs with two for SOC dedicated plus the VTT controllers .. i feel it will be the best bet to running whit dual ram with that has a very good performance. So I’m about to pull the trigger to this mobo and leave the CH8 Wifi 

Could anybody give some advises about the motherboard, issues, constraints, benefits, and if someone has the same memory kit would be better!

Thanks! Martin 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## weleh

I have no idea what you're on about mate.

Any board can do 3800c14 lol...

I've done it on a 90€ board and on a 300€ board.

User error at this point.


----------



## uzeh

Hi again, I've ended up trying out a second board. At first the buzzing (or coil whine.. whatever it is) coming from the VRMs was minimal so I thought I'd keep it. However, within a few days it's back to how the first one was. I've just replaced the power supply with a Corsair rm850x (2021 model) and it's still there. I've tried changing the CPU switching frequency, the soc switching frequency, I've tried messing with various voltages, tried disabling global C states, etc.

Sadly it's doing the weird singing when you move the mouse (I guess due to the 1000hz polling rate) and it's really annoying me. I could still RMA the board, but I'm happy with it otherwise, and I doubt any replacement will be any better.

The only setting which seems to reduce it is setting the CPU voltage, but this isn't ideal as I lose performance from precision boost. There's still some buzzing but at least the mouse doesn't cause the weird singing. Anyone have any other settings or combinations which they've found improve things?


----------



## lmfodor

weleh said:


> I have no idea what you're on about mate.
> 
> Any board can do 3800c14 lol...
> 
> I've done it on a 90€ board and on a 300€ board.
> 
> User error at this point.


Yes,I’m a relative new to mem OC and also I know that is not than easy to achieve 3800-14-14-14 flat as also I could go easy up to 4000-15 or 16 flat but always with error. Some new memories requires a little research .. in my case are 2x16 dual rank Bdie and it’s suppose to be easy. However, my same memory kit with the same processor and in the almost same mobo with the exact settings, one by one, mine couldn’t manage. So there’s a think with my mobo that is not than easy to achieve. But if a new one like the dark hero or the Unify-X give me more flexibility with no doubt I’ll buy it

That’s why I’m asking to the Unifi-x community about his opinions about the mobo. 

It’s clear, if I was a guru of memory OC I could reach easy to the target as you said with a 50 bucks mono. Time is money you know. I spent so many ights, weeks.. trying, running test, and I couldn’t make it. 

So.. I want to change my mobo for the best one for memory OC. I think this is the best, am I wrong?

Thanks!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## weleh

Your current motherboard is more than enough to do 3800c14...

Post Zen Timings, post what you're trying to boot so we can help...


----------



## ManniX-ITA

lmfodor said:


> That’s why I’m asking to the Unifi-x community about his opinions about the mobo.


IMO the memory OC is top notch on this board.
I guess you know already about the coil whine issues.
Amazing board for me, my only real concern is the poor BIOS development.
Too many bugs with profiles and they got worse instead of better.


----------



## 519408

This is my second motherboard, and with the version 2.1 and still with VRM coil noise. This error is unacceptable and that is why I am going to return it.
I love the motherboard but this flaw is somewhat unacceptable. It is a pity.


----------



## Streetdragon

Switched from a X570 Mster to a B550 Unify-x.
2.1. Bios was a old one from last Year. Flashed the newest Beta on it.
NO Coil whine!
AND i can boot 3866/1933 without wheas in idle. Only under load i get some. Way better than on the crappy Gigabyte.
On the weekend i must go higher with the ram. I know, that the CPU can boot 4000/2000. Maybe this board can do it whea-free. Love it


----------



## Serchio

weleh said:


> Yes but I haven't seen any Zen 2 or Zen 3 IMC that can't do 3800c14...


Well, my 3900x can't do 3800 no matter what. It might be CH6 but I believe it is just the CPU having crappy memory controller. I was planning to buy Unify-X but I do not want any more coil whine - RTX2080Ti under load is enough for me.


----------



## degenn

ArnetteHD said:


> This is my second motherboard, and with the version 2.1 and still with VRM coil noise. This error is unacceptable and that is why I am going to return it.
> I love the motherboard but this flaw is somewhat unacceptable. It is a pity.


Under what conditions are you experiencing coil-whine? I've got a Ver 2.1 here with no discernable coil-whine but am curious exactly what programs & what kind of load people are placing on the CPU/Mosfets when they are hearing the coil-whine. I want to try and reproduce it to be sure mine is 100% free from whine.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

degenn said:


> Under what conditions are you experiencing coil-whine? I've got a Ver 2.1 here with no discernable coil-whine but am curious exactly what programs & what kind of load people are placing on the CPU/Mosfets when they are hearing the coil-whine. I want to try and reproduce it to be sure mine is 100% free from whine.


AIDA Memory & Cache benchmark will produce coil whine with almost any board.
On mine I have a mild coil whine running heavy benchmarks. Not running memory tests like TM5 or Kahru.
Geekbench 5 is a good candidate.
Some games while loading as well they trigger it, not many and not much.
Others have coil whine just moving the mouse cursor over the screen when the PC is in idle.

You need to listen when you run AIDA64, then you'll get used to the clacking, buzzing, hissing and you can detect it easily.


----------



## degenn

ManniX-ITA said:


> AIDA Memory & Cache benchmark will produce coil whine with almost any board.
> On mine I have a mild coil whine running heavy benchmarks. Not running memory tests like TM5 or Kahru.
> Geekbench 5 is a good candidate.
> Some games while loading as well they trigger it, not many and not much.
> Others have coil whine just moving the mouse cursor over the screen when the PC is in idle.
> 
> You need to listen when you run AIDA64, then you'll get used to the clacking, buzzing, hissing and you can detect it easily.


I've run it plenty of times (AIDA64) but not paid much attention for noise; just ran it again with fans at idle (800rpm) and could hear an absolutely tiny amount of coil whine for a split second a few times. No clacking, buzzing or hissing though.

I can't hear anything similar during OCCT or Cinebench R23.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

degenn said:


> I've run it plenty of times (AIDA64) but not paid much attention for noise; just ran it again with fans at idle (800rpm) and could hear an absolutely tiny amount of coil whine for a split second a few times. No clacking, buzzing or hissing though.
> 
> I can't hear anything similar during OCCT or Cinebench R23.


Then you are indeed lucky, that's the level of coil whine I have with the Aorus Master.


----------



## degenn

ManniX-ITA said:


> Then you are indeed lucky, that's the level of coil whine I have with the Aorus Master.


It would seem so, I'm pretty sensitive to coil-whine and VRM/inductor noise so if it was bad I'd take notice rather quickly.

Here are my results, not too bad can still tune it more; and yes I am rocking the trial version


----------



## ManniX-ITA

degenn said:


> Here are my results, not too bad can still tune it more; and yes I am rocking the trial version


You should be able to double click on "TRIAL VERSION" and run only that test


----------



## degenn

ManniX-ITA said:


> You should be able to double click on "TRIAL VERSION" and run only that test


It runs the test but still blanks out the result with "TRIAL VERSION". It seems crazy to pay a monthly fee to run cache & mem benchmark 😆 I might consider it if it was a one-time license purchase.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

degenn said:


> It runs the test but still blanks out the result with "TRIAL VERSION". It seems crazy to pay a monthly fee to run cache & mem benchmark 😆 I might consider it if it was a one-time license purchase.


Oh, they "fixed" it 
Not crazy to pay a monthly fee, needs to get updated regularly.
But it's one of the software I hurt every time I renew it; the price is highly disproportionate to what it offers.
The result of lack of competition, sadly.


----------



## 519408

ManniX-ITA said:


> AIDA Memory & Cache benchmark will produce coil whine with almost any board.
> On mine I have a mild coil whine running heavy benchmarks. Not running memory tests like TM5 or Kahru.
> Geekbench 5 is a good candidate.
> Some games while loading as well they trigger it, not many and not much.
> Others have coil whine just moving the mouse cursor over the screen when the PC is in idle.
> 
> You need to listen when you run AIDA64, then you'll get used to the clacking, buzzing, hissing and you can detect it easily.


Before, I had an Asus X570-E and never under any circumstances had a coil whine.



degenn said:


> Under what conditions are you experiencing coil-whine? I've got a Ver 2.1 here with no discernable coil-whine but am curious exactly what programs & what kind of load people are placing on the CPU/Mosfets when they are hearing the coil-whine. I want to try and reproduce it to be sure mine is 100% free from whine.


With the B550 unify-x for example in the games menu. the coil sounds very loud.
Yesterday I was playing Mount Blade 2 and every so often you hear a coil whine.
Playing Need for speed, coil whine also sounds.
On the web, the sound is very low, you have to get close to hear it.

It is very annoying, because it sounds quite loud.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

ArnetteHD said:


> Before, I had an Asus X570-E and never under any circumstances had a coil whine.


AIDA can produce coil whine with almost all boards with a decent VRM and/or high PWM switching frequency but there are exceptions.
It's the easiest method to check for sure.

If you get it also browsing web, it's a definitely a bad sample...


----------



## lmfodor

Hi, I'm about to swap my CH8 for an MSI Unify-X, I don't really care about the coil noise. I have some fan noise to cool down the ram and also the AIO radiator, so it wouldn't be a problem for me. But maybe I read that the BIOS is not so complete. I have a good set of GSkill and could get the most of it and I think my current mobo is limiting me in some ways. I'm thinking that two dimm slots would be much better instead of daisy-chaining, strong VRM phases would allow me a more effective OC ... I should buy a USB extender as my CH8 has a lot of USB ports ... and I’m not using hard drives, just 3YB of NVME in two slots, and one RTX 3080. Anything else to consider? For me MSI makes the best mobos. At least as a perception. Asus has a lot of problems, I had to send two mobos to RMA for qcode 00, but even considering Asus has a good BIOS interface ... they don't seem to be that reliable. Anything else to consider? I just want the best mobo with him keep optimizing my mem OC and playing with the 3080 ... that would be fine, right? Thanks!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## ManniX-ITA

After 6 months, my coil whine almost disappeared.
The thermal pad needs curing, needs a lot of time to cure...
I really have to make an effort to hear it when running any benchmark while before it was easily audible.
Now with AIDA is just a bit louder than with the Aorus Master.


----------



## weleh

Does anyone have a complete list of relevant unify X bios? I need a bios with rebar, co and unlocked pbo limits. 

Something below A10 bios but above A05. 

If anyone could provide this it would be much appreciated.

The latest bios completely trash cpu performance due to USB fixes and pbo locking.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

weleh said:


> Does anyone have a complete list of relevant unify X bios? I need a bios with rebar, co and unlocked pbo limits.
> 
> Something below A10 bios but above A05.
> 
> If anyone could provide this it would be much appreciated.
> 
> The latest bios completely trash cpu performance due to USB fixes and pbo locking.


I have nothing between A05 and A10.
What do you mean about PBO locking?
I didn't notice any big change from A01 to A22 on CPU performances.
Tried A24 but instead of fixing it did introduce massive USB issues for me which I never had before.


----------



## weleh

They locked override to 200Mhz on any cpu since A10 bios I think when they introduced 1.2 agesa. 

Also Ive lost st and mt performance since then. I just flashed A10 and its so much better but still pbo locked.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Ah yes you are right, it's messed up.
I don't go above 125 MHz so I forgot about it.

Didn't notice a loss in CPU performance on my setup, this is with A22:






Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MS-7D13 - Geekbench Browser


Benchmark results for a Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MS-7D13 with an AMD Ryzen 9 5950X processor.



browser.geekbench.com





This result is from 6th of January and I think I was running A0501:






Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MS-7D13 - Geekbench Browser


Benchmark results for a Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MS-7D13 with an AMD Ryzen 9 5950X processor.



browser.geekbench.com





It's very similar.


----------



## weleh

These are my results

As you can see between lowest and best score there's a huge difference in ST performance.


----------



## weleh

I might just flash A05 but I think 1900 fCLK didn't work for me there.

Do you have A05?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

I don't think Geekbench 5 is that much reliable with reproducible results between runs... 
For sure 300 MT points is a very huge gap but I don't see much anything else.
Only 100 between the older one is really not much.
I get 50-100 difference between runs if the ambient temp goes up.
But of course I have limited cooling...

The ST seems very similar, 20 points delta is a normal variance in my runs.

A501:






MEG B550 UNIFY-XA05O1.zip







drive.google.com





A5O2:






E7D13AMSA05O2.zip







drive.google.com


----------



## Arni90

weleh said:


> View attachment 2488595
> 
> 
> These are my results
> 
> As you can see between lowest and best score there's a huge difference in ST performance.


1841/1808 is 1.8% difference, that's within run to run variance


----------



## weleh

On a test like GB5? That's not margin of error nor run to run variance I can assure you.


----------



## MyUsername

I'm done testing for now after almost 100 hours in the last week tweaking and trying different bioses and even my GB Master to compare. My 5950 is taking the piss out of me I'm sure. What I don't get is anything up to 1867 fclk is super easy and I can chuck anything at and it'll be fine. SoC works with 1.0V to 1.2V, it doesn't care about vddg it can be anywhere from 0.9V up to 1.2V and it'll work no wheas, but as soon as I select 1900 fclk completely different cpu, SoC will freak out if I give it 1.1V and it exacerbates the the errors if I go higher to the point where pci-e starts giving me the finger, graphics crashes.

A210 and A24 bioses where an absolute nightmare at 1900. A24 I couldn't even choose 1.2V for the SoC, code 92. I could if I had AMD OC set to 1150 and use the offset in tweaker but that just made the pc have an epileptic fit. A210 would allow 1.2V but I could not get that stable at whatever I tried. PBO would just whea all over the place and restart.

A22 works. Running y-cruncher and get a few whea on the first round and it doesn't seem to error after that, occt I get 1or 2 whea, but it's stable.


----------



## Dar|{cyde

Hey all, long time lurker, first time poster. I got my Unify-X running, and I've spent a bunch of time learning how to do MemOC on Ryzen (haven't been on AMD since my Opteron). After giving it the juice to see what it was capable of, I tightened up 3800C14 flat, and was pretty happy. I can run 2000 FCLK error free on MT5, but it throws WHEA like everyone else gets.

I decided to try 3866 for giggles, lo and behold no issues or WHEA at all. This is on the latest A24 bios. So there's the 1900 FCLK cap theory out the window. Any higher does throw WHEA though.

Running dual rank 3600C14 Gskill. I tried to get 1T working, but it just wont play nice, it requires lowering all the timings so much that 2T turns out faster. Must be due to the dual rank. I've been tweaking my 2T setup, still fiddling with making it tighter. I haven't lowered the voltage yet, SOC and VDIMM can probably go much lower. Still lots to test, but this clears 2.5 hours of MT5.

Thanks to all here for sharing the knowledge and spreadsheet calculators! It makes doing these dark arts a lot easier.


----------



## weleh

I have absolutely no idea how you guys can't run 1T...

3600c14 bin is capable of 1T easily...Doesn't matter if it's DR...


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Not all kits can, I guess it's a matter of PCB.
I can run it only with setup timings 56-56-56.

One of the reasons I ordered a F4-3200C14D-32GTZSK kit.

@Dar|{cyde 

Maybe you can get some inspiration from this one.
I couldn't use either RTT 7-3-3 or 6-3-3 with 1T.
If 56 doesn't work you may have to try a different value.
On my Aorus Master same kit wanted 61.


----------



## weleh

I have helped hundreds of people tunning their RAM (mainly bdie) and I have never seen a DR or SR kit that couldn't do 1T at 3800c14 or any other freq/latency at all.

I have OCed bdie from b450 to x570 boards and the behaviour is the same. 

I don't know, either you guys are very unlucky or you're messing with ProcODT and RTT's when you shouldn't...


----------



## ManniX-ITA

My kit doesn't commonly run at 1T, almost everyone I've seen all had same behavior.
Except one lucky guy which could run it quite easily.
Good luck in binning is for sure a factor but my guess is mainly a PCB factor.
Seems very rare a 3600C14 kit can't do it, probably a bad binning.


----------



## Dar|{cyde

@ManniX-ITA Oh I tried those 56-56-56 CAD_BUS timings at 1T. However I could never get my latency lower than about 52.3ns, even at the same 14-flat timings (I'm running in the 51's at 2T). I believe RonLazer is right, running those timings over 32 essentially makes it 2T again. The instability of trying to get 1T working helped me determine my ProcODT, RTT's and DrvStr though. I walked ProcODT down from 40, and things were most stable at 28.2.









쿨엔조이,쿨앤조이 coolenjoy, cooln, 쿨엔, 검은동네


출처:https://blog.asset-intertech.com/test_data_out/2014/11/memory-training-testing-and-margining.ht



coolenjoy.net




That has a table explaining it... some. 

I'm really not sure how to test all those things at all... maybe lowering voltage until it's just on the edge of throwing errors, and trying to stabilize it? 









[Sammelthread] - Ryzen RAM OC + mögliche Limitierungen


Inhaltsverzeichnis: RAM OC Board/UEFI Limitierung IMC (CPU) Limitierung ProcODT (CPU) Limitierung RAM ICs Limitierung RAM Taktpotenzial der Mainboards Mainboard Sammelthreads FAQ Hilfreiche Threads RAM OC Nach oben Allgemeines Anleitungen und Guides RAM OC Anleitung für Zen/+...




www.hardwareluxx.de




Some info on all of it there, but written for Zen2.

I'm wary of 0/3/1 RTT's (someone popped their DIMMs at high vDIMM I guess?). So I searched for another working one, and 7/3/3 booted and benched fine.

@weleh It can do 1T, at least using those 56-56-56 timings, but its slow and needs lots of volts.


----------



## weleh

Do drvstr, setup and rtts increase performance?
Or are they just a mean to get to an end?


----------



## Dar|{cyde

weleh said:


> Do drvstr, setup and rtts increase performance?
> Or are they just a mean to get to an end?





https://abload.de/img/imclimit2bnipe.png



It could stabilize things that were previously not possible. I bet tuning them juuust right will help this WHEA problem. Figuring them out is a royal pain though.


----------



## weleh

I did a quick test just now.

So my chip scales positively with very low IOD down to 0.9V. Lower it didn't post.
I tried 1933, 1966 and 2000 and I get less and less WHEAs the less IOD. 
Also higher VSOC just doesn't help and make things worse. 

I'm almost positive we're not getting >1900 fCLK as a normal thing this gen. This is 100% on the CPU because 1900 fCLK just works with everything on AUTO if needed... 0 tweaking required.

About RTT, DrvStr and Setups I have true 1T stable, hundreds of hours of AVX2 OCCT, TM5 Anta profile passing over 20 cycles consecutively, etc.
I had it stable since Zen 2 days. Same RTT's, same DrvStr's and same Setups.


----------



## infraredbg

My older and weaker 2x16 B-Die (3200C14) can run 1T GDM off no problem. The 2x16 kit I got later (4266C17) clocks much better and with lower voltage, but is not stable 1T GDM off.
All other 2x8 B-Die kits (old A0) I have can run it no problem.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Dar|{cyde said:


> @ManniX-ITA Oh I tried those 56-56-56 CAD_BUS timings at 1T. However I could never get my latency lower than about 52.3ns, even at the same 14-flat timings (I'm running in the 51's at 2T). I believe RonLazer is right, running those timings over 32 essentially makes it 2T again. The instability of trying to get 1T working helped me determine my ProcODT, RTT's and DrvStr though. I walked ProcODT down from 40, and things were most stable at 28.2.


Yes, it's a timing delay; the effect depends on what you want to achieve and you setup.
I have a dual CCD and the added latency don't matter for me.
Can't go below 54.4ns in Dual and 52.4ns in Single.

But that's latency, there are other aspects like memory bandwidth.
Try comparing 1T and 2T with Sandra Multi Core Efficiency test.

The red line is 1T:










As you can see there's a huge difference.
Not that I could see any difference in benchmark scores so far...
For sure is much more stressing on the CPU, had to reduce EDC.



Dar|{cyde said:


> I'm wary of 0/3/1 RTT's (someone popped their DIMMs at high vDIMM I guess?). So I searched for another working one, and 7/3/3 booted and benched fine.


That was a special case mixing A0 and A2 Viper.
In general 240 Ohm is high but it's also the default RTT; my kit survived at 1.95V so... 
I've used 6/3/3 and also tested 7/3/3 and they both work but only in 2T and GDM, not 1T.

Did a quick check when I created the 1T profile looking for timings below 31 but it's a mess with the Unify-X.
With values above 15 it doesn't POST and I had to clear CMOS every time which is a tragedy.
Gave up after a few tests.


----------



## Dar|{cyde

weleh said:


> About RTT, DrvStr and Setups I have true 1T stable, hundreds of hours of AVX2 OCCT, TM5 Anta profile passing over 20 cycles consecutively, etc.
> I had it stable since Zen 2 days. Same RTT's, same DrvStr's and same Setups.


Do you mind posting a zentimings? I'd like to know what it takes. How much juice do you feed it?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

infraredbg said:


> My older and weaker 2x16 B-Die (3200C14) can run 1T GDM off no problem


I bought that one today... it's among the few that can run consistently flat 14 at 1T at 3800 at low voltages.
Very nice score in the SuperPI Low clock challenge, I did not score even remotely close


----------



## mongoled

So what are these 56-56-56, some new voodoo settings

😄 😄

Well have to give these a go, any performance penalty or other anomoly using these?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Would probably work better if was real voodoo 

Yes there's a performance penalty.
You should really only use it if there's no other way to run 1T or to achieve some frequency validation.


----------



## weleh

How do we know it affects performance?

Anyway here's what I use to get be true 1T stable.

vdimm is 1.56V on bios
vsoc is 1.1
ccd is 0.87
iod is 0.98 (confirmed to scale down to 0.9V)

the magic numbers here are setup at 63 63 50, without them it will eventually error at like really high cycle count.

















Same kit but on my old 3600X


----------



## Cadek

I use copy-paste MSI 3600 cl14 xmp profile, VDIMM voltage fixed as for rest I use auto, @weleh what do you think I can fix here having G Skillz Royal Z Gold 3600 ?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

weleh said:


> How do we know it affects performance?


Cause setup timings above 31 will add a delay; the real extent I don't know but according to @Dar|{cyde test is around 1T penalty.
I don't see it with my 5950x since it's a Dual CCD and I can't go below 54.4ns or 52.4ns in single CCD mode.

@Dar|{cyde

I finally achieved it without setup timings.
It's very hard...
The main culprit is ClkDrvStr (at least for my setup) I could finally get rid of all the errors in the first cycle just setting it to 120 Ohm.
Not sure at all how risky is to run it so high, it's pretty uncommon.
My guess is it's not a problem; I have good temperatures and the rest of RTT is low impendance.
It didn't work on the Aorus Master of course, the Unify-X is definitely better.










It was all a very tedious fine tuning.
So it's unlikely it will work straight for someone else.
AddrCmd, CsOdt, CkeDrvStr have to be 20 Ohm; higher is worse.
ProcODT is thin razor 30 Ohm and it took a while to find 6/3/4.

VDIMM is 1.53V and VTT 750mV.

I've tested the above 45m with TM5.
Changed the fan profiles since they were messed up, that's another thing that the buggy MSI BIOS screws up when you restore a profile.
Added 200rpm on some fans under load and now the DIMMs are topping 54.4c.

Since I slowed down quite a bit the profile to find the stability, I've adjusted back some stuff.
With tRDCWR at 14 Copy suffers and is 100-150 MB/s less than with it at 10.










Now I'm reverting some changes and will check if it's stable running another 45m of TM5.
If that's the case tonight I'll run a longer TM5 test.

This is what I'm testing now:


----------



## infraredbg

weleh said:


> How do we know it affects performance?
> 
> Anyway here's what I use to get be true 1T stable.
> 
> vdimm is 1.56V on bios
> vsoc is 1.1
> ccd is 0.87
> iod is 0.98 (confirmed to scale down to 0.9V)
> 
> the magic numbers here are setup at 63 63 50, without them it will eventually error at like really high cycle count.


The problem I have and seen from other users are all for 2x16 DR kits.
My teammate recently bought a brand new DR kit and it behaves like my recent one.
Still haven't managed to make it stable with 1T, GDM off.
My kit just BSODs while loading Windows, no matter settings. I've also tried up to 2V bench settings and still no go.
I could load the bench OS, but super pi shows error on initial or first loop. That's why I have used the older kit, which runs 1T GDM off no problem.

Currently running the 4266C17 on CH6 and can't even POST with those setup parameters you're showing.
Maybe I'm doing something wrong, but it's not all fun and games.

PS: I will try again today, it's a very good kit (bought it binned for Intel), but not running 1T GDM off effectively makes it obsolete for benching purposes.


----------



## weleh

By the way DRAM VTT doesn't work on Unify. No matter what you set it to, it defaults to Vdimm/2.




ManniX-ITA said:


> Cause setup timings above 31 will add a delay; the real extent I don't know but according to @Dar|{cyde test is around 1T penalty.
> I don't see it with my 5950x since it's a Dual CCD and I can't go below 54.4ns or 52.4ns in single CCD mode.


So in my case (screenshots up) I'm getting penalty since my Setups are higher than 31?
My dialy latency on my normal OS is sub 53ns


----------



## ManniX-ITA

weleh said:


> By the way DRAM VTT doesn't work on Unify. No matter what you set it to, it defaults to Vdimm/2.


Where do you check it?
I'm sure it works, not sure how precise, because I can regularly fix voltages issues adjusting it.



weleh said:


> So in my case (screenshots up) I'm getting penalty since my Setups are higher than 31?
> My dialy latency on my normal OS is sub 53ns


Yes, indeed.
I could go down to 52.4ns in single mode CCD.
You should be able to go sub 52ns; @Dar|{cyde can go below with 2T.

@infraredbg
Try with ClkDrvStr to 120Ohm.

The first ZenTimings screenshot works for mine.
The second already failed, I'm trying this one now:










Which just failed 
And of course I reduced tFAW instead of tWR...


----------



## weleh

I'll test this theory out later, about the setup times.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

infraredbg said:


> Currently running the 4266C17 on CH6 and can't even POST with those setup parameters you're showing.
> Maybe I'm doing something wrong, but it's not all fun and games.


Setup times are not the same for every board.
My kit would work with all 61 on the Aorus Master but not on the Unify-X, needs all 56.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

I couldn't make it work with SCL 3 so I moved to SCL 4 but still had some errors.
They were due to tWTR; 4/10 doesn't work anymore had to move to 5/14.
Will try to tomorrow if I can lower down again SCL to 3.

At the end a bit less bandwidth and a bit better latency.

















So far tested for 45m.

A bit better Sandra latency, around 43ns instead of 44ns.
Some losses in bandwidth for big datasets but also some gains for smaller ones.
Which is interesting as they are the more frequent; overall a tad more than 3 GB/s gain.


----------



## weleh

Any idea why my board doesn't calculate tRFC2/4?

I know it's irrelevant but it bothers my OCD.


----------



## infraredbg

weleh said:


> By the way DRAM VTT doesn't work on Unify. No matter what you set it to, it defaults to Vdimm/2.


It works for me (Unify-X), but it's not reflected in the power table, so ZenTimings always shows vdimm/2 - that's what is reported.
And VDIMM is always reported 0.01V higher than what is set in bios. It's not reflecting real voltage, though.
You can try to lower VTT to absurdly low values and see if the system doesn't work anymore. That would indicate it is changing.

@ManniX-ITA I've tried your setup as well, but it's still almost instant BSOD or tons of errors after starting TestMem.
Keep in mind I'm on Crosshair VI Hero and 3900X, will have to try on the Unify-X.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

weleh said:


> Any idea why my board doesn't calculate tRFC2/4?
> 
> I know it's irrelevant but it bothers my OCD.


It's unbelievable that they don't calculate it properly...
Even more that the first or 2nd BIOS release for the Unify-X was doing it right.
Then they broke it...



infraredbg said:


> @ManniX-ITA I've tried your setup as well, but it's still almost instant BSOD or tons of errors after starting TestMem.
> Keep in mind I'm on Crosshair VI Hero and 3900X, will have to try on the Unify-X.


It could work only on the Unify-X but could also specific to my kit. Or both 
But it's worth a try!
Had to really sweat to find the right settings (and I'm still not sure it works).
But by setting ClkDrvStr to 120 went from a flurry of 0/6/12 errors to just 5-6.


----------



## Dar|{cyde

I'm not sure that about the >31 CAD_BUS timings, just going by what I've read and what others said. The timings default to 1/2 clock when set to 0. When you add fine timings under 31, it converts to very small nanosecond values... when set over 31, it adds 1 clock, then further values raise the timing. Essentially you are manually setting clock skew of the CAD timings (vs the MemClk). We need to test both 1T at 0 CAD_BUS and 1T at >31 timings to find out.

I let MT5 run last night with my current setup, which I"m pretty damn happy with. Not many people with 32gb DR dimms can get these timings. I have a 140mm fan directly over my DIMMs, and they never reached 42C, so that's awesome.

I did fiddle with ProcODT up to 40 and normal RTTs of 0/3/1, it was all fine. System didnt care, I guess mem training just works around it. Seems to be pretty rare that anyone can run 1933 FCLK free of errors, guess my humble little 5600 turned out OK. It's a pretty new chip, build date 2111, so about middle of March.










I'm inspired to try 1T again @ManniX-ITA. Pity this new RAM doesn't just run it fine like the old stuff.


----------



## Dar|{cyde

So this is interesting. I've been trying a ton of things to stabilize 1T, nothing works except dropping to 16-flat. Unacceptabru! Decided to check of the CAD_BUS timings made any difference:



Code:


3866-14-15-15-15-30-45-1T @ 0/0/0 = 52.1ns -with 20-30 TM5 errors/min
3866-14-15-15-15-30-45-1T @ 56/56/56 = 52.0ns - no errors

The 0.1 might be from the lack of errors, or I juts didnt try enough times. Looks like the CAD_BUS timings aren't that evil, at least for basic latency numbers. The errors are mostly 2, 6 and 12 on 1usmus_v3 test, but I'm already at 1.6V, so I'm capped out for daily usage.

==============
Not to distract from all the awesome memOC talk...

Does anyone know what all the undocumented headers are for? 

JDP1 = Debug Port 1... LPC debug maybe? Is it just serial, does it do anything?
JSMB1 = SMBus clearly, but why? It was once used by some MSI Greenpower Genie thing, but its ancient. MSI Eclipse SLI | bit-tech.net
JBD1 = ?

There's also 3 "+" shaped dots that I'm guessing are voltage read points? One on the front, 2 on the back.


----------



## gymleader91

Need some help on this because it doesn't seem correct but here goes. MSI updated the RAM QVL for their boards this past week and the TeamGroup Xtreem ARGB White RAM made the list on the B550 Unify.

The QVL specifically states that TF13D432G3600HC14CDC01 will work in 1 2 and 4 slot configurations.










This seems pretty extreme right? Is MSI 100% stating that every single 5000 series cpu is capabale of running 64GB of 3600 speed at 14-15-15-35? In MSI's defence it does say at the top of the page "Note: Memory compatibility support depended on the CPU memory controller."

This opens up so many problems though. Say you did read the QVL and said to yourself "fantastic 64GB of 3600C14 memory on my 5000 series cpu wow!" and bought 2 of these kits. They arrive and you enable xmp... bsod city cause your cpu imc is just bad. Most retailers won't accept an rma for ram that isn't actually faulty so are you just supposed to pray that your cpu imc can handle it?


----------



## Hale59

KedarWolf said:


> Yeah, I can do that. Give me a bit though.


Apparently you removed the links to download the skinned/trimmed W10 (W10 64 and 32 bit).
And I had no chance to download the skinned/trimmed W10 32 bit.
Can you make arrangements to have the skinned/trimmed W10 32 bit for download.
Thanks


----------



## Hale59

Deleted


----------



## Hale59

Apologies, deleted again.


----------



## Hale59

YoungChris said:


> AMD - Google Drive
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> New XOC bioses based on AGESA 1201 for X570 Godlike and B550 Unify/Unify-X! Get your unlocked voltages and L3$ fix here





Hale59 said:


> Nothing for the MSI X570 Unify?





YoungChris said:


> I will ask


Was there any updates about this?


----------



## KedarWolf

New chipset drivers.



We'll be back.


----------



## EniGma1987

KedarWolf said:


> New chipset drivers.
> 
> 
> 
> We'll be back.


Are these supposed to help those with USB issues?


----------



## gymleader91

Anyone with a Unify board happen to have a Samsung SSD and is willing to boot up Samsung Magician USB Secure Erase for my sanity? I am almost convinced that the MSI implementation or whatever when not just in UEFI mode is broken. I need someone to confirm.

1: Download Samsung Magician
2: Create the secure erase USB drive
3: Go into BIOS and put on CSM mode via EZ Mode (since the usb boot is non UEFI Linux based)
4: Boot the USB drive via F11 or whatever

The kernel will load and everything but for the life of me I cannot get the keyboard to work at first to accept the disclaimer. If I plug and replug the keyboard into multiple usb ports (be it usb 2 or 3) it eventually gets recognised then I can press y but then the software can't find the nvme drive. I think since I am taking so long to press y the nvme drive is in a "sleep" mode and is not responding. Tried this on a Corsair K70 and a crappy Dell USB keyboard with the same results.

The questions I need answered are:

1: Is this MSI messing up or is there some BIOS setting I haven't checked? It appears as if Legacy USB support isn't proper here.
2: If anyone does have a USB keyboard do you have the same problems?
3: I would also like to know if a PS/2 keyboard would fix this issue. I'm willing to buy one if it will solve this.

I know everyone will be like "just try another program" but I want to know why this doesn't work.


----------



## MyUsername

gymleader91 said:


> Anyone with a Unify board happen to have a Samsung SSD and is willing to boot up Samsung Magician USB Secure Erase for my sanity? I am almost convinced that the MSI implementation or whatever when not just in UEFI mode is broken. I need someone to confirm.
> 
> 1: Download Samsung Magician
> 2: Create the secure erase USB drive
> 3: Go into BIOS and put on CSM mode via EZ Mode (since the usb boot is non UEFI Linux based)
> 4: Boot the USB drive via F11 or whatever
> 
> The kernel will load and everything but for the life of me I cannot get the keyboard to work at first to accept the disclaimer. If I plug and replug the keyboard into multiple usb ports (be it usb 2 or 3) it eventually gets recognised then I can press y but then the software can't find the nvme drive. I think since I am taking so long to press y the nvme drive is in a "sleep" mode and is not responding. Tried this on a Corsair K70 and a crappy Dell USB keyboard with the same results.
> 
> The questions I need answered are:
> 
> 1: Is this MSI messing up or is there some BIOS setting I haven't checked? It appears as if Legacy USB support isn't proper here.
> 2: If anyone does have a USB keyboard do you have the same problems?
> 3: I would also like to know if a PS/2 keyboard would fix this issue. I'm willing to buy one if it will solve this.
> 
> I know everyone will be like "just try another program" but I want to know why this doesn't work.


I get this with freedos sometimes. I know the keyboard works because the highlighted box goes weird when I press a key, I just can't select to go in to dos. Making a new bootable USB fixes it, no reason why it doesn't work but something goes wrong when it writes to the usb. Now freedos works every time so I've got a dedicated freedos usb lol.

You can use the secure erase+ in the BIOS, I tried it on one of my Corsair mp600 to test and it works fine.


----------



## gymleader91

MyUsername said:


> I get this with freedos sometimes. I know the keyboard works because the highlighted box goes weird when I press a key, I just can't select to go in to dos. Making a new bootable USB fixes it, no reason why it doesn't work but something goes wrong when it writes to the usb. Now freedos works every time so I've got a dedicated freedos usb lol.
> 
> You can use the secure erase+ in the BIOS, I tried it on one of my Corsair mp600 to test and it works fine.


That would actually be hilarious if that was the reason but yeah I just ended up getting Parted Magic to secure erase it.


----------



## lmfodor

Hi, as you know, I am about to change a lot of ChrossHair Hero 8 Wifi for Unify X. Even the CH8 that is working well, I have a lot of trouble improving my timings with my new Gskill 3800 CL14 2z16 DR. I know these memories work great on other systems so my processor or motherboard could be limiting me. I have a 5900x and most of the tests I saw were done with a 5950. But I know that the VRMs of the Unify X are much better (I would say the best on the market) and the Swtiching frequency much higher than mine, as well as the levels of protection. So it's face to face with the Dark Hero. However, the Dark Hero is still Daisy Chain and it doesn't have a lot of options in the BIOS like MSI, so I'm almost ready to pull the trigger for this mobo. My only concern is BIOS corruption when updating. I only know of one case here at OCN. And I would like to know if anyone had any problems and could recover from the Flashback. With my asus, you also have to cibtar with the retry and safe boot buttons (which don't always work), the Flashback works very well, it saves me a lot of trouble. I don't remember how many BIOS I installed on this mobo in a few months, but that's a lot

And I just saw a video of Buildzoid where it doesn't end very well, It usually does it, but the method that it uses is surprising, not only by decoupling the frequency from the IF, but by the method, putting extremely high voltage values and leaving the impedances in AUTO, I estimate that the board will do its job well to compensate for so much voltage, I mean, above 2V from VDIMM, high VSOCs ... and well, in this case he couldn't achieve it. At least I saw what MSI's memory training is like.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHRxzzRgc8A 

I'm not that frustrated because that's what happened to me every day when I try to lower my tRCDRD from 16 to 15 or 14, in a simple 3800 setting, and also when I try to go to 4000MHz. I really want to force the 1: 1 ratio with FCLK, but I know there are a lot of problems. I wonder why Buildzoid constantly uses such deinctronized timings, such as 5000/2000, or 4800-1933 ... kinda strange, because 2000 or 1933 shouldn't be stable. How do we know there is no WHEA? How reliable is the Memtest you use? The truth seems to me strange evidence. But I like that most of the testing was done with Unify X and previously with an Aorus Master.

So, I would like if you wanted to push me for this purchase of the Unify X, because I really like it and I have high expectations to obtain better results with my memories, which of course cost me more than 2 Unify X, because in the US there are 500 USD and more. My country's Taxes ended about 700..almost a GPU! I know, it was a bad choice, I should have bought the same Single Rank model or maybe a RipJaws or maybe some Crutial Ballisticks or some Team Group ... But hey, they already work very well but I want to maximize the investment, Well, I hope you get the most sincere comments! Thanks!
st honest feedback! Thanks!


----------



## KedarWolf

*The CL16 4000 almost $100 cheaper and only 1.4v vs 1.5v for the CL14 3800, so the 4000 might be higher binned I'm thinking.*

Edit: Both are b-die.









G.SKILL Trident Z Neo Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 4000 (PC4 32000) Desktop Memory Model F4-4000C16D-32GTZNA - Newegg.com


Buy G.SKILL Trident Z Neo Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 4000 (PC4 32000) Desktop Memory Model F4-4000C16D-32GTZNA with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Once you know, you Newegg!




www.newegg.ca





*G.SKILL Trident Z Neo Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 4000 (PC4 32000) Intel XMP 2.0 Desktop Memory Model F4-4000C16D-32GTZNA *

_DDR4 4000 (PC4 32000)_
_Timing 16-16-16-36_
_CAS Latency 16_
_Voltage 1.40V_



_*or*_









G.SKILL Trident Z Neo Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) DDR4 3800 (PC4 30400) Desktop Memory Model F4-3800C14D-32GTZN - Newegg.com


Buy G.SKILL Trident Z Neo Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) DDR4 3800 (PC4 30400) Desktop Memory Model F4-3800C14D-32GTZN with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Once you know, you Newegg!




www.newegg.ca





_*G.SKILL Trident Z Neo Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 3800 (PC4 30400) Desktop Memory Model F4-3800C14D-32GTZN*_


_DDR4 3800 (PC4 30400)_
_Timing 14-16-16-36_
_CAS Latency 14_
_Voltage 1.50V_


----------



## ManniX-ITA

KedarWolf said:


> The CL16 4000 almost $100 cheaper.


I think they are almost identical.
Maybe it's better to go for the 4000CL16 since it's cheaper.
I'm looking for a 3600C14 cause it can do tRCDRD 14 if you are lucky with the PCB.
Those ones they both can't.


----------



## KedarWolf

ManniX-ITA said:


> I think they are almost identical.
> Maybe it's better to go for the 4000CL16 since it's cheaper.
> I'm looking for a 3600C14 cause it can do tRCDRD 14 if you are lucky with the PCB.
> Those ones they both can't.


This one?

*Edit: I might try the CL16 4000 but if it doesn't perform at specs or I get tons of WHEA errors, send it back and see if those CL14 3600 do better.*






Are you a human?







www.newegg.ca





*G.SKILL Trident Z Neo Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 3600 (PC4 28800) Desktop Memory Model F4-3600C14D-32GTZN*


DDR4 3600 (PC4 28800)
Timing 14-15-15-35
CAS Latency 14
Voltage 1.45V


----------



## ManniX-ITA

KedarWolf said:


> This one?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you a human?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newegg.ca


Exactly.
But I want first to try my chances with the Ripjaws version cause it's without LEDs:






Are you a human?







www.newegg.ca


----------



## KedarWolf

ManniX-ITA said:


> Exactly.
> But I want first to try my chances with the Ripjaws version cause it's without LEDs:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you a human?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newegg.ca


I've heard peeps say the heatsinks on Ripjaws cool terribly and you can turn the LED off on the NEO.


----------



## KedarWolf

ManniX-ITA said:


> Exactly.
> But I want first to try my chances with the Ripjaws version cause it's without LEDs:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you a human?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newegg.ca


 I might try the CL16 4000 but if it doesn't perform at specs or I get tons of WHEA errors, send it back and see if those CL14 3600 do better.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

KedarWolf said:


> I've heard peeps say the heatsinks on Ripjaws cool terribly and you can turn the LED off on the NEO.


Sadly you can't turn them off until you boot into Windows with the Unify-X.
I could do it on the Master.
Not concerned with the heatsink cause I'm going to replace it with the heatsinks for the watercooling block.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

KedarWolf said:


> I might try the CL16 4000 but if it doesn't perform at specs or I get tons of WHEA errors, send it back and see if those CL14 3600 do better.


It works quite well, within the specs and more.
But the DIMM itself doesn't have an impact on WHEA with high FCLK.
If you get them now, it's not going to change.
It's a nice kit but on mine tRCDRD doesn't go below 16 and 1T only with setup timings.


----------



## KedarWolf

ManniX-ITA said:


> It works quite well, within the specs and more.
> But the DIMM itself doesn't have an impact on WHEA with high FCLK.
> If you get them now, it's not going to change.
> It's a nice kit but on mine tRCDRD doesn't go below 16 and 1T only with setup timings.


Yeah, I know it won't affect the WHEA errors, it'll just be an excuse to send them back for a full refund if I want to try the CL14 3600 kit.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

KedarWolf said:


> Yeah, I know it won't affect the WHEA errors, it'll just be an excuse to send them back for a full refund if I want to try the CL14 3600 kit.


It's a good one 
Just sent back the 3200C14 kit today...


----------



## PJVol

ManniX-ITA said:


> But the DIMM itself doesn't have an impact on WHEA with high FCLK


Could you take a look at this ram, just curious how much board might contribute to successful OC, or it may be unstable ? AFAIK its ripjaws?


----------



## KedarWolf

PJVol said:


> Could you take a look at this ram, just curious how much board might contribute to successful OC, or it may be unstable ? AFAIK its ripjaws?


I'd be amazed if that passes TM5 AND OCCT Large Data Set Extreme present.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

PJVol said:


> Could you take a look at this ram, just curious how much board might contribute to successful OC, or it may be unstable ? AFAIK its ripjaws?


Yes ending GVK is Ripjaws.
Wow 2200 FCLK is really high...
But it's a Single Rank module and that makes it much easier.


----------



## mongoled

gymleader91 said:


> Anyone with a Unify board happen to have a Samsung SSD and is willing to boot up Samsung Magician USB Secure Erase for my sanity? I am almost convinced that the MSI implementation or whatever when not just in UEFI mode is broken. I need someone to confirm.
> 
> 1: Download Samsung Magician
> 2: Create the secure erase USB drive
> 3: Go into BIOS and put on CSM mode via EZ Mode (since the usb boot is non UEFI Linux based)
> 4: Boot the USB drive via F11 or whatever
> 
> The kernel will load and everything but for the life of me I cannot get the keyboard to work at first to accept the disclaimer. If I plug and replug the keyboard into multiple usb ports (be it usb 2 or 3) it eventually gets recognised then I can press y but then the software can't find the nvme drive. I think since I am taking so long to press y the nvme drive is in a "sleep" mode and is not responding. Tried this on a Corsair K70 and a crappy Dell USB keyboard with the same results.
> 
> The questions I need answered are:
> 
> 1: Is this MSI messing up or is there some BIOS setting I haven't checked? It appears as if Legacy USB support isn't proper here.
> 2: If anyone does have a USB keyboard do you have the same problems?
> 3: I would also like to know if a PS/2 keyboard would fix this issue. I'm willing to buy one if it will solve this.
> 
> I know everyone will be like "just try another program" but I want to know why this doesn't work.


Realise you got what you wanted to do done.

In such scenarios PS2 keyboard works fine.

Unsure what is the root cause...


----------



## ManniX-ITA

lmfodor said:


> Hi, as you know, I am about to change a lot of ChrossHair Hero 8 Wifi for Unify X. Even the CH8 that is working well, I have a lot of trouble improving my timings with my new Gskill 3800 CL14 2z16 DR. I know these memories work great on other systems so my processor or motherboard could be limiting me. I have a 5900x and most of the tests I saw were done with a 5950. But I know that the VRMs of the Unify X are much better (I would say the best on the market) and the Swtiching frequency much higher than mine, as well as the levels of protection.


I think there's a chance the Unify-X has an edge over the CH8.
But I wouldn't expect miracles, your kit performs very similar to mine and the switch will not allow it to do crazy stuff.

Yes, the VRM is good; PWM controller top notch and 90A
But the AORUS Master which is a 12 phases 50A it's still a bit better in comparison for me.
It's a tiny margin but I would have expected sometime more.
To be fair the Master is much older and got dozens more bios updates to get there.
That's on the performance side; if we talk about reliability the Unify wins big time over the Master.
Hardly any problem of stability that I couldn't track back to the AGESA or my settings.
Can't say the same for the Master, most of the issues were from the BIOS.



lmfodor said:


> My only concern is BIOS corruption when updating. I only know of one case here at OCN. And I would like to know if anyone had any problems and could recover from the Flashback. With my asus, you also have to cibtar with the retry and safe boot buttons (which don't always work), the Flashback works very well, it saves me a lot of trouble. I don't remember how many BIOS I installed on this mobo in a few months, but that's a lot


Yes it's a common issue with MSI the broken FLASH.
It's not that uncommon either with other brands, just a bit more with MSI.
Forget the luxury of a retry button.
It's my biggest concern with this board.
Wouldn't be a big problem, I could clear CMOS and reload quickly the last profile.
Almost the same.
But the profiles now are bugged more and more.
I can't quickly load them anymore, I have to Clear CMOS again.
That's because even if they are loaded the options are not really set.
It's a a software issue, hopefully they'll fix it.



lmfodor said:


> I'm not that frustrated because that's what happened to me every day when I try to lower my tRCDRD from 16 to 15 or 14, in a simple 3800 setting, and also when I try to go to 4000MHz. I really want to force the 1: 1 ratio with FCLK, but I know there are a lot of problems. I wonder why Buildzoid constantly uses such deinctronized timings, such as 5000/2000, or 4800-1933 ... kinda strange, because 2000 or 1933 shouldn't be stable. How do we know there is no WHEA? How reliable is the Memtest you use? The truth seems to me strange evidence. But I like that most of the testing was done with Unify X and previously with an Aorus Master.


In sync mode you are limited to the FCLK, in de-sync you can push much higher frequencies but it has a big cost in latency.
I don't think he cares about WHEA 
TM5 is very reliable.



lmfodor said:


> So, I would like if you wanted to push me for this purchase of the Unify X, because I really like it and I have high expectations to obtain better results with my memories, which of course cost me more than 2 Unify X, because in the US there are 500 USD and more. My country's Taxes ended about 700..almost a GPU! I know, it was a bad choice, I should have bought the same Single Rank model or maybe a RipJaws or maybe some Crutial Ballisticks or some Team Group ... But hey, they already work very well but I want to maximize the investment, Well, I hope you get the most sincere comments! Thanks!
> st honest feedback! Thanks!


I would suggest you to read the whole thread or almost if you didn't already.
You have to consider the coil whine; if you are sensible it can become an issue.
You'll receive it, almost sure, with the screws on the back loose.
I'm pretty happy with it, despite some missing features and the BIOS bugs.
Pretty sure there's no other ATX board that can do better with memory, not so much comfortably as it should be but it's ok.


----------



## YoungChris

Been a while since I've posted in here.
Apparently my DR can push FCLK higher, without regression, than my SR?








Also my CCD/IOD/VDDP go lower on DR?
The properties of this set are pretty weird, but you won't catch me complaining about 4066 12-11 1t GDM Off on dual rank.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

YoungChris said:


> Also my CCD/IOD/VDDP go lower on DR?


Pretty weird indeed... yes it's cool CL12 at 4067 

Any news about newer XOC releases?


----------



## YoungChris

ManniX-ITA said:


> Any news about newer XOC releases?


Haven't heard anything yet, I'm still a strong promoter of A05O1, as my fclk isn't any better on newer bioses and even with the same settings, newer bioses are performing worse.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

YoungChris said:


> Haven't heard anything yet, I'm still a strong promoter of A05O1, as my fclk isn't any better on newer bioses and even with the same settings, newer bioses are performing worse.


Yes but I think is missing CO... am I right?


----------



## YoungChris

ManniX-ITA said:


> Yes but I think is missing CO... am I right?


What's CO?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

YoungChris said:


> What's CO?


Curve Optimizer


----------



## KedarWolf

Anyone who wants to disable all auto driver updates in Windows with Windows 2004 or higher, save this code as update.reg in Notepad++ and click on it.

Then Windows won't install crap like the AMD drivers that crashed peeps. I always install all my drivers manually on a clean Windows install or integrate them into my Windows ISO install.wim and boot.wim for auto-installs when installing Windows. 




Code:


Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Device Metadata]
"PreventDeviceMetadataFromNetwork"=dword:00000001

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Policies\Microsoft\Windows\DriverSearching]
"DriverUpdateWizardWuSearchEnabled"=dword:00000000
"SearchOrderConfig"=dword:00000000

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Policies\Microsoft\Windows\WindowsUpdate]
"ExcludeWUDriversInQualityUpdate"=dword:00000001

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Policies\Microsoft\Windows\CloudContent]
"DisableWindowsConsumerFeatures"=dword:00000001


----------



## gymleader91

Just me or the MSI bios, driver, manual etc pages completely blank?










Also I don't know how you got wind of that G. Skill 4000C16 SKU but it's pretty interesting. How would that stack up against a 3600C14 1.45v bin? Like yeah technically the 3600 is faster but 1.40 vs 1.45v is worth looking at.


----------



## KedarWolf

gymleader91 said:


> Just me or the MSI bios, driver, manual etc pages completely blank?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also I don't know how you got wind of that G. Skill 4000C16 SKU but it's pretty interesting. How would that stack up against a 3600C14 1.45v bin? Like yeah technically the 3600 is faster but 1.40 vs 1.45v is worth looking at.


Sometimes the MSI page is blank just before a new BIOS update, I've seen that happen a few times.

I was just Googling around on Newegg and saw the RAM. And yeah, I'm thinking it might be a higher bin being Cl16 4000 at only 1.4v. And it's straight 16's (_16-16-16-36)_ and b-die.


----------



## lmfodor

Hi @ManniX-ITA,

This is my current settings with 1T GDM off using your magical cad bus setup, the performance increased a bit, and what I did is once I finished a couple of TM5 Test, I shutted down the computer, power cycle off and then starting again with all test, -y-cruncher all test, TM5 Anta Extreme 15 cycles, 1Usmus 25 Cycles, OOCT Large, Extreme, and I have not WHEA and no BSOD as before. Now as mongoled asked you, I'm trying to understand the impact on read write operation between SCL 2 and 4. Now in 2 It seems to be a little bit better, and in 4 the read performance decrease a bit and the write increase. So, for my understanding the key would be to lower tRDWR one CK, to 9, however if I do it, I don't get post.. so maybe I will that to go 11,3, then try tower to maybe 8 3. The reduction in tRDWR should have an impact in read to write operation. But again, the CADBUS Setup 56 56 56 did the trick for a dual rank memory











ManniX-ITA said:


> I think there's a chance the Unify-X has an edge over the CH8.
> But I wouldn't expect miracles, your kit performs very similar to mine and the switch will not allow it to do crazy stuff.
> 
> Yes, the VRM is good; PWM controller top notch and 90A
> But the AORUS Master which is a 12 phases 50A it's still a bit better in comparison for me.
> It's a tiny margin but I would have expected sometime more.
> To be fair the Master is much older and got dozens more bios updates to get there.
> That's on the performance side; if we talk about reliability the Unify wins big time over the Master.
> Hardly any problem of stability that I couldn't track back to the AGESA or my settings.
> Can't say the same for the Master, most of the issues were from the BIOS.
> 
> Yes it's a common issue with MSI the broken FLASH.
> It's not that uncommon either with other brands, just a bit more with MSI.
> Forget the luxury of a retry button.
> It's my biggest concern with this board.
> Wouldn't be a big problem, I could clear CMOS and reload quickly the last profile.
> Almost the same.
> But the profiles now are bugged more and more.
> I can't quickly load them anymore, I have to Clear CMOS again.
> That's because even if they are loaded the options are not really set.
> It's a a software issue, hopefully they'll fix it.


I really have great expectations with the Unifi-X and now that I read you that you think it has an advantage over the Dark Hero it ends up convincing me more. What happens to me is the following, previously I read you that you did not believe that my memories 3800CL14 DR 2x16 did not achieve 14 flat or any other combination with tRDCRD in 14, but if they do, and even if you don't think it's very easy. I know of three cases where they are working like this, a member from OCN, another from another forum and Yuri's review that has these same memories. It's weird, because for example I have two cases where simply with a Dark Hero, which is the same motherboard that I have with the difference of the VRMs and the Dynamics OC Swithing (which honestly does not interest me), I replicate the configuration of your dark Hero and to my surprise, not only had all the VRMs on Auto, but also much of the sub-timing and voltage values. So that's where my head breaks trying to figure out what is limiting me, clearly it is not the memories, or it is the processor, which is a 5900 vs a 5950, that perhaps the latter has some improvement in the BMI , or the Motherboard that does not have the updated circuits. I do not think it is the power of the VRM, because 90A is too much, but with the Dark Hero for these memories it is almost plug and play, I have the BIOS output and even copying everything, I have immediate errors of 6, 12, 2 almost in mode burst. Which is what always happens to me when I put tRCDRD in 14. 


Spoiler: 3800CL14 2x16DR - tRCDRD 14














So, it is not because of a performance issue clearly that I would change the motherboard, let's say I take this as a hobby, I want to continue learning. According to Yuri, they are the best memories available in the market today, but the truth is, they are very expensive and surely they are good, but you can achieve the same and much more with less money. 

So there I found out about Unify-X and yes, I not only read this entire forum, but also all the reviews. For me it have enough for my setup, I have an Asus 3080, that is, only a PCIE 4 slot and two NVME, one Gen4 and one Gen 3, with that I am, it also allows to add more NVME, at least one more Gen3 t I think it would not affect the performance of the PCIE4, right? But I could easily put another 2TB more if I wanted. About the Coil Whine, it doesn't really bother me at all, I was never bothered by the noises, in fact now I have on the memories some silent fans Pantheks of 140 running at 1500RPMs, but I bought several Noctua industrial models of 3000RPM, to exhaust the cabinet and also to hit the memories. The same today with my configuration, with an ambient temperature of 24 degrees ... I am at 36 degrees with the memories and the fan in full stress test, super cold. The other thing I like about the Unify-X is for example the switching frequency of the VRMs, which reach 1000, when I reach 500 or 600 at most. And also that it has more overclocking options, the profiles in Asus do not work very well either. And Asus has many problems with the QCode, I had to return two with QCode OO problems, one with low line Asus X570 e-Gaming and another with Maximus. Although I don't hear anything about the Dark Hero, it seems to be a much improved product in terms of quality. 

