# Asus & X399 The ROG Zenith Extreme: A Complaint & Bug Tracking Thread



## Lemon Wolf

Greetings,
i found my way here to this forum because of issues with the ROG Zenith Extreme.
The Asus product support for the Zenith Extreme is disappointing to say the least.
I bought this new platform right when it came out and things started out terrible.
The Ram i bought didnt work with the Zenith Extreme, no configuration worked. I couldnt even enter the bios, so i had no choice to return it and get another, different ram kit.
Gaming performance and performance in general was so terrible, even my notebook yielded better FPS despite me using a 1080Ti.
I again found help here by discovering that the Asus Ai Suite was the software responsible for this dreadful performance but not before i reinstalled windows 3 times.
Why did Asus release this faulty software in the first place? Dont they have a test lab?
To this date i am unable to use my Ram at its default speed of DDR4 3600 because of Bios issues.
The latest Bios on the support page is from mid August. Whats the deal with that? Other vendors already released final versions with the latest AGESA code.
Why cant Asus do the same. I paid more than 500€ for this board and i really expected better support. Back in the 90s Bios support was faster than this.
I bought a lot of Asus products including my monitors and the graphics card but this terrible support makes me think that it might me time to switch vendors completely.


----------



## Naeem

None of AMD Motherboards are working as they have to even after 6 months ryzen motherboards does not have stable enough bios , there are bugs in every single one of them i think asus does not have enough people working for them right now and they put their hands in everything now they can't finish anything


----------



## Kyozon

Very well said @ENTERPRISE. A much needed thread to address our frustration with the current status of the Board.

I don't think i have much to add on as of currently, with the exception of my frustration with the Old AGESA that we are stuck with and the Many important features that are Disabled on the BIOS there.

I can only hope that ASUS will listen and provide better support for this Motherboard, more ASUS people on the Zenith Thread as there seems to have lots of them on Intel's ones would help too.

Thank you for pulled trigger, it needed to be done.


----------



## TrixX

I'll have to add myself to this, really disappointed there's been no movement on the BIOS front for months now. 0801 is old news and leaves many things unfinished. Not to mention that we still can't run AI Suite at all due to it's inherent ability to break everything in Win10 (HPET being the culprit I believe).


----------



## The L33t

I am in full agreement with @ENTERPRISE.

There is no excuses that I would find acceptable in this particular Zenith situation.None.

Asus is a very big company, actually the biggest "in this game" and if they manage to find resources to design and assemble and put out the door this products, they can also find such resources on the software front. They have to, one does not work without the other.

Smaller vendors have managed to have x399 motherboards more stable and with updated AMD code (AGESA).

Asus likes to release motherboards with a myriad of functions only to then never have them working properly. Zenith is a clear case for this.

I understand having a platform like the ROG Zenith with extended options for the overclocker on top of everything else can at times get complicated, specially on a new platform, but this was their option, no one obligates them to release products in such a way. But those options are what they advertise, and are what we paid for. So they better stand by them.

On this product official page we cant find the most updated bios (BETA), only a BIOS from the release month of the Threadripper platform. Just imagine some clients that do not frequent this forum and do not see or want the BETA bios..... and even those are lacking in quantity or quality, it's not like those BETA bios are "the good stuff".

We cant also find the most updated AISuite, Aura and other software that actually exists, just not posted or distributed correctly.

Same for the drivers.

If this is what ASUS has to offer on the ROG platform and what we should expect, them I'm afraid this is going to be my last Asus product, not only my last Asus motherboard, mostly because I find this absolutely disgraceful and in some ways pure false advertisement looking at the product page.

If I treated my clients this way I'd be finished, ASUS is lucky to enjoy a pretty dominant position so they can do this, but that will catch up one day. Be sure.


----------



## RoBiK

+1

ASUS why???


----------



## mumford

Frak. I just odered this board on Thusday. You guys are scaring me already.


----------



## TheGovernment

I'm in the same boat. The support for this board is non existent. The flagship board should get the most attention, not the least.


----------



## The L33t

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mumford*
> 
> Frak. I just odered this board on Thusday. You guys are scaring me already.


Hopefully you got a better deal than most who got it on "day one". This board was severely discounted during black Friday on Amazon. Like 350$ if I remember correctly.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *L33tBastard*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *mumford*
> 
> Frak. I just odered this board on Thusday. You guys are scaring me already.
> 
> 
> 
> Hopefully you got a better deal than most who got it on "day one". This board was severely discounted during black Friday on Amazon. Like 350$ if I remember correctly.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it was had at a good discount for sure, may be the discount was due to the boards poor support.


----------



## ReHWolution

+1 for this thread. Unfortunately you hit the right spots with your thread. With me dropping 2k on an entire new system (coming from a 5960X+X99 ASRock board, incredibly reliable and stable), I thought I'd had a good experience with ASUS, since one of the main reasons I bought the ZE was the software support (looking at the mainboards available, basically all of them have an 8+2/8+3 configuration, veeeeeery similar specs wise), but since that is lacking I'm seriously considering to switch to a Taichi or a Pro Gaming by ASRock. It's a real shame that Intel users receive a special treatment.


----------



## f1lter

i wish i would of did my research here first on this board before i bought it. I would of defiantly bought a different board.

its sad that this board gets such little support for suppose to be a highend board.


----------



## Aby67

*@ASUS*

@elmor

@[email protected]

*Dear ASUS*
_
It is very clear by now that, *Your Head of ROG motherboards department and Project Engineers for AMD x399 motherboards*_ have made a bet on releasing a ROG motherboard for Tr4 only to find out in time that You should have release instead a WS x399 motherboard, and thus left a ton of clients who did purchase Your Zenith Motherboard hanging there with no support development because of the cut in resources and funding that should be dedicated to this platform.

While It is understandable that You had to make a hard choice because PCIe gen 4 was still not available, *there is no excuse for not debugging this BETA stage Motherboard* so for it to have at least all of its basic features to work at AMD Tr4 specifications and capabilities.

I Hope that You do understand that if You do make a X399 motherboard it has to have all the slots IO connections *to take full advantage of the whole 64 PCIe lanes offers.....You have fallen into the misconception that TR4 is about cores while it is instead about PCIe Lanes*.
TR4 is designed for *HPC* not for Intel grade like HEDT.

*AMD x399 HEDT motherboards should be HPC platform*
Future ROG MB should come with as standard 7 16 PCIe lanes just as WS motherboards so that even gamers can run games using 6 gpus as SLI will not be necessary.

*DEAR ASUS*

The least You can do now, is to send an official letter of apologies to Your x399 customers and fire and replace the X399 platform Chief Officer, because this has become a Ethical problem now, for which the people who spend money of Your products demand amendments.

*Until that moment I feel safe to say that Your x399 concept, quality, engineering, and support is a complete piece of cheap junk*
*
Please do note that if You had made a 7 PCIe slots dual 10 Gbit ethernet IO WS motherboard or even a ROG one with these specifications, You would have sold it like bread even if Threadripper was coming in a 4 core variant.*
This is a further reason for having Your Chief of X399 platform resign and be replaced, as You would have sold *at least 70 times* more than what You actually did. Your chief has caused You financial losses, bad reputation and catastrophic missed opportunities on x399.


----------



## mumford

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *L33tBastard*
> 
> Hopefully you got a better deal than most who got it on "day one". This board was severely discounted during black Friday on Amazon. Like 350$ if I remember correctly.


I ordered from Amazon, and then cancelled Amazon order and ordered at Newegg because it was a few bucks cheaper plus additional $130 combo discount with 1950x.


----------



## The Stilt

The code base / firmwares (AGESA) for Zeppelin is pretty mature at this point, so the lack of bios based on the latest AGESA isn't a big deal anymore. For example between the AGESA 1.0.0.3 & 1.0.0.4 (ThreadripperPI) there are no changes to any of the firmwares, which control the vast majority of the hardware. Basically the only changes to the bios code would be the changes affecting the platform specific custom code from the ODM side.


----------



## Iceman2733

@ENTERPRISE Man finally some else speaks out!!! Asus has fallen so far from its original state and what we all have grown to expect and love.

Don't feel or think that they are doing this just to or/ happening to the x399 only check out the Rampage VI Extreme it is the same exact way, releasing BETA Bios's on this forum but NO information given as to what they fix and not on the support page. Drivers yea it would be extremely nice if they updated the drivers for our products more than release of product (i know they do somewhat but not keeping up with at least Intel release)

Don't get me started on there horrible Aura software that has been broken for how long now? I have read complaints with the same issues I am having from several years ago, still aren't fixed. There LiveDash software is just as broken as Aura.

X299 Skylake-X still does not have an option in the BIOS for SPD WRITE ENABLE so that a person can back up the SPD tables on memory, I have asked about this in several forums along with others on this forum and including their own forum and also called NOTHING has changed or any information given.

Thank you for taking the time to make this post I made these post before in several other threads and was pretty much told to complain to Asus WHICH i have done several times and filled out there worthless google form little support thing. They don't care they aren't going to change anything. I have contacted support via the phone several times each time to be told they don't help with software, than who does??

I wanted to let you know you are not alone my friend, and thank you for making this post and hopefully it will bring more light on issues.

Only way to change these issues is to vote with our wallets, I have decided once the EVGA x299 Dark comes out this Rampage VI Extreme will be for sale.


----------



## ReHWolution

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The Stilt*
> 
> The code base / firmwares (AGESA) for Zeppelin is pretty mature at this point, so the lack of bios based on the latest AGESA isn't a big deal anymore. For example between the AGESA 1.0.0.3 & 1.0.0.4 (ThreadripperPI) there are no changes to any of the firmwares, which control the vast majority of the hardware. Basically the only changes to the bios code would be the changes affecting the platform specific custom code from the ODM side.


Hey The Stilt, great job on the DRAM profiles, keep it up!
Unfortunately, it's not just the BIOS (I gotta be honest, I'm perfect as I am right now BIOS wise, even though I'd love to give a try to your mBIOS ASAP







), it's the entire platform to suffer from late (and few) updates. After 3 months, AURA, LiveDash and AISuite still have tons of problems...


----------



## The Stilt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ReHWolution*
> 
> After 3 months, AURA, LiveDash and AISuite still have tons of problems...


Thanks.
Can't comment on the apps since I have never tried them


----------



## Kyozon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Iceman2733*
> 
> @ENTERPRISE Man finally some else speaks out!!! Asus has fallen so far from its original state and what we all have grown to expect and love.
> 
> Don't feel or think that they are doing this just happening to the x399 check out the Rampage VI Extreme it is the same exact way, releasing BETA Bios's on this forum but NO information given as to what they fix and not on the support page. Drivers yea it would be extremely nice if they updated the drivers for our products more than release of product (i know they do somewhat but not keeping up with at least Intel release)
> 
> Don't get me started on there horrible Aura software that has been broken for how long now? I have read complaints with the same issues I am having from several years ago, still aren't fixed. There LiveDash software is just as broken as Aura.
> 
> X299 still does not have an option in the BIOS for SPD WRITE ENABLE so that a person can back up the SPD tables on memory, I have asked about this in several forums along with others on this forum and including their own forum and also called NOTHING has changed or any information given.
> 
> Thank you for taking the time to make this post I made these post before in several other threads and was pretty much told to complain to Asus WHICH i have done several times and filled out there worthless google form little support thing. They don't care they aren't going to change anything. I have contacted support via the phone several times each time to be told they don't help with software, than who does??
> 
> I wanted to let you know you are not alone my friend, and thank you for making this post and hopefully it will bring more light on issues.
> 
> Only way to change these issues is to vote with our wallets, I have decided once the EVGA x299 Dark comes out this Rampage VI Extreme will be for sale.


Thank you a lot for sharing your frustration!

Let us hope that with both Teams united ASUS will do something about before we pull the trigger for other board vendor.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The Stilt*
> 
> The code base / firmwares (AGESA) for Zeppelin is pretty mature at this point, so the lack of bios based on the latest AGESA isn't a big deal anymore. For example between the AGESA 1.0.0.3 & 1.0.0.4 (ThreadripperPI) there are no changes to any of the firmwares, which control the vast majority of the hardware. Basically the only changes to the bios code would be the changes affecting the platform specific custom code from the ODM side.


It is a big deal, the fact is why can other manufacturers get out the latest code base, but Asus cannot. Regardless of how small the changes are, we should be operating on the latest AGESA. I though Asus was supposed to provide enthusiast level hardware ? If so then why are we not getting enthusiast level support and updates ? Especially after we paid enthusiast level prices !

Just no excuse in my mind.

Thanks all for sharing your perspectives thus far


----------



## Mega Man

Jokes, and flame wars aside,

welcome, everyone to amd, i was amazed with the support zen got, frankly amd is low priority. Esp with the new platform for intel out, that everyone flocked to. Frankly I am amazed everyone expected differently. Amd was never as bad as people made it out too be, but due to this stigma, and has less sales, with less sales, less support.


----------



## ReHWolution

If it was "stigmatically" worse than Intel, why the ZE is, in some countries, more expensive than the RVIE?


----------



## Aby67

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ENTERPRISE*
> 
> It is a big deal, the fact is why can other manufacturers get out the latest code base, but Asus cannot. Regardless of how small the changes are, we should be operating on the latest AGESA. I though Asus was supposed to provide enthusiast level hardware ? If so then why are we not getting enthusiast level support and updates ? Especially after we paid enthusiast level prices !
> 
> Just no excuse in my mind.
> 
> Thanks all for sharing your perspectives thus far


Unfortunately AMD Epyc derived CPUs are above enthusiast for what they can do....today I Would call the AM4 platform as HEDT and enthusiast, not X399 or EPYC.

You can run 6 GPUs on a single socket, or tons of storage in raid, You can daisy chain machines if there was in build dual 10 Gbit Ethernet rather than a pathetic add on card, and obliterate in performance 100 thousand dollars Nvidia DGX severs or or 60 thousand dollars VCA with just two AMD Threaripper motherboards with 8 cores non OC cpus on it if there was proper motherboard engineering and concept for EPYC/Threadripper.
You could have only remotely have dreamed of this just a few month back and forced to commit to a 8 gpu dual socket Intel server, to get less HPC out put than what You can now...and it can only get 100% faster with PCIE 4.0 at the least......*calling x399 enthusiast platform is what all the press You tubers and ASUS got wrong right from day 1.*
It is pretty obvious that because of this ASUS debacle, that at Nvidia they will come out with lowest possible specced Volta GPUS rather than what was supposed to be in the real roadmap, and We as usual lose in all of this both as product quality , availability and performance.

I would want to add that there is no way that even a perfect working state of the art ZENITH ROG motherboard, would be anywhere close to be sufficient in features for an AMD threadripper with 32 cores on 7 NM installed on it.

*in few words ...even if ROG ZENITH WAS PERFECT AND SUPPORT PERFECT, it would still be a piece of junk motherboard*


----------



## Mega Man

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ReHWolution*
> 
> If it was "stigmatically" worse than Intel, why the ZE is, in some countries, more expensive than the RVIE?


Higher cost, does not mean higher profit.
Hypothetical example
10000 at 600, with 30% markup or 10000000 at 450 20% markup which makes more monies


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mega Man*
> 
> Jokes, and flame wars aside,
> 
> welcome, everyone to amd, i was amazed with the support zen got, frankly amd is low priority. Esp with the new platform for intel out, that everyone flocked to. Frankly I am amazed everyone expected differently. Amd was never as bad as people made it out too be, but due to this stigma, and has less sales, with less sales, less support.


It is this that I find to be the case, at least with regards to the Zenith, but it seems it could be across more products after reading into it further. I cannot speak for the other products having not used them but in the Zenith's case it is appauling. I really hope that someone from Asus will pop there head in and give us some sort of update or explanation as that is the very least they could do for their consumers.


----------



## The L33t

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The Stilt*
> 
> The code base / firmwares (AGESA) for Zeppelin is pretty mature at this point, so the lack of bios based on the latest AGESA isn't a big deal anymore. For example between the AGESA 1.0.0.3 & 1.0.0.4 (ThreadripperPI) there are no changes to any of the firmwares, which control the vast majority of the hardware. Basically the only changes to the bios code would be the changes affecting the platform specific custom code from the ODM side.


The new AGESA seems to have helped a few folks see use for their full 128gb kits, before it was impossible, Only 7 of the 8 dimms. Reported on the ASRock forum and and.com board.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mega Man*
> 
> Jokes, and flame wars aside,
> 
> welcome, everyone to amd, i was amazed with the support zen got, frankly amd is low priority. Esp with the new platform for intel out, that everyone flocked to. Frankly I am amazed everyone expected differently. Amd was never as bad as people made it out too be, but due to this stigma, and has less sales, with less sales, less support.


This has been true in most regards but Threadripper is actually outselling the intel offerings (now I9) by quite a big margin on most vendors since day one and still true after the new x299 offerings got released.

This of course is the upper echelon of the consumer cpu market and not where most sales are done but still this platform is not being ignored on a sales basis, that I do not believe.

And the trend is upwards now that you can find TR severely discounted. AMD is pushing those yields on a high note.


----------



## The Stilt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *L33tBastard*
> 
> The new AGESA seems to have helped a few folks see use for their full 128gb kits, before it was impossible, Only 7 of the 8 dimms. Reported on the ASRock forum and and.com board.
> This has been true in most regards but Threadripper is actually outselling the intel offerings (now I9) by quite a big margin on most vendors since day one and still true after the new x299 offerings got released.


If that the case, then the original issue was related to ASRocks own code and not to AGESA itself.
All of the firmwares found in the 1004 bioses released by ASRock are identical to the ones found in ZE 0801 bios.

AGESA can contain some minor fixes despite that, but they cannot affect any low level functionality such as memory related things.


----------



## The L33t

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The Stilt*
> 
> If that the case, then the original issue was related to ASRocks own code and not to AGESA itself.
> All of the firmwares found in the 1004 bioses released by ASRock are identical to the ones found in ZE 0801 bios.
> 
> AGESA can contain some minor fixes despite that, but they cannot affect any low level functionality such as memory related things.


I see.

On the ASUS side I've seen complaints about not getting the motherboard to boot with 128GB but OK with 64GB, with any timings at any speed, no boot.

Like: http://forum.corsair.com/v3/showthread.php?s=73dca59cbd47ceaa0277c92c3a198b7c&t=170450 (two users, different kits)

And also reported on ASUS ROG forum: https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?95601-Zenith-Extreme-1950x-and-128GB-RAM-Wont-post!

Seems to be somewhat limited to Hynix, well... probably everything not Samsung B-die I would surmise.

I also have one of such kits to test out but I am out abroad so I cannot. Mine is also 5.39 (Hynix), when I get home I will see if the latest bios released by @elmor fixed or helped this issue as that particular bios was released to address Hynix kits specifically.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Just to see if anyone can shed some light on the issues, I will contact @elmor and @[email protected] directly via PM to see if they have any information.


----------



## The L33t

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ENTERPRISE*
> 
> Just to see if anyone can shed some light on the issues, I will contact @elmor
> and @[email protected]
> directly via PM to see if they have any information.


Good luck. From what I've seen they have visited the forum regularly since this thread started and previously. So we must assume they are not talking purposely.

I would surmise they can only do(or speak) so much. Meaning... Upper management has them tied up.

Not a good position to be but it goes with the job.

I guess we have to take our losses and learn a lesson from this.


----------



## Aby67

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *L33tBastard*
> 
> The new AGESA seems to have helped a few folks see use for their full 128gb kits, before it was impossible, Only 7 of the 8 dimms. Reported on the ASRock forum and and.com board.
> This has been true in most regards but Threadripper is actually outselling the intel offerings (now I9) by quite a big margin on most vendors since day one and still true after the new x299 offerings got released.
> 
> This of course is the upper echelon of the consumer cpu market and not where most sales are done but still this platform is not being ignored on a sales basis, that I do not believe.
> 
> And the trend is upwards now that you can find TR severely discounted. AMD is pushing those yields on a high note.


The ratio is over 4 AMD to 1 Intel cpu, but now that the sage motherboards for intel both xeon and I9 sockets will be released, Intel sales will for sure match amd ones.....that being said, if ASUS does release a 7 PCIe 16with at least 3 wired at x16 and other four 16 wired x8, AMD sales should boost at least 20 AMD cpus for one Intel.......If they Released a single socket a SAGE MB for EPYC with 8 PCIE slots all at 16 then for workstation would AMD would get 100% of all sales and a massive cut in private storage servers.

As currently ASUS has announced only Sage MB for Intel and started releasing them...I suspect, that ASUS has no intention to make any fix, nor any new motherboards for AMD line of products.
It is also possible that at ASUS all the human resources that work on BIOS and system development, will all go for Intel platform...I Wouldnt be surprised if Intel has sponsored heavily ASUS on all the x299 and 3647 Xeon socket, as AMD mcm solutions jeopardize Intel existence as CPU manufacturer, that would put them ou tof business if motherboard manufacturers made otherboards tht fullysupport all of AMD CPus features and beyond as they do with Intel products....
I make You and example

check these benchmarks here

https://benchmark.chaosgroup.com/cpu

The best benchmark is 4 Platinum 8180 xeons costing precisely https://www.scan.co.uk/products/intel-xeon-platinum-8180-s3647-skylake-sp-28-cores-56-threads-25ghz-32ghz-turbo-385mb-cach?v=b
that would be *12,395* per CPU plus at least another 4500 dollars for the server to run them on..
*50000 dollars* for 4 CPUs

The under You see dual EPYC 32 cores benching at much much much less than double the time. But this is a FAKE because if We care for performance as the thing we desperately need, the Intel is the slowest in the world and this is why.

We can asses from the benchmarks, that a single socket AMD *EPYC* CPU performs like a T*hreadripper* cpu.
So if you make 4 AMD workstations with either Threadripper or EPYC Intel would be AT LEAST 30 % slower......
*But*
Given the fact that one Threadripper costs 1/13 the of a single platinum....we can do the math and say that for the same amount of money spend in CPUs we could buy precisely 52 1950X Threadripper CPUs, and be at least 26 times faster than a same Intel Xeon server.......let s say we have to pay for motherboards and components, we would still be at least 10 times faster with less than half of workstations.
Of course, only hollywood would buy 2 300 machines or nasa, or VFX companies, maybe Boeing, but normal people small studios would certainly buy anything from 2 to 6 machines.....

Anyhow...

But if we make ONLY 4 for the price of less than a SINGLE TOP TIER INTEL server or workstation...we would be 70% faster than Intel for the cost of a single Platinum 8180.

SO something doesn't add UP if ASUS has x399 not working properly under featured, and with such a almost non existent line of motherboards for it.
ASUS must have someone that is backing them up for all the 4 times at least AMD motherboards they would sell.

because if they fixed all the bugs, and they had a wider range of x399 motherboards including a few WS ones ASUS would sell at least 4 times as many motherboards because of AMD CPUs *AT LEAST*.
So if we do the math Threadripper is selling 4 times as much as intel, but if supported with decent motherboard range fully featured for 64 pcie lanes and support and development working properly @ASUS @[email protected], it is logical to conclude that for every Intel CPU 16 AMD would be sold instead..plus all the more that would sell because of the added value from the branding, of teh very succesful AMD mcm design to the public opinion...

This is something that Intel cannot afford, and we have seen it with the glued together bs officially posted by them and all the corruption scandals...and for some reason ASUS is sandbagging x399, knowing mathematically that this causes ASUS @[email protected] massive losses....it is hard for me to find a logical reason for ASUS to be at a loss, or not wanting to make money *unless they are making it some other way but only if they sandbag AMD HPC line*

@ENTERPRISE It is appalling that even development and support is such a disgrace, and still x399 sells 4 times as much as Intel
So i am fully supportive and feel to speak My mind bluntly, because We have reached a point were We as clients or common people are fed up with crap being rained on or heads, because of special interest, even in consumer or commercial electronics as the rest wasn't enough already.

Now You tell Me @[email protected] given the choice which would You buy ?!
*One of this?*



*or one of this?*



*or 4 of these...or 8 or 12?!*



*and what if it was made also for EPYC*?!.....how many drives could be supported by it?....how may m.2 on each x16pcie...and then how many via sata are still left...i don't even wanna bother taking out the calculator, but im sure that it would be enough for all the astrophysicists, engineers, physicists, photographers, seismologists, meteorologists, VFX studios, 3d artists, gaming studios, and all the thousands of engineers working with solids.....oh yeah there is also a bunch of you tubers they aren't many but it is still money.


----------



## capitaltpt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *L33tBastard*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ENTERPRISE*
> 
> Just to see if anyone can shed some light on the issues, I will contact @elmor
> and @[email protected]
> directly via PM to see if they have any information.
> 
> 
> 
> Good luck. From what I've seen they have visited the forum regularly since this thread started and previously. So we must assume they are not talking purposely.
> 
> I would surmise they can only do(or speak) so much. Meaning... Upper management has them tied up.
> 
> Not a good position to be but it goes with the job.
> 
> I guess we have to take our losses and learn a lesson from this.
Click to expand...

To be fair, it's also the holidays and maybe they're on vacation until after the 1st of the year.


----------



## elmor

We are checking this thread and others. Realistically what we can do is to address existing issues and try to get them fixed. If there are specific complaints on things not working, feel free to report here, in the support thread or directly in the bug report form.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *capitaltpt*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *L33tBastard*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ENTERPRISE*
> 
> Just to see if anyone can shed some light on the issues, I will contact @elmor
> and @[email protected]
> directly via PM to see if they have any information.
> 
> 
> 
> Good luck. From what I've seen they have visited the forum regularly since this thread started and previously. So we must assume they are not talking purposely.
> 
> I would surmise they can only do(or speak) so much. Meaning... Upper management has them tied up.
> 
> Not a good position to be but it goes with the job.
> 
> I guess we have to take our losses and learn a lesson from this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> To be fair, it's also the holidays and maybe they're on vacation until after the 1st of the year.
Click to expand...

While that could be the case [email protected] is viewing this thread as I type this.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *elmor*
> 
> We are checking this thread and others. Realistically what we can do is to address existing issues and try to get them fixed. If there are specific complaints on things not working, feel free to report here, in the support thread or directly in the bug report form.


Thanks for checking in, much appreciated. What I will ask is can we get an update on any progress being made ,even if not from you specifically ?

I think we would all appreciate that. For instance is Asus working on a new BIOS with the latest AMD base code ? I think what frustrates most is that competitors are well up to date but Asus seem to be slower on the uptake.


----------



## elmor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ENTERPRISE*
> 
> Thanks for checking in, much appreciated. What I will ask is can we get an update on any progress being made ,even if not from you specifically ?
> 
> I think we would all appreciate that. For instance is Asus working on a new BIOS with the latest AMD base code ? I think what frustrates most is that competitors are well up to date but Asus seem to be slower on the uptake.


I think the only updates you will get are through me and Raja. We have a new BETA on AGESA 1.0.0.3 but still missing a few things, will release when ready. Has the 2DPC Hynix patch, some fixes for fan control etc. AGESA 1.0.0.4 is being worked on, but I don't have a timeframe.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *elmor*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ENTERPRISE*
> 
> Thanks for checking in, much appreciated. What I will ask is can we get an update on any progress being made ,even if not from you specifically ?
> 
> I think we would all appreciate that. For instance is Asus working on a new BIOS with the latest AMD base code ? I think what frustrates most is that competitors are well up to date but Asus seem to be slower on the uptake.
> 
> 
> 
> I think the only updates you will get are through me and Raja. We have a new BETA on AGESA 1.0.0.3 but still missing a few things, will release when ready. Has the 2DPC Hynix patch, some fixes for fan control etc. AGESA 1.0.0.4 is being worked on, but I don't have a timeframe.
Click to expand...

Thanks @elmor for the updates, it is good to hear they are actively being worked on and hopefully Asus will be able to get it all polished up sooner rather than later.

As per my OP, What is being done about the products support page...or lack thereof ? I am sure you have seen its not exactly showing all the software nor even the latest BIOS. I just find it odd that this product is so left in the dust compared to others.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Hey guys so after working with @elmor at Asus it would be best for us to more accurately collect particular bugs whether it be BIOS or Software regarding the Zenith Extreme. Please see below what is now part of the OP .

If you could all please detail your issued it could go a long way in getting this product the way we want it !

Quote:


> *Have Your Say & Create a BUG Report*
> 
> Have you noticed any bugs or potential issues with the Zenith Rog Extreme ? If so please post a report in the below format to help Asus fix the issues
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Bug Type:* *Software or BIOS*
> 
> *Applicable Software/Bios Version:* *Let us know what version BIOS/Software you are using*
> 
> *Windows Version & Build* *Let us know what Windows version & build you are running*
> 
> *Bug Description:* *Describe the problem*
> 
> *Steps to re-produce:* *Detail how you can re-produce the bug or where to find it*
> 
> 
> 
> All Reports will then be added to the OP for Asus to look at
Click to expand...


----------



## nycgtr

Running 128 at rated would be nice, but ASUS AISUITE is a serious pain in the ass on both platforms lol. One reason I prefer asus boards is the fan control, but seriously I am going to just buy an aqauaero and never touch it again.


----------



## bummerboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ENTERPRISE*
> 
> Just to see if anyone can shed some light on the issues, I will contact @elmor
> and @[email protected]
> directly via PM to see if they have any information.


there are various issues, described over the ze thread here and on rog forum.
i am pretty sure both of them knows about it.

- i am personally experiencing inconsistency between boots, and the longest streak i have without a random reset or bsod (green now) is about 8 days (continuous usage with no restart). i run my pc 24/7 so this is kinda critical to me [stability testing is inconsistent as well, i could do 24 hours prime one day, and not the next without changing any settings]

- the broken software support, which either partially works, or break what is working (AISUITE/AURA/LiveDash). yes we could live without them, but those are part of the 500 dollar investment we owners made

- the various ram compatibility issues ( i am running a simple 4x8gb setup and so far has no problem running at 3200, boots fine, ram tests passed for days)

- the lack of (with a feeling of abandonment) support for bios / software

- subjectively, i guess we're losing faith in asus and the rog branding


----------



## ENTERPRISE

I can

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bummerboy*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ENTERPRISE*
> 
> Just to see if anyone can shed some light on the issues, I will contact @elmor
> and @[email protected]
> directly via PM to see if they have any information.
> 
> 
> 
> there are various issues, described over the ze thread here and on rog forum.
> i am pretty sure both of them knows about it.
> 
> - i am personally experiencing inconsistency between boots, and the longest streak i have without a random reset or bsod (green now) is about 8 days (continuous usage with no restart). i run my pc 24/7 so this is kinda critical to me [stability testing is inconsistent as well, i could do 24 hours prime one day, and not the next without changing any settings]
> 
> - the broken software support, which either partially works, or break what is working (AISUITE/AURA/LiveDash). yes we could live without them, but those are part of the 500 dollar investment we owners made
> 
> - the various ram compatibility issues ( i am running a simple 4x8gb setup and so far has no problem running at 3200, boots fine, ram tests passed for days)
> 
> - the lack of (with a feeling of abandonment) support for bios / software
> 
> - subjectively, i guess we're losing faith in asus and the rog branding
Click to expand...

While there are reports of the issues on OCN already, the unfortunate thing is they are not sorted into a proper report format which makes finding and diagnosing an issue a lot easer from the get go. Coming from a bug testing background I can tell you it is vastly easier to have a one stop shop for bug reports have them laid out into something that makes sense in order to diagnose the issue.

This is something I am hoping users will do  Do not get me wrong though, I get the losing faith, but ive not lost hope.


----------



## elmor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bummerboy*
> 
> there are various issues, described over the ze thread here and on rog forum.
> i am pretty sure both of them knows about it.
> 
> - i am personally experiencing inconsistency between boots, and the longest streak i have without a random reset or bsod (green now) is about 8 days (continuous usage with no restart). i run my pc 24/7 so this is kinda critical to me [stability testing is inconsistent as well, i could do 24 hours prime one day, and not the next without changing any settings]
> 
> - the broken software support, which either partially works, or break what is working (AISUITE/AURA/LiveDash). yes we could live without them, but those are part of the 500 dollar investment we owners made
> 
> - the various ram compatibility issues ( i am running a simple 4x8gb setup and so far has no problem running at 3200, boots fine, ram tests passed for days)
> 
> - the lack of (with a feeling of abandonment) support for bios / software
> 
> - subjectively, i guess we're losing faith in asus and the rog branding


1. Definitely sounds like a DRAM Training problem. The nature of it is that it will give different results each boot, since we don't have anything similar to Intel's "Fast Boot" option that stores and re-uses the initial training result. Basically you're too close to the edge of stability with your DRAM settings.

2-. Again, we can't do anything with general complaints. We can attempt to fix specific issues. What are your system specs, what exactly is not working and how can we replicate it in order to figure out the issue?


----------



## The L33t

@elmor

*Bug Type:* Not able to boot with more than 64GB on a 128GB kit.
*Applicable Software/Bios Version: 0801
Windows Version & Build:* Windows 10
*Bug Description:* Not able to use my full 128GB kit (CMD128GX4M8A2666C15), this kit is mentioned as approved on the QVL for 128GB, but the kit tested on the QVL is v4.31 (Samsung) and mine is v5.39.. (Hynix)
*Steps to re-produce:* Just put anything more than 4 dimms, no post, just cycles.

Following ASUS's diagrams for recommended RAM order on the motherboard when adding 2/4/6/or 8 DRAMs


----------



## elmor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *L33tBastard*
> 
> @elmor
> 
> *Bug Type:* Not able to boot with more than 64GB on a 128GB kit.
> *Applicable Software/Bios Version: 0801
> Windows Version & Build:* Windows 10
> *Bug Description:* Not able to use my full 128GB kit (CMD128GX4M8A2666C15), this kit is mentioned as approved on the QVL for 128GB, but the kit tested on the QVL is v4.31 (Samsung) and mine is v5.39.. (Hynix)
> *Steps to re-produce:* Just put anything more than 4 dimms, no post, just cycles.
> 
> Following ASUS's diagrams for recommended RAM order on the motherboard when adding 2/4/6/or 8 DRAMs


Which POST code do you get? What if you plug 4x sticks in the inner slots only? Did you try this BIOS? It patches exactly that, Hynix 2x DIMMs per channel configuration.

http://www.mediafire.com/file/nxscgmaiuy8ssqy/ROG-ZENITH-EXTREME-ASUS-0007.zip


----------



## The L33t

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *elmor*
> 
> Did you try this BIOS? It patches exactly that, Hynix 2x DIMMs per channel configuration.
> 
> http://www.mediafire.com/file/nxscgmaiuy8ssqy/ROG-ZENITH-EXTREME-ASUS-0007.zip


I will try it. I am unfortunately out of country at the moment but as soon as I get home I will try this and report back to you! Thanks!


----------



## capitaltpt

The only actual bug I've come across is that PCI-E 4 cannot be changed to 8x even with the U.2 port unoccupied. Doing so causes the system to attempt boot several times and then doesn't change the setting. I've reported this through the bug report form on the ROG forums, but can post info here if you need me to.

Beyond that, my problems have been with the software. The two differentiators that made me go with this board over the ASRock were the addressable LED header and the dedicated water cooling headers. There was also the fact that VRM heatsinks could be easily removed for third party monoblocks with a dedicated header for those. Unfortunately, none of the 3rd party block makers opted to use the dedicated header. Not ASUS's fault. I have found that my Water flow sensor header does not work on my board. Whether that's a problem with my board or an issue with the 801 BIOS, I haven't figure out yet. The sensor does work in a normal fan header though and 801 has been stable enough for me not to reflash just to get a header to work yet.

On the Addressable Header/AURA front, that's been the frustration for me.
I added a CableMod Addressable LED strip, but my only option for this strip in static mode is to have the strip all one color. For me, this defeats the purpose of having an addressable strip. I thought this was a defect with my board and contacted tech support which went through 5 people who didn't even understand what I was talking about before they gave up and stopped responding to me. Finally, when mentioning it in the Aura software thread on the ROG forums, someone mentioned that Aura doesn't allow you individually address LEDs on the addressable header and was going to add it to the suggestions for the future. Seems like a big oversight to me.

I also seem to have an onboard OLED that doesn't work half the time. I've figured out this has to do with the combination of Aura, Live Dash, and AI Suite not playing well together. I now have only AURA software installed. I've found I only see the OLED after booting up after shutdown. The OLED doesn't show if I wake from sleep or hibernate.


----------



## bummerboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ENTERPRISE*
> 
> I can
> 
> While there are reports of the issues on OCN already, the unfortunate thing is they are not sorted into a proper report format which makes finding and diagnosing an issue a lot easer from the get go. Coming from a bug testing background I can tell you it is vastly easier to have a one stop shop for bug reports have them laid out into something that makes sense in order to diagnose the issue.
> 
> This is something I am hoping users will do
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do not get me wrong though, I get the losing faith, but ive not lost hope.


we are all hanging on!!!

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *elmor*
> 
> 1. Definitely sounds like a DRAM Training problem. The nature of it is that it will give different results each boot, since we don't have anything similar to Intel's "Fast Boot" option that stores and re-uses the initial training result. Basically you're too close to the edge of stability with your DRAM settings.
> 
> 2-. Again, we can't do anything with general complaints. We can attempt to fix specific issues. What are your system specs, what exactly is not working and how can we replicate it in order to figure out the issue?


1. any settings i could tweak?

2. i understand that every system is different, but features of the motherboard like LiveDash/Aura/AiSuite shouldn't be setup dependent. it has to work across any configuration the user might have


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *capitaltpt*
> 
> The only actual bug I've come across is that PCI-E 4 cannot be changed to 8x even with the U.2 port unoccupied. Doing so causes the system to attempt boot several times and then doesn't change the setting. I've reported this through the bug report form on the ROG forums, but can post info here if you need me to.
> 
> Beyond that, my problems have been with the software. The two differentiators that made me go with this board over the ASRock were the addressable LED header and the dedicated water cooling headers. There was also the fact that VRM heatsinks could be easily removed for third party monoblocks with a dedicated header for those. Unfortunately, none of the 3rd party block makers opted to use the dedicated header. Not ASUS's fault. I have found that my Water flow sensor header does not work on my board. Whether that's a problem with my board or an issue with the 801 BIOS, I haven't figure out yet. The sensor does work in a normal fan header though and 801 has been stable enough for me not to reflash just to get a header to work yet.
> 
> On the Addressable Header/AURA front, that's been the frustration for me.
> I added a CableMod Addressable LED strip, but my only option for this strip in static mode is to have the strip all one color. For me, this defeats the purpose of having an addressable strip. I thought this was a defect with my board and contacted tech support which went through 5 people who didn't even understand what I was talking about before they gave up and stopped responding to me. Finally, when mentioning it in the Aura software thread on the ROG forums, someone mentioned that Aura doesn't allow you individually address LEDs on the addressable header and was going to add it to the suggestions for the future. Seems like a big oversight to me.
> 
> I also seem to have an onboard OLED that doesn't work half the time. I've figured out this has to do with the combination of Aura, Live Dash, and AI Suite not playing well together. I now have only AURA software installed. I've found I only see the OLED after booting up after shutdown. The OLED doesn't show if I wake from sleep or hibernate.