And lastly, having only two memory slots is definitely going to be a lot better. Also I see a community of memory OC much more developed here in the Unify forum than in the Asus forum My only concern is the BIOS problem breaking or failing to update. I don't know why it happens. I have had several problems with my asus, but before any problem, I put the pendrive with nothing, without processor memories, nothing and only the BIOS was updated and it came out working. That is, I got out of BIOS corruption problems. But I am not looking at you if I tell you that I will have updated the BIOS 50 times in several months .. I tried all the AGESA versions, so I would like to be calm with that point and that it does not break, also, I live outside the US and the RMA Although I can, it would take more time. I think MSI support is better than ASUS, well I think any is better than ASUS. I want to achieve 14 flat, but I also want to go to 4000, and there it no longer depends on the board ... we depend on AMD and its improvements. Back, it seems to me that the Unify X has the best controllers and VRMs on the market, and it costs half a DH, which for me, saving the USB ports and perhaps the safe button, which sometimes helps, does not give me much more. . I don't use any SATA drives, I don't use PCIE boards. 

So thanks for your tips, they are really very useful.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

lmfodor said:


> Now in 2 It seems to be a little bit better, and in 4 the read performance decrease a bit and the write increase.


Yes it's one of the few cases were SCL at 2 works a bit better.
In 2T and GDM running at 4 is better.
I always try both but with SCL at 4 not all combinations of tRDWR/tWRRD works.



lmfodor said:


> I really have great expectations with the Unifi-X and now that I read you that you think it has an advantage over the Dark Hero it ends up convincing me more.


The advantage is that it has 2 slots.
Which is good for extreme stuff if you are pro but also good for novices like us that want to have fun and get a much easier toy to play with 
The Unify-X is very much memory oriented; if you enjoy it then it's a good choice.
There are also many more options than other boards for this aspect which can potentially be fun but I still have to explore them.



lmfodor said:


> I know of three cases where they are working like this, a member from OCN, another from another forum and Yuri's review that has these same memories. It's weird, because for example I have two cases where simply with a Dark Hero, which is the same motherboard that I have with the difference of the VRMs and the Dynamics OC Swithing (which honestly does not interest me), I replicate the configuration of your dark Hero and to my surprise, not only had all the VRMs on Auto, but also much of the sub-timing and voltage values. So that's where my head breaks trying to figure out what is limiting me, clearly it is not the memories, or it is the processor, which is a 5900 vs a 5950, that perhaps the latter has some improvement in the BMI , or the Motherboard that does not have the updated circuits.


I wish you luck but I don't think the motherboard is going to change anything, hope to be proven wrong!

There's also a single user I've seen running my kit at tRCDRD 14; best of all with an AORUS Master Rel 1.0.
Which in general is very problematic with Dual Rank B-die kits.
But for him no problems...

Bought the same kit 3200C14 as Neody and Infrared; they both use the Unify-X.
Their profiles doesn't work for me with the same part number.

My guess is that the culprit of this big variations reside in the binning procedure used by G.Skill.

Simply put, there's not much difference with any of ours kits.
I think they don't pre-bin the Samsung B-die ICs except maybe for the extremely expensive kits.

Everything else which is in our price tag and below it just gets mass produced with different PCB layouts with and without LEDs.
Then they are validated and get a binning profile that tells them what's the minimum that they can achieve.
When they have to supply the markets, in base of requested quantities, the same kit can become a 3200C14 or 3600C14 or 3800C14 or 4000C16...

If you check your PCB there's no trace of your part number.
They serialized the XMP profile, stick the corresponding heatsink and put the label with the model and serial on top.
So it's more a matter of luck about the quality of ICs and type of PCB your kit ended up to be.

My hope is that the 3600C14 kit is more likely to end up with a PCB that can do tRCDRD 14.
But it could be very well that also your luck on the IC quality plays a part.
I'll let you know, tomorrow I should get the Ripjaws kit


----------



## lmfodor

ManniX-ITA said:


> Yes it's one of the few cases were SCL at 2 works a bit better.
> In 2T and GDM running at 4 is better.
> I always try both but with SCL at 4 not all combinations of tRDWR/tWRRD works.
> 
> 
> 
> The advantage is that it has 2 slots.
> Which is good for extreme stuff if you are pro but also good for novices like us that want to have fun and get a much easier toy to play with
> The Unify-X is very much memory oriented; if you enjoy it then it's a good choice.
> There are also many more options than other boards for this aspect which can potentially be fun but I still have to explore them.
> 
> 
> 
> I wish you luck but I don't think the motherboard is going to change anything, hope to be proven wrong!
> 
> There's also a single user I've seen running my kit at tRCDRD 14; best of all with an AORUS Master Rel 1.0.
> Which in general is very problematic with Dual Rank B-die kits.
> But for him no problems...
> 
> Bought the same kit 3200C14 as Neody and Infrared; they both use the Unify-X.
> Their profiles doesn't work for me with the same part number.
> 
> My guess is that the culprit of this big variations reside in the binning procedure used by G.Skill.
> 
> Simply put, there's not much difference with any of ours kits.
> I think they don't pre-bin the Samsung B-die ICs except maybe for the extremely expensive kits.
> 
> Everything else which is in our price tag and below it just gets mass produced with different PCB layouts with and without LEDs.
> Then they are validated and get a binning profile that tells them what's the minimum that they can achieve.
> When they have to supply the markets, in base of requested quantities, the same kit can become a 3200C14 or 3600C14 or 3800C14 or 4000C16...
> 
> If you check your PCB there's no trace of your part number.
> They serialized the XMP profile, stick the corresponding heatsink and put the label with the model and serial on top.
> So it's more a matter of luck about the quality of ICs and type of PCB your kit ended up to be.
> 
> My hope is that the 3600C14 kit is more likely to end up with a PCB that can do tRCDRD 14.
> But it could be very well that also your luck on the IC quality plays a part.
> I'll let you know, tomorrow I should get the Ripjaws kit


You wouldn't believe me if I told you that I almost asked for a ripjaws past weekend !! just to try and play around a bit. When I hear that the PCB is not good, or they are not well binned, thinking that they are undoubtedly the most expensive memories (not counting the Royal line that will surely come out with low latency) it worries me a little, but I can not do anything. They are all excellent, but 500 usd for 32GB deserve to have the best, although we know that it is all marketing. Tell me how it goes with the RipJaws. Those were my first option, and I ended up seduced by marketing 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## ManniX-ITA

It's a big bet and I have the feeling I have few chances to win 
The Ripjaws have just the same price as the Trident Neo.
I think it's a matter or luck, that's all...
They are being delivered today hopefully, will let you know.


----------



## gymleader91

@KedarWolf Can confirm MSI updated the Bluetooth, Wifi and audio driver. The chipset has not been updated though which is strange.


----------



## YoungChris

Got annoyed trying to run Gear 1 on Rocket Lake so I decided to come back to AMD SuperPi.
















Sparky's__Adventure`s SuperPi - 32M with BenchMate score: 5min 41sec 928ms with a Ryzen 7 5800X


The Ryzen 7 5800X @ 5003.4MHzscores getScoreFormatted in the SuperPi - 32M with BenchMate benchmark. Sparky's__Adventureranks #null worldwide and #null in the hardware class. Find out more at HWBOT.




hwbot.org




Currently #6 in the competition rankings, will work to push further up the ladder. I think I can get somewhere between 4th and 2nd with my current hardware if ambients don't creep too high.





Sparky's 32M and Geekbench 3 OSs for AMD.7z







drive.google.com




The OS I used is still publicly available here, though I will warn that it is a pain in the rear to setup.


----------



## Jinto

I sincerely apologize if this is prohibited in this thread, but I need guidance/suggestions.

So I just got myself a new PC build set up.
MOBO: MSI B550 Unify
CPU: Ryzen 9 5900x
RAM: Crucial Ballistix RGB 3600 Mhz 32GB (16GBx2) CL16 BL2K16G36C16U4BL
GPU: EVGA 1080Ti (hopefully to be replaced by 3080Ti soon...)
Storage: 1 Sabrant 1TB PCIE 4.0 nvme drive (located in m.2 slot _1) & 1 Samsung 970 Evo+ 1TB (located in m.2 slot _3)
Peripherals: Elgato HD60 Pro capture card.
Cooling: EK AIO 240 closed loop
Case: Be Quiet 500DX

The problem I am having is after the EZ Debug LED cycles through itself, it eventually settles on the "boot" led. And the error code is "02". Which I suppose means, "AP initialization before microcode loading".
I have since "attempted" to update the bios to the latest release via the EZ Flash utility. I say "attempted" because I never know if the damn thing takes the update or not. I had used a 64GB USB 3.1 Samsung flash drive to install the BIOS update (specific model). And yes, I did format the stick to FAT 32 and renamed the file to "MSI.ROM"
I have also removed one of the memory sticks and kept a single 16GB stick in the DIMMA2 slot. I see this tip thrown around often but to no avail I still cannot achieve post.
All in all everything seems to light up as it should, the two EK Vardar RGB fans, the EK pump block RGB, the Crucial Ballistix memory RGB lights, the 1080Ti led and of course the power & reset red led lights.








I'm at my whits end. Any tips and advice would be greatly appreciated.


----------



## weleh

The way flashback works is:


Turn off your PC
Plug USB on the correct port
Click biosflashback button

At this point the PC should turn on automatically and the led should blink all the way through the process until the PC shuts off and turns on again.

If the light is stuck on, or any of the other things do not happen, it failed. 

Also to discard dead CPU or bad instalation, you can flash back with CPU out. If it doesn't work, then board is dead.


----------



## Jinto

For whatever reason, as long as I don't plug in a SATA cable into SATA_01 on the motherboard I am able to finally achieve post. But once I installed Windows and reboot I don't seem to get a splash screen to hit "delete" to enter BIOS. It just transitions straight into desktop.


----------



## KedarWolf

Got this earlier today.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Awesome!



YoungChris said:


> The OS I used is still publicly available here, though I will warn that it is a pain in the rear to setup.


Thanks for sharing it; I did try to create my own special for SuperPI and failed miserably...


----------



## MyUsername

Alrighty then! I've been hammering my BIOS for the last 3 and a half weeks trying to find the Goldilocks zone for 1900/3800, got close but whea's would always pop up. 1866/3733 can run at soc 0.95 vddg 900/900 whea free, so I was hovering around these values. At a complete loss and feeling defeated, I enabled LN2 and set numa nodes to np0 still at 3800. Booted and it's error free, ycruncher, occd, tm5, prime95 the lot passed whea free. What the hell does the LN2 setting do man? I can't believe that was all it was to make my machine stable lol.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

MyUsername said:


> I enabled LN2


Which LN2 setting and on which BIOS?


----------



## weleh

MyUsername said:


> Alrighty then! I've been hammering my BIOS for the last 3 and a half weeks trying to find the Goldilocks zone for 1900/3800, got close but whea's would always pop up. 1866/3733 can run at soc 0.95 vddg 900/900 whea free, so I was hovering around these values. At a complete loss and feeling defeated, I enabled LN2 and set numa nodes to np0 still at 3800. Booted and it's error free, ycruncher, occd, tm5, prime95 the lot passed whea free. What the hell does the LN2 setting do man? I can't believe that was all it was to make my machine stable lol.


LN2 mode overvolts some voltage rails like CPU PLL.
I used this trick on my 3600X to boot 1900 fCLK and other people used it to give them an extra tick of fCLK past 1900.
It is not clear if running this daily has any meaningful negative impact on CPU life though.

However, I've tried this on my Unify X and I cannot boot if I enable LN2 mode so, to make Manni's words my own, which LN2 mode did you enable because there are 2. 
Also which bios?


----------



## MyUsername

weleh said:


> LN2 mode overvolts some voltage rails like CPU PLL.
> I used this trick on my 3600X to boot 1900 fCLK and other people used it to give them an extra tick of fCLK past 1900.
> It is not clear if running this daily has any meaningful negative impact on CPU life though.
> 
> However, I've tried this on my Unify X and I cannot boot if I enable LN2 mode so, to make Manni's words my own, which LN2 mode did you enable because there are 2.
> Also which bios?





ManniX-ITA said:


> Which LN2 setting and on which BIOS?


LN2 mode 1 and 2 seem to do the same thing, it does make the CPU behave slightly differently. With LN2 off the soc and vddg can go low like above, but LN2 on vddg iod minimum is 1.1v, any lower it spits out 100s of whea's 1 every half a second, it also has a seesaw with cc'd, one guess up or down the other needs changing to stabilise. Sweet spot now 1.15v soc 1.0v vddg ccd, 1.1v iod. BIOS I'm on s a24, I'll try other bioses now I find this ln2 magic button works. I have noticed the CPU runs slightly higher voltage during full load, LN2 off load 0.950v, on 1.15v, need further testing. I'm sure I tried LN2 before and it didn't boot.

Another thing, spread spectrum works with LN2 at 3800 and above, LN2 off 3733 is max then it doesn't post, weird.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

I have the XOC bios and there's an MSI LN2 on the overclocking menu, LN2 Mode 1 in AMD CBS and LN2 Mode 2 in AMD OC.
Last time I checked I couldn't post enabling LN2 Mode 1 or 2 and performances were terrible with MSI LN2.


----------



## weleh

Thanks for testing.

I'll sure be doing some of my own today when I get home.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

@YoungChris

Your are probably very experienced in Geekbench 3 results, especially in memory.

Is this a good one for my 5950x?
Not sure why the SC score is higher than the MC...
And flagged as inaccurate when uploaded?

It's not XOC of course, it's a daily profile for FCLK 2033 with 4066CL16










This is FCLK 2000 with same settings, lower but MC is higher than SC:












Spoiler: Full bench results and config


----------



## weleh

The 2033 score looks fine.

Here's my 3800c14 setup on my 5800X.






Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MS-7D13 - Geekbench Browser


Benchmark results for a Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MS-7D13 with an AMD Ryzen 7 5800X processor.



browser.geekbench.com


----------



## weleh

I cant boot with ln2 Mode enabled, at all.


----------



## KedarWolf

KedarWolf said:


> Got this earlier today.
> 
> View attachment 2490610


Improved my score by a decent margin.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

KedarWolf said:


> Improved my score by a decent margin.


I noticed!
What did you? Brought home an iceberg?


----------



## KedarWolf

ManniX-ITA said:


> I noticed!
> What did you? Brought home an iceberg?


My ambient temps are pretty high, to be honest, not setting up my A/C until June. Just used a different 3090 BIOS and tweaked my video card overclock mostly.


----------



## YoungChris

ManniX-ITA said:


> @YoungChris
> Your are probably very experienced in Geekbench 3 results, especially in memory.
> 
> Is this a good one for my 5950x?
> And flagged as inaccurate when uploaded?
> 
> It's not XOC of course, it's a daily profile for FCLK 2033 with 4066CL16
> 
> View attachment 2511255
> 
> 
> View attachment 2511253


Memory score looks pretty good to me, I think even a daily profile could benefit from a full subtiming overhaul. What is your 5950X clocking to during all-core workloads?










For reference, here's a 5950X running a daily-ish DR Rev B profile and 4600 all core. One of my friends' screens.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

YoungChris said:


> Memory score looks pretty good to me, I think even a daily profile could benefit from a full subtiming overhaul. What is your 5950X clocking to during all-core workloads?


Thanks for the info!
I see the same oddity with the memory MC score.

My 5950x is an average bin; I can't go down too much on some cores with CO counts. Plus right now is under a silent air cooler 
CB23 starts at 4500 and ends at 4450 MHz. TM5 runs at 4.6-4.65 GHz.

Now I'm going to test FCLK 2000 and will try to make a decent memory profile.
Unfortunately my DR kit just like doesn't want to go below tRCDRD 16 at 3800 has the same problem at 4000 and over and doesn't want to go below 17.


----------



## MyUsername

weleh said:


> I cant boot with ln2 Mode enabled, at all.


AMD CBS LN2 does nothing when LN2 in AMD OC is disabled, but works and no whea's when it is enabled in AMD OC and disabled in CBS. So something changes in agesa somehow, dunno it works and everything looks normal. I flashed a21 xoc and it was the same and repeatable.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

MyUsername said:


> AMD CBS LN2 does nothing when LN2 in AMD OC is disabled, but works and no whea's when it is enabled in AMD OC and disabled in CBS. So something changes in agesa somehow, dunno it works and everything looks normal. I flashed a21 xoc and it was the same and repeatable.


Must be dependent on the CPU, same for me, doesn't boot.
Same also on the AORUS Master with the 5950x.
While the 3800x, depending on BIOS releases, I could boot in LN2 mode.
It just didn't help


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Guys, I really need your input as I have to decide if to send the Unify-X in RMA or not.
Not sure if these bugs are only mine or from the BIOS, wonder if I may have a faulty flash chip or not.

These are bugs which started maybe with A10, for sure happens with A21/A22/A24.
All related to the profiles.

Please if you have the same or don't, tell me:

Profiles can be saved to USB but not restored after a roll-back
Whenever I test a different BIOS eg. from A10 to A21 and then go back to the previous eg. A10 the profiles can't be restored
I get an error saying "Setup options changed, please select another profile"
This is a disaster since this board lacks Dual BIOS, I have to retype from screenshots every single option every time or just not do any A/B testing at all

Massive problems after Clear CMOS, this is another disaster considering how miserable is in recovering memory training issues, I have to clear CMOS continuosly
Restoring via Alt+Fx doesn't work anymore, black screen; I have to press F1 and restore via F8
Restoring the profile after a Clear CMOS doesn't work like restoring a profile coming from an active profile
While only the AMD OC/CBS options are not restored properly, coming from a Clear most of the options are not restored properly
Options are sets in the menu but not for real
I have to "touch" +/- almost every single option otherwise I get a black screen and again Clear CMOS
All options in Overclock menu that are pertinent in some way to the AMD OC menu are not restored
CO counts are restore in Overclock\Advanced\AMD OC but not in Setup\Advanced\AMD OC
Every single count must be touched with +/-



Thanks


----------



## weleh

MyUsername said:


> AMD CBS LN2 does nothing when LN2 in AMD OC is disabled, but works and no whea's when it is enabled in AMD OC and disabled in CBS. So something changes in agesa somehow, dunno it works and everything looks normal. I flashed a21 xoc and it was the same and repeatable.


I just couldn't get it to boot no matter what.
At least at 2000 fCLK, I didn't try lower.

Tried playing with VSOC, VDDG's, nothing. Even tried enabling spread spectrum and disabling, nothing.


----------



## YoungChris

MyUsername said:


> AMD CBS LN2 does nothing when LN2 in AMD OC is disabled, but works and no whea's when it is enabled in AMD OC and disabled in CBS. So something changes in agesa somehow, dunno it works and everything looks normal. I flashed a21 xoc and it was the same and repeatable.


Does ln2 mode help with whea or something?


----------



## MyUsername

YoungChris said:


> Does ln2 mode help with whea or something?


It eradicates it completely. It does however limit going higher than 2000 fclk. The memory side I assume doesn't like it as it whea's like crazy at 1933 and higher, but the weird thing is the whea's almost stop when I stress test it, it doesn't crash either. There's an issue where I'm unable to select 1.2v for the soc at whatever speed and gets a debug code 92, but if I choose 2000fclk it auto selects 1.2v 🤪


----------



## weleh

LN2 mode was an old trick back from Zen 2 days.
I'm just baffled I can't post with LN2 mode on.


----------



## YoungChris

MyUsername said:


> It eradicates it completely. It does however limit going higher than 2000 fclk. The memory side I assume doesn't like it as it whea's like crazy at 1933 and higher, but the weird thing is the whea's almost stop when I stress test it, it doesn't crash either. There's an issue where I'm unable to select 1.2v for the soc at whatever speed and gets a debug code 92, but if I choose 2000fclk it auto selects 1.2v 🤪


Have you tried manually tuning that v1.8/p1.8 thing?


----------



## weleh

YoungChris said:


> Have you tried manually tuning that v1.8/p1.8 thing?


Unify doesn't have this exposed on later bioses.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

weleh said:


> Unify doesn't have this exposed on later bioses.


Should be there, maybe it's limited on non XOC versions, it's called CPU 1P8 Voltage.



Spoiler: A22















To stabilize some Geekbench tests I tried using 1P8 but I needed 1.940V which I'm not sure how safe it is and it didn't work fully.
At the end I had to increase all the voltages. FCLK 2033 is very demanding in comparison to 2000.
But it's like it has one gear more in responsiveness...

Ended up with this:


























Tomorrow I'll check how much I can reduce the VDIMM.


----------



## weleh

I tried 2033 and 2066 too.

2100 doesn't boot.

2033 is fine on AIDA and some other benches but 2066 throttles too much and you can see this even on AIDA.


----------



## MyUsername

Well it boots 😃

















last one for me tonight.


----------



## Serchio

Hello guys.

I have received my unify-x with 5900x. I have build a small test bench before I will put in into my PC case. The board came with bios version E7D13AMS.A00 from 2020.11.23. What is the recommended bios version to flash it with? With the current bios the board does not want to boot with FCLK above 1900MHz (3800MHz) - it gives me code 07 even with Spread Spectrum disabled and SoC 1.2v. RAM runs at 2133MHz because I am trying to figure out if I can reach FCLK 2000MHz. Any recommendations are welcome.

EDIT.
I have flashed A24 - I can boot with FCLK 2000MHz but event viewer gives my a lot of WHEA errors now.


----------



## MyUsername

Serchio said:


> Hello guys.
> 
> I have received my unify-x with 5900x. I have build a small test bench before I will put in into my PC case. The board came with bios version E7D13AMS.A00 from 2020.11.23. What is the recommended bios version to flash it with? With the current bios the board does not want to boot with FCLK above 1900MHz (3800MHz) - it gives me code 07 even with Spread Spectrum disabled and SoC 1.2v. RAM runs at 2133MHz because I am trying to figure out if I can reach FCLK 2000MHz. Any recommendations are welcome.
> 
> EDIT.
> I have flashed A24 - I can boot with FCLK 2000MHz but event viewer gives my a lot of WHEA errors now.


Try and aim for 1900/3800 whea free, you'll get good performance and it'll be easier on the memory timings. It's hard to get whea free above 1900/3800 and it's for bragging rights really, awesome if your chip can do it though.


----------



## YoungChris

ManniX-ITA said:


> Should be there, maybe it's limited on non XOC versions, it's called CPU 1P8 Voltage.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: A22
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2511373
> 
> 
> 
> 
> To stabilize some Geekbench tests I tried using 1P8 but I needed 1.940V which I'm not sure how safe it is and it didn't work fully.
> At the end I had to increase all the voltages. FCLK 2033 is very demanding in comparison to 2000.
> But it's like it has one gear more in responsiveness...
> 
> Ended up with this:
> 
> View attachment 2511374
> 
> 
> View attachment 2511376
> 
> 
> Tomorrow I'll check how much I can reduce the VDIMM.


I have heard 1p8 usually scales to 2-2.3v on ambient.


----------



## weleh

IP8 voltage doesn't go to 2V on A24.


----------



## YoungChris

MyUsername said:


> Well it boots 😃
> View attachment 2511412
> 
> View attachment 2511413
> 
> 
> last one for me tonight.
> 
> View attachment 2511415


you need to get going in the HWBot AMD SuperPi competition 
seems to love fclk





Overclocking, overclocking, and much more! Like overclocking.


HWBOT is a site dedicated to overclocking. We promote overclocking achievements and competitions for professionals as well as enthousiasts with rankings and a huge hardware database.




hwbot.org




4th, 5th, and 6th place all Unify-X lol


----------



## ManniX-ITA

ManniX-ITA said:


> Guys, I really need your input as I have to decide if to send the Unify-X in RMA or not.
> Not sure if these bugs are only mine or from the BIOS, wonder if I may have a faulty flash chip or not.
> 
> These are bugs which started maybe with A10, for sure happens with A21/A22/A24.
> All related to the profiles.
> 
> Please if you have the same or don't, tell me:
> 
> Profiles can be saved to USB but not restored after a roll-back
> Whenever I test a different BIOS eg. from A10 to A21 and then go back to the previous eg. A10 the profiles can't be restored
> I get an error saying "Setup options changed, please select another profile"
> This is a disaster since this board lacks Dual BIOS, I have to retype from screenshots every single option every time or just not do any A/B testing at all
> 
> Massive problems after Clear CMOS, this is another disaster considering how miserable is in recovering memory training issues, I have to clear CMOS continuosly
> Restoring via Alt+Fx doesn't work anymore, black screen; I have to press F1 and restore via F8
> Restoring the profile after a Clear CMOS doesn't work like restoring a profile coming from an active profile
> While only the AMD OC/CBS options are not restored properly, coming from a Clear most of the options are not restored properly
> Options are sets in the menu but not for real
> I have to "touch" +/- almost every single option otherwise I get a black screen and again Clear CMOS
> All options in Overclock menu that are pertinent in some way to the AMD OC menu are not restored
> CO counts are restore in Overclock\Advanced\AMD OC but not in Setup\Advanced\AMD OC
> Every single count must be touched with +/-
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks


Anyone?


----------



## MyUsername

ManniX-ITA said:


> Anyone?


I made a profile with a24, flashed a210 to replicate the whea fix with ln2, went back to a24 and the profile loaded.

Restoring alt-Fx is broken, I get AE the F9 then od, first and last time I'm using that lol

I have never had this problem, I'm not sure I understand the first question.

Options are sets in the menu but not for real
I have to "touch" +/- almost every single option otherwise I get a black screen and again Clear CMOS


All settings in AMD OC(AGESA) are not restored and have always had to be re-entered after the CMOS has been reset. AMD CBS settings are restored.

All options in Overclock menu that are pertinent in some way to the AMD OC menu are not restored 


CO gets restored in Settings/AMD OC and in OC/Advanced. I use the number pad and +/-, I've never had an issue with the keyboard.


CO counts are restore in Overclock\Advanced\AMD OC but not in Setup\Advanced\AMD OC
Every single count must be touched with +/-


----------



## KedarWolf

Someone in another thread said LLC on Auto better for Cinebench, I'd barely hit 30000 on LLC 2, this on Auto.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

MyUsername said:


> I have never had this problem, I'm not sure I understand the first question.


Thanks for the input!
Which question? 

As an example of "touch"; if the div1 is set to sync and I don't touch it when I save & reboot it will be in desync at /2.
More than a few times I've run a while with memory in desync wondering what happened till I opened Zentimings.

My CO counts are restored only in OC menu.
They get restored also in Setup\Advanced if I restore a profile without clear cmos


----------



## ManniX-ITA

KedarWolf said:


> Someone in another thread said LLC on Auto better for Cinebench, I'd barely hit 30000 on LLC 2, this on Auto.


Yes MSI did something stupid, probably to boost Cinebench results like the Performance Regulator.
Luckily seems to be limited to Cinebench.


----------



## Serchio

MyUsername said:


> Try and aim for 1900/3800 whea free, you'll get good performance and it'll be easier on the memory timings. It's hard to get whea free above 1900/3800 and it's for bragging rights really, awesome if your chip can do it though.


Works like a charm with 1900/3800 but anything above is going to be a fight. Overall, I like the board - boots 10x faster than CH6 with 3900x. I can hear some coil whine from time to time but the board is on my desk right now so it is not a perfect placement for noise evaluation. The only thing I miss is a header for an external temperature sensor - like the one I have in CH6 (t_sensor). I will need to figure out how to set radiators fans without access to the water temperature sensor...


----------



## MyUsername

ManniX-ITA said:


> Thanks for the input!
> Which question?
> 
> As an example of "touch"; if the div1 is set to sync and I don't touch it when I save & reboot it will be in desync at /2.
> More than a few times I've run a while with memory in desync wondering what happened till I opened Zentimings.
> 
> My CO counts are restored only in OC menu.
> They get restored also in Setup\Advanced if I restore a profile without clear cmos


This question

Options are sets in the menu but not for real
I haven't had a problem with mclk/fclk sync, I set to 1:1 and it sticks.

Both AMD OC CO have always been the same after profile restore. Can't say I've had any issues really. I'm at work, so I'll have to see when I get back.


----------



## MyUsername

KedarWolf said:


> Someone in another thread said LLC on Auto better for Cinebench, I'd barely hit 30000 on LLC 2, this on Auto.
> 
> View attachment 2511560


I've left the LLC setting all on auto, I've tried soc LLC on level 2 and it made little difference. I have been concentrating on stability though, just fine tweaking CO now which is time consuming!


----------



## ManniX-ITA

MyUsername said:


> This question
> 
> Options are sets in the menu but not for real
> I haven't had a problem with mclk/fclk sync, I set to 1:1 and it sticks.
> 
> Both AMD OC CO have always been the same after profile restore. Can't say I've had any issues really. I'm at work, so I'll have to see when I get back.


Sorry, hard to explain 

I set it without any problem as well, in a normal condition.

When I want to switch to another profile eg. via F8 and the new Div1 is different, I reboot and it's set properly.

What is messed up is after a Clear CMOS only.
Which happens tragically frequently on this board.
Then I load a profile and Div1 like many other options looks like it's set but it's not.
On screen it's selected in sync but when I boot I find out it's set to Auto which defaults to /2.

Same for almost everything related to AMD OC/CBS menu.
VSOC, VDDG, VDDP, all PBO and also the CO counts (which are 33 options to toggle up & down), etc

Hope it's clear!


----------



## MyUsername

ManniX-ITA said:


> Sorry, hard to explain
> 
> I set it without any problem as well, in a normal condition.
> 
> When I want to switch to another profile eg. via F8 and the new Div1 is different, I reboot and it's set properly.
> 
> What is messed up is after a Clear CMOS only.
> Which happens tragically frequently on this board.
> Then I load a profile and Div1 like many other options looks like it's set but it's not.
> On screen it's selected in sync but when I boot I find out it's set to Auto which defaults to /2.
> 
> Same for almost everything related to AMD OC/CBS menu.
> VSOC, VDDG, VDDP, all PBO and also the CO counts (which are 33 options to toggle up & down), etc
> 
> Hope it's clear!


Gotcha, when you load another profile on top of another with different values, the settings are out of whack. Haven't noticed, but I only use 1 profile. I'll experiment when I get back, I'll try with the fclk 2033 and 2067 profiles later and see what happens if it'll let me.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

MyUsername said:


> Gotcha, when you load another profile on top of another with different values, the settings are out of whack. Haven't noticed, but I only use 1 profile. I'll experiment when I get back, I'll try with the fclk 2033 and 2067 profiles later and see what happens if it'll let me.


No sorry, not that 
When you load it over an existing profile works fine, except PBO settings which are wiped out and sometimes CBS.
The problem is only after a Clear CMOS.
Then you don't have a profile, it's like after a Load Optimized Defaults. Blank slate.
At that point I load my beloved profile and I have to fiddle for 5 minutes to set again almost everything.
It's really stressing to test memory timings this way...


----------



## MyUsername

ManniX-ITA said:


> No sorry, not that
> When you load it over an existing profile works fine, except PBO settings which are wiped out and sometimes CBS.
> The problem is only after a Clear CMOS.
> Then you don't have a profile, it's like after a Load Optimized Defaults. Blank slate.
> At that point I load my beloved profile and I have to fiddle for 5 minutes to set again almost everything.
> It's really stressing to test memory timings this way...


Okay that's clear lol. The AMD OC being wiped is normal. I'll get back to you.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

MyUsername said:


> Okay that's clear lol. The AMD OC being wiped is normal. I'll get back to you.


Thanks 

Yes the AMD OC wiped has been a classic since A00.
Briefly improved but promptly remediated going back to the worse.
I'm getting really frustrated with all these bugs, this board it's not new since 6 months.


----------



## RonLazer

For PBO the default LLC performs best on most CPUs/Boards because its the one the PBO algorithm expects and dynamically adjusts VID on the basis of. If you run higher LLC (less droop) then it will use surplus voltage creating more heat and thermal throttling. If you run lower LLC (more droop) then it will not hit its voltage:frequency targets and you'll see clock-stretching or WHEA 18s. 

Some chips might have better voltage response and can run at lower LLC without clock-stretching, but it's not going to be the default and ultimately its unclear why you'd use non-standard LLC instead of Curve-Optimiser.


----------



## RonLazer

ManniX-ITA said:


> Thanks
> 
> Yes the AMD OC wiped has been a classic since A00.
> Briefly improved but promptly remediated going back to the worse.
> I'm getting really frustrated with all these bugs, this board it's not new since 6 months.


CBS gets wiped on safe-boot, but if you have saved the profile and reload it then it usually restores the CBS settings too.


----------



## KedarWolf

If I save a Profile within the BIOS and reset CMOS, then load the profile, all my settings are restored except for EDC, TDC, Scaler and Boost etc., they are all on Auto. I need to manually set them again.


----------



## MyUsername

Holy crap, this thing is impressing me now, I'm just having a laugh. Let try dropping that soc V.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

KedarWolf said:


> If I save a Profile within the BIOS and reset CMOS, then load the profile, all my settings are restored except for EDC, TDC, Scaler and Boost etc., they are all on Auto. I need to manually set them again.


Mmmm, maybe I have to send it back....

But do they actually work?
Cause if I go to Setup>Advanced>AMD Overclocking the VSOC, VDDP, VDDG, FCLK, they are all in Auto
Have to toggle up and down each one and then when I go back they are all set properly.
If I boot without doing this every time they are indeed all set in Auto.


----------



## RonLazer

ManniX-ITA said:


> Mmmm, maybe I have to send it back....
> 
> But do they actually work?
> Cause if I go to Setup>Advanced>AMD Overclocking the VSOC, VDDP, VDDG, FCLK, they are all in Auto
> Have to toggle up and down each one and then when I go back they are all set properly.
> If I boot without doing this every time they are indeed all set in Auto.


Set them in the main OC menu?




MyUsername said:


> Holy crap, this thing is impressing me now, I'm just having a laugh. Let try dropping that soc V.
> View attachment 2511625


Goddamn! That's not anything special about the Unify-X, you have a very nice 5950X. 

You'll likely need SOC in the vicinity of that to be stable and/or get the full performance out of it. I need 1.200-1.225V to max out memory performance on my 5600X.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

RonLazer said:


> Set them in the main OC menu?


Yes when you restore the profile they are set in the main OC menu.
But it's only a fake, they are not really set.
I have to go to VDDP and set it again otherwise the real value is what is in AMD OC which is Auto.


----------



## MyUsername

That's the limit, bench stable ish, it's not very happy at this LOL


















I can boot with this


----------



## MyUsername

ManniX-ITA said:


> Yes when you restore the profile they are set in the main OC menu.
> But it's only a fake, they are not really set.
> I have to go to VDDP and set it again otherwise the real value is what is in AMD OC which is Auto.


You're correct, but it seems more extreme with yours than mine. I cleared cmos, loaded a profile and all I noticed with zentimings there was a few memory timings were at a default value and the vddg iod was wrong.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

MyUsername said:


> You're correct, but it seems more extreme with yours than mine. I cleared cmos, loaded a profile and all I noticed with zentimings there was a few memory timings were at a default value and the vddg iod was wrong.


Memory timings are often not set even after the 2n reboot.
Only the VDDG it's a luxury... but then I wonder if sending back to RMA will solve anything.


----------



## MyUsername

ManniX-ITA said:


> Memory timings are often not set even after the 2n reboot.
> Only the VDDG it's a luxury... but then I wonder if sending back to RMA will solve anything.


If it was me and the hardware was fine, I would work a round it if I was aware of the bugs. There are a few bugs in this bios that annoy me, but it's a fine board to play with.


----------



## weleh

Managed this with no regression.
I do notice that MT scores get lower and lower the more you push fCLK.

1800+ ST on GB5 and 11900 MT which is at least 300 points lower than my 3800c14 setup and 100 points lower than my 4000c15 profile.
This MT throttle is seen on CPU-Z too.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

weleh said:


> I do notice that MT scores get lower and lower the more you push fCLK.


I'm almost there regaining what's lost with the NUMA at NPS0, the xGMI Encryption disabled and Scalar at 2x.


----------



## weleh

ManniX-ITA said:


> I'm almost there regaining what's lost with the NUMA at NPS0, the xGMI Encryption disabled and Scalar at 2x.


You're on a 5950X?
I think NUMA does nothing on 5800X am I correct?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

weleh said:


> You're on a 5950X?
> I think NUMA does nothing on 5800X am I correct?


Yes I'm on a 5950x, didn't think about it.
Very likely it's not doing anything on a single CCD.
Try with the xGMI link encryption disabled in DF>Link, seems they helped a bit.
Scalar at 2x stabilized more, you can try with one notch of positive or negative offset.
Positive was better for me but I'm still testing.


----------



## weleh

Where's that xGMI stuff?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

weleh said:


> Where's that xGMI stuff?


Ah you are on A24, right?
It's only on XOC BIOS with full CBS menu unlocked.
I would use A21O to test FCLK, there's too much missing in the normal BIOS.


----------



## weleh

Using scallar 3x seemed to have helped.

Man it's impressive how the system feels so much better than at 3800c14. Might just be placebo but I'm digging 4067c15


----------



## weleh

Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MS-7D13 - Geekbench Browser


Benchmark results for a Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MS-7D13 with an AMD Ryzen 7 5800X processor.



browser.geekbench.com





10.1K mem score
0 signs of performance throttle.


----------



## BluePaint

I only get performance throttling on 5950X but not the 5800X with fclk > 1900.


----------



## infraredbg

I know the board officially supports just Zen2 and Zen3, but the bios has all the modules and even 1800X works.
I keep one CPU from each generation in order to verify each ZenTimings release, so I need a board that supports them.
When 1800X or 1600AF are installed on A21O bios everything seems present, except vcore and vsoc, the OC Mode switch on top of the OC Explore Mode [Expert/Normal] does not unlock anything and AMD Overclocking menu is also missing. LN2 mode is not present either, however I wanted to leave just Unify-X as an universal testing/extreme benching/daily motherboard and sell the other 2 boards I have.

Has anyone tested other bioses? I will roll back other versions in the weekend, but would be easier if someone tested it before.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

infraredbg said:


> Has anyone tested other bioses?


Nope sorry, only tested the 5950x and the 3800x.
If you are also testing an APU... can you check if the option to set VDDP is labeled "CPU VDDP"?


----------



## YoungChris

MyUsername said:


> That's the limit, bench stable ish, it's not very happy at this LOL
> View attachment 2511633
> 
> 
> View attachment 2511634
> 
> 
> I can boot with this
> 
> View attachment 2511635


Does your CPU continue to scale with VSOC past 1.225? Also, have you messed with 1P8?


----------



## MyUsername

YoungChris said:


> Does your CPU continue to scale with VSOC past 1.225? Also, have you messed with 1P8?


Na, it proper hits a wall @2166 that was difficult to start, 2133 the screen continuously goes blank, so I think the pci-e is freaking out there, but at the moment 2100/4200 seems to be the sweet spot, I get 51.2n and no regression as it appears, more testing. I did play with the 1P8, it didn't do much, still at auto. I need to find 2.5 seconds for superpi #1, 12-13th place ATM. My core is boosting to 4925-4975mhz, need to figure how to get that higher, not easy.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

MyUsername said:


> Na, it proper hits a wall @2166 that was difficult to start, 2133 the screen continuously goes blank, so I think the pci-e is freaking out there, but at the moment 2100/4200 seems to be the sweet spot, I get 51.2n and no regression as it appears, more testing. I did play with the 1P8, it didn't do much, still at auto. I need to find 2.5 seconds for superpi #1, 12-13th place ATM. My core is boosting to 4925-4975mhz, need to figure how to get that higher, not easy.


Run a Geekbench 5 at 3800 MHz and use it as a baseline.
Compare multiple runs when you raise FCLK.
Even if you get better or same scores doesn't mean you don't have performance regressions.
Check that every single test is scoring in between the 2% or better.
I could score 20% more on Gaussian and 25% less in N-Body tests and get a better score.


----------



## YoungChris

MyUsername said:


> Na, it proper hits a wall @2166 that was difficult to start, 2133 the screen continuously goes blank, so I think the pci-e is freaking out there, but at the moment 2100/4200 seems to be the sweet spot, I get 51.2n and no regression as it appears, more testing. I did play with the 1P8, it didn't do much, still at auto. I need to find 2.5 seconds for superpi #1, 12-13th place ATM. My core is boosting to 4925-4975mhz, need to figure how to get that higher, not easy.


the solution for core is disable some cores and SMT and get a static OC going. You're probably looking at 1.35-1.475 for 5g SuperPi. That's definitely a lot, but keep in mind you'll only have process affinity to one core. Also, you're gonna want some much more aggressive memory settings. Do not fear 2vdimm+
Benchmate 10.5, OS is Win10 1809 x86.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

YoungChris said:


> the solution for core is disable some cores and SMT and get a static OC going. You're probably looking at 1.35-1.475 for 5g SuperPi. That's definitely a lot, but keep in mind you'll only have process affinity to one core. Also, you're gonna want some much more aggressive memory settings. Do not fear 2vdimm+
> Benchmate 10.5, OS is Win10 1809 x86.


Do not fear 2V VDIMM... I do, you are brave 
Also disabling CPPC and Global C-States can help.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

weleh said:


> Man it's impressive how the system feels so much better than at 3800c14. Might just be placebo but I'm digging 4067c15


I don't think so, I have the same feeling.
Shame this AGESA is worse cause previously at 2067 MHz it was visibly faster than anything below.
Now at 2067 it's not much different than 2033.
Did you try gaming anything?
For me feels much better.


----------



## weleh

Yea I gamed 2 days ago whole day.
Played Warzone.

I don't feel anything particularly different because I do 1440p144Hz max settings an my 6900XT handles it just fine.

But the whole system feels so much better.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

weleh said:


> I don't feel anything particularly different because I do 1440p144Hz max settings an my 6900XT handles it just fine.


I do the same but on an GTX 1070
Mine doesn't handle it really so well 
Must be the reason i see a diffrerence...


----------



## MyUsername

That's not all it's got either


----------



## Hale59

MyUsername said:


> That's not all it's got either


Enter the hwbot competition:





Overclocking, overclocking, and much more! Like overclocking.


HWBOT is a site dedicated to overclocking. We promote overclocking achievements and competitions for professionals as well as enthousiasts with rankings and a huge hardware database.




hwbot.org


----------



## KedarWolf

Anyone having issues with the just released A2 BIOS. I flashed it, no boot, tried to flash it with M-Flash renaming it to MSI.ROM and the BIOS flashing light kept flashing for 30 minutes, I gave up, powered off the PC, tried to start it, still no boot.


----------



## KedarWolf

KedarWolf said:


> Anyone having issues with the just released A2 BIOS. I flashed it, no boot, tried to flash it with M-Flash renaming it to MSI.ROM and the BIOS flashing light kept flashing for 30 minutes, I gave up, powered off the PC, tried to start it, still no boot.


Welp, my motherboard is bricked.

Tried three different BIOS, renamed them to MSI.ROM, the USB starts flashing the BIOS with BIOS flashback, the fans start, but then the lights on the USB never start flashing again like is actually flashing the BIOS and the BIOS flash light never stops blinking.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

KedarWolf said:


> Welp, my motherboard is bricked.
> 
> Tried three different BIOS, renamed them to MSI.ROM, the USB starts flashing the BIOS with BIOS flashback, the fans start, but then the lights on the USB never start flashing again like is actually flashing the BIOS and the BIOS flash light never stops blinking.


Ouch... what a nightmare
Are you sure that flashback did actually work?


----------



## KedarWolf

ManniX-ITA said:


> Ouch... what a nightmare
> Are you sure that flashback did actually work?


It doesn't work, no.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

KedarWolf said:


> It doesn't work, no


I had massive problems with flashback.. it doesn't like most USB sticks.
All fancy Sandisk sticks, puked out.
Some very reliable old sticks only for flashing, same.
A stupid 10 euro Kingston 32GB, loved it....

Is it shutting down by itself after 4-5 minutes?
That's the only way I found to be sure it's working.


----------



## weleh

KedarWolf said:


> Welp, my motherboard is bricked.
> 
> Tried three different BIOS, renamed them to MSI.ROM, the USB starts flashing the BIOS with BIOS flashback, the fans start, but then the lights on the USB never start flashing again like is actually flashing the BIOS and the BIOS flash light never stops blinking.


I bricked my first Unify X like that however bricked flashback usually would leave the led on not blinking.
Make sure to test other USB sticks and format the drive properly.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

KedarWolf said:


> Tried three different BIOS, renamed them to MSI.ROM, the USB starts flashing the BIOS with BIOS flashback, the fans start, but then the lights on the USB never start flashing again like is actually flashing the BIOS and the BIOS flash light never stops blinking.


This is one of the behaviors when it doesn't like the USB stick.
Same doing with my glorious Verbatim 2GB which can be used to flash anything.
But doesn't work with the Unify-X...

What works for me is a Kingston Data Traveler 100 G3 32GB


----------



## MyUsername

Absolutely smashed it but the cpu speed is way over


----------



## ManniX-ITA

MyUsername said:


> Absolutely smashed it but the cpu speed is way over


Glorius 
How much VDIMM did you use?


----------



## YoungChris

MyUsername said:


> That's not all it's got either
> 
> View attachment 2511727


Awesome! What was the core clock during the run?


----------



## weleh

Doesn't look like he used high vdimm, timings aren't XOC


----------



## MyUsername

ManniX-ITA said:


> Glorius
> How much VDIMM did you use?


1.8v. I'm having trouble getting it to even start with 2.0v cl12 @4200. Broken Windows and now reinstalling lol. I'm trying 1 8 gig stick, see if I have better luck.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

MyUsername said:


> 1.8v. I'm having trouble getting it to even start with 2.0v cl12 @4200. Broken Windows and now reinstalling lol. I'm trying 1 8 gig stick, see if I have better luck.


Use a Windows To Go installation.
You'll get a Pulitzer if you can corrupt it


----------



## MyUsername

ManniX-ITA said:


> Use a Windows To Go installation.
> You'll get a Pulitzer if you can corrupt it


Yeah I tried that, it refuses to boot with 2 cores which I found out after setting it up, my primary m.2 works. I'm setting it back up for normal use again. Given up for now, I'm getting moaned at too.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

MyUsername said:


> Yeah I tried that, it refuses to boot with 2 cores, my primary m.2 works. I'm setting it back up for normal use again. Given up for now, I'm getting moaned at too.


That's weird mine boot without problems...


----------



## Dar|{cyde

That's some weird naming convention on the new A2 bios. It's still 1.2.0.2, so they rolled something new since A24? Just added a note about USB compatibility. Were people still getting USB dropouts on A24?




Spoiler: A24



----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MEG B550 UNIFY-X (MS-7D13) V10.24 BIOS Release
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. This is AMI BIOS release

2. This BIOS fixes the following problem of the previous version:
- Update to ComboAM4PIV2 1.2.0.2

3. 2021/04/08





Spoiler: A2



----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MEG B550 UNIFY-X (MS-7D13) V10.2 BIOS Release
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. This is AMI BIOS release

2. This BIOS fixes the following problem of the previous version:

Update to ComboAM4PIV2 1.2.0.2
Improved USB device compatibility

3. 2021/05/17



@KedarWolf That sucks. Did you have a stick worked before for flashback? I only tried one, it never flashed, just sat there. Reminds me to try to find a working one.

Flashback only supports Fat32 I'm guessing?


----------



## KedarWolf

Dar|{cyde said:


> That's some weird naming convention on the new A2 bios. It's still 1.2.0.2, so they rolled something new since A24? Just added a note about USB compatibility. Were people still getting USB dropouts on A24?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: A24
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> MEG B550 UNIFY-X (MS-7D13) V10.24 BIOS Release
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 1. This is AMI BIOS release
> 
> 2. This BIOS fixes the following problem of the previous version:
> - Update to ComboAM4PIV2 1.2.0.2
> 
> 3. 2021/04/08
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: A2
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> MEG B550 UNIFY-X (MS-7D13) V10.2 BIOS Release
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 1. This is AMI BIOS release
> 
> 2. This BIOS fixes the following problem of the previous version:
> 
> Update to ComboAM4PIV2 1.2.0.2
> Improved USB device compatibility
> 
> 3. 2021/05/17
> 
> 
> 
> @KedarWolf That sucks. Did you have a stick worked before for flashback? I only tried one, it never flashed, just sat there. Reminds me to try to find a working one.
> 
> Flashback only supports Fat32 I'm guessing?


Yes, it only supports MBR FAT32, I'm trying another 2GB USB right now that had always worked. The 16GB Kingston has worked in the past though. But I just started with the 2GB USB.


----------



## KedarWolf

KedarWolf said:


> Yes, it only supports MBR FAT32, I'm trying another 2GB USB right now that had always worked. The 16GB Kingston has worked in the past though. But I just started with the 2GB USB.


I tried three USBs, two of which have worked on the past, nada. 

I'm picking up a new motherboard this afternoon, then RMAing this one and selling the return motherboard at a loss. I don't have a working backup PC.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

I just did it once to find the right stick and it was a good move


----------



## KedarWolf

ManniX-ITA said:


> I just did it once to find the right stick and it was a good move


Yeah, like I said, two of the USBs have worked in the past, so I don't think it's that. 16GB Kingston Data Traveller and a really old 2GB USB 2.0.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

KedarWolf said:


> Yeah, like I said, two of the USBs have worked in the past, so I don't think it's that. 16GB Kingston Data Traveller and a really old 2GB USB 2.0.


Agree, it's probably bricked... my sympathies for this tragedy.


----------



## KedarWolf

ManniX-ITA said:


> Agree, it's probably bricked... my sympathies for this tragedy.


I bought one more Philips 16GB USB 2.0 stick, but I really doubt it's not bricked.


----------



## KedarWolf

KedarWolf said:


> I bought one more Philips 16GB USB 2.0 stick, but I really doubt it's not bricked.


Nope, it's bricked for sure, now that's FOUR USBs I tried. Including two that have always worked in the past.


----------



## MyUsername

KedarWolf said:


> Nope, it's bricked for sure, now that's FOUR USBs I tried. Including two that have always worked in the past.


That sucks. Do you know how it failed, was it m-flash or flashrom, any warning? You were unlucky unfortunately, the new a20 bios is okay. 

Good as any time to test flashback with my ancient sandisk 8GB cruzer micro 2006-07ish, it's done many flashes, and then flashrom a20. I had to go outside for a smoke, I couldn't watch it.


----------



## KedarWolf

MyUsername said:


> That sucks. Do you know how it failed, was it m-flash or flashrom, any warning? You were unlucky unfortunately, the new a20 bios is okay.
> 
> Good as any time to test flashback with my ancient sandisk 8GB cruzer micro 2006-07ish, it's done many flashes, and then flashrom a20. I had to go outside for a smoke, I couldn't watch it.
> View attachment 2511846


Flashrom is what bricked mine.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

KedarWolf said:


> Flashrom is what bricked mine.


I'm not sure the fault is on flashrom, it is proven to be extremely reliable.
It's the flash used in MSI boards that seems to be inferior quality compares to others.
Really impressive how many had the same issue and it's not only on the Unify-X.
I had as well issues with M-Flash not booting for a long time, I really hope it's going to last for a while...


----------



## KedarWolf

ManniX-ITA said:


> I'm not sure the fault is on flashrom, it is proven to be extremely reliable.
> It's the flash used in MSI boards that seems to be inferior quality compares to others.
> Really impressive how many had the same issue and it's not only on the Unify-X.
> I had as well issues with M-Flash not booting for a long time, I really hope it's going to last for a while...


It might be my modded BIOS was bad, and might be from when I got coolant all over my motherboard and dried it with a blow dryer, worked for several months, but might have messed up something with the BIOS Flashback. 

Edit: I'm buying a new motherboard locally tomorrow, then RMAing this one and selling it at a loss. :/


----------



## weleh

The eeprom is bad on these boards.
Not the first Unify to die after flash. My first one did too.


----------



## MyUsername

I'll leave this here Other Tools (not BIOS modding related) » [Tool] Flashrom v1.2 [DOS] [AMD]

Some guy compiled Flashrom 1.2 with Ryzen support, the old one must have it too, but I feel confident with this and been using it for about a month, it works.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

MyUsername said:


> Some guy compiled Flashrom 1.2 with Ryzen support, the old one must have it too, but I feel confident with this and been using it for about a month, it works.


Thanks, can it flash ROMs after A10 without having to go back to a previous one?


----------



## MyUsername

ManniX-ITA said:


> Thanks, can it flash ROMs after A10 without having to go back to a previous one?


MSI must have locked it for their own crappy proprietary M-Flash


----------



## ManniX-ITA

MyUsername said:


> MSI must have locked it for their own crappy proprietary M-Flash


Yeah, how stupid....


----------



## MyUsername

A20 isn't stable at 1900/3800 for me, it just randomly restarts with nothing in the event log. Back to a24 with identical settings and waiting lol, no whea's so that's cool.


----------



## KedarWolf

I picked up my replacement motherboard today. Just relaxing with a coffee, then when I'm done installing the new board. I have some MX-5 thermal paste. 

I used to swear by MasterMaker Gel buy they changed it now and it's a lot thicker and harder to apply.

I prefer low viscosity pastes, why I'm trying the MX-5. I find the easier it is to apply, the better performance I get with it, even if it's not the highest wm/k paste.


----------



## KedarWolf

MyUsername said:


> MSI must have locked it for their own crappy proprietary M-Flash
> View attachment 2511875


If you flash the oldest BIOS on the MSI site with M-Flash, then you can flash the newest with flashrom.


----------



## KedarWolf

KedarWolf said:


> I picked up my replacement motherboard today. Just relaxing with a coffee, then when I'm done installing the new board. I have some MX-5 thermal paste.
> 
> I used to swear by MasterMaker Gel buy they changed it now and it's a lot thicker and harder to apply.
> 
> I prefer low viscosity pastes, why I'm trying the MX-5. I find the easier it is to apply, the better performance I get with it, even if it's not the highest wm/k paste.


Yep, BIOS was screwed. The new board works just fine.


----------



## Elrick

KedarWolf said:


> I used to swear by MasterMaker Gel buy they changed it now and it's a lot thicker and harder to apply.


You have to now drop it into a cup of hot water at 100C and leave it there for about 3 or 4 minutes. Then it becomes softer and easier to apply, a real waste of time.



KedarWolf said:


> I prefer low viscosity pastes, why I'm trying the MX-5. I find the easier it is to apply, the better performance I get with it, even if it's not the highest wm/k paste.


Have also used MX-5 simply due to its easy application and overall performance under both Air and AIOs.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Elrick said:


> You have to now drop it into a cup of hot water at 100C and leave it there for about 3 or 4 minutes. Then it becomes softer and easier to apply, a real waste of time.


So practical 

I've been quite satisfied with the Kryonaut, it's easy to apply and lasts long.

Did anyone had any experience with the Extreme version?
I'm going to try it for sure but I'm wondering if it's worth spending the ridiculous amount of 87€ for 34 grams.


----------



## weleh

Using NT-H2 from Noctua, tried MX-5 and it was a lot worse.


----------



## MyUsername

Had a stab at optimizing the CO at the weekend. So AMD recommends tweaking each core individually. Initially I was testing each core by putting a value testing with CB20 to see how it performs, getting an average, then moving on to the next core. Now I have them in order by HWINFO or CTR, great easy. But I couldn't quite get it right, the multi-core performance would just tank. I disabled SMT and whoa that made it really easy. Start with the best performing core first, if it's too high, Windows will crash, or CB20 will crash and Windows will reboot, or CB20 will crash when you test the core you just adjusted, just drop it by 1 and test to see if it's stable. The lower performing cores will be at that value or higher. Only test one CCD at a time, leave CCD1 at 0 on all cores while testing CCD0, complete CCD0 then move on to CCD1. CCD1 start with all cores on 10 to save time and repeat the process. There's no need to adjust the vcore.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

You should use an SSE workload instead of CB20 which is AVX.
With an SSE workload the core frequency will be higher and some can crash while stable in AVX.
Best to use OCCT with its core cycling method; I use SSE Large Extreme Variable.
Tried with CoreCycler but gave up, the results have been totally random with one day passing 6 cycles and the next crashing immediately.


----------



## MyUsername

ManniX-ITA said:


> So practical
> 
> I've been quite satisfied with the Kryonaut, it's easy to apply and lasts long.
> 
> Did anyone had any experience with the Extreme version?
> I'm going to try it for sure but I'm wondering if it's worth spending the ridiculous amount of 87€ for 34 grams.


Too expensive, the cost doesn't reflect the price/performance difference and I'm happy with Kryonaut Grizzly.


----------



## MyUsername

ManniX-ITA said:


> You should use an SSE workload instead of CB20 which is AVX.
> With an SSE workload the core frequency will be higher and some can crash while stable in AVX.
> Best to use OCCT with its core cycling method; I use SSE Large Extreme Variable.
> Tried with CoreCycler but gave up, the results have been totally random with one day passing 6 cycles and the next crashing immediately.


I'll give it a try. Doing it that way I mentioned I got 29800 on CB23, my best so far. Going to try for an insane score later.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

MyUsername said:


> Too expensive, the cost doesn't reflect the price/performance difference and I'm happy with Kryonaut Grizzly.


It's more a matter of investment than cost.
The normal version per gram in 5.55g tube, the big one, has a price of 3.25€ per gram.
The Extreme in quantity is cheaper, has a price of 2.57€ per gram.
Wonder if someone actually used it since buying a can will mean I'll have to stick to it for a long time.

I've read the Guru3D round-up and I'm not convinced they tested it properly.
Too much variance between the setups, something feels wrong.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

And the cores which were always failing in 1 second with CoreCycler the other day now, same settings, doesn't fail anymore.
There's still something wrong between P95 and the AGESA...


----------



## MyUsername

ManniX-ITA said:


> And the cores which were always failing in 1 second with CoreCycler the other day now, same settings, doesn't fail anymore.
> There's still something wrong between P95 and the AGESA...


It's tricky and random slightly if a value is too high, why AMD couldn't just come out with a guaranteed working method or make a snazzy tool for it I don't know. What I did find is CCD1 does not continue from CCD0. My CCD0 is core/value from memory, 0-4, 4-9, 6-19, 5-21, 7-23, 3-30, 2-30, 1-30. Can't remember CDD1 but it doesn't start at 30, more like 11 or something and ends 26. Test test test.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

It's very tricky, every time you change a count it can impact another core.
And you have to start over validating.

AMD should have provided the OEM a BIOS module to test and calibrate the counts.
Wasn't that hard for them.

I appreciate the granularity but the cores should have been equalized.
If you set -5 on one core could be faster than -30 on another.
It's stupid, count 0 should have been balanced to an equal average for all cores.
All core is penalized if you have a big arithmetic delta between counts... 

Always test you ram before validating the counts, a little instability and it drives you crazy.
Did this mistake once, lost an half day.


----------



## Dar|{cyde

ManniX-ITA said:


> You should use an SSE workload instead of CB20 which is AVX.
> With an SSE workload the core frequency will be higher and some can crash while stable in AVX.
> Best to use OCCT with its core cycling method; I use SSE Large Extreme Variable.
> Tried with CoreCycler but gave up, the results have been totally random with one day passing 6 cycles and the next crashing immediately.


How long to you run the cycle on each core? The most reliable thing I've found so far is y-cruncher. Just run it till she reboots. Then load up event viewer and look for the WHEA 18 to see which core crashed.

I'm trying OCCT now, since I just ran into some crashes.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Dar|{cyde said:


> How long to you run the cycle on each core? The most reliable thing I've found so far is y-cruncher. Just run it till she reboots. Then load up event viewer and look for the WHEA 18 to see which core crashed.
> 
> I'm trying OCCT now, since I just ran into some crashes.


It depends, checking all cores maximum I did is 16 minutes.
Takes ages on a 5950x...

But now I was checking specifically Core 1 which was almost regularly crashing in P95.
Not like Cores 7,8,9 crashing immediately, it was crashing after a while.
Found out it was the telemetry.
I've tested it with OCCT with 6 minutes cycles on 1 core.
It failed after 20 minutes.
I've changed settings till it was passing.
At the end last crash had it after 43 minutes

So if you don't cycle on the same core for at least 45 minutes don't feel safe 
Passed 1h40m with OCCT but now crashing immediately with Prime95...
According to sp00n OCCT is using an old version of Prime.
I'm baffled...


----------



## Serchio

Isn't CO available in the official A24 bios? I have tried to find it but I do not have such option in bios.


----------



## Speed Potato

1.2.0.7 - Google Drive







drive.google.com




Found new Beta bios trough the AMD reddit.


----------



## MyUsername

Speed Potato said:


> 1.2.0.7 - Google Drive
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Found new Beta bios trough the AMD reddit.


I'm testing right now, new microcode for 5950x


----------



## mongoled

Speed Potato said:


> 1.2.0.7 - Google Drive
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Found new Beta bios trough the AMD reddit.


Nice find!

Also available for the Unify X570


----------



## KedarWolf

MyUsername said:


> I'm testing right now, new microcode for 5950x


Let me know how it goes. New microcode for 5000 series?


----------



## Serchio

With the beta bios I am unable to boot with my stable ram settings. I get code 50 each time.









With 5900x RAM at 3800, FCLK 1900.

Edit
Even with just XMP profile and RAM at 3866, FCLK windows gives a lot of WHEA errors.


----------



## MyUsername

KedarWolf said:


> Let me know how it goes. New microcode for 5000 series?


Yeah man 100% okay, I was hoping to get 1933 whea free with the new microcode, but no.
Spun it through UBU and had a nice surprise 00A20F10 is new, not sure what 00A20F12 is though, Google had no results, the mystery continues


----------



## KedarWolf

MyUsername said:


> Yeah man 100% okay, I was hoping to get 1933 whea free with the new microcode, but no.
> Spun it through UBU and had a nice surprise 00A20F10 is new, not sure what 00A20F12 is though, Google had no results, the mystery continues
> View attachment 2512368


Yeah, I shared them in WinRaid forums and extracted them with UBU Tool and uploaded them to the Mega link.


----------



## MyUsername

KedarWolf said:


> Yeah, I shared them in WinRaid forums and extracted them with UBU Tool and uploaded them to the Mega link.


I thought about it, but someone else always does so I never.

Spanked it with TM5 and y-cruncher and running corecycler right now as I'm just finalizing my CO, that takes the piss optimizing, but I think I've got it by the proverbial balls, I get 11720 with CBr20 stable/optimized


----------



## KedarWolf

MyUsername said:


> I thought about it, but someone else always does so I never.
> 
> Spanked it with TM5 and y-cruncher and running corecycler right now as I'm just finalizing my CO, that takes the piss optimizing, but I think I've got it by the proverbial balls, I get 11720 with CBr20 stable/optimized
> View attachment 2512379


Do you have LLCs on Auto. I saw a big improvement in R20 and R23 with them on Auto after reading a post about that.


----------



## MyUsername

KedarWolf said:


> Do you have LLCs on Auto. I saw a big improvement in R20 and R23 with them on Auto after reading a post about that.


Yeah on auto, infact I've got soc on offset -0.0250v, so soc minus 0.025 minus vdroop. I could run the soc on 1.1v if I wanted but I run it at 1.15 to avoid any instabilities that may occur, but it's critical vddg iod is 1.1v, any lower I will get whea's. VDDG CCD doesn't give a toss as long as it's higher than 0.925v. I may play with things later, but being 100% stable at maximum performance whatever this cpu can give me is my goal.

Best I've had is 11889 cbr20 and 30264 cbr23


----------



## ManniX-ITA

KedarWolf said:


> Do you have LLCs on Auto. I saw a big improvement in R20 and R23 with them on Auto after reading a post about that.


This is another "bug" from MSI.
Is the same also on the X570 Unify.
They disable the throttling for Prime and Cinebench only if LLC is Auto...
Gigabyte and ASUS have a specific option for this, I don't understand why messing with LLC.


----------



## MyUsername

ManniX-ITA said:


> This is another "bug" from MSI.
> Is the same also on the X570 Unify.
> They disable the throttling for Prime and Cinebench only if LLC is Auto...
> Gigabyte and ASUS have a specific option for this, I don't understand why messing with LLC.


So you reckon LLC on auto is optimal while stress testing with prime etc ie corecycler?  That's what I've been doing for a god damn week.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

MyUsername said:


> So you reckon LLC on auto is optimal while stress testing with prime etc ie corecycler?  That's what I've been doing for a god damn week.


That I saw is affecting all-core not single core.
But yes is indeed better LLC Auto.
Gives also some more point on Geekbench 5 but it's not much.


----------



## degenn

What's up guys just looking for the TLDR re: the new bios (ComboAM4PIV2 1.2.0.2) released on May 17? Any improvement to achievable FCLK without WHEAs?


----------



## KedarWolf

[Official] AMD Ryzen DDR4 24/7 Memory Stability Thread


Will do a comparisson for you with Linpack Extreme between 3800/1900 and 4133/2067. If you like make a prediction :) Per AIDA64, SiSoft Sandra and DRAM Calc membench test I am not seeing any noticable degradation same goes for CB23 performance ** EDIT ** 1st result in - 3800-1900 2nd...




www.overclock.net





Unlocked AGESA 1.2.0.3a BIOS.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

degenn said:


> What's up guys just looking for the TLDR re: the new bios (ComboAM4PIV2 1.2.0.2) released on May 17? Any improvement to achievable FCLK without WHEAs?


No improvements, even with the latest 1.2.0.3a


----------



## KedarWolf

Yes, someone else said RAM overclocks the same, but supposed to be performance improvements, does AIDA64 or Cinebench do any better?


----------



## KedarWolf

Oh, off topic, but soon EKWB will have active backplates for RTX 3080/3090 Strix and FTW3. Available for pre-order now, out in June and July I think.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Didn't test it, @Edar reported about the FCLK.

Not really fancying to test a new release, still stabilizing the CO.


----------



## Serchio

MSI has really strange naming scheme - the bios released 17 May is named A20. Previously released bios was A24 which is now removed from MSI webpage. My only problem with A20 is locked Gear Down Mode which on "auto" is disabled for me. I didn't really notice any improvements against A24.


----------



## infraredbg

MyUsername said:


> Yeah man 100% okay, I was hoping to get 1933 whea free with the new microcode, but no.
> Spun it through UBU and had a nice surprise 00A20F10 is new, not sure what 00A20F12 is though, Google had no results, the mystery continues


00A20F12 cpuid should be Vermeer B2 revision.


----------



## weleh

I've noticed something strange but that could help pushing higher CPU clocks/performance or at least, help squeezing that little bit of performance.

As you know most kits have 2 XMPs which are usually identical timings however on my own kit (3600c16 bdie), XMP 1 does less VSOC (1.03) less VDDGs (1.05) and more VDDP (0.95) vs XMP 2 settings VSOC (1.08) VDDGs (1.1) and less VDDP (0.9).

With PBO off, I get roughly the same nT performance however, 1T sees a significative increase in boosting.

This should help understanding the impact these voltages can have on CPU behaviour, specially when pushing higher fCLK/RAM.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

weleh said:


> As you know most kits have 2 XMPs which are usually identical timings however on my own kit (3600c16 bdie), XMP 1 does less VSOC (1.03) less VDDGs (1.05) and more VDDP (0.95) vs XMP 2 settings VSOC (1.08) VDDGs (1.1) and less VDDP (0.9).


The kit usually has only one XMP, you can check it with Taiphoon Burner.

The 2nd profile is a "fake"; it's the board optimized profile.

Every manufacturer does something different. MSI is very peculiar as it's tuning also the voltages.
ASUS and Gigabyte doesn't AFAIK.

ASUS is reworking/overclocking massively the profile.
Gigabyte marginally; on my B-die the only change was a very small lower tRFC.


----------



## gymleader91

weleh said:


> I've noticed something strange but that could help pushing higher CPU clocks/performance or at least, help squeezing that little bit of performance.
> 
> As you know most kits have 2 XMPs which are usually identical timings however on my own kit (3600c16 bdie), XMP 1 does less VSOC (1.03) less VDDGs (1.05) and more VDDP (0.95) vs XMP 2 settings VSOC (1.08) VDDGs (1.1) and less VDDP (0.9).
> 
> With PBO off, I get roughly the same nT performance however, 1T sees a significative increase in boosting.
> 
> This should help understanding the impact these voltages can have on CPU behaviour, specially when pushing higher fCLK/RAM.


Yeah I talked about this in March via this thread when I got similar, still not sure why it happens. You even replied about it: MSI B550 Unify / Unify-X Overclocking & Discussions...

Just to make sure you made a mistake in naming the profile numbers right? You meant to say xmp 1 is 1.08 and xmp 2 is 1.03? This would echo what me and MyUsername got.


----------



## Weisswolf

Pardon the noob nature of this question, but I'm looking at these boards and wondering about the 2 vs 4 RAM slots. 
You often see talk of 5-10% more fps in games with 4 sticks of RAM in conventional motherboards with 4 slots, does that mean I will lose a bit of performance by going with the Unify-X for a gaming system vs the "regular" Unify?

Or does that not apply to boards with just 2 slots, because all slots are populated?


----------



## thigobr

Each DIMM slot supports 2 ranks. Modern CPU memory controllers like the ones embedded into Ryzen like to have at least 4 ranks to interleave memory access across them. So 2 slots populated by dual rank memory or 4 slots with single rank memory each will behave very similar in performance.


----------



## KedarWolf

thigobr said:


> Each DIMM slot supports 2 ranks. Modern CPU memory controllers like the ones embedded into Ryzen like to have at least 4 ranks to interleave memory access across them. So 2 slots populated by dual rank memory or 4 slots with single rank memory each will behave very similar in performance.


X570 and B550 boards are Daisy Chain, so 2x16GB Dual Rank will overclock better than 4x8GB Single Rank.


----------



## KedarWolf

I'm sending the 16-16-16-36 4000MHz G.Skill Neo RAM back, it performs worse than my CL16 3600 Neo.

Newegg will honour the refund because it won't even boot at XMP settings and will with higher voltages but I get tons of WHEA errors and they are made for our platform.

That's not why I'm sending it back though, it needs more voltage to be stable at the same timings at 3800. I knew I'd likely still get WHEA errors at 4000.

Someone on overclock.net got tons of flack from another member here for saying the FLCK WHEA issues are CPU dependent but I really think they are too.

Some CPUs will do 4000 no WHEA errors, but they are few and far between. Some CPUs won't even boot at 3800 but a new CPU has fixed that for some.

And I have a two DIMM Unify-X motherboard, so if 4000 wasn't CPU dependent, I'd likely have no issues with it.

My 5950x CPU does really great with the CO Curve though. 150 Boost, Scaler 6, 17-17-21-21-23-23-25-25-25-25-30-30-30-30-30-30 which isn't half bad.

Core Cycler, TM5 and Linpack XTreme stable as well.


----------



## KedarWolf

I fine-tuned my Curve Optimiser settings.

This passes Core Cycler 4-1344 FFTs. I'm thinking my CPU is a decent sample.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

@KedarWolf 
Very nice indeed!
Mine sucks badly in comparison.

May I ask if this new BIOS has also the AMD PBS menu unlocked like the XOC?
Can you post a screenshot in case?

Also if you can, would you test limits PPT/TDC/EDC at 200/220/215 or similar, compared to those you are using now?
With the PPT in AMD CBS adjusted accordingly of course.
Considering your much better cooling would be nice to test also something more beefy but with the same strategy; eg. 220/250/230


----------



## MyUsername

KedarWolf said:


> I fine-tuned my Curve Optimiser settings.
> 
> This passes Core Cycler 4-1344 FFTs. I'm thinking my CPU is a decent sample.


I thought I had it too, passed multiple everything until I played resident evil 8(finished it awesome game). Crashed three or four times whea in I'd 12. Kept dropping by 1 and on the higher cores, then the pc freaked, crashed and wouldn't post, 00 debug code on off on off. Reseated the memory, played the game crash and the same. Pulled the power CMOS reset, the same. Let it rest for a minute with no power, reset the CMOS, disabled CO and continued with game. CCD0 was fine, just CC1 was freaking out. Bit extreme and weird error.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

MyUsername said:


> CCD0 was fine, just CC1 was freaking out. Bit extreme and weird error.


Could be the same the drove me crazy.
I had one core that was always passing OCCT and CoreCycler but was unstable.
It was causing other cores to error randomly.
Never had any real issue or crashes, just this weird behavior.
At some point it was catch by OCCT Medium with a 20 minutes cycle.
Fixed that core everything went back to "normal"; had to fix also other stuff (Cache Prefect in CBS Enabled makes P95 error too).


----------



## MyUsername

ManniX-ITA said:


> Could be the same the drove me crazy.
> I had one core that was always passing OCCT and CoreCycler but was unstable.
> It was causing other cores to error randomly.
> Never had any real issue or crashes, just this weird behavior.
> At some point it was catch by OCCT Medium with a 20 minutes cycle.
> Fixed that core everything went back to "normal"; had to fix also other stuff (Cache Prefect in CBS Enabled makes P95 error too).


I don't know, I'm at a loss here. Core 12 is my weakest core at -28 before I started the game, got it down to -24 due to whea crashes blue screens, then the weirdness started, why -24 and not -28 is odd. I didn't actually notice s performance loss when I disabled CO, the game still ran at 45+ FPS.


----------



## EniGma1987

KedarWolf said:


> Someone on overclock.net got tons of flack from another member here for saying the FLCK WHEA issues are CPU dependent but I really think they are too.
> 
> Some CPUs will do 4000 no WHEA errors, but they are few and far between. Some CPUs won't even boot at 3800 but a new CPU has fixed that for some.
> 
> And I have a two DIMM Unify-X motherboard, so if 4000 wasn't CPU dependent, I'd likely have no issues with it.


The FCLK WHEA stuff is absolutely CPU dependent. It all depends on how far the fabric hardware can overclock.


----------



## KedarWolf

ManniX-ITA said:


> @KedarWolf
> Very nice indeed!
> Mine sucks badly in comparison.
> 
> May I ask if this new BIOS has also the AMD PBS menu unlocked like the XOC?
> Can you post a screenshot in case?
> 
> Also if you can, would you test limits PPT/TDC/EDC at 200/220/215 or similar, compared to those you are using now?
> With the PPT in AMD CBS adjusted accordingly of course.
> Considering your much better cooling would be nice to test also something more beefy but with the same strategy; eg. 220/250/230


I tried 220/250/230 and Cinbench R23 went down like 500 points and CPU-Z single-core went down 10 points.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

EniGma1987 said:


> The FCLK WHEA stuff is absolutely CPU dependent. It all depends on how far the fabric hardware can overclock.


Didn't know you are working for AMD.
Kidding 

It's a complex topic and while it's sure it's CPU _related, _it's not sure it's CPU _dependent._
Of course it happens when the FCLK goes above 1900.
But it doesn't happen only when it's under stress.
It could be just the CPU, the board, the SOC, all of them, some of them...
So far only theory and no evidence.

There are some reporting they got a new CPU and get no WHEA.
But so far not a single one with a 5900x or a 5950x.
All 5600x or 5800x.
Both CPUs that doesn't stress the IF even remotely enough.
So I'm not sure how much is relevant; maybe they just work a tad bit better.

Right now I can only tell that at FCLK 2000 my 5950x still works better than at 1900.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

KedarWolf said:


> I tried 220/250/230 and Cinbench R23 went down like 500 points and CPU-Z single-core went down 10 points.


Thanks for testing!


----------



## KedarWolf

ManniX-ITA said:


> Thanks for testing!


----------



## KedarWolf

I passed 4-1344FFTs overnight and an now running 1344-MAX while I'm at work. Had to manually set the max FFT for SSE but don't remember what it was, I'm on my phone going to work.


----------



## KedarWolf

@ManniX-ITA 

ALL my BIOS settings. 



http://imgur.com/a/ZkrrKj5


----------



## KedarWolf

KedarWolf said:


> I fine-tuned my Curve Optimiser settings.
> 
> This passes Core Cycler 4-1344 FFTs. I'm thinking my CPU is a decent sample.
> 
> View attachment 2512780
> 
> 
> View attachment 2512781
> 
> 
> View attachment 2512782
> 
> 
> View attachment 2512783


Had to reduce Core 4 to 24, but 100% every FFT Core Cycler stable.


----------



## ObviousCough

APU overclocking is more fun than i thought it would be. I've been really impressed by the graphics performance of the 5700G. The Unify-X has made it extremely easy for me


----------



## KedarWolf

Shouldn't this be quite highly binned. Is b-die. 2x16GB.

G.SKILL Trident Z Royal Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 4266 (PC4 34100) Intel XMP 2.0 Desktop Memory Model F4-4266C17D-32GTRGB










G.SKILL Trident Z Royal Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 4266 (PC4 34100) Desktop Memory Model F4-4266C17D-32GTRGB - Newegg.com


Buy G.SKILL Trident Z Royal Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 4266 (PC4 34100) Desktop Memory Model F4-4266C17D-32GTRGB with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Once you know, you Newegg!




www.newegg.ca





DDR4 4266 (PC4 34100)
Timing 17-18-18-38
CAS Latency 17
Voltage 1.50v
Edit: Saw some on the Intel forums that said it'll only do 3733 on a Z590 board which is terrible.


----------



## gymleader91

KedarWolf said:


> Shouldn't this be quite highly binned. Is b-die. 2x16GB.


I think I would rather try G. Skill's 4000 14-15-15-35 bin.









F4-4000C14D-32GTZN - G.SKILL International Enterprise Co., Ltd.


Trident Z Neo DDR4-4000 CL14-15-15-35 1.55V 32GB (2x16GB) Engineered and optimized for full compatibility on the latest AMD Ryzen platforms, Trident Z Neo brings unparalleled DRAM memory performance and vibrant RGB lighting to any gaming PC or workstation with latest AMD Ryzen CPUs and AMD DDR4...




www.gskill.com





Also while I'm here does anyone have any info why MSI has not updated the amd chipset drivers for any motherboard they have? MSI pages are February v2.11 and latest is June v2.17. MSI goes to the bother to give latest audio drivers (why would you even need to update audio drivers lol) but not the actual important stuff.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

gymleader91 said:


> I think I would rather try G. Skill's 4000 14-15-15-35 bin.


Thanks I didn't notice this one was out... just ordered one.


----------



## Nighthog

ManniX-ITA said:


> Thanks I didn't notice this one was out... just ordered one.


I saw that pop out just a couple days ago. 
The 2x8 is 14-14-14 while the 2x16 dual-rank is 14-15-15.
There are 3600 & 4000Mhz variants.

Makes it a tempting to buy if you want good B-die. I've not yet tested Samsung B-die and would like to try them out but they aren't cheap.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Nighthog said:


> Makes it a tempting to buy if you want good B-die. I've not yet tested Samsung B-die and would like to try them out but they aren't cheap.


They are definitely expensive...
Paid 468€ while the Royal Z 4266C17 was 380€ and something.
But hopefully will be better than the usual.
Evey kit I bought last weeks, 3200C14, 3600C16, 4266C17, all the same.


----------



## KedarWolf

ManniX-ITA said:


> They are definitely expensive...
> Paid 468€ while the Royal Z 4266C17 was 380€ and something.
> But hopefully will be better than the usual.
> Evey kit I bought last weeks, 3200C14, 3600C16, 4266C17, all the same.


Did you notice those CL14 4000 are rated at 1.55v?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

KedarWolf said:


> Did you notice those CL14 4000 are rated at 1.55v?


Sure.
But those timings, at least the primaries, are not working on the other sticks I have tested even at 1.55V.


----------



## MyUsername

Realtek audio driver update 9172.1, it's to fix 9160.1 bad sound quality. You'll need to download the full driver off MSI to update with this.

Sauce


----------



## gymleader91

MyUsername said:


> Realtek audio driver update 9172.1, it's to fix 9160.1 bad sound quality. You'll need to download the full driver off MSI to update with this.
> 
> Sauce


Speaking of audio drivers can anyone confirm this bug on the MSI download page for me. Site says it will download 9136 but the actual download is for 9102. Seems to be the same on the X570 Unify and I would presume all MSI boards.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

gymleader91 said:


> Speaking of audio drivers can anyone confirm this bug on the MSI download page for me. Site says it will download 9136 but the actual download is for 9102. Seems to be the same on the X570 Unify and I would presume all MSI boards.


Download it from the Unify-X webpage, is the 9136.
The update it with the new one in the link that @MyUsername posted above, it works.


----------



## gymleader91

I tried Unify-x webpage it's the same zip and also 9102. crc checksummed to make sure. Maybe their cdn has issues for certain regions?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

gymleader91 said:


> I tried Unify-x webpage it's the same zip and also 9102. crc checksummed to make sure. Maybe their cdn has issues for certain regions?


Could be, this is the file I download:

Name: realtek_audio_N_APO3.zip
Size: 61195328 bytes (58 MiB)
SHA256: B0989804A81D9B3FBC22A7BEE0955EE9DDFCC3982B5C8FD0494808ED31C27DDA

And inside the driver is the right version:


----------



## gymleader91

Issue seems to be resolved now. 9136 is visible. I don't know if it mattered but before I clicked download I clicked the date/time icon right above the red download button and that updated the date and time shown on the website.


----------



## KedarWolf

I run all cores at 30 except the two top cores, Boost at 150, Scaler at 6, get this which is decent. 

And it passes Core Cycler as well.


----------



## KedarWolf

I do just a bit better with Curve disabled and CCX overclock at 4.7GHz/4.65GHz.


----------



## weleh

Installed the A31 unlocked bios with DF state control and disabled it.
2000 fCLK hard reboots during AIDA.
Wasn't this supposed to help with fCLK stability?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

weleh said:


> Installed the A31 unlocked bios with DF state control and disabled it.
> 2000 fCLK hard reboots during AIDA.
> Wasn't this supposed to help with fCLK stability?


I had stability problems at FCLK 2000 both with and without on A31 
So far the best still A21O for me.


----------



## weleh

Yea but DF states wasn't supposed to help or something? 
Either way, back to 3800 because I did some gaming benches between 3800c14 and 4000c15 and they are within margin of error.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

weleh said:


> Yea but DF states wasn't supposed to help or something?
> Either way, back to 3800 because I did some gaming benches between 3800c14 and 4000c15 and they are within margin of error.


In general no, it's disabled by default cause usually it's causing instabilities.
But on A21O for me it's the opposite with FCLK 2000, I got a couple of random reboots with it disabled.
Guess there must be something else connected to it but I didn't identify it.


----------



## gymleader91

Ok I thought the audio driver not being the latest version was fixed but apparently not. I'm still getting a 9102 driver from the website. Obviously not much of an issue but still annoying for anybody looking that doesn't know any better.

Also can someone tell me how to check if I am actually getting whea errors besides having hwinfo64 open? I know it's somewhere in the event viewer but where exactly?

Also my god I was doing a fresh Windows 10 install and I forgot how bad it was to keep your ethernet plugged in. Bombarded with complete garbage and Windows somehow finds time to install an old Nvidia driver if you have ethernet plugged in. Thing is you need to do this if you want to have your pc auto sign in (impossible on a local account) so I've got it down to a science now where you run limited setup till you get all your drivers installed (have all the drivers on the windows 10 usb install stick with ninite also for 7-zip vlc sharex etc). Plug in your ethernet and after 30 seconds or so the realtek audio console should install. You can then sign in to your ms account and set a PIN. Then go to sign in options and untick Windows hello and below that deselect something along the lines of "users must enter a password for windows hello". Then you can close that window and go run > netplwiz and the "users must enter a password" box will now be there. No idea why they make it so awkward, never was like this before.


----------



## weleh

I made a little troubleshoot guide for a discord I'm on.
The first few steps shows you how to create filters for WHEAs









CO GUIDE


Folha1 CURVE OPTIMIZER SUPER FAST TROUBLESHOOT FOR DUMMIES by WELELEH aka SQUIRTLE aka PAPI @overclocking discord INTRO. What is this guide for? This "guide" is for people having issues after applying Curve Optimizer settings. Issues can be from game crashes to unexpected system restarts/hangs...




docs.google.com


----------



## gymleader91

Chipset drivers were updated today on the MSI page for what seems to be every board. From 2.11 to 2.15. From what I understand the MSI drivers supplied by them are tested extensively compared to the normal generic drivers by AMD (their latest is 2.17).


----------



## uiriamu

Hi guys. I'm new to overclocking and am trying to learn. I've been looking at reviews nonstop and have come to this build below which includes this motherboard, 5900x and trident neos 3600 cl14



https://pcpartpicker.com/list/WbxCRT



I was wondering where the best guides were for noobie idiots like myself who have no idea where to start. Are there any highly recommended guides to walk through the process for all things overclocking? CPU , GPU and ram?

Does anyone happen to know what I should be aiming for in terms of overclocking numbers for each of these components or if theres a good place to find out? I really am a complete newbie to this haha


Very keen to learn but am overwhelmed trying to learn from this thread where everyone is so advanced haha

thanks in advance!


----------



## weleh

New bios released.


__
https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/o4or1w


----------



## weleh

Apparently nothing changed...


__
https://www.reddit.com/r/MSI_Gaming/comments/o4ooz6


----------



## MyUsername

Quote from Wccftech, not much really,

The AMD AGESA 1.2.0.3 Patch B BIOS Firmware also extends support to the Ryzen 5000G APUs (Cezanne) and Ryzen 5000 CPUs (Vermeer B2 Stepping). One of the key features of the Patch B BIOS is that it resolves all USB issues that users have been facing on Ryzen 5000 systems.


----------



## Veii

weleh said:


> Apparently nothing changed...
> 
> 
> __
> https://www.reddit.com/r/MSI_Gaming/comments/o4ooz6


Can't deny the comments, but only agree
USB dropouts where never fixed and couldn't be, when this is no 1203B (A, B sheme again)

"They where the first to announce 1203*B* support, which was confirmed by their CEO"
~ can also agree, building a house on lies makes the whole building crash, once fake foundations are discovered

It's unfortunate, but appears contineous & common company practice
They don't need this fakeness, why do they still keep insisting on such business practices

It's sad that still nobody really is pushing out pure 1203B, while removing all traces of 1200 or "no so broken 1191 & 1201"
But lying, is worse than making users update life harder

Lying and making your userbase looks like blind donkeys, is not a good practice
Yet seems to be common sense on their business policy, repeating over and over again
~ just agreeing with the reddit comments here, can't deny anything people mention there


----------



## gymleader91

Kind of off topic but while we are discussing agesa stuff anyone else think this move to B2 stepping for 5000 and what appears to be a weird X570S launch is AMD basically saying the usb dropout issue is a hardware level issue that software can't fix?


----------



## EniGma1987

gymleader91 said:


> Kind of off topic but while we are discussing agesa stuff anyone else think this move to B2 stepping for 5000 and what appears to be a weird X570S launch is AMD basically saying the usb dropout issue is a hardware level issue that software can't fix?


Doubtful. The X570S is simply a lower power chipset designed for passive cooling and the B stepping is supposed to be from a different fab to increase supply.


----------



## Veii

gymleader91 said:


> Kind of off topic but while we are discussing agesa stuff anyone else think this move to B2 stepping for 5000 and what appears to be a weird X570S launch is AMD basically saying the usb dropout issue is a hardware level issue that software can't fix?


Unlikely
Considering new year will get interesting for AMD, everything is running according to plan
There are other board issues. USB dropouts being a firmware thing

Everything is running butter smooth for them, its just a signal integrity and silicon/cost choice going with a passive chipset
See X470
Just that X470 got a flash upgrade
5xxS will be an I/O upgrade to cover USB 4.0/TB4, mainstream 2.5gbit ethernet (killer&dragon)
And a subtle VRM upgrade from most of the 50A Vishay Mosfets + HDMI 2.1 for the APUs on 5th, of August
Nothing exceptional, just setting in stone the last AM4 Board as rememberable achievement


----------



## Karister

Hi all,

I have recently built my first AMD platform PC and I completely don't understand OCing it compared to Intel. I have MEG B550 Unify-X with updated BIOS and Ryzen 5950X. In Ryzen Master I have set all cores to 4400MHz at 1.2125V core. It is stable and HWMonitor shows a max voltage drawn of 1.212V. Temps are low 60s when gaming and mid 70s during the Cinebench R23 test. AMD Ryzen Master monitoring says the same. I am very happy with these results but enabling Ryzen master every reboots is terrible.

Surprisingly I cannot get even close results when using OC in BIOS. When I set 4400MHz all cores and the closest possible voltage to 1.2125V, it goes really hot. HWMonitor and Ryzen Master show much higher (around 1.4V) current drawn and the CPU instantly gets 90+ degrees. I don't use LLC. When I try lowering the voltage in BIOS, strange things happen. I tried lowering it by 0.1V. Reading from sensors is 1.3V then and temps are 10 degrees higher than ones when using Ryzen Master OC. Also, my PC is extremely unstable. It crashes after a few seconds of the Cinebench test. I don't get it. I Provided a higher voltage from BIOS than one from the Ryzen Master setting and it is unstable. Why 1.2V from Ryzen Master is cool and stable while 1.3V from BIOS is hot and unstable? Am I missing something?


----------



## Veii

Karister said:


> lso, my PC is extremely unstable. It crashes after a few seconds of the Cinebench test. I don't get it. I Provided a higher voltage from BIOS than one from the Ryzen Master setting and it is unstable. Why 1.2V from Ryzen Master is cool and stable while 1.3V from BIOS is hot and unstable? Am I missing something?


If the per CCX voltage option in the bios sets the "load" voltage, which you have to factor on LLC
then it will be dynamic. If it sets VID for example. But the bios description will say what it sets

Generally more voltage = worse results
Beyond 1.3v under specific usecases and thermal constrains can be degrading - depends 
some AVX2 loads require a droop to 1.18v , some SSE FMA loads push it up to 1.35-1.36

Generally running an allcore is not optimal
But for your target, you want to "override" v-core, at best from the VRM side of things & not from the VID side of things
there is a difference between overriding "requested voltage VID" vs "overriding what VRM can provide"


----------



## mongoled

Karister said:


> Hi all,
> 
> I have recently built my first AMD platform PC and I completely don't understand OCing it compared to Intel. I have MEG B550 Unify-X with updated BIOS and Ryzen 5950X. In Ryzen Master I have set all cores to 4400MHz at 1.2125V core. It is stable and HWMonitor shows a max voltage drawn of 1.212V. Temps are low 60s when gaming and mid 70s during the Cinebench R23 test. AMD Ryzen Master monitoring says the same. I am very happy with these results but enabling Ryzen master every reboots is terrible.
> 
> Surprisingly I cannot get even close results when using OC in BIOS. When I set 4400MHz all cores and the closest possible voltage to 1.2125V, it goes really hot. HWMonitor and Ryzen Master show much higher (around 1.4V) current drawn and the CPU instantly gets 90+ degrees. I don't use LLC. When I try lowering the voltage in BIOS, strange things happen. I tried lowering it by 0.1V. Reading from sensors is 1.3V then and temps are 10 degrees higher than ones when using Ryzen Master OC. Also, my PC is extremely unstable. It crashes after a few seconds of the Cinebench test. I don't get it. I Provided a higher voltage from BIOS than one from the Ryzen Master setting and it is unstable. Why 1.2V from Ryzen Master is cool and stable while 1.3V from BIOS is hot and unstable? Am I missing something?


Please first uninstall ryzen master and reboot the PC two times.

On the second reboot shutdown the PC and reset the CMOS/BIOS. 

Boot the PC and now try to set your overclock. Only change the multiplier and the CPU vcore to what you want. 

Report back


----------



## Karister

@Veii @mongoled Thanks both!

I removed Ryzen Master, rebooted, cleared CMOS and apparently, BIOS now does what I ask for. When I set 1.2V it reads ~1.2V in HWMonitor. After some testing, I have decent results for 1.0750V vcore override + 0.0875V offset. HWMonitor shows 1.144-1.162V and Cinebench passes without crashing. Temps are 80°C during Cinebench and 45-48°C when playing Witcher III. This is when my Fractal Define 7 doors are closed with the hard top installed. I am cooling my 5950X with Noctua NH-D15S.

I think this is not bad but of curiosity, I reverted back to Auto in BIOS and used Ryzen Master again. I used the simple view and just put back 1.2125V, 4400MHz. HWMonitor shows 1.212V which makes sense. But I have observed that when I start the Cinebench, voltages go down to 1.112V and only occasionally go up to 1.2V. This makes power draw significantly lower (195W -> 175W) and temps better (80°C -> 75°C) maintaining PC stable. Any idea if I can achieve such behaviour using BIOS features?


----------



## Veii

Karister said:


> I have decent results for 1.0750V vcore override + 0.0875V offset. HWMonitor shows 1.144-1.162V and Cinebench passes without crashing. Temps are 80°C during Cinebench and 45-48°C when playing Witcher III. This is when my Fractal Define 7 doors are closed with the hard top installed. I am cooling my 5950X with Noctua NH-D15S.


Grab y-cruncher, y-cruncher - A Multi-Threaded Pi Program
Open the .bat , press 1-7-0
let all 9 tests loop for 4 loops , (it will get hot) 
if this passes ~ you are good to go


----------



## KedarWolf

For Windows 11 I just enable the built-in TPM module in the BIOS, right?


----------



## Veii

KedarWolf said:


> For Windows 11 I just enable the built-in TPM module in the BIOS, right?


And secure boot
You can disable both later after installation
Please show me an Aida64 screenshot, because L3 seems to get a big hit ~ yet games nor benchmarks show this "bad" performance
There is no difference i can find bettween fTPM on and off
Nor any difference between Send to SPI TPM or LCP TPM (typing error?)

Did you get "my" Optimize-Offline iso of ProWorkstation


----------



## KedarWolf

Veii said:


> And secure boot
> You can disable both later after installation
> Please show me an Aida64 screenshot, because L3 seems to get a big hit ~ yet games nor benchmarks show this "bad" performance
> There is no difference i can find bettween fTPM on and off
> Nor any difference between Send to SPI TPM or LCP TPM (typing error?)
> 
> Did you get "my" Optimize-Offline iso of ProWorkstation


Yes, as soon as MSI fixes/replaces my motherboard. On the newer BIOS's flashrom bricks the board so bad even BIOS Flashback not working.

They have the board at their repair centre a week ago Friday, hoping to have it back by end of this week.

I guess I could have gotten a USB BIOS programmer but they all seem to come from China and takes forever to get them. 

Edit: I can always make my own ISO if I want, know the best way to do Pro For Workstations for Optimize Offline.

Is there any improvement with it over Enterprise?


----------



## Veii

KedarWolf said:


> Edit: I can always make my own ISO if I want, know the best way to do Pro For Workstations for Optimize Offline.
> 
> Is there any improvement with it over Enterprise?


You can follow these screenshots for what to wipe
There is no online account requirement with 11 ~ unlike what many youtubers tell
But also note 2 things:

BCD bootloader is acting different. Unplug your not used windows 10 drive, else the bootloader will jump drives | Or just go with it ontop of Win10, but you will need to fix the sorting order by yourself later
You manually need to wipe the revision check from optimize-offline
But the post explains both things well








[Official] AMD Ryzen DDR4 24/7 Memory Stability Thread


Pretty similar to what I'm running. Some are the same, some lower, some higher. But I have the same test results, except L3 cache, mine are much higher (560 BG/s) but I think that one depends on PBO. Gonna try to copy this and see if I get better results. Yeah L3 is from my EDC being at...




www.overclock.net





I only always have to disable DeveloperMode in Optimize-Offline
Wpd also works flawlessly after installation, (tho first sophia-script) then blackviper-script + disabling SysMain again (enabling WLAN Autoconfig for WiFi) & then finishing it off with Wpd App

Enterprise vs ProWorkstation,
I don't quite know
As an individual or for past clients, getting enterpise keys was more than painful.
High-Range Broadcasters could pass through, but normal individuals got easier to cheap ProWorkstation keys

The thread-sheduler seems to be different on ProWorkstation & if you get good results with enterprise or Pro, then the thread sheduler is still broken
But i prefer now ProWorkstation for any setup away from Pro
Keys cost 18-20$ more, but i haven't had negative experiences
As for me in person, i can pick morally what i'd want to run
A.) buy a legit key and bind it to my microsoft account. B.) Just be my own license server and generate it, having no connection with Microsoft

It's that easy via Android Phone, that the decision of A & B for personal usage, is up to my mood and will to support Microsoft

Speaking about supporting microsoft,
First public build was pushed as a Leak, then microsoft updated this leak
Now aparrantly they should stop doing so and we can wait till next year for a beta build
As if it wasn't them who updated the "leaked" version and kept updating it. lol

Nvidia drivers you want 470.25 for WDDM 3.0 support
AMDs chip set drivers do nothing and the thread scheduler is messed up
Someone is to blame, Microsoft optimizing it for upcoming intel units and intentionally throttling AMD
(Well it's broken, idk how to phrase this)
Or AMD messing up layered-kernel virtualization & branch prediction through virtualized pass through and secure boot

Considering tho, AMD marked up strongly their Hyper-V functionality support, has "Pro" units out there, has a huge EPYC lineup with very wide experience in the enterpise and notebooks segment
All rather looks like forced throttling and not really as a "bug"
New microcodes do nothing to support it, soo we'll see
Gaming & benchmarking perf is fine, soo i dont mind the throttle ~ but thread scheduler is certain broken
However intentional it was to begin with


----------



## Whatisthisfor

Im still on A.10, because i couldnt get the mem settings stable with A.24 and A.32.







Mb A.20 is better than its beta version?


----------



## Serchio

Whatisthisfor said:


> Im still on A.10, because i couldnt get the mem settings stable with A.24 and A.32.
> View attachment 2515370
> Mb A.20 is better than its beta version?


It might be related to GDM option in bios. On A.24 and A.32 GDM is locked and defaults to Disabled (at least for me). Have you tried the current mem timings with Cmd2T set to 2T instead of GDM + 1T?


----------



## weleh

To disable GDM you need to set 1T at the top of the memory timings otherwise you can't disable it.


----------



## Whatisthisfor

Serchio said:


> It might be related to GDM option in bios. On A.24 and A.32 GDM is locked and defaults to Disabled (at least for me). Have you tried the current mem timings with Cmd2T set to 2T instead of GDM + 1T?


I see, didnt know, GDM defaults to disabled on the newer BIOSes, thanks for that. I will try A.32 again with it explicitely enabled, when i have some spare time.


----------



## Whatisthisfor

weleh said:


> To disable GDM you need to set 1T at the top of the memory timings otherwise you can't disable it.


I wasnt successful with GDM disabled with my previous boards. But will try with CL 15. Thanks.


----------



## KedarWolf

*On newer BIOS's flashrom WILL brick your board so bad even USB Flashback will not work.*

See this link to a program that does work and it better and more secure than flashing within the BIOS with MSI.










MSI MEG X570 Unify Overclocking & Discussion Thread


so not even memory stability imrpoved or anything special with new beta bios? i think i will go back to asus boards msi they have beefy boards but their bios is just not as good as asus Will make little difference who you choose from what I have read across the various motherboard threads ...




www.overclock.net


----------



## EniGma1987

Why do people flash the bios in windows? I had always heard that was the least safe way to do things


----------



## i9forever

Hello dear Unify-X owners. I am about to join the AMD team, already got all the components (CPU is 5800X), only missing a board. I am thinking about B550 Unify-X or B550 Master. I am interested in memory overclocking only, I don´t care about CPU OC at all if it makes a difference.
Many of you are experienced with both boards, which one would you buy nowadays? Or some other board? Please help me to decide


----------



## Hale59

i9forever said:


> Hello dear Unify-X owners. I am about to join the AMD team, already got all the components (CPU is 5800X), only missing a board. I am thinking about B550 Unify-X or B550 Master. I am interested in memory overclocking only, I don´t care about CPU OC at all if it makes a difference.
> Many of you are experienced with both boards, which one would you buy nowadays? Or some other board? Please help me to decide


I would go for Unify-X or EVGA X570(S) Dark








EVGA teases AMD-based motherboard, X570 Dark coming? - VideoCardz.com


EVGA to launch X570(S) Dark motherboard for AMD Ryzen CPUs? EVGA to join the club of AMD motherboard manufacturers. EVGA AMD Dark motherboard teaser vs AMD Ryzen logo, Source: EVGA & AMD A short teaser has been published on EVGA social media. The company is now expected to launch a motherboard...




videocardz.com


----------



## EniGma1987

i9forever said:


> Hello dear Unify-X owners. I am about to join the AMD team, already got all the components (CPU is 5800X), only missing a board. I am thinking about B550 Unify-X or B550 Master. I am interested in memory overclocking only, I don´t care about CPU OC at all if it makes a difference.
> Many of you are experienced with both boards, which one would you buy nowadays? Or some other board? Please help me to decide


Unify-X has 2 memory slots, so is technically the "best" at memory overclocking. However, you are limited by the two slots if you need a large amount of memory, and having a high density dimm lowers OC potential anyway. So IMO either board is fine. I used the regular Unify when I built my friends PC and it was much more stable than my Gigabyte X570 Master, I was also able to get memory OC dialed in easier, which has been something Gigabyte is the absolute worst at IMO. Stay away from them.
The only real boards I hear people talking about now days is the B550 Unify and the X570 Dark Hero. All boards have their quirks, so just research and decide which set of quirks you can put up with. 

The major one for the Unify(x) is VRM coil whine. Most boards seem to have it to varying degrees. The one I got had it a little bit, but with the side panel on the tower and front fans it is not audible because fan noise is higher. But for those that like absolute silence and have no fan noise and the tower is up on their desk with them it seems to be loud enough in a lot of board samples that people are annoyed by it.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

EniGma1987 said:


> Why do people flash the bios in windows? I had always heard that was the least safe way to do things


Cause M-Flash often does not work properly or leaves the BIOS in an unstable state.
Flashrom doesn't work well with the latest releases and seems it's bricking boards.
So the latest AMI flash tool for Windows seems to be the best solution for now.
There's also a DOS version BTW.


----------



## weleh

i9forever said:


> Hello dear Unify-X owners. I am about to join the AMD team, already got all the components (CPU is 5800X), only missing a board. I am thinking about B550 Unify-X or B550 Master. I am interested in memory overclocking only, I don´t care about CPU OC at all if it makes a difference.
> Many of you are experienced with both boards, which one would you buy nowadays? Or some other board? Please help me to decide


Get the B550 Unify (non-X).

It's exactly the same board as the Unify-X but with 4 dimm slots.
As a Unify-X owner, I regret not having 4 dimms so much since buying 2 SR bdie kits is so much cheaper than buying 1 DR bdie kit.

Also, on Zen, 2 dimmers vs 4 dimmers make 0 difference.

I can run the same extremely tight true 1T settings on any AM4 board that I run on my Unify-X.


----------



## KedarWolf

ManniX-ITA said:


> Cause M-Flash often does not work properly or leaves the BIOS in an unstable state.
> Flashrom doesn't work well with the latest releases and seems it's bricking boards.
> So the latest AMI flash tool for Windows seems to be the best solution for now.
> There's also a DOS version BTW.


From the README.

Aptio V AFU for DOS is no longer being maintained. The last official release was in February 2015, therefore any projects/products created after this time may not flash correctly with Aptio V AFU for DOS. The preferred method available for download from the website is AFU for EFI or Microsoft Windows.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

KedarWolf said:


> Aptio V AFU for DOS is no longer being maintained. The last official release was in February 2015, therefore any projects/products created after this time may not flash correctly with Aptio V AFU for DOS. The preferred method available for download from the website is AFU for EFI or Microsoft Windows.


Oh yes, didn't noticed it.
There's the EFI version anyway which is even better.


----------



## weleh

New bios on MSI page, anyone tested? A32


----------



## gymleader91

Since most of the RAM experts are here I'll ask.

What do you think is a difference in bin quality between the 3600 14-15-15-35 and the more recent 3600 14-14-14-34 bin (both at 1.45v)?

Does the latter have a better chance at running 3800C14 under 1.5v?


----------



## Spectre73

So besides the usual RAM related topics here I just noticed some strange behaviour of my Unify-X with regards to PCIe 4.0 support.
I am running a WD Black SN850 SSD at 4 lanes and PCIe 4.0 connection speed. So everything how it should be. Today I added an RX6800XT GPU. The GPU "only" runs at PCIe 3.0 speed. It should run at 4.0 speed, though.
I already tried forcing slot 1 at 4.0 speed, but the GPU stays at 3.0. So I tried switching the board layout from chipset mode to CPU mode. And now the GPU runs fine at PCIe 4.0, but of course only with x8 lanes 
So somehow the GPU refuses tu run at max connection speed. 
I could not find much about it online, but at least one user of a B550 Asus board had the same problem - but only when a PCIe 4.0 SSD was installed. The moment he removes the SSD, the GPU runs fine at max settings (x16 4.0).
Has anyone experienced something simliar or knows a solution? Could not find much about it.


----------



## EniGma1987

@spectre73 you might have your WD Black nvme in a slot that uses some of those 16 GPU lanes. This would cause the GPU to split because some have to go to the drive.

But it doesnt really matter anyway. PCIE 4.0 @x8 probably has a half a percent or less difference than @16 in cards right now.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Spectre73 said:


> Has anyone experienced something simliar or knows a solution?


Does it run at x8 or x16 3.0?

Heard about similar issues.
Also about the SN850 issues with X570.
Does it work properly with B550? 
Maybe this one is as well a firmware issue.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

gymleader91 said:


> What do you think is a difference in bin quality between the 3600 14-15-15-35 and the more recent 3600 14-14-14-34 bin (both at 1.45v)?
> 
> Does the latter have a better chance at running 3800C14 under 1.5v?


Very likely there's no difference at all.
Small chance it's a better bin.
Is this SR or DR memory?


----------



## Spectre73

EniGma1987 said:


> @spectre you might have your WD Black nvme in a slot that uses some of those 16 GPU lanes. This would cause the GPU to split because some have to go to the drive.
> 
> But it doesnt really matter anyway. PCIE 4.0 @x8 probably has a half a percent or less difference than @16 in cards right now.


The B550 chipset is capable of running the first M.2 slot at x4 gen 4 as well as running the GPU in the first PCIe slot at x16 gen 4 simultaneously. The board is configured to NOT use additioonal gen 4 lanes from the 1st PCIe slot to run the other M.2 slots at gen 4 (this is a unique option of the B550 Unify). So I run the board in the so called "chipset" mode.


----------



## Spectre73

ManniX-ITA said:


> Does it run at x8 or x16 3.0?
> 
> Heard about similar issues.
> Also about the SN850 issues with X570.
> Does it work properly with B550?
> Maybe this one is as well a firmware issue.


Interestingly, that changes from boot to boot ........right now it is running at x8 4.0 - after a reboot it has been reported as x16 3.0....without changing a single setting. I even configured the 1st slot as 4.0 and - just to check - as auto. No idea what is going on here....
The WD SN850 just yesterday received a firmware update, but this fixes some issue for running in a chipset powered M.2 slot, not in a CPU powered slot (allegedly).


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Spectre73 said:


> Interestingly, that changes from boot to boot ........right now it is running at x8 4.0 - after a reboot it has been reported as x16 3.0....without changing a single setting.


Maybe there's a signal integrity issue... try cleaning the GPU slot contacts and also be sure it's firmly inserted in.


----------



## Spectre73

ManniX-ITA said:


> Maybe there's a signal integrity issue... try cleaning the GPU slot contacts and also be sure it's firmly inserted in.


Does not seem to be the case. I cleaned and reseated the GPU (should have thought of it myself). No change...
So I flashed latest official BIOS A20 (instead of A32) - still no change. I am quite sure that it is no problem of the GPU (because then it would not be able to run at either x16 3.0 or x8 4.0) but still somewhat strange. I know that there is no noticeable performance impact from runnning with lower settings, but that is not the problem here......


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Spectre73 said:


> So I flashed latest official BIOS A20 (instead of A32) - still no change. I am quite sure that it is no problem of the GPU (because then it would not be able to run at either x16 3.0 or x8 4.0) but still somewhat strange. I know that there is no noticeable performance impact from runnning with lower settings, but that is not the problem here......


Agree, should work as it's supposed to.
Maybe try some very old one, like A0,A10.


----------



## weleh

Both those kits will do 3800c14 at or below 1.5V


Spectre73 said:


> Does not seem to be the case. I cleaned and reseated the GPU (should have thought of it myself). No change...
> So I flashed latest official BIOS A20 (instead of A32) - still no change. I am quite sure that it is no problem of the GPU (because then it would not be able to run at either x16 3.0 or x8 4.0) but still somewhat strange. I know that there is no noticeable performance impact from runnning with lower settings, but that is not the problem here......


I have a friend on another discord that RMA'ed his Unify-X because of this problem you're reporting.
I would suggest doing the same.


----------



## Spectre73

weleh said:


> Both those kits will do 3800c14 at or below 1.5V
> 
> 
> I have a friend on another discord that RMA'ed his Unify-X because of this problem you're reporting.
> I would suggest doing the same.


I wrote a support ticket with MSI support. Lets see what they have to say about it. I can not believe that it is a hardware defect of any sort. Just some BIOS setting or mess up on MSIs part. Also wrote to AMD about it, in case it has something to do with AGESA (do not believe this, but still possible).


----------



## algida79

Hello all,

Looks like today MSI released "stable" BIOSes with AGESA 1.2.0.3b for both boards, replacing the previous beta ones on the Support pages:






MSI MEG B550 UNIFY AMD AM4 DDR4 CF M.2 USB 3.2 Gen 2 Wi-Fi 6 HDMI ATX Gaming Motherboard


Powered by AMD Ryzen AM4 processors, the MSI MEG B550 UNIFY begins its dark conquest with a design made to accomplish any task with cruel efficiency. Connect to ultra-fast networks with 2.5G LAN and Wi-Fi AX. Move bulky files faster with USB 3.2 Gen 2. On




www.msi.com




Version: 7D13v13
Release: Date 2021-07-05
Description: Update to AMD ComboAM4PIV2 1.2.0.3b






MSI MPG B550 UNIFY-X AMD AM4 DDR4 CF M.2 USB 3.2 Gen 2 Wi-Fi 6 HDMI ATX Gaming Motherboard


Powered by AMD Ryzen AM4 processors, the MSI MEG B550 UNIFY-X begins its dark conquest with a design made to accomplish any task with cruel efficiency. Exclusive 2 DIMM solution deliver the world class memory performance. Connect to ultra-fast networks wi




www.msi.com




Version: 7D13vA3
Release: Date 2021-07-05
Description: Update to AMD ComboAM4PIV2 1.2.0.3b

I haven't tried to flash my Unify non-X yet, will try to share impressions once I do.


----------



## weleh

Wonder what all these bioses do.


----------



## 648885

Any of you guys compared X570 Unify and B550 Unify-X? Is it worth to switch from X570 Unify to B550 Unify-X for memory overclocking, and FCLK overclocking? Currently hard stuck at 1900FCLK on 5950X with X570 Unify.


----------



## weleh

algida79 said:


> Hello all,
> 
> Looks like today MSI released "stable" BIOSes with AGESA 1.2.0.3b for both boards, replacing the previous beta ones on the Support pages:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MSI MEG B550 UNIFY AMD AM4 DDR4 CF M.2 USB 3.2 Gen 2 Wi-Fi 6 HDMI ATX Gaming Motherboard
> 
> 
> Powered by AMD Ryzen AM4 processors, the MSI MEG B550 UNIFY begins its dark conquest with a design made to accomplish any task with cruel efficiency. Connect to ultra-fast networks with 2.5G LAN and Wi-Fi AX. Move bulky files faster with USB 3.2 Gen 2. On
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.msi.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Version: 7D13v13
> Release: Date 2021-07-05
> Description: Update to AMD ComboAM4PIV2 1.2.0.3b
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MSI MPG B550 UNIFY-X AMD AM4 DDR4 CF M.2 USB 3.2 Gen 2 Wi-Fi 6 HDMI ATX Gaming Motherboard
> 
> 
> Powered by AMD Ryzen AM4 processors, the MSI MEG B550 UNIFY-X begins its dark conquest with a design made to accomplish any task with cruel efficiency. Exclusive 2 DIMM solution deliver the world class memory performance. Connect to ultra-fast networks wi
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.msi.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Version: 7D13vA3
> Release: Date 2021-07-05
> Description: Update to AMD ComboAM4PIV2 1.2.0.3b
> 
> I haven't tried to flash my Unify non-X yet, will try to share impressions once I do.