Mind filling out a bug report as per the OP ? This will make tracking issues much more concise and I can add it to the OP to make it easier for Asus to track issues.


----------



## capitaltpt

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ENTERPRISE*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *capitaltpt*
> 
> The only actual bug I've come across is that PCI-E 4 cannot be changed to 8x even with the U.2 port unoccupied. Doing so causes the system to attempt boot several times and then doesn't change the setting. I've reported this through the bug report form on the ROG forums, but can post info here if you need me to.
> 
> Beyond that, my problems have been with the software. The two differentiators that made me go with this board over the ASRock were the addressable LED header and the dedicated water cooling headers. There was also the fact that VRM heatsinks could be easily removed for third party monoblocks with a dedicated header for those. Unfortunately, none of the 3rd party block makers opted to use the dedicated header. Not ASUS's fault. I have found that my Water flow sensor header does not work on my board. Whether that's a problem with my board or an issue with the 801 BIOS, I haven't figure out yet. The sensor does work in a normal fan header though and 801 has been stable enough for me not to reflash just to get a header to work yet.
> 
> On the Addressable Header/AURA front, that's been the frustration for me.
> I added a CableMod Addressable LED strip, but my only option for this strip in static mode is to have the strip all one color. For me, this defeats the purpose of having an addressable strip. I thought this was a defect with my board and contacted tech support which went through 5 people who didn't even understand what I was talking about before they gave up and stopped responding to me. Finally, when mentioning it in the Aura software thread on the ROG forums, someone mentioned that Aura doesn't allow you individually address LEDs on the addressable header and was going to add it to the suggestions for the future. Seems like a big oversight to me.
> 
> I also seem to have an onboard OLED that doesn't work half the time. I've figured out this has to do with the combination of Aura, Live Dash, and AI Suite not playing well together. I now have only AURA software installed. I've found I only see the OLED after booting up after shutdown. The OLED doesn't show if I wake from sleep or hibernate.
> 
> 
> 
> Mind filling out a bug report as per the OP ? This will make tracking issues much more concise and I can add it to the OP to make it easier for Asus to track issues.
Click to expand...

The PCI-E issue may be fixed in the 804 BIOS just posted in the main support forum. I'll check that out before I post it here.


----------



## Aby67

@ENTERPRISE
Dear Enterprise......I am going to give You a REP for putting so much effort and time, for unofficial support that should be instead official by ASUS.

It is clear that at this stage ASUS released a AMD platform motherboard supported by BETA software and not what is marketed neither by ASUS neither by official retailers and distributors.

it is also *unacceptable* that any product made by any manufacturer in an industry or product of durable and non durable goods, of which is the segment that consumer and enterprise electronics belongs to, has to find its support via a 3rd party channel, via unofficial software that because of its bugs is just as unfit to legitimate sales just as the official support software in the official support channel.

While it is normal that any supporting software that is necessary to run electronic hardware can, have patches and releases, it is *unlawful* to release hardware nor any product whose functionality and features promoted by the vendor do not meet precisely what is stated and fully working in all its capability. or known as *RTM* (release to manufacturing) ''going gold''.

This is the reason for which any bios or firmware or any software provided, via official ASUS and unofficial ASUS channels is no matter what a BETA and far from being even a *''going silver''* stage product.

*Please refer to wikipedia in case You are not familiar with the meaning of alpha and beta and official final software releases* *here*

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_release_life_cycle

In the *United States* You can file Your complaint here

https://www.ftc.gov/about-ftc/bureaus-offices/bureau-consumer-protection/office-technology-research-investigation

The same laws are applicable and in vigor in the *EU*

*It would be also proper to know via an official channel if BIOS versions passed via unofficial channels are covered by Warranty*, so for the consumer to advocate its right for a total refund of the product purchased plus direct and indirect costs, as it does NOT do what it is promoted it can, during its whole warranty period.

Any consumer or business is also entitled to refund of any component that is damaged in the case of a beta supported motherboard, and have legal right not only for a refund, but also any damage caused to the business in its totality plus interest.

Dear @elmor and @[email protected], I think that You doing the best You can, and I am sure that You are very passionate of Your profession and job, and I as everyone else here can only thank You for all the time and effort, and I hop that You will do whatever possible in reasonable time frame to satisfy the legitimate demands of ASUS clients, who are not satisfied, with the bugs that are clearly still present at this time, and that do not warrant a product that is fully functional in all of its features out of the box.

It is also understandable that this is a relatively new platform, and I hope that whatever BIOS hot fixes You are working on will be good also for supporting 6 or more GPUs on AMD platforms as apparently even wiring of the PCIE slots is not reliable.

While I would kindly ask You to release from now on ONLY Pcie lanes 16 for AMD EPYC and Threadripper*, I would also kindly ask You to consider that it is time to take this up all the way to ASUS CEO and members of the board, so for them to vote unanimously at next member's of the board meeting to conform to the laws* in those countries that Your products are sold.

Things have changed, and You cannot go on doing 80's like business anymore.

Asus offers excellent products along all of its line, from cell phones to internet routers, but as far as motherboards on a new platform go, not good, really not good.....

I think that it would not be bad practice at all and very welcome by all the public, that the next time You release a motherboard like the Zenith or when You will release the WS 7 PCIe 16 x399 Motherboard, that You showcase it on the ASUS website as *all brand new x399 WS BETA*

There is nothing wrong with promoting a product as BETA, You would certainly gain much more respect and reputation compared to other vendors by doing so, and the public would be extremely happy and satisfied and aware of what they are getting into.

It is worth to mention that if You do embrace the practice of *naming Your Motherboards as Beta for future AMD or Intel products, if You beat all clients expectation with a very good beta release* You can only gain more prestige....but above all ASUS would be abiding to the law and I think We all want this without any doubt.


----------



## Aby67

@ENTERPRISE

Grrr forgot I cant REP You!

I wanted to ask You one thing.

I personally have been invited to a couple of Nvidia BETAs eg IRay for Maya program, where there is dedicated Project managers and engineers that set up a forum for the users, where they post features, how to do things and bug reports or especially feature requests..while in some instances feature requests is about introducing maybe something new or unseen other times is to change a layout or way a feature is displayed in the interface or how the interface s made for such feature to work or being asked for to work.

Do You think it would be sweet, for a company like ASUS to do the same when they release a new motherboard for a new platform?!
They have not yet release Neither EPYC nor X399 WS motherboards and Zenith its til basically a ongoing beta, so I think that it would be nice to have a dedicated private by invitation forum for exclusive ASUS motherboard clients, that they can log in learn and ask and report bugs, in orderly manner with ASUS direct interlocutors replying daily.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Aby67*
> 
> @ENTERPRISE
> Dear Enterprise......I am going to give You a REP for putting so much effort and time, for unofficial support that should be instead official by ASUS.
> 
> It is clear that at this stage ASUS released a AMD platform motherboard supported by BETA software and not what is marketed neither by ASUS neither by official retailers and distributors.
> 
> it is also *unacceptable* that any product made by any manufacturer in an industry or product of durable and non durable goods, of which is the segment that consumer and enterprise electronics belongs to, has to find its support via a 3rd party channel, via unofficial software that because of its bugs is just as unfit to legitimate sales just as the official support software in the official support channel.
> 
> While it is normal that any supporting software that is necessary to run electronic hardware can, have patches and releases, it is *unlawful* to release hardware nor any product whose functionality and features promoted by the vendor do not meet precisely what is stated and fully working in all its capability. or known as *RTM* (release to manufacturing) ''going gold''.
> 
> This is the reason for which any bios or firmware or any software provided, via official ASUS and unofficial ASUS channels is no matter what a BETA and far from being even a *''going silver''* stage product.
> 
> *Please refer to wikipedia in case You are not familiar with the meaning of alpha and beta and official final software releases* *here*
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_release_life_cycle
> 
> In the *United States* You can file Your complaint here
> 
> https://www.ftc.gov/about-ftc/bureaus-offices/bureau-consumer-protection/office-technology-research-investigation
> 
> The same laws are applicable and in vigor in the *EU*
> 
> *It would be also proper to know via an official channel if BIOS versions passed via unofficial channels are covered by Warranty*, so for the consumer to advocate its right for a total refund of the product purchased plus direct and indirect costs, as it does NOT do what it is promoted it can, during its whole warranty period.
> 
> Any consumer or business is also entitled to refund of any component that is damaged in the case of a beta supported motherboard, and have legal right not only for a refund, but also any damage caused to the business in its totality plus interest.
> 
> Dear @elmor and @[email protected], I think that You doing the best You can, and I am sure that You are very passionate of Your profession and job, and I as everyone else here can only thank You for all the time and effort, and I hop that You will do whatever possible in reasonable time frame to satisfy the legitimate demands of ASUS clients, who are not satisfied, with the bugs that are clearly still present at this time, and that do not warrant a product that is fully functional in all of its features out of the box.
> 
> It is also understandable that this is a relatively new platform, and I hope that whatever BIOS hot fixes You are working on will be good also for supporting 6 or more GPUs on AMD platforms as apparently even wiring of the PCIE slots is not reliable.
> 
> While I would kindly ask You to release from now on ONLY Pcie lanes 16 for AMD EPYC and Threadripper*, I would also kindly ask You to consider that it is time to take this up all the way to ASUS CEO and members of the board, so for them to vote unanimously at next member's of the board meeting to conform to the laws* in those countries that Your products are sold.
> 
> Things have changed, and You cannot go on doing 80's like business anymore.
> 
> Asus offers excellent products along all of its line, from cell phones to internet routers, but as far as motherboards on a new platform go, not good, really not good.....
> 
> I think that it would not be bad practice at all and very welcome by all the public, that the next time You release a motherboard like the Zenith or when You will release the WS 7 PCIe 16 x399 Motherboard, that You showcase it on the ASUS website as *all brand new x399 WS BETA*
> 
> There is nothing wrong with promoting a product as BETA, You would certainly gain much more respect and reputation compared to other vendors by doing so, and the public would be extremely happy and satisfied and aware of what they are getting into.
> 
> It is worth to mention that if You do embrace the practice of *naming Your Motherboards as Beta for future AMD or Intel products, if You beat all clients expectation with a very good beta release* You can only gain more prestige....but above all ASUS would be abiding to the law and I think We all want this without any doubt.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Aby67*
> 
> @ENTERPRISE
> 
> Grrr forgot I cant REP You!
> 
> I wanted to ask You one thing.
> 
> I personally have been invited to a couple of Nvidia BETAs eg IRay for Maya program, where there is dedicated Project managers and engineers that set up a forum for the users, where they post features, how to do things and bug reports or especially feature requests..while in some instances feature requests is about introducing maybe something new or unseen other times is to change a layout or way a feature is displayed in the interface or how the interface s made for such feature to work or being asked for to work.
> 
> Do You think it would be sweet, for a company like ASUS to do the same when they release a new motherboard for a new platform?!
> They have not yet release Neither EPYC nor X399 WS motherboards and Zenith its til basically a ongoing beta, so I think that it would be nice to have a dedicated private by invitation forum for exclusive ASUS motherboard clients, that they can log in learn and ask and report bugs, in orderly manner with ASUS direct interlocutors replying daily.


No worries, I wanted to bring this to light a little more is all and hopefully with co-operation with elmore and Raja at Asus we can improve upon the quality of the Zenith Extreme and get it where it ought to be. I thank elmor and Raja for participating in this thread and taking onboard the comments and reports.

Hopefully we can keep collecting bug reports in order to push things forward 

Haha yeah, no REP for us Staff. As for the Dedicated forums for upcoming releases and a sort of dedicated preview in order to hunt down bugs prior to formal release as well as feature comments, this does happen a fair bit in other industries, especially software. I think it could be a good idea for Asus and other manufacturers to do, sometimes it can be challenging to involve the public but I think it is doable if properly set out.


----------



## Aby67

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ENTERPRISE*
> 
> No worries, I wanted to bring this to light a little more is all and hopefully with co-operation with elmore and Raja at Asus we can improve upon the quality of the Zenith Extreme and get it where it ought to be. I thank elmor and Raja for participating in this thread and taking onboard the comments and reports.
> 
> Hopefully we can keep collecting bug reports in order to push things forward
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Haha yeah, no REP for us Staff. As for the Dedicated forums for upcoming releases and a sort of dedicated preview in order to hunt down bugs prior to formal release as well as feature comments, this does happen a fair bit in other industries, especially software. I think it could be a good idea for Asus and other manufacturers to do, sometimes it can be challenging to involve the public but I think it is doable if properly set out.


I think they should definitely release almost all their motherboards as Betas, with a private Beta before sales and Public beta when they start sales...I think x299 has some issues as well , but as far as AMD x399 and soon to come (hopefully EPYC), because of Samsung so invested in AMD tech and so many PCIe, it can only be reasonable to sell them as Betas once they whole debugging as been dealt with.
There is only a handful of motherboards for AMD TR4 platform, when the offering will be at least a dozen from ASUS between x399 and EPYC, Zen will become the core business as far as motherboards go for the next 5 7 years......organizing public beta is the only way for ASUS to gain reputation as Gigabyte as an example is gaining momentum quite impressively.
Microsoft for Holones has its own dedicated forum for software developers with over 40k subscribed, and they all get the full support and downloads they need there starting from unity to whatever needed, the same goes with Nvidia.

I find this relevant because the bugs are all software related, even if I think that a company like ASUS could maybe start thinking into more futuristic motherboards as leds to me sound like a last resort to hide this dinosaur concept current motherboards...it is evident that we have reached the point where the hardware on motherboards cannot satisfy the software development any more ...A BIOS has become way more advanced that what the MB components can offer, it looks like a 15 year gap between the two......and all of this becomes multiplies because of Zen...if Zen didnt exist Intel would have stil lhave kept us on slow limiting computers on 4 to 16 cores and crazy prices till 2030


----------



## Mega Man

Ya, no, sorry, asus products are not betas, nor are they doing anything illegal. Anything can have bugs, and the more complicated the product, the more bugs. And asus has ALWAYS (in the recent past) been ahead of the curve.

Since it is obvious you know so much about what it takes to run a business building and servicing motherboards, i have to assume you have your own.

Which company do you represent? Add if you dont, i have to think this would be a put up or shut up moment

Has asus been slacking on the updates? Maybe, maybe they are just that complicated. But they don't deserve all of that piled on them


----------



## Aby67

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mega Man*
> 
> Ya, no, sorry, asus products are not betas, nor are they doing anything illegal. Anything can heave bugs, and the more complicated the product, the more bugs. And asus has ALWAYS (in the recent past) been ahead of the curve.
> 
> Since it is obvious you know so much about what it takes to run a business building and servicing motherboards, i have to assume you have your own.
> 
> Which company do you represent? Add if you dont, i have to think this would be a put up or shut up moment gas
> 
> Has asus been slacking on the updates? Maybe, maybe they are just that complicated.


Any thing that needs debugging is a Beta...if its not fully featured it would be an alpha...I make an example...when the 1900x launched the Zenith Mb didnt support it, this made the status of the zenith motherboard software downgrade to alpha because at moment of launch the motherboard itself wasn't featured to support the 1900x even if AMD announced releasing 8 12 and 16 core cpus.
I like ASUS company a lot because a lot of their products are impressive, and while I can agree with You that Asus is definitely the best when it comes to motherboards, this doesnt make the best mean that the product is good, it just makes the competitors worse
While i dont have enough words to thank and talk well of the time and work asus engineers put to cope with forums on top their hard work at the office and definitely dont blame them for bugs or things related to peoples malcontent...I definitely double down on the fact that the x399 platform motherboard concept by asus was a total bad choice, as all x399 motherboard should come with 7 Pcie slots, and that a motherboard with the zenith should have been a micro atx format for what it offers, considering that for hedt you do have single slot gpus available...and i triple down about beta because 99% of zenith clients are using a bios found on the support page at asus official website that is not as the ones found here...and in both cases they are being debugged....just now support for hynix ram has landed, but hynix ram was there way long before even x399 was launched at all.

In the first page you see a looooong list of stuff that doesnt work or is not good posted by someone who knows how not to break a computer in the first 5 minutes.....it is evidence to classify x399 in beta stage nothing else.

I just bought a car , i that electric hand brake, electric steering navigator a lot of computer an stuff on it,,,,i didnt have to download any bios, i didnt have to go to a forum, i got the keys and everything worked to the tin.

In the country I live in, like in all of europe, just even that the aura doesnt work and all the rest does, everyone is entitled not to RMA but total refund even if unboxed and put to work....I dont know where You live in but i would be very surprised if you dont have this same right as well.

What company I own or work for doesnt really matter, for what it counts i could be unemployed or sick and need to ask My wife or parents for money to live...this would even make tings worse for an company that would sell Me something that can cause Me a loss at over 500 dollars like a Zenith motherboard..maybe 600 dollars for me is like 50 million for ASUS.
I hope You take no offense because I do not wish to talk bad about ASUS , but If You dont ask You will never get, if You do not express what is wrong or what You would like You will never have it as You need it or want it.

This thread is about fixing something that for many doesn't work, which I appreciate a lot having ASUS team follow and be active with members, but We dont know if installing a Bios offered here and not on ASUS official site in case it cause some failure would be considered under warranty, not that it happened bu tit is the principle.....just as it is a principle that ASUS website talks about 3600mhz ram or Aura and most of the people cant get it to work...for ram in some cases it is not even asus fault as Threadripper memory controllers some are extra good and some are ok but will not run 3600 16 16 16.....
To You it is all so nice and cool, but there are legal aspects of all these things that are intolerable in 2017, banana republic marketing is a thing of many many years ago for almost everything, so why do motherboards have to be an exception?

Why DO You have to entice a kid maybe 16 years old to see a wonderful flashy Led lit motherboard Branded ROG for a CPU that gaming is its lightest task and yet promised to overlook and yet dont work?...do You think that for that kid it would be air that Aura doesnt work?or that he cant get memory to speed? or that PCIE slot doesnt wire as You need it?

Someone has to pay for this kids loss and there are laws in place to safeguard this kid...imagine a company that pays taxes and has timelines to abide to with its customers.

I have done business with Chinese all my life great people and Taiwanese will definitely be just as good.
But selling a motherboard with a software to support it that will NOT allow the motherboard to do what it is declared it will do , is illegal, You can like it or not, but this is how the world spins nowadays.
Im not here to threaten ASUS, I write what I think because I hope that some good will come out of this and that BOTH ASUS and its clients will always be very happy into doing business together....
...This includes You as well


----------



## Mega Man

I have not the time to read your post atm, but i will later, but by your definition there is no such thing as a finished build


----------



## ENTERPRISE

In the interest of keeping on topic I think it would be best to leave the debate of Asus product methodology and related practises out of this thread. The reality of this thread is to focus on issues related directly to the Asus Zenith Extreme with a view to improving it.

Thanks !

E


----------



## ReHWolution

I'm crossposting with the main ZE thread:
Quote:


> AURA 1.05.27 still doesn't work properly. The Rainbow mode (that should be the default mode) is bugged and doesn't apply correctly, with TridentZ RGB RAM and an ADD strip connected, together with 2 "classic" RGB LED Rigid strips by Nanoxia.
> Latest version of LiveDash on the website (labeled as LiveDash_1.01.07_20171128, uploaded 2 days ago) breaks AURA, making it showing red only. The issue was found by several more people on the ROG forums.
> 
> You can find latest version of AI Suite labeled as *DIP5_1.04.92*, and so far, together with the beta BIOS posted my elmor (0807) it seems to work fine, at least Fan control-wise.


Bug Type: Software
Applicable Software/Bios Version: AURA 1.05.27, tested on 0701, 0801 and 0804
Windows Version & Build: Windows 10 Pro 1709 x64 16299.64
Bug Description: When setting Rainbow Mode, AURA fails to set it correctly. At first it gives the Rainbow mode then after a couple of seconds switches to a mode similar to color cycle.
Steps to re-produce: Install AURA 1.05.27 and set Rainbow Mode or Default to have the same bug

Bug Type: Software
Applicable Software/Bios Version: LiveDash 1.01.17, tested on 0701, 0801 and 0804
Windows Version & Build Windows 10 Pro 1709 x64 16299.64
Bug Description: Once installed, LiveDash breaks AURA, with red-only colours displayed by both RAM, Mainboard and RGB strips (ADD and not ADD). Also, LiveDash fails to set anything on the OLED display.
Steps to re-produce: Installing LiveDash 1.01.17 does it.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ReHWolution*
> 
> I'm crossposting with the main ZE thread:
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> AURA 1.05.27 still doesn't work properly. The Rainbow mode (that should be the default mode) is bugged and doesn't apply correctly, with TridentZ RGB RAM and an ADD strip connected, together with 2 "classic" RGB LED Rigid strips by Nanoxia.
> Latest version of LiveDash on the website (labeled as LiveDash_1.01.07_20171128, uploaded 2 days ago) breaks AURA, making it showing red only. The issue was found by several more people on the ROG forums.
> 
> You can find latest version of AI Suite labeled as *DIP5_1.04.92*, and so far, together with the beta BIOS posted my elmor (0807) it seems to work fine, at least Fan control-wise.
> 
> 
> 
> Bug Type: Software
> Applicable Software/Bios Version: AURA 1.05.27, tested on 0701, 0801 and 0804
> Windows Version & Build: Windows 10 Pro 1709 x64 16299.64
> Bug Description: When setting Rainbow Mode, AURA fails to set it correctly. At first it gives the Rainbow mode then after a couple of seconds switches to a mode similar to color cycle.
> Steps to re-produce: Install AURA 1.05.27 and set Rainbow Mode or Default to have the same bug
> 
> Bug Type: Software
> Applicable Software/Bios Version: LiveDash 1.01.17, tested on 0701, 0801 and 0804
> Windows Version & Build Windows 10 Pro 1709 x64 16299.64
> Bug Description: Once installed, LiveDash breaks AURA, with red-only colours displayed by both RAM, Mainboard and RGB strips (ADD and not ADD). Also, LiveDash fails to set anything on the OLED display.
> Steps to re-produce: Installing LiveDash 1.01.17 does it.
Click to expand...

Thanks very much, I have added this to the OP !


----------



## ReHWolution

Thank YOU for creating this thread. I really hope we'll sort things out, 'cause before having so many problems, I was about to pull the trigger on a RVIE.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ReHWolution*
> 
> Thank YOU for creating this thread. I really hope we'll sort things out, 'cause before having so many problems, I was about to pull the trigger on a RVIE.


I know how you feel, I was considering jumping to a different product but I realised I should not have to tear down my rig due to poor performance back at Asus.


----------



## ReHWolution

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ENTERPRISE*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ReHWolution*
> 
> Thank YOU for creating this thread. I really hope we'll sort things out, 'cause before having so many problems, I was about to pull the trigger on a RVIE.
> 
> 
> 
> I know how you feel, I was considering jumping to a different product but I realised I should not have to tear down my rig due to poor performance back at Asus.
Click to expand...

It's not a problem for me, I got both the ASRock X299 Professional Gaming i9 AND the Professional Gaming i9 XE (sometimes, being a reviewer pays off, lol), so all I really need is a decent CPU


----------



## Kyozon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ReHWolution*
> 
> It's not a problem for me, I got both the ASRock X299 Professional Gaming i9 AND the Professional Gaming i9 XE (sometimes, being a reviewer pays off, lol), so all I really need is a decent CPU


Wow, impressive. Kind of an off-topic, but if you have reviewed a X299 System i am looking forward to it. As i am planning to build another System featuring it next year. Trying to get as much data as i can.

It looks like ASRock is killing it, with those XE Series Boards.


----------



## Brain29

this is what I ran into today with 804 the fan temp selection was fixed some of the headers would only read the CPU temp even if it was changed to another sensor like water - other then that my board has crapped out I figured I would give the new ai suit a try but it is still crap and the fan expert still cant see fans if there on a splitter

not sure why this board cant control a simple fan correctly

804 (after update clear cmos)

-uefi USB storage is not recognized (have 5 storage devices plugged in only 1 is seen *only the latest plugged in can be viewed)
-Uefi bios snapshot freezes bios (can not make snapshots for bug report)
-Uefi Asus fan controller does not set correct min fan power %
(Values are completely random per header all fans are the same type, settings yet each has a dramatically diffrent allowed min and Max power %)
-DIP5_1.04.92 fan expert , can not see extension fans if they are set to pwm on a extender same fan min % errors as in Uefi
-Uefi update sets external rgb to 100% power
-Uefi sets all board rgbs to off
-Aura (version from support page) no longer functional
-Livedash 1.01.07 not functional


----------



## ReHWolution

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kyozon*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ReHWolution*
> 
> It's not a problem for me, I got both the ASRock X299 Professional Gaming i9 AND the Professional Gaming i9 XE (sometimes, being a reviewer pays off, lol), so all I really need is a decent CPU
> 
> 
> 
> Wow, impressive. Kind of an off-topic, but if you have reviewed a X299 System i am looking forward to it. As i am planning to build another System featuring it next year. Trying to get as much data as i can.
> 
> It looks like ASRock is killing it, with those XE Series Boards.
Click to expand...

I reviewed X299 already, but with an i5 7640X so far. This time, I'm giving a shot at a 7920X (almost on par price-wise with the 1950X) kindly provided by ASRock, please consider, though, that my reviews are not written in English, but in Italian








Yeah, those XE boards are impressive. I'll pm you once I'm done to tell you about the experience I had


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Brain29*
> 
> this is what I ran into today with 804 the fan temp selection was fixed some of the headers would only read the CPU temp even if it was changed to another sensor like water - other then that my board has crapped out I figured I would give the new ai suit a try but it is still crap and the fan expert still cant see fans if there on a splitter
> 
> not sure why this board cant control a simple fan correctly
> 
> 804 (after update clear cmos)
> 
> -uefi USB storage is not recognized (have 5 storage devices plugged in only 1 is seen *only the latest plugged in can be viewed)
> -Uefi bios snapshot freezes bios (can not make snapshots for bug report)
> -Uefi Asus fan controller does not set correct min fan power %
> (Values are completely random per header all fans are the same type, settings yet each has a dramatically diffrent allowed min and Max power %)
> -DIP5_1.04.92 fan expert , can not see extension fans if they are set to pwm on a extender same fan min % errors as in Uefi
> -Uefi update sets external rgb to 100% power
> -Uefi sets all board rgbs to off
> -Aura (version from support page) no longer functional
> -Livedash 1.01.07 not functional


I will add this to the OP shortly. Many thanks !


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Any more bugs chaps ?


----------



## Brain29

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ENTERPRISE*
> 
> Any more bugs chaps ?


not that big of one compared to the others

*fans stuck at 100% after wake from sleep*

reproduce
if in Windows OS and system goes to sleep
upon wake all fans will be pinned at 100% power regardless of settings or temperature or header

*this issue has been present in every uefi version I have tested with or without ai*suit installed
others in several threads have confirmed this with me


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Brain29*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ENTERPRISE*
> 
> Any more bugs chaps ?
> 
> 
> 
> not that big of one compared to the others
> 
> *fans stuck at 100% after wake from sleep*
> 
> reproduce
> if in Windows OS and system goes to sleep
> upon wake all fans will be pinned at 100% power regardless of settings or temperature or header
> 
> *this issue has been present in every uefi version I have tested with or without ai*suit installed
> others in several threads have confirmed this with me
Click to expand...

Is this via AI Suite ? I think I have experienced this myself but only with AI Suite.

*EDIT*

Re-read your post, Ignore. I will list this in the OP. Thanks !


----------



## elmor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ReHWolution*
> 
> I'm crossposting with the main ZE thread:
> Bug Type: Software
> Applicable Software/Bios Version: AURA 1.05.27, tested on 0701, 0801 and 0804
> Windows Version & Build: Windows 10 Pro 1709 x64 16299.64
> Bug Description: When setting Rainbow Mode, AURA fails to set it correctly. At first it gives the Rainbow mode then after a couple of seconds switches to a mode similar to color cycle.
> Steps to re-produce: Install AURA 1.05.27 and set Rainbow Mode or Default to have the same bug
> 
> Bug Type: Software
> Applicable Software/Bios Version: LiveDash 1.01.17, tested on 0701, 0801 and 0804
> Windows Version & Build Windows 10 Pro 1709 x64 16299.64
> Bug Description: Once installed, LiveDash breaks AURA, with red-only colours displayed by both RAM, Mainboard and RGB strips (ADD and not ADD). Also, LiveDash fails to set anything on the OLED display.
> Steps to re-produce: Installing LiveDash 1.01.17 does it.


Not sure how Rainbow mode is supposed to work, it has an option called color cycle which is very similar to the color cycle mode. If I set it to gradient it works as expected. In reverse mode it uses the colors not highlighted in the circle.

When using Aura 1.05.28, LiveDash 1.01.17 and OLED firmware 0201 it seems to work as expected for me. Download here: https://www.mediafire.com/file/ghsph3acslirrqz/Lighting_Control_1.05.28.zip

OLED firmware is in here (Aura IC FW Update.exe). (mirror https://www.mediafire.com/file/6bp55f66g143da5/V1.00.13_20170919.zip)


----------



## ReHWolution

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *elmor*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ReHWolution*
> 
> I'm crossposting with the main ZE thread:
> Bug Type: Software
> Applicable Software/Bios Version: AURA 1.05.27, tested on 0701, 0801 and 0804
> Windows Version & Build: Windows 10 Pro 1709 x64 16299.64
> Bug Description: When setting Rainbow Mode, AURA fails to set it correctly. At first it gives the Rainbow mode then after a couple of seconds switches to a mode similar to color cycle.
> Steps to re-produce: Install AURA 1.05.27 and set Rainbow Mode or Default to have the same bug
> 
> Bug Type: Software
> Applicable Software/Bios Version: LiveDash 1.01.17, tested on 0701, 0801 and 0804
> Windows Version & Build Windows 10 Pro 1709 x64 16299.64
> Bug Description: Once installed, LiveDash breaks AURA, with red-only colours displayed by both RAM, Mainboard and RGB strips (ADD and not ADD). Also, LiveDash fails to set anything on the OLED display.
> Steps to re-produce: Installing LiveDash 1.01.17 does it.
> 
> 
> 
> Not sure how Rainbow mode is supposed to work, it has an option called color cycle which is very similar to the color cycle mode. If I set it to gradient it works as expected. In reverse mode it uses the colors not highlighted in the circle.
> 
> When using Aura 1.05.28, LiveDash 1.01.17 and OLED firmware 0201 it seems to work as expected for me. Download here: https://www.mediafire.com/file/ghsph3acslirrqz/Lighting_Control_1.05.28.zip
> 
> OLED firmware is in here (FW.exe), but don't flash the Aura Firmware that's also bundled.
Click to expand...

Thanks, I'll give it a try. For what I understood, Rainbow mode is supposed to be the mainboard's default setting, with colors "rainbowing" instead of solid colors cycling.
EDIT: no FW.exe in the .zip that I downloaded from there


----------



## elmor

Filename V1.00.13_20170919.zip? Try mirrored here: https://www.mediafire.com/file/6bp55f66g143da5/V1.00.13_20170919.zip


----------



## elmor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Brain29*
> 
> not that big of one compared to the others
> 
> *fans stuck at 100% after wake from sleep*
> 
> reproduce
> if in Windows OS and system goes to sleep
> upon wake all fans will be pinned at 100% power regardless of settings or temperature or header
> 
> *this issue has been present in every uefi version I have tested with or without ai*suit installed
> others in several threads have confirmed this with me


Which AiSuite/DIP5 version?


----------



## elmor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Brain29*
> 
> this is what I ran into today with 804 the fan temp selection was fixed some of the headers would only read the CPU temp even if it was changed to another sensor like water - other then that my board has crapped out I figured I would give the new ai suit a try but it is still crap and the fan expert still cant see fans if there on a splitter
> 
> not sure why this board cant control a simple fan correctly
> 
> 804 (after update clear cmos)
> 
> -uefi USB storage is not recognized (have 5 storage devices plugged in only 1 is seen *only the latest plugged in can be viewed)
> -Uefi bios snapshot freezes bios (can not make snapshots for bug report)
> -Uefi Asus fan controller does not set correct min fan power %
> (Values are completely random per header all fans are the same type, settings yet each has a dramatically diffrent allowed min and Max power %)
> -DIP5_1.04.92 fan expert , can not see extension fans if they are set to pwm on a extender same fan min % errors as in Uefi
> -Uefi update sets external rgb to 100% power
> -Uefi sets all board rgbs to off
> -Aura (version from support page) no longer functional
> -Livedash 1.01.07 not functional


-uefi USB storage is not recognized (have 5 storage devices plugged in only 1 is seen *only the latest plugged in can be viewed)

Works here with 5x usb flash drives plugged, got a list of the devices?

-Uefi bios snapshot freezes bios (can not make snapshots for bug report)

Works for me. Anything you can think of that I can try to replicate the issue? I can get it to lock if I unplug the device before selecting it for saving the screenshot, but that's not really normal behavior.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *elmor*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ReHWolution*
> 
> I'm crossposting with the main ZE thread:
> Bug Type: Software
> Applicable Software/Bios Version: AURA 1.05.27, tested on 0701, 0801 and 0804
> Windows Version & Build: Windows 10 Pro 1709 x64 16299.64
> Bug Description: When setting Rainbow Mode, AURA fails to set it correctly. At first it gives the Rainbow mode then after a couple of seconds switches to a mode similar to color cycle.
> Steps to re-produce: Install AURA 1.05.27 and set Rainbow Mode or Default to have the same bug
> 
> Bug Type: Software
> Applicable Software/Bios Version: LiveDash 1.01.17, tested on 0701, 0801 and 0804
> Windows Version & Build Windows 10 Pro 1709 x64 16299.64
> Bug Description: Once installed, LiveDash breaks AURA, with red-only colours displayed by both RAM, Mainboard and RGB strips (ADD and not ADD). Also, LiveDash fails to set anything on the OLED display.
> Steps to re-produce: Installing LiveDash 1.01.17 does it.
> 
> 
> 
> Not sure how Rainbow mode is supposed to work, it has an option called color cycle which is very similar to the color cycle mode. If I set it to gradient it works as expected. In reverse mode it uses the colors not highlighted in the circle.
> 
> When using Aura 1.05.28, LiveDash 1.01.17 and OLED firmware 0201 it seems to work as expected for me. Download here: https://www.mediafire.com/file/ghsph3acslirrqz/Lighting_Control_1.05.28.zip
> 
> OLED firmware is in here (FW.exe), but don't flash the Aura Firmware that's also bundled.
Click to expand...

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *elmor*
> 
> Filename V1.00.13_20170919.zip? Try mirrored here: https://www.mediafire.com/file/6bp55f66g143da5/V1.00.13_20170919.zip


Cheers, I have added these to the OP as I assume these are the latest lol.


----------



## mypickaxe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ENTERPRISE*
> 
> Any more bugs chaps ?


I need to test more on the 0804 UEFI, but I'm finding my CPU (Tdie & Tctl) temps are not reported properly once an overclock is applied. In my case, temps seem to be accurate on stock clocks, but when overclocking with additional voltage applied, Tdie & Tctl drop 10-20C.


----------



## vsimone67

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mypickaxe*
> 
> I need to test more on the 0804 UEFI, but I'm finding my CPU (Tdie & Tctl) temps are not reported properly once an overclock is applied. In my case, temps seem to be accurate on stock clocks, but when overclocking with additional voltage applied, Tdie & Tctl drop 10-20C.


It does this on 0801 also (at least for me). When I overclocked my board I was getting negative temps in HWINFO, when I turned it off it went back to normal.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *elmor*
> 
> Filename V1.00.13_20170919.zip? Try mirrored here: https://www.mediafire.com/file/6bp55f66g143da5/V1.00.13_20170919.zip


Hey @elmor tried running the FW.exe for OLED 2.0 but nothing seemingly happens. Running Windows 10 X64


----------



## keng

Hey thanks for this thread.
Honestly almost 99% of people have most definitely Dual ranked ram. It just won't work with any current bios. People do not know if their ram is dual rank or not so we keep having 1000000 posts with different ram kits, be it 16 gig, 32 gig, 128 gigs,etc....it is just painful. *For love of god....in big letters write BIOS misconfigures dual rank ram universally*. Almost all of the errors are caused by this. Thanks


----------



## mypickaxe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *keng*
> 
> Hey thanks for this thread.
> Honestly almost 99% of people have most definitely Dual ranked ram. It just won't work with any current bios. People do not know if their ram is dual rank or not so we keep having 1000000 posts with different ram kits, be it 16 gig, 32 gig, 128 gigs,etc....it is just painful. *For love of god....in big letters write BIOS misconfigures dual rank ram universally*. Almost all of the errors are caused by this. Thanks


I must be in the 1%.

Two kits of this RAM and it is single rank:

http://www.corsair.com/en-us/dominator-platinum-series-16gb-4-x-4gb-ddr4-dram-2800mhz-c16-memory-kit-cmd16gx4m4a2800c16

I can't get the RAM to post at 2800 or 3000 (the two XMP profiles.) I checked the QVL and only version 5.29 is listed. Mine are 4.23 and 4.24, respectively. Funny thing, though...the 64GB kit is "certified" at version 4.24.

They work fine in quad channel at 2666, however.

It will post with an XMP profile active when 3 sticks are populated, but as soon as I attempt quad channel, no can do.


----------



## ReHWolution

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mypickaxe*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *keng*
> 
> Hey thanks for this thread.
> Honestly almost 99% of people have most definitely Dual ranked ram. It just won't work with any current bios. People do not know if their ram is dual rank or not so we keep having 1000000 posts with different ram kits, be it 16 gig, 32 gig, 128 gigs,etc....it is just painful. *For love of god....in big letters write BIOS misconfigures dual rank ram universally*. Almost all of the errors are caused by this. Thanks
> 
> 
> 
> I must be in the 1%.
> 
> Two kits of this RAM and it is single rank:
> 
> http://www.corsair.com/en-us/dominator-platinum-series-16gb-4-x-4gb-ddr4-dram-2800mhz-c16-memory-kit-cmd16gx4m4a2800c16
> 
> I can't get the RAM to post at 2800 or 3000 (the two XMP profiles.) I checked the QVL and only version 5.29 is listed. Mine are 4.23 and 4.24, respectively. Funny thing, though...the 64GB kit is "certified" at version 4.24.
> 
> They work fine in quad channel at 2666, however.
> 
> It will post with an XMP profile active when 3 sticks are populated, but as soon as I attempt quad channel, no can do.
Click to expand...

Those should be Samsung E-die, while the 64GB kit should be a 4x16GB dual rank b-die. That's why it's certified. Other than that though, QVL means nothing.