The release dates are strange. Also the version is A30 while their most recent beta bios is A32


----------



## weleh

Has anyone in here tested their NVME drivers with this board?

I'm getting stupid low speeds on my SX8200 PRO. On my B450 board this same SSD was doing 3500 read and 3000 write.


----------



## weleh

Guys can you test your nvme drivers on this board?

This is my ADATA SX8200 PRO GEN3 1TB bought 1 year ago before the NAND fiasco.

It's rated at 3500/3000 which worked fine on my B450 board as you can see here:










This is on the Unify-X

Running from CPU:










Running from the chipset:










Clearly the drive is good so the issue lies with the board and it's terrible PCI-E layout...
Would love to see your own testing.


----------



## D-EJ915

You can't compare speeds at different drive capacity usage.


----------



## algida79

D-EJ915 said:


> You can't compare speeds at different drive capacity usage.


@weleh still has ~50% disk free, would that degrade the write speed that much? 

Anyway, here's mine with the exact same NVME drive:


----------



## weleh

D-EJ915 said:


> You can't compare speeds at different drive capacity usage.


Bruh, I just showed you the drive is fine and capable of doing more when plugged via Chipset.
Besides going from 3GB/s reads to 0.8GB/s wouldn't happen even if the drive was 90% full...


----------



## D-EJ915

weleh said:


> Bruh, I just showed you the drive is fine and capable of doing more when plugged via Chipset.
> Besides going from 3GB/s reads to 0.8GB/s wouldn't happen even if the drive was 90% full...


Which port(s) are you using?


----------



## weleh

D-EJ915 said:


> Which port(s) are you using?


The right ones.

NVME is on the PCI-E slot closest to the CPU...
Anyway, someone else run crystalmark to check performance.


----------



## algida79

weleh said:


> Anyway, someone else run crystalmark to check performance.


I attached a CrystalDiskMark screenshot in my post above. If there are no fundamental differences in PCI Express layout between the Unify-X and non-X, your theory here doesn't seem to hold water:



weleh said:


> so the issue lies with the board and it's terrible PCI-E layout...


----------



## weleh

Yes I'm trying to see if there's anyone else affected.

It will be my second board being RMA'ed...


----------



## D-EJ915

weleh said:


> The right ones.
> 
> NVME is on the PCI-E slot closest to the CPU...
> Anyway, someone else run crystalmark to check performance.


I asked which slots because I wanted to test with mine, one next to CPU can't be used with chipset so which chipset slot did you use?










Some of them run x2 mode when in chipset mode:


----------



## weleh

For the chipset I used M2_2, it was just to rule out issues with the drive itself (second picture).

The drive is ran on M2_1 as it's supposed usually (first picture).

Now the question is, can I run CPU mode on M2_2 and keep PCI_E1 at x16? Or does it automaticaly go to x8 even if M2_1 is unpopulated? Just to confirm it's not the drive slot that's ****ed?


----------



## weleh

Don't think I can.


----------



## D-EJ915

weleh said:


> For the chipset I used M2_2, it was just to rule out issues with the drive itself (second picture).
> 
> The drive is ran on M2_1 as it's supposed usually (first picture).
> 
> Now the question is, can I run CPU mode on M2_2 and keep PCI_E1 at x16? Or does it automaticaly go to x8 even if M2_1 is unpopulated? Just to confirm it's not the drive slot that's ****ed?


Only one besides M2_1 that is full x4 without downgrading PCIE x16 slot is the bottom one from PCH M2_4 which is gen3.

I went ahead and tested on mine which only has 10GB used on my SN750 but results are:
M2_1 run1: 3420/3113
M2_1 run 2: 3433/3109
M2_2 cpu: 3435/3092
M2_2 pch: 1786/1691
M2_3 cpu: 3434/3108
M2_3 pch: 1787/1706
M2_4 3396/3110

I used fresh crystal disk mark from the download site ver 8.0.4 x64, set 1 run of 1GiB like in your photo.

Odd thing was when I switched M2_2/M2_3 from CPU back to Chipset, I had to remove the drive for it to detect it again in slot 3. Not that big of a deal just kind of weird. I ran test from first M2_1, M2_2 pch, M2_2 cpu, M2_3 cpu, M2_4, M2_3 pch, M2_1 test 2 last.

Mine doesn't appear to have issue with the M2_1 slot. If you don't have a 2nd drive to try in M2_1 slot then RMA I guess is only option. It is pretty weird because you get full read speed of gen3 but the write is messed up so the link speed seems to be fine.


----------



## weleh

Many


D-EJ915 said:


> Only one besides M2_1 that is full x4 without downgrading PCIE x16 slot is the bottom one from PCH M2_4 which is gen3.
> 
> I went ahead and tested on mine which only has 10GB used on my SN750 but results are:
> M2_1 run1: 3420/3113
> M2_1 run 2: 3433/3109
> M2_2 cpu: 3435/3092
> M2_2 pch: 1786/1691
> M2_3 cpu: 3434/3108
> M2_3 pch: 1787/1706
> M2_4 3396/3110
> 
> I used fresh crystal disk mark from the download site ver 8.0.4 x64, set 1 run of 1GiB like in your photo.
> 
> Odd thing was when I switched M2_2/M2_3 from CPU back to Chipset, I had to remove the drive for it to detect it again in slot 3. Not that big of a deal just kind of weird. I ran test from first M2_1, M2_2 pch, M2_2 cpu, M2_3 cpu, M2_4, M2_3 pch, M2_1 test 2 last.
> 
> Mine doesn't appear to have issue with the M2_1 slot. If you don't have a 2nd drive to try in M2_1 slot then RMA I guess is only option. It is pretty weird because you get full read speed of gen3 but the write is messed up so the link speed seems to be fine.


Many thanks for your testing!
Since my drive is Gen3 I'm not bothered about Gen3 vs Gen4, all I want is x4 full speed.
I'll test the M2_4 to see if it's a problem with M2_1.

Again, many thanks!


----------



## weleh

Switching to M2_4 is the same. 
Low write speeds.


----------



## weleh

Formated and the drive is back to normal.
I'm guessing it's just a trash drive after all.

Going to fill it up and check for performance later.

Thanks all.


----------



## weleh

30% filled up.


----------



## D-EJ915

One of my old test bench OSes was like that too, if I used it as the boot drive it performed worse than expected but if I had it as a storage drive on another bench it was full speed it was really strange. Good to see your board is not faulty though.


----------



## Dziarson

Did you change settings to NVME SSD


----------



## thomasck

Hi all, just saying hello to introduce myself to the thread. Coming from a 4 years old taichi x370 which is not doing good fclk with the 5000 series cpu due to agesa/bios limitations.
I am going to pair the unify-x with a 5900x and 2x8gb predator 4000 cl19, which I used to run with a 3900x/taichi at 3733 cl15 gdm off cr1 at 1.45v. I hope I can achieve similiar speed and cl. 
Any issues I should be aware of?
Thanks


----------



## Dziarson

thomasck said:


> Hi all, just saying hello to introduce myself to the thread. Coming from a 4 years old taichi x370 which is not doing good fclk with the 5000 series cpu due to agesa/bios limitations.
> I am going to pair the unify-x with a 5900x and 2x8gb predator 4000 cl19, which I used to run with a 3900x/taichi at 3733 cl15 gdm off cr1 at 1.45v. I hope I can achieve similiar speed and cl.
> Any issues I should be aware of?
> Thanks


Maybe better Dziarson`s MaxxMem Read Bandwidth (alpha) score: 53526 MByte/sec. with a DDR4 SDRAM. 3600cl17 ;D


----------



## Rhadamanthis

AMD ComboAM4PIV2 1.2.0.3c..........next beta
7D13vA41(Beta version)


----------



## thomasck

So, all installed and running fine, really pleased by the switch from taichi x370 the unify.
I haven't tried yet anything above fclk 1900 because of the time, but 1900 seems fine, and no whea errors.
Vsoc does not seem to stick with what I set, there's always a discrepancy. 1.1v leads to 1.0825v and 1.080 reads 1.0615 in hwinfo64. Also I did not notice much improvement with sam enabled, not in timespy. All within margin of error.
Is it worth it to play with pbo boost etc? I have zero experience with it as it never really worked in the taichi x370 and 3900x or previous gen. Or I just leave all auto as it is and call a day? The rig is mainly for gaming.
ATM with cpu all stock I am seeing boosts of 4950 to 4900 in 6 cores and 4825 to 4770 in the other 6 cores. Effective clock boosting goes from 4890 to 4810 in the best 6 and 4610 to 4653 in the worse 6 cores.
Here's my settings for now, still need to tight timings. latency of 58ns, 1.46V. Vddp 0900 and vddg 0950. Soc "1080"mv. Also seems I can't set tRFC 2/4?


----------



## weleh

Friend of mine:


----------



## KedarWolf

weleh said:


> Friend of mine:
> 
> View attachment 2521602


Yeah, those new CPUs overclock memory quite well, if only they started making like 5950x's with those IMCs.

6000 series maybe next year?


----------



## D-EJ915

Having integrated memory controller would be nice but chiplet design is too good for production scaling I think so I doubt we will see it unless they switch to quad channel or something.


----------



## thomasck

Has anyone managed fclk higher than 1900 without whea errors? If yes, what voltages? TIA.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk


----------



## MyUsername

thomasck said:


> Has anyone managed fclk higher than 1900 without whea errors? If yes, what voltages? TIA.
> 
> Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk


I can't even do 1900 without enabling LN2 mode on my 5950x to rid whea's, but this breaks cppc preferred cores on Windows 11 so I'm stuck at 1866/3733.


----------



## thomasck

@MyUsername Thanks for the input. Currently I am doing 1900 free of wheas. What can you say about CPPC? I am used to thinker with these settings when using the 3900+x370 and now with the 5900X+unify-x I have no idea if is worth the time. What do you recommend. Also, cpu is full stock pbo off no curve (still need to understand that as it is a new feature to me). Ram 3800 CL15, 1.47V (is reported 1.48V, funny) vddp 0900 vddg 0950 iod 0975 and soc 1090. Any input is appreciated.


----------



## MyUsername

thomasck said:


> @MyUsername Thanks for the input. Currently I am doing 1900 free of wheas. What can you say about CPPC? I am used to thinker with these settings when using the 3900+x370 and now with the 5900X+unify-x I have no idea if is worth the time. What do you recommend. Also, cpu is full stock pbo off no curve (still need to understand that as it is a new feature to me). Ram 3800 CL15, 1.47V (is reported 1.48V, funny) vddp 0900 vddg 0950 iod 0975 and soc 1090. Any input is appreciated.


Run y-cruncher for a few cycles to be sure you're whea free, in y-cruncher select 1, 7 then 0 and let it run for an hour. If it passes whea free and no errors etc you're golden.

Optimizing the PBO and the CO can yield a nice all core boost and also give you better single core performance, you may lose a weekend optimizing this. A quick way I found for the CO is to boost your best core on ccd 0 as high as it'll go until it crashes then back it off 1. To do this, stress with cpu-z stress cpu with using set affinity in task manager to select the best core(hwinfo or CTR will tell you the cppc preferred cores) and check the clock with hwinfo core effective clocks. The other cores on the same ccd may get to the same speed or very close if you're lucky, just adjust the CO (-) to increase the clock then repeat on ccd 1. Check the core stability with corecycler to fine tune the CO, this is time consuming. 
For example my 5950x after optimizing can do 5GHz on ccd0 and 4.8GHz on ccd1 on each core individually and an all core is about 4.5GHz. The worst core on ccd0 was about 4.7GHz and I got it up to about 5GHz, so not bad. I've seen better and I've seen worse out there so I'm happy with it, it's a lot better than stock. Don't waste too much time on this if you plan to use your PC for gaming, you won't get the same performance boost in games as you do in benchmarks, but I think it helps with minimum fps.

Vdimm does report 0.01 higher with zentimings, but hwinfo reports the same as bios, so I dunno. I trust the value I put in the bios. Your voltages look okay.

Have fun tinkering.


----------



## thomasck

@MyUsername Thanks! I will look into that.


----------



## weleh

Bit of fun myself... Was bored and decided to play with RAM.










Performance starts dropping here, too many wheas I guess










And then, the highest I ever booted SYNCED...


----------



## KedarWolf

MSI MEG X570S UNIFY-X MAX - 6 x Gen4 M.2, Direct 16+2 Phase 90A SPS, EXTREME OC, 2.5G LAN


----------



## jvidia

KedarWolf said:


> MSI MEG X570S UNIFY-X MAX - 6 x Gen4 M.2, Direct 16+2 Phase 90A SPS, EXTREME OC, 2.5G LAN


Any idea when the Unify-X MAX will hit the shelfs?


----------



## KedarWolf

jvidia said:


> Any idea when the Unify-X MAX will hit the shelfs?


Dunno, but can't wait. Look at the VRMs. 16x2 90a direct phase, no doublers I think. It already has an overclocking record for the fastest single core.

🐺


----------



## KedarWolf

I'm considering going to ASUS though for their X570S board. Their dynamic overclocking feature is really tempting.


----------



## KedarWolf

KedarWolf said:


> MSI MEG X570S UNIFY-X MAX - 6 x Gen4 M.2, Direct 16+2 Phase 90A SPS, EXTREME OC, 2.5G LAN


It's Dual BIOS too, nice they went with that. I just read the manual.


----------



## ObviousCough

Would anyone happen to know what the cheapest AM4 product is that will post in a Unify-X? I'm looking at Athlon 200GE and A10-9700 tier junk for competitive overclocking stuff.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

ObviousCough said:


> Would anyone happen to know what the cheapest AM4 product is that will post in a Unify-X? I'm looking at Athlon 200GE and A10-9700 tier junk for competitive overclocking stuff.


Not sure sorry, according to the CPU QVL they aren't supported.
Haven't heard about anyone attempting the combo.



KedarWolf said:


> It's Dual BIOS too, nice they went with that. I just read the manual.


They addressed many shortcomings of the B550 Unify-X but still not very satisfying.
The "safe boot" jumper according to the manual only resets the PCIe clock, weird...
Would be useful if was booting with safe CPU/RAM settings but doesn't look like.
I'm also wondering why the 2nd PCIe slot is positioned at the very bottom. Weird.

If I'm going to replace the board before AM5 comes out will be probably with the CH8 Extreme.
But only (maybe) if the price goes below 600€. Right now is at 800€ and it's obscene.


----------



## KedarWolf

Can peeps here run the latest CPU-Z benchmark?

This is what I get.


----------



## MyUsername

KedarWolf said:


> Can peeps here run the latest CPU-Z benchmark?
> 
> This is what I get.
> 
> View attachment 2522852


Windows 11 CPU fan at 100%









Balls out unstable


----------



## KedarWolf

MyUsername said:


> Windows 11 CPU fan at 100%
> View attachment 2522879
> 
> 
> Balls out unstable
> View attachment 2522880


Is that using Curve Optimizer or a static overclock?

And if it's not a staticb overclock, what is your EDC etc. and you're Curve at?


----------



## MyUsername

KedarWolf said:


> Is that using Curve Optimizer or a static overclock?
> 
> And if it's not a staticb overclock, what is your EDC etc. and you're Curve at?


Just curve, PPT 210W, TDC 155A, EDC 200A, scalar and override are on auto, VDD full scale 155, offset 65. cTDP and PPL at 210W, I'm not entirely sure cTDP and PPL do much. 
Curve is adjusted so CCD0 is approx 5GHz(I have one weak core, core 5 will only do 4.95GHz, the rest do 5GHz) and CCD1 is 4.8GHz single core full load on cpu-z, fine tweaked with corecycler the best I could and it's been stable for a couple of months now. 0 and 14 are the best cores on each CCD.
The balls out cpu-z was 10 on core 0 and 4, 30 on the rest, 200 override, it rebooted just after I saved a picture with paint. Not bad.


----------



## KedarWolf

MyUsername said:


> Windows 11 CPU fan at 100%
> View attachment 2522879
> 
> 
> Balls out unstable
> View attachment 2522880


Oh man, thank you so much. Just using your EC settings etc. my score is so much better.


----------



## KedarWolf

MyUsername said:


> Just curve, PPT 210W, TDC 155A, EDC 200A, scalar and override are on auto, VDD full scale 155, offset 65. cTDP and PPL at 210W, I'm not entirely sure cTDP and PPL do much.
> Curve is adjusted so CCD0 is approx 5GHz(I have one weak core, core 5 will only do 4.95GHz, the rest do 5GHz) and CCD1 is 4.8GHz single core full load on cpu-z, fine tweaked with corecycler the best I could and it's been stable for a couple of months now. 0 and 14 are the best cores on each CCD.
> The balls out cpu-z was 10 on core 0 and 4, 30 on the rest, 200 override, it rebooted just after I saved a picture with paint. Not bad.
> View attachment 2522946


Oh, where in the BIOS do I find the cTDP and PPL


----------



## KedarWolf

EDC 190 seems to be the sweet spot.


----------



## 4i4ymi

weleh said:


> Friend of mine:
> 
> View attachment 2521602



How to go like that? 
I get limit 1:1 only 4933. 
If I need to go to 5000. I just set bclk 101.375. 

Could you pls guide me?


----------



## MyUsername

You'll need


KedarWolf said:


> Oh, where in the BIOS do I find the cTDP and PPL


You'll need a modded BIOS, they're in NBIO common options, under settings, advanced, AMD CBS. I start off at 13600 ish, but temperature kills it. Just single core test usually about 695, the best I've seen is 708ish with an Aircon unit blasting straight into the pc case lol.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

KedarWolf said:


> EDC 190 seems to be the sweet spot.


I'm using PPT/EDC/EDC at 280/165/220 with Scalar 6x now.
Pretty decent results considering the abysmal cooling (Dark Rock Pro 4) 










Core 0 is weak, this is Core 4 the best:












Spoiler: More benches
























But I'd be more interested in comparing CPU-z scores with lower number of threads:


----------



## thomasck

Don't know why because I am sure that before it was running at x16 4.0 and now GPU-Z shows x8 4.0. I've got two nvmes installed, one on the top slot, another on the last. It should not affect the performance of the 6900XT, but "bothers" me it is not running at x16 4.0. That might be because of the slots used for the nvme?










Edit

It has to be a bug, rebooted and now shows x16 3.0, yet, should be 4.0.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

thomasck said:


> That might be because of the slot used for the nvme?


Nope, unless you have set CPU mode in the bios.
If your 2nd SSD is x4 would be better to use M2_4 slot.


----------



## thomasck

@ManniX-ITA My mistake, I edited the post. The NVMEs are on the 1st and 4th slots as per instructions. Plus two Satas on the 1 and 2 ports. I believe it is a bug, because after rebooting it's shown x16 3.0, but yet, should not be x16 x4.0?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

thomasck said:


> @ManniX-ITA My mistake, I edited the post. The NVMEs are on the 1st and 4th slots as per instructions. Plus two Satas on the 1 and 2 ports. I believe it is a bug, because after rebooting it shown x16 3.0, but yet, should not be x16 x4.0?


More likely you need to re-seat the GPU and/or clean the PCIe contacts & slot.
Happens very frequently with these big and heavy GPUs.
You didn't mention vertical mount with a raiser cable so I assume it's directly connected to the slot.
Otherwise that's the first culprit to investigate.


----------



## thomasck

@ManniX-ITA Yeah I should have. Usually what I believe is, if is not seated properly it would crash or give some headache. No riser nothing. Just a water block but the card is being supported by a piece of EVA so no SAG whatsoever. I am going to try to clean the slot, but, as the mobo is new, and the gpu is new, I would not expect that to be a issue.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

thomasck said:


> @ManniX-ITA Yeah I should have. Usually what I believe is, if is not seated properly it would crash or give some headache. No riser nothing. Just a water block but the card is being supported by a piece of EVA so no SAG whatsoever. I am going to try to clean the slot, but, as the mobo is new, and the gpu is new, I would not expect that to be a issue.


If it's not seated properly the first issue is exactly that.
I'd thought would be a rare issue but I see it popping very frequently lately with new GPUs.
Really hope it's that cause if both the GPU and MB are new then gets more likely something is defective...


----------



## Dziarson

Have someone A.210 bios for B550 unify-X


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Dziarson said:


> Have someone A.210 bios for B550 unify-X


Here it is:





__





MEG B550 UNIFY-XA21O.zip







drive.google.com


----------



## Dziarson

@ManniX-ITA thx


----------



## Spectre73

thomasck said:


> Don't know why because I am sure that before it was running at x16 4.0 and now GPU-Z shows x8 4.0. I've got two nvmes installed, one on the top slot, another on the last. It should not affect the performance of the 6900XT, but "bothers" me it is not running at x16 4.0. That might be because of the slots used for the nvme?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Edit
> 
> It has to be a bug, rebooted and now shows x16 3.0, yet, should be 4.0.


I had and have the same problem. I do not believe it has anything to do with a wrongly seated GPU or CPU. I am using a 6800 XT and that was exactly what happened to my board.
The behaviour was totally random. Setting PCIe Gen to Auto in the bios resulted in the board booting either with x16 3.0 or x8 x4.0
I was able to sometimes get x16 x4 after a clear cmos and fresh boot without entering the bios. But next boot it was back to the above behaviour.

I could force x16 3.0 by setting the PCIe link speed in the bios or I got most of the time x8 4.0 by setting it to gen 4.

MSI germany was no help at all since they suggested a faulty CPU. I switched the rig back to my "old" x570 master 1.0 and the GPU runs at x16 4.0 ALL THE TIME. Even at auto gen settings. I showed these results to MSI support and they still insisted it is a CPU problem.
I was able to find 1-2 reports of the issue only (and now yours). It either has to do with the unusual lane splitting of the unify-x (being able to redirect CPU lanes to M.2 slots) or is some other incompatibility with the Navi 2 GPU. At least that is what I suspect.

ATM I am running the system with my x570 master, but this board gives me WHEA errors at 1900 FCLK that I never had with the unify-x. Can't have it all, I supppose. So I am running my master with x16 4.0 at 3600 MHz ram speed. Seems a good trade of.

I really still like MSI MBs. But this experience was disheartening.....I am asking myself wether I should get myself some new x570S board from MSI or even the new aorus master, Problem ist, with the recent leaks and attacks on Gigabyte it seems their BIOS department slowed down massively....


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Spectre73 said:


> I could force x16 3.0 by setting the PCIe link speed in the bios or I got most of the time x8 4.0 by setting it to gen 4.


Sad... definitely a board issue.
If they don't want fulfill your rightful RMA, burn the board and send it back in RMA. They deserve it.
Plug in only the PSU, possibly a backup one, and short ICs pins until it's dead. Usually works with the Flash IC.

I just checked mine which thankfully always seems to boot at x16 4.0 but I noticed the render test in GPU-z doesn't trigger anymore the highest PCIe mode.
My 3090 fluctuates between x16 1.1 and 2.0... maybe some energy saving improvement with the latest chipset drivers.
You need to start Furmark GPU Stress Test to get it to full PCIe speed.


----------



## Spectre73

ManniX-ITA said:


> Sad... definitely a board issue.
> If they don't want fulfill your rightful RMA, burn the board and send it back in RMA. They deserve it.
> Plug in only the PSU, possibly a backup one, and short ICs pins until it's dead. Usually works with the Flash IC.
> 
> I just checked mine which thankfully always seems to boot at x16 4.0 but I noticed the render test in GPU-z doesn't trigger anymore the highest PCIe mode.
> My 3090 fluctuates between x16 1.1 and 2.0... maybe some energy saving improvement with the latest chipset drivers.
> You need to start Furmark GPU Stress Test to get it to full PCIe speed.


I believe it to be specifically a problem with an AMD GPU and the board. All reports of link speed not working is with an AMD GPU. BTW, the switch back to lower speeds seems to be a NVIDIA thing, my AMD cards (Vega and on) never did it. At least not reported in GPU-Z.

I will not purposefully damage the board. I considered an RMA but the board works otherwise. It runs in my wifes PC now. Not ideal, but only a minor annoyance, considering that I am the only one running a PCIe 4.0 GPU (and probably for a long time).


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Spectre73 said:


> BTW, the switch back to lower speeds seems to be a NVIDIA thing, my AMD cards (Vega and on) never did it. At least not reported in GPU-Z.


Never noticed this behavior with the previous GTX 1070... maybe it's a thing for the new cards or the chipset drivers.



Spectre73 said:


> It runs in my wifes PC now.


Indeed better to keep the wife happy


----------



## thomasck

@Spectre73 Yeah, it sucks. Not that it will degrade scores or make the card run slower in games but, if the feature is there, I want it to work as intended. Like yours, mine does x16 3.0 or either x8 4.0. For some reason now is x16 4.0,








But I am sure that once I reboot it will go back to ax16 3.0 or x8 4.0. I even considered and removing the nvme from m2_1 and installing in the m2_4, and take the nvme that is in the m2_4 and put in the m2_2 and setting it to chipset mode but due to the amount of zmt around, three rads, I would need to move too much stuff around today and I don't have time. It bothers me but I am sure in few days I will forget because as I said, as long as it does not deteriorate performnace, is "fine" for now because I don't have the time.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

thomasck said:


> Not that it will degrade scores or make the card run slower in games but, if the feature is there, I want it to work as intended.


There is actually a small performance degradation but it's in the range of 0.1-1% on max fps...
I'm actually planning to switch 3 of the M.2 drives to Gen4 and set CPU mode since it's really neglegible.
But for now I have only one at Gen4 so I'm fine with chipset mode.


----------



## Spectre73

thomasck said:


> @Spectre73 Yeah, it sucks. Not that it will degrade scores or make the card run slower in games but, if the feature is there, I want it to work as intended. Like yours, mine does x16 3.0 or either x8 4.0. For some reason now is x16 4.0,
> 
> But I am sure that once I reboot it will go back to ax16 3.0 or x8 4.0. I even considered and removing the nvme from m2_1 and installing in the m2_4, and take the nvme that is in the m2_4 and put in the m2_2 and setting it to chipset mode but due to the amount of zmt around, three rads, I would need to move too much stuff around today and I don't have time. It bothers me but I am sure in few days I will forget because as I said, as long as it does not deteriorate performnace, is "fine" for now because I don't have the time.


I did exactly that prior to switching the board completely. I moved my WD Black SN850 from M.2_1 down to 4 and moved an ADATA 8200 Pro to M.2_1. I thought, that would change the behavior of the GPU but it did not. Since I wanted to test the "theory" of german MSI support, I switched boards and as you said, I am no longer infinitely patient with such things to troubleshoot day in and day out. I did more than could reasonably be expected from me. 

I am in the same boat as you. Since it is advertised as an 4.0 board, I expect it to work and this is a reason to RMA the board, but they probably would have sent me a different unify-x (if at all) and I fully expected it to behave the same way with my GPU. So I decided - whatever, switch boards and be done with it.
I really like MSI boards (espescially the UEFI) more than the other brands, but I do not know if I should take my chances and order a x570S. It would be giving in to the bad supoprt and instead of letting them feel RMA rates, I instead buy another of their products....
So probably back to gigabyte. They were great, did not like the BIOS as much and the master 1.0 had a few quirks but overall great quality. Now with frequency of BIOS updates - that is a different story.


----------



## aussie7

anyone else got an am4 5700G and the b550 unify


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Did a quick test to compare ReBAR On/Off and/at x8/x16.

Horizon Zero Down is not really reliable so I'm probably going to test something else in the feature.
But it does support really well ReBAR.

Metro Exodus EE does not seem to react much to ReBAR and or x8/x16 but I realized too late it's probably cause RT is enabled.
Should have tested without it.

When I'll find another game that works well with ReBAR will update the MEEE results.

Bottom line is going down to x8 can cost more than anticipated, up to more than 3%. Almost 4%.
It's not a negligible difference.

ReBAR when works can really help GPU rendering, especially in fps consistency.
At 14% on 99% FPS seems quite impressive.
But I have run only once the benchmark, not sure it'd show the same delta over multiple runs.
Also the average FPS ultimately is only 2-4% better.


----------



## Shift.

Question for you guys with this board:

Has anyone noticed any coil whine from the VRM?

Considering picking one of these up and saw a number of people mentioning that.

Thanks.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Shift. said:


> Has anyone noticed any coil whine from the VRM?


Yes, almost all boards have a varying degree of coil-whine.
In some cases is extreme, buzzing while moving the mouse, but mostly is just loud under load.
More then the other boards for sure. 
I notice it only while running AIDA and seldom on other benchmarks.
While with the GB Master I had to listen carefully to hear it while running AIDA.

If you are sensible very likely you'll be disappointed.


----------



## algida79

Hello folks.

Is anyone experiencing issues with *unrealistically high RPM fan speeds* being reported by the motherboard's sensors? This is what I see with my Unify non-X with the latest stable BIOS (7D13v13) and LED F/W (7D13_v0004):










It's not an issue with HWiNFO64; I am seeing similar figures when in the BIOS. The fans *are not* spinning to max when this happens, it's just a measurement issue it seems. Both were working wonderfully on my previous motherboard, an Asus Prime X470 Pro.

"Arctic F14 top back" is connected to the System 1 header, "Arctic F14 top front" to the System 2 header.

Both have common settings in the BIOS: PWM, tied to CPU temp, step up 0.7s, step down 1.0s, Smart Fan Mode enabled, curve is 75C-50% 60C-35% 45C-31% 15C-30%

I would be grateful for any tips or suggestions to correct or troubleshoot further.

Thanks.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

algida79 said:


> I would be grateful for any tips or suggestions to correct or troubleshoot further.


I have a similar issue with one fan but not that bad.
The RPM jumps randomly to 2000-3000 when is running, mostly when at low RPM.
It's not the fan itself, it's the port, System 3 in my case.
And it's not the fan type cause I have 3 of them, Arctic P14 (non PWM, 3-pins).
The other 2 works fine and switched one to the same port it does the same.
Didn't try other type of fans but maybe there's not much love between MSI and Arctic fans...


----------



## algida79

ManniX-ITA said:


> I have a similar issue with one fan but not that bad.
> The RPM jumps randomly to 2000-3000 when is running, mostly when at low RPM.
> It's not the fan itself, it's the port, System 3 in my case.
> And it's not the fan type cause I have 3 of them, Arctic P14 (non PWM, 3-pins).
> The other 2 works fine and switched one to the same port it does the same.
> Didn't try other type of fans but maybe there's not much love between MSI and Arctic fans...


Cheers mate, I agree it's a little suspect that you have a similar issue with Arctic 14cm fans again.

I guess I could try to disconnect the back fan from System 6 and plug one of the 14cm there to see what happens.

Aaargh, this is going to be a PITA for my cable management.


----------



## thomasck

Guys using a 5900X. Did you enable PBO2/Curve Optimizer? Do you think if is worthy?
I just enabled it and got a bump in the multicore (9600 to 9800) and singlecore (664 to 669) in cpuz. Not sure if that translated in anything in the real life but I am leaning towards to disable it. What is your guys approach?


----------



## Audioboxer

Shift. said:


> Question for you guys with this board:
> 
> Has anyone noticed any coil whine from the VRM?
> 
> Considering picking one of these up and saw a number of people mentioning that.
> 
> Thanks.


I genuinely notice nothing at all. I'm watercooled as well so I run a pretty silent PC and with a Lian Li O11 XL case it's all glass sides and front so noise reduction inside isn't as good as some air cooling based cases.

The only coil whine I have is from my 2080Ti when under load lol, noisy chap. 

But I swear there is nothing from my VRMs, or its genuinely inaudible in any meaningful way. Powering a 5950x.


----------



## KedarWolf

Dziarson said:


> Have someone A.210 bios for B550 unify-X


Here's A21 but with the latest 5000 series microcodes, like for the 5950x, 5900x etc.

Used the included AFUWINGUI to run as Admin in the .zip file to flash the bios.bin with the below options.

Make SURE you use the correct as below.















__





AfuWin64.zip







drive.google.com


----------



## MyUsername

Just took bios A43 AGESA 1.2.0.4 for a spin on my unify x. New SMU, TPM enabled by default for windows 11 and VDDG is broken, seems to be stuck on 0.9976V for ccd and iod whatever value I punch into the bios🤷‍♂️


----------



## Audioboxer

MyUsername said:


> Just took bios A43 AGESA 1.2.0.4 for a spin on my unify x. New SMU, TPM enabled by default for windows 11 and VDDG is broken, seems to be stuck on 0.9976V for ccd and iod whatever value I punch into the bios🤷‍♂️


Same issue here. VDDG reports at 0.99v in ZenTimings no matter what is put 1.0v and above.


----------



## aussie7

anyone able to help wiith 5700G | Gskill 4000mhz | B550 Unify bios settings ?
stable at mem 4733mhz @ 1.5v and 2367fclk all other voltages on auto. passes y-cruncher 1hr test
stable mem 4800mhz @ 1.6v and 2400fclk soc @ 1.4v all other volts on auto
anyone got any ideas on what settings will get me lower ram and soc volts so I can run 4800mhz and 2400fclk daily ?
ruining on linux so no zen timings pics
TIA 
bios screen shots of bios attached


----------



## thomasck

Little update about the PCIE speeds around here. The random pcie speed seems to randomly change once the rig is restarted, but it always boots as x16 4.0 when powered on from cold boot or just a simples power off>power on. Example, cold boot, boots up at x16 4.0, if rebooted it will get stuck at x16 3.0 or x8 4.0. If powered off then powered on, it will boot as x16 4.0 again. 
I've opened a thread at MSI forum and was contacted my PM to give some more information as the behaviour was duplicated by them so "they will look into it".


----------



## ManniX-ITA

thomasck said:


> Little update about the PCIE speeds around here. The random pcie speed seems to randomly change once the rig is restarted, but it always boots as x16 4.0 when powered on from cold boot or just a simples power off>power on. Example, cold boot, boots up at x16 4.0, if rebooted it will get stuck at x16 3.0 or x8 4.0. If powered off then powered on, it will boot as x16 4.0 again.
> I've opened a thread at MSI forum and was contacted my PM to give some more information as the behaviour was duplicated by them so "they will look into it".


I wonder if PCIe ASPM could be a factor.
If you have the option in the BIOS, check that it's disabled.
Try with one of my custom power plans:









Ryzen Custom Power Plans for Windows 10/11 (Snappy...


CPUDoc now features a custom dynamic power plan with ultra low power in standby: https://github.com/mann1x/CPUDoc/releases/latest These are the custom power plans I've made for my 5950x. I have tested them as well on a 3800X and 5600G (not very thoroughly). They should not interfere with PBO...




www.overclock.net





The standard Windows power plans all have it enabled.
In theory if the BIOS is disabling it should have priority but you never know...


----------



## Spectre73

thomasck said:


> Little update about the PCIE speeds around here. The random pcie speed seems to randomly change once the rig is restarted, but it always boots as x16 4.0 when powered on from cold boot or just a simples power off>power on. Example, cold boot, boots up at x16 4.0, if rebooted it will get stuck at x16 3.0 or x8 4.0. If powered off then powered on, it will boot as x16 4.0 again.
> I've opened a thread at MSI forum and was contacted my PM to give some more information as the behaviour was duplicated by them so "they will look into it".


Wow, you got farther than I was ever able to. I went through all the same hops but for me, MSI support was no help. Please inform us how it goes and if there is a fix available.


----------



## thomasck

@Spectre73 sure thing!


----------



## thomasck

@Spectre73 Update, bad one. Just received a PM saying that MSI could not replicate the issue, LOL, few days ago it was posted they replicated the issue. 
Well, I won't bother about it. I won't RMA the board as suggested in the PM. What x16 4.0? Cold boot. Need to reboot the PC and need to see x16 4.0 is reported? Shut it down, wait a big, turn on again for x16 4.0 lol. 

@ManniX-ITA I will look into PCIe ASPM, thanks.


----------



## Spectre73

thomasck said:


> @Spectre73 Update, bad one. Just received a PM saying that MSI could not replicate the issue, LOL, few days ago it was posted they replicated the issue.
> Well, I won't bother about it. I won't RMA the board as suggested in the PM. What x16 4.0? Cold boot. Need to reboot the PC and need to see x16 4.0 is reported? Shut it down, wait a big, turn on again for x16 4.0 lol.
> 
> @ManniX-ITA I will look into PCIe ASPM, thanks.


@thomasck That is really sad. I really suspect they somehow bodged the MB and now are not allowed to admit it because of RMA expectations. There are more people with the exact same problem, even though it does not seem to be widespread. But that might have to do with the rare combination of an AMD Navi card and the unify-x.


----------



## aussie7

anyone using the new beta bios 144 for b550 unify board ?

link to msi forum

Updates:
1. Update to COMBOAM4v2PI 1.2.0.4
2. SMU firmware updated for Vermeer, Cezanne and Picasso
3. TPM enabled by default


----------



## Hale59

aussie7 said:


> anyone using the new beta bios 144 for b550 unify board ?
> 
> link to msi forum
> 
> Updates:
> 1. Update to COMBOAM4v2PI 1.2.0.4
> 2. SMU firmware updated for Vermeer, Cezanne and Picasso
> 3. TPM enabled by default


People are complaining that vDDG IOD/CCD cannot go above 1.0v. Seems bugged.


----------



## aussie7

don't have any of those voltage settings on my Cezanne 5700G with my b550 unify board and beta bios 144 ?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

aussie7 said:


> don't have any of those voltage settings on my Cezanne 5700G with my b550 unify board and beta bios 144 ?
> 
> View attachment 2524861


Yes, APU only have SOC and VDDP.
VDDG is a thing for Multi Core with Infinity Fabric interposer and IOD.


----------



## Iarwa1N

Hi guys, I am new with the Unify X. I just checked the pcie speeds on my 6800xt and while GPU-Z and AMD Driver page reports PCIE 3 x16, Aida64 reports PCIE 4 x16;










I made a 3DMark PCI Express Feature test and the result is;










I guess this is PCIE 3 x16 speed.


----------



## Spectre73

Iarwa1N said:


> Hi guys, I am new with the Unify X. I just checked the pcie speeds on my 6800xt and while GPU-Z and AMD Driver page reports PCIE 3 x16, Aida64 reports PCIE 4 x16;
> 
> View attachment 2524872
> 
> 
> I made a 3DMark PCI Express Feature test and the result is;
> 
> View attachment 2524873
> 
> 
> I guess this is PCIE 3 x16 speed.


@thomasck and me have the same problem with your combination. MSI only partially admitted it. They could not recreate it but it definitely seems to be a problem with the unify-x and navi 2 cards......


----------



## Iarwa1N

Spectre73 said:


> @thomasck and me have the same problem with your combination. MSI only partially admitted it. They could not recreate it but it definitely seems to be a problem with the unify-x and navi 2 cards......


Did you try other bios versions?



KedarWolf said:


> Here's A21 but with the latest 5000 series microcodes, like for the 5950x, 5900x etc.
> 
> Used the included AFUWINGUI to run as Admin in the .zip file to flash the bios.bin with the below options.
> 
> Make SURE you use the correct as below.
> 
> View attachment 2523967
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AfuWin64.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


I couldn't find the bios.bin, where is it? Also what is the benefit of updating the bios from Windows, doesn't M-Flash in the bios is safer?


----------



## thomasck

Spectre73 said:


> @thomasck and me have the same problem with your combination. MSI only partially admitted it. They could not recreate it but it definitely seems to be a problem with the unify-x and navi 2 cards......


They DID recreate the issue, but then after "swapping" the CPU the issue was gone. I'd recommend you both to open a thread in their forum. That might help. My cpu was already RMAed once because of this issue and definitely is not a cpu issue, unless I got again a defective cpu.

The more people opening threads about it the better.


----------



## KedarWolf

Iarwa1N said:


> Did you try other bios versions?
> 
> 
> 
> I couldn't find the bios.bin, where is it? Also what is the benefit of updating the bios from Windows, doesn't M-Flash in the bios is safer?


Wait, I was sure I included the bios.bin in the .zip but it's not there.

Will fix it when I get home from work.

The program I provided is a sector by sector based flash and is better than the M-Flash option.

Plus if you don't check the auto-reboot option and the flash doesn't fully work, you can flash another working BIOS or reflash the one you tried.


----------



## Iarwa1N

KedarWolf said:


> Wait, I was sure I included the bios.bin in the .zip but it's not there.
> 
> Will fix it when I get home from work.
> 
> The program I provided is a sector by sector based flash and is better than the M-Flash option.
> 
> Plus if you don't check the auto-reboot option and the flash doesn't fully work, you can flash another working BIOS or reflash the one you tried.


Any chance did you fix it? I want to try your method because after reflashing the latest A41 bios, the "Data Link Feature Exchange" section in the PCI settings is lost, I believe I had it before, is this possible?


----------



## Denvys5

Greetings.
I recently obtained B550 Unify-X. Board is awesome, but I have some questions:
1) How to get bclk running past 102.6? I get instant crash, and I think I am doing something wrong here. Maybe its gpu that doesnt like high bclk?
2) How to make this board train DR ram past 4333? It manages to boot 4333 after several training failures, but if it does boot, it is actually stable. I even can push bclk to 102.6 with 4333 initial memory freq to get 4445 - so 4445 is actually achievable. What I have also noticed, board won't train 4333 if I keep high cpu clocks, even 4Ghz is too high.
Memory tryit also wont boot 4400 preset.
My ram freq struggles -> AMD Ryzen 5 3600 @ 3898.41 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR


Spoiler














3) What bios version do I run daily? I started with A20, idk how bad is it, so far seems fine. Minor adjustment, I am looking only for ReBAR-ready versions.
4) To continue question above, is there a fix/stable bios version that will properly load cpu freq from profiles?

Other components: R5 3600 and Crucial's DR Rev. B


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Denvys5 said:


> 1) How to get bclk running past 102.6? I get instant crash, and I think I am doing something wrong here. Maybe its gpu that doesnt like high bclk?


Seems a bit extreme 102.6... were you running it stable with your previous board and same hardware?



Denvys5 said:


> 2) How to make this board train DR ram past 4333? It manages to boot 4333 after several training failures, but if it does boot, it is actually stable. I even can push bclk to 102.6 with 4333 initial memory freq to get 4445 - so 4445 is actually achievable. What I have also noticed, board won't train 4333 if I keep high cpu clocks, even 4Ghz is too high.


It needs a lot of work and experience. Fine tuning of many settings.
The memory TryIt presets are very generic.

I hope it's just for fun. Running them in desync is slower than a much lower frequency in sync.



Denvys5 said:


> 3) What bios version do I run daily? I started with A20, idk how bad is it, so far seems fine. Minor adjustment, I am looking only for ReBAR-ready versions.


I use A21O which is unlocked and has ReBar.





MEG B550 UNIFY-XA21O.zip







drive.google.com







Denvys5 said:


> 4) To continue question above, is there a fix/stable bios version that will properly load cpu freq from profiles?


The less buggy for me is the above.
It will not restore the PBO settings.
If you Clear CMOS you need to set the SOC/VDDG IOD/CCD (cycle to another value and select again what was set), reboot and reload again the profile.


----------



## Denvys5

ManniX-ITA said:


> Seems a bit *extreme* 102.6... were you running it stable with your previous board and same hardware?


Yes, going for that. I see how I am artificially limited by bclk. Never tried another gpu, first time pushing bclk with Unify-X. I've seen other guys pushing 115+, so interested in doing that 



ManniX-ITA said:


> It needs a lot of work and experience. Fine tuning of many settings.
> The memory TryIt presets are very generic.


Tryit are generic. As they should be, that is expected. 
I clearly know that I am doing something wrong. How? Friend of mine had 4400 running with same DR sticks and same exact cpu, but on b550 tomahawk. And he wasnt doing something complicated, just set frequency, timings and boot. And even tryit, he got 4400 working with generic preset.

I know for a fact that both sticks and cpu can run >4400. But I have a mistake somewhere in my setup.

Once again, anybody running DR 4400+? 



ManniX-ITA said:


> I hope it's just for fun. Running them in desync is slower than a much lower frequency in sync.


I've done some testing, with 4333 strap above, I think I can do some weird scores with higher ram freq, like 4500+.



ManniX-ITA said:


> I use A21O which is unlocked and has ReBar.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MEG B550 UNIFY-XA21O.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The less buggy for me is the above.
> It will not restore the PBO settings.
> If you Clear CMOS you need to set the SOC/VDDG IOD/CCD (cycle to another value and select again what was set), reboot and reload again the profile.


Okay, I'll try that one. But your notice already seems worse (with voltages and pbo), than I already have. Well, as always, YMMV


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Denvys5 said:


> Yes, going for that. I see how I am artificially limited by bclk. Never tried another gpu, first time pushing bclk with Unify-X. I've seen other guys pushing 115+, so interested in doing that


Maybe we have a different concept of stability 
I've seen very few people running stable above 102 with a 3000. Mostly only for benching, not for daily.
Going over AFAIK needs high voltages, lot of luck and very often exotic cooling.
Did you try setting the GPU to lower PCIe Gen and splitting lanes?



Denvys5 said:


> I know for a fact that both sticks and cpu can run >4400. But I have a mistake somewhere in my setup.


Try posting screenshots to get advice, press F12 to save them.



Denvys5 said:


> Okay, I'll try that one. But your notice already seems worse (with voltages and pbo), than I already have. Well, as always, YMMV


As far as I remember A20 is even worse.
Only A00/A01/A05 are barely better.
When you restore a profile some settings (voltages, CBS, etc) are set in BIOS but not for real.
If you check with Zentimings or HWInfo you'll see discrepancies. The BIOS option is set only in the UI but the default is actually selected.
This could be one issue preventing you to achieve BCLK/RAM OC.

You can verify by yourself by loading a profile that will not boot with a low VDDG IOD voltage, like high FCLK.
It will end up in black screen if you just load the profile and save & exit.

Just to be sure, when you reset CMOS, load optimized, save and reboot.
Then load the profile you want to use and reboot again.


----------



## Denvys5

ManniX-ITA said:


> Maybe we have a different concept of stability
> I've seen very few people running stable above 102 with a 3000. Mostly only for benching, not for daily.
> Going over AFAIK needs high voltages, lot of luck and very often exotic cooling.
> Did you try setting the GPU to lower PCIe Gen and splitting lanes?


Yes, for benching. I tried running gpu in pcie1.1 mode, and tried running gpu in chipset slot - no difference. Sad part - its GT1030, which I expected to be good at bclk. Still, I dont know, if it is even gpu related. 




ManniX-ITA said:


> Try posting screenshots to get advice, press F12 to save them.


In first post:


Spoiler














I haven't set up anything that isn`t on the screen. RTT-CAD here; Vcore, Vsoc, vddp, vddg here too; bclk with 1.8V PLL here
Pushing for ram freq I had all timings loose:








AMD Ryzen 5 3600 @ 2253.04 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR


[gt4xua] Validated Dump by Denvys5 (2021-09-18 22:15:07) - MB: MSI MEG B550 UNIFY-X (MS-7D13) - RAM: 65536 MB




valid.x86.fr




(no zentimings screen, sadly  )
So, I haven`t touched "make things good" buttons on Unify, like "ram latency enhancer", hence, idk what do they do.




ManniX-ITA said:


> This could be one issue preventing you to achieve BCLK/RAM OC.


Yeah, I was expecting that 👍 



ManniX-ITA said:


> As far as I remember A20 is even worse.
> Only A00/A01/A05 are barely better.
> When you restore a profile some settings (voltages, CBS, etc) are set in BIOS but not for real.
> If you check with Zentimings or HWInfo you'll see discrepancies. The BIOS option is set only in the UI but the default is actually selected.


Good to know 🤔 



ManniX-ITA said:


> Just to be sure, when you reset CMOS, load optimized, save and reboot.
> Then load the profile you want to use and reboot again.


And that properly sets values from profiles? WOW


----------



## Denvys5

Denvys5 said:


> I've seen other guys pushing 115+, so interested in doing that





Spoiler










So I checked out, BZ had bclk running past 102.6 with no problem. And he is not setting all the settings yada-yada, board does a lot of stuff on auto.
Causes:

either gpu
or bios version
I'll check both, in a week or two. So far, I see my settings as good, need to check other factors.


----------



## mongoled

Unplug your SATA drives and try, thats if you have any plugged into SATA ports ...


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Denvys5 said:


> I haven't set up anything that isn`t on the screen. RTT-CAD here; Vcore, Vsoc, vddp, vddg here too; bclk with 1.8V PLL here


Better the BIOS screenshots.
I'd update Zentimings.

BZ is using a very old BIOS and, much more importantly, an APU 4750G.
You can't even think about doing something similar with a 3600.

VDDG at 950mV is insanely low.
Consider at least 1050mV.


----------



## mongoled

ManniX-ITA said:


> You can't even think about doing something similar with a 3600.


Doh, did not see they were using that, I just assumed in the manner they were talking it would be a APU ....


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Denvys5 said:


> I haven't set up anything that isn`t on the screen. RTT-CAD here; Vcore, Vsoc, vddp, vddg here too; bclk with 1.8V PLL here


VDDP probably needs to be more, in range of 950-1050mV, 1P8 from 1.83V and up.
Also Command Center Lite sucks (well it's more AMD); set everything you need as voltage before, in BIOS, and only change BCLK there if you don't already.


----------



## Denvys5

mongoled said:


> Unplug your SATA drives and try, thats if you have any plugged into SATA ports ...


Well, okay... And how to run windows? USB install?



ManniX-ITA said:


> Better the BIOS screenshots.
> I'd update Zentimings.


True. Updates for next ram oc session 



ManniX-ITA said:


> BZ is using a very old BIOS and, much more importantly, an APU 4750G.
> You can't even think about doing something similar with a 3600.


Once again. This exact cpu running 4400 with same sticks on B550 Tomahawk. I can do 4400 with bclk on Unify-X. No boot with 4400 strap, I dont get it.
I am not pushing 5k, not even 4500. Its 4400, I can do it daily stable with bclk (y-cruncher 2.5b stable with no effort).


Spoiler

















ManniX-ITA said:


> VDDG at 950mV is insanely low.
> Consider at least 1050mV.





ManniX-ITA said:


> VDDP probably needs to be more, in range of 950-1050mV, 1P8 from 1.83V and up.


I didn`t expect that RAM OC with async/1:2 IF may be impacted by VDDP-VDDG voltages.
1.8PLL too, I only expect it to improve bclk OC. 


ManniX-ITA said:


> Also Command Center Lite sucks (well it's more AMD); set everything you need as voltage before, in BIOS, and only change BCLK there if you don't already.


Its good to set bclk and core multi, thats good enough for me.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Denvys5 said:


> Well, okay... And how to run windows? USB install?


Either M.2 or USB.
Usually more luck with M.2



Denvys5 said:


> I didn`t expect that RAM OC with async/1:2 IF may be impacted by VDDP-VDDG voltages.
> 1.8PLL too, I only expect it to improve bclk OC.


VDDP yes, it's the IMC voltage.
Rest is more for BCLK but IOD also drives the IF so more memory bandwidth, more stress on IF.


----------



## Denvys5

ManniX-ITA said:


> Either M.2 or USB.
> Usually more luck with M.2


M.2 and bclk? Sounds like an easy way to kill one  


ManniX-ITA said:


> VDDP yes, it's the IMC voltage.
> Rest is more for BCLK but IOD also drives the IF so more memory bandwidth, more stress on IF.


🤔


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Denvys5 said:


> M.2 and bclk? Sounds like an easy way to kill one


They are cheap


----------



## Denvys5

ManniX-ITA said:


> They are cheap


My cpu costs not much more, I'll better kill that thing while benching


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Denvys5 said:


> My cpu costs not much more, I'll better kill that thing while benching


Buy old Intel or Samsung OEM on eBay, 10-15 € for 256 GB and they are robust.
To kill them you have to set them on fire


----------



## Audioboxer

Can anyone with a spare 5 mins do some quick testing for me with the B550? Technically any MSI mobo will do, but I'm on the B550. Found that tPHYRDL behaves weird and I've tested it now with two bins of b-die, 3600C14 and 4000C14.

By weird I mean all even tCLs result in 28/26 at 1T, 26/26 at 2T and all uneven tCLs result in 26/26 at 1T and 28/26 at 2T

tCL13 2T = 28/26

tCL13 1T = 26/26

tCL14 2T = 26/26

tCL14 1T = 28/26

tCL15 2T = 28/26

tCL15 1T = 26/26

tCL16 2T = 26/26

tCL16 1T = 28/26

It's frustrating as while I have a tCL14 and tCL15 profile stable



















I _can't_ run the tCL14 profile on 1T due to 28/26 ending up in a small latency penalty. Mismatched DIMMs when it comes to tPHYRDL does that.










Here is an example of tCL13 at 1T, runs 26/26. Ignore the TM5 errors, I haven't managed to stabilise tCL13 yet (might not even manage it LOL). On a related note this mobo actually boots flat 13 at 3800 

I found some other users in the memory topic who could replicate this MSI bios funkiness, someone with an X570 board. Hoping to gather enough information to find out if it's an MSI issue and I can email them and ask them to take a look. Absolutely nothing other than command rate and tCL impacts the tPHYRDL behaviour, I've obviously had advice to play with VDDP, ProcODT and so on and as I said it's repeated behaviour for other users who also aren't all using a 5950x IMC.


----------



## kakos84

you have something to suggest msi b550-a pro 3700x oc ram oc ??


----------



## KedarWolf

Denvys5 said:


> Yes, going for that. I see how I am artificially limited by bclk. Never tried another gpu, first time pushing bclk with Unify-X. I've seen other guys pushing 115+, so interested in doing that
> 
> 
> Tryit are generic. As they should be, that is expected.
> I clearly know that I am doing something wrong. How? Friend of mine had 4400 running with same DR sticks and same exact cpu, but on b550 tomahawk. And he wasnt doing something complicated, just set frequency, timings and boot. And even tryit, he got 4400 working with generic preset.
> 
> I know for a fact that both sticks and cpu can run >4400. But I have a mistake somewhere in my setup.
> 
> Once again, anybody running DR 4400+?
> 
> 
> I've done some testing, with 4333 strap above, I think I can do some weird scores with higher ram freq, like 4500+.
> 
> 
> Okay, I'll try that one. But your notice already seems worse (with voltages and pbo), than I already have. Well, as always, YMMV


I also run A21. Latency in AIDA goes down from 55.5 to 54.6

Oh, this about Windows 10 and 11, even the DEV build. Notice the L3 cache on my 5950x.

Windows 10.










Windows 11 DEV. The regular Windows 11 beta is even worse.


----------



## Audioboxer

Windows 11 just looks like a total mess. I'll be staying away for now, especially whatever build launches in like 2 weeks.


----------



## Screwz1use

Hello Everyone!

Yesterday I managed to obtain the MSI B550 Unify-X board in order to solve a problem I was having with my x570 (Asus CH8 Dark Hero). I was having issues having the board train a 4x8GB Samsung B-Die kit past 3666 Mhz. I spent time over the past two weeks trying about everything I was able to read through the CH8 and CH8 Dark Hero Forum pages but had no luck. I found it odd to be a memory issue so I was leaning the problem being my PSU, Motherboard or just bad silicone lotter on my 5950x to the point the IMC couldn't handle it. Fortunately I have a Microcenter about 20 min away from me which happened to have this board in stock so I figured it was worth a try to conduct further troubleshooting.

As advertised, this board had no issues posting my Gskill F4-4000C14D-32GTES 2x16DR memory with default xmp settings which my CH8 Dark Hero had 0 success doing. Since the board did manage to post, I figured I would adventure into Memory Overclocking. I mainly just want to focus on tightening the timings. I started doing this last night but noticed that the xmp profile was producing a FCLK of 1800 but still being successful at a providing a 4000 Frequency. I've had 0 WHEA errors in Windows nor did multiple passes of OCCT SSE and AVX2. If I go full manual with memory OC settings and adjust the FCLK to 2000, I do get WHEA errors in OCCT and none yet have occurred in Windows. This leads to my question and sorry for the rambling above.

Should I be concerned about MCLK and FCLK not being 1:1? I'd also like to note that the UCLK is 1000. I did flash on the A210 Bios that others had recommended to use as their Daily bios. Attached below is my current ZenTimings.










Before I go down the tightening timings even more and benchmarking performance after each pass, I wanted to reach out here first. Anyway thanks for reading and cheers!


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Screwz1use said:


> I do get WHEA errors in OCCT and none yet have occurred in Windows.


WHEAs are from Windows, so if you get errors in OCCT is because the CPU or Memory OC.



Screwz1use said:


> Should I be concerned about MCLK and FCLK not being 1:1?


Yes, try first with 1:1 at 1900/3800 and only then move to 2000/4000.
You'll probably get a lot of WHEA at 2000.

Read this post if you want to try 2000:









WHEAService, WHEA errors suppressor - unleash Ryzen...


@anyone of yall, thats been running this since you had WHEA19 issues. have you noticed any strange things occur? have you needed to increase voltage ranges on IOD/CCD/cLDO_VDDP to keep 4000/2000 stable (or whatever IF clk your running?) ive managed to DRASTICLY lower my WHEA 19s at IF 2000...




www.overclock.net





This is what you need to set for 1:1 UCLK:


----------



## Audioboxer

ManniX-ITA said:


> WHEAs are from Windows, so if you get errors in OCCT is because the CPU or Memory OC.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, try first with 1:1 at 1900/3800 and only then move to 2000/4000.
> You'll probably get a lot of WHEA at 2000.
> 
> Read this post if you want to try 2000:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WHEAService, WHEA errors suppressor - unleash Ryzen...
> 
> 
> @anyone of yall, thats been running this since you had WHEA19 issues. have you noticed any strange things occur? have you needed to increase voltage ranges on IOD/CCD/cLDO_VDDP to keep 4000/2000 stable (or whatever IF clk your running?) ive managed to DRASTICLY lower my WHEA 19s at IF 2000...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is what you need to set for 1:1 UCLK:
> 
> View attachment 2526353


I'm nearing the end of my journey with 1900/3800 so this post reminded me my next journey is to try and get 4000/2000 stability test stable. I get WHEA over 1900 but I can at least boot everything up to 2000 and even beyond it.

Which is a start I guess, none of those weird FCLK holes. With memory rated for 4000 I've at least got a good base for seeing if I can get stability in testing.

Other than TM5 what do you recommend for testing for stability with WHEA suppressed? OCCT? Corecycler? The usual?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Audioboxer said:


> Which is a start I guess, none of those weird FCLK holes. With memory rated for 4000 I've at least got a good base for seeing if I can get stability in testing.


It's quite a while that I switched to FCLK 2000 and I'm not regretting it.
It was hard to get the performances right but it was worth the satisfaction


----------



## Screwz1use

Thanks ManniX-ITA! I took all your recommendations yesterday and started with 1900/3800. I did manage to get it stable and reduce tighten up some of the timings with performance gains and stability tests ran successfully. I even utilized the post you had me take a look at.

I think this coming up weekend I may take a stab at 2000/4000 again but thank you for the advice!


----------



## musician

New beta available, MSI MPG B550 UNIFY-X AMD AM4 DDR4 CF M.2 USB 3.2 Gen 2 Wi-Fi 6 HDMI ATX Gaming Motherboard.

Version
7D13vA44(Beta version)
Release Date
2021-09-27
File Size
18.44 MB

Description

Windows 11 Support.
Update to AMD ComboAM4PIV2 1.2.0.3c.


----------



## KedarWolf

musician said:


> New beta available, MSI MPG B550 UNIFY-X AMD AM4 DDR4 CF M.2 USB 3.2 Gen 2 Wi-Fi 6 HDMI ATX Gaming Motherboard.
> 
> Version
> 7D13vA44(Beta version)
> Release Date
> 2021-09-27
> File Size
> 18.44 MB
> 
> Description
> 
> Windows 11 Support.
> Update to AMD ComboAM4PIV2 1.2.0.3c.


Tried it. Cinebench R23 dropped from 30406 to well under 24000 with the exact same overclock settings from A21.


----------



## Audioboxer

musician said:


> New beta available, MSI MPG B550 UNIFY-X AMD AM4 DDR4 CF M.2 USB 3.2 Gen 2 Wi-Fi 6 HDMI ATX Gaming Motherboard.
> 
> Version
> 7D13vA44(Beta version)
> Release Date
> 2021-09-27
> File Size
> 18.44 MB
> 
> Description
> 
> Windows 11 Support.
> Update to AMD ComboAM4PIV2 1.2.0.3c.


lol straight up ignoring 1.2.0.4 for now on the main page, obviously aware of the voltage bug.


----------



## mongoled

Audioboxer said:


> lol straight up ignoring 1.2.0.4 for now on the main page, obviously aware of the voltage bug.


These BIOSs have fixed the IOD/CCD voltage issue

At least it has on my X570 Unify, but now vDIMM no longer appears in ZenTimings along with MEMVTT

And these are not 1.2.0.4 but 1.2.0.3c with fixed CCD/IOD


----------



## Audioboxer

mongoled said:


> These BIOSs have fixed the IOD/CCD voltage issue
> 
> At least it has on my X570 Unify, but now vDIMM no longer appears in ZenTimings along with MEMVTT
> 
> And these are not 1.2.0.4 but 1.2.0.3c with fixed CCD/IOD


1.2.0.3c never had the issue in the first place, I'm running it just now. All MSI have done is update the previous beta with Windows 11 support.


----------



## mongoled

Audioboxer said:


> 1.2.0.3c never had the issue in the first place, I'm running it just now. All MSI have done is update the previous beta with Windows 11 support.


It looks like ive muddles things up

😃


----------



## Audioboxer

mongoled said:


> It looks like ive muddles things up
> 
> 😃


It's cool I understand why, they've actually removed the first beta from the product page


----------



## KedarWolf

Scored over 13600 with a decent single core.


----------



## Audioboxer

ManniX-ITA said:


> WHEAs are from Windows, so if you get errors in OCCT is because the CPU or Memory OC.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, try first with 1:1 at 1900/3800 and only then move to 2000/4000.
> You'll probably get a lot of WHEA at 2000.
> 
> Read this post if you want to try 2000:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> WHEAService, WHEA errors suppressor - unleash Ryzen...
> 
> 
> @anyone of yall, thats been running this since you had WHEA19 issues. have you noticed any strange things occur? have you needed to increase voltage ranges on IOD/CCD/cLDO_VDDP to keep 4000/2000 stable (or whatever IF clk your running?) ive managed to DRASTICLY lower my WHEA 19s at IF 2000...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is what you need to set for 1:1 UCLK:
> 
> View attachment 2526353


Hey Manni I'm finally ready to have a go at FCLK 2000. Starting with my RAM on XMP as it's rated for 4000 and I'm looking for the smartest way to test IF instability? Happy to use TM5 for memory but what would you recommend for IF? OCCT and y-cruncher?

Obviously using your WHEAService to deal with the yellow bus/interconnect errors. Some seem to be slipping through in Windows 11 though. I think Windows 11 might be stopping the service running :/


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Audioboxer said:


> Hey Manni I'm finally ready to have a go at FCLK 2000. Starting with my RAM on XMP as it's rated for 4000 and I'm looking for the smartest way to test IF instability? Happy to use TM5 for memory but what would you recommend for IF? OCCT and y-cruncher?


Yes test with y-cruncher.
But you need to compare for performance regressions.
So while at 1900 FCLK run the Monero miner (xmr-stak-rx) for more than 15 minutes and record the throughput.
Also take multiple benchmark results, especially Geekbench 5.
Then run the same at FLCK 2000, you should get same or better scores.
Better scores with the monero miner. Otherwise you have regression and it's better to go back to 1900.


----------



## Audioboxer

ManniX-ITA said:


> Yes test with y-cruncher.
> But you need to compare for performance regressions.
> So while at 1900 FCLK run the Monero miner (xmr-stak-rx) for more than 15 minutes and record the throughput.
> Also take multiple benchmark results, especially Geekbench 5.
> Then run the same at FLCK 2000, you should get same or better scores.
> Better scores with the monero miner. Otherwise you have regression and it's better to go back to 1900.


Thanks. I'm struggling with your WHEAService on Windows 11 though, it keeps stopping it running lol. Is this a known issue or am I doing something wrong?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Audioboxer said:


> Thanks. I'm struggling with your WHEAService on Windows 11 though, it keeps stopping it running lol. Is this a known issue or am I doing something wrong?


Known issue, it's not working right now with Windows 11 (at least this non final release).


----------



## Audioboxer

ManniX-ITA said:


> Known issue, it's not working right now with Windows 11 (at least this non final release).


Ah, thanks for confirming. The release preview will be the final build I believe but I understand waiting to see if it can be fixed. I guess I'll just test with the WHEAs logging lol. I've had 305 in like 25 mins.

No red errors it's just the usual spam warnings.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Audioboxer said:


> Ah, thanks for confirming. The release preview will be the final build I believe but I understand waiting to see if it can be fixed. I guess I'll just test with the WHEAs logging lol. I've had 305 in like 25 mins.


When it's such low amount it will only help not cluttering the event log.
If you are unstable at FCLK 2000 it's not going to help.
If these errors are causing a performance penalty it will not help as well.
It will only help when you get thousands per minute and the system becomes sluggish.


----------



## Audioboxer

ManniX-ITA said:


> When it's such low amount it will only help not cluttering the event log.
> If you are unstable at FCLK 2000 it's not going to help.
> If these errors are causing a performance penalty it will not help as well.
> It will only help when you get thousands per minute and the system becomes sluggish.


Ah right good to know, system isn't sluggish so I will crack on with testing. I'm running a modified MSI bios with things unlocked and I see you mentioned a setting you use that helps. Is it under PBS?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Audioboxer said:


> Ah right good to know, system isn't sluggish so I will crack on with testing. I'm running a modified MSI bios with things unlocked and I see you mentioned a setting you use that helps. Is it under PBS?


Yes it's CLKREQ# and you can see if it's working with the miner; if the throughput improves while it's enabled.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

@Audioboxer 

I have updated the post with some instructions 









WHEAService, WHEA errors suppressor - unleash Ryzen...


Doesn't work with Windows 11 Either it's a bug, I have reported it, or Microsoft decided for you that is better you always get WHEA whatever you like it or not (more likely this one) Due to the high number of WHEA errors clogging the system, running a Ryzen with high FCLK incurs in a...




www.overclock.net


----------



## xVanilla

Hi Guys, 

could the 5900x owners of of you, post your settings running FCLK at 1900 and above? 

i am currently running 1866/3733 stable but whatever I try, can't get it stable without whea errors running above.

I read through the thread but whenever I find ppl with presuming stable settings, most still run into whea errors, which is a no go for me.


----------



## KedarWolf

This is a bit off-topic but helps PC performance, so may be interesting to some.

I use a stripped-down bloatware removed Windows 10 with a ton of services not needed disabled.

See here how I do it.

*Optimize-Offline Guide - Windows Debloating Tool, Windows 1803, 1903, 19H2, 1909, 20H1 and LTSC 2019*
All credit goes to GodHand and who wrote and maintains this script. And to @gdeliana who created the fork of Godhand' s Script we are using for...
forums.mydigitallife.net

This is my O/S after running four hours with MSI Afterburner running and VMWare installed. Some extra services with VMWare, it would be leaner if I uninstalled it.

*Edit: The second pic is with VMWare uninstalled.*


----------



## Luggage

ManniX-ITA said:


> Yes test with y-cruncher.
> But you need to compare for performance regressions.
> So while at 1900 FCLK run the Monero miner (xmr-stak-rx) for more than 15 minutes and record the throughput.
> Also take multiple benchmark results, especially Geekbench 5.
> Then run the same at FLCK 2000, you should get same or better scores.
> Better scores with the monero miner. Otherwise you have regression and it's better to go back to 1900.


I run the full stress suite but I have a sneaking suspicion that I could just run BBP, FFT and HNT to test for WHEA. BBP produces the most heat, FFT pushes EDC and HNT while fluctuating wildly pushes TDC and PPT by far the most. TM5 though pushes EDC and clocks even more, about the same as OCCT mem test.
But I don’t know if the other tests have some less obvious benefit for stability?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Luggage said:


> TM5 though pushes EDC and clocks even more, about the same as OCCT mem test.
> But I don’t know if the other tests have some less obvious benefit for stability?


TM5 is the champion of EDC, I think nothing can push more 
Yes the other y-cruncher tests are very important as well.
OCCT is only FFT and TM5 pure memory.
It's not only how much they consume in power but what they do which is important.

The miner is important above FCLK 1900 cause you can see clearly if the IF is behaving properly when maxed out.
But you need at least a 5900x.
Only 6-8 cores are not enough to fill the IF at 2000 MHz and see the difference.


----------



## Luggage

Aww dammit I thought I found a way to increase efficiency by 2/3


----------



## Audioboxer

KedarWolf said:


> This is a bit off-topic but helps PC performance, so may be interesting to some.
> 
> I use a stripped-down bloatware removed Windows 10 with a ton of services not needed disabled.
> 
> See here how I do it.
> 
> *Optimize-Offline Guide - Windows Debloating Tool, Windows 1803, 1903, 19H2, 1909, 20H1 and LTSC 2019*
> All credit goes to GodHand and who wrote and maintains this script. And to @gdeliana who created the fork of Godhand' s Script we are using for...
> forums.mydigitallife.net
> 
> This is my O/S after running four hours with MSI Afterburner running and VMWare installed. Some extra services with VMWare, it would be leaner if I uninstalled it.
> 
> *Edit: The second pic is with VMWare uninstalled.*
> 
> 
> View attachment 2527773
> 
> 
> View attachment 2527776


I need to get this done with Windows 11, the amount of processes I have at boot is shocking. Hoping I can find something that helps trim it down once installed, not looking for a clean install at the moment.

I briefly looked at the Sophia script but it was like damn I'll need to take out a degree to learn how to use this 

Ideally just want to cut down on unnecessary Windows services/tasks without breaking the installation.


----------



## KedarWolf




----------



## KedarWolf

X570S Unify-X can be ordered now, but not in stock backorders only in Canada. :/


----------



## Audioboxer

KedarWolf said:


> X570S Unify-X can be ordered now, but not in stock backorders only in Canada. :/


I've only got 1 NVMe 4.0 drive just now so I doubt it would be worth it. Still interested to see how memory gets on with this versus the B550.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Some new B550 Unify-X OC BIOS Rel. A42/43/44O:






AMD - Google Drive







drive.google.com


----------



## Audioboxer

ManniX-ITA said:


> Some new B550 Unify-X OC BIOS Rel. A42/43/44O:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AMD - Google Drive
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


AGESA version?

What's different with the O variant?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Audioboxer said:


> AGESA version?


Don't know but I suppose it's a 1.2.0.4 something


----------



## LionAlonso

ManniX-ITA said:


> Don't know but I suppose it's a 1.2.0.4 something


If its “a” i think they still have the VDDG bug, hope someone can confirm.


----------



## AdiSImpson

Audioboxer said:


> AGESA version?
> 
> What's different with the O variant?


SMU Checker says SMU 56.52 so its 1.2.0.3 C.


----------



## KedarWolf

Audioboxer said:


> AGESA version?
> 
> What's different with the O variant?


They are unlocked BIOS's with the full PBS and CBS menus available, lots more options to choose from, I'll post BIOS screenshots with what I use when I get home from work. Helps you be more stable and higher AIDA bandwidth etc.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

KedarWolf said:


> They are unlocked BIOS's with the full PBS and CBS menus available, lots more options to choose from, I'll post BIOS screenshots with what I use when I get home from work. Helps you be more stable and higher AIDA bandwidth etc.


Mmmm sounds nice I'm tempted to try. Which version are you testing?


----------



## KedarWolf

ManniX-ITA said:


> Mmmm sounds nice I'm tempted to try. Which version are you testing?


I run the A21O, brb, I'll get BIOS screenshots.

Edit: I update the microcode in the BIOS, there is a newer one for 5000 series CPUs, and the network firmware as well.


----------



## Audioboxer

KedarWolf said:


> I run the A21O, brb, I'll get BIOS screenshots.
> 
> Edit: I update the microcode in the BIOS, there is a newer one for 5000 series CPUs, and the network firmware as well.


Interested to know how that works!


----------



## KedarWolf

Audioboxer said:


> Interested to know how that works!


Here's A21O with updated microcode and ethernet firmware, you can flash in BIOS is better yet with the Aptio V Firmware Update Utility from within Windows.

The Aptio does a sector-by-sector bios update and is superior to flashing from within the BIOS. Open the BIOS with it, and choose these options including the Do Not Check ROM ID., then hit Flash and let it finish.

I just flashed the modded BIOS and it does work. On first boot if you get a black screen, don't panic, just power off your power supply after maybe 20 seconds into the boot, power on again and it'll boot. BIOS profiles from the regular BIOS WON'T work.

The BIOS and Aptio are in the download.





__





AfuWin.zip







drive.google.com















BIOS screenshots are in the Spoiler.



Spoiler: BIOS Screenshots


----------



## Audioboxer

KedarWolf said:


> Here's A21O with updated microcode and ethernet firmware, you can flash in BIOS is better yet with the Aptio V Firmware Update Utility from within Windows.
> 
> The Aptio does a sector-by-sector bios update and is superior to flashing from within the BIOS. Open the BIOS with it, and choose these options including the Do Not Check ROM ID., then hit Flash and let it finish.
> 
> I just flashed the modded BIOS and it does work. On first boot if you get a black screen, don't panic, just power off your power supply after maybe 20 seconds into the boot, power on again and it'll boot. BIOS profiles from the regular BIOS WON'T work.
> 
> The BIOS and Aptio are in the download.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AfuWin.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2529766
> 
> 
> BIOS screenshots are in the Spoiler.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: BIOS Screenshots
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2529768
> 
> View attachment 2529769
> 
> View attachment 2529770
> 
> View attachment 2529771
> 
> View attachment 2529772
> 
> View attachment 2529773
> 
> View attachment 2529774
> 
> View attachment 2529775
> 
> View attachment 2529776
> 
> View attachment 2529777
> 
> View attachment 2529778
> 
> View attachment 2529779
> 
> View attachment 2529780
> 
> View attachment 2529781
> 
> View attachment 2529782
> 
> View attachment 2529783
> 
> View attachment 2529784
> 
> View attachment 2529785
> 
> View attachment 2529798
> 
> View attachment 2529786
> 
> View attachment 2529787
> 
> View attachment 2529799
> 
> View attachment 2529788
> 
> View attachment 2529789
> 
> View attachment 2529790
> 
> View attachment 2529791
> 
> View attachment 2529792
> 
> View attachment 2529793
> 
> View attachment 2529794
> 
> View attachment 2529795
> 
> View attachment 2529796
> 
> View attachment 2529797


Fantastic! A lot for me to play with. Is there a particular reason you run an older BIOS other than "it just works"?


----------



## KedarWolf

Audioboxer said:


> Fantastic! A lot for me to play with. Is there a particular reason you run an older BIOS other than "it just works"?


I find it performs better in AIDA and SisSoft Sandra than the newer ones, more stable, better timings. It has Rebar video support too.

Here's my AIDA64, for 3800 WHEA free and TM5 stable, I'm pretty happy. Windows 10.

Edit: This with an Optimise Offline and services trimmed Windows install, but I have a few things running extra like a VPN, some benchmarking apps and game launcher apps etc. that add some services. It's a trimmed O/S but not a benching O/S.










Oh, and an amazing CPU-Z, I lucked out on this CPU. 









That CPU-Z was Windows 11, I had issues with it, not ready for release I feel, this is with Windows 10, much better single-core, bit less multi.


----------



## Audioboxer

KedarWolf said:


> Here's A21O with updated microcode and ethernet firmware, you can flash in BIOS is better yet with the Aptio V Firmware Update Utility from within Windows.
> 
> The Aptio does a sector-by-sector bios update and is superior to flashing from within the BIOS. Open the BIOS with it, and choose these options including the Do Not Check ROM ID., then hit Flash and let it finish.
> 
> I just flashed the modded BIOS and it does work. On first boot if you get a black screen, don't panic, just power off your power supply after maybe 20 seconds into the boot, power on again and it'll boot. BIOS profiles from the regular BIOS WON'T work.
> 
> The BIOS and Aptio are in the download.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AfuWin.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2529766
> 
> 
> BIOS screenshots are in the Spoiler.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: BIOS Screenshots
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2529768
> 
> View attachment 2529769
> 
> View attachment 2529770
> 
> View attachment 2529771
> 
> View attachment 2529772
> 
> View attachment 2529773
> 
> View attachment 2529774
> 
> View attachment 2529775
> 
> View attachment 2529776
> 
> View attachment 2529777
> 
> View attachment 2529778
> 
> View attachment 2529779
> 
> View attachment 2529780
> 
> View attachment 2529781
> 
> View attachment 2529782
> 
> View attachment 2529783
> 
> View attachment 2529784
> 
> View attachment 2529785
> 
> View attachment 2529798
> 
> View attachment 2529786
> 
> View attachment 2529787
> 
> View attachment 2529799
> 
> View attachment 2529788
> 
> View attachment 2529789
> 
> View attachment 2529790
> 
> View attachment 2529791
> 
> View attachment 2529792
> 
> View attachment 2529793
> 
> View attachment 2529794
> 
> View attachment 2529795
> 
> View attachment 2529796
> 
> View attachment 2529797


Follow up question, any chance you can update the microcode/ethernet for A44 or show me how to do it? Cheers


----------



## KedarWolf

Audioboxer said:


> Follow up question, any chance you can update the microcode/ethernet for A44 or show me how to do it? Cheers


I'm pretty sure A44 already has the latest of both but I'll check later.


----------



## aaronstransam

Just moved from strix b450 to unify-x b550. 5600x and 2x8gb b-die (viper 4400) on water. Stix had me limited to 3733-14-15-14-28 t1 @1.5 soc sweetspot at 1.075, vddg 1.035. Absolutely would not post any higher no mater what. I just posted a 3866-18-18-18-38 @1.5 soc 1.1 everything else auto on the unify. Any sweetspots this board likes you all might know before i start tightening up those timing whould be very apriciated. Thanks in advance.


----------



## algida79

Hello all,

Does anyone have any tips/settings to get the Unify non-X to POST with GDM off at 3800MHz? The CPU (3900XT) and the RAM kit (Crucial Ballistix 3000C15 2x16 DR Rev E) are capable, at least on my previous motherboard (Asus Prime X470 Pro), where I could pass all stability tests with GDM off just by leaving all termination values on Auto and only setting ClkDrvStr to 120Ω.

No such luck with the Unify, and I've already tried different ClkDrvStr values from 30-120Ω, plus ProcODT from the default 48Ω down to 32Ω.

Here is a ZenTimings screenshot of my current settings at 3800MHz GDM on:











Thanks in advance!


----------



## Denvys5

algida79 said:


> Hello all,
> 
> Does anyone have any tips/settings to get the Unify non-X to POST with GDM off at 3800MHz? The CPU (3900XT) and the RAM kit (Crucial Ballistix 3000C15 2x16 DR Rev E) are capable, at least on my previous motherboard (Asus Prime X470 Pro), where I could pass all stability tests with GDM off just by leaving all termination values on Auto and only setting ClkDrvStr to 120Ω.
> 
> No such luck with the Unify, and I've already tried different ClkDrvStr values from 30-120Ω, plus ProcODT from the default 48Ω down to 32Ω.
> 
> Here is a ZenTimings screenshot of my current settings at 3800MHz GDM on:
> 
> View attachment 2530641
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks in advance!


Try high rdwr-wrrd, like 18-7. I am running stable with 12-3



http://imgur.com/MwaQKxw


----------



## algida79

Denvys5 said:


> Try high rdwr-wrrd, like 18-7. I am running stable with 12-3
> 
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/MwaQKxw


Thanks for the quick help mate, you were spot on! It was the very aggressive tWRRD that the board was trying to train on its own. So, tWRRD 2 is no go, even with high tRDWR 12. I am currently booted with 8-3. It is odd, since with the Asus board I could do either 9-2 or 8-3.


----------



## KedarWolf

AMD Chipset Driver
Version
3.10.22.706
Release Date
2021-11-02
File Size
50.31 MB





__





MSI MPG B550 UNIFY-X AMD AM4 DDR4 CF M.2 USB 3.2 Gen 2 Wi-Fi 6 HDMI ATX Gaming Motherboard


Powered by AMD Ryzen AM4 processors, the MSI MEG B550 UNIFY-X begins its dark conquest with a design made to accomplish any task with cruel efficiency. Exclusive 2 DIMM solution deliver the world class memory performance. Connect to ultra-fast networks wi




www.msi.com


----------



## Mach3.2

KedarWolf said:


> AMD Chipset Driver
> Version
> 3.10.22.706
> Release Date
> 2021-11-02
> File Size
> 50.31 MB
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MSI MPG B550 UNIFY-X AMD AM4 DDR4 CF M.2 USB 3.2 Gen 2 Wi-Fi 6 HDMI ATX Gaming Motherboard
> 
> 
> Powered by AMD Ryzen AM4 processors, the MSI MEG B550 UNIFY-X begins its dark conquest with a design made to accomplish any task with cruel efficiency. Exclusive 2 DIMM solution deliver the world class memory performance. Connect to ultra-fast networks wi
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.msi.com


This one isn't on AMD's website yet, I guess MSI jumped the gun.

Edit: Processor Power Management Support got updated to v7.0.4.4 from v7.0.3.5, no changelog yet.


----------



## KedarWolf

5950x still better in multicore than 12900k. Single-core much better on Alder Lake though.

Ima gonna wait for 6000 series AMD CPUs for sure.


----------



## LesPaulLover

KedarWolf said:


> 5950x still better in multicore than 12900k. Single-core much better on Alder Lake though.
> 
> Ima gonna wait for 6000 series AMD CPUs for sure.


Bigtime! The REAL scam right now is DDR5 -- overpriced and underperforming. I'll be waiting for Zen4 and/or Raptor Lake on more mature DDR5 platforms. Hopefully DDR5 also won't be impossible to find and impossibly expensive by then, either~


----------



## LesPaulLover

I'm REALLY lookin' at this board, yall. Help me out here. I accidentally killed my X570 Taichi by plugging a fan in while the system was running - something I've probably done hundreds of times over the past 20 years - and FINALLY my worst fears came to life. Damn thing went POOF and has been COMPLETELY dead since then.

I got this X570s Aorus Master (new silent chipset) and I'm sorry but it just sucks. My DRAM that was running 3600MHz 14-14-14-34 (and all other timings tightened) on the Taichi cant even run 3600MHz standard XMP on this board without upping the VDIMM.


----------



## LesPaulLover

ManniX-ITA said:


> Yes test with y-cruncher.
> But you need to compare for performance regressions.
> So while at 1900 FCLK run the Monero miner (xmr-stak-rx) for more than 15 minutes and record the throughput.
> Also take multiple benchmark results, especially Geekbench 5.
> Then run the same at FLCK 2000, you should get same or better scores.
> Better scores with the monero miner. Otherwise you have regression and it's better to go back to 1900.


Whats the reason for the performance regression with 2000FCLK?


----------



## LesPaulLover

Spectre73 said:


> @thomasck That is really sad. I really suspect they somehow bodged the MB and now are not allowed to admit it because of RMA expectations. There are more people with the exact same problem, even though it does not seem to be widespread. But that might have to do with the rare combination of an AMD Navi card and the unify-x.


Could also just be certain batches due to manufacturing variance in available components or something, perhaps?


----------



## Spectre73

LesPaulLover said:


> Could also just be certain batches due to manufacturing variance in available components or something, perhaps?


Who knows? I can just say that the glitch does not happen with Aorus Master x570 v1 and x570s. So it at least somehow is board related. Have not heard of a solution since then.


----------



## LesPaulLover

Spectre73 said:


> Who knows? I can just say that the glitch does not happen with Aorus Master x570 v1 and x570s. So it at least somehow is board related. Have not heard of a solution since then.


So I should be OK if I have an NVIDIA GPU?


----------



## Spectre73

LesPaulLover said:


> So I should be OK if I have an NVIDIA GPU?


Can't say for sure, but only heard of it with a 6800 card. I believe so, yes.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

LesPaulLover said:


> Whats the reason for the performance regression with 2000FCLK?


Instability of Infinity Fabric over 1900 MHz.
Depends on the sample and configuration, the quality of the interposer and the IOD are factor as it's the CCD/s.


----------



## KedarWolf




----------



## LesPaulLover

ManniX-ITA said:


> Instability of Infinity Fabric over 1900 MHz.
> Depends on the sample and configuration, the quality of the interposer and the IOD are factor as it's the CCD/s.


Yea it's WHEA-CITY for this chip anywhere above 1866MHz FCLK. However, that seems to be EXTREMELY stable and so now I'm just working on dialing in my timings instead (currently 3733MHz DRAM // 1866MHz F/UCLK CL14 w/ tight secondary/tertiaries.

This board more stable in a couple hours than my X570s Aorus Master was after a couple WEEKS of testing......


----------



## Dziarson

From some reason ma board get boost 2 months ago valid 5025Mhz fclk 2000MHz stable 4 sek. 
Yesturday https://hwbot.org/submission/4853827_
Today i will do more test. 
5050Mhz on AIO


----------



## Dziarson




----------



## Dziarson

I love this board 🤭🤭🤭


----------



## SuperCloud

Hey all,
I am buying components for an AMD ryzen 5000 cpu build with RTX3080 Ti. The B550 Unify-X has peaked my interest for overclocking memory with tight timmings 3800 CL 14 or 4000 CL15 or CL16.
I read that there were issues with B550 Unify-X coil whine and instability?
If I purchase now, are those issues still present? Will my GPU run at pcie 4.0 x16 or drop to x8 or pcie 3.0 x16?

I was looking at x570S Edge Max or x570S Carbon Max than Unify-X, would these be better boards to overclock cpu (if possible) and memory for 1:1 ratio at least 3800 if not 4000?


----------



## Dziarson

FCLK4000 depends on CPU get x570S system will be faster .


----------



## ManniX-ITA

SuperCloud said:


> I read that there were issues with B550 Unify-X coil whine and instability?


Yes there are issues with coil whine, not with instability.
It's more likely you'll get coil whine than not.
Sometimes can be fixed tightening the VRM heatsink screws.



SuperCloud said:


> Will my GPU run at pcie 4.0 x16 or drop to x8 or pcie 3.0 x16?


It's a reported issue with AMD GPUs. nVidia, unless the board is a dud, are working fine.



SuperCloud said:


> I was looking at x570S Edge Max or x570S Carbon Max than Unify-X, would these be better boards to overclock cpu (if possible) and memory for 1:1 ratio at least 3800 if not 4000?


They are newer which is usually a bonus.
The Unify-X VRM is pretty good but it's not that I could do much better than the Aorus Master (which has one much more undersized) with my 5950x.
The 2 x DIMMs will let you easily OC RAM but unless you like to compete on HWBot or do frequency validation (or just being a memory OC freak) it's just a slight advantage.

Since you are going to spend more money for an X570S I would consider only those with:










Will make your OC life much easier 
And also Dual BIOS, those 2 models doesn't have it.




Dziarson said:


> FCLK4000 depends on CPU get x570S system will be faster .


Not sure about the X570S but the X570 is not faster than a B550.
It's actually slower if you use SATA...
FCLK 2000 depends also on the board but for sure it's much easier on a 5600X/5800X.


----------



## Dziarson

@ManniX-ITA im sure i was have x570 ****ty phantom gaming 4 and on some benchmarks she was 5-10% faster.


----------



## SuperCloud

ManniX-ITA said:


> Yes there are issues with coil whine, not with instability.
> It's more likely you'll get coil whine than not.
> Sometimes can be fixed tightening the VRM heatsink screws.
> 
> 
> 
> It's a reported issue with AMD GPUs. nVidia, unless the board is a dud, are working fine.
> 
> 
> 
> They are newer which is usually a bonus.
> The Unify-X VRM is pretty good but it's not that I could do much better than the Aorus Master (which has one much more undersized) with my 5950x.
> The 2 x DIMMs will let you easily OC RAM but unless you like to compete on HWBot or do frequency validation (or just being a memory OC freak) it's just a slight advantage.
> 
> Since you are going to spend more money for an X570S I would consider only those with:
> 
> View attachment 2533482
> 
> 
> Will make your OC life much easier
> And also Dual BIOS, those 2 models doesn't have it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not sure about the X570S but the X570 is not faster than a B550.
> It's actually slower if you use SATA...
> FCLK 2000 depends also on the board but for sure it's much easier on a 5600X/5800X.


Thank you for the help! Appreciate it.
B550 Unify-X is cheaper than when I posted so I am leaning more towards it, but if there is a benefit of going for X570*S* motherboard then I will consider it.

I want to overclock it for performance gains (gaming and typical work, software development, compiling). Not a OC freak or anything lol, its been 10 years since I updated my PC.

The x570*S* I highlighted have 6 and 7 actual power phases at 75A, compared to direct 14 power phases at 90A of Unify-X. So the MSI x570*S* are not that capable of OC cpu + memory (say FCLK up to 2000) ?

In terms of price to performance and to last at least 4-5 years, B550 Unify-X is sufficient or go with MSI x570*S*?

Are there any usb disconnect issues with B550 Unify-X?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Dziarson said:


> @ManniX-ITA im sure i was have x570 ****ty phantom gaming 4 and on some benchmarks she was 5-10% faster.


Sorry but I'm extremely skeptical... 5-10% is a massive difference, nobody here would buy a B550 then 
It's probably due to BIOS/AGESA differences, not the chipset.

The model is partially censored but I guess it's an ASRock.
They like to disregard any safety and specifications from AMD and they play with telemetry.

The CPU on ASRock boards is usually hiddenly overclocked even at stock.
You can probably achieve the same or better with the Unify-X if you play with setting and the telemetry settings.
But sometimes they do crazy stuff with VRM power delivery etc and effectively they can achieve better than other brands.

There are pros and cons of this approach 
Nothing that is related to the chipset anyway, their B550 model can probably do the same.



SuperCloud said:


> B550 Unify-X is cheaper than when I posted so I am leaning more towards it, but if there is a benefit of going for X570*S* motherboard then I will consider it.


Pro for the X570 is the higher speed and more ports for the I/O; the chipset link is Gen4 instead of Gen3.
There's a table here:









AMD Chipset Comparison: B550 Specs vs. X570, B450, X370, & Zen 3 Support (2020)


This includes the intent of the 500-series chipsets to support Zen 3 architecture (reminder: that’s not the same as Ryzen 4000 mobile, nor is it the same as Ryzen 3000 desktop), while the existing B450 and X470 boards are left to cap-out at Ryzen 3000 series (Zen 2) parts. -




www.gamersnexus.net





Which can become a con while overclocking. But you can always switch to Gen3 the X570.



SuperCloud said:


> The x570*S* I highlighted have 6 and 7 actual power phases at 75A, compared to direct 14 power phases at 90A of Unify-X. So the MSI x570*S* are not that capable of OC cpu + memory (say FCLK up to 2000) ?


The Unify-X VRM is top notch and quite cheap compared to the alternatives.
Said that I've seen 5950X overclocked almost as good as with the Unify-X with less powerful boatds.
The difference with CPUs that needs less power draw is very thin.

But indeed true phases at 90A gives you that little edge and simplicity in OC.
The Aorus Master with 14 phases at 50A can do the same as the Unify-X.
Materials, components, PCB design, VRM heatsink quality are all important aspects as well as the pure numbers on phases and capacitors size.
A fantastic board with a terrible BIOS can easily become just an expensive piece of junk...

FCLK 2000 is hard to achieve and can often more achievable with cheap boards than expensive ones 
Nevertheless just achieving it doesn't mean better performances.
Almost all that can achieve FCLK 2000 can do better at FCLK 1900 with tighter memory timings.
I run at FCLK 2000 and love it but unless you run any workload that can gain from the higher bandwidth the advantages are minimal.
The only use cases that I could find are benchmarking and mining.
But if you are mining crypto is more likely convenient to use a GPU!



SuperCloud said:


> In terms of price to performance and to last at least 4-5 years, B550 Unify-X is sufficient or go with MSI x570*S*?


There's a difference in I/O; if you don't think you are going to need those more USB, PCIe, etc then it's the same.



SuperCloud said:


> Are there any usb disconnect issues with B550 Unify-X?


That's an AGESA problem.
If you have them, it's related to the CPU, no the chipset or board.


----------



## Dziarson

ManniX-ITA said:


> FCLK 2000 is hard to achieve and can often more achievable with cheap boards than expensive ones


i think it is not a problem of board 


















2 boards 2 kit of mems one and same 5600X


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Dziarson said:


> i think it is not a problem of board


The CPU is the main factor, the board a secondary one 
A good CPU can be limited by a bad board, a good board can't magically make a bad CPU run at FCLK 2000.

Running at FCLK 2000 doesn't mean that it works properly.
Memory results will (almost) always be excellent.
But it doesn't mean the CPU is working properly and performances are good or scaling up.

The only tool to compare and see scaling up with FCLK is the monero miner.
It's the only "benchmark" that can fully use the gigantic bandwidth available to the memory.
But you need at least 10 cores to see the scaling; lower the Infinity Fabric bandwidth is well enough at FCLK 1900.
So it's a test only suitable for 5900X and 5950X.

For a 5600X/5800X check that all the benchmarks runs by GB5 and Linpack Extreme are scoring same or higher than FCLK 1900.
If you are there, woha, nice sample!


----------



## SuperCloud

ManniX-ITA said:


> Sorry but I'm extremely skeptical... 5-10% is a massive difference, nobody here would buy a B550 then
> It's probably due to BIOS/AGESA differences, not the chipset.
> 
> The model is partially censored but I guess it's an ASRock.
> They like to disregard any safety and specifications from AMD and they play with telemetry.
> 
> The CPU on ASRock boards is usually hiddenly overclocked even at stock.
> You can probably achieve the same or better with the Unify-X if you play with setting and the telemetry settings.
> But sometimes they do crazy stuff with VRM power delivery etc and effectively they can achieve better than other brands.
> 
> There are pros and cons of this approach
> Nothing that is related to the chipset anyway, their B550 model can probably do the same.
> 
> 
> 
> Pro for the X570 is the higher speed and more ports for the I/O; the chipset link is Gen4 instead of Gen3.
> There's a table here:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AMD Chipset Comparison: B550 Specs vs. X570, B450, X370, & Zen 3 Support (2020)
> 
> 
> This includes the intent of the 500-series chipsets to support Zen 3 architecture (reminder: that’s not the same as Ryzen 4000 mobile, nor is it the same as Ryzen 3000 desktop), while the existing B450 and X470 boards are left to cap-out at Ryzen 3000 series (Zen 2) parts. -
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.gamersnexus.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Which can become a con while overclocking. But you can always switch to Gen3 the X570.
> 
> 
> 
> The Unify-X VRM is top notch and quite cheap compared to the alternatives.
> Said that I've seen 5950X overclocked almost as good as with the Unify-X with less powerful boatds.
> The difference with CPUs that needs less power draw is very thin.
> 
> But indeed true phases at 90A gives you that little edge and simplicity in OC.
> The Aorus Master with 14 phases at 50A can do the same as the Unify-X.
> Materials, components, PCB design, VRM heatsink quality are all important aspects as well as the pure numbers on phases and capacitors size.
> A fantastic board with a terrible BIOS can easily become just an expensive piece of junk...
> 
> FCLK 2000 is hard to achieve and can often more achievable with cheap boards than expensive ones
> Nevertheless just achieving it doesn't mean better performances.
> Almost all that can achieve FCLK 2000 can do better at FCLK 1900 with tighter memory timings.
> I run at FCLK 2000 and love it but unless you run any workload that can gain from the higher bandwidth the advantages are minimal.
> The only use cases that I could find are benchmarking and mining.
> But if you are mining crypto is more likely convenient to use a GPU!
> 
> 
> 
> There's a difference in I/O; if you don't think you are going to need those more USB, PCIe, etc then it's the same.
> 
> 
> 
> That's an AGESA problem.
> If you have them, it's related to the CPU, no the chipset or board.


Thank you for the detailed response! This really helps! I believe the B550 Unify-X meets all my requirements in terms of USB ports and pcie and nvme m2.
One concern is the direct storage in the future and using pcie gen 3 nvme in the unify-X. So because of this, I was thinking of buying x570*S *MSI or Gigabyte board for secondary pcie gen 4 nvme drive that I will use..

so in terms of OC for gaming, general use, and software compilation purposes can you help me select the motherboard:
B550 Unify-X 14 direct phases + 90A - $280 [CAD]
MSI x570*S* Ace Max 16 direct phases + 90A - $560 [CAD]
MSI x570*S* Edge Max (Duet 12 phases) 6 direct phases + 75A - $390 [CAD]
MSI x570*S* Carbon Max (Duet 14 phases) 7 direct phases + 75A - $440 [CAD]
GigaByte x570*S* Aorus Master Direct 14 phases + 70A - $490 [CAD]

If you got another less costly motherboard that can OC cpu and memory well, please tell me.

As for usb disconnect, pcie gen 4 not working properly, thats *only* a CPU issue that some people experience but others do not?
Which CPU has been more prone to it, 5600x, 5800x, or 5900x? Which one do you recommend for gaming, general purpose, 1 virtual machine (linux), and software compilations (Android OS)

I do want to upgrade to 3D cache AMD cpu in Q1 2022 though. Thats why I didn't go the intel 12th gen route, but the usb disconnect, pcie gen 4 not working is making me lean towards it.

I will be using 3080 Ti FE

Please help , I am indecisive .


----------



## ManniX-ITA

SuperCloud said:


> If you got another less costly motherboard that can OC cpu and memory well, please tell me.


Did you consider the X570S Unify-X Max?
Wouldn't go for the Gigabyte as after two hacks they are less likely to provide a decent support.



SuperCloud said:


> As for usb disconnect, pcie gen 4 not working properly, thats *only* a CPU issue that some people experience but others do not?


PCI Gen4 is an issue with ATI GPUs and mostly limited to the B550 Unify-X.

USB disconnects is a general AMD issue; hits more some CPUs, much less others.
AMD tried to fix it with the latest AGESA with not much success.
Hopefully the next version will work...



SuperCloud said:


> Which CPU has been more prone to it, 5600x, 5800x, or 5900x? Which one do you recommend for gaming, general purpose, 1 virtual machine (linux), and software compilations (Android OS)


5600x and 5800x have 1 CCD and are less prone, if you want to change it in Q1 go for the 5800x. More than enough.


----------



## SuperCloud

ManniX-ITA said:


> Did you consider the X570S Unify-X Max?
> Wouldn't go for the Gigabyte as after two hacks they are less likely to provide a decent support.


I live in Canada and I have not seen x570*S* unify-X available anywhere. Even USA Amazon doesn't have it.
Thats why I listed the x570*S* motherboards that I can readily purchase or the B550 Unify-X (significantly cheaper though).




ManniX-ITA said:


> PCI Gen4 is an issue with ATI GPUs and mostly limited to the B550 Unify-X.
> 
> USB disconnects is a general AMD issue; hits more some CPUs, much less others.
> AMD tried to fix it with the latest AGESA with not much success.
> Hopefully the next version will work...


I will be using Nvidia 3080 Ti FE that I bought at MSRP . MSI didn't fix the ATI gpu issue at pcie gen 4?

I am more worried about the USB disconnect issue because I use external drives for file transfer and connecting my phone, webcam etc. Some users issue was fixed on 1.2.0.3*c *with select motherboards like MSI x570 Ace, and Gigabyte x570 Aorus Master, but B550 (have it a lot more).
So is it only CPU or combination with motherboard as well?
Which cpu experiences it more 5600x, 5800x, or 5900x?

Do I buy 5800x or 5600x, and B550 Unify-X or MSI x570*S* and see if I experience or what? I feel so conflicted because of this and not sure what to do..



ManniX-ITA said:


> 5600x and 5800x have 1 CCD and are less prone, if you want to change it in Q1 go for the 5800x. More than enough.


Yes, I definitely will upgrade to the 3D cache cpu, that is why I am leaning towards AMD, but the usb issue is making me think otherwise. I rely on USB ports a lot =(. My current 10 year old system is flawless except not capable of gaming ..


----------



## ManniX-ITA

SuperCloud said:


> I live in Canada and I have not seen x570*S* unify-X available anywhere. Even USA Amazon doesn't have it.
> Thats why I listed the x570*S* motherboards that I can readily purchase or the B550 Unify-X (significantly cheaper though).


Well among those I'd buy the Ace Max. The difference from the Carbon Max is not excessive and is much better.



SuperCloud said:


> MSI didn't fix the ATI gpu issue at pcie gen 4?


No fix. Although I have seen similar issues also on the Aorus Master, seems to be specific to the B550 Unify-X.



SuperCloud said:


> I am more worried about the USB disconnect issue because I use external drives for file transfer and connecting my phone, webcam etc. Some users issue was fixed on 1.2.0.3*c *with select motherboards like MSI x570 Ace, and Gigabyte x570 Aorus Master, but B550 (have it a lot more).
> So is it only CPU or combination with motherboard as well?
> So 5600x and 5800x experience it less or none at all?


Less on 1 CCD, they need less VDDG IOD voltage which makes it more infrequent.
Doesn't matter which board AFAIK. Some setups are working fine with the new AGESA, others don't.
Some were working fine and with the new AGESA they start having issues.
I have few problems with my 5950X, which are almost none at FCLK 2000, and the new AGESA made it much worse.

It's a risk and if it happens may limit OC and need some hard tweaking and finetuning to fix.
But still I have a couple of 10 Gbps USB SSD from where I run Windows for testing and use it often to read/write a lot of stuff and I had very few issues.
If you get a really bad sample there's also the RMA; directly from AMD heard is very quick.

From what I've heard also the Intel 10/11th gen have often similar issues.
Alder Lake is the alternative but good luck finding a DDR5 kit now 

I'd go for a 5800x and the Ace Max.


----------



## PJVol

ManniX-ITA said:


> They like to disregard any safety and specifications from AMD and they play with telemetry.


Are you sure, you didn't confuse it with gigabyte? )


----------



## ManniX-ITA

PJVol said:


> Are you sure, you didn't confuse it with gigabyte? )


Ahah no no.
Gigabyte is doing the same stuff but much more subtly and with a much lesser degree.


----------



## PJVol

ManniX-ITA said:


> Gigabyte is doing the same stuff but much more subtly and with a much lesser degree.


Ok, perhaps I have not so long history of using asrock, but in a 4 years with x370 taichi and b550, haven't seen (neither experienced) any of what you mentioned.


----------



## SuperCloud

ManniX-ITA said:


> Well among those I'd buy the Ace Max. The difference from the Carbon Max is not excessive and is much better.


Ace max vs Carbon Max there is a $120 CAD difference in price, so what makes the Ace better? Is it the VRM phases: 16 direct + 90A?
What else?



ManniX-ITA said:


> Less on 1 CCD, they need less VDDG IOD voltage which makes it more infrequent.
> Doesn't matter which board AFAIK. Some setups are working fine with the new AGESA, others don't.
> Some were working fine and with the new AGESA they start having issues.
> I have few problems with my 5950X, which are almost none at FCLK 2000, and the new AGESA made it much worse.
> 
> It's a risk and if it happens may limit OC and need some hard tweaking and finetuning to fix.
> But still I have a couple of 10 Gbps USB SSD from where I run Windows for testing and use it often to read/write a lot of stuff and I had very few issues.
> If you get a really bad sample there's also the RMA; directly from AMD heard is very quick.


Where can I learn about these VDDG IOD voltages and other parameters? Sorry for asking such dumb questions.

What problems do you have with 5950x on B550 Unify-X? Is it the usb disconnect that happens or? What made the new AGESA (1.2.0.3c) worse?
So basically its *the cpu *that causes these usb disconnect and other issues through AGESA? :| I thought it would be motherboard as well.

Should I buy x570S Ace with 5800x and see if i get a good batch that doesn't cause it lol? We have this retailer Canada Computers and they are really awful. They don't recognize this as an issue, they will make up any reason/excuse and turn you down. Also, they don't offer anything once it is open. You're on your own, unless you spend $300 on their warranty and again, they will not replace for "usb issue" because they said its no such thing lol. I asked them.



ManniX-ITA said:


> From what I've heard also the Intel 10/11th gen have often similar issues.
> Alder Lake is the alternative but good luck finding a DDR5 kit now
> 
> I'd go for a 5800x and the Ace Max.


Currently there is a Black Friday sale going on so 5800x is on sale 
For alder lake, I would grab DDR4 motherboard honestly lol. I am thinking of alder lake, unless you suggest I take a risk with AMD and see how it goes?
I haven't heard of any usb disconnect issues with 10th gen lol, 11th gen not sure, but it is power hungry and low performance.

I am using intel i7 2600k for 10 years, no issues.


----------



## SuperCloud

ManniX-ITA said:


> Well among those I'd buy the Ace Max. The difference from the Carbon Max is not excessive and is much better.
> 
> I'd go for a 5800x and the Ace Max.


So why do you not recommend B550 Unify-X? It is $280 CAD vs $560 CAD, both have similar direct phases (14 vs 16) at 90A?

will the Ace x570*S* be less prone to issues or better designed?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

PJVol said:


> Ok, perhaps I have not so long history of using asrock, but in a 4 years with x370 taichi and b550, haven't seen (neither experienced) any of what you mentioned.


I've bought ASRock boards since day one, cause they are cheap eheh

Don't get me wrong, I love their absolute disregard of the rules 
Many of the overclocking options we have in the BIOS are the result of their brave deaf hears.
Despite being threatened by AMD and Intel of blacklisting more times than all other manufacturers together, they keep doing it fiercely.

The competitors they always have to adapt to stay competitive and their tricks becomes standard OC features, very nice!
Of course the boards are mostly cheap, very often with a bad PCB design and low quality components. Stability is often terrible.
But they have done some legendary models and have improved quality a lot in the last years.
The BIOS layout it's still quite bare and often there are less options than water in a desert. But it's ok if you don't pay too much for it.

I still hate myself for buying the 990FX Fatal1ty... awful mainboard, unstable with an 8350/8370 even at stock. But yeah, cheap...
Funny thing is at some point I had to buy another one; it was the only board still on the market. Still cheap thou!

Of course there's a reason why they always can walk away with this behavior; their are ASUS, they are Pegatron, not a nobody 



SuperCloud said:


> Ace max vs Carbon Max there is a $120 CAD difference in price, so what makes the Ace better? Is it the VRM phases: 16 direct + 90A?
> What else?


Yes the VRM, guess it covers the price difference!



SuperCloud said:


> Where can I learn about these VDDG IOD voltages and other parameters? Sorry for asking such dumb questions.


Just the common wisdom here in the forum 
Don't worry about it, if you get one you can get help here in case of issues.



SuperCloud said:


> What problems do you have with 5950x on B550 Unify-X? Is it the usb disconnect that happens or? What made the new AGESA (1.2.0.3c) worse?
> So basically its *the cpu *that causes these usb disconnect and other issues through AGESA? :| I thought it would be motherboard as well.


The motherboard is a factor, it's 95-99% the CPU.
Mostly is how the manufacturer integrated the AGESA; how well, which patch, etc.

Yes 1.2.0.3c made me having USB issues also at FCLK 2000. I don't have almost any issue at FCLK 2000 with 1.2.0.1.
The issues I have randomly are mostly related to power draw when I connected too many devices via HUBs. I really have too many USB devices 



SuperCloud said:


> Should I buy x570S Ace with 5800x and see if i get a good batch that doesn't cause it lol? We have this retailer Canada Computers and they are really awful. They don't recognize this as an issue, they will make up any reason/excuse and turn you down. Also, they don't offer anything once it is open. You're on your own, unless you spend $300 on their warranty and again, they will not replace for "usb issue" because they said its no such thing lol. I asked them.


That's a problem indeed. But direct RMA from AMD is very quick.
If you don't switch immediately to the new rig, in case of issues you can go direct with them.
I remember other OCN users in Canada they said it took less than 2 weeks to get a new CPU.
But really you need to be very unlucky.



SuperCloud said:


> Currently there is a Black Friday sale going on so 5800x is on sale


It's tempting 



SuperCloud said:


> For alder lake, I would grab DDR4 motherboard honestly lol. I am thinking of alder lake, unless you suggest I take a risk with AMD and see how it goes?


I have not seen a single DDR4 board on sale for Alder Lake, are they selling it?
On the paper seems an excellent CPU, even not overclocked.
With OC is really power hungry. But the 12600K runs really well, not too needy both of power and cooling in OC.



SuperCloud said:


> I haven't heard of any usb disconnect issues with 10th gen lol, 11th gen not sure, but it is power hungry and low performance.


I have no direct experience.
But when I lamented these issues with someone really expert, trustable and with extensive knowledge he told me it's often the same or worse on 10/11th Gen.



SuperCloud said:


> So why do you not recommend B550 Unify-X? It is $280 CAD vs $560 CAD, both have similar direct phases (14 vs 16) at 90A?


It was my first recommendation but you said you need Gen4 storage.
Unless you decide to run the GPU at 8x, the B550 Unify-X is limited compared to the X570.
That's exactly where they differ.



SuperCloud said:


> will the Ace x570*S* be less prone to issues or better designed?


No, I think it's the same.


----------



## PJVol

ManniX-ITA said:


> I still hate myself for buying the 990FX Fatal1ty... awful mainboard, unstable with an 8350/8370 even at stock. But yeah, cheap...


Oh.., now I see what you were about...
I should have clarified that the last board I had before the x370 taichi is a Socket A from VIA (paired with athlon XP 2600 Barton)  , so that you have an idea of the time passed outside of computer technology for me.
If we're talking about the last 4 years, then it's hard to disagree, regarding the BIOS, though components' quality seems acceptable to me.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

PJVol said:


> I should have clarified that the board I had before the x370 taichi is a Socket A from VIA


Wow, I had quite many Athlon XP & Duron. Good ol' times!



PJVol said:


> If we're talking about the last 4 years, then it's hard to disagree, regarding the BIOS, though components' quality seems acceptable to me.


It really depends on a per model basis about components quality. Sometimes are bad but on average I find it acceptable for the cost.
Good price/quality/performance ratio overall.
And to be honest the tier 1 brands are not doing so much better despite the claims.
What about ALL of them having the caps blowing up cause they bought the cheap China stolen replica caps instead of the genuine original Japanese version?
Many of them they were marketing the boards with bold claims about the quality of their caps!
And indeed while I had ASUS, MSI and Gigabyte boards with exploding caps, I don't remember any ASRock with the issue.
They just always used average quality cheap Chinese caps which did just work...


----------



## SuperCloud

ManniX-ITA said:


> Yes the VRM, guess it covers the price difference!


But, isn't the MSI x570*S *Carbon Max 7 direct phases + 75A enough to overclock cpu and memory to do 1:1 ratio?
Or B550 Unify-X / x570S Ace vrm are needed?

I read that any higher OC than 1:1 ratio, there is performance hit on gaming , so based on this I want to OC to maintain 1:1 ratio.




ManniX-ITA said:


> The motherboard is a factor, it's 95-99% the CPU.
> Mostly is how the manufacturer integrated the AGESA; how well, which patch, etc.
> 
> Yes 1.2.0.3c made me having USB issues also at FCLK 2000. I don't have almost any issue at FCLK 2000 with 1.2.0.1.
> The issues I have randomly are mostly related to power draw when I connected too many devices via HUBs. I really have too many USB devices
> 
> 
> 
> That's a problem indeed. But direct RMA from AMD is very quick.
> If you don't switch immediately to the new rig, in case of issues you can go direct with them.
> I remember other OCN users in Canada they said it took less than 2 weeks to get a new CPU.
> But really you need to be very unlucky.


Oh darn, even you experienced usb disconnect issues on B550 Unify-X. Didn't you try to RMA/exchange the cpu? 
I've read some people the 1.2.0.3c fixed it, but yours has gotten worse .

I guess I need to try and see it.