----------



## mypickaxe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ReHWolution*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *mypickaxe*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *keng*
> 
> Hey thanks for this thread.
> Honestly almost 99% of people have most definitely Dual ranked ram. It just won't work with any current bios. People do not know if their ram is dual rank or not so we keep having 1000000 posts with different ram kits, be it 16 gig, 32 gig, 128 gigs,etc....it is just painful. *For love of god....in big letters write BIOS misconfigures dual rank ram universally*. Almost all of the errors are caused by this. Thanks
> 
> 
> 
> I must be in the 1%.
> 
> Two kits of this RAM and it is single rank:
> 
> http://www.corsair.com/en-us/dominator-platinum-series-16gb-4-x-4gb-ddr4-dram-2800mhz-c16-memory-kit-cmd16gx4m4a2800c16
> 
> I can't get the RAM to post at 2800 or 3000 (the two XMP profiles.) I checked the QVL and only version 5.29 is listed. Mine are 4.23 and 4.24, respectively. Funny thing, though...the 64GB kit is "certified" at version 4.24.
> 
> They work fine in quad channel at 2666, however.
> 
> It will post with an XMP profile active when 3 sticks are populated, but as soon as I attempt quad channel, no can do.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Those should be Samsung E-die, while the 64GB kit should be a 4x16GB dual rank b-die. That's why it's certified. Other than that though, QVL means nothing.
Click to expand...

Is there some master list of die type floating around out there?


----------



## mypickaxe

Another issue I've run into involves the CMOS reset button. That works, but the OC profiles remain and become unusable. For instance, reset CMOS then attempt to load the profile saved previously and the UEFI hard locks. I have to power off and on again and save over the top of the profile to use it again.



Follow up...
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *vsimone67*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *mypickaxe*
> 
> I need to test more on the 0804 UEFI, but I'm finding my CPU (Tdie & Tctl) temps are not reported properly once an overclock is applied. In my case, temps seem to be accurate on stock clocks, but when overclocking with additional voltage applied, Tdie & Tctl drop 10-20C.
> 
> 
> 
> It does this on 0801 also (at least for me). When I overclocked my board I was getting negative temps in HWINFO, when I turned it off it went back to normal.
Click to expand...

I checked this issue on 0804 and it seems to be working as expected now. I will monitor this.


----------



## Brain29

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *elmor*
> 
> -uefi USB storage is not recognized (have 5 storage devices plugged in only 1 is seen *only the latest plugged in can be viewed)
> 
> Works here with 5x usb flash drives plugged, got a list of the devices?
> 
> -Uefi bios snapshot freezes bios (can not make snapshots for bug report)
> 
> Works for me. Anything you can think of that I can try to replicate the issue? I can get it to lock if I unplug the device before selecting it for saving the screenshot, but that's not really normal behavior.






-fans at 100% after windows wake-
I have had this issue since the board was released every version of bios I tested no AiSuite needed to recreate, however every version of AiSuite I have used has not corrected the issue. The issue was still present with DIP5

uefi usb issue (had a mix of old corsair and sandisk usb)
- was weird- noticed right after updating to 804 - the issue was still there after clear cmos and about 8 cold reboots
- I could boot with all the drives in and I could see them (no problem)
- If I only had a few or none plugged in and started to add more. The new drive would appear but the usb drive plugged in before would vanish. My sata ssd never vanished.
-this was only noticed in the UEFI on the saving overclock profiles -- windows os was able to see the drives
*I noticed this trying to find the drive with bios 801 so I could jump back*
*I only tried to take screen shots when this was happening so that might be why the uefi kept freezing

** I have since jumped back to 801, I didn't like hearing the higher min fan curves 804 uefi was giving me ** I have noticed allot of weird things happen everytime I seem to upgrade to a new bios with is board. Most notably the rgbs disappearing or stuck at 100% the software will not able to start in windows it will crash. Then coming back randomly a week to two weeks later they will all be working with no driver or firmware updates, no install or reinstall of the software (don't know if this type of weirdness is useful, maybe the usb issue was just one of those glitches because I updated)

I have a basic windows set up -- no raid or duel boot
useplatformclock false

I use the 10g card
stopped using the wifi *it would cut out on random reboots

Processor -- 1950x
Memory (part number) -- 8X G_Skill F4-3200C16-8GTZ -- 64gb (runs at 2933)
Graphics Card #1 -- GIGABYTE GeForce GTX 980 Ti WF (latest drivers nvidia)
Monitor -- cintiq 22hd touch
Storage #1 -- Sam SSD 850 EVO 1TB (running magician 5.1)
CPU Cooler -- D5 - XSPC block- 3x120 slim rad
Case -- View 71
Power Supply -- EVGA supernova 1000G3


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mypickaxe*
> 
> Another issue I've run into involves the CMOS reset button. That works, but the OC profiles remain and become unusable. For instance, reset CMOS then attempt to load the profile saved previously and the UEFI hard locks. I have to power off and on again and save over the top of the profile to use it again.
> 
> 
> 
> Follow up...
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *vsimone67*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *mypickaxe*
> 
> I need to test more on the 0804 UEFI, but I'm finding my CPU (Tdie & Tctl) temps are not reported properly once an overclock is applied. In my case, temps seem to be accurate on stock clocks, but when overclocking with additional voltage applied, Tdie & Tctl drop 10-20C.
> 
> 
> 
> It does this on 0801 also (at least for me). When I overclocked my board I was getting negative temps in HWINFO, when I turned it off it went back to normal.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I checked this issue on 0804 and it seems to be working as expected now. I will monitor this.
Click to expand...

What BIOS Version does this occur on ?


----------



## ReHWolution

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mypickaxe*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ReHWolution*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *mypickaxe*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *keng*
> 
> Hey thanks for this thread.
> Honestly almost 99% of people have most definitely Dual ranked ram. It just won't work with any current bios. People do not know if their ram is dual rank or not so we keep having 1000000 posts with different ram kits, be it 16 gig, 32 gig, 128 gigs,etc....it is just painful. *For love of god....in big letters write BIOS misconfigures dual rank ram universally*. Almost all of the errors are caused by this. Thanks
> 
> 
> 
> I must be in the 1%.
> 
> Two kits of this RAM and it is single rank:
> 
> http://www.corsair.com/en-us/dominator-platinum-series-16gb-4-x-4gb-ddr4-dram-2800mhz-c16-memory-kit-cmd16gx4m4a2800c16
> 
> I can't get the RAM to post at 2800 or 3000 (the two XMP profiles.) I checked the QVL and only version 5.29 is listed. Mine are 4.23 and 4.24, respectively. Funny thing, though...the 64GB kit is "certified" at version 4.24.
> 
> They work fine in quad channel at 2666, however.
> 
> It will post with an XMP profile active when 3 sticks are populated, but as soon as I attempt quad channel, no can do.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Those should be Samsung E-die, while the 64GB kit should be a 4x16GB dual rank b-die. That's why it's certified. Other than that though, QVL means nothing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Is there some master list of die type floating around out there?
Click to expand...

Yes there is, but it's not complete: http://www.overclock.net/t/1627555/ryzen-memory-ic-collection-thread/0_50

I reviewed tons of memory kits, that's why I can tell you which kit is what


----------



## ReHWolution

@elmor
Small update: AURA 1.05.28 still doesn't work properly when it comes to the Rainbow mode. The FW.exe in the download does nothing, even with safe mode or admin launch.
Fan Xpert is still broken on the latest AI Suite available on the ZE website (DIP5 1.04.92)...


----------



## mypickaxe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ENTERPRISE*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *mypickaxe*
> 
> Another issue I've run into involves the CMOS reset button. That works, but the OC profiles remain and become unusable. For instance, reset CMOS then attempt to load the profile saved previously and the UEFI hard locks. I have to power off and on again and save over the top of the profile to use it again.
> 
> 
> 
> Follow up...
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *vsimone67*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *mypickaxe*
> 
> I need to test more on the 0804 UEFI, but I'm finding my CPU (Tdie & Tctl) temps are not reported properly once an overclock is applied. In my case, temps seem to be accurate on stock clocks, but when overclocking with additional voltage applied, Tdie & Tctl drop 10-20C.
> 
> 
> 
> It does this on 0801 also (at least for me). When I overclocked my board I was getting negative temps in HWINFO, when I turned it off it went back to normal.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I checked this issue on 0804 and it seems to be working as expected now. I will monitor this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What BIOS Version does this occur on ?
Click to expand...

The OC profile issue has occurred for me on every UEFI version, including 0701 and 0804.

As far as the negative temp readout, it definitely occurred for me on 0701. I posted this before testing the 0804 beta.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ReHWolution*
> 
> @elmor
> Small update: AURA 1.05.28 still doesn't work properly when it comes to the Rainbow mode. The FW.exe in the download does nothing, even with safe mode or admin launch.
> Fan Xpert is still broken on the latest AI Suite available on the ZE website (DIP5 1.04.92)...


Same, the FW.exe does nothing in any mode @elmor. Is fan Expert still broken for you on BIOS 0804 ? Is it just a fan profile issue ? I just need to know so I can list it as a bug.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mypickaxe*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ENTERPRISE*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *mypickaxe*
> 
> Another issue I've run into involves the CMOS reset button. That works, but the OC profiles remain and become unusable. For instance, reset CMOS then attempt to load the profile saved previously and the UEFI hard locks. I have to power off and on again and save over the top of the profile to use it again.
> 
> 
> 
> Follow up...
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *vsimone67*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *mypickaxe*
> 
> I need to test more on the 0804 UEFI, but I'm finding my CPU (Tdie & Tctl) temps are not reported properly once an overclock is applied. In my case, temps seem to be accurate on stock clocks, but when overclocking with additional voltage applied, Tdie & Tctl drop 10-20C.
> 
> 
> 
> It does this on 0801 also (at least for me). When I overclocked my board I was getting negative temps in HWINFO, when I turned it off it went back to normal.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I checked this issue on 0804 and it seems to be working as expected now. I will monitor this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What BIOS Version does this occur on ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The OC profile issue has occurred for me on every UEFI version, including 0701 and 0804.
> 
> As far as the negative temp readout, it definitely occurred for me on 0701. I posted this before testing the 0804 beta.
Click to expand...

I have no issue ever with loading OC Profile after a CMOS reset, but that is not to say it is not a bug. I will list it as something to look into. Could you let me know your other system variables such as the RAM being used ? I can then list this as something to investigate.

As for the negative readout, is this happening on the OLED and AI Suite or strictly just HWInfo ?


----------



## mypickaxe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ENTERPRISE*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ReHWolution*
> 
> @elmor
> 
> Small update: AURA 1.05.28 still doesn't work properly when it comes to the Rainbow mode. The FW.exe in the download does nothing, even with safe mode or admin launch.
> 
> Fan Xpert is still broken on the latest AI Suite available on the ZE website (DIP5 1.04.92)...
> 
> 
> 
> Same, the FW.exe does nothing in any mode @elmor
> . Is fan Expert still broken for you on BIOS 0804 ? Is it just a fan profile issue ? I just need to know so I can list it as a bug.
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *mypickaxe*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ENTERPRISE*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *mypickaxe*
> 
> Another issue I've run into involves the CMOS reset button. That works, but the OC profiles remain and become unusable. For instance, reset CMOS then attempt to load the profile saved previously and the UEFI hard locks. I have to power off and on again and save over the top of the profile to use it again.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Follow up...
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *vsimone67*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *mypickaxe*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It does this on 0801 also (at least for me). When I overclocked my board I was getting negative temps in HWINFO, when I turned it off it went back to normal.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I checked this issue on 0804 and it seems to be working as expected now. I will monitor this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What BIOS Version does this occur on ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The OC profile issue has occurred for me on every UEFI version, including 0701 and 0804.
> 
> As far as the negative temp readout, it definitely occurred for me on 0701. I posted this before testing the 0804 beta.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I have no issue ever with loading OC Profile after a CMOS reset, but that is not to say it is not a bug. I will list it as something to look into. Could you let me know your other system variables such as the RAM being used ? I can then list this as something to investigate.
> 
> As for the negative readout, is this happening on the OLED and AI Suite or strictly just HWInfo ?
Click to expand...

System (until I rebuild my custom loop):

ROG Zenith Extreme (obviously)
AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X
Corsair Dominator Platinum 2800 - CMD16GX4M4A2800C16 (two quad channel kits, 32GB total, 8 slots occupied.)
MSI GeForce GTX 1080 Ti Gaming X 11G
Intel Optane SSD 900P 480GB (PCIe)
Samsung 950 Pro 512GB (installed in DIMM.2 #1)
Intel 750 Series SSD 1.2TB (PCIe)
WD Black 6TB WD6002FZWX (SATA)
Enermax Liqtech TR4 360 (connected to WPump header)
Corsair AX1200i PSU (Corsair Link not connected)
Corsair Gaming K65 Lux Keyboard
Corsair M65 Pro RGB mouse (connected through keyboard.)
Asus fan extension in use (3 Noctua PWM fans connected.)

The negative temp readout is happening in Ryzen Master as well as HWInfo, but only on pre-0804 UEFI versions. I skipped 0801. I also saw this with the latest version of HWMonitor, but I don't depend on it for accurate temp readings in the first place.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mypickaxe*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ENTERPRISE*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ReHWolution*
> 
> @elmor
> 
> Small update: AURA 1.05.28 still doesn't work properly when it comes to the Rainbow mode. The FW.exe in the download does nothing, even with safe mode or admin launch.
> 
> Fan Xpert is still broken on the latest AI Suite available on the ZE website (DIP5 1.04.92)...
> 
> 
> 
> Same, the FW.exe does nothing in any mode @elmor
> . Is fan Expert still broken for you on BIOS 0804 ? Is it just a fan profile issue ? I just need to know so I can list it as a bug.
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *mypickaxe*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ENTERPRISE*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *mypickaxe*
> 
> Another issue I've run into involves the CMOS reset button. That works, but the OC profiles remain and become unusable. For instance, reset CMOS then attempt to load the profile saved previously and the UEFI hard locks. I have to power off and on again and save over the top of the profile to use it again.
> 
> 
> 
> Follow up...
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *vsimone67*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *mypickaxe*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It does this on 0801 also (at least for me). When I overclocked my board I was getting negative temps in HWINFO, when I turned it off it went back to normal.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I checked this issue on 0804 and it seems to be working as expected now. I will monitor this.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What BIOS Version does this occur on ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The OC profile issue has occurred for me on every UEFI version, including 0701 and 0804.
> 
> As far as the negative temp readout, it definitely occurred for me on 0701. I posted this before testing the 0804 beta.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I have no issue ever with loading OC Profile after a CMOS reset, but that is not to say it is not a bug. I will list it as something to look into. Could you let me know your other system variables such as the RAM being used ? I can then list this as something to investigate.
> 
> As for the negative readout, is this happening on the OLED and AI Suite or strictly just HWInfo ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> System (until I rebuild my custom loop):
> 
> ROG Zenith Extreme (obviously)
> AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X
> Corsair Dominator Platinum 2800 - CMD16GX4M4A2800C16 (two quad channel kits, 32GB total, 8 slots occupied.)
> MSI GeForce GTX 1080 Ti Gaming X 11G
> Intel Optane SSD 900P 480GB (PCIe)
> Samsung 950 Pro 512GB (installed in DIMM.2 #1)
> Intel 750 Series SSD 1.2TB (PCIe)
> WD Black 6TB WD6002FZWX (SATA)
> Enermax Liqtech TR4 360 (connected to WPump header)
> Corsair AX1200i PSU (Corsair Link not connected)
> Corsair Gaming K65 Lux Keyboard
> Corsair M65 Pro RGB mouse (connected through keyboard.)
> Asus fan extension in use (3 Noctua PWM fans connected.)
> 
> The negative temp readout is happening in Ryzen Master as well as HWInfo, but only on pre-0804 UEFI versions. I skipped 0801. I also saw this with the latest version of HWMonitor, but I don't depend on it for accurate temp readings in the first place.
Click to expand...

Well as the 0804 BIOS is out there would be little point in me listing this as a bug, unless it is also happening in 0804. I have however listed the Bug regarding the loading of OC Profiles after a CMOS reset to see if Asus can reproduce the issue.


----------



## mypickaxe

It's a data point. I thought 0804 was a beta and as such, there could be regressions, especially if the fact the temp readout issue is working properly in 0804 by coincidence rather than an explicit bug fix.

Also, there are separate issues listed here. OC profile after CMOS reset is still an issue.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mypickaxe*
> 
> It's a data point. I thought 0804 was a beta and as such, there could be regressions, especially if the fact the temp readout issue is working properly in 0804 by coincidence rather than an explicit bug fix.
> 
> Also, there are separate issues listed here. OC profile after CMOS reset is still an issue.


I listed the OC Profile bug a little while a go







as for the temp readout issue, I will list it in the OP for review.


----------



## elmor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ReHWolution*
> 
> @elmor
> Small update: AURA 1.05.28 still doesn't work properly when it comes to the Rainbow mode. The FW.exe in the download does nothing, even with safe mode or admin launch.
> Fan Xpert is still broken on the latest AI Suite available on the ZE website (DIP5 1.04.92)...


Sorry bad instructions, should run the "Aura IC FW Update.exe" file. There are some Aura functions on the same IC controlling the OLED display.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *elmor*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ReHWolution*
> 
> @elmor
> Small update: AURA 1.05.28 still doesn't work properly when it comes to the Rainbow mode. The FW.exe in the download does nothing, even with safe mode or admin launch.
> Fan Xpert is still broken on the latest AI Suite available on the ZE website (DIP5 1.04.92)...
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry bad instructions, should run the "Aura IC FW Update.exe" file. There are some Aura functions on the same IC controlling the OLED display.
Click to expand...

Brill will give that a go and put that instruction in the OP


----------



## ReHWolution

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *elmor*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ReHWolution*
> 
> @elmor
> Small update: AURA 1.05.28 still doesn't work properly when it comes to the Rainbow mode. The FW.exe in the download does nothing, even with safe mode or admin launch.
> Fan Xpert is still broken on the latest AI Suite available on the ZE website (DIP5 1.04.92)...
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry bad instructions, should run the "Aura IC FW Update.exe" file. There are some Aura functions on the same IC controlling the OLED display.
Click to expand...

"The firmware is the last version. Do not need to update."


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Is anyone having any temp read out errors using BIOS 0804 ?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ReHWolution*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *elmor*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ReHWolution*
> 
> @elmor
> Small update: AURA 1.05.28 still doesn't work properly when it comes to the Rainbow mode. The FW.exe in the download does nothing, even with safe mode or admin launch.
> Fan Xpert is still broken on the latest AI Suite available on the ZE website (DIP5 1.04.92)...
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry bad instructions, should run the "Aura IC FW Update.exe" file. There are some Aura functions on the same IC controlling the OLED display.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> "The firmware is the last version. Do not need to update."
Click to expand...

That is dissapointing, that will likely be the case for me to.

Is anyone having any temp read out errors using BIOS 0804 ?


----------



## ENTERPRISE

I can confirm that the OLED2.0 FW is the one I already have, so if it is a proposed update, it certainly is not


----------



## gupsterg

Issues I have had with the ZE are :-

i) Twice or so noted fan headers have had PWM stuck at x% in normal usage (not using sleep/resume), a repost of mobo solves issue. Non issue for me as it's been so rare that not even worth mentioning.

ii) PSU power active from wall plug, on post I will be in UEFI menu, as none of the SATA storage devices were detected. A repost of mobo solves issue. This has occurred on all UEFIs so far, again so rare it's a non issue for me.

Not saying there are not bugs/issues, but above is it for me.

My rig specs:-

TR 1950X
ASUS ZE
F4-3200C14D-16GTZ

RX VEGA 64
1x SATA SSD, 2x SATA HDD

6x Arctic Cooling F12 PWM, using 2x 4 in 1 molex powered cable but PWM from mobo. 1x Be Quiet Silent Wings 3 power/PWM from mobo. EK D5 PWM molex power but PWM mobo. All fans/pump controlled by ASUS ZE, via UEFI, based on water loop temp sensor connected to mobo. I use a total of 4 fan headers for PWM from mobo and 2 of the temps sensor headers.

4 of the rear USB are always occupied. Cherry MX Board 3.0 keyboard, Logitech G700S receiver, Logitech G700S charge cable, XBox 360 receiver. I also use the USB 3.0/2.0 headers from mobo for USB ports on case.

I don't use things like AURA, Ai Suite, etc. I set what I want using UEFI. Board RGB was set once via AURA, then never needed again so uninstalled. OLED, etc all work as I need.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Brain29*
> 
> -Uefi bios snapshot freezes bios (can not make snapshots for bug report)
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *elmor*
> 
> Works for me. Anything you can think of that I can try to replicate the issue? I can get it to lock if I unplug the device before selecting it for saving the screenshot, but that's not really normal behavior.
Click to expand...

I have had above on all UEFIs. The reason it occurs for me is when I use a USB stick with low free space. For example when USB stick has <~60MB I get freeze at UEFI snapshot, if it's ~100MB it's a non issue.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gupsterg*
> 
> Issues I have had with the ZE are :-
> 
> i) Twice or so noted fan headers have had PWM stuck at x% in normal usage (not using sleep/resume), a repost of mobo solves issue. Non issue for me as it's been so rare that not even worth mentioning.
> 
> ii) PSU power active from wall plug, on post I will be in UEFI menu, as none of the SATA storage devices were detected. A repost of mobo solves issue. This has occurred on all UEFIs so far, again so rare it's a non issue for me.
> 
> Not saying there are not bugs/issues, but above is it for me.
> 
> My rig specs:-
> 
> TR 1950X
> ASUS ZE
> F4-3200C14D-16GTZ
> 
> RX VEGA 64
> 1x SATA SSD, 2x SATA HDD
> 
> 6x Arctic Cooling F12 PWM, using 2x 4 in 1 molex powered cable but PWM from mobo. 1x Be Quiet Silent Wings 3 power/PWM from mobo. EK D5 PWM molex power but PWM mobo. All fans/pump controlled by ASUS ZE, via UEFI, based on water loop temp sensor connected to mobo. I use a total of 4 fan headers for PWM from mobo and 2 of the temps sensor headers.
> 
> 4 of the rear USB are always occupied. Cherry MX Board 3.0 keyboard, Logitech G700S receiver, Logitech G700S charge cable, XBox 360 receiver. I also use the USB 3.0/2.0 headers from mobo for USB ports on case.
> 
> I don't use things like AURA, Ai Suite, etc. I set what I want using UEFI. Board RGB was set once via AURA, then never needed again so uninstalled. OLED, etc all work as I need.
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Brain29*
> 
> -Uefi bios snapshot freezes bios (can not make snapshots for bug report)
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *elmor*
> 
> Works for me. Anything you can think of that I can try to replicate the issue? I can get it to lock if I unplug the device before selecting it for saving the screenshot, but that's not really normal behavior.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I have had above on all UEFIs. The reason it occurs for me is when I use a USB stick with low free space. For example when USB stick has <~60MB I get freeze at UEFI snapshot, if it's ~100MB it's a non issue.
Click to expand...

That is interesting that a USB Stick with 60Mb or less would crash it, sounds like a bug to me. Not a huge issue, but a bug nonetheless. I will add it to the OP as well.


----------



## Bartouille

First, I would like to know why the settings in AiTweaker aren't synchronized with the ones under AMD CBS. If there is no reason it would be nice that they get synchronized for the sake of consistency and not to confuse the user. Second, it would be nice if you guys added some coloring to the voltages (yellow, purple, red). My Z97-A had it so I don't see why it's not present here.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

It sure would be preferable if it were AI Suit was in tune with the BIOS settings.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

With regards to the Official Changlog for the 0804 BIOS Relase

Quote:


> 1. Improve memory compatibility
> 2. Fix CPU abnormal temperature after clearing CMOS
> 3. Fix CPU/CHA Fan EQ mode issue under AI-suite 3
> 4. Fix PWM and DC mode display error for EXT_Fan under Fan Xpert
> 
> NOTICE: If you are upgrading from beta BIOS 0801 and have a SATA/NVMe RAID configuration, backup your data and remove the array before updating to this build.
> If you are updating from any other BIOS version (e.g. 0701) or do not have any drives configured in RAID, you may update normally.


Clearly confirm this BIOS kills RAID Config. What are they up to over there ? Disappointing they have killed RAID to som extent. Here is to hoping more fixes with a later BIOS that will hopefully include the new AGESA.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Just as a reminder, anyone facing memory issues with the lates 0804 BIOS please post a Bug report here and we can make Asus aware. Please feel free to report any other issues also, but as we know the memory issues are still prevalent.


----------



## Brain29

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ENTERPRISE*
> 
> Just as a reminder, anyone facing memory issues with the lates 0804 BIOS please post a Bug report here and we can make Asus aware. Please feel free to report any other issues also, but as we know the memory issues are still prevalent.


this might be a dumb idea or more trouble then its worth but i wonder if there is a way to create a poll
submit the issue then if someone has experience the issue they could +1 it or vote yes or no


----------



## elmor

A few more fan tuning and control issues should be patched in this test BIOS. PWM/DC seems to detect properly. I still get bad min fan speed detected after running Q-Fan Tuning, but way more seldom (2 times out of 50). https://www.mediafire.com/file/f8b7sbaauk5ss94/ROG-ZENITH-EXTREME-ASUS-0012.zip
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ENTERPRISE*
> 
> With regards to the Official Changlog for the 0804 BIOS Relase
> 
> Clearly confirm this BIOS kills RAID Config. What are they up to over there ? Disappointing they have killed RAID to som extent. Here is to hoping more fixes with a later BIOS that will hopefully include the new AGESA.


Not fully up to date on this, but most likely due to updated UEFI AMD RAID module which would be a change from AMD's side and not ours. The updated version is not backwards compatible, was the same situation when NVMe RAID support was added, any existing AHCI RAID array got lost.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bartouille*
> 
> First, I would like to know why the settings in AiTweaker aren't synchronized with the ones under AMD CBS. If there is no reason it would be nice that they get synchronized for the sake of consistency and not to confuse the user. Second, it would be nice if you guys added some coloring to the voltages (yellow, purple, red). My Z97-A had it so I don't see why it's not present here.


Because AMD CBS settings are provided by AMD in the base code structure, and we port some of the settings to AiTweaker. Could suggest to hide the options we port in CBS or something like that. Anyhow, we need to focus on fixing the bugs first.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *elmor*
> 
> A few more fan tuning and control issues should be patched in this test BIOS. PWM/DC seems to detect properly. I still get bad min fan speed detected after running Q-Fan Tuning, but way more seldom (2 times out of 50). https://www.mediafire.com/file/f8b7sbaauk5ss94/ROG-ZENITH-EXTREME-ASUS-0012.zip
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ENTERPRISE*
> 
> With regards to the Official Changlog for the 0804 BIOS Relase
> 
> Clearly confirm this BIOS kills RAID Config. What are they up to over there ? Disappointing they have killed RAID to som extent. Here is to hoping more fixes with a later BIOS that will hopefully include the new AGESA.
> 
> 
> 
> Not fully up to date on this, but most likely due to updated UEFI AMD RAID module which would be a change from AMD's side and not ours. The updated version is not backwards compatible, was the same situation when NVMe RAID support was added, any existing AHCI RAID array got lost.
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Bartouille*
> 
> First, I would like to know why the settings in AiTweaker aren't synchronized with the ones under AMD CBS. If there is no reason it would be nice that they get synchronized for the sake of consistency and not to confuse the user. Second, it would be nice if you guys added some coloring to the voltages (yellow, purple, red). My Z97-A had it so I don't see why it's not present here.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Because AMD CBS settings are provided by AMD in the base code structure, and we port some of the settings to AiTweaker. Could suggest to hide the options we port in CBS or something like that. Anyhow, we need to focus on fixing the bugs first.
Click to expand...

Understood, I did not think it would have been an AMD Module that was not backwards compatible that caused the issue, good to know and hopefully AMD can provide an updated version for this.

As for the test BIOS, Thanks we will have to give that a go and see if this has patched some of the FAN woes we have had. Can I assume your test BIOS is 0804 just with the extra Fan patches ? @elmor


----------



## Brain29

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *elmor*
> 
> A few more fan tuning and control issues should be patched in this test BIOS. PWM/DC seems to detect properly. I still get bad min fan speed detected after running Q-Fan Tuning, but way more seldom (2 times out of 50). https://www.mediafire.com/file/f8b7sbaauk5ss94/ROG-ZENITH-EXTREME-ASUS-0012.zip


FANS !! I'll give it ago this weekend

is 0012 built ontop of 804 ?? (just wondering)


----------



## Dominican

download link not working for bios please fix.


----------



## Brain29

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dominican*
> 
> download link not working for bios please fix.


it just worked for me (maybe the site is doing a hide if adblock is up)


----------



## Dominican

Latest Beta BIOS: 0012 is same one from asus website right ????


----------



## keng

@elmor: Why is i2c disabled on zenith?
What procedure should be followed for OCing the BCLK?
What exactly are EPU and TPU doing at baseline?
....can you open source your UEFI? We could help you, this is not going well, and it might get worse.


----------



## elmor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ENTERPRISE*
> 
> Understood, I did not think it would have been an AMD Module that was not backwards compatible that caused the issue, good to know and hopefully AMD can provide an updated version for this.
> 
> As for the test BIOS, Thanks we will have to give that a go and see if this has patched some of the FAN woes we have had. Can I assume your test BIOS is 0804 just with the extra Fan patches ? @elmor


Update on this. 0801 was updated to a new AMD UEFI RAID driver, but we found it caused some issues when using SATA RAID. 0804 is downgraded to an older version which does not support NVMe RAID at all. Next BIOS will have this fixed, sorry for the confusion.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Brain29*
> 
> FANS !! I'll give it ago this weekend
> 
> is 0012 built ontop of 804 ?? (just wondering)


Not sure which is the base, but most likely. It's a test BIOS to confirm fixes for fan control.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dominican*
> 
> Latest Beta BIOS: 0012 is same one from asus website right ????


No, 0012 is not available anywhere else.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *keng*
> 
> @elmor: Why is i2c disabled on zenith?
> What procedure should be followed for OCing the BCLK?
> What exactly are EPU and TPU doing at baseline?
> ....can you open source your UEFI? We could help you, this is not going well, and it might get worse.


- Which I2C and what do you need it for?
- Just increase step by step, our auto rules will take care of PCIe link downgrading. Most CPUs top out around 116-118 MHz using PCIe Gen2.
- They're various controllers on board to improve power efficiency, performance and most on-board features
- No, it's proprietary AMI code.


----------



## keng

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *elmor*
> 
> - Which I2C and what do you need it for?
> - Just increase step by step, our auto rules will take care of PCIe link downgrading. Most CPUs top out around 116-118 MHz using PCIe Gen2.
> - They're various controllers on board to improve power efficiency, performance and most on-board features
> - No, it's proprietary AMI code.


@elmor !!

- don't enable it for me, I have done this. I am curious why its off by default

- pressing f5 and setting bclk to 100.2 by pushing plus sign is insta boot loop. It just don't work


----------



## gupsterg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bartouille*
> 
> First, I would like to know why the settings in AiTweaker aren't synchronized with the ones under AMD CBS. If there is no reason it would be nice that they get synchronized for the sake of consistency and not to confuse the user. Second, it would be nice if you guys added some coloring to the voltages (yellow, purple, red). My Z97-A had it so I don't see why it's not present here.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *elmor*
> 
> Because AMD CBS settings are provided by AMD in the base code structure, and we port some of the settings to AiTweaker. Could suggest to hide the options we port in CBS or something like that. Anyhow, we need to focus on fixing the bugs first.
Click to expand...

@Bartouille

I will add in FAQ of the ZE thread that only a instance of option needs changing to apply. I for one welcomed the duplication of settings. The reason is on C6H when AMD code detected failed boot it would reset settings in AMD CBS, once some of these settings were in Ai Tweaker it meant they were there to reapply after a failed boot without being toggled to what you wanted.


----------



## Bartouille

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *keng*
> 
> @elmor !!
> 
> - don't enable it for me, I have done this. I am curious why its off by default
> 
> - pressing f5 and setting bclk to 100.2 by pushing plus sign is insta boot loop. It just don't work


What bios are you on? BCLK is working just fine for me on 0804. Currently running 106Mhz with PCIe Gen 3. Tried 120MHz with Gen 2 and it didn't work.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gupsterg*
> 
> @Bartouille
> 
> I will add in FAQ of the ZE thread that only a instance of option needs changing to apply. I for one welcomed the duplication of settings. The reason is on C6H when AMD code detected failed boot it would reset settings in AMD CBS, once some of these settings were in Ai Tweaker it meant they were there to reapply after a failed boot without being toggled to what you wanted.


Cool, thanks for the info.


----------



## keng

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Bartouille*
> 
> What bios are you on? BCLK is working just fine for me on 0804. Currently running 106Mhz with PCIe Gen 3. Tried 120MHz with Gen 2 and it didn't work.
> Cool, thanks for the info.


Ohok! How are you changing it? In bios? Which OS are you running? Are you running any AUS apps?


----------



## Bartouille

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *keng*
> 
> Ohok! How are you changing it? In bios? Which OS are you running? Are you running any AUS apps?


Yeah in bios. No ASUS apps. Try turning off your power supply for 30 sec then retry. Had a boot loop once and that's what I did and it worked.


----------



## capitaltpt

Quick question: The OP has a link for OLED firmware 2.0, but the actual file it links to is the 1.00.13 firmware that has been around since September. Is this a mistake or is that the latest firmware?


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *capitaltpt*
> 
> Quick question: The OP has a link for OLED firmware 2.0, but the actual file it links to is the 1.00.13 firmware that has been around since September. Is this a mistake or is that the latest firmware?


Elmor stated this was OLED 2.0 when the download was made available but I do not think it is, will edit the OP.


----------



## elmor

Beta BIOS 0901 http://www.mediafire.com/file/8tp9l09l275uta2/ROG-ZENITH-EXTREME-ASUS-0901.zip

Have not tested this extensively, let me know how it works for you.

- AGESA 1.0.0.4
- Fan fixes from 0012
- UEFI RAID driver updated (and hopefully back on track)

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *keng*
> 
> @elmor !!
> 
> - don't enable it for me, I have done this. I am curious why its off by default
> 
> - pressing f5 and setting bclk to 100.2 by pushing plus sign is insta boot loop. It just don't work


The disabled I2C lines are not used afaik.

Bclk works here, do you get the same behavior if you go down in frequency?

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *capitaltpt*
> 
> Quick question: The OP has a link for OLED firmware 2.0, but the actual file it links to is the 1.00.13 firmware that has been around since September. Is this a mistake or is that the latest firmware?


File name is "V1.00.13_20170919.zip"

Inside FW folder: "AMD_ZE_0201.dfu"

Contains 0201 firmware as stated.


----------



## nycgtr

Anyone know what's in AGESA 1.0.0.4 ? I never had ram issues running at rated.


----------



## tcoreprime

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *elmor*
> 
> Beta BIOS 0901 http://www.mediafire.com/file/8tp9l09l275uta2/ROG-ZENITH-EXTREME-ASUS-0901.zip
> 
> Have not tested this extensively, let me know how it works for you.
> 
> - AGESA 1.0.0.4
> - Fan fixes from 0012
> - UEFI RAID driver updated (and hopefully back on track)
> The disabled I2C lines are not used afaik.
> 
> Bclk works here, do you get the same behavior if you go down in frequency?
> File name is "V1.00.13_20170919.zip"
> 
> Inside FW folder: "AMD_ZE_0201.dfu"
> 
> Contains 0201 firmware as stated.


So.. when trying to use that OLED FW.. is that the same 201 since Sept?? Is there a way to verify FW version in the system somewhere, and/or reflash if need be? Also.. what if we skipped the v1.00.10 and jumped right to the 1.00.13??


----------



## elmor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tcoreprime*
> 
> So.. when trying to use that OLED FW.. is that the same 201 since Sept?? Is there a way to verify FW version in the system somewhere, and/or reflash if need be? Also.. what if we skipped the v1.00.10 and jumped right to the 1.00.13??


Not aware of any method to check the version, the updater should tell you if you already have it flashed to this version.


----------



## tcoreprime

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *elmor*
> 
> Not aware of any method to check the version, the updater should tell you if you already have it flashed to this version.


Ok... but is there a concern on having skipped the .10 one though?? or is everything that was in .10 included in the .13 file?


----------



## elmor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *tcoreprime*
> 
> Ok... but is there a concern on having skipped the .10 one though?? or is everything that was in .10 included in the .13 file?


Not a problem, new firmware overrides the old.