ManniX-ITA said:


> I have not seen a single DDR4 board on sale for Alder Lake, are they selling it?
> On the paper seems an excellent CPU, even not overclocked.
> With OC is really power hungry. But the 12600K runs really well, not too needy both of power and cooling in OC.


Well DDR4 3600 CL16 is $110 here so I was gonna use that for alder lake. Yeah, alder lake is great! But, there are compatibility issues such as old games may not work due to different hybrid design, and same with applications. So, there is that. 



ManniX-ITA said:


> It was my first recommendation but you said you need Gen4 storage.
> Unless you decide to run the GPU at 8x, the B550 Unify-X is limited compared to the X570.
> That's exactly where they differ.
> 
> No, I think it's the same.


I don't know if I need two pcie gen 4 nvme. My use case is gaming, software development, general purpose use (HD streaming etc). My CPU M2 slot will be gen4 nvme, but for game storage (or installing games), and just general file storage, do I need pcie gen 4 nvme or pcie gen 3 nvme is sufficient?

That's what it really comes down to and I can't decide. I will be using my current SATA SSD MX500 1TB in new system as storage. I won't buy *secondary *pcie based nvme yet because my current build is already expensive. But, down the line I may grab secondary pcie nvme ssd.

This more pcie gen 4, better vrm for OC at 1:1, and buying 3D-V cache cpu are my deciding factors for motherboard.

Thank you!


----------



## ManniX-ITA

SuperCloud said:


> But, isn't the MSI x570*S *Carbon Max 7 direct phases + 75A enough to overclock cpu and memory to do 1:1 ratio?
> Or B550 Unify-X / x570S Ace vrm are needed?
> 
> I read that any higher OC than 1:1 ratio, there is performance hit on gaming , so based on this I want to OC to maintain 1:1 ratio.


Better VRM, more OC headroom.
Yes always 1:1 and probably not more than 1900:3800.
7 phases at 75A is not bad. But it's not the same 



SuperCloud said:


> I guess I need to try and see it.


No I didn't RMA the CPU, the chances it would be the same with a new 5950X were too high.
You need to see, I wouldn't be worried about it.
Even if you have issues most of the times can be fixed setting manual voltages for VDDG.



SuperCloud said:


> I don't know if I need two pcie gen 4 nvme. My use case is gaming, software development, general purpose use (HD streaming etc). My CPU M2 slot will be gen4 nvme, but for game storage (or installing games), and just general file storage, do I need pcie gen 4 nvme or pcie gen 3 nvme is sufficient?


Windows 11 will have Direct Storage and new games will fully use Gen4 bandwidth like the XBox.
In general no you don't need it. I have a 980 Pro Gen4, 970 Pro Gen3 and a SATA 860 QVO.
There's almost no difference in gaming or game loading between them.
Anyway you can install on the Gen4 CPU drive the few games that will support this feature.
By the time will be popular you can probably replace the primary M2 with a 4 or 8TB Gen4


----------



## KedarWolf

Win10BenchISO.zip







drive.google.com





*New and improved benching ISO, stripped, services disabled.*

Windows 10 LTSC 2021, lots of services disabled and all bloatware removed.

Tested as working in VMWare.

There will be no printing, no audio no Wi-Fi, no Bluetooth etc. just a bare-bones Win 10 operating system strictly for benching.

Before installing the O/S, you might want to back up your existing O/S with a Macrium Reflect Free boot USB you make in 'Other Tasks' in the software.

Or just install the Windows 10 to a spare M.2 or SSD to dual boot with your existing O/S.

READ the README.txt in the .zip file, there are some more things to disable with Autoruns and you need to install your chipset drivers and use the included NVCleanstall_1.12.0.exe to install Nvidia drivers.

Burn the ISO with the included RUFUS and can only be used as a clean Windows install.


----------



## Dziarson

Hey guys has anyone raid 0 of 4 disks nvme on unify-x ?


----------



## Denvys5

Denvys5 said:


> 1) How to get bclk running past 102.6? I get instant crash, and I think I am doing something wrong here. Maybe its gpu that doesnt like high bclk?
> 2) How to make this board train DR ram past 4333? It manages to boot 4333 after several training failures, but if it does boot, it is actually stable. I even can push bclk to 102.6 with 4333 initial memory freq to get 4445 - so 4445 is actually achievable. What I have also noticed, board won't train 4333 if I keep high cpu clocks, even 4Ghz is too high.


I am back, with answers for myself.
1) my bclk was limited not by drives or else, but by garbage ASUS GT1030, which I used as gpu. Got 109 bclk after gpu swap.
2) I did succeed training 4400 strap, tho wasnt easy. It even was kinda stable


Spoiler












denvys5`s y-cruncher - Pi-2.5b score: 2min 15sec 643ms with a Ryzen 5 3600


The Ryzen 5 3600 @ 4450.1MHzscores getScoreFormatted in the y-cruncher - Pi-2.5b benchmark. denvys5ranks #null worldwide and #null in the hardware class. Find out more at HWBOT.




hwbot.org














But no more, 4466 with R5 3600 is no go.
As was suggested in thread "go with cezanne". Done, R5 5600G. Still, cant boot 4466. I cant say I worked hard, but, at a first glance, no improvement at multiplier... 
Got valid with 105.6mhz, 4640mt 2xDR sticks


Spoiler















Board struggles a lot training anything past 4266


----------



## gameinn

Does anyone have info on what headphones these can power (ohms wise?) I can't find much info on "audio boost".


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Denvys5 said:


> What bios version do I run daily? I started with A20, idk how bad is it, so far seems fine. Minor adjustment, I am looking only for ReBAR-ready versions.


I use A21O, latest decent is A44O (slower for me).
Both have ReBar.



Denvys5 said:


> Board struggles a lot training anything past 4266


It's neither the board or the CPU, it's the memory.
2xDR 32GB are best run at lower frequencies.
Your timings are so high that running them at that speed is just an exercise of style.
Also if you don't have set FCLK 1:1 with MCLK, the latency is probably ugly.


----------



## rj2

Hi .using a 550 unify with 32gig kit gskill flareX ram,for the life of me i cannot figure out in bios how to manually set the sub trfc timings,i have it set at 272-auto,i have searched a lot ,looked in the advanced dram config as well as the amd overclocking menu.Any help appreciated!!


----------



## Luggage

rj2 said:


> Hi .using a 550 unify with 32gig kit gskill flareX ram,for the life of me i cannot figure out in bios how to manually set the sub trfc timings,i have it set at 272-auto,i have searched a lot ,looked in the advanced dram config as well as the amd overclocking menu.Any help appreciated!!


If it’s like x570. Ignore trfc, set trfc/1 trfc/2 trfc/4


----------



## Denvys5

ManniX-ITA said:


> It's neither the board or the CPU, it's the memory.


mems cant train 4333 properly, but if they do, they also can run like 4600. Yeah, PCB issue, sticks suck nice logic  😁
And if other board can properly boot these same sticks at 4400, thats also sticks issue, they are too unpredictable XD 


ManniX-ITA said:


> It's neither the board or the CPU, it's the memory.
> 2xDR 32GB are best run *at lower frequencies.*


at what? This thread gives me suspicion that I am running 2x32 faster than everybody else. And I know it isnt true  


ManniX-ITA said:


> Your timings are so high that running them at that speed is just an exercise of style.


You ever heard of valids? 


Dont take this seriously, just wasnt helpful 👌


----------



## rj2

Luggage said:


> If it’s like x570. Ignore trfc, set trfc/1 trfc/2 trfc/4


thats my issue lol,i want to set it manual trfc 1 272 trfc 2 199 trfc 4 122
but the setting in the dram config-sits at auto-nothing else works-tried typing manual instead of auto nothing
bios is msi latest beta


----------



## thomasck

@rj2 not sure if is possible to set all three. i've set my timings a while ago and IIRC i could only set trfc, the other two took the same value automatically, that is, trfc 280, trfc 2 280 and trcf 4 280


----------



## rj2

ya i don`t know,there are posts in this thread where the trfc 1 2 4 timings are set!!


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Denvys5 said:


> You ever heard of valids?


Okay, if you are just doing validation has more sense 
But it doesn't really make it so valuable if it's not 1:1
If the other boards were with 4 DIMMs remember there are subtle differences
Usually you need to target lower ProcODT and DrvStr on this board


----------



## ManniX-ITA

rj2 said:


> Hi .using a 550 unify with 32gig kit gskill flareX ram,for the life of me i cannot figure out in bios how to manually set the sub trfc timings,i have it set at 272-auto,i have searched a lot ,looked in the advanced dram config as well as the amd overclocking menu.Any help appreciated!!


There are multiple selections for tRFC; one will duplicate the value on tRFC2/4 and the other will allow different inputs


----------



## Dziarson

I wast try loot of bios and there are some of them there you cannot set TRFC 1-2-3 it is not working. Now i have A.30 i think is the best one for benching.
One important thing sometimes you set trfc save setings in bios and after restart you have to go 2 time to bios and save him one more time .Then TRFc will be set Biuldzoid have same problem on this board .









now i want to see 4X ns on AMD 








Im close


----------



## Luggage

Dziarson said:


> I wast try loot of bios and there are some of them there you cannot set TRFC 1-2-3 it is not working. Now i have A.30 i think is the best one for benching.
> One important thing sometimes you set trfc save setings in bios and after restart you have to go 2 time to bios and save him one more time .Then TRFc will be set Biuldzoid have same problem on this board .
> View attachment 2534915
> 
> 
> now i want to see 4X ns on AMD
> View attachment 2534916
> 
> Im close











[Official] AMD Ryzen DDR4 24/7 Memory Stability Thread


Alright, guess it is true what they say a manual overclock is almost always going to kick PBO's ass on CB lol. 1000 points more, but it comes with the price of 1.35v and during CB I was hitting 92~95 degrees with loop on idle fans. With fans at 100% I managed to curb it to 86~88 degrees. This...




www.overclock.net


----------



## Dziarson

Luggage said:


> [Official] AMD Ryzen DDR4 24/7 Memory Stability Thread
> 
> 
> Alright, guess it is true what they say a manual overclock is almost always going to kick PBO's ass on CB lol. 1000 points more, but it comes with the price of 1.35v and during CB I was hitting 92~95 degrees with loop on idle fans. With fans at 100% I managed to curb it to 86~88 degrees. This...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net


Overclock means stabilyty nooo its have to do benchmarck what you want nothing else .
My stability on ram is FCLK 2000 4000mem cl 16 but you cannot bench on that high Cl.


----------



## rj2

okay 2 pix of where trfc can be changed in the 550 unify bios,in the amd section-trfc cntrl is where the numbers are 110 110 110
do those numbers need to be entered as hexadecimaal?,entering them as the numbers 272 199 122 are totally wrong once viewed in zen timings for example


----------



## KedarWolf

rj2 said:


> okay 2 pix of where trfc can be changed in the 550 unify bios,in the amd section-trfc cntrl is where the numbers are 110 110 110
> do those numbers need to be entered as hexadecimaal?,entering them as the numbers 272 199 122 are totally wrong once viewed in zen timings for example


On the first pic you keep the top tRFC entry on Auto and then change the three below it.


----------



## rj2

geez right in front of me,LOL.thanks so much Kedar from 1 canuck to another!!


----------



## Veii

infraredbg said:


> 00A20F12 cpuid should be Vermeer B2 revision.


Correct
6 months early bird 
BG 2143 SUS ~ confirmed








2139 is A0








EDIT:
Requires 1.2.0.5 to function well. AMD Overclocking tab on 1203C barely reacts to it, only Mailbox comments pass through


----------



## Dziarson

49,9NS


----------



## KedarWolf

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/578340164187979796/916409170360676402/B550UNIFY-XA45.zip



Unify-X AGESA 1205 BIOS, unlocked menus.


----------



## drdrache

KedarWolf said:


> https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/578340164187979796/916409170360676402/B550UNIFY-XA45.zip
> 
> 
> 
> Unify-X AGESA 1205 BIOS, unlocked menus.


they got the Non -X floating around?


----------



## Luggage

drdrache said:


> they got the Non -X floating around?





Luggage said:


> Agesa 1205 test beta bios AGESA 1205 - Google Drive


not unlocked though


----------



## drdrache

Luggage said:


> not unlocked though


well, it's a start; If I knew how to unlock them on these newer bios, I'd just do it myself - call it a lost skill (as in, I lost it  )
either way,

Thankies!


----------



## jayfkay

will there be a huge difference in ram oc between the X and non-X? ive seen a lot of people overclock on the x570 unify which is also 4dimm, so I am wondering if it even matters.


----------



## KedarWolf

jayfkay said:


> will there be a huge difference in ram oc between the X and non-X? ive seen a lot of people overclock on the x570 unify which is also 4dimm, so I am wondering if it even matters.


Well, the Unify-X is only two DIMM slots and the memory tracing is shorter. Two DIMM boards almost always overclock memory than four DIMM boards, especially since B550 and X570 is T-Topology and overclock better with two memory sticks.


----------



## jayfkay

KedarWolf said:


> Well, the Unify-X is only two DIMM slots and the memory tracing is shorter. Two DIMM boards almost always overclock memory than four DIMM boards, especially since B550 and X570 is T-Topology and overclock better with two memory sticks.


so the X570 Unify and B550 Unify-X have T-Topo and the regular B550 Unify has daisy chain? I just wanna know if the b550 unify would oc 2x16 b-die significantly worse tahn the unify-x


----------



## KedarWolf

jayfkay said:


> so the X570 Unify and B550 Unify-X have T-Topo and the regular B550 Unify has daisy chain? I just wanna know if the b550 unify would oc 2x16 b-die significantly worse tahn the unify-x


No, they all have T-Topology.

Edit: But two DIMM boards have fewer and shorter tracings so are known to overclock memory better.


----------



## Luggage

W


KedarWolf said:


> No, they all have T-Topology.
> 
> Edit: But two DIMM boards have fewer and shorter tracings so are known to overclock memory better.


What “all”? No x570 or b550 is T-topology. Some preproduction boards where but if you want t-topology you have to go back to x470.


----------



## KedarWolf

Luggage said:


> W
> 
> What “all”? No x570 or b550 is T-topology. Some preproduction boards where but if you want t-topology you have to go back to x470.


Yes, I got mixed up. I meant to say they are daisy chain.

My dyslexic brain in action again.


----------



## Dziarson

@Luggage


----------



## Dziarson

This board is best  watch CL


----------



## Audioboxer

KedarWolf said:


> https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/578340164187979796/916409170360676402/B550UNIFY-XA45.zip
> 
> 
> 
> Unify-X AGESA 1205 BIOS, unlocked menus.


This comes as a .ROM file, is it OK to rename it to flash through BIOS?

Edit - Renaming works fine


----------



## Audioboxer

First impressions of the BIOS, my mouse jerk issues are fixed on FCLK 1933~2000 but y-cruncher test 17 can still cause USB disconnects. I'm trying to stabilise this, but so far it seems only 1 foot forward not both. Somewhat promising though, as prior BIOS I couldn't use the computer if OCCT/y-cruncher were hitting the CPU at FCLK 2000, now I can use the computer but I'm still having some issues with USB drop outs.

CPU VCORE seems to be capped a lot lower than 1.5v. It seems maybe around 1.45v (often less). This is hurting light load boosts. My CB23 scores seem to be lower with my prior curve/PBO/telemetry settings as well, so possibly heavy loads are hurting a bit as well.

No idea if this is a voltage bug like how VDDG was bugged on 1.2.0.4 or if AMD are purposefully reducing the voltage they're going to allow their chips to boost to (hopefully not).

So an interesting BIOS in so far as it fixes some issues I had above 1900 FCLK, but it seems I might not quite get 2000 FCLK stable yet and also if staying at 1900 it seems performance is going to be worse than 1.2.0.3c.

1.2.0.5










1.2.0.3c










Core VID is definitely broken on this BIOS.


----------



## Audioboxer

Scratch the above, PBO off, voltage is fine. So it's clear old PBO values and your old curve settings will NOT transfer to 1.2.0.5. Seems everything has to be done all over.

*edit* - Turning PBO on, irrespective of just enabled or with manually set values, introduces a low voltage cap again. No curve in use. Seems it's PBO that is broken.


----------



## Pedropc

It is advisable to update then to Bios 1.2.0.5 ???, is it better than the previous ones ???. Greetings and thank you.


----------



## Luggage

Pedropc said:


> It is advisable to update then to Bios 1.2.0.5 ???, is it better than the previous ones ???. Greetings and thank you.


I’ll wait for non beta/test version… unless you really feel like beta testing.


----------



## TheBoy08

Hello, I just switched to a B550 Unify-x recently (from a x570 Asus Dark Hero). I used to be able to get 9202 multi score on Cinebench r20 with my Dark Hero. Since switching I was able to run tighter timings on my ram kit AND better PBO settings (-30 on all cores + 200Mhz boost) the problem is since switching mobo I barely get 8800 multi score on Cinebench r20 while also getting higher temps (now hitting the 85C during r20 run) despite having what I would qualify as better PBO settings. What am I missing or doing wrong?


----------



## domdtxdissar

TheBoy08 said:


> Hello, I just switched to a B550 Unify-x recently (from a x570 Asus Dark Hero). I used to be able to get 9202 multi score on Cinebench r20 with my Dark Hero. Since switching I was able to run tighter timings on my ram kit AND better PBO settings (-30 on all cores + 200Mhz boost) the problem is since switching mobo I barely get 8800 multi score on Cinebench r20 while also getting higher temps (now hitting the 85C during r20 run) despite having what I would qualify as better PBO settings. What am I missing or doing wrong?


I would guess you need to use weaker LLC on the MSI motherboard to match the Asus performance, lower vcore means lower temp which again mean high boosting.
Dark Hero @ auto LLC is the weakest LLC there is.. ive even seen above 10% voltage drop at around 250 PPT


----------



## TheBoy08

domdtxdissar said:


> I would guess you need to use weaker LLC on the MSI motherboard to match the Asus performance, lower vcore means lower temp which again mean high boosting.
> Dark Hero @ auto LLC is the weakest LLC there is.. ive even seen above 10% voltage drop at around 250 PPT


That makes sense! I'll try that tomorrow.
I was using auto LLC on my Dark Hero.


----------



## SuperCloud

I got my build done
AMD 5800x, B550 Unify-X rev 2.1 board, and crucial balistix 16GB (2x8GB) CL16 at 3600mhz.
I want to overclock my cpu and memory for better gaming and daily performance.
How do I get started on overclocking the cpu and memory? I want to push my memory to 3800mhz at CL15 or make 3600mhz at CL14.
Please help!

Also, how do I check for those usb disconnect issues? As in what triggers those issues? I have GPU 3080 Ti FE at pcie gen4 and nvme gen4 installed and being used.


----------



## TheBoy08

domdtxdissar said:


> I would guess you need to use weaker LLC on the MSI motherboard to match the Asus performance, lower vcore means lower temp which again mean high boosting.
> Dark Hero @ auto LLC is the weakest LLC there is.. ive even seen above 10% voltage drop at around 250 PPT


Follow up: I tweaked LLC and the performances improved, still not up with what I used to be able to achieve on the Dark Hero but at least it's a big step forward.

For whoever had the same issue as me: MSI LLC is inverse of ASUS, 1 being flat, 8 being the most droopy. Asus has 8 being the flattest, and 1 being the most droopy. So you want to use level 8 LLC on a MSI board if you want to match Asus' LLC.


----------



## Dziarson

@TheBoy08 x570 is faster then B550 it is normal you have better results on x570


----------



## TheBoy08

Dziarson said:


> @TheBoy08 x570 is faster then B550 it is normal you have better results on x570


I'm getting similar results now that I fixed my issue so...


----------



## drdrache

so... I have an issue which is of my own making (you'll see, it's sad really) -
Board : Unify
ram : decent g.skill B-die

so, when I got this board and some b-die; I worked with a few fellas who helped me understand ram OC and tweaking, but I really only retained a little bit, but I got tweaked B-die on this board, and was able to replicate the settings across bios updates, actually pretty easy... 
these settings here :










no problem you say... should have learned instead of replicating what I didn't full understand you say; all true.but it worked and I was learning more and more as I researched; but - then many things happened, and then Bios 146 was dropped recently (I was on 145) so I thought, no big deal right?

I was unable to get it to boot with these settings - I must be missing something somewhere.
I get the speed set.. the voltage...
and the timings and sub-timings (first two set of settings)

I get to windows login; and then crashes - I think I am missing something; I went back to 145; and I still couldn't get my settings to work.
issues I am aware of :
tRFCPAGE - this supposed to stay zero?
tRFC - tRFC2 -TRFC4 - tRFC/2/4 - which one HAS to be set and which is auto?
only set VDIMM - or do I need to set MEM VTT?

I understand there is a skill gap here - and I am working on it.


----------



## TheBoy08

drdrache said:


> so... I have an issue which is of my own making (you'll see, it's sad really) -
> Board : Unify
> ram : decent g.skill B-die
> 
> so, when I got this board and some b-die; I worked with a few fellas who helped me understand ram OC and tweaking, but I really only retained a little bit, but I got tweaked B-die on this board, and was able to replicate the settings across bios updates, actually pretty easy...
> these settings here :
> View attachment 2537466
> 
> 
> 
> no problem you say... should have learned instead of replicating what I didn't full understand you say; all true.but it worked and I was learning more and more as I researched; but - then many things happened, and then Bios 146 was dropped recently (I was on 145) so I thought, no big deal right?
> 
> I was unable to get it to boot with these settings - I must be missing something somewhere.
> I get the speed set.. the voltage...
> and the timings and sub-timings (first two set of settings)
> 
> I get to windows login; and then crashes - I think I am missing something; I went back to 145; and I still couldn't get my settings to work.
> issues I am aware of :
> tRFCPAGE - this supposed to stay zero?
> tRFC - tRFC2 -TRFC4 - tRFC/2/4 - which one HAS to be set and which is auto?
> only set VDIMM - or do I need to set MEM VTT?
> 
> I understand there is a skill gap here - and I am working on it.


tRFCPAGE on auto. tRFC is the one you have to set, tRFC 2 and 4 don't matter so leave them on auto. If you still can't boot I'd recommend increasing voltage to 1.50v Make sure to stability test with memtest-anta777 extreme config and check dimm temperature while under load.


----------



## drdrache

TheBoy08 said:


> tRFCPAGE on auto. tRFC is the one you have to set, tRFC 2 and 4 don't matter so leave them on auto. If you still can't boot I'd recommend increasing voltage to 1.50v Make sure to stability test with memtest-anta777 extreme config and check dimm temperature while under load.


I did as you suggested (screens at bottom) and still freezes up before login.
I then upped the voltage and only thing that changed was the BSOD.

I am at a loss - this was working perfectly for 8-ish months through various bios revisions; and many reinstalls and day-long gaming sessions - as well as a 300 pass T5 using IIRC umus extreme? or perhaps Anta777?

I feel like there is something I am totally missing here, or doing so wrong...


----------



## ManniX-ITA

drdrache said:


> tRFCPAGE - this supposed to stay zero?
> tRFC - tRFC2 -TRFC4 - tRFC/2/4 - which one HAS to be set and which is auto?
> only set VDIMM - or do I need to set MEM VTT?


You can try with VTT a bit lower; eg. 700 mV.

For tRFC is better if you set properly 2/4 as well to get more stable latency:









tRFC mini


TM5 Error Description ,TM5 Errors Decyphered,SOURCE 1usmus_V3,Error Type,Error Description ERROR #0,RefreshStable 0Mb,Voltage cutoff choke, suspect tRRD & tWTR Nearly always tRRD & tWTR but can also be too low tRP or tiny bit too low tRC (if user used > -3 on tRC) Start by adding VDIMM 6x Err...




docs.google.com





GDM is masking issues, try with 2T and GDM Off.

Other things to try: tCKE at 1 and DrvStr: 24/24/24/24 could work easy at 3600 MHz.
I wouldn't recommend all at 20.
Try something popular like 40/20/24/24 or 40/20/30/24.


----------



## drdrache

ManniX-ITA said:


> You can try with VTT a bit lower; eg. 700 mV.
> 
> For tRFC is better if you set properly 2/4 as well to get more stable latency:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> tRFC mini
> 
> 
> TM5 Error Description ,TM5 Errors Decyphered,SOURCE 1usmus_V3,Error Type,Error Description ERROR #0,RefreshStable 0Mb,Voltage cutoff choke, suspect tRRD & tWTR Nearly always tRRD & tWTR but can also be too low tRP or tiny bit too low tRC (if user used > -3 on tRC) Start by adding VDIMM 6x Err...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> docs.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> GDM is masking issues, try with 2T and GDM Off.
> 
> Other things to try: tCKE at 1 and DrvStr: 24/24/24/24 could work easy at 3600 MHz.
> I wouldn't recommend all at 20.
> Try something popular like 40/20/24/24 or 40/20/30/24.


will try this right now - I will point out that these settings worked great; so I'm not sure why I'd need different settings, but obviously, they don't work.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

drdrache said:


> will try this right now - I will point out that these settings worked great; so I'm not sure why I'd need different settings, but obviously, they don't work.


More likely a combination of GDM and Auto.
Set everything manually, including RTT ad ProcODT.


----------



## drdrache

ManniX-ITA said:


> More likely a combination of GDM and Auto.
> Set everything manually, including RTT ad ProcODT.


ok smart man - LOL (I mean that in the best way possible) 
what I did this time is :
SET VTT to .700
set Cmd2T to - 2T
got myself a clean(ish?) boot - I'm going to try and see where I get errors now, or I'll stop and change something else if someone yells at me.


----------



## SuperCloud

I need help with OC 5800x
Mobo: B550 Unify-X
Bios: A.10 (Jan 18,2021) came with motherboard
Agesa 1.2.0.0

Ram: crucial ballistix 16GB DDR4 single rank at 3800 MHz 14-18-14-14-34 stable 
Tested TM5 extreme several cycles occt and prime95 large fft
Fclk == mclk == uclk

I was following guide I found on Reddit and YouTube to OC:
In the bios:
Overclocking\advanced CPU configuration\AMD Overclocking
Precision boost Overdrive - Enabled
PBO limits - manual
PPT: 142 W
TDC: 95A
EDC: 140 W
precision boost Overdrive scalar - Auto
Max CPU boost clock Overdrive - Auto
So this Max CPU I can't set it to 0mhz
The lowest is 25mhz
How do I set it to 0mhz? Do I need to update bios / agesa? 
Other motherboard like gigabyte and Asus allow this change but MSI isn't
Please help how do this or other steps to overclock 5800x 
I'm trying to use curve optimizer


----------



## Luggage

SuperCloud said:


> I need help with OC 5800x
> Mobo: B550 Unify-X
> Bios: A.10 (Jan 18,2021) came with motherboard
> Agesa 1.2.0.0
> 
> Ram: crucial ballistix 16GB DDR4 single rank at 3800 MHz 14-18-14-14-34 stable
> Tested TM5 extreme several cycles occt and prime95 large fft
> Fclk == mclk == uclk
> 
> I was following guide I found on Reddit and YouTube to OC:
> In the bios:
> Overclocking\advanced CPU configuration\AMD Overclocking
> Precision boost Overdrive - Enabled
> PBO limits - manual
> PPT: 142 W
> TDC: 95A
> EDC: 140 W
> precision boost Overdrive scalar - Auto
> Max CPU boost clock Overdrive - Auto
> So this Max CPU I can't set it to 0mhz
> The lowest is 25mhz
> How do I set it to 0mhz? Do I need to update bios / agesa?
> Other motherboard like gigabyte and Asus allow this change but MSI isn't
> Please help how do this or other steps to overclock 5800x
> I'm trying to use curve optimizer


0 boost overdrive = disable 
Other than that, read here Clav's method for Zen 3 OC


----------



## Unifyx

Hi guys... I am just new to this forum... I experience some instability with my G. Skill 3600 CL14 @1t gear down... this kit is 2x 16 GB with a B1 pcb samsung b-die dual rank. 
with the original bios A10 that was originally on the unify x... it was unstable with a lot of errors ... with the A30 it's sometimes unstable or not booting at all but most of the time it works flawless. 
Can somebody please share the A04 bios. just to have it in my bios collection and to have a try on it. 

Thank's in advance 

john


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Unifyx said:


> Can somebody please share the A04 bios. just to have it in my bios collection and to have a try on it.


Here's A04


----------



## Unifyx

ManniX-ITA said:


> Here's A04


Thank you so much for the fast response  and sharing the file


----------



## TheBoy08

So I am kind of hitting a wall performances wise. I've done tigth as hell ram timings, I'm using Curve Optimizer with custom per core offset, 200 boost offset, customized power limits, 1x scalar, CPU LLC mode 8 and SoC LLC mode 8, C-state disabled, spread spectrum disabled, 1:1 memory clock and FCLK, 100 BCLK. These are all the bios settings I changed (not mentioning ram timings and voltages) which other settings should I tweak? I haven't touched CPU voltages should I try looking into that?


----------



## Luggage

TheBoy08 said:


> So I am kind of hitting a wall performances wise. I've done tigth as hell ram timings, I'm using Curve Optimizer with custom per core offset, 200 boost offset, customized power limits, 1x scalar, CPU LLC mode 8 and SoC LLC mode 8, C-state disabled, spread spectrum disabled, 1:1 memory clock and FCLK, 100 BCLK. These are all the bios settings I changed (not mentioning ram timings and voltages) which other settings should I tweak? I haven't touched CPU voltages should I try looking into that?


PBO limits, bclk, scalar, vcore offset, LLC, boost offset - depends on where you are and where you wanna go.
Do you have winter? Fastest improvement is lower ambient.


----------



## TheBoy08

Luggage said:


> PBO limits, bclk, scalar, vcore offset, LLC, boost offset - depends on where you are and where you wanna go.
> Do you have winter? Fastest improvement is lower ambient.


Oooh vcore offset, I haven't touched that yet. I'm not familiar with it either, any guide I can follow?


----------



## Luggage

TheBoy08 said:


> Oooh vcore offset, I haven't touched that yet. I'm not familiar with it either, any guide I can follow?


I just added a very small one to remove the difference between VID and svi2tfn - really helped with keeping sc boost stable.
As for a negative offset you are probably better of doing it with the curve.
Also, why llc8? You are not running an all core are you?


----------



## TheBoy08

Luggage said:


> I just added a very small one to remove the difference between VID and svi2tfn - really helped with keeping sc boost stable.
> As for a negative offset you are probably better of doing it with the curve.
> Also, why llc8? You are not running an all core are you?


I'm using a curve already so I guess negative offset won't change much huh?!
I started using LLC8 to match the performances I used to get on my x570 Dark Hero but since then I noticed this is what gives me the most performance. I start losing benchmark scores when I switch to LLC1. No I'm not running an all core OC.


----------



## Luggage

TheBoy08 said:


> I'm using a curve already so I guess negative offset won't change much huh?!
> I started using LLC8 to match the performances I used to get on my x570 Dark Hero but since then I noticed this is what gives me the most performance. I start losing benchmark scores when I switch to LLC1. No I'm not running an all core OC.


Big change with auto llc?


----------



## TheBoy08

Luggage said:


> Big change with auto llc?


70+ score difference on r20 and even bigger gap on r23


----------



## Luggage

TheBoy08 said:


> 70+ score difference on r20 and even bigger gap on r23


Now you made me want to try that - but everything that makes a drastic powering change needs a retuned curve and it’s such a pain U_U


----------



## TheBoy08

Luggage said:


> Now you made me want to try that - but everything that makes a drastic powering change needs a retuned curve and it’s such a pain U_U


Try without changing your curve first, see if you even get positive results. Try the droopiest which is level 8 (the closest one to Asus bios LLC) and also try the level 7 one which is close to Asus LLC 1. Let me know if you get good results


----------



## Luggage

TheBoy08 said:


> Try without changing your curve first, see if you even get positive results. Try the droopiest which is level 8 (the closest one to Asus bios LLC) and also try the level 7 one which is close to Asus LLC 1. Let me know if you get good results


Tried level 7 - no bueno.


http://imgur.com/a/E2weAvJ


----------



## TheBoy08

Luggage said:


> Tried level 7 - no bueno.
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/a/E2weAvJ


intredasting


----------



## Rhadamanthis

Damn msi, bios A4 1.2.0.3C agesa is in beta state long time and asus release bios 1.2.0.5 agesa.


----------



## Shenhua

I know this is the thread for unify, but my board is not really that popular, and im pretty sure is more an issue with MSI boards and software, rather than the hardware capabilities, so im gonna ask here:

5900x+b550 carbon+ Im running 2x8+2x8 crucial ballistix 3600 cl16, at XMP (the XMP is the one from the 2x8 kit).

1. Im on manual OC at 1.025v and 4.1ghz. For some reason my CPU at very low loads 0.5%-4% hover the 40w mark. When im playing warzone with 15-25% load sits around 50-55w....








Apparently on auto does the same thing hovering the 40w mark with no load. Shouldnt it go lower? It does scale a lot with gaming tho.









2. Then the memory voltages are completely screwed up.









3. Then you have this guy from MSI, saying is totally OK Voltage bug reporting on MSI boards (vsoc, vddp and vddg) | MSI Global English Forum - Index

So wth is going on???


----------



## Luggage

Shenhua said:


> I know this is the thread for unify, but my board is not really that popular, and im pretty sure is more an issue with MSI boards and software, rather than the hardware capabilities, so im gonna ask here:
> 
> Im on manual OC at 1.025v and 4.1ghz. For some reason my CPU at very low loads 0.5%-4% hover the 40w mark. When im playing warzone with 15-25% load sits around 50-55w....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Screenshot
> 
> 
> Captured with Lightshot
> 
> 
> 
> 
> prnt.sc
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently on auto does the same thing Screenshot
> 
> Then the memory voltages are completely screwed up. Screenshot Im running 2x8+2x8 crucial ballistix 3600 cl16, at XMP (the XMP is the one from the 2x8 kit).
> 
> Then you have this guy from MSI, saying is totally OK Voltage bug reporting on MSI boards (vsoc, vddp and vddg) | MSI Global English Forum - Index
> 
> So wth is going on???


Plz use another image host or just add the images to your post.


----------



## Shenhua

Luggage said:


> Plz use another image host or just add the images to your post.


done


----------



## Luggage

Shenhua said:


> done


What power plan do you use, balanced or performance. And what happens if you really let it idle?


----------



## Shenhua

Luggage said:


> What power plan do you use, balanced or performance. And what happens if you really let it idle?


Balanced. This is auto, completely idle.


----------



## KedarWolf

Audioboxer said:


> LOL, mad lad.
> 
> Yeah, the X570s Unify MAX is like gold dust in the UK, just non-existent, so I'll be interested to see if other than the full PCIe 4.0 support across all channels if there is any performance uplift.
> 
> Heck even the B550 is getting sparse here now, though one or two decent deals still out there.


Here in Canada, buying for sure.









MSI MEG X570S UNIFY-X MAX AM4 ATX AMD Motherboard - Newegg.com


Buy MSI MEG X570S UNIFY-X MAX AM4 AMD X570 SATA 6Gb/s ATX AMD Motherboard with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Once you know, you Newegg!




www.newegg.ca


----------



## Audioboxer

KedarWolf said:


> Here in Canada, buying for sure.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MSI MEG X570S UNIFY-X MAX AM4 ATX AMD Motherboard - Newegg.com
> 
> 
> Buy MSI MEG X570S UNIFY-X MAX AM4 AMD X570 SATA 6Gb/s ATX AMD Motherboard with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Once you know, you Newegg!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newegg.ca











MSI MEG X570S UNIFY-X MAX AM4 ATX AMD Motherboard - Newegg.com


Buy MSI MEG X570S UNIFY-X MAX AM4 AMD X570 SATA 6Gb/s ATX AMD Motherboard with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Once you know, you Newegg!




www.newegg.com





Ooft, £355 is UK price. I bought my B550 for like £160 lol.


----------



## KedarWolf

ComboAM4v2 1.2.0.2 only bios available on the X570S Unify-X Max. 

Edit: Never mind, I read the list wrong, is ComboAM4v2 1.2.0.3C


----------



## domdtxdissar

Trying to learn the x570s x max.. Coming from Asus motherboard so the bios layout/settings is totally new for me.

What switching speeds do you guys use on regular Unify X ? 
1000mhz for both soc and cpu, or running it at auto ?

What does "Latency enchance" actually do ? 
Kinda hard to find any difference between it turned on/off in benchmarks..









Any point to mess around with these ?









Have so far establish that this motherboard + memcombo is atleast good for 4400MT/s when running these dualrank 2x16GB sticks asynced.. Too bad my cpu caps out at 1900.









Any tips and tricks for these motherboards ?


----------



## KedarWolf

domdtxdissar said:


> Trying to learn the x570s x max.. Coming from Asus motherboard so the bios layout/settings is totally new for me.
> 
> What switching speeds do you guys use on regular Unify X ?
> 1000mhz for both soc and cpu, or running it at auto ?
> 
> What does "Latency enchance" actually do ?
> Kinda hard to find any difference between it turned on/off in benchmarks..
> View attachment 2538887
> 
> 
> Any point to mess around with these ?
> View attachment 2538888
> 
> 
> Have so far establish that this motherboard + memcombo is atleast good for 4400MT/s when running these dualrank 2x16GB sticks asynced.. Too bad my cpu caps out at 1900.
> View attachment 2538889
> 
> 
> Any tips and tricks for these motherboards ?











[Official] AMD Ryzen DDR4 24/7 Memory Stability Thread


113 Binning value is already good, 118 is fantastic - haven't seen 120+ so far This opens quite some interesting doors :P Now you got a 125... but my silicon quality is not that good, not sure how reliable is this metric eheh Also see my FIT VID is 1.5V and the Limit is a monstrous 52K:




www.overclock.net





Get the unlocked BIOS here.






AMD - Google Drive







drive.google.com


----------



## domdtxdissar

KedarWolf said:


> [Official] AMD Ryzen DDR4 24/7 Memory Stability Thread
> 
> 
> 113 Binning value is already good, 118 is fantastic - haven't seen 120+ so far This opens quite some interesting doors :P Now you got a 125... but my silicon quality is not that good, not sure how reliable is this metric eheh Also see my FIT VID is 1.5V and the Limit is a monstrous 52K:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Get the unlocked BIOS here.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AMD - Google Drive
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


Thanks for the link and overview over your settings 
Few questions:

Why do you run with LN2 mode enabled ? What does this setting really change on the Unify X ?
Why do you run with DF Cstates /Gobal c-states disabled ? Coming from the Asus motherboard my experience was that you lose a few points in ST benchmarks when the other cores could not sleep (c-state disabled)
IOD(1.15) and CCD (1.1) voltages seem alittle on the highside for 1900:3800, but i guess that comes down to the cpu sample..
Any benefit from manually setting the chipset CORE and PHY voltage @ 1.05v/2.5v instead of using auto ?

Also found the wording in the bios for these settings a little confusing.









"CPU over voltage protection" @ 400mv = Does this allow the cpu to request get 1.54 vcore ? Or is it 400mv lower -> 1.46v max request get voltage

"CPU/SOC" Over current protection @ enhanced = does this actually mean "higher performance" or stricter protections limits which would mean lower performance ?


----------



## Speed Potato

KedarWolf said:


> ComboAM4v2 1.2.0.2 only bios available on the X570S Unify-X Max.
> 
> Edit: Never mind, I read the list wrong, is ComboAM4v2 1.2.0.3C


The 1.2.0.5 beta bios page does not show anything for the X570s Unify-X Max.


----------



## KedarWolf

domdtxdissar said:


> Thanks for the link and overview over your settings
> Few questions:
> 
> Why do you run with LN2 mode enabled ? What does this setting really change on the Unify X ?
> Why do you run with DF Cstates /Gobal c-states disabled ? Coming from the Asus motherboard my experience was that you lose a few points in ST benchmarks when the other cores could not sleep (c-state disabled)
> IOD(1.15) and CCD (1.1) voltages seem alittle on the highside for 1900:3800, but i guess that comes down to the cpu sample..
> Any benefit from manually setting the chipset CORE and PHY voltage @ 1.05v/2.5v instead of using auto ?
> 
> Also found the wording in the bios for these settings a little confusing.
> View attachment 2538892
> 
> 
> "CPU over voltage protection" @ 400mv = Does this allow the cpu to request get 1.54 vcore ? Or is it 400mv lower -> 1.46v max request get voltage
> 
> "CPU/SOC" Over current protection @ enhanced = does this actually mean "higher performance" or stricter protections limits which would mean lower performance ?



DF C- States disabled etc helps with stability on overclocks, it's supposed to be L2N Mode disabled, not sure why I had it enabled in those screenshots. 

The Enhanced etc. I'm not quite sure, maybe someone else can chip in?


----------



## domdtxdissar

_Not 100% sure this is the correct thread for me to post about the Unify X *Max* in, but i guess this is close enough.. And the bioses/settings should be the same i think (?)_

Have spent many hours testing settings one by one to see what impact they have on performance, and i think ive finally found what i will call my new daily 24/7 setup 

Some observations i found interesting:

Lately ive seen some reports about motherboards from all the different vendors "getting bricked" by *error code "00" *(freezing with power/restart button not working). I started experiencing the same problems and after a lengthy search i found the guilty. Turns out *CPU switching speed* *1000kHZ is the cause for this*. Lower it and all is fine. Was talking with one guy on Hydra discord who was prepared to RMA his Asus darkhero because if this, but after he lowered the value motherboard started to act normal again. (i'm running 800kHZ on both CPU and SOC now)
I'm scoring really low on the Cinebench (r20) ST benchmarks and i cant figure out why. ST score is decent in all other benchmark.. Must be some problems in the bios since this is the first (beta) and the only one released atm, running a rather old AGESA.
I needed ~15mv higher vdimm on the Unify x max to run same timings as my Asus MB (~1.57 vs 1.55v)
Stock bios is really optimized, you often actually get lower performance changing anything away from "auto".
Both "CPU/SOC" Over current protection @ enhanced and ""CPU over voltage protection" @ 400mv " gives you lower performance
C-states disabled lowers your ST score but increase stability, just as with previous motherboards
The following scores are done with PBO CO allcore








Cinebench r20
Aida64 memory benchmark
CPU-Z benchmark
Linpack extreme
35 cycles testmem5 1usmus cfg








OCCT CPU bench
Geekbench 3
3DMark Profiler
100% runmemtestpro

SuperPi 32m with my true and tested everyday memory settings 









*Some async fun below:*

1100:1900:4400 Geekbench 3







VS my regular synced 1900 CL13









In other news, eager HWbot admins have removed most my scores from their site because i was showing memory timings/settings in screenshot with "Zentimings" instead of useless CPU-Z memory tab which actually don't show anything you wanna know.. _That _m_ust be the most petty "benchmark-site" ever, where members report all new scores that's faster than their own on stupid technicality instead of trying to beat them, but that is a story for a other day_.

In anycase, i had the 5950x #1 (and all Zen3 i think?) for both "Y-CRUNCHER - PI-1B" and "Y-CRUNCHER - PI-2.5B"


----------



## KedarWolf

domdtxdissar said:


> _Not 100% sure this is the correct thread for me to post about the Unify X *Max* in, but i guess this is close enough.. And the bioses/settings should be the same i think (?)_
> 
> Have spent many hours testing setting one by one to see what impact they have on performance, and i think ive finally found what i will call my new daily 24/7 setup
> 
> Some observations i found interesting:
> 
> Lately ive seen some reports about motherboards from all the different vendors "getting bricked" by *error code "00" *(freezing with power/restart button not working). I started experiencing the same problems and after a lengthy search i found the guilty. Turns out *CPU switching speed* *1000kHZ is the cause for this*. Lower it and all is fine. Was talking with one guy on Hydra discord who was prepared to RMA his Asus darkhero because if this, but after he lowered value motherboard was back to normal. (i'm running 800kHZ on both CPU and SOC now)
> I'm scoring really low on the Cinebench (r20) ST benchmarks and i cant figure out why. ST score is decent in all other benchmark.. Must be some problems in the bios since this is the first (beta) and the only one released atm, running a rather old AGESA.
> I needed ~15mv higher vdimm on the Unify x max to run same timings as my Asus MB (~1.57 vs 1.55v)
> Stock bios is really optimized, you often actually get lower performance changing anything away from "auto".
> Both "CPU/SOC" Over current protection @ enhanced and ""CPU over voltage protection" @ 400mv " gives you lower performance
> C-states disabled lowers your ST score but increase stability, just as with previous motherboards
> The following scores are done with PBO CO allcore
> View attachment 2539175
> 
> Cinebench r20
> Aida64 memory benchmark
> CPU-Z benchmark
> Linpack extreme
> 35 cycles testmem5 1usmus cfg
> View attachment 2539176
> 
> OCCT CPU bench
> Geekbench 3
> 3DMark Profiler
> 100% runmemtestpro
> 
> SuperPi 32m with my true and tested everyday memory settings
> View attachment 2539185
> 
> 
> *Some async fun below:*
> 
> 1100:1900:4400 Geekbench 3
> View attachment 2539180
> VS my regular synced 1900 CL13
> View attachment 2539181
> 
> 
> In other news, eager HWbot admins have removed most my scores from their site because i was showing memory timings/settings in screenshot with "Zentimings" instead of useless CPU-Z memory tab which actually don't show anything you wanna know.. _That _m_ust be the most petty "benchmark-site" ever, where members report all new scores that's faster than their own on stupid technicality instead of trying to beat them, but that is a story for a other day_.
> 
> In anycase, i had the 5950x #1 (and all Zen3 i think?) for both "Y-CRUNCHER - PI-1B" and "Y-CRUNCHER - PI-2.5B"
> View attachment 2539183
> 
> View attachment 2539184
> 
> 
> View attachment 2539187


See BIOS screenshots here, literally a few posts back.









[Official] AMD Ryzen DDR4 24/7 Memory Stability Thread


113 Binning value is already good, 118 is fantastic - haven't seen 120+ so far This opens quite some interesting doors :P Now you got a 125... but my silicon quality is not that good, not sure how reliable is this metric eheh Also see my FIT VID is 1.5V and the Limit is a monstrous 52K:




www.overclock.net


----------



## domdtxdissar

KedarWolf said:


> See BIOS screenshots here, literally a few posts back.


Hmm what is it you want me to see ? Dont think i understand what you mean.. (?)
_edit_
Just a misunderstanding


----------



## KedarWolf

domdtxdissar said:


> Hmm what is it you want me to see?
> 
> Hmm what is it you want me to see ? Dont think i understand what you mean.. (?)


My ADHD again, I skimmed over what you wrote and thought you were asking for BIOS settings. :/


----------



## Luggage

domdtxdissar said:


> _Not 100% sure this is the correct thread for me to post about the Unify X *Max* in, but i guess this is close enough.. And the bioses/settings should be the same i think (?)_
> 
> Have spent many hours testing setting one by one to see what impact they have on performance, and i think ive finally found what i will call my new daily 24/7 setup
> 
> Some observations i found interesting:
> 
> Lately ive seen some reports about motherboards from all the different vendors "getting bricked" by *error code "00" *(freezing with power/restart button not working). I started experiencing the same problems and after a lengthy search i found the guilty. Turns out *CPU switching speed* *1000kHZ is the cause for this*. Lower it and all is fine. Was talking with one guy on Hydra discord who was prepared to RMA his Asus darkhero because if this, but after he lowered value motherboard was back to normal. (i'm running 800kHZ on both CPU and SOC now)
> I'm scoring really low on the Cinebench (r20) ST benchmarks and i cant figure out why. ST score is decent in all other benchmark.. Must be some problems in the bios since this is the first (beta) and the only one released atm, running a rather old AGESA.
> I needed ~15mv higher vdimm on the Unify x max to run same timings as my Asus MB (~1.57 vs 1.55v)
> Stock bios is really optimized, you often actually get lower performance changing anything away from "auto".
> Both "CPU/SOC" Over current protection @ enhanced and ""CPU over voltage protection" @ 400mv " gives you lower performance
> C-states disabled lowers your ST score but increase stability, just as with previous motherboards
> The following scores are done with PBO CO allcore
> View attachment 2539175
> 
> Cinebench r20
> Aida64 memory benchmark
> CPU-Z benchmark
> Linpack extreme
> 35 cycles testmem5 1usmus cfg
> View attachment 2539176
> 
> OCCT CPU bench
> Geekbench 3
> 3DMark Profiler
> 100% runmemtestpro
> 
> SuperPi 32m with my true and tested everyday memory settings
> View attachment 2539185
> 
> 
> *Some async fun below:*
> 
> 1100:1900:4400 Geekbench 3
> View attachment 2539180
> VS my regular synced 1900 CL13
> View attachment 2539181
> 
> 
> In other news, eager HWbot admins have removed most my scores from their site because i was showing memory timings/settings in screenshot with "Zentimings" instead of useless CPU-Z memory tab which actually don't show anything you wanna know.. _That _m_ust be the most petty "benchmark-site" ever, where members report all new scores that's faster than their own on stupid technicality instead of trying to beat them, but that is a story for a other day_.
> 
> In anycase, i had the 5950x #1 (and all Zen3 i think?) for both "Y-CRUNCHER - PI-1B" and "Y-CRUNCHER - PI-2.5B"
> View attachment 2539183
> 
> View attachment 2539184
> 
> 
> View attachment 2539187


Yea the cpu-z memory tab is pretty ****ing useless compared to zentimings so it’s really counterintuitive that they would want less information… so they are just being petty


----------



## KedarWolf

I'm pretty sure that attached is the unlocked X570S Unify-X Max BIOS, but I don't get my board until Wednesday to check and be sure.


----------



## KedarWolf

Also passed TM5 1usmus_v3 25 cycles but neglected to take a screenshot.

This is on the E7D13AMS.A21O bios, can't get A45 Y-Cruncher stable.


----------



## gameinn

Might be wrong but seems like the 1.2.0.5 BIOS was just released on MSI page. I swear I didn't see it last week (even though it says 22nd December).

Edit: Seems like they only officially pushed B550 Unify (non X) and X570 Unify. 1.2.0.5 is also non BETA which is strange.


----------



## ribosome

Is this the thread for discussing the X570S Unify-X Max as well? I see a lot of posts about it.

I accidentally bricked my X570 Unify so I decided to get an X570S Unify-X Max. Great board, few issues with it. I do have an occasional USB disconnection issue though. Any ideas on how to fix it?


----------



## KedarWolf

I'm not making sense of the MSI X570S Unify-X Max manual.

Will I be able to do 2x M.2s at 4 PCI-e lanes on the CPU and 2x M.2s at 4 lanes on the chipset? All PCI-e 4.0 I mean.

Four M.2s in total.

I know if I do two on the CPU, the GPU will lock to 8x.


----------



## ribosome

KedarWolf said:


> I'm not making sense of the MSI X570S Unify-X Max manual.
> 
> Will I be able to do 2x M.2s at 4 PCI-e lanes on the CPU and 2x M.2s at 4 lanes on the chipset? All PCI-e 4.0 I mean.
> 
> Four M.2s in total.
> 
> I know if I do two on the CPU, the GPU will lock to 8x.


I'm really not sure how it works. I have drives in M2_1, M2_2 and M2_5. According to the share tables it only disables the second PCI-E slot with that setup, but I still get the full 6 SATA ports. GPU-Z confirms my GPU is still using 16 lanes of PCI-E 4.0.

I think if you put drives in M2_1, M2_2, M2_5 and M2_6, you'll get two lanes for each of the first two M.2 drives and then four for each of the latter two, a disabled second PCI-E slot, and full 16 lanes on the first. All gen 4.


----------



## Rhadamanthis

gameinn said:


> Might be wrong but seems like the 1.2.0.5 BIOS was just released on MSI page. I swear I didn't see it last week (even though it says 22nd December).
> 
> Edit: Seems like they only officially pushed B550 Unify (non X) and X570 Unify. 1.2.0.5 is also non BETA which is strange.


the first motherboard to which the bios agesa 1.2.0.5 was released is la la msi mortar and then slowly they are updating the whole line.
I honestly don't really like this thing here. i think i'm going back to asus that at least release faster updates with bug fixes


----------



## Audioboxer

Rhadamanthis said:


> the first motherboard to which the bios agesa 1.2.0.5 was released is la la msi mortar and then slowly they are updating the whole line.
> I honestly don't really like this thing here. i think i'm going back to asus that at least release faster updates with bug fixes


MSI is usually quite fast or at least the beta builds leak very fast. Not too sure what the hold up is for the B550 Unify X 1.2.0.5 final. Chances are it's no different than the leaked beta anyway. The voltage cap above 160 EDC isn't fixed/changed on any final 1.2.0.5 releases.


----------



## Luggage

140


----------



## Rhadamanthis

Audioboxer said:


> MSI is usually quite fast or at least the beta builds leak very fast. Not too sure what the hold up is for the B550 Unify X 1.2.0.5 final. Chances are it's no different than the leaked beta anyway. The voltage cap above 160 EDC isn't fixed/changed on any final 1.2.0.5 releases.


in fact it is the last time i buy high level mainboard from msi .... i will only consider evga / asus


----------



## aussie7

A4 non beta bios for the Unify-x is up on the MSI site 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MEG B550 UNIFY-X (MS-7D13) V10.4 BIOS Release
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. This is AMI BIOS release

2. This BIOS fixes the following problem of the previous version:

Support Windows 11
Update to AMD ComboAm4v2PI 1.2.0.5

3. 2021/12/23


----------



## thomasck

Rhadamanthis said:


> in fact it is the last time i buy high level mainboard from msi .... i will only consider evga / asus


Same boat here. Left Asrock to MSI, and I am not happy. I got a issue with the PCIE link speed, they reproduced the error, then later on said was the CPU was causing that. Next board I'm going to go with another brand.


----------



## KedarWolf

thomasck said:


> Same boat here. Left Asrock to MSI, and I am not happy. I got a issue with the PCIE link speed, they reproduced the error, then later on said was the CPU was causing that. Next board I'm going to go with another brand.


I'm really happy with MSI, zero issues, great overclocking on CPU and memory.


----------



## Unifyx

I have no issues at all... running the A3 BIOS... no problems with USB, LAN, RAM OC running with a 3070 from MSI as well. My board revision is 2.1


----------



## KedarWolf

Here is the final Unify-X unlocked BIOS. 7D13vA4 PBS and CBS menus unlocked. It's a direct link from the Ryzen RAM Overclock Community Discord.



https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/927899633856966666/927907410708934736/7D13vA4.zip


----------



## thomasck

@KedarWolf Apart from that I have issues. USB, etc none. But this one of the PCIE yes, it bothers me. I should have sent the mobo back, but I could not be without a PC for so long. Memory wise I am running pretty much as the same speed and timings I was running when using a x370 board, bit more lose timings but is fine.


----------



## KedarWolf

thomasck said:


> @KedarWolf Apart from that I have issues. USB, etc none. But this one of the PCIE yes, it bothers me. I should have sent the mobo back, but I could not be without a PC for so long. Memory wise I am running pretty much as the same speed and timings I was running when using a x370 board, bit more lose timings but is fine.


Could you buy a really cheap board on Craiglist, just to have a working PC while you send this board back?


----------



## thomasck

Speaking of which, is there anything I could do with RttNom, RttNom, RttPark, Clk/Addr/CsOdt/CKeDrvStr and AddrCmd, CsOdt, CkeSetup? Last time I've tested stability was fine, and probably stills fine as does not freeze/crash in any game, but, is there anything I could improve tweaking these a bit more? I remember that when with the Taichi x370 I was using something like 60, 20, 24, 24 which allowed me to reduce vdimm a bit and it remained stable. I don't personally like to run these sticks at 1.47V.

voltages set in bios,
vsoc 1.095
vddp 900
vddg ccd 0950
vddg iod 975
vdimms 1.47
these are hyperx 4000 cl19 bdie 2x8 1R










@KedarWolf I could, but all the trouble.... I have a custom loop with three rads, two pumps, 11 fans.. cpu and gpu blocks.. that would be another nightmare to take apart again. I rather just turn the pc off, then on, then the pcie speed link is displayed at correct pcie 4 x16. I will update to this last bios, they might have fixed that, really unlikely but I will update. 