----------



## Brain29

@elmor

901 Issues *updated form 801 - re-flashed 4 times - cleared cmos each time

1) still no lights *present since updating to 804 then reverting back
2) fan issues still present (min fan power percentage is all over the place regardless of settings) *present since start
3) usb storage plugged into back usb ports no longer read after update *first noticed in 804 but now it seems to only apply to usb ports on the back
*If i plug them into the usb using the headers on the motherboard they are found
*windows has no issues seeing/reading storage drives

NEW to 901
4) Temperature reading is inaccurate
@4.1 I usually hit 70c v1.41 - 801 previous
with 901
The board never reports higher then 42c
(@.4.1 during testing at v1.45)

*water temp for both test would raise from 25c to about 30-35c
*external reading for 901 showed 70c ish temps (not accurately tested but far from 42c)

Image of bios settings and fan curves gonewild
*what I am trying to show is the min power% all fans are the same fan1 has a fan extender with 5 fans *I have removed the extender with the same results)



settings for 801


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



[2017/12/02 16:04:55]
Ai Overclock Tuner [D.O.C.P.]
D.O.C.P. [D.O.C.P DDR4-3200 16-18-18-38-1.35V]
BCLK Frequency [100.0000]
Custom CPU Core Ratio [Auto]
> CPU Core Ratio [40.50]
Overclocking Enhancement [Auto]
Performance Bias [Auto]
Memory Frequency [DDR4-2933MHz]
Core Performance Boost [Auto]
SMT Mode [Auto]
Spread Spectrum [Auto]
EPU Power Saving Mode [Disabled]
TPU [Keep Current Settings]
CPU Core Voltage [Manual mode]
- CPU Core Voltage Override [1.32500]
CPU SOC Voltage [Auto]
DRAM AB Voltage [1.35000]
DRAM CD Voltage [1.35000]
1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
1.05V SB Voltage [Auto]
Target TDP [Auto]
TRC_EOM [Auto]
TRTP_EOM [Auto]
TRRS_S_EOM [Auto]
TRRS_L_EOM [Auto]
TWTR_EOM [Auto]
TWTR_L_EOM [Auto]
TWCL_EOM [Auto]
TWR_EOM [Auto]
TFAW_EOM [Auto]
TRCT_EOM [Auto]
TREFI_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_DD_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_SD_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_SC_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_SCL_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_DD_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_SD_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_SC_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_SCL_EOM [Auto]
TWRRD_EOM [Auto]
TRDWR_EOM [Auto]
TWRRD_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
Mem Over Clock Fail Count [Auto]
DRAM CAS# Latency [16]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Read Delay [18]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Write Delay [18]
DRAM RAS# PRE Time [18]
DRAM RAS# ACT Time [38]
Trc [Auto]
TrrdS [Auto]
TrrdL [Auto]
Tfaw [Auto]
TwtrS [Auto]
TwtrL [Auto]
Twr [Auto]
Trcpage [Auto]
TrdrdScl [Auto]
TwrwrScl [Auto]
Trfc [Auto]
Trfc2 [Auto]
Trfc4 [Auto]
Tcwl [Auto]
Trtp [Auto]
Trdwr [Auto]
Twrrd [Auto]
TwrwrSc [Auto]
TwrwrSd [Auto]
TwrwrDd [Auto]
TrdrdSc [Auto]
TrdrdSd [Auto]
TrdrdDd [Auto]
Tcke [Auto]
ProcODT [Auto]
Cmd2T [Auto]
Gear Down Mode [Auto]
Power Down Enable [Auto]
RttNom [Auto]
RttWr [Auto]
RttPark [Auto]
MemAddrCmdSetup [Auto]
MemCsOdtSetup [Auto]
MemCkeSetup [Auto]
MemCadBusClkDrvStren [Auto]
MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [Auto]
MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [Auto]
MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [Auto]
VTTDDR AB Voltage [Auto]
VTTDDR CD Voltage [Auto]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA [Auto]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHB [Auto]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHC [Auto]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHD [Auto]
VPP DRAM AB [Auto]
VPP DRAM CD [Auto]
1.8V Standby Voltage [Auto]
CPU 3.3v AUX [Auto]
2.5V SB Voltage [Auto]
DRAM R1 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R2 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R3 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R4 Tune [Auto]
Sense MI Skew [Auto]
Sense MI Offset [Auto]
Clock Amplitude [Auto]
PLL Tune R1 [Auto]
PLL Tune R2 [Auto]
PCIE Tune R1 [Auto]
PCIE Tune R2 [Auto]
PCIE Tune R3 [Auto]
Ln2 Tune [Auto]
PLL Reference Voltage [Auto]
PLL Reference Voltage 2 [Auto]
Short Reset [Auto]
CLDO VDDP voltage [Auto]
CPU Load-line Calibration [Auto]
CPU Current Capability [Auto]
CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Auto]
VRM Spread Spectrum [Auto]
CPU Power Duty Control [T.Probe]
CPU Power Phase Control [Auto]
CPU Power Thermal Control [120]
VDDSOC Load-line Calibration [Auto]
VDDSOC Current Capability [Auto]
VDDSOC Switching Frequency [Auto]
VDDSOC Phase Control [Auto]
VDDSOC Power Thermal Control [120]
DRAM Current Capability(CHA, CHB) [100%]
DRAM Current Capability(CHC, CHD) [100%]
DRAM Power Phase Control(CHA, CHB) [Extreme]
DRAM Power Phase Control(CHC, CHD) [Extreme]
DRAM Switching Frequency(CHA, CHB) [Auto]
DRAM Switching Frequency(CHC, CHD) [Auto]
DRAM VBoot Voltage AB [Auto]
DRAM VBoot Voltage CD [Auto]
Security Device Support [Enable]
Security Device Support [Enable]
Pending operation [None]
Platform Hierarchy [Enabled]
Storage Hierarchy [Enabled]
Endorsement Hierarchy [Enabled]
TPM2.0 UEFI Spec Version [TCG_2]
Physical Presence Spec Version [1.3]
TPM Device Selection [Discrete TPM]
Erase fTPM NV for factory reset [Enabled]
SATA Port Enable [Enabled]
PT Aggresive SATA Device Sleep Port 0 [Auto]
PT Aggresive SATA Device Sleep Port 1 [Auto]
PT XHCI GEN1 [Auto]
PT XHCI GEN2 [Auto]
PT USB Equalization4 [Auto]
PT USB Redriver [Auto]
U31G2_1 [Enabled]
USB3.1_2 [Enabled]
U31G1_9 [Enabled]
U31G1_10 [Enabled]
U31G1_11 [Enabled]
U31G1_12 [Enabled]
PT USB30 PORT4 [Enabled]
PT USB30 PORT5 [Enabled]
USB13 [Enabled]
USB14 [Enabled]
USB_3 [Enabled]
USB_5 [Enabled]
USB_6 [Enabled]
USB_4 [Enabled]
PT PCIE PORT 0 [Auto]
PT PCIE PORT 1 [Auto]
PT PCIE PORT 2 [Auto]
PT PCIE PORT 3 [Auto]
PT PCIE PORT 4 [Auto]
PT PCIE PORT 5 [Auto]
PT PCIE PORT 6 [Auto]
PT PCIE PORT 7 [Auto]
Onboard LED [Enabled]
SATA Port Enable [Enabled]
SATA Mode [AHCI]
SMART Self Test [Enabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
ErP Ready [Disabled]
Restore On AC Power Loss [Power Off]
Power On By PCI-E/PCI [Disabled]
Power On By RTC [Disabled]
HD Audio Controller [Enabled]
CPU PCIE Link Mode [Auto]
SB PCIE Link Mode [Auto]
PCIEX16_1 Bandwidth [X16 Mode]
PCIEX8_2 Bandwidth [X8 Mode]
PCIEX16_3 Bandwidth [X16 Mode]
PCIE_X8/X4_4 Bandwidth [X4 Mode]
Asmedia USB 3.1 Controller [Enabled]
USB Type C Power Switch for U31G2_1 [Auto]
USB Type C Power Switch for U31G2_EC1 [Auto]
When system is in working state [On]
When system is in sleep, hibernate or soft off states [On]
Intel LAN Controller [Enabled]
Intel LAN OPROM [Disabled]
Wi-Fi Controller [Enabled]
Bluetooth Controller [Enabled]
NX Mode [Enabled]
SVM Mode [Disabled]
Network Stack [Disabled]
Debug Port Table [Disabled]
Debug Port Table 2 [Disabled]
Legacy USB Support [Enabled]
XHCI Hand-off [Enabled]
Corsair Slider 3.0 1.00 [Auto]
U31G2_EC1 [Enabled]
U31G2_E2 [Enabled]
U31G2_1 [Enabled]
U31G1_1 [Enabled]
U31G1_2 [Enabled]
U31G1_3 [Enabled]
U31G1_4 [Enabled]
U31G1_5 [Enabled]
U31G1_6 [Enabled]
U31G1_7 [Enabled]
U31G1_8 [Enabled]
U31G1_9 [Enabled]
U31G1_10 [Enabled]
U31G1_11 [Enabled]
U31G1_12 [Enabled]
USB13 [Enabled]
USB14 [Enabled]
CPU Temperature [Monitor]
MotherBoard Temperature [Monitor]
VRM Temperature [Monitor]
PCH Temperature [Monitor]
T_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
T_Sensor2 Temperature [Monitor]
DIMM.2 sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
DIMM.2 sensor2 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor2 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor3 Temperature [Monitor]
CPU Fan Speed [Ignore]
Chassis Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
HAMP Fan Speed [Monitor]
W_PUMP+ Speed [Monitor]
CPU Optional Fan Speed [Monitor]
COV Fan Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
W FLOW1 Speed [Monitor]
Water In T Sensor Temperature [Monitor]
Water Out T Sensor Temperature [Monitor]
W FLOW2 Speed [Monitor]
WB In T Sensor Temperature [Monitor]
WB Out T Sensor Temperature [Monitor]
CPU Core Voltage [Monitor]
3.3V Voltage [Monitor]
5V Voltage [Monitor]
12V Voltage [Monitor]
CPU Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
W_PUMP+ Control [Disabled]
COV Fan Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
COV Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
COV Fan Upper Temperature [74]
COV Fan Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
COV Fan Middle Temperature [69]
COV Fan Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [63]
COV Fan Lower Temperature [55]
COV Fan Min. Duty Cycle (%) [48]
Allow Fan Stop [Disabled]
Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Chassis Fan 1 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
Chassis Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [Ignore]
Chassis Fan 1 Profile [Manual]
Chassis Fan 1 Upper Temperature [71]
Chassis Fan 1 Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
Chassis Fan 1 Middle Temperature [50]
Chassis Fan 1 Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [28]
Chassis Fan 1 Lower Temperature [14]
Chassis Fan 1 Min. Duty Cycle (%) [28]
Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Chassis Fan 2 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
Chassis Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Chassis Fan 2 Profile [Manual]
Chassis Fan 2 Upper Temperature [75]
Chassis Fan 2 Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
Chassis Fan 2 Middle Temperature [70]
Chassis Fan 2 Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [60]
Chassis Fan 2 Lower Temperature [65]
Chassis Fan 2 Min. Duty Cycle (%) [60]
Allow Fan Stop [Enabled]
HAMP Fan Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
HAMP Fan Source [CPU]
HAMP Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
HAMP Fan Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
HAMP Fan Profile [Manual]
HAMP Fan Upper Temperature [60]
HAMP Fan Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
Chassis Fan 3 Middle Temperature [55]
Chassis Fan 3 Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [60]
HAMP Fan Lower Temperature [50]
HAMP Fan Min. Duty Cycle (%) [60]
Allow Fan Stop [Enabled]
Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [T_Sensor2]
Extension Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Extension Fan 1 Profile [Manual]
Extension Fan 1 Upper Temperature [59]
Extension Fan 1 Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
Extension Fan 1 Middle Temperature [50]
Extension Fan 1 Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [38]
Extension Fan 1 Lower Temperature [20]
Extension Fan 1 Min. Duty Cycle (%) [38]
Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Extension Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Extension Fan 2 Profile [Manual]
Extension Fan 2 Upper Temperature [70]
Extension Fan 2 Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
Extension Fan 2 Middle Temperature [54]
Extension Fan 2 Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [30]
Extension Fan 2 Lower Temperature [27]
Extension Fan 2 Min. Duty Cycle (%) [30]
Allow Fan Stop [Disabled]
Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
Extension Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Extension Fan 3 Profile [Manual]
Extension Fan 3 Upper Temperature [67]
Extension Fan 3 Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
Extension Fan 3 Middle Temperature [56]
Extension Fan 3 Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [30]
Extension Fan 3 Lower Temperature [37]
Extension Fan 3 Min. Duty Cycle (%) [30]
Allow Fan Stop [Disabled]
OnChip SATA Channel [Enabled]
OnChip SATA Type [AHCI]
U31G1_1 [Enabled]
U31G1_2 [Enabled]
U31G1_3 [Enabled]
U31G1_4 [Enabled]
U31G1_5 [Enabled]
U31G1_6 [Enabled]
U31G1_7 [Enabled]
U31G1_8 [Enabled]
IR Config [Disabled]
SD Mode [Disabled]
SdForce18 Enable [Disabled]
SD Mode configuration [AMDA]
Uart 0 Enable [Disabled]
Uart 1 Enable [Disabled]
I2C 0 Enable [Disabled]
I2C 1 Enable [Disabled]
I2C 2 Enable [Disabled]
I2C 3 Enable [Disabled]
Restore On AC Power Loss [Power Off]
GPIO Devices Support [Disabled]
ESATA Port On Port 0 [Disabled]
ESATA Port On Port 1 [Disabled]
ESATA Port On Port 2 [Disabled]
ESATA Port On Port 3 [Disabled]
ESATA Port On Port 4 [Disabled]
ESATA Port On Port 5 [Disabled]
ESATA Port On Port 6 [Disabled]
ESATA Port On Port 7 [Disabled]
SATA Power On Port 0 [Enabled]
SATA Power On Port 1 [Enabled]
SATA Power On Port 2 [Enabled]
SATA Power On Port 3 [Enabled]
SATA Power On Port 4 [Enabled]
SATA Power On Port 5 [Enabled]
SATA Power On Port 6 [Enabled]
SATA Power On Port 7 [Enabled]
SATA Port 0 MODE [Auto]
SATA Port 1 MODE [Auto]
SATA Port 2 MODE [Auto]
SATA Port 3 MODE [Auto]
SATA Port 4 MODE [Auto]
SATA Port 5 MODE [Auto]
SATA Port 6 MODE [Auto]
SATA Port 7 MODE [Auto]
SATA Hot-Removabel Support [Disabled]
SATA 6 AHCI Support [Disabled]
Int. Clk Differential Spread [Disabled]
SATA MAXGEN2 CAP OPTION [Disabled]
SATA CLK Mode Option [INT 100MHz]
Aggressive Link PM Capability [Enabled]
Port Multiplier Capability [Enabled]
SATA Ports Auto Clock Control [Enabled]
SATA Partial State Capability [Enabled]
SATA FIS Based Switching [Enabled]
SATA Command Completion Coalescing Support [Disabled]
SATA Slumber State Capability [Enabled]
SATA MSI Capability Support [Disabled]
SATA Target Support 8 Devices [Disabled]
Generic Mode [Disabled]
SATA AHCI Enclosure [Disabled]
SATA SGPIO 0 [Disabled]
SATA SGPIO 1 [Disabled]
SATA PHY PLL [Disabled]
AC/DC Change Message Delivery [Disabled]
TimerTick Tracking [Enabled]
Clock Interrupt Tag [Enabled]
EHCI Traffic Handling [Disabled]
Fusion Message C Multi-Core [Disabled]
Fusion Message C State [Disabled]
SPI Auto Mode [Disabled]
SPI Read Mode [Default]
SPI 100MHz Support [Enabled]
SPI Normal Speed [33MHz]
SPI Fast Read Speed [Default]
SPI Burst Write [Disabled]
I2C 0 D3 Support [Enabled]
I2C 1 D3 Support [Enabled]
I2C 2 D3 Support [Enabled]
I2C 3 D3 Support [Enabled]
UART 0 D3 Support [Enabled]
UART 1 D3 Support [Enabled]
SATA D3 Support [Enabled]
EHCI D3 Support [Enabled]
XHCI D3 Support [Enabled]
SD D3 Support [Enabled]
S0I3 [Disabled]
Chipset Power Saving Features [Enabled]
SB Clock Spread Spectrum [Enabled]
SB Clock Spread Spectrum Option [-0.375%]
HPET In SB [Enabled]
MsiDis in HPET [Disabled]
_OSC For PCI0 [Enabled]
USB Phy Power Down [Disabled]
PCIB_CLK_Stop Override [0]
USB MSI Option [Disabled]
LPC MSI Option [Disabled]
PCIBridge MSI Option [Disabled]
AB MSI Option [Disabled]
SB C1E Support [Disabled]
SB Hardware Reduced Support [Disabled]
GPP Serial Debug Bus Enable [Disabled]
Fast Boot [Enabled]
Next Boot after AC Power Loss [Normal Boot]
Boot Logo Display [Auto]
POST Delay Time [3 sec]
Boot up NumLock State [Enabled]
Wait For 'F1' If Error [Enabled]
Option ROM Messages [Enabled]
Interrupt 19 Capture [Disabled]
Setup Mode [Advanced Mode]
Launch CSM [Enabled]
Boot Device Control [UEFI and Legacy OPROM]
Boot from Network Devices [Legacy only]
Boot from Storage Devices [Legacy only]
Boot from PCI-E Expansion Devices [Legacy only]
OS Type [Other OS]
Setup Animator [Disabled]
Load from Profile [1]
Profile Name [OC_CPU_MEM_FAN]
Save to Profile [2]
CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
VDDSOC Voltage [Auto]
1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
BCLK Frequency [Auto]
CPU Ratio [Auto]
Bus Interface [PCIEX16_1]



settings for 901 (i currently have the cpu overclocked to 41 no issues)


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



[2017/12/13 20:36:10]
Ai Overclock Tuner [D.O.C.P.]
D.O.C.P. [D.O.C.P DDR4-3200 16-18-18-38-1.35V]
BCLK Frequency [100.0000]
Custom CPU Core Ratio [Auto]
> CPU Core Ratio [Auto]
Overclocking Enhancement [Auto]
Performance Bias [Auto]
Memory Frequency [DDR4-3200MHz]
Core Performance Boost [Auto]
SMT Mode [Auto]
Spread Spectrum [Auto]
EPU Power Saving Mode [Disabled]
TPU [Keep Current Settings]
CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
CPU SOC Voltage [Auto]
DRAM AB Voltage [1.35000]
DRAM CD Voltage [1.35000]
1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
1.05V SB Voltage [Auto]
Target TDP [Auto]
TRC_EOM [Auto]
TRTP_EOM [Auto]
TRRS_S_EOM [Auto]
TRRS_L_EOM [Auto]
TWTR_EOM [Auto]
TWTR_L_EOM [Auto]
TWCL_EOM [Auto]
TWR_EOM [Auto]
TFAW_EOM [Auto]
TRCT_EOM [Auto]
TREFI_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_DD_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_SD_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_SC_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
TRDRD_SCL_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_DD_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_SD_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_SC_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
TWRWR_SCL_EOM [Auto]
TWRRD_EOM [Auto]
TRDWR_EOM [Auto]
TWRRD_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
Mem Over Clock Fail Count [Auto]
DRAM CAS# Latency [16]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Read Delay [18]
DRAM RAS# to CAS# Write Delay [18]
DRAM RAS# PRE Time [18]
DRAM RAS# ACT Time [38]
Trc [Auto]
TrrdS [Auto]
TrrdL [Auto]
Tfaw [Auto]
TwtrS [Auto]
TwtrL [Auto]
Twr [Auto]
Trcpage [Auto]
TrdrdScl [Auto]
TwrwrScl [Auto]
Trfc [Auto]
Trfc2 [Auto]
Trfc4 [Auto]
Tcwl [Auto]
Trtp [Auto]
Trdwr [Auto]
Twrrd [Auto]
TwrwrSc [Auto]
TwrwrSd [Auto]
TwrwrDd [Auto]
TrdrdSc [Auto]
TrdrdSd [Auto]
TrdrdDd [Auto]
Tcke [Auto]
ProcODT [Auto]
Cmd2T [Auto]
Gear Down Mode [Auto]
Power Down Enable [Auto]
RttNom [Auto]
RttWr [Auto]
RttPark [Auto]
MemAddrCmdSetup [Auto]
MemCsOdtSetup [Auto]
MemCkeSetup [Auto]
MemCadBusClkDrvStren [Auto]
MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [Auto]
MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [Auto]
MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [Auto]
VTTDDR AB Voltage [Auto]
VTTDDR CD Voltage [Auto]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA [Auto]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHB [Auto]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHC [Auto]
DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHD [Auto]
VPP DRAM AB [Auto]
VPP DRAM CD [Auto]
1.8V Standby Voltage [Auto]
CPU 3.3v AUX [Auto]
2.5V SB Voltage [Auto]
DRAM R1 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R2 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R3 Tune [Auto]
DRAM R4 Tune [Auto]
Sense MI Skew [Auto]
Sense MI Offset [Auto]
Clock Amplitude [Auto]
PLL Tune R1 [Auto]
PLL Tune R2 [Auto]
PCIE Tune R1 [Auto]
PCIE Tune R2 [Auto]
PCIE Tune R3 [Auto]
Ln2 Tune [Auto]
PLL Reference Voltage [Auto]
PLL Reference Voltage 2 [Auto]
Short Reset [Auto]
CLDO VDDP voltage [Auto]
CPU Load-line Calibration [Auto]
CPU Current Capability [Auto]
CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Auto]
VRM Spread Spectrum [Auto]
CPU Power Duty Control [T.Probe]
CPU Power Phase Control [Auto]
CPU Power Thermal Control [120]
VDDSOC Load-line Calibration [Auto]
VDDSOC Current Capability [Auto]
VDDSOC Switching Frequency [Auto]
VDDSOC Phase Control [Auto]
VDDSOC Power Thermal Control [120]
DRAM Current Capability(CHA, CHB) [100%]
DRAM Current Capability(CHC, CHD) [100%]
DRAM Power Phase Control(CHA, CHB) [Extreme]
DRAM Power Phase Control(CHC, CHD) [Extreme]
DRAM Switching Frequency(CHA, CHB) [Auto]
DRAM Switching Frequency(CHC, CHD) [Auto]
DRAM VBoot Voltage AB [Auto]
DRAM VBoot Voltage CD [Auto]
Security Device Support [Enable]
Security Device Support [Enable]
Pending operation [None]
Platform Hierarchy [Enabled]
Storage Hierarchy [Enabled]
Endorsement Hierarchy [Enabled]
TPM2.0 UEFI Spec Version [TCG_2]
Physical Presence Spec Version [1.3]
TPM Device Selection [Discrete TPM]
Erase fTPM NV for factory reset [Enabled]
SATA Port Enable [Enabled]
PT Aggresive SATA Device Sleep Port 0 [Auto]
PT Aggresive SATA Device Sleep Port 1 [Auto]
PT XHCI GEN1 [Auto]
PT XHCI GEN2 [Auto]
PT USB Equalization4 [Auto]
PT USB Redriver [Auto]
U31G2_1 [Enabled]
USB3.1_2 [Enabled]
U31G1_9 [Enabled]
U31G1_10 [Enabled]
U31G1_11 [Enabled]
U31G1_12 [Enabled]
PT USB30 PORT4 [Enabled]
PT USB30 PORT5 [Enabled]
USB13 [Enabled]
USB14 [Enabled]
USB_3 [Enabled]
USB_5 [Enabled]
USB_6 [Enabled]
USB_4 [Enabled]
PT PCIE PORT 0 [Auto]
PT PCIE PORT 1 [Auto]
PT PCIE PORT 2 [Auto]
PT PCIE PORT 3 [Auto]
PT PCIE PORT 4 [Auto]
PT PCIE PORT 5 [Auto]
PT PCIE PORT 6 [Auto]
PT PCIE PORT 7 [Auto]
Onboard LED [Disabled]
SATA Port Enable [Enabled]
SATA Mode [AHCI]
SMART Self Test [Enabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
Hot Plug [Disabled]
ErP Ready [Disabled]
Restore On AC Power Loss [Power Off]
Power On By PCI-E/PCI [Disabled]
Power On By RTC [Disabled]
HD Audio Controller [Enabled]
CPU PCIE Link Mode [Auto]
SB PCIE Link Mode [Auto]
PCIEX16_1 Bandwidth [X16 Mode]
PCIEX8_2 Bandwidth [X8 Mode]
PCIEX16_3 Bandwidth [X16 Mode]
PCIE_X8/X4_4 Bandwidth [X4 Mode]
Asmedia USB 3.1 Controller [Enabled]
USB Type C Power Switch for U31G2_1 [Auto]
USB Type C Power Switch for U31G2_EC1 [Auto]
When system is in working state [On]
When system is in sleep, hibernate or soft off states [On]
Intel LAN Controller [Enabled]
Intel LAN OPROM [Disabled]
Wi-Fi Controller [Enabled]
Bluetooth Controller [Enabled]
NX Mode [Enabled]
SVM Mode [Disabled]
Network Stack [Disabled]
Debug Port Table [Disabled]
Debug Port Table 2 [Disabled]
Legacy USB Support [Enabled]
XHCI Hand-off [Enabled]
SanDisk [Auto]
Corsair Slider 3.0 1.00 [Auto]
U31G2_EC1 [Enabled]
U31G2_E2 [Enabled]
U31G2_1 [Enabled]
U31G1_1 [Enabled]
U31G1_2 [Enabled]
U31G1_3 [Enabled]
U31G1_4 [Enabled]
U31G1_5 [Enabled]
U31G1_6 [Enabled]
U31G1_7 [Enabled]
U31G1_8 [Enabled]
U31G1_9 [Enabled]
U31G1_10 [Enabled]
U31G1_11 [Enabled]
U31G1_12 [Enabled]
USB13 [Enabled]
USB14 [Enabled]
Hide Asus Logo [Disabled]
CPU Temperature [Monitor]
MotherBoard Temperature [Monitor]
VRM Temperature [Monitor]
PCH Temperature [Monitor]
T_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
T_Sensor2 Temperature [Monitor]
DIMM.2 sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
DIMM.2 sensor2 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor2 Temperature [Monitor]
EXT_Sensor3 Temperature [Monitor]
CPU Fan Speed [Ignore]
Chassis Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
Chassis Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
HAMP Fan Speed [Monitor]
W_PUMP+ Speed [Monitor]
CPU Optional Fan Speed [Ignore]
COV Fan Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
Extension Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
W FLOW1 Speed [Monitor]
Water In T Sensor Temperature [Monitor]
Water Out T Sensor Temperature [Monitor]
W FLOW2 Speed [Monitor]
WB In T Sensor Temperature [Monitor]
WB Out T Sensor Temperature [Monitor]
CPU Core Voltage [Monitor]
3.3V Voltage [Monitor]
5V Voltage [Monitor]
12V Voltage [Monitor]
CPU Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
CPU Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
CPU Fan Speed Lower Limit [200 RPM]
CPU Fan Profile [Manual]
CPU Upper Temperature [60]
CPU Fan Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
CPU Middle Temperature [45]
CPU Fan Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [60]
CPU Lower Temperature [40]
CPU Fan Min. Duty Cycle (%) [60]
W_PUMP+ Control [Disabled]
COV Fan Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
COV Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
COV Fan Upper Temperature [95]
COV Fan Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
COV Fan Middle Temperature [90]
COV Fan Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
COV Fan Lower Temperature [70]
COV Fan Min. Duty Cycle (%) [60]
Allow Fan Stop [Enabled]
Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [T_Sensor2]
Chassis Fan 1 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
Chassis Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Chassis Fan 1 Profile [Standard]
Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [T_Sensor2]
Chassis Fan 2 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
Chassis Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Chassis Fan 2 Profile [Standard]
HAMP Fan Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
HAMP Fan Source [CPU]
HAMP Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
HAMP Fan Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
HAMP Fan Profile [Standard]
Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [T_Sensor2]
Extension Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Extension Fan 1 Profile [Manual]
Extension Fan 1 Upper Temperature [60]
Extension Fan 1 Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
Extension Fan 1 Middle Temperature [25]
Extension Fan 1 Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [38]
Extension Fan 1 Lower Temperature [10]
Extension Fan 1 Min. Duty Cycle (%) [38]
Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [T_Sensor2]
Extension Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Extension Fan 2 Profile [Manual]
Extension Fan 2 Upper Temperature [60]
Extension Fan 2 Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
Extension Fan 2 Middle Temperature [45]
Extension Fan 2 Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [60]
Extension Fan 2 Lower Temperature [40]
Extension Fan 2 Min. Duty Cycle (%) [5]
Allow Fan Stop [Disabled]
Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [T_Sensor2]
Extension Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
Extension Fan 3 Profile [Manual]
Extension Fan 3 Upper Temperature [60]
Extension Fan 3 Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
Extension Fan 3 Middle Temperature [45]
Extension Fan 3 Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [60]
Extension Fan 3 Lower Temperature [40]
Extension Fan 3 Min. Duty Cycle (%) [37]
Allow Fan Stop [Disabled]
OnChip SATA Channel [Enabled]
OnChip SATA Type [AHCI]
U31G1_1 [Enabled]
U31G1_2 [Enabled]
U31G1_3 [Enabled]
U31G1_4 [Enabled]
U31G1_5 [Enabled]
U31G1_6 [Enabled]
U31G1_7 [Enabled]
U31G1_8 [Enabled]
IR Config [Disabled]
SD Mode [Disabled]
SdForce18 Enable [Disabled]
SD Mode configuration [AMDA]
Uart 0 Enable [Disabled]
Uart 1 Enable [Disabled]
I2C 0 Enable [Disabled]
I2C 1 Enable [Disabled]
I2C 2 Enable [Disabled]
I2C 3 Enable [Disabled]
Restore On AC Power Loss [Power Off]
GPIO Devices Support [Disabled]
ESATA Port On Port 0 [Disabled]
ESATA Port On Port 1 [Disabled]
ESATA Port On Port 2 [Disabled]
ESATA Port On Port 3 [Disabled]
ESATA Port On Port 4 [Disabled]
ESATA Port On Port 5 [Disabled]
ESATA Port On Port 6 [Disabled]
ESATA Port On Port 7 [Disabled]
SATA Power On Port 0 [Enabled]
SATA Power On Port 1 [Enabled]
SATA Power On Port 2 [Enabled]
SATA Power On Port 3 [Enabled]
SATA Power On Port 4 [Enabled]
SATA Power On Port 5 [Enabled]
SATA Power On Port 6 [Enabled]
SATA Power On Port 7 [Enabled]
SATA Port 0 MODE [Auto]
SATA Port 1 MODE [Auto]
SATA Port 2 MODE [Auto]
SATA Port 3 MODE [Auto]
SATA Port 4 MODE [Auto]
SATA Port 5 MODE [Auto]
SATA Port 6 MODE [Auto]
SATA Port 7 MODE [Auto]
SATA Hot-Removabel Support [Disabled]
SATA 6 AHCI Support [Disabled]
Int. Clk Differential Spread [Disabled]
SATA MAXGEN2 CAP OPTION [Disabled]
SATA CLK Mode Option [INT 100MHz]
Aggressive Link PM Capability [Enabled]
Port Multiplier Capability [Enabled]
SATA Ports Auto Clock Control [Enabled]
SATA Partial State Capability [Enabled]
SATA FIS Based Switching [Enabled]
SATA Command Completion Coalescing Support [Disabled]
SATA Slumber State Capability [Enabled]
SATA MSI Capability Support [Disabled]
SATA Target Support 8 Devices [Disabled]
Generic Mode [Disabled]
SATA AHCI Enclosure [Disabled]
SATA SGPIO 0 [Disabled]
SATA SGPIO 1 [Disabled]
SATA PHY PLL [Disabled]
AC/DC Change Message Delivery [Disabled]
TimerTick Tracking [Enabled]
Clock Interrupt Tag [Enabled]
EHCI Traffic Handling [Disabled]
Fusion Message C Multi-Core [Disabled]
Fusion Message C State [Disabled]
SPI Auto Mode [Disabled]
SPI Read Mode [Default]
SPI 100MHz Support [Enabled]
SPI Normal Speed [33MHz]
SPI Fast Read Speed [Default]
SPI Burst Write [Disabled]
I2C 0 D3 Support [Enabled]
I2C 1 D3 Support [Enabled]
I2C 2 D3 Support [Enabled]
I2C 3 D3 Support [Enabled]
UART 0 D3 Support [Enabled]
UART 1 D3 Support [Enabled]
SATA D3 Support [Enabled]
EHCI D3 Support [Enabled]
XHCI D3 Support [Enabled]
SD D3 Support [Enabled]
S0I3 [Disabled]
Chipset Power Saving Features [Enabled]
SB Clock Spread Spectrum [Enabled]
SB Clock Spread Spectrum Option [-0.375%]
HPET In SB [Enabled]
MsiDis in HPET [Disabled]
_OSC For PCI0 [Enabled]
USB Phy Power Down [Disabled]
PCIB_CLK_Stop Override [0]
USB MSI Option [Disabled]
LPC MSI Option [Disabled]
PCIBridge MSI Option [Disabled]
AB MSI Option [Disabled]
SB C1E Support [Disabled]
SB Hardware Reduced Support [Disabled]
GPP Serial Debug Bus Enable [Disabled]
Fast Boot [Enabled]
Next Boot after AC Power Loss [Normal Boot]
Boot Logo Display [Auto]
POST Delay Time [3 sec]
Boot up NumLock State [Enabled]
Wait For 'F1' If Error [Enabled]
Option ROM Messages [Enabled]
Interrupt 19 Capture [Disabled]
Setup Mode [Advanced Mode]
Launch CSM [Enabled]
Boot Device Control [UEFI and Legacy OPROM]
Boot from Network Devices [Legacy only]
Boot from Storage Devices [Legacy only]
Boot from PCI-E Expansion Devices [Legacy only]
OS Type [Other OS]
SATA Boot Only [Disabled]
USB Boot [Enabled]
Watchdog Support [Disabled]
ASUS RMT Tool Support [Disabled]
Setup Animator [Disabled]
Load from Profile [1]
Profile Name [Fans_set]
Save to Profile [1]
CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
VDDSOC Voltage [Auto]
1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
BCLK Frequency [Auto]
CPU Ratio [Auto]
Bus Interface [PCIEX16_1]



computer info dump


Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



HWiNFO64 Version 5.60-3280

WHITEBOX

[Current Computer]
Computer Name: WHITEBOX
Computer Description: White_box
[Operating System]
Operating System: Microsoft Windows 10 Professional (x64) Build 16299.125 (1709/RS3)
UEFI Boot: Present

Central Processor(s)

[CPU Unit Count]
Number Of Processor Packages (Physical): 1
Number Of Processor Cores: 16
Number Of Logical Processors: 32

AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X

[General Information]
Processor Name: AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X
Original Processor Frequency: 4100.0 MHz
Original Processor Frequency [MHz]: 4100
CPU ID: 00800F11
Extended CPU ID: 00800F11
CPU Brand Name: AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X 16-Core Processor
CPU Vendor: AuthenticAMD
CPU Stepping: ZP-B1
CPU Code Name: ThreadRipper
CPU Technology: 14 nm
CPU Platform: SP3r2 (TR4)
Microcode Update Revision: 8001129
SMU Firmware Revision: 4.25.100.0
Number of CPU Cores: 16
Number of Logical CPUs: 32
[Operating Points]
CPU HFM (Maximum): 4100.0 MHz = 41.00 x 100.0 MHz
CPU CPB: [Unlimited]
CPU Current: 2199.5 MHz = 22.00 x 100.0 MHz @ 1.4500 V
CPU Bus Type: UMI
[Cache and TLB]
L1 Cache: Instruction: 16 x 64 KBytes, Data: 16 x 32 KBytes
L2 Cache: Integrated: 16 x 512 KBytes
L3 Cache: 2 x 16 MBytes
Instruction TLB: Fully associative, 64 entries
Data TLB: Fully associative, 64 entries
[Standard Feature Flags]
FPU on Chip Present
Enhanced Virtual-86 Mode Present
I/O Breakpoints Present
Page Size Extensions Present
Time Stamp Counter Present
Pentium-style Model Specific Registers Present
Physical Address Extension Present
Machine Check Exception Present
CMPXCHG8B Instruction Present
APIC On Chip / PGE (AMD) Present
Fast System Call Present
Memory Type Range Registers Present
Page Global Feature Present
Machine Check Architecture Present
CMOV Instruction Present
Page Attribute Table Present
36-bit Page Size Extensions Present
Processor Number Not Present
CLFLUSH Instruction Present
Debug Trace and EMON Store Not Present
Internal ACPI Support Not Present
MMX Technology Present
Fast FP Save/Restore (IA MMX-2) Present
Streaming SIMD Extensions Present
Streaming SIMD Extensions 2 Present
Self-Snoop Not Present
Multi-Threading Capable Present
Automatic Clock Control Not Present
IA-64 Processor Not Present
Signal Break on FERR Not Present
Streaming SIMD Extensions 3 Present
PCLMULQDQ Instruction Support Present
MONITOR/MWAIT Support Present
Supplemental Streaming SIMD Extensions 3 Present
FMA Extension Present
CMPXCHG16B Support Present
Streaming SIMD Extensions 4.1 Present
Streaming SIMD Extensions 4.2 Present
x2APIC Not Present
POPCNT Instruction Present
AES Cryptography Support Present
XSAVE/XRSTOR/XSETBV/XGETBV Instructions Present
XGETBV/XSETBV OS Enabled Present
AVX Support Present
Half-Precision Convert (CVT16) Present
[Extended Feature Flags]
FPU on Chip Present
Enhanced Virtual-86 Mode Present
I/O Breakpoints Present
Page Size Extensions Present
Time Stamp Counter Present
AMD-style Model Specific Registers Present
Machine Check Exception Present
CMPXCHG8B Instruction Present
APIC On Chip Present
SYSCALL and SYSRET Instructions Present
Memory Type Range Registers Present
Page Global Feature Present
Machine Check Architecture Present
CMOV Instruction Present
Page Attribute Table Present
36-bit Page Size Extensions Present
Multi-Processing / Brand feature Not Present
No Execute Present
MMX Technology Present
MMX+ Extensions Present
Fast FP Save/Restore Present
Fast FP Save/Restore Optimizations Present
1 GB large page support Present
RDTSCP Instruction Present
x86-64 Long Mode Present
3DNow! Technology Extensions Not Present
3DNow! Technology Not Present
Bit Manipulation Instructions Set 1 Present
Bit Manipulation Instructions Set 2 Present
Advanced Vector Extensions 2 (AVX2) Present
Advanced Vector Extensions 512 (AVX-512) Not Present
AVX-512 Prefetch Instructions Not Present
AVX-512 Exponential and Reciprocal Instructions Not Present
AVX-512 Conflict Detection Instructions Not Present
AVX-512 Doubleword and Quadword Instructions Not Present
AVX-512 Byte and Word Instructions Not Present
AVX-512 Vector Length Extensions Not Present
AVX-512 52-bit Integer FMA Instructions Not Present
Secure Hash Algorithm (SHA) Extensions Present
Software Guard Extensions (SGX) Support Not Present
Supervisor Mode Execution Protection (SMEP) Present
Supervisor Mode Access Prevention (SMAP) Present
Hardware Lock Elision (HLE) Not Present
Restricted Transactional Memory (RTM) Not Present
Memory Protection Extensions (MPX) Not Present
Read/Write FS/GS Base Instructions Present
Enhanced Performance String Instruction Not Present
INVPCID Instruction Not Present
RDSEED Instruction Present
Multi-precision Add Carry Instructions (ADX) Present
PCOMMIT Instructions Not Present
CLFLUSHOPT Instructions Present
CLWB Instructions Not Present
TSC_THREAD_OFFSET Not Present
Platform Quality of Service Monitoring (PQM) Not Present
Platform Quality of Service Enforcement (PQE) Not Present
FPU Data Pointer updated only on x87 Exceptions Not Present
Deprecated FPU CS and FPU DS Not Present
Intel Processor Trace Not Present
PREFETCHWT1 Instruction Not Present
AVX-512 Vector Bit Manipulation Instructions Not Present
User-Mode Instruction Prevention Not Present
Protection Keys for User-mode Pages Not Present
OS Enabled Protection Keys Not Present
AVX-512 VPOPCNTD/VPOPCNTQ Instructions Not Present
Read Processor ID Not Present
SGX Launch Configuration Not Present
AVX-512 Deep Learning Enhanced Word Variable Precision Not Present
AVX-512 Deep Learning Floating-point Single Precision Not Present
LAHF/SAHF Long Mode Support Present
Core Multi-Processing Legacy Mode Present
Secure Virtual Machine Present
Extended APIC Register Space Present
LOCK MOV CR0 Support Present
Advanced Bit Manipulation Present
SSE4A Support Present
Misaligned SSE Mode Present
PREFETCH(W) Support Present
OS Visible Work-around Support Present
Instruction Based Sampling Not Present
XOP Instruction Support Not Present
SKINIT, STGI, and DEV Support Present
Watchdog Timer Support Present
TBM0 Instruction Support Not Present
Lightweight Profiling Support Not Present
FMA4 Instruction Support Not Present
Translation Cache Extension Present
NodeId Support Not Present
Trailing Bit Manipulation Not Present
Topology Extensions Present
Core Performance Counter Extensions Present
NB Performance Counter Extensions Present
Streaming Performance Monitor Architecture Not Present
Data Breakpoint Extension Present
Performance Time-Stamp Counter Not Present
L2I Performance Counter Extensions Present
MWAITX/MONITORX Support Present
[Enhanced Features]
Core Performance Boost Supported, Disabled
[Memory Ranges]
Maximum Physical Address Size: 48-bit (256 TBytes)
Maximum Virtual Address Size: 48-bit (256 TBytes)
[MTRRs]
Range 0-80000000 (0MB-2048MB) Type: Write Back (WB)
Range 7C000000-80000000 (1984MB-2048MB) Type: Uncacheable (UC)

Motherboard

[Computer]
Computer Brand Name: Unknown on Noname
[Motherboard]
Motherboard Model: ASUS ROG ZENITH EXTREME
Motherboard Chipset: AMD X399 (Promontory)
Motherboard Slots: 4xPCI Express x1, 1xPCI Express x2, 2xPCI Express x4, 2xPCI Express x8, 2xPCI Express x16
PCI Express Version Supported: v3.0
USB Version Supported: v3.1
[BIOS]
BIOS Manufacturer: American Megatrends
BIOS Date: 12/13/2017
BIOS Version: 0901
AMD AGESA Version: ThreadRipperPI-SP3r2-0.0.6.0
UEFI BIOS: Capable
Super-IO/LPC Chip: ITE IT8665E

ACPI Devices

AMD I2C Controller

Device Name: AMD I2C Controller
[Assigned Resources]
IRQ: 10
[Alternative 1]
Memory Location: FEDC2000 - FEDC2FFF
IRQ: 10

AMD GPIO Controller

Device Name: AMD GPIO Controller
[Assigned Resources]
IRQ: 7
[Alternative 1]
Memory Location: FED81500 - FED818FF
IRQ: 7

AMD GPIO Controller

Device Name: AMD GPIO Controller
[Assigned Resources]
Memory Location: FEC30000 - FEC30FFF
[Alternative 1]
Memory Location: FEC30000 - FEC30FFF

Programmable interrupt controller

Device Name: Programmable interrupt controller
[Assigned Resources]
I/O Port: 0020 - 0021
IRQ: 65792
[Alternative 1]
I/O Port: 0020 - 0021
I/O Port: 00A0 - 00A1

System timer

Device Name: System timer
[Assigned Resources]
I/O Port: 0040 - 0043
[Alternative 1]
I/O Port: 0040 - 0043
IRQ: 0

High precision event timer

Device Name: High precision event timer
[Assigned Resources]
Memory Location: FED00000 - FED003FF
[Alternative 1]
Memory Location: FED00000 - FED003FF
IRQ: 0
IRQ: 8

Direct memory access controller

Device Name: Direct memory access controller
[Assigned Resources]
I/O Port: 0089 - 008B
DMA: 4
[Alternative 1]
I/O Port: 0000 - 000F
I/O Port: 0081 - 0083
I/O Port: 0087
I/O Port: 0089 - 008B
I/O Port: 008F
I/O Port: 00C0 - 00DF
DMA: 4

System speaker

Device Name: System speaker
[Assigned Resources]
I/O Port: 0061
[Alternative 1]
I/O Port: 0061

PCI Express Root Complex

Device Name: PCI Express Root Complex
[Assigned Resources]
I/O Port: 0000 - FFFFFFFF
I/O Port: 0000 - 7FFF
Memory Location: ECC00000 - ECBFFFFF
[Alternative 1]
I/O Port: 0000 - 03AF
I/O Port: 03E0 - 0CF7
I/O Port: 0000 - 7FFF
Memory Location: 000C0000 - 000DFFFF
Memory Location: ECC00000 - EFFFFFFF

PCI Express Root Complex

Device Name: PCI Express Root Complex
[Assigned Resources]
I/O Port: 03B0 - 03AF
Memory Location: 000A0000 - 000BFFFF
[Alternative 1]
I/O Port: 03B0 - 03DF
I/O Port: 8000 - FFFF
Memory Location: 000A0000 - 000BFFFF
Memory Location: CE000000 - ECBFFFFF

System CMOS/real time clock

Device Name: System CMOS/real time clock
[Assigned Resources]
I/O Port: 0070 - 0071
[Alternative 1]
I/O Port: 0070 - 0071

System board

Device Name: System board
[Assigned Resources]
Memory Location: F0000000 - F7FFFFFF
[Alternative 1]
Memory Location: F0000000 - F7FFFFFF

Motherboard resources

Device Name: Motherboard resources
[Assigned Resources]
I/O Port: 02A0 - 02AF
[Alternative 1]
I/O Port: 02A0 - 02AF
I/O Port: 0230 - 023F
I/O Port: 0290 - 029F

Motherboard resources

Device Name: Motherboard resources
[Assigned Resources]
Memory Location: ECB00000 - ECB7FFFF
[Alternative 1]
Memory Location: ECB00000 - ECB7FFFF

Motherboard resources

Device Name: Motherboard resources
[Assigned Resources]
Memory Location: FEB00000 - FEBFFFFF
[Alternative 1]
Memory Location: FEB00000 - FEBFFFFF

Motherboard resources

Device Name: Motherboard resources
[Assigned Resources]
I/O Port: 0010 - 001F
I/O Port: 0067 - 006F
I/O Port: 0088
I/O Port: 00B1
I/O Port: 04D6
I/O Port: 0C52
I/O Port: 0000 - 0C6E
I/O Port: 0CD2 - 0CD3
I/O Port: 0800 - 089F
I/O Port: 0910 - 091F
Memory Location: 00000000 - 0000008F
IRQ: 1114369
IRQ: 1114369
[Alternative 1]
I/O Port: 0010 - 001F
I/O Port: 0022 - 003F
I/O Port: 0063
I/O Port: 0065
I/O Port: 0067 - 006F
I/O Port: 0072 - 007F
I/O Port: 0080
I/O Port: 0084 - 0086
I/O Port: 0088
I/O Port: 008C - 008E
I/O Port: 0090 - 009F
I/O Port: 00A2 - 00BF
I/O Port: 00B1
I/O Port: 00E0 - 00EF
I/O Port: 04D0 - 04D1
I/O Port: 040B
I/O Port: 04D6
I/O Port: 0C00 - 0C01
I/O Port: 0C14
I/O Port: 0C50 - 0C51
I/O Port: 0C52
I/O Port: 0C6C
I/O Port: 0C6F
I/O Port: 0CD0 - 0CD1
I/O Port: 0CD2 - 0CD3
I/O Port: 0CD4 - 0CD5
I/O Port: 0CD6 - 0CD7
I/O Port: 0CD8 - 0CDF
I/O Port: 0800 - 089F
I/O Port: 0B00 - 0B0F
I/O Port: 0B20 - 0B3F
I/O Port: 0900 - 090F
I/O Port: 0910 - 091F
Memory Location: FEC00000 - FEC00FFF
Memory Location: FEC01000 - FEC01FFF
Memory Location: FEDC0000 - FEDC0FFF
Memory Location: FEE00000 - FEE00FFF
Memory Location: FED80000 - FED8FFFF
Memory Location: FED61000 - FED70FFF
Memory Location: FEC10000 - FEC10FFF
Memory Location: FF000000 - FFFFFFFF

Microsoft ACPI-Compliant Embedded Controller

Device Name: Microsoft ACPI-Compliant Embedded Controller
[Assigned Resources]
I/O Port: 0062
[Alternative 1]
I/O Port: 0062
I/O Port: 0066

SMBIOS DMI

BIOS

BIOS Vendor: American Megatrends Inc.
BIOS Version: 0901
BIOS Release Date: 12/13/2017
BIOS Start Segment: F000
BIOS Size: 16384 KBytes
System BIOS Version: 5.13
ISA Support: Not Present
MCA Support: Not Present
EISA Support: Not Present
PCI Support: Present
PC Card (PCMCIA) Support: Not Present
Plug-and-Play Support: Not Present
APM Support: Present
Flash BIOS: Present
BIOS Shadow: Present
VL-VESA Support: Not Present
ESCD Support: Not Present
Boot from CD: Present
Selectable Boot: Present
BIOS ROM Socketed: Present
Boot from PC Card: Not Present
EDD Support: Present
NEC PC-98 Support: Not Present
ACPI Support: Present
USB Legacy Support: Present
AGP Support: Not Present
I2O Boot Support: Not Present
LS-120 Boot Support: Not Present
ATAPI ZIP Drive Boot Support: Not Present
IEE1394 Boot Support: Not Present
Smart Battery Support: Not Present
BIOS Boot Specification Support: Present
Function key-initiated Network Service Boot Support: Not Present
Targeted Content Distribution Support: Present
UEFI Specification Support: Present
Virtual Machine: Not Present

System

System Manufacturer: System manufacturer
Product Name: System Product Name
Product Version: System Version
Product Serial Number: System Serial Number
UUID: {AD0BEAE0-7AD1-11E7-B2D1-107B44913567}
SKU Number: SKU
Family: To be filled by O.E.M.

Mainboard

Mainboard Manufacturer: ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC.
Mainboard Name: ROG ZENITH EXTREME
Mainboard Version: Rev 1.xx
Mainboard Serial Number: 170706735801743
Asset Tag: Default string
Location in chassis: Default string

System Enclosure

Manufacturer: Default string
Case Type: Desktop
Version: Default string
Serial Number: Default string
Asset Tag Number: Default string

On Board Device

Device Description: To Be Filled By O.E.M.
Device Type: Video Adapter
Device Status: Enabled

OEM Strings

System Configuration Options

System Boot Information

Boot Status: No error occured

Additional Information

On Board Device

Device Description: Onboard IGD
Device Type: Video Adapter
Device Status: Enabled

On Board Device

Device Description: Onboard LAN
Device Type: Ethernet Adapter
Device Status: Enabled

On Board Device

Device Description: Onboard 1394
Device Type: Unknown
Device Status: Enabled

L1 - Cache

Socket Designation: L1 - Cache
Cache State: Enabled
Cache Type: Internal, Unified
Cache Scheme: Write-Back
Supported SRAM Type: Pipeline Burst
Current SRAM Type: Pipeline Burst
Cache Speed: 1 ns
Error Correction Type: Multi-bit ECC
Maximum Cache Size: 1536 KBytes
Installed Cache Size: 1536 KBytes
Cache Associativity: 8-way Set-Associative

L2 - Cache

Socket Designation: L2 - Cache
Cache State: Enabled
Cache Type: Internal, Unified
Cache Scheme: Write-Back
Supported SRAM Type: Pipeline Burst
Current SRAM Type: Pipeline Burst
Cache Speed: 1 ns
Error Correction Type: Multi-bit ECC
Maximum Cache Size: 8192 KBytes
Installed Cache Size: 8192 KBytes
Cache Associativity: 8-way Set-Associative

L3 - Cache

Socket Designation: L3 - Cache
Cache State: Enabled
Cache Type: Internal, Unified
Cache Scheme: Write-Back
Supported SRAM Type: Pipeline Burst
Current SRAM Type: Pipeline Burst
Cache Speed: 1 ns
Error Correction Type: Multi-bit ECC
Maximum Cache Size: 32768 KBytes
Installed Cache Size: 32768 KBytes
Cache Associativity: 32-way Set-Associative

Processor

Processor Manufacturer: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
Processor Version: AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X 16-Core Processor
External Clock: 100 MHz
Maximum Clock Supported: 4200 MHz
Current Clock: 4100 MHz
CPU Socket: Populated
CPU Status: Enabled
Processor Type: Central Processor
Processor Voltage: 1.5 V
Processor Upgrade: Socket SP3r2
Socket Designation: SP3r2

Memory Devices

32-bit Memory Error Information

Physical Memory Array

Array Location: System board
Array Use: System memory
Error Detecting Method: None
Memory Capacity: 512 GBytes
Memory Devices: 8

Memory Array Mapped Address

Starting Address: 00000000
Ending Address: 03FFFFFF
Partition Width: 8

32-bit Memory Error Information

Memory Device

Total Width: 64 bits
Data Width: 64 bits
Device Size: 8192 MBytes
Device Form Factor: DIMM
Device Locator: DIMM 0
Bank Locator: P0 CHANNEL A
Device Type: DDR4
Device Type Detail: Synchronous
Memory Speed: 2933 MHz
Manufacturer: Unknown
Serial Number: 00000000
Part Number: F4-3200C16-8GTZKW
Asset Tag: Unknown

Memory Device Mapped Address

Starting Address: 00000000
Ending Address: 00FFFFFF
Partition Row Position: Unknown
Interleave Position: Unknown
Interleave Data Depth: Unknown

32-bit Memory Error Information

Memory Device

Total Width: 64 bits
Data Width: 64 bits
Device Size: 8192 MBytes
Device Form Factor: DIMM
Device Locator: DIMM 1
Bank Locator: P0 CHANNEL A
Device Type: DDR4
Device Type Detail: Synchronous
Memory Speed: 2933 MHz
Manufacturer: Unknown
Serial Number: 00000000
Part Number: F4-3200C16-8GTZSW
Asset Tag: Unknown

Memory Device Mapped Address

Starting Address: 00000000
Ending Address: 00FFFFFF
Partition Row Position: Unknown
Interleave Position: Unknown
Interleave Data Depth: Unknown

32-bit Memory Error Information

Memory Device

Total Width: 64 bits
Data Width: 64 bits
Device Size: 8192 MBytes
Device Form Factor: DIMM
Device Locator: DIMM 0
Bank Locator: P0 CHANNEL B
Device Type: DDR4
Device Type Detail: Synchronous
Memory Speed: 2933 MHz
Manufacturer: Unknown
Serial Number: 00000000
Part Number: F4-3200C16-8GTZKW
Asset Tag: Unknown

32-bit Memory Error Information

Memory Device

Total Width: 64 bits
Data Width: 64 bits
Device Size: 8192 MBytes
Device Form Factor: DIMM
Device Locator: DIMM 1
Bank Locator: P0 CHANNEL B
Device Type: DDR4
Device Type Detail: Synchronous
Memory Speed: 2933 MHz
Manufacturer: Unknown
Serial Number: 00000000
Part Number: F4-3200C16-8GTZSW
Asset Tag: Unknown

32-bit Memory Error Information

Memory Device

Total Width: 64 bits
Data Width: 64 bits
Device Size: 8192 MBytes
Device Form Factor: DIMM
Device Locator: DIMM 0
Bank Locator: P0 CHANNEL C
Device Type: DDR4
Device Type Detail: Synchronous
Memory Speed: 2933 MHz
Manufacturer: Unknown
Serial Number: 00000000
Part Number: F4-3200C16-8GTZKW
Asset Tag: Unknown

32-bit Memory Error Information

Memory Device

Total Width: 64 bits
Data Width: 64 bits
Device Size: 8192 MBytes
Device Form Factor: DIMM
Device Locator: DIMM 1
Bank Locator: P0 CHANNEL C
Device Type: DDR4
Device Type Detail: Synchronous
Memory Speed: 2933 MHz
Manufacturer: Unknown
Serial Number: 00000000
Part Number: F4-3200C16-8GTZSW
Asset Tag: Unknown

32-bit Memory Error Information

Memory Device

Total Width: 64 bits
Data Width: 64 bits
Device Size: 8192 MBytes
Device Form Factor: DIMM
Device Locator: DIMM 0
Bank Locator: P0 CHANNEL D
Device Type: DDR4
Device Type Detail: Synchronous
Memory Speed: 2933 MHz
Manufacturer: Unknown
Serial Number: 00000000
Part Number: F4-3200C16-8GTZKW
Asset Tag: Unknown

32-bit Memory Error Information

Memory Device

Total Width: 64 bits
Data Width: 64 bits
Device Size: 8192 MBytes
Device Form Factor: DIMM
Device Locator: DIMM 1
Bank Locator: P0 CHANNEL D
Device Type: DDR4
Device Type Detail: Synchronous
Memory Speed: 2933 MHz
Manufacturer: Unknown
Serial Number: 00000000
Part Number: F4-3200C16-8GTZSW
Asset Tag: Unknown

Port Connectors

Network Port

Port Type: Network Port
Internal Reference: M.2(WIFI)
Internal Connector Type: None
External Reference: M.2(WIFI)
External Connector Type: Unknown

USB

Port Type: USB
Internal Reference: U31G1_5678
Internal Connector Type: None
External Reference: U31G1_5678
External Connector Type: Access Bus (USB)

USB

Port Type: USB
Internal Reference: U31G1_34
Internal Connector Type: None
External Reference: U31G1_34
External Connector Type: Access Bus (USB)

USB

Port Type: USB
Internal Reference: U31G1_12
Internal Connector Type: None
External Reference: U31G1_12
External Connector Type: Access Bus (USB)

USB

Port Type: USB
Internal Reference: U31G2_EC1
Internal Connector Type: None
External Reference: U31G2_EC1
External Connector Type: Access Bus (USB)

USB

Port Type: USB
Internal Reference: U31G2_E2
Internal Connector Type: None
External Reference: U31G2_E2
External Connector Type: Access Bus (USB)

Network Port

Port Type: Network Port
Internal Reference: LAN
Internal Connector Type: None
External Reference: LAN
External Connector Type: RJ-45

Audio Port

Port Type: Audio Port
Internal Reference: AUDIO
Internal Connector Type: None
External Reference: AUDIO
External Connector Type: Unknown

Port Connector

Port Type: Unknown
Internal Reference: CPU_FAN
Internal Connector Type: Unknown
External Reference: Unknown
External Connector Type: None

Port Connector

Port Type: Unknown
Internal Reference: CPU_OPT
Internal Connector Type: Unknown
External Reference: Unknown
External Connector Type: None

Port Connector

Port Type: Unknown
Internal Reference: H_AMP_FAN
Internal Connector Type: Unknown
External Reference: Unknown
External Connector Type: None

Port Connector

Port Type: Unknown
Internal Reference: CHA_FAN1
Internal Connector Type: Unknown
External Reference: Unknown
External Connector Type: None

Port Connector

Port Type: Unknown
Internal Reference: CHA_FAN2
Internal Connector Type: Unknown
External Reference: Unknown
External Connector Type: None

Port Connector

Port Type: Unknown
Internal Reference: W_PUMP+
Internal Connector Type: Unknown
External Reference: Unknown
External Connector Type: None

Port Connector

Port Type: Unknown
Internal Reference: W_FLOW
Internal Connector Type: Unknown
External Reference: Unknown
External Connector Type: None

Port Connector

Port Type: Unknown
Internal Reference: W_IN
Internal Connector Type: Unknown
External Reference: Unknown
External Connector Type: None

Port Connector

Port Type: Unknown
Internal Reference: W_OUT
Internal Connector Type: Unknown
External Reference: Unknown
External Connector Type: None

Port Connector

Port Type: Unknown
Internal Reference: WB_SENSOR
Internal Connector Type: Unknown
External Reference: Unknown
External Connector Type: None

Port Connector

Port Type: Unknown
Internal Reference: COV_FAN
Internal Connector Type: Unknown
External Reference: Unknown
External Connector Type: None

Port Connector

Port Type: Unknown
Internal Reference: EXT_FAN
Internal Connector Type: Unknown
External Reference: Unknown
External Connector Type: None

Port Connector

Port Type: Unknown
Internal Reference: T_SENSOR1
Internal Connector Type: Unknown
External Reference: Unknown
External Connector Type: None

Port Connector

Port Type: Unknown
Internal Reference: T_SENSOR2
Internal Connector Type: Unknown
External Reference: Unknown
External Connector Type: None

SATA

Port Type: SATA
Internal Reference: SATA6G_12
Internal Connector Type: SAS/SATA Plug Receptacle
External Reference: Unknown
External Connector Type: None

SATA

Port Type: SATA
Internal Reference: SATA6G_34
Internal Connector Type: SAS/SATA Plug Receptacle
External Reference: Unknown
External Connector Type: None

SATA

Port Type: SATA
Internal Reference: SATA6G_56
Internal Connector Type: SAS/SATA Plug Receptacle
External Reference: Unknown
External Connector Type: None

Port Connector

Port Type: Unknown
Internal Reference: M.2_1(SOCKET3)
Internal Connector Type: Unknown
External Reference: Unknown
External Connector Type: None

Port Connector

Port Type: Unknown
Internal Reference: U.2
Internal Connector Type: Unknown
External Reference: Unknown
External Connector Type: None

USB

Port Type: USB
Internal Reference: U31G2_1
Internal Connector Type: Access Bus (USB)
External Reference: Unknown
External Connector Type: None

USB

Port Type: USB
Internal Reference: U31G1_910
Internal Connector Type: Access Bus (USB)
External Reference: Unknown
External Connector Type: None

USB

Port Type: USB
Internal Reference: U31G1_1112
Internal Connector Type: Access Bus (USB)
External Reference: Unknown
External Connector Type: None

USB

Port Type: USB
Internal Reference: U31G1_1314
Internal Connector Type: Access Bus (USB)
External Reference: Unknown
External Connector Type: None

Port Connector

Port Type: Unknown
Internal Reference: RGE_HEADER1
Internal Connector Type: Unknown
External Reference: Unknown
External Connector Type: None

Port Connector

Port Type: Unknown
Internal Reference: RGE_HEADER2
Internal Connector Type: Unknown
External Reference: Unknown
External Connector Type: None

Port Connector

Port Type: Unknown
Internal Reference: LED_CON1
Internal Connector Type: Unknown
External Reference: Unknown
External Connector Type: None

Port Connector

Port Type: Unknown
Internal Reference: LED_CON2
Internal Connector Type: Unknown
External Reference: Unknown
External Connector Type: None

Port Connector

Port Type: Unknown
Internal Reference: LED_CON3
Internal Connector Type: Unknown
External Reference: Unknown
External Connector Type: None

Port Connector

Port Type: Unknown
Internal Reference: OLED_HEADER
Internal Connector Type: Unknown
External Reference: Unknown
External Connector Type: None

Port Connector

Port Type: Unknown
Internal Reference: ADD_HEADER
Internal Connector Type: Unknown
External Reference: Unknown
External Connector Type: None

Port Connector

Port Type: Unknown
Internal Reference: AAFP
Internal Connector Type: Unknown
External Reference: Unknown
External Connector Type: None

Port Connector

Port Type: Unknown
Internal Reference: TMP
Internal Connector Type: Unknown
External Reference: Unknown
External Connector Type: None

Port Connector

Port Type: Unknown
Internal Reference: F_PANEL
Internal Connector Type: Unknown
External Reference: Unknown
External Connector Type: None

System Slots

PCIEX16_1

Slot Designation: PCIEX16_1
Slot Type: PCI Express
Slot Usage: In use
Slot Data Bus Width: 16x / x16
Slot Length: Long

PCIEX8_2

Slot Designation: PCIEX8_2
Slot Type: PCI Express
Slot Usage: In use
Slot Data Bus Width: 8x / x8
Slot Length: Long

PCIEX4

Slot Designation: PCIEX4
Slot Type: PCI Express
Slot Usage: In use
Slot Data Bus Width: 4x / x4
Slot Length: Short

PCIEX16_3

Slot Designation: PCIEX16_3
Slot Type: PCI Express
Slot Usage: In use
Slot Data Bus Width: 16x / x16
Slot Length: Long

PCIEX1

Slot Designation: PCIEX1
Slot Type: PCI Express
Slot Usage: In use
Slot Data Bus Width: 1x / x1
Slot Length: Short

PCIE_X8/X4_4

Slot Designation: PCIE_X8/X4_4
Slot Type: PCI Express
Slot Usage: In use
Slot Data Bus Width: 8x / x8
Slot Length: Long

Memory

[General information]
Total Memory Size: 64 GBytes
Total Memory Size [MB]: 65536
[Current Performance Settings]
Current Memory Clock: 1466.4 MHz
Current Timing (tCAS-tRCD-tRP-tRAS): 16-18-18-38
Command Rate: 1T
Read to Read Delay (tRD_RD) Same Rank: 6T
Read to Read Delay (tRD_RD) Different DIMM: 5T
Write to Write Delay (tWR_WR) Same Rank: 6T
Write to Write Delay (tWR_WR) Different DIMM: 7T
Read to Precharge Delay (tRTP): 12T
Write to Precharge Delay (tWTP): 33T
Write Recovery Time (tWR): 22T
Row Cycle Time (tRC): 69T
Refresh Cycle Time (tRFC): 514T
Four Activate Window (tFAW): 31T

Row: 0 - 8 GB PC4-25600 DDR4 SDRAM G Skill F4-3200C16-8GTZKW

[General Module Information]
Module Number: 0
Module Size: 8 GBytes
Memory Type: DDR4 SDRAM
Module Type: Unbuffered DIMM (UDIMM)
Memory Speed: 1600.0 MHz (DDR4-3200 / PC4-25600)
Module Manufacturer: G Skill
Module Part Number: F4-3200C16-8GTZKW
Module Revision: 0.0
Module Serial Number: 0
Module Manufacturing Date: N/A
Module Manufacturing Location: 0
SDRAM Manufacturer: SK Hynix
DRAM Steppping: 0.0
Error Check/Correction: None
[Module Characteristics]
Row Address Bits: 16
Column Address Bits: 10
Module Density: 8192 Mb
Number Of Ranks: 1
Device Width: 8 bits
Bus Width: 64 bits
Die Count: 1
Module Nominal Voltage (VDD): 1.2 V
Minimum SDRAM Cycle Time (tCKAVGmin): 0.93800 ns
Maximum SDRAM Cycle Time (tCKAVGmax): 1.60000 ns
CAS# Latencies Supported: 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16
Minimum CAS# Latency Time (tAAmin): 13.750 ns
Minimum RAS# to CAS# Delay (tRCDmin): 13.750 ns
Minimum Row Precharge Time (tRPmin): 13.750 ns
Minimum Active to Precharge Time (tRASmin): 33.000 ns
Supported Module Timing at 1066.1 MHz: 15-15-15-36
Supported Module Timing at 1000.0 MHz: 14-14-14-33
Supported Module Timing at 933.3 MHz: 13-13-13-31
Supported Module Timing at 866.7 MHz: 12-12-12-29
Supported Module Timing at 800.0 MHz: 11-11-11-27
Supported Module Timing at 733.3 MHz: 11-11-11-25
Supported Module Timing at 666.7 MHz: 10-10-10-22
Minimum Active to Active/Refresh Time (tRCmin): 46.750 ns
Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC1min): 350.000 ns
Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC2min): 260.000 ns
Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC4min): 160.000 ns
Minimum Four Activate Window Delay Time (tFAWmin): 21.000 ns
Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Different Bank Group (tRRD_Smin): 3.700 ns
Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Same Bank Group (tRRD_Lmin): 5.300 ns
Minimum CAS to CAS Delay Time - Same Bank Group (tCCD_Lmin): 5.625 ns
[Features]
Module Temperature Sensor (TSOD): Not Supported
Module Nominal Height: 31 - 32 mm
Module Maximum Thickness (Front): 1 - 2 mm
Module Maximum Thickness (Back): 1 - 2 mm
Address Mapping from Edge Connector to DRAM: Standard
[Intel Extreme Memory Profile (XMP)]
XMP Revision: 2.0
[Certified Profile [Enabled]]
Module VDD Voltage Level: 1.35 V
Minimum SDRAM Cycle Time (tCKAVGmin): 0.625 ns
CAS# Latencies Supported: 16
Minimum CAS# Latency Time (tAAmin): 10.000 ns
Minimum RAS# to CAS# Delay (tRCDmin): 11.250 ns
Minimum Row Precharge Time (tRPmin): 11.250 ns
Minimum Active to Precharge Time (tRASmin): 23.750 ns
Supported Module Timing at 1600.0 MHz: 16-18-18-38
Minimum Active to Active/Refresh Time (tRCmin): 35.000 ns
Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC1min): 350.000 ns
Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC2min): 260.000 ns
Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC4min): 160.000 ns
Minimum Four Activate Window Delay Time (tFAWmin): 24.000 ns
Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Different Bank Group (tRRD_Smin): 3.500 ns
Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Same Bank Group (tRRD_Lmin): 5.000 ns

Row: 1 - 8 GB PC4-25600 DDR4 SDRAM G Skill F4-3200C16-8GTZSW

[General Module Information]
Module Number: 1
Module Size: 8 GBytes
Memory Type: DDR4 SDRAM
Module Type: Unbuffered DIMM (UDIMM)
Memory Speed: 1600.0 MHz (DDR4-3200 / PC4-25600)
Module Manufacturer: G Skill
Module Part Number: F4-3200C16-8GTZSW
Module Revision: 0.0
Module Serial Number: 0
Module Manufacturing Date: N/A
Module Manufacturing Location: 0
SDRAM Manufacturer: SK Hynix
DRAM Steppping: 0.0
Error Check/Correction: None
[Module Characteristics]
Row Address Bits: 16
Column Address Bits: 10
Module Density: 8192 Mb
Number Of Ranks: 1
Device Width: 8 bits
Bus Width: 64 bits
Die Count: 1
Module Nominal Voltage (VDD): 1.2 V
Minimum SDRAM Cycle Time (tCKAVGmin): 0.93800 ns
Maximum SDRAM Cycle Time (tCKAVGmax): 1.60000 ns
CAS# Latencies Supported: 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16
Minimum CAS# Latency Time (tAAmin): 13.750 ns
Minimum RAS# to CAS# Delay (tRCDmin): 13.750 ns
Minimum Row Precharge Time (tRPmin): 13.750 ns
Minimum Active to Precharge Time (tRASmin): 33.000 ns
Supported Module Timing at 1066.1 MHz: 15-15-15-36
Supported Module Timing at 1000.0 MHz: 14-14-14-33
Supported Module Timing at 933.3 MHz: 13-13-13-31
Supported Module Timing at 866.7 MHz: 12-12-12-29
Supported Module Timing at 800.0 MHz: 11-11-11-27
Supported Module Timing at 733.3 MHz: 11-11-11-25
Supported Module Timing at 666.7 MHz: 10-10-10-22
Minimum Active to Active/Refresh Time (tRCmin): 46.750 ns
Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC1min): 350.000 ns
Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC2min): 260.000 ns
Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC4min): 160.000 ns
Minimum Four Activate Window Delay Time (tFAWmin): 21.000 ns
Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Different Bank Group (tRRD_Smin): 3.700 ns
Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Same Bank Group (tRRD_Lmin): 5.300 ns
Minimum CAS to CAS Delay Time - Same Bank Group (tCCD_Lmin): 5.625 ns
[Features]
Module Temperature Sensor (TSOD): Not Supported
Module Nominal Height: 31 - 32 mm
Module Maximum Thickness (Front): 1 - 2 mm
Module Maximum Thickness (Back): 1 - 2 mm
Address Mapping from Edge Connector to DRAM: Standard
[Intel Extreme Memory Profile (XMP)]
XMP Revision: 2.0
[Certified Profile [Enabled]]
Module VDD Voltage Level: 1.35 V
Minimum SDRAM Cycle Time (tCKAVGmin): 0.625 ns
CAS# Latencies Supported: 16
Minimum CAS# Latency Time (tAAmin): 10.000 ns
Minimum RAS# to CAS# Delay (tRCDmin): 11.250 ns
Minimum Row Precharge Time (tRPmin): 11.250 ns
Minimum Active to Precharge Time (tRASmin): 23.750 ns
Supported Module Timing at 1600.0 MHz: 16-18-18-38
Minimum Active to Active/Refresh Time (tRCmin): 35.000 ns
Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC1min): 350.000 ns
Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC2min): 260.000 ns
Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC4min): 160.000 ns
Minimum Four Activate Window Delay Time (tFAWmin): 24.000 ns
Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Different Bank Group (tRRD_Smin): 3.500 ns
Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Same Bank Group (tRRD_Lmin): 5.000 ns

Row: 2 - 8 GB PC4-25600 DDR4 SDRAM G Skill F4-3200C16-8GTZKW

[General Module Information]
Module Number: 2
Module Size: 8 GBytes
Memory Type: DDR4 SDRAM
Module Type: Unbuffered DIMM (UDIMM)
Memory Speed: 1600.0 MHz (DDR4-3200 / PC4-25600)
Module Manufacturer: G Skill
Module Part Number: F4-3200C16-8GTZKW
Module Revision: 0.0
Module Serial Number: 0
Module Manufacturing Date: N/A
Module Manufacturing Location: 0
SDRAM Manufacturer: SK Hynix
DRAM Steppping: 0.0
Error Check/Correction: None
[Module Characteristics]
Row Address Bits: 16
Column Address Bits: 10
Module Density: 8192 Mb
Number Of Ranks: 1
Device Width: 8 bits
Bus Width: 64 bits
Die Count: 1
Module Nominal Voltage (VDD): 1.2 V
Minimum SDRAM Cycle Time (tCKAVGmin): 0.93800 ns
Maximum SDRAM Cycle Time (tCKAVGmax): 1.60000 ns
CAS# Latencies Supported: 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16
Minimum CAS# Latency Time (tAAmin): 13.750 ns
Minimum RAS# to CAS# Delay (tRCDmin): 13.750 ns
Minimum Row Precharge Time (tRPmin): 13.750 ns
Minimum Active to Precharge Time (tRASmin): 33.000 ns
Supported Module Timing at 1066.1 MHz: 15-15-15-36
Supported Module Timing at 1000.0 MHz: 14-14-14-33
Supported Module Timing at 933.3 MHz: 13-13-13-31
Supported Module Timing at 866.7 MHz: 12-12-12-29
Supported Module Timing at 800.0 MHz: 11-11-11-27
Supported Module Timing at 733.3 MHz: 11-11-11-25
Supported Module Timing at 666.7 MHz: 10-10-10-22
Minimum Active to Active/Refresh Time (tRCmin): 46.750 ns
Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC1min): 350.000 ns
Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC2min): 260.000 ns
Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC4min): 160.000 ns
Minimum Four Activate Window Delay Time (tFAWmin): 21.000 ns
Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Different Bank Group (tRRD_Smin): 3.700 ns
Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Same Bank Group (tRRD_Lmin): 5.300 ns
Minimum CAS to CAS Delay Time - Same Bank Group (tCCD_Lmin): 5.625 ns
[Features]
Module Temperature Sensor (TSOD): Not Supported
Module Nominal Height: 31 - 32 mm
Module Maximum Thickness (Front): 1 - 2 mm
Module Maximum Thickness (Back): 1 - 2 mm
Address Mapping from Edge Connector to DRAM: Standard
[Intel Extreme Memory Profile (XMP)]
XMP Revision: 2.0
[Certified Profile [Enabled]]
Module VDD Voltage Level: 1.35 V
Minimum SDRAM Cycle Time (tCKAVGmin): 0.625 ns
CAS# Latencies Supported: 16
Minimum CAS# Latency Time (tAAmin): 10.000 ns
Minimum RAS# to CAS# Delay (tRCDmin): 11.250 ns
Minimum Row Precharge Time (tRPmin): 11.250 ns
Minimum Active to Precharge Time (tRASmin): 23.750 ns
Supported Module Timing at 1600.0 MHz: 16-18-18-38
Minimum Active to Active/Refresh Time (tRCmin): 35.000 ns
Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC1min): 350.000 ns
Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC2min): 260.000 ns
Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC4min): 160.000 ns
Minimum Four Activate Window Delay Time (tFAWmin): 24.000 ns
Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Different Bank Group (tRRD_Smin): 3.500 ns
Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Same Bank Group (tRRD_Lmin): 5.000 ns

Row: 3 - 8 GB PC4-25600 DDR4 SDRAM G Skill F4-3200C16-8GTZSW

[General Module Information]
Module Number: 3
Module Size: 8 GBytes
Memory Type: DDR4 SDRAM
Module Type: Unbuffered DIMM (UDIMM)
Memory Speed: 1600.0 MHz (DDR4-3200 / PC4-25600)
Module Manufacturer: G Skill
Module Part Number: F4-3200C16-8GTZSW
Module Revision: 0.0
Module Serial Number: 0
Module Manufacturing Date: N/A
Module Manufacturing Location: 0
SDRAM Manufacturer: SK Hynix
DRAM Steppping: 0.0
Error Check/Correction: None
[Module Characteristics]
Row Address Bits: 16
Column Address Bits: 10
Module Density: 8192 Mb
Number Of Ranks: 1
Device Width: 8 bits
Bus Width: 64 bits
Die Count: 1
Module Nominal Voltage (VDD): 1.2 V
Minimum SDRAM Cycle Time (tCKAVGmin): 0.93800 ns
Maximum SDRAM Cycle Time (tCKAVGmax): 1.60000 ns
CAS# Latencies Supported: 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16
Minimum CAS# Latency Time (tAAmin): 13.750 ns
Minimum RAS# to CAS# Delay (tRCDmin): 13.750 ns
Minimum Row Precharge Time (tRPmin): 13.750 ns
Minimum Active to Precharge Time (tRASmin): 33.000 ns
Supported Module Timing at 1066.1 MHz: 15-15-15-36
Supported Module Timing at 1000.0 MHz: 14-14-14-33
Supported Module Timing at 933.3 MHz: 13-13-13-31
Supported Module Timing at 866.7 MHz: 12-12-12-29
Supported Module Timing at 800.0 MHz: 11-11-11-27
Supported Module Timing at 733.3 MHz: 11-11-11-25
Supported Module Timing at 666.7 MHz: 10-10-10-22
Minimum Active to Active/Refresh Time (tRCmin): 46.750 ns
Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC1min): 350.000 ns
Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC2min): 260.000 ns
Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC4min): 160.000 ns
Minimum Four Activate Window Delay Time (tFAWmin): 21.000 ns
Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Different Bank Group (tRRD_Smin): 3.700 ns
Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Same Bank Group (tRRD_Lmin): 5.300 ns
Minimum CAS to CAS Delay Time - Same Bank Group (tCCD_Lmin): 5.625 ns
[Features]
Module Temperature Sensor (TSOD): Not Supported
Module Nominal Height: 31 - 32 mm
Module Maximum Thickness (Front): 1 - 2 mm
Module Maximum Thickness (Back): 1 - 2 mm
Address Mapping from Edge Connector to DRAM: Standard
[Intel Extreme Memory Profile (XMP)]
XMP Revision: 2.0
[Certified Profile [Enabled]]
Module VDD Voltage Level: 1.35 V
Minimum SDRAM Cycle Time (tCKAVGmin): 0.625 ns
CAS# Latencies Supported: 16
Minimum CAS# Latency Time (tAAmin): 10.000 ns
Minimum RAS# to CAS# Delay (tRCDmin): 11.250 ns
Minimum Row Precharge Time (tRPmin): 11.250 ns
Minimum Active to Precharge Time (tRASmin): 23.750 ns
Supported Module Timing at 1600.0 MHz: 16-18-18-38
Minimum Active to Active/Refresh Time (tRCmin): 35.000 ns
Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC1min): 350.000 ns
Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC2min): 260.000 ns
Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC4min): 160.000 ns
Minimum Four Activate Window Delay Time (tFAWmin): 24.000 ns
Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Different Bank Group (tRRD_Smin): 3.500 ns
Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Same Bank Group (tRRD_Lmin): 5.000 ns