Did anyone tried this latest bios? Does it still have the vddp fixed at 1.1v? It was vddp IIRC.


----------



## KedarWolf

My X570S Unify-X Max, Newegg sent it Canada Post, I ordered it on Dec. 20th, for some reason it toom until yesterday for it to arrive and it was a friggin' holiday, our business was closed.

Now the tracking says it's on hold, I think I need to go pick it up.


----------



## MyUsername

KedarWolf said:


> Here is the final Unify-X unlocked BIOS. 7D13vA4 PBS and CBS menus unlocked. It's a direct link from the Ryzen RAM Overclock Community Discord.
> 
> 
> 
> https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/927899633856966666/927907410708934736/7D13vA4.zip


Thanks, working like it should do now. PPT 250 TDC 150 EDC 200


----------



## Audioboxer

KedarWolf said:


> Here is the final Unify-X unlocked BIOS. 7D13vA4 PBS and CBS menus unlocked. It's a direct link from the Ryzen RAM Overclock Community Discord.
> 
> 
> 
> https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/927899633856966666/927907410708934736/7D13vA4.zip


Thanks! Will change from beta build tomorrow. Doubt there is any difference between beta and final though lol.

Is that discord open to all btw or invite only?


----------



## KedarWolf

Audioboxer said:


> Thanks! Will change from beta build tomorrow. Doubt there is any difference between beta and final though lol.
> 
> Is that discord open to all btw or invite only?


Open to all I think. I never needed an invite.






Discord - A New Way to Chat with Friends & Communities


Discord is the easiest way to communicate over voice, video, and text. Chat, hang out, and stay close with your friends and communities.




discord.gg





Edit: I checked the sha-1 on the Final and the A45 1.2.0.5 and they are different.


----------



## Luggage

MyUsername said:


> Thanks, working like it should do now. PPT 250 TDC 150 EDC 200
> View attachment 2541136


Careful with edc over 140 as it will limit vid.
You can set it with rm though.


http://imgur.com/a/d5cReXo


----------



## MyUsername

Luggage said:


> Careful with edc over 140 as it will limit vid.
> You can set it with rm though.
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/a/d5cReXo


Yeah I did notice VID is low, but somehow this one doesn't cripple performance like the beta did. Any random crashes and I'll roll back.


----------



## Audioboxer

Strangely the 1.2.0.5 final BIOS is version VA.40 whereas the beta was VA.45.










Just about to do my usual hopeless USB testing at FCLK 2000 and most of the BIOS on AUTO.

*edit *- Same as before, no more mouse jerk/lag when CPU testing but USB disconnects still happen when CPU is under heavy load. No hope to ever run above 1900 FCLK.


----------



## MyUsername

Audioboxer said:


> Strangely the 1.2.0.5 final BIOS is version VA.40 whereas the beta was VA.45.
> 
> View attachment 2541233
> 
> 
> Just about to do my usual hopeless USB testing at FCLK 2000 and most of the BIOS on AUTO.
> 
> *edit *- Same as before, no more mouse jerk/lag when CPU testing but USB disconnects still happen when CPU is under heavy load. No hope to ever run above 1900 FCLK.


I would be happy to run 1900fclk 24/7 with stupid tight memory timings. In my boat, it's either 1867 which doesn't care what voltage it gets 0.9v soc, it just works, or 1933 to 2000. So I use 2000/4000 for higher clocks at 14, 15, 15, 15 because one stick can't do trcdrd 14 above 3600, really disappointing for the cost of the kit.


----------



## Audioboxer

MyUsername said:


> I would be happy to run 1900fclk 24/7 with stupid tight memory timings. In my boat, it's either 1867 which doesn't care what voltage it gets 0.9v soc, it just works, or 1933 to 2000. So I use 2000/4000 for higher clocks at 14, 15, 15, 15 because one stick can't do trcdrd 14 above 3600, really disappointing for the cost of the kit.


Yeah, those FCLK holes have never made any sense to me lol.

I get USB disconnects on anything above 1900, so it doesn't really matter if I try 1933.


----------



## Luggage

Audioboxer said:


> Strangely the 1.2.0.5 final BIOS is version VA.40 whereas the beta was VA.45.
> 
> View attachment 2541233
> 
> 
> Just about to do my usual hopeless USB testing at FCLK 2000 and most of the BIOS on AUTO.
> 
> *edit *- Same as before, no more mouse jerk/lag when CPU testing but USB disconnects still happen when CPU is under heavy load. No hope to ever run above 1900 FCLK.


MSI always ends stable with 0 and beta with whatever.


----------



## MyUsername

Audioboxer said:


> Yeah, those FCLK holes have never made any sense to me lol.
> 
> I get USB disconnects on anything above 1900, so it doesn't really matter if I try 1933.


Makes me wonder about the QC at GloFo. I reckon the parameters are tighter for the CPU cores to get some sort of performance target depending what level it is, higher costing cpu's gets better binned silicon and TSMC are clearly the best, Samsung are very good, but TSMC are just the nuts. AMD talked about OCing and maybe 2000fclk blablabla and to get holes and dodgy pci-e and usb dropouts at 1900 and above is a bit w t f. My 3900x can still do 1900 whea free, still in use in my second gaming machine and still as good as the day I first dropped it in. That's after getting paste all over the pins and then giving it a bath in alcohol(shiny) lol


----------



## KedarWolf

Got them today, had to wait 14 days to go to work to pick them up for a negative a COVID test.


----------



## Audioboxer

Been doing some testing with Geekbench 5 and the EDC 140 voltage cap 100% hurts scores. The only way around it is to have PBO on auto in BIOS and set the PBO values in Windows with Ryzen Master.

Yet again another borked AMD bios that hurts the OCer. Pretty strange none of the tech media has picked up on this to get an answer out of AMD.


----------



## KedarWolf

Audioboxer said:


> Been doing some testing with Geekbench 5 and the EDC 140 voltage cap 100% hurts scores. The only way around it is to have PBO on auto in BIOS and set the PBO values in Windows with Ryzen Master.
> 
> Yet again another borked AMD bios that hurts the OCer. Pretty strange none of the tech media has picked up on this to get an answer out of AMD.


Found out recently Ryzen Master does NOT work on Windows 11, even with fixes some have suggested. 

Wait, someone says running it as Admin works, I'll have to try that.

But I find with Cinebench and CPU-Z higher EDC than 140 STILL helps multicore scores.


----------



## Audioboxer

KedarWolf said:


> Found out recently Ryzen Master does NOT work on Windows 11, even with fixes some have suggested.
> 
> But I find with Cinebench and CPU-Z higher EDC than 140 STILL helps multicore scores.


I'm using it on Windows 11???

Maybe you've removed a service or something? With your slim Windows builds lol.

Definitely, at 270/168/220 I can push Geekbench 5 multicore over 20k when it's cold enough. At a minimum it's around 19800-19900. Single core around 1800, it takes a small hit when pushing TDC. Or is it EDC that drops ST for MT? Get those two mixed up lol.

I think I've got quite a power hungry 5950x but seeing as I have the cooling bruteforcing my way to performance is fine lol.


----------



## KedarWolf

Audioboxer said:


> I'm using it on Windows 11???
> 
> Maybe you've removed a service or something? With your slim Windows builds lol.
> 
> Definitely, at 270/168/220 I can push Geekbench 5 multicore over 20k when it's cold enough. At a minimum it's around 19800-19900. Single core around 1800, it takes a small hit when pushing TDC. Or is it EDC that drops ST for MT? Get those two mixed up lol.
> 
> I think I've got quite a power hungry 5950x but seeing as I have the cooling bruteforcing my way to performance is fine lol.


Oh, could be. I'll look into it.

Edit: The Workstation service needs to be on Auto. Quick search found that. :/


----------



## KedarWolf

Deleted


----------



## MyUsername

KedarWolf said:


> Oh, could be. I'll look into it.


I disabled the workstation service once, I was going round in circles for about half an hour until I found it, then it ryzen master worked.


----------



## KedarWolf

MyUsername said:


> I disabled the workstation service once, I was going round in circles for about half an hour until I found it, then it ryzen master worked.


Yes, I edited the previous post that I Googled just that.

From Reddit.

"If workstation services is disabled (look inside services.msc) Ryzen Master whill fail to start with a completely unrelated message, basically telling you that it didn't recognize your OS (Something like "Ryzenaster need Windows 10 to work", even if you are running windows 10).

Why on earth a program which handle voltages/clocks/.... need as dependency a Windows service which description is "Creates and maintains client network connections to remote servers using the SMB protocol."????

At least make the error message more descriptive like "This program needs the 'Workstation' service to be enabled and running". Is a really basic check to do."


----------



## MyUsername

Audioboxer said:


> Been doing some testing with Geekbench 5 and the EDC 140 voltage cap 100% hurts scores. The only way around it is to have PBO on auto in BIOS and set the PBO values in Windows with Ryzen Master.
> 
> Yet again another borked AMD bios that hurts the OCer. Pretty strange none of the tech media has picked up on this to get an answer out of AMD.


I'm confused. I've set PBO in bios, PPT 4096 with cTDP 250 and PPL 250 with efficiency mode 1, TDC 150 with telemery +7mA to get the PRD nearer to 100%. I fell out of love setting the TDC in the telemetry CPU VDD full scale thing as it skews things too much for my liking. And EDC to 200. I'm getting this with fans on silent and closed case, about to watch a movie. Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MS-7D13 - Geekbench Browser

Seems about right on the new 1.2.0.5 agesa bios


----------



## Audioboxer

MyUsername said:


> I'm confused. I've set PBO in bios, PPT 4096 with cTDP 250 and PPL 250 with efficiency mode 1, TDC 150 with telemery +7mA to get the PRD nearer to 100%. I fell out of love setting the TDC in the telemetry CPU VDD full scale thing as it skews things too much for my liking. And EDC to 200. I'm getting this with fans on silent and closed case, about to watch a movie. Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MS-7D13 - Geekbench Browser
> 
> Seems about right on the new 1.2.0.5 agesa bios


That's about normal, here are two I ran tonight experimenting with BIOS/Ryzen Master






Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MS-7D13 - Geekbench Browser


Benchmark results for a Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MS-7D13 with an AMD Ryzen 9 5950X processor.



browser.geekbench.com










Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MS-7D13 - Geekbench Browser


Benchmark results for a Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MS-7D13 with an AMD Ryzen 9 5950X processor.



browser.geekbench.com





And here is two where I broke 20k






Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MS-7D13 - Geekbench Browser


Benchmark results for a Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MS-7D13 with an AMD Ryzen 9 5950X processor.



browser.geekbench.com










Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MS-7D13 - Geekbench Browser


Benchmark results for a Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MS-7D13 with an AMD Ryzen 9 5950X processor.



browser.geekbench.com





IIRC with the 20k ones last year apart from being on AGESA 1.2.0.3c, I had windows open (as in room windows) and fans at 100% to push water temps and ambient down lol.

It seems as if GB5 is quite like CB23, if you can seriously drop temps you might get those last few hundred points.

All of the above is using 150/45 on telemetry and something around 270/168/220. The ones over 20k might have been slightly different PBO figures, I posted them on this forum, so if I can find my posts again I'll double check.

There is every chance AGESA 1.2.0.5 just performs worse. I've already had to adjust my curve slightly due to Corecycler flagging a few of my best cores on a 1.2.0.5 run. Only changing 3 values by +2, but even that could be at play for now being under 20k. This BIOS just seems like a bit of a bust, thanks AMD!

_Almost _tempted to go back to 1.2.0.3c. Even just to stop this having to load Ryzen Master every Windows boot nonsense.

Btw, you should set your PPT/TDC/EDC properly, letting it use mobo limits or values like 4096 can actually hurt performance. Also if you're on AGESA 1.2.0.5 don't actually input numbers in the BIOS. Put PBO to advanced and then PBO values to manual, but leave the PPT/TDC/EDC on auto in BIOS. This is to get around the voltage limit. Once in Windows set the 3 values with Ryzen Master.

*edit* - I didn't know memory had a notable boost for GB5, thought it was mostly CPU, this is at 4400mhz on memory Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MS-7D13 - Geekbench Browser


----------



## MyUsername

Audioboxer said:


> Btw, you should set your PPT/TDC/EDC properly, letting it use mobo limits or values like 4096 can actually hurt performance. Also if you're on AGESA 1.2.0.5 don't actually input numbers in the BIOS. Put PBO to advanced and then PBO values to manual, but leave the PPT/TDC/EDC on auto in BIOS. This is to get around the voltage limit. Once in Windows set the 3 values with Ryzen Master.
> 
> *edit* - I didn't know memory had a notable boost for GB5, thought it was mostly CPU, this is at 4400mhz on memory Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MS-7D13 - Geekbench Browser


I'm 100% air, the scores are not bad and I'm not going for record numbers. I don't use PPT, instead I use cTDP and PPL in NBIO and use TDC and EDC like normal. 4096 is probably the same as auto as using cTDP and PPL overrides PPT, I just force it.

I did manage to get this one out Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MS-7D13 - Geekbench Browser.

1.2.0.5 is definitely broken and why AMD released it is as good as the Aztec and Mayans mystery to us. 1.425 max voltage, really AMD. My CPU max temp is 83'C, when it used to be 90'C constant stress test load on CPU-z. I might go back 440, I have the profile saved on USB.


----------



## Luggage

MyUsername said:


> I'm 100% air, the scores are not bad and I'm not going for record numbers. I don't use PPT, instead I use cTDP and PPL in NBIO and use TDC and EDC like normal. 4096 is probably the same as auto as using cTDP and PPL overrides PPT, I just force it.
> 
> I did manage to get this one out Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MS-7D13 - Geekbench Browser.
> 
> 1.2.0.5 is definitely broken and why AMD released it is as good as the Aztec and Mayans mystery to us. 1.425 max voltage, really AMD. My CPU max temp is 83'C, when it used to be 90'C constant stress test load on CPU-z. I might go back 440, I have the profile saved on USB.


Just in case anyone is reading and unclear - the lowest limit of PPT, cTDP/PPL is enforced.

You know you can get 1.5max back with limits at manual/auto/auto/auto and change them later in RM?

Well the edc>140 is the limiting factor as of now.

Not sure how that works with cTDP/PPL though.


----------



## Axaion

Having to load ryzen master at all is completely unacceptable though


----------



## MyUsername

Luggage said:


> Just in case anyone is reading and unclear - the lowest limit of PPT, cTDP/PPL is enforced.
> 
> You know you can get 1.5max back with limits at manual/auto/auto/auto and change them later in RM?
> 
> Well the edc>140 is the limiting factor as of now.
> 
> Not sure how that works with cTDP/PPL though.


It's a lot of effort compared to earlier bioses like 1 2 3, AMD need to sort it out for the OC community, even how insignificant the OC community is. Calculating all core load voltage being 1.25-1.3v to determine TDC and EDC to get total Watts PPT, agesa 1.2.0.5 completely breaks it and even if you offset higher to 1.5v in bios, it breaks the VID table and you get poor performance. It's not by design and manipulating through RM shouldn't be the norm. cTDP and PPL is how you set total Watts on the Epyc platform, so in theory should relate to the Ryzen platform as well as it's still the Zen3. Anyway agesa 1.2.0.3c works how it should.


----------



## TheBoy08

KedarWolf said:


> Got them today, had to wait 14 days to go to work to pick them up for a negative a COVID test.
> 
> View attachment 2541648


Got mine yesterday. So far it scores better than the B550 in CPU-Z single and multi threaded, in r20 and r23 but AIDA latency is a bit worse by 0.02 ns. Other than that I'm really satisfied by it


----------



## Audioboxer

TheBoy08 said:


> Got mine yesterday. So far it scores better than the B550 in CPU-Z single and multi threaded, in r20 and r23 but AIDA latency is a bit worse by 0.02 ns. Other than that I'm really satisfied by it


Nice, that's a few reports of the CPUs doing better on this board. 0.02 is maybe just margin of error stuff unless anyone else has experience with memory doing a bit worse.

If I was going to use 2 NVMe drives and availability of the X570s was better I'd maybe consider it. But availability and price is bad and I'm just slugging away with 1 2TB NVMe.

I'll _probably_ stay with the B550 Unify X until I decide to go to DDR5.


----------



## TheBoy08

Audioboxer said:


> Nice, that's a few reports of the CPUs doing better on this board. 0.02 is maybe just margin of error stuff unless anyone else has experience with memory doing a bit worse.
> 
> If I was going to use 2 NVMe drives and availability of the X570s was better I'd maybe consider it. But availability and price is bad and I'm just slugging away with 1 2TB NVMe.
> 
> I'll _probably_ stay with the B550 Unify X until I decide to go to DDR5.


I broke my R20 PR on the x570 Unify X so that means I broke the record previously held by the x570 Dark Hero I used to own. This board so far is really good.
Where I live the x570s is only 70€ more than the B550 so I said **** it and pulled the plug. No pressure for you to "upgrade" really.


----------



## Audioboxer

TheBoy08 said:


> I broke my R20 PR on the x570 Unify X so that means I broke the record previously held by the x570 Dark Hero I used to own. This board so far is really good.
> Where I live the x570s is only 70€ more than the B550 so I said **** it and pulled the plug. No pressure for you to "upgrade" really.


I paid £164 for my B550 Unify X, albeit it sale price on Amazon before stock got a bit iffy.

I'm now looking at around £380 for the X570s Unify X MAX so it's just not worth changing. Gonna guess the VRMs are similar so it's likely the X570 chipset is just better for the CPU.

I don't think I'd be wrong to say the X570s Unify X MAX is probably the best AM4 motherboard going right now. It's not overpriced thanks to the RGB tax and the 2 DIMM is great for memory.


----------



## KedarWolf

TheBoy08 said:


> Got mine yesterday. So far it scores better than the B550 in CPU-Z single and multi threaded, in r20 and r23 but AIDA latency is a bit worse by 0.02 ns. Other than that I'm really satisfied by it


My board tests quite a bit better on CB20, CB23 and CPU-Z, AIDA scores around the same but 2ns lower latency. Also it shows my boost in AIDA to be 5025, whereas I was getting 4975 on my B550 Unify-X.


----------



## MyUsername

Well what a day. Updated 440 through UBU, seemed to go well, flashed the bios and got a lovely post code 07. Flash back is useless. Just purchased a s570 Unify x Max for £40 more than the B550 Unify X £338, arrives Thursday.


----------



## TheBoy08

Kedar really started a movement. Scratch that, A REVOLUTION 😂


----------



## KedarWolf

MyUsername said:


> Well what a day. Updated 440 through UBU, seemed to go well, flashed the bios and got a lovely post code 07. Flash back is useless. Just purchased a s570 Unify x Max for £40 more than the B550 Unify X £338, arrives Thursday.


UBU Tool if you upgrade the RST bricks your board. If you don't update the RST, it's fine.

Edit: RMA the board, then sell it.


----------



## Audioboxer

KedarWolf said:


> My board tests quite a bit better on CB20, CB23 and CPU-Z, AIDA scores around the same but 2ns lower latency. Also it shows my boost in AIDA to be 5025, whereas I was getting 4975 on my B550 Unify-X.


Has anyone done a teardown of the X570s to see if the memory is handled differently? With it being 2 DIMM I just assumed it would be the same layout and traces as the B550.

Guessing all the uplift might just be a better chipset.


----------



## KedarWolf

Audioboxer said:


> Has anyone done a teardown of the X570s to see if the memory is handled differently? With it being 2 DIMM I just assumed it would be the same layout and traces as the B550.
> 
> Guessing all the uplift might just be a better chipset.


I have tried changing my memory timings at all.


----------



## MyUsername

KedarWolf said:


> UBU Tool if you upgrade the RST bricks your board. If you don't update the RST, it's fine.


I pulled the raid drivers off A4 and updated, updated the microcode and GOP, updated network driver off Realtek website, it looked fine. The post code started normal 14 15 then 07, so I think microcode went wrong, something went FUBAR


----------



## KedarWolf

MyUsername said:


> I pulled the raid drivers off A4 and updated, updated the microcode and GOP, updated network driver off Realtek website, it looked fine. The post code started normal 14 15 then 07, so I think microcode went wrong, something went FUBAR


I'm telling you, updating the RAID drivers with UBU Tool bricks the board. It happened to me. I figured it out when I updated everything including the RAID firmware, flashed the BIOS with Aptio_V_AMI_Firmware_Update_Utility with the reboot option disabled, and the flash failed. I flashed a not updated BIOS right away without rebooting with Aptio_V_AMI_Firmware_Update_Utility and it flashed fine and I was okay.

If you just update the microcode and the ethernet firmware, you're fine. Upgrade the RAID with UBU Tool, you're bricked.

That is why I exclusively use Aptio_V_AMI_Firmware_Update_Utility now, you can see if it flashes right. If large portions of the blocks don't flash, you're bricked. If only 6 of the blocks don't flash, you're fine. That's normal. And if you disabled the reboot right away option and the BIOS you flash fails, you can flash a working not updated BIOS right away without rebooting and you're okay.


----------



## MyUsername

KedarWolf said:


> I'm telling you, updating the RAID drivers with UBU Tool bricks the board. It happened to me. I figured it out when I updated everything including the RAID firmware, flashed the BIOS with Aptio_V_AMI_Firmware_Update_Utility with the reboot option disabled, and the flash failed. I flashed a not updated BIOS right away without rebooting with Aptio_V_AMI_Firmware_Update_Utility and it flashed fine and I was okay.
> 
> If you just update the microcode and the ethernet firmware, you're fine. Upgrade the RAID with UBU Tool, you're bricked.
> 
> That is why I exclusively use Aptio_V_AMI_Firmware_Update_Utility now, you can see if it flashes right. If large portions of the blocks don't flash, you're bricked. If only 6 of the blocks don't flash, you're fine. That's normal.


I believe ya, I have done it before manually updating the files and it worked, maybe I was lucky the first time. And I'm 100% with you on the Aptio tool, shame it doesn't work on my Gigabyte x570 board and still have to use Flashrom on it for modded roms, newer bioses are pointless for the 3900x anyway. That's what you get for tinkering eh

I might get adventurous and flash a new bios chip and get a micro solder to fix it.


----------



## KedarWolf

MyUsername said:


> I believe ya, I have done it before manually updating the files and it worked, maybe I was lucky the first time. And I'm 100% with you on the Aptio tool, shame it doesn't work on my Gigabyte x570 board and still have to use Flashrom on it for modded roms, newer bioses are pointless for the 3900x anyway. That's what you get for tinkering eh
> 
> I might get adventurous and flash a new bios chip and get a micro solder to fix it.


I had no problems with older UBU Tools, it's the newer ones are bugged.


----------



## MyUsername

KedarWolf said:


> I had no problems with older UBU Tools, it's the newer ones are bugged.


You might be on to something there, it was early last year I last attempted to manually update all of the efi drivers and before UBU was able auto updated.


----------



## MyUsername

£80 for a new bios chip, flashed and replace bios chip. My 3900x is getting a new home soon.


----------



## Audioboxer

Speaking of all these BIOS shenanigans above is there any way to update parts of 1.2.0.3c with bits from 1.2.0.5? lol

I guess the biggest downgrade with 1.2.0.3c on MSI is a bigger drop down with SMU than the likes of ASUS. For whatever reason MSI rolled back SMU further than others when all the USB issues were going on.

I'll probably just stay with 1.2.0.5 and just put up with running Ryzen Master... I'm presuming there will be a hacky way to at least get it to boot with Windows to semi automate the profile process.


----------



## KedarWolf




----------



## aussie7

anyone overclocking the 5700G cpu on a B550 Unify-X ?


----------



## binder87

hi all. not actively writing here, but i am reading most of the information that's being written in this topic...
i have a weird issue with the hopes someone here may be able to chime in with an answer.
i own a B550 unify running agesa 1.2.0.3b (didn't like .0.5 so i reverted back) with a 5800X.
to make a long story short, I decided to disable global C states as it seems to have solved me an annoying issue i had: CPU dependent games (mostly CSGO) crashing randomly to desktop on low usage, that was with PBO enabled but stock limits (142 95 140), curve optimizer disabled (to eliminate an aggressive curve as the culprit). limits are +150 mhz. needless to say, ram is fully stable with karhu (with cache enabled and fpu stress)+tm5 anta777 extreme flawless runs, the case is phanteks p600s, CPU is cooled with arctic cooling liquid freezer II 360mm in the offset position, all fans\pump are running at 100% 24\7, so temps or ram were never the issue. after lots of fiddling, as i mentioned, disabling c states solved the issue. i guess my CPU doesnt like running at clocks past stock when idling without some form of help from changing the settings. also, unlike what i have read, my csgo fps actually went up after doing it... ironically, the CPU could pass aggressive stress testing with +150 and even +200 offsets with no problem, but csgo would knock him down. i guess the transition between states\voltages\boosts were too much, evident by disabling c states solving the issue.

one thing that bothers me, is that after doing it, in HWinfo64, i get weird reading of my vcore. the VID is low, and the vcore reported from the motherboard sensor is also low, around 1.0X volts reported by the mobo, 0.X reported by the VID, obviously when I'm doing nothing but running hwinfo in the desktop. however, the SVI2 TFN reading are constantly showing 1.38-1.45V...is this a bug? is it showing only the voltage 1-2 active vcores are being fed as its the highest? doesn't make sense to me that the mobo is reading 1.0X volts supplied by the vrm, but the CPU sensor is reading above 1.4V. i am running high performance power plan in stead of balanced. could be it?
would love to get an answer as i really don't wanna re enable c states, but i don't wanna damage my CPU as well...


----------



## KedarWolf

This is Core Cycler and Y-Cruncher stable. Passes TM5 as well, 8 Cycles at 1000% Usmus 7+ hour run.


----------



## KedarWolf

Something weird about the X570S Unify-X Max is it installs the Realtek USB Audio drivers by default, using even older Realtek drivers from Station Drivers and the one from the MSI support website.

I even tried to manually load the non-USB Realtek Audio driver in the device manager and my PC went into a blue screen boot loop with no recovery screen until I disabled the audio controller in the BIOS, booted into Windows and manually deleted the driver in Device Manager.

I'm not sure why on this board it needs the USB audio driver, not the regular Realtek one. :/

Okay, this explains it.









The Realtek ALC4080 on the new Intel boards demystified and the differences to the ALC1220 | Insider | igor'sLAB


The Realtek ALC4080, which was launched in 2020, can now be found as a sound solution on many new mid-range and high-end Intel boards without the customer really knowing what's behind it.




www.igorslab.de


----------



## TheBoy08

KedarWolf said:


> Something weird about the X570S Unify-X Max is it installs the Realtek USB Audio drivers by default, using even older Realtek drivers from Station Drivers and the one from the MSI support website.
> 
> I even tried to manually load the non-USB Realtek Audio driver in the device manager and my PC went into a blue screen boot loop with no recovery screen until I disabled the audio controller in the BIOS, booted into Windows and manually deleted the driver in Device Manager.
> 
> I'm not sure why on this board it needs the USB audio driver, not the regular Realtek one. :/
> 
> Okay, this explains it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Realtek ALC4080 on the new Intel boards demystified and the differences to the ALC1220 | Insider | igor'sLAB
> 
> 
> The Realtek ALC4080, which was launched in 2020, can now be found as a sound solution on many new mid-range and high-end Intel boards without the customer really knowing what's behind it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.igorslab.de


I was having the same issue and was about to post here. Hell I was even downloading realtek drivers from their website directly to see if it would work. The problem with USB drivers is if you start a video the audio doesn't start right away, there's a 2 seconds delay, it's ****ing stupid and it's driving me nuts.


----------



## KedarWolf

TheBoy08 said:


> I was having the same issue and was about to post here. Hell I was even downloading realtek drivers from their website directly to see if it would work. The problem with USB drivers is if you start a video the audio doesn't start right away, there's a 2 seconds delay, it's ****ing stupid and it's driving me nuts.


Try this firmware update.






4080.zip







drive.google.com


----------



## TheBoy08

KedarWolf said:


> Try this firmware update.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4080.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


Still having the issue 😟


----------



## KedarWolf

Other USB devices can affect it.

You have any removable hard drives, USB drives or anything other than your keyboard and mouse attached?


----------



## KedarWolf

The issue I'm having is random USB disconnect sounds, everything works fine, nothing actually disconnects. I checked the USB logs.I had disable the USB sounds as a fix. :/


----------



## KedarWolf

TheBoy08 said:


> Still having the issue 😟


Try the MSI Utility V3, enable interrupts and put the priority on high. I'm on the bus so can't do a screenshot.









Windows: Line-Based vs. Message Signaled-Based Interrupts. MSI tool.


... or another attempt to improve latencies Little bit of theory: ***** From "Windows Internals" by Mark Russinovich, David A. Solomon, Alex...




forums.guru3d.com


----------



## TheBoy08

KedarWolf said:


> Try the MSI Utility V3, enable interrupts and put the priority on high. I'm on the bus so can't do a screenshot.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Windows: Line-Based vs. Message Signaled-Based Interrupts. MSI tool.
> 
> 
> ... or another attempt to improve latencies Little bit of theory: ***** From "Windows Internals" by Mark Russinovich, David A. Solomon, Alex...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> forums.guru3d.com


That didn't do anything either but don't sweat it too much, tomorrow imma just do a clean windows install because I don't think I properly uninstalled my B550 audio drivers and they're probably conflicting with the new audio drivers


----------



## KedarWolf

TheBoy08 said:


> That didn't do anything either but don't sweat it too much, tomorrow imma just do a clean windows install because I don't think I properly uninstalled my B550 audio drivers and they're probably conflicting with the new audio drivers


Try DDU, reboot to safe mode, enable it in DDU options, enable Do Not Install Drivers Automatically as well. Uninstall Realtech, reboot, install the below drivers.









Display Driver Uninstaller (DDU) V18.0.4.7 Released.


Display Driver Uninstaller (DDU) V18.0.4.7 Released. ChangeLog: ALL: Target .Net Framework 4.8 ALL: Dropped support for Windows Vista. AMD: AMDKMPFD removal enhancements AMD: Files / registry removal enhancements. NVIDIA: Additional files removal.




www.wagnardsoft.com










Realtek USB Audio Driver (UAD) Version 6.3.9600.2291 (Msi)


Windows 10 / 11




www.station-drivers.com


----------



## TheBoy08

KedarWolf said:


> Try DDU, reboot to safe mode, enable it in DDU options, enable Do Not Install Drivers Automatically as well. Uninstall Realtech, reboot, install the below drivers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Display Driver Uninstaller (DDU) V18.0.4.7 Released.
> 
> 
> Display Driver Uninstaller (DDU) V18.0.4.7 Released. ChangeLog: ALL: Target .Net Framework 4.8 ALL: Dropped support for Windows Vista. AMD: AMDKMPFD removal enhancements AMD: Files / registry removal enhancements. NVIDIA: Additional files removal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.wagnardsoft.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Realtek USB Audio Driver (UAD) Version 6.3.9600.2291 (Msi)
> 
> 
> Windows 10 / 11
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.station-drivers.com


So it doesn't do the sound playing delay on my speakers which are plugged in via AUX cable but it does the delay with my Astro A40 TR which are plugged in via optical cable. 🤔


----------



## MyUsername

KedarWolf said:


> Try DDU, reboot to safe mode, enable it in DDU options, enable Do Not Install Drivers Automatically as well. Uninstall Realtech, reboot, install the below drivers.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Display Driver Uninstaller (DDU) V18.0.4.7 Released.
> 
> 
> Display Driver Uninstaller (DDU) V18.0.4.7 Released. ChangeLog: ALL: Target .Net Framework 4.8 ALL: Dropped support for Windows Vista. AMD: AMDKMPFD removal enhancements AMD: Files / registry removal enhancements. NVIDIA: Additional files removal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.wagnardsoft.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Realtek USB Audio Driver (UAD) Version 6.3.9600.2291 (Msi)
> 
> 
> Windows 10 / 11
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.station-drivers.com


I'm surprised there's still problems with this alc4080 audio chip, it's been released for over a year now and still they're having the same issues with it, shocking. I kinda glad I'm using hdmi audio to my Samsung Dolby Atmos soundbar.


----------



## binder87

KedarWolf said:


> This is Core Cycler and Y-Cruncher stable. Passes TM5 as well, 8 Cycles at 1000% Usmus 7+ hour run.
> 
> View attachment 2542063
> 
> View attachment 2542057
> 
> View attachment 2542058
> 
> View attachment 2542059
> 
> View attachment 2542061
> 
> View attachment 2542062
> 
> View attachment 2542060


That's quiet an agressive curve for +200. Are you using any llc with that? Or you find the scalar x10 to help with stability?


----------



## KedarWolf

binder87 said:


> That's quiet an agressive curve for +200. Are you using any llc with that? Or you find the scalar x10 to help with stability?


Actually, I reduced Core 0 and 4 to 7-17 and my CB23 jumped 250 points. This is what I was running before my new MB. My CPU-Z jumped too. I'm using LLC Auto and LLC 2 on the SOC LLC I think it is. LLC Auto helps with CB20 for sure, maybe even CB23.

On my MSI B550 Unify-X, I was getting around 30230 in CB23. On my X570 Unify-X Max I got 30695 last night with that curve. I reduced Core 12 to 29 as Core Cycler found an error I get at 30. I don't get it at 29. This is on a EKWB Predator 360 AIO with an Optimus Foundation block, so I'm pretty happy. 

Edit: I was at work. It was Core 9 I put at 29, not Core 12.


----------



## ribosome

KedarWolf said:


> The issue I'm having is random USB disconnect sounds, everything works fine, nothing actually disconnects. I checked the USB logs.I had disable the USB sounds as a fix. :/


That was my issue as well. And my workaround.


----------



## KedarWolf

On your MSI X570S Unify-X Max, in HWInfo, check Bus Clock. I noticed it was wrong when CPU-Z showed my memory speed too low and I opened up HWInfo. 

Mine was stuck at 99.2, even setting it in the BIOS to 100.00 manually never fixed it. Resetting CMOS with PC off and reloading the BIOS settings fixed it.


----------



## MyUsername

YASS, unify X Max motherboard delivered a day early.

I'm thinking about a mega build, Corsair 1000D, 2 in 1 pc one for gaming and the other for media, overkill water cooling and over the top puke RGB. My B550 is being repaired this weekend, new bios chip and used as my second gaming machine with steering wheel on a monitor paired with a 3900x and 3080 ti and so if the missus wants to watch TV she can, while the main rig is on the TV as gaming and media. The unify X Max with 5950x with another 3080ti and my gigabyte master with a low power chip and cheap display card as secondary. Still in the thinking process, need to see if I'm able to cast to TV with Dolby Atmos as it won't be connected via hdmi cable.


----------



## Audioboxer

Hearing USB mixed with audio just gives me nightmares considering all the damn USB issues with AMD bios lol.

Right now my B550 is just running optical to some Kanto YU6s.


----------



## MyUsername

What's going on with my life? Not fair. Gorilla glue to the rescue, sigh


----------



## Nighthog

MyUsername said:


> What's going on with my life? Not fair. Gorilla glue to the rescue, sigh


Are the stand-offs press fitted or soldered into place on there?

Can't really tell from the image. It doesn't hold in place when you put it back?
I know some brands use screws to hold them into place from behind the boards but this doesn't seem to do that.


----------



## MyUsername

Nighthog said:


> Are the stand-offs press fitted or soldered into place on there?
> 
> Can't really tell from the image. It doesn't hold in place when you put it back?
> I know some brands use screws to hold them into place from behind the boards but this doesn't seem to do that.


It's stuck down with some epoxy resin or double sided tape. The aluminium insert standoffs are loose in the holes. I can 100% assure you the screw was finger tight, about half a second after pulling the screwdriver away it bounced off like it was spring loaded by the thermal pad compressed on the M.2. The 3 other M.2s I did before that, that hang off the CPU are fine, that was number 4. I've got to admit I was gobsmacked and I did go a bit ape $#!t. First time in my 42 years I've actually broke something before I've even turned it on or even connected the power. On the B550 unify X, the M.2 clam shells have screws from the bottom with inserts firmly pressed into the heatsinks, perfect. Why MSI, WHY cut corners on a premium board? Apart from that, it's a good board.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

binder87 said:


> i am running high performance power plan in stead of balanced. could be it?


Yes it's the Power Plan. Try balanced with the slider in the middle.


----------



## MyUsername

Okay clever people figure this one out, because I'm baffled. Grabbed my b550 late December 2020, popped my 3900x and ran 1900fclk flawlessly. Received my 5950x in April, dropped it in and ever since I was plagued with the fclk hole at 1900. 1900fclk is now stable on this 570s chipset board🤪. Any other config up to 2000/4000 is about the same. Why? I was expecting to crash in the usual 10 seconds of touching any stress test at 1900fclk, crazy. Getting minor whea that I'll iron out over the weekend, hopefully.

Forget the whea's, auto seems to work


----------



## Viron

Hello guys. I was wondering if anyone could shed some light on my slow read speed. This is a fresh installed win 10, with updated drivers for chipset etc. A30 bios. No whea`s at 3800/1900. 
It is not the memory, because i have also the same kit as MyUsername above here, and results are the same with that kit. While on Dark Hero, the 4K CL14 is well above 59000 in read score so i am a bit confused what is causeing this? The voltages are not fine tuned, i just put them in because i had some higher speeds on the ram a few min ago. Btw at higher speeds, the deviation is even bigger.
To me it seems almost so the chipset is not up to speed, some hardware issue?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Viron said:


> To me it seems almost so the chipset is not up to speed, some hardware issue?


There are a lot of possible issues in the timings that could impact RBW:

GDM On, try 2T GDM Off
CLDO VDDP at 1.1V is too high, try 900mV
Try different DrvStr with GDM Off, eg. 40/20/24/24
tRFC at 225 could be unstable
SCL at 3, try 4 or 5
RDRD SD/DD at 4/3, try 4/4 or 5/5
WRWR SD/DD at 6/5, try 6/6 or 5/5
RDWR/WRRD at 10/1, try 8/3
Unusual WTRS/WTRL at 3/7, try 4/8 or 4/10
WR too tight, try 16
Could be also BIOS A30, I didn't test much


----------



## Viron

Thanks for answer, did not change much except giving even less read speed. Also tryed the turn around timings i Auto. Tryed the newest bios aswell, but same result. 
But like i said, i tryed a compled different kit that i use on the Dark Hero, and i got the same low read sped on the Unify-X with that one. 
I am a bit out of ideas realy. Espesically since the latency seems very good for this speed.


----------



## Audioboxer

Everyone else with the B550, are these the two CHIPSET options you have in the bios?

I was trying to hunt down CHIPSET CLDO, but it appears that might only be a voltage applicable to x570 chipsets.


----------



## Nighthog

Anyone got suggestion what might be wrong when I only get 53000MB/s for read & copy @ 5100Mts on the X570S Unify-X?
Also 67ns+ in latency.
Something isn't right there.


----------



## PJVol

Nighthog said:


> Something isn't right there


Async mode penalty?


----------



## Nighthog

PJVol said:


> Async mode penalty?


It should not be this severe. Looks like I'm running 3600Mts or something with this kind of score.


----------



## domdtxdissar

PJVol said:


> Async mode penalty?


Async penalty is not so bad..








Most be something else wrong with that setup, like massive amounts of WHEA and/or throttling


----------



## Nighthog

domdtxdissar said:


> Async penalty is not so bad..
> View attachment 2544344
> 
> Most be something else wrong with that setup, like massive amounts of WHEA and/or throttling


Yeah, the bandwidth is like not even close to what it should be.
What kind of numbers to you get for LinpackXtreme? 
Was getting only ~275GFlops as it is.


----------



## Luggage

Nighthog said:


> Yeah, the bandwidth is like not even close to what it should be.
> What kind of numbers to you get for LinpackXtreme?
> Was getting only ~275GFlops as it is.


Zen-timings?


----------



## domdtxdissar

Nighthog said:


> Yeah, the bandwidth is like not even close to what it should be.
> What kind of numbers to you get for LinpackXtreme?
> Was getting only ~275GFlops as it is.


Linpack xtreme dont scale that well with memory bandwidth in async mode, better to run in sync.
Y-cruncher scales extremely well with bandwidth and here async mode is faster



> When testing how high memory-speed this motherboard + memory combo would run decoupled from flck with the minimum fiddling in the bios, (second day i have this motherboard) i also decided to perform some basic benchmark comparisons @ a static 4500/4400mhz cpu clock against my standard synced flck 1900 CL profile..
> 
> Since the IO die on my 5950x is so bad limiting me to lowish 1900:1900:3800 when running synced, it really depend on what the benchmark I'm running for it to be faster than running 4400:1800:1100 asynced..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> VS


Testing at static cpu clockspeed at 4500/4400mhz:

1800:1100:4400 asynced
Linpack = 659 average gflops
y-cruncher = 60.99*0* seconds

1900:1900:3800 synced
Linpack = 661 average gflops
y-cruncher = 63.711 seconds

_edit_
Seems like i was running flck at only 1800 by mistake in async mode testing.. need to retest
_edit2_

1900:1100:4400 asynced
Linpack = *662.4* average gflops
y-cruncher = *60.680* seconds







Not 100% apples to apples comparison as i have both a new OS installed and a new 5950x.. But cpu should not matter as all runs are at static 4500/4400mhz..

Can maybe try to push higher async speeds with dual rank on this cpu and see how it goes.. 
(my old stopped at 4400MT/s with DR)


----------



## PJVol

Nighthog said:


> It should not be this severe





domdtxdissar said:


> ...massive amounts of WHEA and/or throttling


I thought that's a given and we're kinda got used to it here?


----------



## domdtxdissar

> Can maybe try to push higher async speeds with dual rank on this cpu and see how it goes..
> (my old stopped at 4400MT/s with DR)


Seems like i maxes out at 4466MT/s, so not much differente with other cpu
But i kinda start to wonder if this async CL15 4466MT/s profile could match or even beat my synced CL13 3800MT/s everyday profile.. Think i have to do more comparisons on this. 







1900:1116:4466 asynced CL15

Linpack = 663.5 average gflops
y-cruncher = 59.850 seconds
Dram bench = 88.80 seconds
OCCT = read:1570 -> write:1298 -> combined 1491
Geekbench 3 = memory single core: 9948 -> memory multi core:10108

_edit_







1900:1900:3800 synced CL13

Linpack = 660.5 average gflops
y-cruncher = 63.501 seconds
Dram bench = 96.51 seconds
OCCT = read:1389 -> write:1183 -> combined 1333
Geekbench 3 = memory single core: 9837 -> memory multi core:9741


----------



## ManniX-ITA

domdtxdissar said:


> Think i have to do more comparisons on this.


What about SOTR/Blender?


----------



## Luggage

ManniX-ITA said:


> What about SOTR/Blender?


Corona? 


http://imgur.com/a/ISLvQKt


----------



## domdtxdissar

ManniX-ITA said:


> What about SOTR/Blender?


All benchmarks @ static 4700/4600mhz







1900:1116:4466 asynced CL15

Corona = 12062900 rays/sec (40sec)


Blender BMW = 1min 17sec
Blender classroom = 3min 18sec
Blender fishy_cat = 1min 39sec
Blender koro = 2min 29sec
Blender pavillon = 3min 24sec
Blender victor = 5min 42sec


SotTR #1 run = 318fps average cpu game
SotTR #2 run = 319fps average cpu game
SotTR #3 run = 319fps average cpu game








1900:1900:3800 synced CL13

Corona = 12226500 rays/sec (39sec)


Blender BMW = 1min 17sec
Blender classroom = 3min 18sec
Blender fishy_cat = 1min 39sec
Blender koro = 2min 29sec
Blender pavillon = 3min 25sec
Blender victor = 5min 40sec


SotTR #1 run = 317fps average cpu game
SotTR #2 run = 310fps average cpu game
SotTR #3 run = 314fps average cpu game
Seems like its a ~wash in Blender and the corona benchmark, but synced 1900:3800 is faster in SotTR cpu game average


----------



## Nighthog

New BIOS with AGESA 1.2.0.5 seems to be available for download.

Found *7D51v11* on the website today for the X570S UNIFY-X Though they seem to have "backdated" it to have been released January 5th.


----------



## PJVol

ManniX-ITA said:


> What about SOTR/Blender?





Spoiler: Yeah... SOTR )














That was on 1.2.0.3 C, with 1.2.0.5 it's worse.


----------



## knock

Anyone lose ability to POST when disabling cores and/or SMT at high clocks on both CPU and DRAM?


----------



## Audioboxer

domdtxdissar said:


> Seems like i maxes out at 4466MT/s, so not much differente with other cpu
> But i kinda start to wonder if this async CL15 4466MT/s profile could match or even beat my synced CL13 3800MT/s everyday profile.. Think i have to do more comparisons on this.
> View attachment 2544373
> 
> 1900:1116:4466 asynced CL15
> 
> Linpack = 663.5 average gflops
> y-cruncher = 59.850 seconds
> Dram bench = 88.80 seconds
> OCCT = read:1570 -> write:1298 -> combined 1491
> Geekbench 3 = memory single core: 9948 -> memory multi core:10108
> 
> _edit_
> View attachment 2544386
> 
> 1900:1900:3800 synced CL13
> 
> Linpack = 660.5 average gflops
> y-cruncher = 63.501 seconds
> Dram bench = 96.51 seconds
> OCCT = read:1389 -> write:1183 -> combined 1333
> Geekbench 3 = memory single core: 9837 -> memory multi core:9741


Dom was it the X570s that let you boot to 4466? Was your B550 not like mine and it struggled to go more than 4400?


----------



## domdtxdissar

Audioboxer said:


> Dom was it the X570s that let you boot to 4466? Was your B550 not like mine and it struggled to go more than 4400?


I dont have any b550 boards, so it was the x570s unify x max 
The trick to make the jump from 4400 to 4466 was to set all DrvStr to 20 (board auto configure to this at this speed)


----------



## Nighthog

domdtxdissar said:


> I dont have any b550 boards, so it was the x570s unify x max
> The trick to make the jump from 4400 to 4466 was to set all DrvStr to 20 (board auto configure to this at this speed)
> View attachment 2544668


Dual-rank limited that much to such frequency only? I was hopefull it would be like 4600Mts or such with such kits. (wishful thinking)


----------



## Audioboxer

domdtxdissar said:


> I dont have any b550 boards, so it was the x570s unify x max
> The trick to make the jump from 4400 to 4466 was to set all DrvStr to 20 (board auto configure to this at this speed)
> View attachment 2544668


Yeah you did??? lol. Me and you were booting 4400 on the B550. Or am I mixing you up with someone else?

I'll try this later anyway, I've been stuck at 4400.


----------



## knock

Would someone mind trying to disable cores/SMT when fully OC'd?

Having problems at anything 4000+. Can run up to 5.3GHz/4933/2467 with a 5700G on all cores but as soon as I try to disable cores/threads can no longer post. Tested this with as low settings as 4.9GHz/4000/auto FCLK - won't post or doesn't train RAM to BIOS settings above default.


----------



## Luggage

knock said:


> Would someone mind trying to disable cores/SMT when fully OC'd?
> 
> Having problems at anything 4000+. Can run up to 5.3GHz/4933/2467 with a 5700G on all cores but as soon as I try to disable cores/threads can no longer post. Tested this with as low settings as 4.9GHz/4000/auto FCLK - won't post or doesn't train RAM to BIOS settings above default.


Haven’t seen anyone here doing 5+ all core.

Well I did cpu-z at 5.0 but that was a suicide run that didn’t even manage cb r23 sc.

What voltage and cooling do you run?


----------



## knock

Luggage said:


> Haven’t seen anyone here doing 5+ all core.
> 
> Well I did cpu-z at 5.0 but that was a suicide run that didn’t even manage cb r23 sc.
> 
> What voltage and cooling do you run?


1.4 to 1.5v on phase, depending on the benchmark and frequency I can run. I can msconfig OS affinity but initially booting it takes way more voltage than it needs if could just disable in the BIOS.






knock @ HWBOT


Ranked 14 in the apprentice league




hwbot.org





EDIT: The link box says 107? I'm 49 lol


----------



## ribosome

I can't get above 4200 MHz on memory on this board sadly. Maybe I'm not trying the right settings. I did set 2T and increased vDIMM accordingly, also loosened a bunch of timings. Not sure what else I should try.

This is how I'm currently running it (1.5 V DRAM):


----------



## Unifyx

Hi guys

I am running 2x16GB dualrank G.Skill 3600 14-15-15 at 1.45V and my desktop icons are invisible 3 of 10 times after booting the system. The icons are visible only after I slide the mouse over the part of the desktop, where the icons should be. Settings are GDM enabled , power down disabled, fast boot disabled and all timings manually set.
Did some overclocking to 3800 16-16-16 at 1.4V with no problems and the system feels snappier.
I am on BIOS A3 on the B550 Unify x. BIOS A1 was really unstable throwing errors with any RAM test. If somebody knows which BIOS is more stable for such a RAM kit, please let me know.

This b-die kit has BCTD insted of BCPB under the hood.

Edit: I think it has sometimes to do with the Graphics card. Maybe a driver problem.


----------



## Iarwa1N

KedarWolf said:


> View attachment 2542060


Can someone please explain what “VDD Full Scale Current and VDd Telemetry Offset Value” does? I have an Unify X but couldnt find explanation for these settings.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Iarwa1N said:


> Can someone please explain what “VDD Full Scale Current and VDd Telemetry Offset Value” does? I have an Unify X but couldnt find explanation for these settings.


Full Scale is manipulating the CPU package TDC Current consumption, scaling the actual value to the Amperes you set.
Eg. if the TDC Max is 200 A in PBO and you set 100 A in Full Scale when actual TDC value is 100 A will be reported 50 A.
You can set it a tad lower than the max; too low will cause the CPU to sense something is wrong and reduce the performances instead of improving.
Provides a small boost; set too low can sometimes cause instability.

VDD Offset will manipulate the minimum TDC & EDC power consumption.
If you set 40 mA it will add a 40 A minimum power consumption to EDC & TDC.
When they go above that threshold the reported Amperes are the correct values (except TDC if you manipulated it with Full Scale).
You need to run benchmarks to find the right value; first find the right CO values.
Set too low or too high will cause a drop in performances and high instability (reset during load).
Provides a major boost; both in ST and MT max and sustained clocks (hence the tight relation with CO).
Use Boosttester to check the max clocks. Highly recommended to use CoreCycler to check stability.


----------



## Iarwa1N

ManniX-ITA said:


> Full Scale is manipulating the CPU package TDC Current consumption, scaling the actual value to the Amperes you set.
> Eg. if the TDC Max is 200 A in PBO and you set 100 A in Full Scale when actual TDC value is 100 A will be reported 50 A.
> You can set it a tad lower than the max; too low will cause the CPU to sense something is wrong and reduce the performances instead of improving.
> Provides a small boost; set too low can sometimes cause instability.
> 
> VDD Offset will manipulate the minimum TDC & EDC power consumption.
> If you set 40 mA it will add a 40 A minimum power consumption to EDC & TDC.
> When they go above that threshold the reported Amperes are the correct values (except TDC if you manipulated it with Full Scale).
> You need to run benchmarks to find the right value; first find the right CO values.
> Set too low or too high will cause a drop in performances and high instability (reset during load).
> Provides a major boost; both in ST and MT max and sustained clocks (hence the tight relation with CO).
> Use Boosttester to check the max clocks. Highly recommended to use CoreCycler to check stability.


Thanks for the explanation but I don’t get why we would want to manipulate minimum power consumption with VDD Offset. Is this to prevent CPU from sensing something is wrong after the VDD scale is applied? Or is it to fake a minimum load at all times to keep clocks higher?

Is it possible to broke the cpu while experimenting with this values? Are there any safe limits while experimenting? I have a 5900x.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## MyUsername

Hi guys. Could someone with an MSI Unify X motherboard tell me what 256 Mbit bios IC is on it please, it'a big IC near the CPU next to a fan header and you might need a macro camera. I believe it to be a Matronix MX25U25673G going by some Russian site and other spec sheets, as the board is at a repair shop. They've replaced it with a Winbond W25Q256FV and it doesn't work, they said it's pre-flashed by their distributer. Have these guys not got an eeprom programmer? Going by the spec sheets for both, the Matronix is 1.65V-2.0V and the Winbond is 2.7V-3.6V. I don't think the Winbond will work if the board is designed for a lower operating voltage.


----------



## Unifyx

hi, do you mean this chip there?










it would be easier to find the chip that you are searching for , if you mark the chip on a picture of the mainboard.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Iarwa1N said:


> Or is it to fake a minimum load at all times to keep clocks higher?


This one but don't ask me why the clocks are higher with a minimum load...
You can check it easily with OCCT running on your best core (1 thread).
The average clock will be higher 25-50 MHz and will boost 50-100 MHz higher as well (if it works).



Iarwa1N said:


> Is it possible to broke the cpu while experimenting with this values? Are there any safe limits while experimenting? I have a 5900x.


Broke no but be careful with very low values.
I got my 5950X stuck once and needed to clear CMOS and shut off the PSU for a few minutes.
For my processor with TDP 175 usually I test between 150 and 165 for Full Scale.
Offset 40-55 mA.


----------



## MyUsername

Unifyx said:


> hi, do you mean this chip there?
> 
> 
> 
> it would be easier to find the chip that you are searching for , if you mark the chip on a picture of the mainboard.


I appreciate this buddy. This one, it might have MXIC and numbers on it, I think. Nuvoton IC are sensors and controllers for other ICs.


----------



## Unifyx

I am at work now, if nobody sends a message or takes a picture until the next 5 hours, I will be back to take my graphics card out to take a picture of the chip.


----------



## Unifyx

So here it is:


----------



## MyUsername

Unifyx said:


> So here it is:


Fantastic thank you, much appreciated. Be careful with these ICs, not easily fixable.


----------



## MyUsername

Still some good people out there. The repair shop acknowledged the Winbond needs 3 Volts, okay fine. He said he tried flash back before he did any work on it and it didn't work, then removed the bios chip and tried flashing it on an eeprom programmer and said he couldn't get it to read, erase or anything, I think he fried it putting 3 Volts through, idiot. He said he'll do his homework and that a bios chip on a Mac might work. Well a quick Google and I found they use Winbond ICs too, facepalm. Hammering Ebay, I found someone selling Macronix bios chips, only to find out they only sell Winbond, I replied mate they don't work they need 3 Volts and Macronix's need 1.8 Volts, went silent. I then found someone selling an MSI B550M Pro for spares or repair, asked them what bios chip it has, quoting the IC I need only for them to reply, hey I've got that exact chip. Eureka I thought, he then replied what motherboard is for, maybe I can flash it for you? He flashed it, tested it on another board and sold it to me for £10. I'm blown away, just the chip would nice, but that effort is priceless to me.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

MyUsername said:


> He flashed it, tested it on another board and sold it to me for £10. I'm blown away, just the chip would nice, but that effort is priceless to me.


Awesome


----------



## KedarWolf

MyUsername said:


> Still some good people out there. The repair shop acknowledged the Winbond needs 3 Volts, okay fine. He said he tried flash back before he did any work on it and it didn't work, then removed the bios chip and tried flashing it on an eeprom programmer and said he couldn't get it to read, erase or anything, I think he fried it putting 3 Volts through, idiot. He said he'll do his homework and that a bios chip on a Mac might work. Well a quick Google and I found they use Winbond ICs too, facepalm. Hammering Ebay, I found someone selling Macronix bios chips, only to find out they only sell Winbond, I replied mate they don't work they need 3 Volts and Macronix's need 1.8 Volts, went silent. I then found someone selling an MSI B550M Pro for spares or repair, asked them what bios chip it has, quoting the IC I need only for them to reply, hey I've got that exact chip. Eureka I thought, he then replied what motherboard is for, maybe I can flash it for you? He flashed it, tested it on another board and sold it to me for £10. I'm blown away, just the chip would nice, but that effort is priceless to me.


On AliExpress you can buy an MSI JSPI1 flasher that is supposed to be the fool proof way to flash an MSI board. If doesn't hook up to the Winbond cup itself, but the JSPI1 connectors. Let me find it.