Row: 4 - 8 GB PC4-25600 DDR4 SDRAM G Skill F4-3200C16-8GTZKW

[General Module Information]
Module Number: 4
Module Size: 8 GBytes
Memory Type: DDR4 SDRAM
Module Type: Unbuffered DIMM (UDIMM)
Memory Speed: 1600.0 MHz (DDR4-3200 / PC4-25600)
Module Manufacturer: G Skill
Module Part Number: F4-3200C16-8GTZKW
Module Revision: 0.0
Module Serial Number: 0
Module Manufacturing Date: N/A
Module Manufacturing Location: 0
SDRAM Manufacturer: SK Hynix
DRAM Steppping: 0.0
Error Check/Correction: None
[Module Characteristics]
Row Address Bits: 16
Column Address Bits: 10
Module Density: 8192 Mb
Number Of Ranks: 1
Device Width: 8 bits
Bus Width: 64 bits
Die Count: 1
Module Nominal Voltage (VDD): 1.2 V
Minimum SDRAM Cycle Time (tCKAVGmin): 0.93800 ns
Maximum SDRAM Cycle Time (tCKAVGmax): 1.60000 ns
CAS# Latencies Supported: 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16
Minimum CAS# Latency Time (tAAmin): 13.750 ns
Minimum RAS# to CAS# Delay (tRCDmin): 13.750 ns
Minimum Row Precharge Time (tRPmin): 13.750 ns
Minimum Active to Precharge Time (tRASmin): 33.000 ns
Supported Module Timing at 1066.1 MHz: 15-15-15-36
Supported Module Timing at 1000.0 MHz: 14-14-14-33
Supported Module Timing at 933.3 MHz: 13-13-13-31
Supported Module Timing at 866.7 MHz: 12-12-12-29
Supported Module Timing at 800.0 MHz: 11-11-11-27
Supported Module Timing at 733.3 MHz: 11-11-11-25
Supported Module Timing at 666.7 MHz: 10-10-10-22
Minimum Active to Active/Refresh Time (tRCmin): 46.750 ns
Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC1min): 350.000 ns
Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC2min): 260.000 ns
Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC4min): 160.000 ns
Minimum Four Activate Window Delay Time (tFAWmin): 21.000 ns
Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Different Bank Group (tRRD_Smin): 3.700 ns
Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Same Bank Group (tRRD_Lmin): 5.300 ns
Minimum CAS to CAS Delay Time - Same Bank Group (tCCD_Lmin): 5.625 ns
[Features]
Module Temperature Sensor (TSOD): Not Supported
Module Nominal Height: 31 - 32 mm
Module Maximum Thickness (Front): 1 - 2 mm
Module Maximum Thickness (Back): 1 - 2 mm
Address Mapping from Edge Connector to DRAM: Standard
[Intel Extreme Memory Profile (XMP)]
XMP Revision: 2.0
[Certified Profile [Enabled]]
Module VDD Voltage Level: 1.35 V
Minimum SDRAM Cycle Time (tCKAVGmin): 0.625 ns
CAS# Latencies Supported: 16
Minimum CAS# Latency Time (tAAmin): 10.000 ns
Minimum RAS# to CAS# Delay (tRCDmin): 11.250 ns
Minimum Row Precharge Time (tRPmin): 11.250 ns
Minimum Active to Precharge Time (tRASmin): 23.750 ns
Supported Module Timing at 1600.0 MHz: 16-18-18-38
Minimum Active to Active/Refresh Time (tRCmin): 35.000 ns
Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC1min): 350.000 ns
Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC2min): 260.000 ns
Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC4min): 160.000 ns
Minimum Four Activate Window Delay Time (tFAWmin): 24.000 ns
Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Different Bank Group (tRRD_Smin): 3.500 ns
Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Same Bank Group (tRRD_Lmin): 5.000 ns

Row: 5 - 8 GB PC4-25600 DDR4 SDRAM G Skill F4-3200C16-8GTZSW

[General Module Information]
Module Number: 5
Module Size: 8 GBytes
Memory Type: DDR4 SDRAM
Module Type: Unbuffered DIMM (UDIMM)
Memory Speed: 1600.0 MHz (DDR4-3200 / PC4-25600)
Module Manufacturer: G Skill
Module Part Number: F4-3200C16-8GTZSW
Module Revision: 0.0
Module Serial Number: 0
Module Manufacturing Date: N/A
Module Manufacturing Location: 0
SDRAM Manufacturer: SK Hynix
DRAM Steppping: 0.0
Error Check/Correction: None
[Module Characteristics]
Row Address Bits: 16
Column Address Bits: 10
Module Density: 8192 Mb
Number Of Ranks: 1
Device Width: 8 bits
Bus Width: 64 bits
Die Count: 1
Module Nominal Voltage (VDD): 1.2 V
Minimum SDRAM Cycle Time (tCKAVGmin): 0.93800 ns
Maximum SDRAM Cycle Time (tCKAVGmax): 1.60000 ns
CAS# Latencies Supported: 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16
Minimum CAS# Latency Time (tAAmin): 13.750 ns
Minimum RAS# to CAS# Delay (tRCDmin): 13.750 ns
Minimum Row Precharge Time (tRPmin): 13.750 ns
Minimum Active to Precharge Time (tRASmin): 33.000 ns
Supported Module Timing at 1066.1 MHz: 15-15-15-36
Supported Module Timing at 1000.0 MHz: 14-14-14-33
Supported Module Timing at 933.3 MHz: 13-13-13-31
Supported Module Timing at 866.7 MHz: 12-12-12-29
Supported Module Timing at 800.0 MHz: 11-11-11-27
Supported Module Timing at 733.3 MHz: 11-11-11-25
Supported Module Timing at 666.7 MHz: 10-10-10-22
Minimum Active to Active/Refresh Time (tRCmin): 46.750 ns
Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC1min): 350.000 ns
Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC2min): 260.000 ns
Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC4min): 160.000 ns
Minimum Four Activate Window Delay Time (tFAWmin): 21.000 ns
Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Different Bank Group (tRRD_Smin): 3.700 ns
Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Same Bank Group (tRRD_Lmin): 5.300 ns
Minimum CAS to CAS Delay Time - Same Bank Group (tCCD_Lmin): 5.625 ns
[Features]
Module Temperature Sensor (TSOD): Not Supported
Module Nominal Height: 31 - 32 mm
Module Maximum Thickness (Front): 1 - 2 mm
Module Maximum Thickness (Back): 1 - 2 mm
Address Mapping from Edge Connector to DRAM: Standard
[Intel Extreme Memory Profile (XMP)]
XMP Revision: 2.0
[Certified Profile [Enabled]]
Module VDD Voltage Level: 1.35 V
Minimum SDRAM Cycle Time (tCKAVGmin): 0.625 ns
CAS# Latencies Supported: 16
Minimum CAS# Latency Time (tAAmin): 10.000 ns
Minimum RAS# to CAS# Delay (tRCDmin): 11.250 ns
Minimum Row Precharge Time (tRPmin): 11.250 ns
Minimum Active to Precharge Time (tRASmin): 23.750 ns
Supported Module Timing at 1600.0 MHz: 16-18-18-38
Minimum Active to Active/Refresh Time (tRCmin): 35.000 ns
Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC1min): 350.000 ns
Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC2min): 260.000 ns
Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC4min): 160.000 ns
Minimum Four Activate Window Delay Time (tFAWmin): 24.000 ns
Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Different Bank Group (tRRD_Smin): 3.500 ns
Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Same Bank Group (tRRD_Lmin): 5.000 ns

Row: 6 - 8 GB PC4-25600 DDR4 SDRAM G Skill F4-3200C16-8GTZKW

[General Module Information]
Module Number: 6
Module Size: 8 GBytes
Memory Type: DDR4 SDRAM
Module Type: Unbuffered DIMM (UDIMM)
Memory Speed: 1600.0 MHz (DDR4-3200 / PC4-25600)
Module Manufacturer: G Skill
Module Part Number: F4-3200C16-8GTZKW
Module Revision: 0.0
Module Serial Number: 0
Module Manufacturing Date: N/A
Module Manufacturing Location: 0
SDRAM Manufacturer: SK Hynix
DRAM Steppping: 0.0
Error Check/Correction: None
[Module Characteristics]
Row Address Bits: 16
Column Address Bits: 10
Module Density: 8192 Mb
Number Of Ranks: 1
Device Width: 8 bits
Bus Width: 64 bits
Die Count: 1
Module Nominal Voltage (VDD): 1.2 V
Minimum SDRAM Cycle Time (tCKAVGmin): 0.93800 ns
Maximum SDRAM Cycle Time (tCKAVGmax): 1.60000 ns
CAS# Latencies Supported: 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16
Minimum CAS# Latency Time (tAAmin): 13.750 ns
Minimum RAS# to CAS# Delay (tRCDmin): 13.750 ns
Minimum Row Precharge Time (tRPmin): 13.750 ns
Minimum Active to Precharge Time (tRASmin): 33.000 ns
Supported Module Timing at 1066.1 MHz: 15-15-15-36
Supported Module Timing at 1000.0 MHz: 14-14-14-33
Supported Module Timing at 933.3 MHz: 13-13-13-31
Supported Module Timing at 866.7 MHz: 12-12-12-29
Supported Module Timing at 800.0 MHz: 11-11-11-27
Supported Module Timing at 733.3 MHz: 11-11-11-25
Supported Module Timing at 666.7 MHz: 10-10-10-22
Minimum Active to Active/Refresh Time (tRCmin): 46.750 ns
Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC1min): 350.000 ns
Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC2min): 260.000 ns
Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC4min): 160.000 ns
Minimum Four Activate Window Delay Time (tFAWmin): 21.000 ns
Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Different Bank Group (tRRD_Smin): 3.700 ns
Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Same Bank Group (tRRD_Lmin): 5.300 ns
Minimum CAS to CAS Delay Time - Same Bank Group (tCCD_Lmin): 5.625 ns
[Features]
Module Temperature Sensor (TSOD): Not Supported
Module Nominal Height: 31 - 32 mm
Module Maximum Thickness (Front): 1 - 2 mm
Module Maximum Thickness (Back): 1 - 2 mm
Address Mapping from Edge Connector to DRAM: Standard
[Intel Extreme Memory Profile (XMP)]
XMP Revision: 2.0
[Certified Profile [Enabled]]
Module VDD Voltage Level: 1.35 V
Minimum SDRAM Cycle Time (tCKAVGmin): 0.625 ns
CAS# Latencies Supported: 16
Minimum CAS# Latency Time (tAAmin): 10.000 ns
Minimum RAS# to CAS# Delay (tRCDmin): 11.250 ns
Minimum Row Precharge Time (tRPmin): 11.250 ns
Minimum Active to Precharge Time (tRASmin): 23.750 ns
Supported Module Timing at 1600.0 MHz: 16-18-18-38
Minimum Active to Active/Refresh Time (tRCmin): 35.000 ns
Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC1min): 350.000 ns
Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC2min): 260.000 ns
Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC4min): 160.000 ns
Minimum Four Activate Window Delay Time (tFAWmin): 24.000 ns
Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Different Bank Group (tRRD_Smin): 3.500 ns
Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Same Bank Group (tRRD_Lmin): 5.000 ns

Row: 7 - 8 GB PC4-25600 DDR4 SDRAM G Skill F4-3200C16-8GTZSW

[General Module Information]
Module Number: 7
Module Size: 8 GBytes
Memory Type: DDR4 SDRAM
Module Type: Unbuffered DIMM (UDIMM)
Memory Speed: 1600.0 MHz (DDR4-3200 / PC4-25600)
Module Manufacturer: G Skill
Module Part Number: F4-3200C16-8GTZSW
Module Revision: 0.0
Module Serial Number: 0
Module Manufacturing Date: N/A
Module Manufacturing Location: 0
SDRAM Manufacturer: SK Hynix
DRAM Steppping: 0.0
Error Check/Correction: None
[Module Characteristics]
Row Address Bits: 16
Column Address Bits: 10
Module Density: 8192 Mb
Number Of Ranks: 1
Device Width: 8 bits
Bus Width: 64 bits
Die Count: 1
Module Nominal Voltage (VDD): 1.2 V
Minimum SDRAM Cycle Time (tCKAVGmin): 0.93800 ns
Maximum SDRAM Cycle Time (tCKAVGmax): 1.60000 ns
CAS# Latencies Supported: 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16
Minimum CAS# Latency Time (tAAmin): 13.750 ns
Minimum RAS# to CAS# Delay (tRCDmin): 13.750 ns
Minimum Row Precharge Time (tRPmin): 13.750 ns
Minimum Active to Precharge Time (tRASmin): 33.000 ns
Supported Module Timing at 1066.1 MHz: 15-15-15-36
Supported Module Timing at 1000.0 MHz: 14-14-14-33
Supported Module Timing at 933.3 MHz: 13-13-13-31
Supported Module Timing at 866.7 MHz: 12-12-12-29
Supported Module Timing at 800.0 MHz: 11-11-11-27
Supported Module Timing at 733.3 MHz: 11-11-11-25
Supported Module Timing at 666.7 MHz: 10-10-10-22
Minimum Active to Active/Refresh Time (tRCmin): 46.750 ns
Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC1min): 350.000 ns
Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC2min): 260.000 ns
Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC4min): 160.000 ns
Minimum Four Activate Window Delay Time (tFAWmin): 21.000 ns
Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Different Bank Group (tRRD_Smin): 3.700 ns
Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Same Bank Group (tRRD_Lmin): 5.300 ns
Minimum CAS to CAS Delay Time - Same Bank Group (tCCD_Lmin): 5.625 ns
[Features]
Module Temperature Sensor (TSOD): Not Supported
Module Nominal Height: 31 - 32 mm
Module Maximum Thickness (Front): 1 - 2 mm
Module Maximum Thickness (Back): 1 - 2 mm
Address Mapping from Edge Connector to DRAM: Standard
[Intel Extreme Memory Profile (XMP)]
XMP Revision: 2.0
[Certified Profile [Enabled]]
Module VDD Voltage Level: 1.35 V
Minimum SDRAM Cycle Time (tCKAVGmin): 0.625 ns
CAS# Latencies Supported: 16
Minimum CAS# Latency Time (tAAmin): 10.000 ns
Minimum RAS# to CAS# Delay (tRCDmin): 11.250 ns
Minimum Row Precharge Time (tRPmin): 11.250 ns
Minimum Active to Precharge Time (tRASmin): 23.750 ns
Supported Module Timing at 1600.0 MHz: 16-18-18-38
Minimum Active to Active/Refresh Time (tRCmin): 35.000 ns
Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC1min): 350.000 ns
Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC2min): 260.000 ns
Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC4min): 160.000 ns
Minimum Four Activate Window Delay Time (tFAWmin): 24.000 ns
Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Different Bank Group (tRRD_Smin): 3.500 ns
Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Same Bank Group (tRRD_Lmin): 5.000 ns

Bus

PCI Bus #0

AMD Zen - Root Complex

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD Zen - Root Complex
Original Device Name: AMD Zen - Root Complex
Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
Revision ID: 0
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:0:0
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1450&SUBSYS_87611043&REV_00
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: N/A
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Disabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1450&SUBSYS_87611043&REV_00\3&11583659&0&00

AMD Zen - IOMMU

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD Zen - IOMMU
Original Device Name: AMD Zen - IOMMU
Device Class: IOMMU
Revision ID: 0
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:0:2
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1451&SUBSYS_14511022&REV_00
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: INTA#
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Disabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable

AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
Original Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
Revision ID: 0
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:1:0
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1452&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: N/A
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Disabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1452&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00\3&11583659&0&08

AMD Zen - PCIe GPP Bridge

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe GPP Bridge
Original Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe GPP Bridge
Device Class: PCI-to-PCI Bridge
Revision ID: 0
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:1:1
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1453&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
[PCI Express]
Version: 3.0
Maximum Link Width: 4x
Current Link Width: 4x
Maximum Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
Current Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
Device/Port Type: Root Port of PCI Express Root Complex
Slot Implemented: Yes
Hot-Plug: Not Capable
Hot-Plug Surprise: Not Capable
Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L1
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: Disabled
L0s Exit Latency: 256 - 512 ns
L1 Exit Latency: 32 - 64 us
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: N/A
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Enabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
Driver Description: PCI Express Root Port
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.125
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1453&SUBSYS_87611043&REV_00\3&11583659&0&09

PCI Express x4 Bus #1

AMD 300-Series Chipset - USB Controller B

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD 300-Series Chipset - USB Controller B
Original Device Name: AMD 300-Series Chipset - USB Controller B
Device Class: USB xHCI Controller
Revision ID: 2
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 1:0:0
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_43BA&SUBSYS_11421B21&REV_02
[PCI Express]
Version: 3.0
Maximum Link Width: 4x
Current Link Width: 4x
Maximum Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
Current Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
Device/Port Type: Legacy PCI Express Endpoint
Slot Implemented: No
Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L0s and L1
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: Disabled
L0s Exit Latency: 1 - 2 us
L1 Exit Latency: >64 us
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: INTA#
Memory Base Address 0 EF8A0000
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Enabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
USB Version Supported: 3.1
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: Generic USB xHCI Host Controller
Driver Description: USB xHCI Compliant Host Controller
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.125
Driver Date: 06-Dec-2017
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_43BA&SUBSYS_11421B21&REV_02\4&5558812&0&0009

USB Root Hub

[Port1] : No Device Connected

[Port2] : No Device Connected

[Port3] : No Device Connected

[Port4] : USB Mass Storage Device

[Device Information]
Device Manufacturer: Corsair
Product Name: Slider 3.0
Serial Number: 1211296954
USB Version Supported: 3.00
USB Device Speed: USB 3.0 SuperSpeed
Driver Description: USB Mass Storage Device
Hardware ID: USB\VID_1B1C&PID_1A06
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: Compatible USB storage device
Driver Description: USB Mass Storage Device
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId USB\VID_1B1C&PID_1A06\1211296954

[Port5] : No Device Connected

[Port6] : No Device Connected

[Port7] : No Device Connected

[Port8] : No Device Connected

[Port9] : No Device Connected

[Port10] : Qualcomm Atheros QCA61x4A Bluetooth 4.1

[Device Information]
Device Manufacturer: ASUSTek
Product Name: -
Serial Number: -
USB Version Supported: 1.10
USB Device Speed: USB 1.1 Full-speed
Driver Description: Qualcomm Atheros QCA61x4A Bluetooth 4.1
Hardware ID: USB\VID_0B05&PID_1868
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: Qualcomm Atheros Communications
Driver Description: Qualcomm Atheros QCA61x4A Bluetooth 4.1
Driver Provider: Qualcomm Atheros Communications
Driver Version: 10.0.0.303
Driver Date: 21-Mar-2017
DeviceInstanceId USB\VID_0B05&PID_1868\6&61C3BDB&0&10

[Port11] : USB Composite Device

[Device Information]
Device Manufacturer: Logitech
Product Name: Gaming Mouse G600
Serial Number: 6EF5641B90870017
USB Version Supported: 2.00
USB Device Speed: USB 1.1 Full-speed
Driver Description: USB Composite Device
Hardware ID: USB\VID_046D&PID_C24A
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard USB Host Controller)
Driver Description: USB Composite Device
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId USB\VID_046D&PID_C24A\6EF5641B90870017

[Port12] : No Device Connected

[Port13] : No Device Connected

[Port14] : No Device Connected

[Port15] : No Device Connected

[Port16] : No Device Connected

[Port17] : USB Mass Storage Device

[Device Information]
Device Manufacturer: SanDisk
Product Name: Ultra Fit
Serial Number: 4C531001561109103233
USB Version Supported: 3.00 (Connected to a USB 2.00 Port)
USB Device Speed: USB 2.0 High-speed
Driver Description: USB Mass Storage Device
Hardware ID: USB\VID_0781&PID_5583
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: Compatible USB storage device
Driver Description: USB Mass Storage Device
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId USB\VID_0781&PID_5583\4C531001561109103233

[Port18] : USB Composite Device

[Device Information]
Device Manufacturer: Logitech
Product Name: USB Receiver
Serial Number: N/A
USB Version Supported: 2.00
USB Device Speed: USB 1.1 Full-speed
Driver Description: USB Composite Device
Hardware ID: USB\VID_046D&PID_C52B
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard USB Host Controller)
Driver Description: USB Composite Device
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId USB\VID_046D&PID_C52B\6&61C3BDB&0&18

[Port19] : USB Input Device

[Device Information]
Device Manufacturer: AsusTek Computer Inc.
Product Name: AURA Custom Human interface
Serial Number: 00000000001A
USB Version Supported: 2.00
USB Device Speed: USB 1.1 Full-speed
Driver Description: USB Input Device
Hardware ID: USB\VID_0B05&PID_1867
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
Driver Description: USB Input Device
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId USB\VID_0B05&PID_1867\00000000001A

[Port20] : No Device Connected

[Port21] : No Device Connected

[Port22] : No Device Connected

AMD 300-Series Chipset - SATA Controller B

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD 300-Series Chipset - SATA Controller B
Original Device Name: AMD 300-Series Chipset - SATA Controller B
Device Class: SATA AHCI Controller
Revision ID: 2
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 1:0:1
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_43B6&SUBSYS_10621B21&REV_02
[PCI Express]
Version: 3.0
Maximum Link Width: 4x
Current Link Width: 4x
Maximum Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
Current Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
Device/Port Type: Legacy PCI Express Endpoint
Slot Implemented: No
Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L0s and L1
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: Disabled
L0s Exit Latency: 1 - 2 us
L1 Exit Latency: >64 us
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: INTB#
Memory Base Address 5 EF880000
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Enabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[SATA Host Controller]
Interface Speed Supported: Gen3 6.0 Gbps
Number Of Ports: 8
External SATA Support: Capable
Aggressive Link Power Management: Capable
Staggered Spin-up: Capable
Mechanical Presence Switch: Not Capable
Command Queue Acceleration: Capable
64-bit Addressing: Capable
AHCI Status: Enabled
AHCI Version: 1.31
Ports Implemented: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
[SATA Port#0]
Port Status: No Device Present
External SATA Port: Not Capable
Hot Plug: Not Capable
[SATA Port#1]
Port Status: Device Present, Phy communication established
Current Interface Speed: Gen3 6.0 Gbps
External SATA Port: Not Capable
Hot Plug: Not Capable
Device Type: SATA
[SATA Port#2]
Port Status: No Device Present
External SATA Port: Not Capable
Hot Plug: Not Capable
[SATA Port#3]
Port Status: No Device Present
External SATA Port: Not Capable
Hot Plug: Not Capable
[SATA Port#4]
Port Status: No Device Present
External SATA Port: Not Capable
Hot Plug: Not Capable
[SATA Port#5]
Port Status: No Device Present
External SATA Port: Not Capable
Hot Plug: Not Capable
[SATA Port#6]
Port Status: No Device Present
External SATA Port: Not Capable
Hot Plug: Not Capable
[SATA Port#7]
Port Status: No Device Present
External SATA Port: Not Capable
Hot Plug: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: Standard SATA AHCI Controller
Driver Description: Standard SATA AHCI Controller
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.98
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_43B6&SUBSYS_10621B21&REV_02\4&5558812&0&0109

AMD 300-Series Chipset - PCI Express Root Port B (Switch USP)

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD 300-Series Chipset - PCI Express Root Port B (Switch USP)
Original Device Name: AMD 300-Series Chipset - PCI Express Root Port B (Switch USP)
Device Class: PCI-to-PCI Bridge
Revision ID: 2
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 1:0:2
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_43B1&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_02
[PCI Express]
Version: 3.0
Maximum Link Width: 4x
Current Link Width: 4x
Maximum Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
Current Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
Device/Port Type: Upstream Port of PCI Express Switch
Slot Implemented: No
Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L0s and L1
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: Disabled
L0s Exit Latency: 1 - 2 us
L1 Exit Latency: >64 us
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: IRQ15
Interrupt Pin: INTC#
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Enabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
Driver Description: PCI Express Upstream Switch Port
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.125
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_43B1&SUBSYS_02011B21&REV_02\4&5558812&0&0209

PCI Express x4 Bus #2

AMD 300-Series Chipset - GPP-Switch DSP/SATA-e

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD 300-Series Chipset - GPP-Switch DSP/SATA-e
Original Device Name: AMD 300-Series Chipset - GPP-Switch DSP/SATA-e
Device Class: PCI-to-PCI Bridge
Revision ID: 2
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 2:0:0
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_43B4&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_02
[PCI Express]
Version: 2.0
Maximum Link Width: 1x
Current Link Width: 1x
Maximum Link Speed: 5.0 GT/s
Current Link Speed: 2.5 GT/s
Device/Port Type: Downstream Port of PCI Express Switch
Slot Implemented: Yes
Hot-Plug: Not Capable
Hot-Plug Surprise: Not Capable
Slot Power Limit: 26.000 W
Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L0s and L1
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: L0s Entry
L0s Exit Latency: 1 - 2 us
L1 Exit Latency: >64 us
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: IRQ11
Interrupt Pin: INTA#
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Enabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
Driver Description: PCI Express Downstream Switch Port
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.125
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_43B4&SUBSYS_33061B21&REV_02\5&3809BF7C&0&000209

PCI Express x1 Bus #3

Atheros/Qualcomm QCA6174 802.11ac Wireless Network Adapter

[General Information]
Device Name: Atheros/Qualcomm QCA6174 802.11ac Wireless Network Adapter
Original Device Name: Atheros/Qualcomm QCA6174 802.11ac Wireless Network Adapter
Device Class: Unknown Network Adapter
Revision ID: 32
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 3:0:0
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_168C&DEV_003E&SUBSYS_87521043&REV_32
[PCI Express]
Version: 1.1
Maximum Link Width: 1x
Current Link Width: 1x
Maximum Link Speed: 2.5 GT/s
Current Link Speed: 2.5 GT/s
Device/Port Type: PCI Express Endpoint
Slot Implemented: No
Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L0s and L1
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: L0s Entry
L0s Exit Latency: 2 - 4 us
L1 Exit Latency: 32 - 64 us
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: INTA#
Memory Base Address 0 EF400000
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Enabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: Qualcomm Atheros Communications Inc.
Driver Description: Qualcomm Atheros QCA61x4A Wireless Network Adapter
Driver Provider: Qualcomm Atheros Communications Inc.
Driver Version: 12.0.0.309
Driver Date: 17-Apr-2017
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_168C&DEV_003E&SUBSYS_87521043&REV_32\6&382B5092&0&00000209

AMD 300-Series Chipset - GPP-Switch DSP/SATA-e

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD 300-Series Chipset - GPP-Switch DSP/SATA-e
Original Device Name: AMD 300-Series Chipset - GPP-Switch DSP/SATA-e
Device Class: PCI-to-PCI Bridge
Revision ID: 2
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 2:1:0
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_43B4&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_02
[PCI Express]
Version: 2.0
Maximum Link Width: 1x
Current Link Width: 1x
Maximum Link Speed: 5.0 GT/s
Current Link Speed: 5.0 GT/s
Device/Port Type: Downstream Port of PCI Express Switch
Slot Implemented: Yes
Hot-Plug: Not Capable
Hot-Plug Surprise: Not Capable
Slot Power Limit: 26.000 W
Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L0s and L1
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: Disabled
L0s Exit Latency: >4 us
L1 Exit Latency: >64 us
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: IRQ10
Interrupt Pin: INTA#
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Enabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
Driver Description: PCI Express Downstream Switch Port
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.125
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_43B4&SUBSYS_33061B21&REV_02\5&3809BF7C&0&080209

PCI Express x1 Bus #4

Wilocity, Device ID: 0310

[General Information]
Device Name: Wilocity, Device ID: 0310
Original Device Name: Wilocity, Device ID: 0310
Device Class: Unknown Network Adapter
Revision ID: 2
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 4:0:0
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1AE9&DEV_0310&SUBSYS_00001AE9&REV_02
[PCI Express]
Version: 2.0
Maximum Link Width: 1x
Current Link Width: 1x
Maximum Link Speed: 5.0 GT/s
Current Link Speed: 5.0 GT/s
Device/Port Type: PCI Express Endpoint
Slot Implemented: No
Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L1
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: Disabled
L0s Exit Latency: 2 - 4 us
L1 Exit Latency: 32 - 64 us
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: INTA#
Memory Base Address 0 EF200000
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Enabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: Qualcomm Atheros
Driver Description: Qualcomm Atheros Sparrow 11ad Wireless Network Adapter
Driver Provider: Qualcomm Atheros
Driver Version: 1.1.5.89
Driver Date: 10-Mar-2017
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1AE9&DEV_0310&SUBSYS_00001AE9&REV_02\6&2A24000F&0&00080209

AMD 300-Series Chipset - GPP-Switch DSP/SATA-e

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD 300-Series Chipset - GPP-Switch DSP/SATA-e
Original Device Name: AMD 300-Series Chipset - GPP-Switch DSP/SATA-e
Device Class: PCI-to-PCI Bridge
Revision ID: 2
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 2:2:0
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_43B4&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_02
[PCI Express]
Version: 2.0
Maximum Link Width: 1x
Current Link Width: 1x
Maximum Link Speed: 5.0 GT/s
Current Link Speed: 2.5 GT/s
Device/Port Type: Downstream Port of PCI Express Switch
Slot Implemented: Yes
Hot-Plug: Not Capable
Hot-Plug Surprise: Not Capable
Slot Power Limit: 26.000 W
Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L0s and L1
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: Disabled
L0s Exit Latency: 1 - 2 us
L1 Exit Latency: >64 us
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: IRQ15
Interrupt Pin: INTA#
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Enabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
Driver Description: PCI Express Downstream Switch Port
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.125
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_43B4&SUBSYS_33061B21&REV_02\5&3809BF7C&0&100209

PCI Express x1 Bus #5

Intel I211AT Copper (Pearsonville) Network Adapter

[General Information]
Device Name: Intel I211AT Copper (Pearsonville) Network Adapter
Original Device Name: Intel I211AT Copper (Pearsonville) Network Adapter
Device Class: Ethernet Adapter
Revision ID: 3
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 5:0:0
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_1539&SUBSYS_85F01043&REV_03
[PCI Express]
Version: 1.1
Maximum Link Width: 1x
Current Link Width: 1x
Maximum Link Speed: 2.5 GT/s
Current Link Speed: 2.5 GT/s
Device/Port Type: PCI Express Endpoint
Slot Implemented: No
Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L0s and L1
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: Disabled
L0s Exit Latency: 1 - 2 us
L1 Exit Latency: 8 - 16 us
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: INTA#
Memory Base Address 0 EF700000
I/O Base Address 2 0
Memory Base Address 3 EF720000
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Enabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: Intel
Driver Description: Intel(R) I211 Gigabit Network Connection
Driver Provider: Intel
Driver Version: 12.15.184.0
Driver Date: 07-Dec-2016
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_1539&SUBSYS_85F01043&REV_03\107B44FFFF913A8200

AMD 300-Series Chipset - GPP-Switch DSP/SATA-e

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD 300-Series Chipset - GPP-Switch DSP/SATA-e
Original Device Name: AMD 300-Series Chipset - GPP-Switch DSP/SATA-e
Device Class: PCI-to-PCI Bridge
Revision ID: 2
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 2:3:0
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_43B4&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_02
[PCI Express]
Version: 2.0
Maximum Link Width: 1x
Current Link Width: 1x
Maximum Link Speed: 5.0 GT/s
Current Link Speed: 2.5 GT/s
Device/Port Type: Downstream Port of PCI Express Switch
Slot Implemented: Yes
Hot-Plug: Not Capable
Hot-Plug Surprise: Not Capable
Slot Power Limit: 26.000 W
Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L0s and L1
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: Disabled
L0s Exit Latency: >4 us
L1 Exit Latency: >64 us
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: IRQ5
Interrupt Pin: INTA#
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Enabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
Driver Description: PCI Express Downstream Switch Port
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.125
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_43B4&SUBSYS_33061B21&REV_02\5&3809BF7C&0&180209

PCI Express x1 Bus #6

AMD 300-Series Chipset - GPP-Switch DSP/SATA-e

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD 300-Series Chipset - GPP-Switch DSP/SATA-e
Original Device Name: AMD 300-Series Chipset - GPP-Switch DSP/SATA-e
Device Class: PCI-to-PCI Bridge
Revision ID: 2
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 2:4:0
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_43B4&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_02
[PCI Express]
Version: 2.0
Maximum Link Width: 4x
Current Link Width: 4x
Maximum Link Speed: 5.0 GT/s
Current Link Speed: 5.0 GT/s
Device/Port Type: Downstream Port of PCI Express Switch
Slot Implemented: Yes
Hot-Plug: Not Capable
Hot-Plug Surprise: Not Capable
Slot Power Limit: 26.000 W
Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L0s and L1
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: Disabled
L0s Exit Latency: 1 - 2 us
L1 Exit Latency: >64 us
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: IRQ11
Interrupt Pin: INTA#
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Enabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
Driver Description: PCI Express Downstream Switch Port
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.125
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_43B4&SUBSYS_33061B21&REV_02\5&3809BF7C&0&200209

PCI Express x4 Bus #7

Aquantia AQtion AQC107 10Gbit Network Adapter

[General Information]
Device Name: Aquantia AQtion AQC107 10Gbit Network Adapter
Original Device Name: Aquantia AQtion AQC107 10Gbit Network Adapter
Device Class: Ethernet Adapter
Revision ID: 2
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 7:0:0
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1D6A&DEV_D107&SUBSYS_872E1043&REV_02
[PCI Express]
Version: 3.0
Maximum Link Width: 4x
Current Link Width: 4x
Maximum Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
Current Link Speed: 5.0 GT/s
Device/Port Type: PCI Express Endpoint
Slot Implemented: No
Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L0s and L1
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: Disabled
L0s Exit Latency: >4 us
L1 Exit Latency: >64 us
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: INTA#
Memory Base Address 0 EF040000
Memory Base Address 2 EF050000
Memory Base Address 4 EEC00000
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Enabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: Aquantia
Driver Description: ROG AREION 10G (NDIS 6.50 Miniport)
Driver Provider: Aquantia
Driver Version: 1.40.25.0
Driver Date: 21-Feb-2017
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1D6A&DEV_D107&SUBSYS_872E1043&REV_02\6&7DB0FF9&0&00200209

AMD 300-Series Chipset - GPP-Switch DSP/SATA-e

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD 300-Series Chipset - GPP-Switch DSP/SATA-e
Original Device Name: AMD 300-Series Chipset - GPP-Switch DSP/SATA-e
Device Class: PCI-to-PCI Bridge
Revision ID: 2
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 2:9:0
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_43B4&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_02
[PCI Express]
Version: 3.0
Maximum Link Width: 2x
Current Link Width: 2x
Maximum Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
Current Link Speed: 5.0 GT/s
Device/Port Type: Downstream Port of PCI Express Switch
Slot Implemented: Yes
Hot-Plug: Not Capable
Hot-Plug Surprise: Not Capable
Slot Power Limit: 26.000 W
Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L1
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: Disabled
L0s Exit Latency: 1 - 2 us
L1 Exit Latency: >64 us
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: IRQ10
Interrupt Pin: INTA#
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Enabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
Driver Description: PCI Express Downstream Switch Port
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.125
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_43B4&SUBSYS_33061B21&REV_02\5&3809BF7C&0&480209

PCI Express x2 Bus #8

ASMedia ASM2142 USB 3.1 xHCI Controller

[General Information]
Device Name: ASMedia ASM2142 USB 3.1 xHCI Controller
Original Device Name: ASMedia ASM2142 USB 3.1 xHCI Controller
Device Class: USB xHCI Controller
Revision ID: 0
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 8:0:0
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1B21&DEV_2142&SUBSYS_87561043&REV_00
[PCI Express]
Version: 3.0
Maximum Link Width: 2x
Current Link Width: 2x
Maximum Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
Current Link Speed: 5.0 GT/s
Device/Port Type: Legacy PCI Express Endpoint
Slot Implemented: No
Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L0s and L1
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: Disabled
L0s Exit Latency: 1 - 2 us
L1 Exit Latency: >64 us
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: INTA#
Memory Base Address 0 EF600000
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Enabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
USB Version Supported: 3.0
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: Generic USB xHCI Host Controller
Driver Description: USB xHCI Compliant Host Controller
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.125
Driver Date: 06-Dec-2017
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1B21&DEV_2142&SUBSYS_87561043&REV_00\6&138EED33&0&00480209

USB Root Hub

[Port1] : No Device Connected

[Port2] : No Device Connected

[Port3] : No Device Connected

[Port4] : No Device Connected

AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
Original Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
Revision ID: 0
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:2:0
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1452&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: N/A
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Disabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1452&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00\3&11583659&0&10

AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
Original Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
Revision ID: 0
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:3:0
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1452&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: N/A
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Disabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1452&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00\3&11583659&0&18

AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
Original Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
Revision ID: 0
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:4:0
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1452&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: N/A
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Disabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1452&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00\3&11583659&0&20

AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
Original Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
Revision ID: 0
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:7:0
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1452&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: N/A
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Disabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1452&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00\3&11583659&0&38

AMD Zen - Internal PCIe GPP Bridge 0 to Bus B/C

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD Zen - Internal PCIe GPP Bridge 0 to Bus B/C
Original Device Name: AMD Zen - Internal PCIe GPP Bridge 0 to Bus B/C
Device Class: PCI-to-PCI Bridge
Revision ID: 0
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:7:1
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1454&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
[PCI Express]
Version: 3.0
Maximum Link Width: 16x
Current Link Width: 16x
Maximum Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
Current Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
Device/Port Type: Root Port of PCI Express Root Complex
Slot Implemented: No
Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L0s and L1
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: L0s and L1 Entry
L0s Exit Latency: < 64 ns
L1 Exit Latency: < 1 us
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: INTA#
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Enabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
Driver Description: PCI Express Root Port
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.125
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1454&SUBSYS_14541022&REV_00\3&11583659&0&39

PCI Express x16 Bus #9

AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Function

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Function
Original Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Function
Device Class: Non-Essential Instrumentation Function
Revision ID: 0
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 9:0:0
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_145A&SUBSYS_145A1022&REV_00
[PCI Express]
Version: 3.0
Maximum Link Width: 16x
Current Link Width: 16x
Maximum Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
Current Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
Device/Port Type: PCI Express Endpoint
Slot Implemented: No
Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L0s and L1
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: L0s Entry
L0s Exit Latency: < 64 ns
L1 Exit Latency: < 1 us
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: N/A
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Enabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: Advanced Micro Devices
Driver Description: AMD PCI
Driver Provider: Advanced Micro Devices
Driver Version: 1.0.0.42
Driver Date: 09-Oct-2017
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_145A&SUBSYS_145A1022&REV_00\4&C93BEE2&0&0039

AMD Zen - Cryptographic Coprocessor PSPCPP

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD Zen - Cryptographic Coprocessor PSPCPP
Original Device Name: AMD Zen - Cryptographic Coprocessor PSPCPP
Device Class: Unknown En/Decryption
Revision ID: 0
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 9:0:2
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1456&SUBSYS_14561022&REV_00
[PCI Express]
Version: 3.0
Maximum Link Width: 16x
Current Link Width: 16x
Maximum Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
Current Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
Device/Port Type: PCI Express Endpoint
Slot Implemented: No
Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L0s and L1
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: L0s Entry
L0s Exit Latency: < 64 ns
L1 Exit Latency: < 1 us
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: INTB#
Memory Base Address 2 EFC00000
Memory Base Address 5 EFBFE000
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Disabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: Advanced Micro Devices Inc.
Driver Description: AMD PSP 3.0 Device
Driver Provider: Advanced Micro Devices Inc.
Driver Version: 4.4.0.0
Driver Date: 01-Jun-2017
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1456&SUBSYS_14561022&REV_00\4&C93BEE2&0&0239

AMD Zen - USB3 xHCI Controller

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD Zen - USB3 xHCI Controller
Original Device Name: AMD Zen - USB3 xHCI Controller
Device Class: USB xHCI Controller
Revision ID: 0
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 9:0:3
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_145C&SUBSYS_87611043&REV_00
[PCI Express]
Version: 3.0
Maximum Link Width: 16x
Current Link Width: 16x
Maximum Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
Current Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
Device/Port Type: PCI Express Endpoint
Slot Implemented: No
Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L0s and L1
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: L0s Entry
L0s Exit Latency: < 64 ns
L1 Exit Latency: < 1 us
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: INTC#
Memory Base Address 0 EFA00000
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Enabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
USB Version Supported: 3.0
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: Generic USB xHCI Host Controller
Driver Description: USB xHCI Compliant Host Controller
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.125
Driver Date: 06-Dec-2017
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_145C&SUBSYS_87611043&REV_00\4&C93BEE2&0&0339

USB Root Hub

[Port1] : Generic USB Hub

[Device Information]
Device Manufacturer: Wacom Co., Ltd.
Product Name: Cintiq 22HDT HUB
Serial Number: N/A
USB Version Supported: 2.00
USB Device Speed: USB 2.0 High-speed
Driver Description: Generic USB Hub
Hardware ID: USB\VID_056A&PID_005C
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard USB HUBs)
Driver Description: Generic USB Hub
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.64
Driver Date: 23-Oct-2017
DeviceInstanceId USB\VID_056A&PID_005C\6&1CD5F76C&0&1

[Port1] : USB Composite Device

[Device Information]
Device Manufacturer: Wacom Co.,Ltd.
Product Name: Cintiq 22HDT TOUCH
Serial Number: N/A
USB Version Supported: 2.00
USB Device Speed: USB 1.1 Full-speed
Driver Description: USB Composite Device
Hardware ID: USB\VID_056A&PID_005E
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard USB Host Controller)
Driver Description: USB Composite Device
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId USB\VID_056A&PID_005E\7&34F0E922&0&1

[Port2] : Wacom Tablet

[Device Information]
Device Manufacturer: Tablet
Product Name: Cintiq 22HDT Tablet
Serial Number: N/A
USB Version Supported: 2.00
USB Device Speed: USB 1.1 Full-speed
Driver Description: Wacom Tablet
Hardware ID: USB\VID_056A&PID_005B
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: Wacom
Driver Description: Wacom Tablet
Driver Provider: Wacom
Driver Version: 3.8.10.3
Driver Date: 05-Oct-2017
DeviceInstanceId USB\VID_056A&PID_005B\7&34F0E922&0&2

[Port3] : No Device Connected

[Port2] : USB Composite Device

[Device Information]
Device Manufacturer: N/A
Product Name: N/A
Serial Number: REV8
USB Version Supported: 1.10
USB Device Speed: USB 1.1 Full-speed
Driver Description: USB Composite Device
Hardware ID: USB\VID_B58E&PID_9E84
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard USB Host Controller)
Driver Description: USB Composite Device
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId USB\VID_B58E&PID_9E84\REV8

[Port3] : No Device Connected

[Port4] : No Device Connected

[Port5] : No Device Connected

[Port6] : No Device Connected

[Port7] : No Device Connected

[Port8] : No Device Connected

AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
Original Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
Revision ID: 0
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:8:0
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1452&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: N/A
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Disabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1452&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00\3&11583659&0&40

AMD Zen - Internal PCIe GPP Bridge 0 to Bus B/C

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD Zen - Internal PCIe GPP Bridge 0 to Bus B/C
Original Device Name: AMD Zen - Internal PCIe GPP Bridge 0 to Bus B/C
Device Class: PCI-to-PCI Bridge
Revision ID: 0
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:8:1
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1454&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
[PCI Express]
Version: 3.0
Maximum Link Width: 16x
Current Link Width: 16x
Maximum Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
Current Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
Device/Port Type: Root Port of PCI Express Root Complex
Slot Implemented: No
Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L0s and L1
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: L0s Entry
L0s Exit Latency: < 64 ns
L1 Exit Latency: < 1 us
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: INTA#
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Enabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
Driver Description: PCI Express Root Port
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.125
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1454&SUBSYS_14541022&REV_00\3&11583659&0&41

PCI Express x16 Bus #10

AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Function

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Function
Original Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Function
Device Class: Non-Essential Instrumentation Function
Revision ID: 0
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 10:0:0
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1455&SUBSYS_14551022&REV_00
[PCI Express]
Version: 3.0
Maximum Link Width: 16x
Current Link Width: 16x
Maximum Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
Current Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
Device/Port Type: PCI Express Endpoint
Slot Implemented: No
Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L0s and L1
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: L0s Entry
L0s Exit Latency: < 64 ns
L1 Exit Latency: < 1 us
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: N/A
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Enabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: Advanced Micro Devices
Driver Description: AMD PCI
Driver Provider: Advanced Micro Devices
Driver Version: 1.0.0.42
Driver Date: 09-Oct-2017
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1455&SUBSYS_14551022&REV_00\4&2B9CC193&0&0041

AMD Carrizo FCH - SATA AHCI Controller (MS)

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD Carrizo FCH - SATA AHCI Controller (MS)
Original Device Name: AMD Carrizo FCH - SATA AHCI Controller (MS)
Device Class: SATA AHCI Controller
Revision ID: 51
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 10:0:2
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_7901&SUBSYS_87611043&REV_51
[PCI Express]
Version: 3.0
Maximum Link Width: 16x
Current Link Width: 16x
Maximum Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
Current Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
Device/Port Type: PCI Express Endpoint
Slot Implemented: No
Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L0s and L1
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: L0s Entry
L0s Exit Latency: < 64 ns
L1 Exit Latency: < 1 us
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: INTB#
Memory Base Address 5 EFD08000
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Disabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[SATA Host Controller]
Interface Speed Supported: Gen3 6.0 Gbps
Number Of Ports: 1
External SATA Support: Not Capable
Aggressive Link Power Management: Capable
Staggered Spin-up: Not Capable
Mechanical Presence Switch: Capable
Command Queue Acceleration: Capable
64-bit Addressing: Capable
AHCI Status: Enabled
AHCI Version: 1.31
Ports Implemented: 0
[SATA Port#0]
Port Status: No Device Present
External SATA Port: Not Capable
Hot Plug: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: Standard SATA AHCI Controller
Driver Description: Standard SATA AHCI Controller
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.98
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_7901&SUBSYS_87611043&REV_51\4&2B9CC193&0&0241

AMD Zen - HD Audio Controller

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD Zen - HD Audio Controller
Original Device Name: AMD Zen - HD Audio Controller
Device Class: Mixed mode device
Revision ID: 0
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 10:0:3
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1457&SUBSYS_874F1043&REV_00
[PCI Express]
Version: 3.0
Maximum Link Width: 16x
Current Link Width: 16x
Maximum Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
Current Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
Device/Port Type: PCI Express Endpoint
Slot Implemented: No
Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L0s and L1
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: L0s Entry
L0s Exit Latency: < 64 ns
L1 Exit Latency: < 1 us
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: IRQ43
Interrupt Pin: INTC#
Memory Base Address 0 EFDF8000
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Enabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: Microsoft
Driver Description: High Definition Audio Controller
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
Driver Date: 27-Sep-2017
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1457&SUBSYS_874F1043&REV_00\4&2B9CC193&0&0341

AMD Carrizo FCH - SMBus and ACPI Controller

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD Carrizo FCH - SMBus and ACPI Controller
Original Device Name: AMD Carrizo FCH - SMBus and ACPI Controller
Device Class: SMBus (System Management Bus)
Revision ID: 59
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:20:0
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_790B&SUBSYS_87611043&REV_59
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: N/A
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Disabled
Running At 66 MHz: Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc
Driver Description: AMD SMBus
Driver Provider: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc
Driver Version: 5.12.0.38
Driver Date: 29-Aug-2017
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_790B&SUBSYS_87611043&REV_59\3&11583659&0&A0

AMD Carrizo FCH - LPC Bridge

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD Carrizo FCH - LPC Bridge
Original Device Name: AMD Carrizo FCH - LPC Bridge
Device Class: PCI-to-ISA Bridge
Revision ID: 51
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:20:3
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_790E&SUBSYS_87611043&REV_51
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: N/A
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Enabled
Running At 66 MHz: Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
Driver Description: PCI standard ISA bridge
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_790E&SUBSYS_87611043&REV_51\3&11583659&0&A3

AMD Zen - Data Fabric

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
Original Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
Revision ID: 0
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:24:0
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1460&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: N/A
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Disabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1460&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00\3&11583659&0&C0

AMD Zen - Data Fabric

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
Original Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
Revision ID: 0
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:24:1
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1461&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: N/A
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Disabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1461&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00\3&11583659&0&C1

AMD Zen - Data Fabric

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
Original Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
Revision ID: 0
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:24:2
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1462&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: N/A
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Disabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1462&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00\3&11583659&0&C2

AMD Zen - Data Fabric

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
Original Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
Revision ID: 0
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:24:3
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1463&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: N/A
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Disabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1463&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00\3&11583659&0&C3

AMD Zen - Data Fabric

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
Original Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
Revision ID: 0
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:24:4
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1464&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: N/A
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Disabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1464&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00\3&11583659&0&C4

AMD Zen - Data Fabric

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
Original Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
Revision ID: 0
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:24:5
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1465&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: N/A
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Disabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1465&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00\3&11583659&0&C5

AMD Zen - Data Fabric

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
Original Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
Revision ID: 0
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:24:6
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1466&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: N/A
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Disabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1466&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00\3&11583659&0&C6

AMD Zen - Data Fabric

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
Original Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
Revision ID: 0
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:24:7
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1467&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: N/A
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Disabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1467&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00\3&11583659&0&C7

AMD Zen - Data Fabric

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
Original Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
Revision ID: 0
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:25:0
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1460&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: N/A
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Disabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1460&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00\3&11583659&0&C8

AMD Zen - Data Fabric

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
Original Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
Revision ID: 0
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:25:1
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1461&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: N/A
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Disabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1461&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00\3&11583659&0&C9

AMD Zen - Data Fabric

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
Original Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
Revision ID: 0
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:25:2
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1462&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: N/A
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Disabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1462&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00\3&11583659&0&CA

AMD Zen - Data Fabric

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
Original Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
Revision ID: 0
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:25:3
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1463&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: N/A
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Disabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1463&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00\3&11583659&0&CB

AMD Zen - Data Fabric

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
Original Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
Revision ID: 0
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:25:4
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1464&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: N/A
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Disabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1464&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00\3&11583659&0&CC

AMD Zen - Data Fabric

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
Original Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
Revision ID: 0
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:25:5
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1465&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: N/A
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Disabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1465&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00\3&11583659&0&CD

AMD Zen - Data Fabric

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
Original Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
Revision ID: 0
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:25:6
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1466&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: N/A
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Disabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1466&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00\3&11583659&0&CE

AMD Zen - Data Fabric

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
Original Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
Revision ID: 0
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:25:7
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1467&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: N/A
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Disabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1467&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00\3&11583659&0&CF

PCI Bus #64

AMD Zen - Root Complex

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD Zen - Root Complex
Original Device Name: AMD Zen - Root Complex
Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
Revision ID: 0
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 64:0:0
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1450&SUBSYS_87611043&REV_00
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: N/A
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Disabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1450&SUBSYS_87611043&REV_00\3&2411E6FE&0&00

AMD Zen - IOMMU

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD Zen - IOMMU
Original Device Name: AMD Zen - IOMMU
Device Class: IOMMU
Revision ID: 0
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 64:0:2
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1451&SUBSYS_14511022&REV_00
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: INTA#
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Disabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: AMD
Driver Description: AMD IOMMU Device
Driver Provider: AMD
Driver Version: 1.2.0.30
Driver Date: 04-Apr-2016
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1451&SUBSYS_14511022&REV_00\3&2411E6FE&0&02

AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
Original Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
Revision ID: 0
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 64:1:0
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1452&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: N/A
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Disabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1452&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00\3&2411E6FE&0&08

AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
Original Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
Revision ID: 0
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 64:2:0
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1452&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: N/A
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Disabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1452&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00\3&2411E6FE&0&10

AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
Original Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
Revision ID: 0
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 64:3:0
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1452&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: N/A
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Disabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1452&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00\3&2411E6FE&0&18

AMD Zen - PCIe GPP Bridge

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe GPP Bridge
Original Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe GPP Bridge
Device Class: PCI-to-PCI Bridge
Revision ID: 0
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 64:3:1
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1453&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
[PCI Express]
Version: 3.0
Maximum Link Width: 16x
Current Link Width: 16x
Maximum Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
Current Link Speed: 2.5 GT/s
Device/Port Type: Root Port of PCI Express Root Complex
Slot Implemented: Yes
Hot-Plug: Not Capable
Hot-Plug Surprise: Not Capable
Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L1
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: Disabled
L0s Exit Latency: 256 - 512 ns
L1 Exit Latency: 32 - 64 us
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: N/A
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Enabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
Driver Description: PCI Express Root Port
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.125
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1453&SUBSYS_87611043&REV_00\3&2411E6FE&0&19

PCI Express x16 Bus #65

GIGABYTE GeForce GTX 980 Ti

[General Information]
Device Name: GIGABYTE GeForce GTX 980 Ti
Original Device Name: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti (GM200-310)
Device Class: VGA Compatible Adapter
Revision ID: A1
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 65:0:0
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_17C8&SUBSYS_36CB1458&REV_A1
[PCI Express]
Version: 3.0
Maximum Link Width: 16x
Current Link Width: 16x
Maximum Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
Current Link Speed: 2.5 GT/s
Device/Port Type: Legacy PCI Express Endpoint
Slot Implemented: No
Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: None
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: Disabled
L0s Exit Latency: 256 - 512 ns
L1 Exit Latency: 2 - 4 us
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: IRQ86
Interrupt Pin: INTA#
Memory Base Address 0 EB000000
Memory Base Address 1 D0000000
Memory Base Address 3 E0000000
I/O Base Address 5 E000
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Enabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: NVIDIA
Driver Description: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti
Driver Provider: NVIDIA
Driver Version: 23.21.13.8843 (GeForce 388.43)
Driver Date: 26-Nov-2017
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_17C8&SUBSYS_36CB1458&REV_A1\4&2A522381&0&0019

NVIDIA GM200 - High Definition Audio Controller

[General Information]
Device Name: NVIDIA GM200 - High Definition Audio Controller
Original Device Name: NVIDIA GM200 - High Definition Audio Controller
Device Class: Mixed mode device
Revision ID: A1
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 65:0:1
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0FB0&SUBSYS_36CB1458&REV_A1
[PCI Express]
Version: 3.0
Maximum Link Width: 16x
Current Link Width: 16x
Maximum Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
Current Link Speed: 2.5 GT/s
Device/Port Type: PCI Express Endpoint
Slot Implemented: No
Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: None
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: Disabled
L0s Exit Latency: 256 - 512 ns
L1 Exit Latency: 2 - 4 us
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: IRQ87
Interrupt Pin: INTB#
Memory Base Address 0 EC080000
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Enabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: Microsoft
Driver Description: High Definition Audio Controller
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
Driver Date: 27-Sep-2017
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0FB0&SUBSYS_36CB1458&REV_A1\4&2A522381&0&0119

AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
Original Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
Revision ID: 0
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 64:4:0
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1452&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: N/A
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Disabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1452&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00\3&2411E6FE&0&20

AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
Original Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
Revision ID: 0
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 64:7:0
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1452&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: N/A
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Disabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1452&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00\3&2411E6FE&0&38

AMD Zen - Internal PCIe GPP Bridge 0 to Bus B/C

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD Zen - Internal PCIe GPP Bridge 0 to Bus B/C
Original Device Name: AMD Zen - Internal PCIe GPP Bridge 0 to Bus B/C
Device Class: PCI-to-PCI Bridge
Revision ID: 0
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 64:7:1
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1454&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
[PCI Express]
Version: 3.0
Maximum Link Width: 16x
Current Link Width: 16x
Maximum Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
Current Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
Device/Port Type: Root Port of PCI Express Root Complex
Slot Implemented: No
Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L0s and L1
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: L0s Entry
L0s Exit Latency: < 64 ns
L1 Exit Latency: < 1 us
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: INTA#
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Enabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
Driver Description: PCI Express Root Port
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.125
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1454&SUBSYS_14541022&REV_00\3&2411E6FE&0&39

PCI Express x16 Bus #66

AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Function

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Function
Original Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Function
Device Class: Non-Essential Instrumentation Function
Revision ID: 0
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 66:0:0
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_145A&SUBSYS_145A1022&REV_00
[PCI Express]
Version: 3.0
Maximum Link Width: 16x
Current Link Width: 16x
Maximum Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
Current Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
Device/Port Type: PCI Express Endpoint
Slot Implemented: No
Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L0s and L1
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: L0s Entry
L0s Exit Latency: < 64 ns
L1 Exit Latency: < 1 us
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: N/A
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Enabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: Advanced Micro Devices
Driver Description: AMD PCI
Driver Provider: Advanced Micro Devices
Driver Version: 1.0.0.42
Driver Date: 09-Oct-2017
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_145A&SUBSYS_145A1022&REV_00\4&3A3540B1&0&0039

AMD Zen - Cryptographic Coprocessor PSPCPP

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD Zen - Cryptographic Coprocessor PSPCPP
Original Device Name: AMD Zen - Cryptographic Coprocessor PSPCPP
Device Class: Unknown En/Decryption
Revision ID: 0
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 66:0:2
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1456&SUBSYS_14561022&REV_00
[PCI Express]
Version: 3.0
Maximum Link Width: 16x
Current Link Width: 16x
Maximum Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
Current Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
Device/Port Type: PCI Express Endpoint
Slot Implemented: No
Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L0s and L1
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: L0s Entry
L0s Exit Latency: < 64 ns
L1 Exit Latency: < 1 us
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: INTB#
Memory Base Address 2 EC400000
Memory Base Address 5 EC3FE000
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Disabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: Advanced Micro Devices Inc.
Driver Description: AMD PSP 3.0 Device
Driver Provider: Advanced Micro Devices Inc.
Driver Version: 4.4.0.0
Driver Date: 01-Jun-2017
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1456&SUBSYS_14561022&REV_00\4&3A3540B1&0&0239

AMD Zen - USB3 xHCI Controller

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD Zen - USB3 xHCI Controller
Original Device Name: AMD Zen - USB3 xHCI Controller
Device Class: USB xHCI Controller
Revision ID: 0
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 66:0:3
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_145C&SUBSYS_145C1022&REV_00
[PCI Express]
Version: 3.0
Maximum Link Width: 16x
Current Link Width: 16x
Maximum Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
Current Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
Device/Port Type: PCI Express Endpoint
Slot Implemented: No
Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L0s and L1
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: L0s Entry
L0s Exit Latency: < 64 ns
L1 Exit Latency: < 1 us
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: INTC#
Memory Base Address 0 EC200000
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Enabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
USB Version Supported: 3.0
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: Generic USB xHCI Host Controller
Driver Description: USB xHCI Compliant Host Controller
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.125
Driver Date: 06-Dec-2017
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_145C&SUBSYS_145C1022&REV_00\4&3A3540B1&0&0339

USB Root Hub

[Port1] : No Device Connected

[Port2] : No Device Connected

[Port3] : No Device Connected

[Port4] : USB Composite Device

[Device Information]
Device Manufacturer: Corsair
Product Name: Corsair K95 RGB Gaming Keyboard
Serial Number: 1803E012AE3998A453481C20F5001945
USB Version Supported: 2.00
USB Device Speed: USB 1.1 Full-speed
Driver Description: USB Composite Device
Hardware ID: USB\VID_1B1C&PID_1B11
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard USB Host Controller)
Driver Description: USB Composite Device
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId USB\VID_1B1C&PID_1B11\1803E012AE3998A453481C20F5001945

[Port5] : No Device Connected

[Port6] : No Device Connected

[Port7] : No Device Connected

[Port8] : No Device Connected

AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
Original Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
Revision ID: 0
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 64:8:0
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1452&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: N/A
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Disabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1452&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00\3&2411E6FE&0&40

AMD Zen - Internal PCIe GPP Bridge 0 to Bus B/C

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD Zen - Internal PCIe GPP Bridge 0 to Bus B/C
Original Device Name: AMD Zen - Internal PCIe GPP Bridge 0 to Bus B/C
Device Class: PCI-to-PCI Bridge
Revision ID: 0
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 64:8:1
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1454&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
[PCI Express]
Version: 3.0
Maximum Link Width: 16x
Current Link Width: 16x
Maximum Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
Current Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
Device/Port Type: Root Port of PCI Express Root Complex
Slot Implemented: No
Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L0s and L1
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: L0s Entry
L0s Exit Latency: < 64 ns
L1 Exit Latency: < 1 us
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: INTA#
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Enabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
Driver Description: PCI Express Root Port
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.125
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1454&SUBSYS_14541022&REV_00\3&2411E6FE&0&41

PCI Express x16 Bus #67

AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Function

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Function
Original Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Function
Device Class: Non-Essential Instrumentation Function
Revision ID: 0
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 67:0:0
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1455&SUBSYS_14551022&REV_00
[PCI Express]
Version: 3.0
Maximum Link Width: 16x
Current Link Width: 16x
Maximum Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
Current Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
Device/Port Type: PCI Express Endpoint
Slot Implemented: No
Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L0s and L1
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: L0s Entry
L0s Exit Latency: < 64 ns
L1 Exit Latency: < 1 us
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: N/A
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Enabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: Advanced Micro Devices
Driver Description: AMD PCI
Driver Provider: Advanced Micro Devices
Driver Version: 1.0.0.42
Driver Date: 09-Oct-2017
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1455&SUBSYS_14551022&REV_00\4&1DA3795B&0&0041

AMD Carrizo FCH - SATA AHCI Controller (MS)

[General Information]
Device Name: AMD Carrizo FCH - SATA AHCI Controller (MS)
Original Device Name: AMD Carrizo FCH - SATA AHCI Controller (MS)
Device Class: SATA AHCI Controller
Revision ID: 51
PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 67:0:2
PCI Latency Timer: 0
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_7901&SUBSYS_87611043&REV_51
[PCI Express]
Version: 3.0
Maximum Link Width: 16x
Current Link Width: 16x
Maximum Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
Current Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
Device/Port Type: PCI Express Endpoint
Slot Implemented: No
Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L0s and L1
Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: L0s Entry
L0s Exit Latency: < 64 ns
L1 Exit Latency: < 1 us
[System Resources]
Interrupt Line: N/A
Interrupt Pin: INTB#
Memory Base Address 5 EC500000
[Features]
Bus Mastering: Disabled
Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
[SATA Host Controller]
Interface Speed Supported: Gen3 6.0 Gbps
Number Of Ports: 1
External SATA Support: Not Capable
Aggressive Link Power Management: Capable
Staggered Spin-up: Not Capable
Mechanical Presence Switch: Capable
Command Queue Acceleration: Capable
64-bit Addressing: Capable
AHCI Status: Enabled
AHCI Version: 1.31
Ports Implemented: 0
[SATA Port#0]
Port Status: No Device Present
External SATA Port: Not Capable
Hot Plug: Not Capable
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: Standard SATA AHCI Controller
Driver Description: Standard SATA AHCI Controller
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.98
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_7901&SUBSYS_87611043&REV_51\4&1DA3795B&0&0241

Video Adapter

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti

Video Chipset: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti
Video Chipset Codename: GM200-310
Video Memory: 6144 MBytes of GDDR5 SDRAM [Hynix]Video Card: GIGABYTE GeForce GTX 980 Ti
Video Bus: PCIe v3.0 x16 (8.0 GT/s) @ x16 (2.5 GT/s)
Video RAMDAC: Integrated RAMDAC
Video BIOS Version: 84.00.36.00.7e
Video Chipset Revision: A1
[Performance]
Processor Clock: 135.0 MHz
Video Unit Clock: 405.0 MHz
Memory Clock: 202.5 MHz (Effective 810.0 MHz)
Memory Bus Width: 384-bit
Number Of ROPs: 96
Number Of Unified Shaders: 2816
Number Of TMUs (Texture Mapping Units): 176
ASIC Quality: 67.4 %
NVIDIA SLI Capability: Capable
NVIDIA SLI Status: Not Present
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_17C8&SUBSYS_36CB1458&REV_A1
PCI Location (Busev:Fnc): 65:00:0
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: NVIDIA
Driver Description: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti
Driver Provider: NVIDIA
Driver Version: 23.21.13.8843 (GeForce 388.43)
Driver Date: 26-Nov-2017
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_17C8&SUBSYS_36CB1458&REV_A1\4&2A522381&0&0019

Monitor

ViewSonic [Unknown Model: VSC0C28]

[General information]
Monitor Name: ViewSonic [Unknown Model: VSC0C28]
Monitor Name (Manuf): VX2453 Series
Serial Number: SDA113616580
Date Of Manufacture: Week: 36, Year: 2011
Monitor Hardware ID: Monitor\VSC0C28
Max. Vertical Size: 29 cm
Max. Horizontal Size: 52 cm
Horizontal Frequency: 15 - 83 kHz
Vertical Frequency: 50 - 76 Hz
Maximum Pixel Clock: 180 MHz
[Advanced parameters]
Input Signal: Digital
Display Type: RGB color
Gamma Factor: 2.20
[DPMS Modes]
Standby: Not Supported
Suspend: Not Supported
Active Off: Supported
Standard Colour Space: Supported
Preferred Timing Mode: Supported
Default GTF Supported: Not Supported
DFP 1.x Compatible: No
[Supported Video Modes]
1680 x 1050 60 Hz
1600 x 1200 60 Hz
1440 x 900 60 Hz
1400 x 1050 60 Hz
1280 x 1024 60 Hz
1280 x 960 60 Hz
1152 x 864 75 Hz
1920 x 1080 520 x 290 mm, Pixel Clock 148.50 MHz

Unknown

[General information]
Monitor Name: Unknown
Monitor Name (Manuf): Cintiq 22HDT
Serial Number: 5LAQ000334
Date Of Manufacture: Week: 50, Year: 2015
Monitor Hardware ID: Monitor\WAC1037
Max. Vertical Size: 27 cm
Max. Horizontal Size: 48 cm
Horizontal Frequency: 30 - 80 kHz
Vertical Frequency: 56 - 76 Hz
Maximum Pixel Clock: 170 MHz
[Advanced parameters]
Input Signal: Digital
Display Type: RGB color
Gamma Factor: 2.20
[DPMS Modes]
Standby: Supported
Suspend: Supported
Active Off: Supported
Standard Colour Space: Not Supported
Preferred Timing Mode: Supported
Default GTF Supported: Not Supported
DFP 1.x Compatible: No
[Supported Video Modes]
1280 x 800 60 Hz
1360 x 765 60 Hz
1280 x 1024 60 Hz
1680 x 1050 60 Hz
1920 x 1080 60 Hz
1920 x 1080 476 x 268 mm, Pixel Clock 148.50 MHz

Drives

(S)ATA/ATAPI Drives

Samsung SSD 850 EVO 1TB

[General Information]
Drive Controller: Serial ATA 6Gb/s @ 6Gb/s
Drive Model: Samsung SSD 850 EVO 1TB
Drive Revision: EMT02B6Q
Drive Serial Number: S2RENXAH309674H
World Wide Name: 5002538D40C2D44D
Drive Capacity: 953,869 MBytes (1000 GB)
Drive Capacity [MB]: 953869
Media Rotation Rate: SSD Drive (Non-rotating)
Nominal Form Factor: 2.5"
ATA Major Version Supported: ATA/ATAPI-5, ATA/ATAPI-6, ATA/ATAPI-7, ATA8-ACS, ACS-2
ATA Minor Version Supported: ATA8-ACS version 4c
ATA Transport Version Supported: SATA 3.1
[Drive Geometry]
Number of Cylinders: 16383
Number of Heads: 16
Sectors Per Track: 63
Number of Sectors: 16514064
Total 32-bit LBA Sectors: 268435455
Total 48-bit LBA Sectors: 1953525168
Logical Sector Size: 512 Bytes
Cache Buffer Size: N/A
[Transfer Modes]
Sectors Per Interrupt: Total: 1, Active: 1
Max. PIO Transfer Mode: 4
Multiword DMA Mode: Total: 2, Active: -
Singleword DMA Mode: Total: -, Active: -
Ultra-DMA Mode: Total: 6 (ATA-133), Active: 6 (ATA-133)
Max. Multiword DMA Transfer Rate: 16.7 MBytes/s
Max. PIO with IORDY Transfer Rate: 16.7 MBytes/s
Max. PIO w/o IORDY Transfer Rate: 16.7 MBytes/s
Native Command Queuing: Supported, Max. Depth: 32
TRIM Command: Supported (Indeterminate Read After TRIM)
[Device flags]
Fixed Drive: Present
Removable Drive: Not Present
Magnetic Storage: Present
LBA Mode: Supported
DMA Mode: Supported
IORDY: Supported
IORDY Disableable: Supported
[Features]
Write Cache: Present, Active
S.M.A.R.T. Feature: Present, Active
Security Feature: Present, Inactive
Removable Media Feature: Not Present, Disabled
Power Management: Present, Active
Advanced Power Management: Not Present, Inactive
Packet Interface: Not Present, Disabled
Look-Ahead Buffer: Present, Active
Host Protected Area: Present, Enabled
Power-Up In Standby: Not Suppported, Inactive
Automatic Acoustic Management: Not Suppported, Inactive
48-bit LBA: Supported, Active
Host-Initiated Link Power Management: Not Supported
Device-Initiated Link Power Management: Supported, Disabled
In-Order Data Delivery: Not Supported
Hardware Feature Control: Supported, Enabled
Software Settings Preservation: Supported, Enabled
NCQ Autosense: Not Supported
Link Power State Device Sleep: Supported, Disabled
Hybrid Information Feature: Not Supported
Rebuild Assist: Not Supported
Power Disable: Not Supported
All Write Cache Non-Volatile: Not Supported
Extended Number of User Addressable Sectors: Not Supported
CFast Specification: Not Supported
NCQ Priority Information: Not Supported
Host Automatic Partial to Slumber Transitions: Not Supported
Device Automatic Partial to Slumber Transitions: Not Supported
NCQ Streaming: Not Supported
NCQ Queue Management Command: Not Supported
DevSleep to Reduced Power State: Supported
Extended Power Conditions Feature: Not Supported
Sense Data Reporting Feature: Not Supported
Free-Fall Control Feature: Not Supported
Write-Read-Verify Feature: Supported, Disabled
[Security]
Security Feature: Supported
Security Status: Disabled
Security Locked: Disabled
Security Frozen: Enabled
Enhanced Security Erase: Supported
Sanitize Feature: Not Supported
Sanitize Device - Crypto Scramble: Not Supported
Sanitize Device - Overwrite: Not Supported
Sanitize Device - Block Erase: Not Supported
Sanitize Device - Antifreeze Lock: Not Supported
Device Encrypts All User Data: Supported
Trusted Computing: Supported
[Self-Monitoring, Analysis and Reporting Technology (S.M.A.R.T.)]
[05] Reallocated Sector Count: 100/10, Worst: 100
[09] Power-On Hours/Cycle Count: 99/Always OK, Worst: 99 (1049 hours / 43.7 days)
[0C] Power Cycle Count: 99/Always OK, Worst: 99 (Data = 448,0)
[B1] Wear Leveling Count: 99/Always OK, Worst: 99 (Data = 3,0)
[B3] Used Reserved Block Count (Total): 100/10, Worst: 100
[B5] Program Fail Count (Total): 100/10, Worst: 100
[B6] Erase Fail Count (Total): 100/10, Worst: 100
[B7] Runtime Bad Block (Total): 100/10, Worst: 100
[BB] Uncorrectable Error Count: 100/Always OK, Worst: 100
[BE] Airflow Temperature: 65/Always OK, Worst: 54 (35.0 у)
[C3] ECC Error Rate: 200/Always OK, Worst: 200
[C7] SATA CRC Error Count: 100/Always OK, Worst: 100
[EB] POR Recovery Count: 99/Always OK, Worst: 99 (Data = 127,0)
[F1] Total Host Writes: 99/Always OK, Worst: 99 (Data = 3392298095,1)
Drive Remaining Life 99%

Audio

AMD Zen - HD Audio Controller

Audio Adapter: AMD Zen - HD Audio Controller
Audio Controller Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1457&SUBSYS_874F1043&REV_00
High Definition Audio Codec: RealTek
Audio Codec Hardware ID: HDAUDIO\FUNC_01&VEN_10EC&DEV_1220&SUBSYS_00000000
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: Realtek
Driver Description: Realtek High Definition Audio
Driver Provider: Realtek Semiconductor Corp.
Driver Version: 6.0.1.8210
Driver Date: 10-Jul-2017
DeviceInstanceId HDAUDIO\FUNC_01&VEN_10EC&DEV_1220&SUBSYS_1043874F&REV_1000\5&1A8BCDA3&0&0001

NVIDIA GM200 - High Definition Audio Controller

Audio Adapter: NVIDIA GM200 - High Definition Audio Controller
Audio Controller Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0FB0&SUBSYS_36CB1458&REV_A1

Network

Atheros/Qualcomm QCA6174 802.11ac Wireless Network Adapter

[General information]
Network Card: Atheros/Qualcomm QCA6174 802.11ac Wireless Network Adapter
Vendor Description: Microsoft
MAC Address: E0-4F-43-70-5E-8E
[Capabilities]
Maximum Link Speed: 2460 Mbps
Transmit Buffer Size: 9 Bytes
Receive Buffer Size: 9 Bytes
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_168C&DEV_003E&SUBSYS_87521043&REV_32
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: Qualcomm Atheros Communications Inc.
Driver Description: Qualcomm Atheros QCA61x4A Wireless Network Adapter
Driver Provider: Qualcomm Atheros Communications Inc.
Driver Version: 12.0.0.309
Driver Date: 17-Apr-2017
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_168C&DEV_003E&SUBSYS_87521043&REV_32\6&382B5092&0&00000209

Wilocity, Device ID: 0310

[General information]
Network Card: Wilocity, Device ID: 0310
Vendor Description: Microsoft
MAC Address: DC-EF-CA-E7-90-26
[Capabilities]
Maximum Link Speed: 54 Mbps
Transmit Buffer Size: 6201344 Bytes
Receive Buffer Size: 6201344 Bytes
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1AE9&DEV_0310&SUBSYS_00001AE9&REV_02
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: Qualcomm Atheros
Driver Description: Qualcomm Atheros Sparrow 11ad Wireless Network Adapter
Driver Provider: Qualcomm Atheros
Driver Version: 1.1.5.89
Driver Date: 10-Mar-2017
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1AE9&DEV_0310&SUBSYS_00001AE9&REV_02\6&2A24000F&0&00080209

Intel I211AT Copper (Pearsonville) Network Adapter

[General information]
Network Card: Intel I211AT Copper (Pearsonville) Network Adapter
Vendor Description: Intel(R) I211 Gigabit Network Connection
MAC Address: 10-7B-44-91-35-67
[Capabilities]
Maximum Link Speed: 1000 Mbps
Transmit Buffer Size: 1550336 Bytes
Receive Buffer Size: 779264 Bytes
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_1539&SUBSYS_85F01043&REV_03
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: Intel
Driver Description: Intel(R) I211 Gigabit Network Connection
Driver Provider: Intel
Driver Version: 12.15.184.0
Driver Date: 07-Dec-2016
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_1539&SUBSYS_85F01043&REV_03\107B44FFFF913A8200

Aquantia AQtion AQC107 10Gbit Network Adapter

[General information]
Network Card: Aquantia AQtion AQC107 10Gbit Network Adapter
Vendor Description: Aquantia AQtion Network Adapter
MAC Address: 10-7B-44-90-B9-AF
[Capabilities]
Maximum Link Speed: 1000 Mbps
Transmit Buffer Size: 18460672 Bytes
Receive Buffer Size: 4606154 Bytes
Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1D6A&DEV_D107&SUBSYS_872E1043&REV_02
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: Aquantia
Driver Description: ROG AREION 10G (NDIS 6.50 Miniport)
Driver Provider: Aquantia
Driver Version: 1.40.25.0
Driver Date: 21-Feb-2017
DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1D6A&DEV_D107&SUBSYS_872E1043&REV_02\6&7DB0FF9&0&00200209

Ports

Serial Ports

Parallel Ports

USB

USB xHCI Compliant Host Controller

Root Hub

[Port1] : No Device Connected

[Port2] : No Device Connected

[Port3] : No Device Connected

[Port4] : USB Mass Storage Device

[Device Information]
Device Manufacturer: Corsair
Product Name: Slider 3.0
Serial Number: 1211296954
USB Version Supported: 3.00
USB Device Speed: USB 3.0 SuperSpeed
Driver Description: USB Mass Storage Device
Hardware ID: USB\VID_1B1C&PID_1A06
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: Compatible USB storage device
Driver Description: USB Mass Storage Device
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId USB\VID_1B1C&PID_1A06\1211296954

[Port5] : No Device Connected

[Port6] : No Device Connected

[Port7] : No Device Connected

[Port8] : No Device Connected

[Port9] : No Device Connected

[Port10] : Qualcomm Atheros QCA61x4A Bluetooth 4.1

[Device Information]
Device Manufacturer: ASUSTek
Product Name: -
Serial Number: -
USB Version Supported: 1.10
USB Device Speed: USB 1.1 Full-speed
Driver Description: Qualcomm Atheros QCA61x4A Bluetooth 4.1
Hardware ID: USB\VID_0B05&PID_1868
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: Qualcomm Atheros Communications
Driver Description: Qualcomm Atheros QCA61x4A Bluetooth 4.1
Driver Provider: Qualcomm Atheros Communications
Driver Version: 10.0.0.303
Driver Date: 21-Mar-2017
DeviceInstanceId USB\VID_0B05&PID_1868\6&61C3BDB&0&10

[Port11] : USB Composite Device

[Device Information]
Device Manufacturer: Logitech
Product Name: Gaming Mouse G600
Serial Number: 6EF5641B90870017
USB Version Supported: 2.00
USB Device Speed: USB 1.1 Full-speed
Driver Description: USB Composite Device
Hardware ID: USB\VID_046D&PID_C24A
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard USB Host Controller)
Driver Description: USB Composite Device
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId USB\VID_046D&PID_C24A\6EF5641B90870017

[Port12] : No Device Connected

[Port13] : No Device Connected

[Port14] : No Device Connected

[Port15] : No Device Connected

[Port16] : No Device Connected

[Port17] : USB Mass Storage Device

[Device Information]
Device Manufacturer: SanDisk
Product Name: Ultra Fit
Serial Number: 4C531001561109103233
USB Version Supported: 3.00 (Connected to a USB 2.00 Port)
USB Device Speed: USB 2.0 High-speed
Driver Description: USB Mass Storage Device
Hardware ID: USB\VID_0781&PID_5583
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: Compatible USB storage device
Driver Description: USB Mass Storage Device
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId USB\VID_0781&PID_5583\4C531001561109103233

[Port18] : USB Composite Device

[Device Information]
Device Manufacturer: Logitech
Product Name: USB Receiver
Serial Number: N/A
USB Version Supported: 2.00
USB Device Speed: USB 1.1 Full-speed
Driver Description: USB Composite Device
Hardware ID: USB\VID_046D&PID_C52B
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard USB Host Controller)
Driver Description: USB Composite Device
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId USB\VID_046D&PID_C52B\6&61C3BDB&0&18

[Port19] : USB Input Device

[Device Information]
Device Manufacturer: AsusTek Computer Inc.
Product Name: AURA Custom Human interface
Serial Number: 00000000001A
USB Version Supported: 2.00
USB Device Speed: USB 1.1 Full-speed
Driver Description: USB Input Device
Hardware ID: USB\VID_0B05&PID_1867
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
Driver Description: USB Input Device
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId USB\VID_0B05&PID_1867\00000000001A

[Port20] : No Device Connected

[Port21] : No Device Connected

[Port22] : No Device Connected

USB xHCI Compliant Host Controller

Root Hub

[Port1] : Generic USB Hub

[Device Information]
Device Manufacturer: Wacom Co., Ltd.
Product Name: Cintiq 22HDT HUB
Serial Number: N/A
USB Version Supported: 2.00
USB Device Speed: USB 2.0 High-speed
Driver Description: Generic USB Hub
Hardware ID: USB\VID_056A&PID_005C
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard USB HUBs)
Driver Description: Generic USB Hub
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.64
Driver Date: 23-Oct-2017
DeviceInstanceId USB\VID_056A&PID_005C\6&1CD5F76C&0&1

[Port1] : USB Composite Device

[Device Information]
Device Manufacturer: Wacom Co.,Ltd.
Product Name: Cintiq 22HDT TOUCH
Serial Number: N/A
USB Version Supported: 2.00
USB Device Speed: USB 1.1 Full-speed
Driver Description: USB Composite Device
Hardware ID: USB\VID_056A&PID_005E
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard USB Host Controller)
Driver Description: USB Composite Device
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId USB\VID_056A&PID_005E\7&34F0E922&0&1

[Port2] : Wacom Tablet

[Device Information]
Device Manufacturer: Tablet
Product Name: Cintiq 22HDT Tablet
Serial Number: N/A
USB Version Supported: 2.00
USB Device Speed: USB 1.1 Full-speed
Driver Description: Wacom Tablet
Hardware ID: USB\VID_056A&PID_005B
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: Wacom
Driver Description: Wacom Tablet
Driver Provider: Wacom
Driver Version: 3.8.10.3
Driver Date: 05-Oct-2017
DeviceInstanceId USB\VID_056A&PID_005B\7&34F0E922&0&2

[Port3] : No Device Connected

[Port2] : USB Composite Device

[Device Information]
Device Manufacturer: N/A
Product Name: N/A
Serial Number: REV8
USB Version Supported: 1.10
USB Device Speed: USB 1.1 Full-speed
Driver Description: USB Composite Device
Hardware ID: USB\VID_B58E&PID_9E84
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard USB Host Controller)
Driver Description: USB Composite Device
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId USB\VID_B58E&PID_9E84\REV8

[Port3] : No Device Connected

[Port4] : No Device Connected

[Port5] : No Device Connected

[Port6] : No Device Connected

[Port7] : No Device Connected

[Port8] : No Device Connected

USB xHCI Compliant Host Controller

Root Hub

[Port1] : No Device Connected

[Port2] : No Device Connected

[Port3] : No Device Connected

[Port4] : No Device Connected

USB xHCI Compliant Host Controller

Root Hub

[Port1] : No Device Connected

[Port2] : No Device Connected

[Port3] : No Device Connected

[Port4] : USB Composite Device

[Device Information]
Device Manufacturer: Corsair
Product Name: Corsair K95 RGB Gaming Keyboard
Serial Number: 1803E012AE3998A453481C20F5001945
USB Version Supported: 2.00
USB Device Speed: USB 1.1 Full-speed
Driver Description: USB Composite Device
Hardware ID: USB\VID_1B1C&PID_1B11
[Driver Information]
Driver Manufacturer: (Standard USB Host Controller)
Driver Description: USB Composite Device
Driver Provider: Microsoft
Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
DeviceInstanceId USB\VID_1B1C&PID_1B11\1803E012AE3998A453481C20F5001945

[Port5] : No Device Connected

[Port6] : No Device Connected

[Port7] : No Device Connected

[Port8] : No Device Connected


----------



## keng

If you are having bios issues, you need to unplug all hard-drives,battery out, drain caps, back in and do the bios flashback to the very first bios.
Then clear cmos button.
Then get into bios.
Then load optimized defaults.
Reboot.
Then get into bios, then shutdown pc. Battery out.
Then back in, then bios flashback to latest version replacing the ZE.CAP.