7.02US $ 10% OFF|Msi Motherboard Bios Chip De Livre Queima Online Máquina Da Escova De Fio Msi Jspi1 Hot Swap Ch341a - Connectors - AliExpress


Smarter Shopping, Better Living! Aliexpress.com




www.aliexpress.com





Can take a few weeks to deliver though, I ordered one when a badly modded BIOS someone did for me ruined one of the BIOS's on my X570S Unify-X Max.

I'll let you know how it goes when I receive it.


----------



## MyUsername

KedarWolf said:


> On AliExpress you can buy an MSI JSPI1 flasher that is supposed to be the fool proof way to flash an MSI board. If doesn't hook up to the Winbond cup itself, but the JSPI1 connectors. Let me find it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 7.02US $ 10% OFF|Msi Motherboard Bios Chip De Livre Queima Online Máquina Da Escova De Fio Msi Jspi1 Hot Swap Ch341a - Connectors - AliExpress
> 
> 
> Smarter Shopping, Better Living! Aliexpress.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.aliexpress.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can take a few weeks to deliver though, I ordered one when a badly modded BIOS someone did for me ruined one of the BIOS's on my X570S Unify-X Max.
> 
> I'll let you know how it goes when I receive it.


Ouch. Be careful it might need modding to output 3 volts then get a 1.8v adaptor or you will fry the chip.

After what I've been through, I'm extremely dubious about flashing experimental bioses now. I have flashed 10G0, but using UBU now to update is a no from now on. I have bought another unify max the other day because I thought the b550 unify X is dead. I need somewhere to put my first 5950x as my second 5950x is in the Max, both have the 1900 fclk hole, that's the luck I have. I might get another 5950x if my unify X gets ressurrected, third time lucky maybe. Forth actually, one 5950x I got had a faulty core 3 and failed prime95 at stock and got returned.

I'm thinking of taking up micro soldering, getting a station, 1000 watt hot air gun. Start with small easy stuff and work my way up to bga etc. I want to mod and fix things I break.


----------



## KedarWolf

MyUsername said:


> Ouch. Be careful it might need modding to output 3 volts then get a 1.8v adaptor or you will fry the chip.
> 
> After what I've been through, I'm extremely dubious about flashing experimental bioses now. I have flashed 10G0, but using UBU now to update is a no from now on. I have bought another unify max the other day because I thought the b550 unify X is dead. I need somewhere to put my first 5950x as my second 5950x is in the Max, both have the 1900 fclk hole, that's the luck I have. I might get another 5950x if my unify X gets ressurrected, third time lucky maybe. Forth actually, one 5950x I got had a faulty core 3 and failed prime95 at stock and got returned.
> 
> I'm thinking of taking up micro soldering, getting a station, 1000 watt hot air gun. Start with small easy stuff and work my way up to bga etc. I want to mod and fix things I break.


Yeah, you're right, needs a 1.8v adaptor. I have one though.

Edit: It's not a CH341A programer, but rather an MCU 32F which is designed to work right on an MSI board.

I can check when I get it, make sure it's like the lower pictures, different chips on it, see here.









6.14US $ 11% OFF|For Msi Motherboard Bios Free Chip Removal Adapter Flashing Machine Cable Jspi1 Programmer To Save Brick Fresh Bios Kit - Electrical Contacts And Contact Materials - AliExpress


Smarter Shopping, Better Living! Aliexpress.com




www.aliexpress.com


----------



## MyUsername

KedarWolf said:


> Yeah, you're right, needs a 1.8v adaptor. I have one though.


Thanks for mentioning that JSPI1, never knew what that was really for, too lazy to find out. Interesting if it works.


----------



## KedarWolf

MyUsername said:


> Thanks for mentioning that JSPI1, never knew what that was really for, too lazy to find out. Interesting if it works.


See my edit to the above, you DON'T need a 1.8v adaptor, a different programmer.


----------



## MyUsername

KedarWolf said:


> See my edit to the above, you DON'T need a 1.8v adaptor, a different programmer.


Nice, I'll look into it myself


----------



## TheBoy08

So I just discovered that my board resets my PBO Limits to lower numbers. I haven't been able to reproduce the issue consistently so it's seems random, sometimes the numbers will stay sometimes they go. When they do go it lowers them to awful values that makes my CPU score on benchmarks lower by a lot. I tried inputing PBO and curve values in the Settings>Advanced>AMD Overclocking section then I also put the values in the OC>Advanced CPU>AMD Overclocking section, still randomly happened and now my values are only in the OC section while the Settings one is on Auto and so far so good but it happens randomly so I never know if it'll stay this way... You guys think it could be an issue with where I input the PBO and curve values or is my board the issue?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

TheBoy08 said:


> You guys think it could be an issue with where I input the PBO and curve values or is my board the issue?


Which version of the BIOS are you using?


----------



## TheBoy08

ManniX-ITA said:


> Which version of the BIOS are you using?


7D51v10


----------



## ManniX-ITA

TheBoy08 said:


> 7D51v10


Then I have no idea 
You are running a X570S Unify-X not a B550 Unify-X


----------



## Unifyx

what settings should be changed to run higher fclk on the unify x. 1900 fclk is running just fine without any errors, 100% stable 24/7 with all settings on auto. RAM : fclk is 1:1.


----------



## MyUsername

Yass, bios repair on my B550 Unify X is fixed. With sourcing a replacement bios IC myself, they knocked £30 off from the initial £80 charge. Happy dance!!!

Edit: Built and working like new.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

I had to review all my settings to adjust them to my new 5950X after it has been updated by AGESA 1.2.0.5; a couple of things to share.
Had to run almost all benchmarks I have available and do A/B testing to see if the behavior changed.

*First is the cTDP setting in AMD CBS menu.*
It does help measurably and gives a nice and pretty constant 0.5-1.0% up to 2% overall.
Mostly on MT loads but also a small help for ST boost.
I have it at 400A, I'm not sure what is the best setting for other models.
This should work for any board.

Second is specific to MSI.
This could be interesting also for you @domdtxdissar @KedarWolf @Audioboxer

*The "CPU VRM Over Temperature Protection" in the DigitALL Power menu is a nefarious and broken throttle mechanism.
It's also partially responsible for the Unify-X high coil whine.*

I've never really investigated it too much since after a quick testing when I got the board didn't show any difference.
The first manual threshold is 90c and considering we all know that all MSI decent boards doesn't even come close to 70c in summer didn't look so relevant.

If you have one of the cheap MSI boards with the VRM topping 140c better to avoid touching it.
But I guess they don't even have this option.

Now my config is really stressed out and the CPU gets really hot, this setting makes a huge difference.
Guess it doesn't have the same effect with custom loops and good samples that needs low voltages.
But a broken throttler in the chain is very likely to mess up something.

If you set it at 150c seems to be mostly disabled and the results, for me, are measurable.

My main concern was Linpack and many other benchmarks that were running faster on the AORUS Master.
Which overall is a worse board than the Unify-X on the VRM side.

This is Linpack with pretty high ambient temperature (window closed):










Which has always puzzled me since I remember it was running much better on the Master, around 630 GFlops.

This is Linpack with limit set to 150c:










This is set to 120c:










This is set to 135c:










*As you can see comparing 120c and 135c to 150c, something is broken.*

Tests above were done all in a timespan of 30 minutes, same ambient temp.

With a much colder ambient temp, window open for a while, Linpack results in Auto are very similar to 150c.
But not consistent.

Independent to ambient temp, there are small differences overall almost all benchmarks.

My average sample overall was scoring around 29700 in CB23.
Now it scores between 29800 and 29900.
This is in line with what I was getting with the AORUS Master.

CPU-z gained almost steadily few points in ST and MT.

Got back some few MHz running Boosttester.

Corona runs much better topping 12M ray/s and falling down much less quickly than before.

In general short load bursts are running better.

Geekbench 5 didn't show almost any gain despite that.
*But the big difference with GB5 is that now during the MT tests the VRM is almost silent.*

AIDA Cache & Memory is always the loudest for coil whine.
But there's a macroscopic difference during the Copy RAM test.
While it's always one of the loudest with Auto sometimes the VRM doesn't emit any coil whine at all with 150c limit.

The monero miner runs steadily with over 19000 h/s even after a long time, much more than before.
Coil whine is exactly the same though.

The frequency checks of AIDA and GB5 are more reliable and hardly reports a lower than expected clock.
AIDA reported latency is much more steady than before.

Give it a try, I've just ran an 8 cycles y-cruncher which passed successfully.

Forgot to add that now the CPU vCore PWM Switching frequency set to 1000 kHz shows a CB23 gain of 50-100 points.
On Auto doesn't make any difference.


----------



## Audioboxer

ManniX-ITA said:


> I had to review all my settings to adjust them to my new 5950X after it has been updated by AGESA 1.2.0.5; a couple of things to share.
> Had to run almost all benchmarks I have available and do A/B testing to see if the behavior changed.
> 
> *First is the cTDP setting in AMD CBS menu.*
> It does help measurably and gives a nice and pretty constant 0.5-1.0% up to 2% overall.
> Mostly on MT loads but also a small help for ST boost.
> I have it at 400A, I'm not sure what is the best setting for other models.
> This should work for any board.
> 
> Second is specific to MSI.
> This could be interesting also for you @domdtxdissar @KedarWolf @Audioboxer
> 
> *The "CPU VRM Over Temperature Protection" in the DigitALL Power menu is a nefarious and broken throttle mechanism.
> It's also partially responsible for the Unify-X high coil whine.*
> 
> I've never really investigated it too much since after a quick testing when I got the board didn't show any difference.
> The first manual threshold is 90c and considering we all know that all MSI decent boards doesn't even come close to 70c in summer didn't look so relevant.
> 
> If you have one of the cheap MSI boards with the VRM topping 140c better to avoid touching it.
> But I guess they don't even have this option.
> 
> Now my config is really stressed out and the CPU gets really hot, this setting makes a huge difference.
> Guess it doesn't have the same effect with custom loops and good samples that needs low voltages.
> But a broken throttler in the chain is very likely to mess up something.
> 
> If you set it at 150c seems to be mostly disabled and the results, for me, are measurable.
> 
> My main concern was Linpack and many other benchmarks that were running faster on the AORUS Master.
> Which overall is a worse board than the Unify-X on the VRM side.
> 
> This is Linpack with pretty high ambient temperature (window closed):
> 
> View attachment 2547688
> 
> 
> Which has always puzzled me since I remember it was running much better on the Master, around 630 GFlops.
> 
> This is Linpack with limit set to 150c:
> 
> View attachment 2547690
> 
> 
> This is set to 120c:
> 
> View attachment 2547691
> 
> 
> This is set to 135c:
> 
> View attachment 2547692
> 
> 
> *As you can see comparing 120c and 135c to 150c, something is broken.*
> 
> Tests above were done all in a timespan of 30 minutes, same ambient temp.
> 
> With a much colder ambient temp, window open for a while, Linpack results in Auto are very similar to 150c.
> But not consistent.
> 
> Independent to ambient temp, there are small differences overall almost all benchmarks.
> 
> My average sample overall was scoring around 29700 in CB23.
> Now it scores between 29800 and 29900.
> This is in line with what I was getting with the AORUS Master.
> 
> CPU-z gained almost steadily few points in ST and MT.
> 
> Got back some few MHz running Boosttester.
> 
> Corona runs much better topping 12M ray/s and falling down much less quickly than before.
> 
> In general short load bursts are running better.
> 
> Geekbench 5 didn't show almost any gain despite that.
> *But the big difference with GB5 is that now during the MT tests the VRM is almost silent.*
> 
> AIDA Cache & Memory is always the loudest for coil whine.
> But there's a macroscopic difference during the Copy RAM test.
> While it's always one of the loudest with Auto sometimes the VRM doesn't emit any coil whine at all with 150c limit.
> 
> The monero miner runs steadily with over 19000 h/s even after a long time, much more than before.
> Coil whine is exactly the same though.
> 
> The frequency checks of AIDA and GB5 are more reliable and hardly reports a lower than expected clock.
> AIDA reported latency is much more steady than before.
> 
> Give it a try, I've just ran an 8 cycles y-cruncher which passed successfully.
> 
> Forgot to add that now the CPU vCore PWM Switching frequency set to 1000 kHz shows a CB23 gain of 50-100 points.
> On Auto doesn't make any difference.


Interesting! I've never been able to hear my VRMs unless I ran a CPU stability test at FCLK 2000. On 1.2.0.3c they were quite noisy, 1.2.0.5 reduced that noise a lot, but still USB disconnect issues.

So I can't say increasing the VRM temp will do anything noise wise for me at 1900.

Will play around with cTDP!


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Audioboxer said:


> Interesting! I've never been able to hear my VRMs unless I ran a CPU stability test at FCLK 2000.


Could have been this nice throttler doing something nefarious 



Audioboxer said:


> So I can't say increasing the VRM temp will do anything noise wise for me at 1900.


Noise probably not but performance wise could help you with your single core boosting not being really enthusiastic.


----------



## colourcode

I'm thinking of picking up a Unify-x for 50% off to replace my Tomahawk x570 Wifi as I managed to break the chipset fan (superglued a noctua fan on it and it runs cooler and quieter than before, but i spent so much money on this PC already may aswell go for a non ghetto build.

The VRM atleast seems to be better on the Unify-x. Anything else?
Is this a complete waste of money?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

colourcode said:


> The VRM atleast seems to be better on the Unify-x. Anything else?
> Is this a complete waste of money?


The VRM is eons better than the Tomahawk.
But you really need to be tolerant with coil whine; on some boards it's really terrible.


----------



## colourcode

ManniX-ITA said:


> The VRM is eons better than the Tomahawk.
> But you really need to be tolerant with coil whine; on some boards it's really terrible.


That's a shame. Literally never had any audible coil whine on a motherboard before 
Think I'll take the shot and return it if it's too bad.


----------



## Nighthog

colourcode said:


> That's a shame. Literally never had any audible coil whine on a motherboard before
> Think I'll take the shot and return it if it's too bad.


I have yet to have coil-whine on my X570S Unfiy-X MAX I bought using a older 3800X.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

colourcode said:


> Think I'll take the shot and return it if it's too bad.


You could get lucky and get almost none, same as other boards with this kind of high end VRM.

Be sure to tighten the screws on the back of the board which are securing the VRM heatsinks before you mount it.
Don't overdo it or you'll destroy the threading, be firm but not too much. They are probably going to be loose due to transport.
Just be careful, the screws are very high quality and rigid, the heatsink aluminum is pretty soft.


----------



## colourcode

In the LTT (i know, i know) tier list they have unify and tomahawk x570 in the same tier. But maybe its not updated / correct?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

colourcode said:


> In the LTT (i know, i know) tier list they have unify and tomahawk x570 in the same tier list. But maybe its not updated / correct?


It's in Italian but the data is the data; you can check yourself the differences here:









Elenco X570 con VRM


Foglio1 AMD,Creato da R3d3x Tech qp,Usa la visualizzazione filtrata per confrontare le schede madri! Come? Chipset X570,<a href="https://www.youtube.com/c/TechqpR3d3x">https://www.youtube.com/c/TechqpR3d3x</a>,1) Clicca sulla riga 8 2) In alto a sinistra vicino all'icona della st...




docs.google.com













Elenco B550 con VRM


Foglio1 AMD ,Creato da R3d3x Tech qp,Usa la visualizzazione filtrata per confrontare le schede madri! Come? Chipset B550,<a href="https://www.youtube.com/c/TechqpR3d3x">https://www.youtube.com/c/TechqpR3d3x</a>,1) Clicca sulla riga 8 2) In alto a sinistra vicino all'icona della s...




docs.google.com





With True phases, Infineon PWM controller and 90A Mosfet the Unify-X is in the top tier.
Are you sure it wasn't comparing the non X Unify or the X570 Unify?


----------



## colourcode

ManniX-ITA said:


> Are you sure it wasn't comparing the non X Unify or the X570 Unify?


Well it's probably the non-x one.

So just to be sure, this is the good one, right? 
MEG B550 UNIFY-X moderkort - AMD Socket - Komplett.se


----------



## ManniX-ITA

colourcode said:


> So just to be sure, this is the good one, right?


Yes the right one!


----------



## colourcode

ManniX-ITA said:


> Yes the right one!


Well then. Ordered!
This will be the first time since pentium 4 I'll remove a cpu from the socket. Pray for me 😂


----------



## Luggage

colourcode said:


> Well then. Ordered!
> This will be the first time since pentium 4 I'll remove a cpu from the socket. Pray for me 😂


Twist before you lift.


----------



## aussie7

anyone else noticed when overclocking on the MSI B550 Unify-X and you raise the VSOC above 1.29v the led display on motherboard gets stuck on some random number and doesn't show the current cpu temp ?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

aussie7 said:


> anyone else noticed when overclocking on the MSI B550 Unify-X and you raise the VSOC above 1.29v the led display on motherboard gets stuck on some random number and doesn't show the current cpu temp ?


I never went above 1.29V


----------



## Veii

Hence this will be needed soon
MSI's JTMP1 Header, from A320 to X570


Code:


CH341A USB Programmer
8        7       6      5
VCC    HOLDn    CLK    MOSI
============================
CS#    MIOS     WPn    GND
1        2       3      4

CH341 1.8v 8pin to MSI AM4 12pin
1 - 5
2 - 3
3 - 11
4 - 7
8 - 1
7 - 12
6 - 6
5 - 4

JTMP1  AM4 Layout
12    11
*     9
8     7
6     5
4     3
2     1

TRANSLATION:
    CS# = CS                      VCC = VCC
SO/SIO1 = DS/DO (MISO/MIOS)      SIO3 = HOLDn
   SIO2 = WP (WPn)               SCLK = CLK
Ground = GND                  SI/SIO0 = DI (MOSI)










Unify-X has


----------



## KedarWolf

Veii said:


> Hence this will be needed soon
> MSI's JTMP1 Header, from A320 to X570
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> CH341A USB Programmer
> 8        7       6      5
> VCC    HOLDn    CLK    MOSI
> ============================
> CS#    MIOS     WPn    GND
> 1        2       3      4
> 
> CH341 1.8v 8pin to MSI AM4 12pin
> 1 - 5
> 2 - 3
> 3 - 11
> 4 - 7
> 8 - 1
> 7 - 12
> 6 - 6
> 5 - 4
> 
> JTMP1  AM4 Layout
> 12    11
> *     9
> 8     7
> 6     5
> 4     3
> 2     1
> 
> TRANSLATION:
> CS# = CS                      VCC = VCC
> SO/SIO1 = DS/DO (MISO/MIOS)      SIO3 = HOLDn
> SIO2 = WP (WPn)               SCLK = CLK
> Ground = GND                  SI/SIO0 = DI (MOSI)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unify-X has
> View attachment 2548676











7.1US $ 9% OFF|Msi Motherboard Bios Chip De Livre Queima Online Máquina Da Escova De Fio Msi Jspi1 Hot Swap Ch341a - Connectors - AliExpress


Smarter Shopping, Better Living! Aliexpress.com




www.aliexpress.com





They come with a special 1.8v OnePro programmer, not the regular CH341A one


----------



## Veii

KedarWolf said:


> 7.1US $ 9% OFF|Msi Motherboard Bios Chip De Livre Queima Online Máquina Da Escova De Fio Msi Jspi1 Hot Swap Ch341a - Connectors - AliExpress
> 
> 
> Smarter Shopping, Better Living! Aliexpress.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.aliexpress.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They come with a special 1.8v programmer, not the regular CH341A one
> 
> View attachment 2548682


They went out of their way for this one ^^'
But the pinout is the same, just PCB routed


----------



## colourcode

Edit: OK THIS IS SOME COIL WHINE YOU WERENT KIDDING. Was absolutely dead silent yesterday and now it's talking to me 😫

Edit2: Coil whine gone again just audible when head inside case. Adjusted CPU fan curve and now i'm not seeing the huge temperature spikes from before, removed the rant from post.


----------



## Bix

Coil whine update: after suffering from a lot of whine on my non-X Unify I finally got around to removing the MB to tighten the screws on the rear of the heatsinks and wow, big difference! Still a few little squeaks here and there but way less than before, especially evident during AIDA64 benchmark and LinX.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Try setting VRM Over Temp to 150C to reduce coil whine.


----------



## KedarWolf

On my MSI X570S Unify-X Max, I fixed the USB disconnecting sounds by raising my PCH voltages a bit. Someone suggested doing that for USB disconnects.

The weird thing was the USB logs in event viewer etc. showed nothing connecting and disconnecting.

Edit: It was the chipset voltages.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

KedarWolf said:


> I fixed the USB disconnecting sounds by raising my PCH voltages a bit.


Are you sure? 
Maybe it's a placebo.
The voltages in the screenshot are the same selected by Auto


----------



## KedarWolf

ManniX-ITA said:


> Are you sure?
> Maybe it's a placebo.
> The voltages in the screenshot are the same selected by Auto


Auto in the Tool Tips are .950v and 1.2v.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

KedarWolf said:


> Auto in the Tool Tips are .950v and 1.2v.


Maybe cause it's a X570S...
Pretty sure those are the voltages for the B550.


----------



## KedarWolf

ManniX-ITA said:


> Maybe cause it's a X570S...
> Pretty sure those are the voltages for the B550.


Yeah, I rebooted in BIOS, set them on Auto and checked. Auto are .950v/1.2v.


----------



## Unifyx

Hi @all

just wanted to ask you, wich bios version works best for fclk / ram overclocking with the b550 unify x. 

I bought this motherboard and it had bios version A1. Was very unstable with my xmp profile, wich is G. Skill F4-3600C14D ( 14-15-15-35 @1.45V) flashed the A3 Bios and it worked better but with some stuttering in bios and in Win10. Flashed A2 and now it works 90% flawless. The thing is, @3800 flat 16 at 1.4V it works 100% stable without any stuttering. 
I bought a second pair of G. Skill 2x16GB F4-4000C16D (16-16-16-36 @1.4V) that works 100% at any settings from 3600 ftat 14 at 1.4V, 3800 flat 16 at 1.35V, 4000 flat 16 at 1.4V. No stuttering at all. 

Would be nice to here from you, wich bios version works best for you. so that I can check, if my 3600cl14 kit is able to work as it shoud with its xmp profile. 

thanks in advance


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Unifyx said:


> Would be nice to here from you, wich bios version works best for you. so that I can check, if my 3600cl14 kit is able to work as it shoud with its xmp profile.


I'm still using A21O with AGESA 1.2.0.1
Other good options are the A3 with 1.2.0.3B or A42/43/44O which should be 1.2.0.3C.
Not sure about A44O, I think I've tried once and it was 1.2.0.4.
I wouldn't use anything 1.2.0.4 and up as they all have VDDG bugs or VID limitations.


----------



## binder87

KedarWolf said:


> Have you run Core Cycler 720-720 FFTs on your -30 CO.
> 
> That test will find an unstable overclock quicker than anything. I've never seen anyone all 30s pass it.


Ill tell you what, my pc is strictly for gaming , web browsing/YouTube/twitch and light office work i do outside of my working hours. In that context now: i ran prime95 across a variety of fft sizes, aida 64, realbench, all for multiple hours, all passed with 0 issues including whea errors. On top of that, i have on these settings at least 200+ hours of gaming , some in csgo which is highly cpu/mem sensitive. Never ever had a crash, bsod or weird behaviour. Than , i went and checked event viewer, no whea id18 there pretty much since dialing in my final settings, and obviously no kernel power 41 errors. So for me, this is perfect, and regardless if core cycler will find anything, it has 0 implications for me in "the real world"....


----------



## binder87

KedarWolf said:


> Have you run Core Cycler 720-720 FFTs on your -30 CO.
> 
> That test will find an unstable overclock quicker than anything. I've never seen anyone all 30s pass it.


Edit: double post


----------



## KedarWolf

X570 AORUS MASTER (rev. 1.0) Support | Motherboard - GIGABYTE Global 

New chipset drivers.


----------



## Mike156

binder87 said:


> What i mean is that if i set the same curve with every setting untouched, if im with boost offset 0, SVI2TFN reads constant 1.3-1.36ish volts. as soon as i change the boost offset to anything but 0, the readings automatically become higher, i don't change anything else.


Sounds like it's able to hit the max boost clock at 1.36V so it has no need to go higher? When you set it to a higher max frequency, it's simply saying it needs more voltage to hit that higher frequency and you haven't hit the voltage limit (1.425/1.5V) so it raises the voltage. Sounds like it's working like it is supposed to.

As for high temps, I noticed when I was messing with Vsoc trying to get 3800+ to work, it raised SoC power quite a bit and had a noticable impact on light load temperatures.

Honestly sounds like a banger of a chip if it's actually hitting 4950MHz on all the cores. I'm not convinced -30 CO means much unless you can also hit high frequency with that setting. All but two of my cores can run at -28, but none of those cores can hit 4950MHz. One or two of them top out at like 4800 and the rest sit around 4900.

Also, if you can run 3800, I have to wonder if you can run 4000. The "hole" seems to be real in my experience, I don't know if I ever got 3800 to even post. I could get 4000 "stable" (karhu 500%) and down to only a couple WHEA errors, never could get it WHEA error free though. The fact 3800 works for you seems like higher probably would to?


----------



## binder87

Mike156 said:


> Sounds like it's able to hit the max boost clock at 1.36V so it has no need to go higher? When you set it to a higher max frequency, it's simply saying it needs more voltage to hit that higher frequency and you haven't hit the voltage limit (1.425/1.5V) so it raises the voltage. Sounds like it's working like it is supposed to.
> 
> As for high temps, I noticed when I was messing with Vsoc trying to get 3800+ to work, it raised SoC power quite a bit and had a noticable impact on light load temperatures.
> 
> Honestly sounds like a banger of a chip if it's actually hitting 4950MHz on all the cores. I'm not convinced -30 CO means much unless you can also hit high frequency with that setting. All but two of my cores can run at -28, but none of those cores can hit 4950MHz. One or two of them top out at like 4800 and the rest sit around 4900.
> 
> Also, if you can run 3800, I have to wonder if you can run 4000. The "hole" seems to be real in my experience, I don't know if I ever got 3800 to even post. I could get 4000 "stable" (karhu 500%) and down to only a couple WHEA errors, never could get it WHEA error free though. The fact 3800 works for you seems like higher probably would to?


So ill just update- i did take kaderwolf's advice and tested with core cycler, and yes, it did error out on 2 cores, however, with lots of recent research and fine tuning my pbo limits (if only i knew before that lowering tdc and edc instead of increasing them while maintaining ppt high actually boosts performance and not just lowering temps..), i am on a fully stable +100 mhz boost offset with all cores on -30, besides my best 2 which are -14 and -24 . Idk if its well known, but just so you know, disabling global c states actually allows for a much more aggressive CO values while maintaining stability. It does make total sense since the cores doesn't go in and out of idle , but i didn't know how much further it allows to push the CO values. Another interesting thing i noted is that at least in my case, +100 actually performs better than +150 or more. Something in the way pbo is boosting (i assume its the curve) changes simply by entering a different boost offset, and while maintaining the same clocks as shown on hwinfo, scores are better on +100 than +150. I understand now how people reach 7k+ cpuz benchmark score , as i can do it now if its cold enough , but i still dont understand how people pull off 685+ single core score. I know cpuz benchmark only uses core 0 to test single core score , so if someone is lucky so that core 0 is the best core, just this by itself will give a higher score as it'll boost better, but still....
And regarding vsoc and thermals, i noticed too the performance impact, but anything below 1.175v with level 3 LLC and ill get random reboots. [email protected] 1:1 with 4 dimms is hard on the imc....its the same with vddp (phy voltage)......i can keep it at 0.9ish volts like many use and it'll be fine, but i get the best latency scores (also shown by tphyrdl values in zentimings) with vddp at 1.08-1.1v.... 4 dimms are a completely different story than 2...


----------



## binder87

Mike156 said:


> Sounds like it's able to hit the max boost clock at 1.36V so it has no need to go higher? When you set it to a higher max frequency, it's simply saying it needs more voltage to hit that higher frequency and you haven't hit the voltage limit (1.425/1.5V) so it raises the voltage. Sounds like it's working like it is supposed to.
> 
> As for high temps, I noticed when I was messing with Vsoc trying to get 3800+ to work, it raised SoC power quite a bit and had a noticable impact on light load temperatures.
> 
> Honestly sounds like a banger of a chip if it's actually hitting 4950MHz on all the cores. I'm not convinced -30 CO means much unless you can also hit high frequency with that setting. All but two of my cores can run at -28, but none of those cores can hit 4950MHz. One or two of them top out at like 4800 and the rest sit around 4900.
> 
> Also, if you can run 3800, I have to wonder if you can run 4000. The "hole" seems to be real in my experience, I don't know if I ever got 3800 to even post. I could get 4000 "stable" (karhu 500%) and down to only a couple WHEA errors, never could get it WHEA error free though. The fact 3800 works for you seems like higher probably would to?


So i split my answer in 2 parts as the first one is just too damn long XD.
Regarding memory- every 1mhz above 3800 and its WHEA land.... obviously its a firmware issue as it doesn't make any sense otherwise. I tried to go above 3800 several times with no success (boots, working , but whea flood when testing), but 3800 @ 14 16 14 14 28 (gdm on) with tight secondaries and tertiaries is stable all day long, both karhu and tm5. I do give it 1.55v though. I might be able to tweak things slightly more, like trying to lower twr from 12 to 10, or taking my trfc (252, i just went trcx6) lower...i didn't try those since im tired of tinkering for now. Another thing i want to try also is gdm [email protected] I still didn't try with addrcmdsetup 56-60, im just "scared" as those hardcore memory bsod's can really **** up and corrupt the OS (happened to me twice in the past, and it happens quiet easily with gdm [email protected]) so im gonna postpone that to before ill format and reinstall windows.
Funny anecdote is that i don't need active cooling for my [email protected], i have FE rtx 3080, and overclocking memory is one of the only reasons where an FE card is actually advantageous due to its fan layout XD..... The top exhaust fan is cooling the ram nicely when running @70%+ of its operating limits XD...i just set an aggressive fan curve and i was good to go (note: not a good solution for those who cant stand noise  )


----------



## KedarWolf

Deleted


----------



## KedarWolf

My new CL14 3600 Royal Elite is an excellent bin, second kit, first kit sucked, I sent back to Newegg for a same replacement kit.

Might help I have a two DIMM slot MSI X570S Unify-X Max motherboard. RAM at 1.5v, VTTs at .730v.

But this is TM5 stable. This is 1000% 1 cycle 1usmus_v3 TM5. I've never had it pass this then fail 25 cycles default 1usmus_v3. And it takes less than an hour to run.


----------



## binder87

can anyone maybe share some insights on the telemetry options? i read it can give a nice bump in performance...i tried to do some research but information is so scarce.
anyone with experience on the 5800x and cpu vdd telemetry options?


----------



## KedarWolf

binder87 said:


> can anyone maybe share some insights on the telemetry options? i read it can give a nice bump in performance...i tried to do some research but information is so scarce.
> anyone with experience on the 5800x and cpu vdd telemetry options?


I get a really good performance boost with this.


----------



## KedarWolf

I just checked my event log. Not even one WHEA error ever.


----------



## binder87

KedarWolf said:


> I get a really good performance boost with this.
> 
> View attachment 2556022


Can i apply this to my 5800x as well? Or does it need different values? Does it depend on the tdc/edc limits which i use?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

binder87 said:


> Can i apply this to my 5800x as well? Or does it need different values? Does it depend on the tdc/edc limits which i use?


Set the full scale a bit below your TDC limit instead of 155A.
Depends on the specific sample, I had better luck with a 5950X B2 with 90A so much lower than the 165A I had set.



binder87 said:


> disabling global c states actually allows for a much more aggressive CO values while maintaining stability


It can also cause a huge loss of boost clock and massive clock stretching so test carefully.
This is usually the reason CO can be more aggressive, it doesn't work properly.
There should be no difference in CO counts allowed if enabled or disabled.

You can check stretching using my bench tool:








Release v1.0.34 Alpha · mann1x/BenchMaestro


v1.0.34 Alpha New: Reworked ZenCore monitoring Fix: Memory clocks display issue in Info when VDIMM not available Fix: Various streching display issues Fix: Zen Clocks from PowerTable normalized to...




github.com





Use boosttester in my sig to check max boost clock.


----------



## binder87

ManniX-ITA said:


> Set the full scale a bit below your TDC limit instead of 155A.
> Depends on the specific sample, I had better luck with a 5950X B2 with 90A so much lower than the 165A I had set.
> 
> 
> 
> It can also cause a huge loss of boost clock and massive clock stretching so test carefully.
> This is usually the reason CO can be more aggressive, it doesn't work properly.
> There should be no difference in CO counts allowed if enabled or disabled.
> 
> You can check stretching using my bench tool:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Release v1.0.34 Alpha · mann1x/BenchMaestro
> 
> 
> v1.0.34 Alpha New: Reworked ZenCore monitoring Fix: Memory clocks display issue in Info when VDIMM not available Fix: Various streching display issues Fix: Zen Clocks from PowerTable normalized to...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> github.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Use boosttester in my sig to check max boost clock.


Will do! Thank you! So if my tdc is 100, 80ish will be fine for full scale? What about offset? 55ma ?


----------



## binder87

so, i went with 80A and 55mA.
is it normal hwinfo is reporting power reporting deviation in the thousands? also cpu ppt wattage on idle doubled itself...is it safe?


----------



## KedarWolf

Someone mentioned on a Discord server they are running the newest BIOS and their VID hitting upwards of 1.5v, not 1.4v like the older bugged BIOS's.

I think I'm going to give the new one a try. 😁

Apparently, your VID is normal only if your EDC is 140 or lower.


----------



## Luggage

KedarWolf said:


> Someone mentioned on a Discord server they are running the newest BIOS and their VID hitting upwards of 1.5v, not 1.4v like the older bugged BIOS's.
> 
> I think I'm going to give the new one a try. 😁


Well if they keep edc at 140 the bug doesn’t show…


----------



## KedarWolf

Luggage said:


> Well if they keep edc at 140 the bug doesn’t show…


Oh yes, maybe your right. :/

Edit: They actually said it's showing as 1.5v, not 1.4v like the bugged BIOSes so I'm going to test it.


----------



## binder87

binder87 said:


> so, i went with 80A and 55mA.
> is it normal hwinfo is reporting power reporting deviation in the thousands? also cpu ppt wattage on idle doubled itself...is it safe?


Ok, so somewhere between 80-90A for full scale (tdc is set to 100) seems to give a nice boost (offset is 55mA) the more i go up on full scale, its better MC boost, while the lower end gives better SC boost (nothing dramatic though). Is it safe to run 24/7? Should i retest my stability with the telemetry settings? (Using core cycler).
Thanks!


----------



## KedarWolf

Luggage said:


> Well if they keep edc at 140 the bug doesn’t show…


What is the best way to test your highest VID. In HWInfo, CB R23, Prime95 single-core, even y-cruncher, not going above 1.2v. :/


----------



## Luggage

KedarWolf said:


> What is the best way to test your highest VID. In HWInfo, CB R23, Prime95 single-core, even y-cruncher, not going above 1.2v. :/


CPU-z, hydra boost tester, mannix boost tester, r23 SC. Occt mem test.



http://imgur.com/a/d5cReXo




http://imgur.com/kp93OL5




http://imgur.com/a/5QD8amF


----------



## Audioboxer

Luggage said:


> Well if they keep edc at 140 the bug doesn’t show…


Yup. For the time being I have actually just left my PBO values on auto, it's fine for gaming. Arguably, probably best for gaming versus the MT balancing act.

I uninstalled Ryzen Master, manually setting PBO values every boot was a pain as well.

Combined with using telemetry it eeks out some decent performance. Tanks benchmarks a bit, but I ain't sitting around "playing" Cinebench. My PC workload doesn't involve rendering videos or anything, just boring text/number work.

I guess I could try leaving EDC at 140 as it is on AUTO, and just play around with the PPT/TDC a little over AUTO values.

Funnily enough I've actually had HWINFO report above 1.5v a few times lol. Those reported spikes could just be incorrect readings due to the telemetry.


----------



## ObviousCough

Why isn't this thread flooded with X3D overclocking results already?

Here's my daily


----------



## KedarWolf

ObviousCough said:


> Why isn't this thread flooded with X3D overclocking results already?
> 
> Here's my daily


There is a PBO Tuner you can use. Peeps getting -30 CPU curves on all cores on the X3D

You can have it run and set every boot too, scroll down the thread a bit.









CoreCycler - tool for testing Curve Optimizer settings


@ArchStanton I'm gonna to find the baseline first then test them all one by one then :D I always thought that if it passed all the extreme stress tests then the light ones should be considered done. Better 1 thread with 2 the boost clock will go down So if it's passed then should I retest...




www.overclock.net










Debug.7z







drive.google.com


----------



## ObviousCough

It's not doing anything for me, it shows my max boost is locked to 4550. i try to change it and it doesn't change :|













edit: actually, with blck applied it does boost my all core load to the 44.5 multiplier.

Maybe i need an earlier bios to get higher single core boost multi?


----------



## Iarwa1N

ObviousCough said:


> Why isn't this thread flooded with X3D overclocking results already?
> 
> Here's my daily


How did you manage to start with bclk 103.8?Can you tell me your voltages? I couldn’t be able to boot anything above 101 with my Unify X. I am suspecting my sata drives might be the problem? I have a 1080ti as well.


----------



## ObviousCough

You have to use the A50 bios. I tried A40 and couldn't do **** without getting locked to 3.3GHz or failing to POST.






0 vs -30 at stock


----------



## Rhadamanthis

1.2.0.7 beta


----------



## Audioboxer

Rhadamanthis said:


> 1.2.0.7 beta


Nice, thanks!


----------



## TrigrH

Iarwa1N said:


> How did you manage to start with bclk 103.8?Can you tell me your voltages? I couldn’t be able to boot anything above 101 with my Unify X. I am suspecting my sata drives might be the problem? I have a 1080ti as well.


I lose video over 101.75 bclk.


----------



## Luggage

TrigrH said:


> I lose video over 101.75 bclk.


try lower pcie gen?


----------



## TrigrH

New A63 beta bios (one above is A62), going to assume this is 1.2.0.7 also?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MEG B550 UNIFY-X (MS-7D13) V10.63 BIOS Release
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. This is AMI BIOS release

2. This BIOS fixes the following problem of the previous version:
- Change the default setting of Secure Boot.



https://download.msi.com/bos_exe/mb/7D13vA63.zip


----------



## KedarWolf

TrigrH said:


> New A63 beta bios (one above is A62), going to assume this is 1.2.0.7 also?
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> MEG B550 UNIFY-X (MS-7D13) V10.63 BIOS Release
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 1. This is AMI BIOS release
> 
> 2. This BIOS fixes the following problem of the previous version:
> - Change the default setting of Secure Boot.
> 
> 
> 
> https://download.msi.com/bos_exe/mb/7D13vA63.zip


----------



## MarlowXim

ObviousCough said:


> Why isn't this thread flooded with X3D overclocking results already?
> 
> Here's my daily


What are memory timings can you screenshot Zentimings? 
I just got this board switched from X570 Tomahawk and need to tweak probably the timings. Did you mess with the PLL voltage?


----------



## KedarWolf

5950x $548 USD.









AMD Ryzen 9 5950X 16-core, 32-Thread Unlocked Desktop Processor : Electronics


Buy AMD Ryzen 9 5950X 16-core, 32-Thread Unlocked Desktop Processor: CPU Processors - Amazon.com ✓ FREE DELIVERY possible on eligible purchases



www.amazon.com


----------



## thomasck

Is it possible to load the saved configs from a previous bios to this new one?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

thomasck said:


> Is it possible to load the saved configs from a previous bios to this new one?


Unfortunately not, to my knowledge


----------



## thomasck

@ManniX-ITA That's sad. I'm tempted in updating the bios to see if the pcie "bug" was eventually fixed, I assume it was not but still I feel I will update. It's just a pain in the ass setting all up again risking some instability in the RAM side of the things. I am currently at 1.2.0.5.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

thomasck said:


> It's just a pain in the ass setting all up again risking some instability in the RAM side of the things. I am currently at 1.2.0.5.


Yes I know the pain...
I save first all the screenshots with F12 and then upload to Google Drive to see them on the notebook or mobile.


----------



## thomasck

Yep, same here.


----------



## Dziarson

I remember all settings in my bios, ale ram timing maybe im freak 😱


----------



## thomasck

What the deal with PBO2 Tunner? BIOS curve optimizer giving worse results with "same" settings applied. Same goes when running TimeSpy and observing the CPU score. 

Stock settings:










-10 in bios:










-10 using PBO2 Tunner:










I don't really want to install RM but is there any other software for tunning the PBO2 that allows me for example to save a profile, or even to set all cores at the same time?


----------



## TrigrH

Looks like a new bios might be inbound: 5800X3D Owners

its here:



Unifyx said:


> hi there
> there are some new Kombo Strike beta BIOS from MSI for the 5800X3D out
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MSI Global English Forum
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> forum-en.msi.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kombo Strike Beta - Google Drive
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


Just tested the bios. Kombo Strike is CO

1 = -10
2 = -20
3 = -30


----------



## KedarWolf

ComboAM4v2 1.2.0.7 - Google Drive







drive.google.com





CBS and PBS menus unlocked MSI X570S, X570 and B550 BIOS's.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

KedarWolf said:


> CBS and PBS menus unlocked MSI X570S, X570 and B550 BIOS's.


Sadly missing the B550 Unify-X


----------



## Rhadamanthis

7D13vA71


----------



## bwana

I am running the bios from 12/20. There have since been a bunch of versions. Is there any thread that discusses how a 5950 would fare with an update to the motherboard? There is no change log that I can find. I did have the crash on idle issue that seems to have been reduced by disabling memory voltage reduction on idle


----------



## Unifyx

I am on the A04 from 11/20 and it works best for my setup with a 5900x. The maybe better option should be the A05O1 that should be better for overclocking (recommended by an overclocker from the hwbot forum).


----------



## bwana

@Unifyx thank you.


----------



## Rhadamanthis

Unifyx said:


> I am on the A04 from 11/20 and it works best for my setup with a 5900x. The maybe better option should be the A05O1 that should be better for overclocking (recommended by an overclocker from the hwbot forum).


A05O1 can you share link?


----------



## Unifyx

@Rhadamanthis

try this link:






MEG B550 UNIFY-XA05O1.zip







drive.google.com


----------



## Dziarson

5600x A.501 +300MHz boost allcore 4561 spi1m 7.1sek cine bench23 11800pts
there is no curve settings in bios


----------



## Speed Potato

I have been using the latest A71 bios with a 5800X3D. The Kombo stike level 3 seems to produce similar results as CO -30 all cores (pbo2tuner show -30 all cores when opened as well). I don't know if it does anything else but it's better than setting a windows task 
I haven't been able to boot at fclk 1900 so i'm still investigating that.


----------



## Rhadamanthis

new beta Bios A72


----------



## Unifyx

new BIOS 



https://download.msi.com/bos_exe/mb/7D13vA7.zip


----------



## biebiep

I've been trying to set a bclk OC on my 5800X3D, but i've noticed an oddity.

HWInfo reports all cores at the new bclk, except Core0. Core0 boost multi looks like it's on the old bclk. Very odd. Any other tools I can use to verify my clock per core?

(I.E all clocks under load ar e reported as 4628, which is 104*44.5. Core 0 is at 4450 according to HWInfo)


----------



## KedarWolf

biebiep said:


> I've been trying to set a bclk OC on my 5800X3D, but i've noticed an oddity.
> 
> HWInfo reports all cores at the new bclk, except Core0. Core0 boost multi looks like it's on the old bclk. Very odd. Any other tools I can use to verify my clock per core?
> 
> (I.E all clocks under load ar e reported as 4628, which is 104*44.5. Core 0 is at 4450 according to HWInfo)
> View attachment 2573305


Ryzen Master


----------



## Dziarson

@biebiep CPUz advenced


----------



## biebiep

CPU-Z advanced reports the 44.5*104, HWInfo reports C0 at 100*44.5 and Ryzen Master shows 100*44.5 for all cores. 

I figured I was buying the "mature" platform here instead of going for AM5. lol.

Now the question is, who's correct? I don't think cores can run off different baseclocks anyway.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

biebiep said:


> Now the question is, who's correct? I don't think cores can run off different baseclocks anyway.


No they can't indeed.
CPU-z is the right one.
Maybe report the issue for HWInfo.
Ryzen Master is just terrible.


----------



## Unifyx

I discovered something strange with ZenTimings on the unify-x.
can somebody please confirm, that RAM slot A1 is displayed as B1 in ZenTimings?
I was testeng all my RAM sticks last weekend one by one with the RAM slot closer to the CPU and ZenTimings reports it as B1 !


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Unifyx said:


> I discovered something strange with ZenTimings on the unify-x.
> can somebody please confirm, that RAM slot A1 is displayed as B1 in ZenTimings?
> I was testeng all my RAM sticks last weekend one by one with the RAM slot closer to the CPU and ZenTimings reports it as B1 !


It's not Zentimings, it does not name the slots.
That's how the BIOS is reporting them.


----------



## Unifyx

thanks for your reply, so then it's a missprogramming of the BIOS builder. I checked different BIOS versions and they all report it mistakenly as B1 instead of A1. Should not be a problem 🙂


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Unifyx said:


> thanks for your reply, so then it's a missprogramming of the BIOS builder. I checked different BIOS versions and they all report it mistakenly as B1 instead of A1. Should not be a problem 🙂


I don't think it's really a mistake, guess in the BIOS itself is showing the right slot.
Probably they switched the channels to optimize the 2 DIMMs layout.
What could be a mistake maybe is the advice in the manual to populate A1 when only using one DIMM.
If the first channel is B, then B1 should be populated first.


----------



## infraredbg

@Unifyx, @ManniX-ITA 
There are 2 readings in ZenTimings - one is the reported from WMI and the other one is calculated by ZenTimings, i.e. what you see in the dropdown is the calculated value.








ZenTimings/MainWindow.xaml.cs at master · irusanov/ZenTimings


Contribute to irusanov/ZenTimings development by creating an account on GitHub.




github.com




It might well be a defect in zentimings, unless they have done something with the layout.

You can run a debug report and check the Memory Modules section.
There should be something similar for each installed module


Code:


P0 CHANNEL A | DIMM 0
-- Slot: A1
-- Dual Rank
-- DCT Offset: 0x0
-- Manufacturer: Micron Technology
-- 36ASF4G72PZ-3G2R1 32GB 3200MHz

where first line is what the BIOS/Windows provide, while next line (Slot) is what ZenTimings tries to detect.
Unfortunately, I have no access to my Unify-X and can't really tell if it is wrong. I've mostly developed and tested on Crosshair VI Hero, which is T-topology, so it's very possible there are some differences in the registers.

PS: I've added the additional calculation, because not all boards provide the channel labels and also the info provided is different between manufacturers.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

infraredbg said:


> Unfortunately, I have no access to my Unify-X and can't really tell if it is wrong. I've mostly developed and tested on Crosshair VI Hero, which is T-topology, so it's very possible there are some differences in the registers.
> 
> PS: I've added the additional calculation, because not all boards provide the channel labels and also the info provided is different between manufacturers.


I did not try unplugging one DIMM so far, maybe I'll do it someday 
I think the layout is different and they just reversed the channels.
The addresses are right, just flipped.
Nothing wrong about that, every manufacturer can make its own design.

What I guess is wrong is in the manual which suggests to use the 2nd channel in case of 1 DIMM only.
Since it's always recommended to use the 1st channel, probably that's not as intended.
But it's only a guess, could also be that the 2nd channel is the one with the shortest path and it's the right one to use for 1 DIMM.
In any case, doesn't seem a big deal...


----------



## Unifyx

infraredbg said:


> @Unifyx, @ManniX-ITA
> There are 2 readings in ZenTimings - one is the reported from WMI and the other one is calculated by ZenTimings, i.e. what you see in the dropdown is the calculated value.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ZenTimings/MainWindow.xaml.cs at master · irusanov/ZenTimings
> 
> 
> Contribute to irusanov/ZenTimings development by creating an account on GitHub.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> github.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It might well be a defect in zentimings, unless they have done something with the layout.
> 
> You can run a debug report and check the Memory Modules section.
> There should be something similar for each installed module
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> P0 CHANNEL A | DIMM 0
> -- Slot: A1
> -- Dual Rank
> -- DCT Offset: 0x0
> -- Manufacturer: Micron Technology
> -- 36ASF4G72PZ-3G2R1 32GB 3200MHz
> 
> where first line is what the BIOS/Windows provide, while next line (Slot) is what ZenTimings tries to detect.
> Unfortunately, I have no access to my Unify-X and can't really tell if it is wrong. I've mostly developed and tested on Crosshair VI Hero, which is T-topology, so it's very possible there are some differences in the registers.
> 
> PS: I've added the additional calculation, because not all boards provide the channel labels and also the info provided is different between manufacturers.


I just checked the debug report and it shows it exactly like in your report


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Unifyx said:


> I just checked the debug report and it shows it exactly like in your report


I can't easily unplug one DIMM now but the test to be done, out of curiosity, would be to unplug DIMM A1 or B1 and check which channel is then reported populated and which not.


----------



## Unifyx

ManniX-ITA said:


> I can't easily unplug one DIMM now but the test to be done, out of curiosity, would be to unplug DIMM A1 or B1 and check which channel is then reported populated and which not.


I will try to do it, but for now I can't easily unplug any DIMM at the moment, like you. But thanks for anything else. 
Will give you feedback as soon as possible


----------



## Unifyx

Things are getting even more confusing 😂

So I unplugged one RAM stick, so there is only one RAM module like this:









ok, so I went into the BIOS to see what it is reporting and it is showing that the RAM is loaded like this 









and it is slot B1. The same as ZenTimings is reporting.
if I put the mouse over the slot, where the RAM is loaded, it is reporting empty and RAM slot A2:










so and in ZenTimings with both RAM modules loaded, it is reporting A1 and B1.
what is going on here???


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Unifyx said:


> so and in ZenTimings with both RAM modules loaded, it is reporting A1 and B1.
> what is going on here??


As expected they swapped memory channels and didn't tell it to the guys which made the manual and BIOS


----------



## Unifyx

ManniX-ITA said:


> As expected they swapped memory channels and didn't tell it to the guys which made the manual and BIOS


the question is:

in which slot should we put the stronger DIMM?


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Unifyx said:


> in which slot should we put the stronger DIMM?


I would use the 2nd (B1), which is going to be the first channel (A1).


----------



## Dziarson

I love this board Vcore


----------



## Unifyx

ManniX-ITA said:


> I would use the 2nd (B1), which is going to be the first channel (A1).


I did some testing today and it looks like, the outer RAMslot is trainig better than the inner one. So I switched the stronger DIMM to the outer Slot and it trains like maximum 4333 with tPHYRDL 28/28 instead of 4333 with tPHYRDL 28/30. at 3800 both combinations are training tPHYRDL 28/26.


----------



## Olevider

Hi guys got myself the B550 Unify-X Motherboard so i had few question regard it. So using it for 2 days stock and looking at HWinfo i have question regarding NUC126 microcontoller sensor it have 2 voltages V1 and V2 (generic voltage name Msi) from looking and bios V1 is Chipset Voltage 1.05 V but what is V2? for strange reason it stay around 1.26-128 V and have jump spikes 2.40-246 V. For me it concerning because if it a problem i gonna RMA the board just in case.


----------



## Dziarson

Live is to short to think about not important things. 🤭


----------



## Rhadamanthis

guys one info, best bios for this main for oc, speed and stability with no limitations is a3?


----------



## Unifyx

Rhadamanthis said:


> guys one info, best bios for this main for oc, speed and stability with no limitations is a3?


It depends, I am on the very first A04 with a 5900X and it is the strongest in RAM OC and boosts the most.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Rhadamanthis said:


> guys one info, best bios for this main for oc, speed and stability with no limitations is a3?


As said by @Unifyx it depends.
I use A21O and it's generally the only one I recommend.
Got only worse bench results with earlier and later versions.

The very latest A71 seems to have a lot of improvements on the memory side, only recommended to bench y-cruncher.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

@Unifyx 
@Rhadamanthis 

BIOS A04O






MEG_B550_Unify-X_BIOS_A04O.zip







drive.google.com


----------



## Unifyx

ManniX-ITA said:


> @Unifyx
> @Rhadamanthis
> 
> BIOS A04O
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MEG_B550_Unify-X_BIOS_A04O.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


@ManniX-ITA 
you are amazing 😍😍😍
was searching since a year for this BIOS and now you find it!!!
Is it just normally to flash over the m-flash or the flash button and renaume it?


----------



## Rhadamanthis

Unifyx said:


> @ManniX-ITA
> you are amazing 😍😍😍
> was searching since a year for this BIOS and now you find it!!!
> Is it just normally to flash over the m-flash or the flash button and renaume it?


i have flashed with m-flash no rename mode


----------



## ManniX-ITA

Unifyx said:


> you are amazing 😍😍😍
> was searching since a year for this BIOS and now you find it!!!
> Is it just normally to flash over the m-flash or the flash button and renaume it?


You have to thank more buildzoid than me 
I didn't try it but you should be able to flash with any method.

Honestly after some scary failures and the flashrom demise I'm lately only flashing through the AptioV the AMI firmware windows utility (AFUWINGUIx64).
Unless of course I suspect instability, in that case via the BIOS or the USB recovery.

Easy to use, just remember to check "Program All Blocks" after loading the rom file with "Open".






Aptio_V_AMI_Firmware_Update_Utility.zip







drive.google.com





This is version 5.14.02.0026, stable for sure.


----------



## ManniX-ITA

I have shared my Unify-X BIOS folder if you are interested:






BIOS - Google Drive







drive.google.com





Of course if you happen to have a BIOS that I miss, let me know


----------



## Unifyx

ManniX-ITA said:


> I have shared my Unify-X BIOS folder if you are interested:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BIOS - Google Drive
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course if you happen to have a BIOS that I miss, let me know


yes, I have actually one that is missing in your drive: it's the A62 






BIOS B550 UNIFY X - Google Drive







drive.google.com


----------



## TrigrH

ManniX-ITA said:


> I have shared my Unify-X BIOS folder if you are interested:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BIOS - Google Drive
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course if you happen to have a BIOS that I miss, let me know


Do you have these?










5800X3D Owners


----------



## ManniX-ITA

TrigrH said:


> Do you have these?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 5800X3D Owners


Definitely not!
Voltage mod?


----------



## Imprezzion

So, what would be the recommended BIOS for a 5800X3D validated to run -30 all core just fine? I plan on buying this board today or tomorrow for my X3D cause my ASUS B550-A just has too many small issues that bother me and the Unify-X is on clearance here locally for like 200 bucks so..


----------



## thomasck

Little feedback, which is a bit weird. 
A while ago I posted in here that each time I'd reboot the system I'd get a different PCIe link speed, that is, 1st cold boot it would be x16 @ 4.0, then if I reboot the system I would come back as x16 @ 3.0, or either x 8 @ 4.0.
So today I swapped cards, 6900xt -> rtx 4080 and after every boot, or reboot, I'd be always at x16 @ 4.0.


----------



## lafonte

thomasck said:


> Little feedback, which is a bit weird.
> A while ago I posted in here that each time I'd reboot the system I'd get a different PCIe link speed, that is, 1st cold boot it would be x16 @ 4.0, then if I reboot the system I would come back as x16 @ 3.0, or either x 8 @ 4.0.
> So today I swapped cards, 6900xt -> rtx 4080 and after every boot, or reboot, I'd be always at x16 @ 4.0.


The board has definitely issues with some GPU, I couldn't boot the 90% of the times with a 5600xt since I upgraded to a 6800xt I don't have such issue, if you have a look in the msi forum it is full of reports of similar issue with pcie 4.0, and MSI never gave a fix or recognised the problem


----------



## thomasck

@lafonte correct, one of the thread in the msi forum is mine, reporting the same thing few months back. Initially they said "yeah it's a bug, we could replicate, we will fix", then later on in the same thread they mentioned that replacing the cpu sorted the issue do it was a cpu problem on my end. Turns out replacing a GPU also "fix" this.. however, is just about not having the "pcie x16 4.0" being displayed, because there was not performance hit in either three pcie speeds..


----------