Then back into bios.

I suspect that we are all "owned" so to speak, especially if you used The Stilt app.
As soon as you connect *any hard drive strange behaviour starts, including limited OC, etc.*


----------



## Brain29

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *keng*
> 
> If you are having bios issues, you need to unplug all hard-drives,battery out, drain caps, back in and do the bios flashback to the very first bios.
> Then clear cmos button.
> Then get into bios.
> Then load optimized defaults.
> Reboot.
> Then get into bios, then shutdown pc. Battery out.
> Then back in, then bios flashback to latest version replacing the ZE.CAP.
> 
> Then back into bios.
> 
> I suspect that we are all "owned" so to speak, especially if you used The Stilt app.
> As soon as you connect *any hard drive strange behaviour starts, including limited OC, etc.*






I'll take it that far tomorrow but that is kind of absurd to need to take it that far if it works


----------



## Brain29

@elmor

901 -- can't use flashback button no storage devices found in uefi


----------



## elmor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Brain29*
> 
> @elmor
> 
> 901 Issues *updated form 801 - re-flashed 4 times - cleared cmos each time
> 
> 1) still no lights *present since updating to 804 then reverting back
> 2) fan issues still present (min fan power percentage is all over the place regardless of settings) *present since start
> 3) usb storage plugged into back usb ports no longer read after update *first noticed in 804 but now it seems to only apply to usb ports on the back
> *If i plug them into the usb using the headers on the motherboard they are found
> *windows has no issues seeing/reading storage drives
> 
> NEW to 901
> 4) Temperature reading is inaccurate
> @4.1 I usually hit 70c v1.41 - 801 previous
> with 901
> The board never reports higher then 42c
> (@.4.1 during testing at v1.45)
> 
> *water temp for both test would raise from 25c to about 30-35c
> *external reading for 901 showed 70c ish temps (not accurately tested but far from 42c)
> 
> Image of bios settings and fan curves gonewild
> *what I am trying to show is the min power% all fans are the same fan1 has a fan extender with 5 fans *I have removed the extender with the same results)
> 
> settings for 801
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> [2017/12/02 16:04:55]
> Ai Overclock Tuner [D.O.C.P.]
> D.O.C.P. [D.O.C.P DDR4-3200 16-18-18-38-1.35V]
> BCLK Frequency [100.0000]
> Custom CPU Core Ratio [Auto]
> > CPU Core Ratio [40.50]
> Overclocking Enhancement [Auto]
> Performance Bias [Auto]
> Memory Frequency [DDR4-2933MHz]
> Core Performance Boost [Auto]
> SMT Mode [Auto]
> Spread Spectrum [Auto]
> EPU Power Saving Mode [Disabled]
> TPU [Keep Current Settings]
> CPU Core Voltage [Manual mode]
> - CPU Core Voltage Override [1.32500]
> CPU SOC Voltage [Auto]
> DRAM AB Voltage [1.35000]
> DRAM CD Voltage [1.35000]
> 1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
> 1.05V SB Voltage [Auto]
> Target TDP [Auto]
> TRC_EOM [Auto]
> TRTP_EOM [Auto]
> TRRS_S_EOM [Auto]
> TRRS_L_EOM [Auto]
> TWTR_EOM [Auto]
> TWTR_L_EOM [Auto]
> TWCL_EOM [Auto]
> TWR_EOM [Auto]
> TFAW_EOM [Auto]
> TRCT_EOM [Auto]
> TREFI_EOM [Auto]
> TRDRD_DD_EOM [Auto]
> TRDRD_SD_EOM [Auto]
> TRDRD_SC_EOM [Auto]
> TRDRD_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
> TRDRD_SCL_EOM [Auto]
> TWRWR_DD_EOM [Auto]
> TWRWR_SD_EOM [Auto]
> TWRWR_SC_EOM [Auto]
> TWRWR_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
> TWRWR_SCL_EOM [Auto]
> TWRRD_EOM [Auto]
> TRDWR_EOM [Auto]
> TWRRD_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
> Mem Over Clock Fail Count [Auto]
> DRAM CAS# Latency [16]
> DRAM RAS# to CAS# Read Delay [18]
> DRAM RAS# to CAS# Write Delay [18]
> DRAM RAS# PRE Time [18]
> DRAM RAS# ACT Time [38]
> Trc [Auto]
> TrrdS [Auto]
> TrrdL [Auto]
> Tfaw [Auto]
> TwtrS [Auto]
> TwtrL [Auto]
> Twr [Auto]
> Trcpage [Auto]
> TrdrdScl [Auto]
> TwrwrScl [Auto]
> Trfc [Auto]
> Trfc2 [Auto]
> Trfc4 [Auto]
> Tcwl [Auto]
> Trtp [Auto]
> Trdwr [Auto]
> Twrrd [Auto]
> TwrwrSc [Auto]
> TwrwrSd [Auto]
> TwrwrDd [Auto]
> TrdrdSc [Auto]
> TrdrdSd [Auto]
> TrdrdDd [Auto]
> Tcke [Auto]
> ProcODT [Auto]
> Cmd2T [Auto]
> Gear Down Mode [Auto]
> Power Down Enable [Auto]
> RttNom [Auto]
> RttWr [Auto]
> RttPark [Auto]
> MemAddrCmdSetup [Auto]
> MemCsOdtSetup [Auto]
> MemCkeSetup [Auto]
> MemCadBusClkDrvStren [Auto]
> MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [Auto]
> MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [Auto]
> MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [Auto]
> VTTDDR AB Voltage [Auto]
> VTTDDR CD Voltage [Auto]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA [Auto]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHB [Auto]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHC [Auto]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHD [Auto]
> VPP DRAM AB [Auto]
> VPP DRAM CD [Auto]
> 1.8V Standby Voltage [Auto]
> CPU 3.3v AUX [Auto]
> 2.5V SB Voltage [Auto]
> DRAM R1 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R2 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R3 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R4 Tune [Auto]
> Sense MI Skew [Auto]
> Sense MI Offset [Auto]
> Clock Amplitude [Auto]
> PLL Tune R1 [Auto]
> PLL Tune R2 [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R1 [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R2 [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R3 [Auto]
> Ln2 Tune [Auto]
> PLL Reference Voltage [Auto]
> PLL Reference Voltage 2 [Auto]
> Short Reset [Auto]
> CLDO VDDP voltage [Auto]
> CPU Load-line Calibration [Auto]
> CPU Current Capability [Auto]
> CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Auto]
> VRM Spread Spectrum [Auto]
> CPU Power Duty Control [T.Probe]
> CPU Power Phase Control [Auto]
> CPU Power Thermal Control [120]
> VDDSOC Load-line Calibration [Auto]
> VDDSOC Current Capability [Auto]
> VDDSOC Switching Frequency [Auto]
> VDDSOC Phase Control [Auto]
> VDDSOC Power Thermal Control [120]
> DRAM Current Capability(CHA, CHB) [100%]
> DRAM Current Capability(CHC, CHD) [100%]
> DRAM Power Phase Control(CHA, CHB) [Extreme]
> DRAM Power Phase Control(CHC, CHD) [Extreme]
> DRAM Switching Frequency(CHA, CHB) [Auto]
> DRAM Switching Frequency(CHC, CHD) [Auto]
> DRAM VBoot Voltage AB [Auto]
> DRAM VBoot Voltage CD [Auto]
> Security Device Support [Enable]
> Security Device Support [Enable]
> Pending operation [None]
> Platform Hierarchy [Enabled]
> Storage Hierarchy [Enabled]
> Endorsement Hierarchy [Enabled]
> TPM2.0 UEFI Spec Version [TCG_2]
> Physical Presence Spec Version [1.3]
> TPM Device Selection [Discrete TPM]
> Erase fTPM NV for factory reset [Enabled]
> SATA Port Enable [Enabled]
> PT Aggresive SATA Device Sleep Port 0 [Auto]
> PT Aggresive SATA Device Sleep Port 1 [Auto]
> PT XHCI GEN1 [Auto]
> PT XHCI GEN2 [Auto]
> PT USB Equalization4 [Auto]
> PT USB Redriver [Auto]
> U31G2_1 [Enabled]
> USB3.1_2 [Enabled]
> U31G1_9 [Enabled]
> U31G1_10 [Enabled]
> U31G1_11 [Enabled]
> U31G1_12 [Enabled]
> PT USB30 PORT4 [Enabled]
> PT USB30 PORT5 [Enabled]
> USB13 [Enabled]
> USB14 [Enabled]
> USB_3 [Enabled]
> USB_5 [Enabled]
> USB_6 [Enabled]
> USB_4 [Enabled]
> PT PCIE PORT 0 [Auto]
> PT PCIE PORT 1 [Auto]
> PT PCIE PORT 2 [Auto]
> PT PCIE PORT 3 [Auto]
> PT PCIE PORT 4 [Auto]
> PT PCIE PORT 5 [Auto]
> PT PCIE PORT 6 [Auto]
> PT PCIE PORT 7 [Auto]
> Onboard LED [Enabled]
> SATA Port Enable [Enabled]
> SATA Mode [AHCI]
> SMART Self Test [Enabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> ErP Ready [Disabled]
> Restore On AC Power Loss [Power Off]
> Power On By PCI-E/PCI [Disabled]
> Power On By RTC [Disabled]
> HD Audio Controller [Enabled]
> CPU PCIE Link Mode [Auto]
> SB PCIE Link Mode [Auto]
> PCIEX16_1 Bandwidth [X16 Mode]
> PCIEX8_2 Bandwidth [X8 Mode]
> PCIEX16_3 Bandwidth [X16 Mode]
> PCIE_X8/X4_4 Bandwidth [X4 Mode]
> Asmedia USB 3.1 Controller [Enabled]
> USB Type C Power Switch for U31G2_1 [Auto]
> USB Type C Power Switch for U31G2_EC1 [Auto]
> When system is in working state [On]
> When system is in sleep, hibernate or soft off states [On]
> Intel LAN Controller [Enabled]
> Intel LAN OPROM [Disabled]
> Wi-Fi Controller [Enabled]
> Bluetooth Controller [Enabled]
> NX Mode [Enabled]
> SVM Mode [Disabled]
> Network Stack [Disabled]
> Debug Port Table [Disabled]
> Debug Port Table 2 [Disabled]
> Legacy USB Support [Enabled]
> XHCI Hand-off [Enabled]
> Corsair Slider 3.0 1.00 [Auto]
> U31G2_EC1 [Enabled]
> U31G2_E2 [Enabled]
> U31G2_1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_2 [Enabled]
> U31G1_3 [Enabled]
> U31G1_4 [Enabled]
> U31G1_5 [Enabled]
> U31G1_6 [Enabled]
> U31G1_7 [Enabled]
> U31G1_8 [Enabled]
> U31G1_9 [Enabled]
> U31G1_10 [Enabled]
> U31G1_11 [Enabled]
> U31G1_12 [Enabled]
> USB13 [Enabled]
> USB14 [Enabled]
> CPU Temperature [Monitor]
> MotherBoard Temperature [Monitor]
> VRM Temperature [Monitor]
> PCH Temperature [Monitor]
> T_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
> T_Sensor2 Temperature [Monitor]
> DIMM.2 sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
> DIMM.2 sensor2 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor2 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor3 Temperature [Monitor]
> CPU Fan Speed [Ignore]
> Chassis Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
> HAMP Fan Speed [Monitor]
> W_PUMP+ Speed [Monitor]
> CPU Optional Fan Speed [Monitor]
> COV Fan Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
> W FLOW1 Speed [Monitor]
> Water In T Sensor Temperature [Monitor]
> Water Out T Sensor Temperature [Monitor]
> W FLOW2 Speed [Monitor]
> WB In T Sensor Temperature [Monitor]
> WB Out T Sensor Temperature [Monitor]
> CPU Core Voltage [Monitor]
> 3.3V Voltage [Monitor]
> 5V Voltage [Monitor]
> 12V Voltage [Monitor]
> CPU Q-Fan Control [Disabled]
> W_PUMP+ Control [Disabled]
> COV Fan Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> COV Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
> COV Fan Upper Temperature [74]
> COV Fan Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
> COV Fan Middle Temperature [69]
> COV Fan Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [63]
> COV Fan Lower Temperature [55]
> COV Fan Min. Duty Cycle (%) [48]
> Allow Fan Stop [Disabled]
> Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
> Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Chassis Fan 1 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
> Chassis Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [Ignore]
> Chassis Fan 1 Profile [Manual]
> Chassis Fan 1 Upper Temperature [71]
> Chassis Fan 1 Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
> Chassis Fan 1 Middle Temperature [50]
> Chassis Fan 1 Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [28]
> Chassis Fan 1 Lower Temperature [14]
> Chassis Fan 1 Min. Duty Cycle (%) [28]
> Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Chassis Fan 2 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
> Chassis Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Chassis Fan 2 Profile [Manual]
> Chassis Fan 2 Upper Temperature [75]
> Chassis Fan 2 Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
> Chassis Fan 2 Middle Temperature [70]
> Chassis Fan 2 Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [60]
> Chassis Fan 2 Lower Temperature [65]
> Chassis Fan 2 Min. Duty Cycle (%) [60]
> Allow Fan Stop [Enabled]
> HAMP Fan Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> HAMP Fan Source [CPU]
> HAMP Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
> HAMP Fan Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> HAMP Fan Profile [Manual]
> HAMP Fan Upper Temperature [60]
> HAMP Fan Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
> Chassis Fan 3 Middle Temperature [55]
> Chassis Fan 3 Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [60]
> HAMP Fan Lower Temperature [50]
> HAMP Fan Min. Duty Cycle (%) [60]
> Allow Fan Stop [Enabled]
> Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
> Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [T_Sensor2]
> Extension Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Extension Fan 1 Profile [Manual]
> Extension Fan 1 Upper Temperature [59]
> Extension Fan 1 Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
> Extension Fan 1 Middle Temperature [50]
> Extension Fan 1 Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [38]
> Extension Fan 1 Lower Temperature [20]
> Extension Fan 1 Min. Duty Cycle (%) [38]
> Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Extension Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Extension Fan 2 Profile [Manual]
> Extension Fan 2 Upper Temperature [70]
> Extension Fan 2 Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
> Extension Fan 2 Middle Temperature [54]
> Extension Fan 2 Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [30]
> Extension Fan 2 Lower Temperature [27]
> Extension Fan 2 Min. Duty Cycle (%) [30]
> Allow Fan Stop [Disabled]
> Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [CPU]
> Extension Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Extension Fan 3 Profile [Manual]
> Extension Fan 3 Upper Temperature [67]
> Extension Fan 3 Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
> Extension Fan 3 Middle Temperature [56]
> Extension Fan 3 Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [30]
> Extension Fan 3 Lower Temperature [37]
> Extension Fan 3 Min. Duty Cycle (%) [30]
> Allow Fan Stop [Disabled]
> OnChip SATA Channel [Enabled]
> OnChip SATA Type [AHCI]
> U31G1_1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_2 [Enabled]
> U31G1_3 [Enabled]
> U31G1_4 [Enabled]
> U31G1_5 [Enabled]
> U31G1_6 [Enabled]
> U31G1_7 [Enabled]
> U31G1_8 [Enabled]
> IR Config [Disabled]
> SD Mode [Disabled]
> SdForce18 Enable [Disabled]
> SD Mode configuration [AMDA]
> Uart 0 Enable [Disabled]
> Uart 1 Enable [Disabled]
> I2C 0 Enable [Disabled]
> I2C 1 Enable [Disabled]
> I2C 2 Enable [Disabled]
> I2C 3 Enable [Disabled]
> Restore On AC Power Loss [Power Off]
> GPIO Devices Support [Disabled]
> ESATA Port On Port 0 [Disabled]
> ESATA Port On Port 1 [Disabled]
> ESATA Port On Port 2 [Disabled]
> ESATA Port On Port 3 [Disabled]
> ESATA Port On Port 4 [Disabled]
> ESATA Port On Port 5 [Disabled]
> ESATA Port On Port 6 [Disabled]
> ESATA Port On Port 7 [Disabled]
> SATA Power On Port 0 [Enabled]
> SATA Power On Port 1 [Enabled]
> SATA Power On Port 2 [Enabled]
> SATA Power On Port 3 [Enabled]
> SATA Power On Port 4 [Enabled]
> SATA Power On Port 5 [Enabled]
> SATA Power On Port 6 [Enabled]
> SATA Power On Port 7 [Enabled]
> SATA Port 0 MODE [Auto]
> SATA Port 1 MODE [Auto]
> SATA Port 2 MODE [Auto]
> SATA Port 3 MODE [Auto]
> SATA Port 4 MODE [Auto]
> SATA Port 5 MODE [Auto]
> SATA Port 6 MODE [Auto]
> SATA Port 7 MODE [Auto]
> SATA Hot-Removabel Support [Disabled]
> SATA 6 AHCI Support [Disabled]
> Int. Clk Differential Spread [Disabled]
> SATA MAXGEN2 CAP OPTION [Disabled]
> SATA CLK Mode Option [INT 100MHz]
> Aggressive Link PM Capability [Enabled]
> Port Multiplier Capability [Enabled]
> SATA Ports Auto Clock Control [Enabled]
> SATA Partial State Capability [Enabled]
> SATA FIS Based Switching [Enabled]
> SATA Command Completion Coalescing Support [Disabled]
> SATA Slumber State Capability [Enabled]
> SATA MSI Capability Support [Disabled]
> SATA Target Support 8 Devices [Disabled]
> Generic Mode [Disabled]
> SATA AHCI Enclosure [Disabled]
> SATA SGPIO 0 [Disabled]
> SATA SGPIO 1 [Disabled]
> SATA PHY PLL [Disabled]
> AC/DC Change Message Delivery [Disabled]
> TimerTick Tracking [Enabled]
> Clock Interrupt Tag [Enabled]
> EHCI Traffic Handling [Disabled]
> Fusion Message C Multi-Core [Disabled]
> Fusion Message C State [Disabled]
> SPI Auto Mode [Disabled]
> SPI Read Mode [Default]
> SPI 100MHz Support [Enabled]
> SPI Normal Speed [33MHz]
> SPI Fast Read Speed [Default]
> SPI Burst Write [Disabled]
> I2C 0 D3 Support [Enabled]
> I2C 1 D3 Support [Enabled]
> I2C 2 D3 Support [Enabled]
> I2C 3 D3 Support [Enabled]
> UART 0 D3 Support [Enabled]
> UART 1 D3 Support [Enabled]
> SATA D3 Support [Enabled]
> EHCI D3 Support [Enabled]
> XHCI D3 Support [Enabled]
> SD D3 Support [Enabled]
> S0I3 [Disabled]
> Chipset Power Saving Features [Enabled]
> SB Clock Spread Spectrum [Enabled]
> SB Clock Spread Spectrum Option [-0.375%]
> HPET In SB [Enabled]
> MsiDis in HPET [Disabled]
> _OSC For PCI0 [Enabled]
> USB Phy Power Down [Disabled]
> PCIB_CLK_Stop Override [0]
> USB MSI Option [Disabled]
> LPC MSI Option [Disabled]
> PCIBridge MSI Option [Disabled]
> AB MSI Option [Disabled]
> SB C1E Support [Disabled]
> SB Hardware Reduced Support [Disabled]
> GPP Serial Debug Bus Enable [Disabled]
> Fast Boot [Enabled]
> Next Boot after AC Power Loss [Normal Boot]
> Boot Logo Display [Auto]
> POST Delay Time [3 sec]
> Boot up NumLock State [Enabled]
> Wait For 'F1' If Error [Enabled]
> Option ROM Messages [Enabled]
> Interrupt 19 Capture [Disabled]
> Setup Mode [Advanced Mode]
> Launch CSM [Enabled]
> Boot Device Control [UEFI and Legacy OPROM]
> Boot from Network Devices [Legacy only]
> Boot from Storage Devices [Legacy only]
> Boot from PCI-E Expansion Devices [Legacy only]
> OS Type [Other OS]
> Setup Animator [Disabled]
> Load from Profile [1]
> Profile Name [OC_CPU_MEM_FAN]
> Save to Profile [2]
> CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
> VDDSOC Voltage [Auto]
> 1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
> BCLK Frequency [Auto]
> CPU Ratio [Auto]
> Bus Interface [PCIEX16_1]
> 
> 
> 
> settings for 901 (i currently have the cpu overclocked to 41 no issues)
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> [2017/12/13 20:36:10]
> Ai Overclock Tuner [D.O.C.P.]
> D.O.C.P. [D.O.C.P DDR4-3200 16-18-18-38-1.35V]
> BCLK Frequency [100.0000]
> Custom CPU Core Ratio [Auto]
> > CPU Core Ratio [Auto]
> Overclocking Enhancement [Auto]
> Performance Bias [Auto]
> Memory Frequency [DDR4-3200MHz]
> Core Performance Boost [Auto]
> SMT Mode [Auto]
> Spread Spectrum [Auto]
> EPU Power Saving Mode [Disabled]
> TPU [Keep Current Settings]
> CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
> CPU SOC Voltage [Auto]
> DRAM AB Voltage [1.35000]
> DRAM CD Voltage [1.35000]
> 1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
> 1.05V SB Voltage [Auto]
> Target TDP [Auto]
> TRC_EOM [Auto]
> TRTP_EOM [Auto]
> TRRS_S_EOM [Auto]
> TRRS_L_EOM [Auto]
> TWTR_EOM [Auto]
> TWTR_L_EOM [Auto]
> TWCL_EOM [Auto]
> TWR_EOM [Auto]
> TFAW_EOM [Auto]
> TRCT_EOM [Auto]
> TREFI_EOM [Auto]
> TRDRD_DD_EOM [Auto]
> TRDRD_SD_EOM [Auto]
> TRDRD_SC_EOM [Auto]
> TRDRD_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
> TRDRD_SCL_EOM [Auto]
> TWRWR_DD_EOM [Auto]
> TWRWR_SD_EOM [Auto]
> TWRWR_SC_EOM [Auto]
> TWRWR_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
> TWRWR_SCL_EOM [Auto]
> TWRRD_EOM [Auto]
> TRDWR_EOM [Auto]
> TWRRD_SCDLR_EOM [Auto]
> Mem Over Clock Fail Count [Auto]
> DRAM CAS# Latency [16]
> DRAM RAS# to CAS# Read Delay [18]
> DRAM RAS# to CAS# Write Delay [18]
> DRAM RAS# PRE Time [18]
> DRAM RAS# ACT Time [38]
> Trc [Auto]
> TrrdS [Auto]
> TrrdL [Auto]
> Tfaw [Auto]
> TwtrS [Auto]
> TwtrL [Auto]
> Twr [Auto]
> Trcpage [Auto]
> TrdrdScl [Auto]
> TwrwrScl [Auto]
> Trfc [Auto]
> Trfc2 [Auto]
> Trfc4 [Auto]
> Tcwl [Auto]
> Trtp [Auto]
> Trdwr [Auto]
> Twrrd [Auto]
> TwrwrSc [Auto]
> TwrwrSd [Auto]
> TwrwrDd [Auto]
> TrdrdSc [Auto]
> TrdrdSd [Auto]
> TrdrdDd [Auto]
> Tcke [Auto]
> ProcODT [Auto]
> Cmd2T [Auto]
> Gear Down Mode [Auto]
> Power Down Enable [Auto]
> RttNom [Auto]
> RttWr [Auto]
> RttPark [Auto]
> MemAddrCmdSetup [Auto]
> MemCsOdtSetup [Auto]
> MemCkeSetup [Auto]
> MemCadBusClkDrvStren [Auto]
> MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [Auto]
> MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [Auto]
> MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [Auto]
> VTTDDR AB Voltage [Auto]
> VTTDDR CD Voltage [Auto]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHA [Auto]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHB [Auto]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHC [Auto]
> DRAM CTRL REF Voltage on CHD [Auto]
> VPP DRAM AB [Auto]
> VPP DRAM CD [Auto]
> 1.8V Standby Voltage [Auto]
> CPU 3.3v AUX [Auto]
> 2.5V SB Voltage [Auto]
> DRAM R1 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R2 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R3 Tune [Auto]
> DRAM R4 Tune [Auto]
> Sense MI Skew [Auto]
> Sense MI Offset [Auto]
> Clock Amplitude [Auto]
> PLL Tune R1 [Auto]
> PLL Tune R2 [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R1 [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R2 [Auto]
> PCIE Tune R3 [Auto]
> Ln2 Tune [Auto]
> PLL Reference Voltage [Auto]
> PLL Reference Voltage 2 [Auto]
> Short Reset [Auto]
> CLDO VDDP voltage [Auto]
> CPU Load-line Calibration [Auto]
> CPU Current Capability [Auto]
> CPU VRM Switching Frequency [Auto]
> VRM Spread Spectrum [Auto]
> CPU Power Duty Control [T.Probe]
> CPU Power Phase Control [Auto]
> CPU Power Thermal Control [120]
> VDDSOC Load-line Calibration [Auto]
> VDDSOC Current Capability [Auto]
> VDDSOC Switching Frequency [Auto]
> VDDSOC Phase Control [Auto]
> VDDSOC Power Thermal Control [120]
> DRAM Current Capability(CHA, CHB) [100%]
> DRAM Current Capability(CHC, CHD) [100%]
> DRAM Power Phase Control(CHA, CHB) [Extreme]
> DRAM Power Phase Control(CHC, CHD) [Extreme]
> DRAM Switching Frequency(CHA, CHB) [Auto]
> DRAM Switching Frequency(CHC, CHD) [Auto]
> DRAM VBoot Voltage AB [Auto]
> DRAM VBoot Voltage CD [Auto]
> Security Device Support [Enable]
> Security Device Support [Enable]
> Pending operation [None]
> Platform Hierarchy [Enabled]
> Storage Hierarchy [Enabled]
> Endorsement Hierarchy [Enabled]
> TPM2.0 UEFI Spec Version [TCG_2]
> Physical Presence Spec Version [1.3]
> TPM Device Selection [Discrete TPM]
> Erase fTPM NV for factory reset [Enabled]
> SATA Port Enable [Enabled]
> PT Aggresive SATA Device Sleep Port 0 [Auto]
> PT Aggresive SATA Device Sleep Port 1 [Auto]
> PT XHCI GEN1 [Auto]
> PT XHCI GEN2 [Auto]
> PT USB Equalization4 [Auto]
> PT USB Redriver [Auto]
> U31G2_1 [Enabled]
> USB3.1_2 [Enabled]
> U31G1_9 [Enabled]
> U31G1_10 [Enabled]
> U31G1_11 [Enabled]
> U31G1_12 [Enabled]
> PT USB30 PORT4 [Enabled]
> PT USB30 PORT5 [Enabled]
> USB13 [Enabled]
> USB14 [Enabled]
> USB_3 [Enabled]
> USB_5 [Enabled]
> USB_6 [Enabled]
> USB_4 [Enabled]
> PT PCIE PORT 0 [Auto]
> PT PCIE PORT 1 [Auto]
> PT PCIE PORT 2 [Auto]
> PT PCIE PORT 3 [Auto]
> PT PCIE PORT 4 [Auto]
> PT PCIE PORT 5 [Auto]
> PT PCIE PORT 6 [Auto]
> PT PCIE PORT 7 [Auto]
> Onboard LED [Disabled]
> SATA Port Enable [Enabled]
> SATA Mode [AHCI]
> SMART Self Test [Enabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> Hot Plug [Disabled]
> ErP Ready [Disabled]
> Restore On AC Power Loss [Power Off]
> Power On By PCI-E/PCI [Disabled]
> Power On By RTC [Disabled]
> HD Audio Controller [Enabled]
> CPU PCIE Link Mode [Auto]
> SB PCIE Link Mode [Auto]
> PCIEX16_1 Bandwidth [X16 Mode]
> PCIEX8_2 Bandwidth [X8 Mode]
> PCIEX16_3 Bandwidth [X16 Mode]
> PCIE_X8/X4_4 Bandwidth [X4 Mode]
> Asmedia USB 3.1 Controller [Enabled]
> USB Type C Power Switch for U31G2_1 [Auto]
> USB Type C Power Switch for U31G2_EC1 [Auto]
> When system is in working state [On]
> When system is in sleep, hibernate or soft off states [On]
> Intel LAN Controller [Enabled]
> Intel LAN OPROM [Disabled]
> Wi-Fi Controller [Enabled]
> Bluetooth Controller [Enabled]
> NX Mode [Enabled]
> SVM Mode [Disabled]
> Network Stack [Disabled]
> Debug Port Table [Disabled]
> Debug Port Table 2 [Disabled]
> Legacy USB Support [Enabled]
> XHCI Hand-off [Enabled]
> SanDisk [Auto]
> Corsair Slider 3.0 1.00 [Auto]
> U31G2_EC1 [Enabled]
> U31G2_E2 [Enabled]
> U31G2_1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_2 [Enabled]
> U31G1_3 [Enabled]
> U31G1_4 [Enabled]
> U31G1_5 [Enabled]
> U31G1_6 [Enabled]
> U31G1_7 [Enabled]
> U31G1_8 [Enabled]
> U31G1_9 [Enabled]
> U31G1_10 [Enabled]
> U31G1_11 [Enabled]
> U31G1_12 [Enabled]
> USB13 [Enabled]
> USB14 [Enabled]
> Hide Asus Logo [Disabled]
> CPU Temperature [Monitor]
> MotherBoard Temperature [Monitor]
> VRM Temperature [Monitor]
> PCH Temperature [Monitor]
> T_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
> T_Sensor2 Temperature [Monitor]
> DIMM.2 sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
> DIMM.2 sensor2 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor1 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor2 Temperature [Monitor]
> EXT_Sensor3 Temperature [Monitor]
> CPU Fan Speed [Ignore]
> Chassis Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
> Chassis Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
> HAMP Fan Speed [Monitor]
> W_PUMP+ Speed [Monitor]
> CPU Optional Fan Speed [Ignore]
> COV Fan Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 1 Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 2 Speed [Monitor]
> Extension Fan 3 Speed [Monitor]
> W FLOW1 Speed [Monitor]
> Water In T Sensor Temperature [Monitor]
> Water Out T Sensor Temperature [Monitor]
> W FLOW2 Speed [Monitor]
> WB In T Sensor Temperature [Monitor]
> WB Out T Sensor Temperature [Monitor]
> CPU Core Voltage [Monitor]
> 3.3V Voltage [Monitor]
> 5V Voltage [Monitor]
> 12V Voltage [Monitor]
> CPU Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> CPU Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
> CPU Fan Speed Lower Limit [200 RPM]
> CPU Fan Profile [Manual]
> CPU Upper Temperature [60]
> CPU Fan Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
> CPU Middle Temperature [45]
> CPU Fan Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [60]
> CPU Lower Temperature [40]
> CPU Fan Min. Duty Cycle (%) [60]
> W_PUMP+ Control [Disabled]
> COV Fan Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> COV Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
> COV Fan Upper Temperature [95]
> COV Fan Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
> COV Fan Middle Temperature [90]
> COV Fan Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
> COV Fan Lower Temperature [70]
> COV Fan Min. Duty Cycle (%) [60]
> Allow Fan Stop [Enabled]
> Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
> Chassis Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [T_Sensor2]
> Chassis Fan 1 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
> Chassis Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Chassis Fan 1 Profile [Standard]
> Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> Chassis Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [T_Sensor2]
> Chassis Fan 2 Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
> Chassis Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Chassis Fan 2 Profile [Standard]
> HAMP Fan Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> HAMP Fan Source [CPU]
> HAMP Fan Smoothing Up/Down Time [0 sec]
> HAMP Fan Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> HAMP Fan Profile [Standard]
> Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Control [PWM Mode]
> Extension Fan 1 Q-Fan Source [T_Sensor2]
> Extension Fan 1 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Extension Fan 1 Profile [Manual]
> Extension Fan 1 Upper Temperature [60]
> Extension Fan 1 Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
> Extension Fan 1 Middle Temperature [25]
> Extension Fan 1 Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [38]
> Extension Fan 1 Lower Temperature [10]
> Extension Fan 1 Min. Duty Cycle (%) [38]
> Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> Extension Fan 2 Q-Fan Source [T_Sensor2]
> Extension Fan 2 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Extension Fan 2 Profile [Manual]
> Extension Fan 2 Upper Temperature [60]
> Extension Fan 2 Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
> Extension Fan 2 Middle Temperature [45]
> Extension Fan 2 Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [60]
> Extension Fan 2 Lower Temperature [40]
> Extension Fan 2 Min. Duty Cycle (%) [5]
> Allow Fan Stop [Disabled]
> Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Control [DC Mode]
> Extension Fan 3 Q-Fan Source [T_Sensor2]
> Extension Fan 3 Speed Low Limit [200 RPM]
> Extension Fan 3 Profile [Manual]
> Extension Fan 3 Upper Temperature [60]
> Extension Fan 3 Max. Duty Cycle (%) [100]
> Extension Fan 3 Middle Temperature [45]
> Extension Fan 3 Middle. Duty Cycle (%) [60]
> Extension Fan 3 Lower Temperature [40]
> Extension Fan 3 Min. Duty Cycle (%) [37]
> Allow Fan Stop [Disabled]
> OnChip SATA Channel [Enabled]
> OnChip SATA Type [AHCI]
> U31G1_1 [Enabled]
> U31G1_2 [Enabled]
> U31G1_3 [Enabled]
> U31G1_4 [Enabled]
> U31G1_5 [Enabled]
> U31G1_6 [Enabled]
> U31G1_7 [Enabled]
> U31G1_8 [Enabled]
> IR Config [Disabled]
> SD Mode [Disabled]
> SdForce18 Enable [Disabled]
> SD Mode configuration [AMDA]
> Uart 0 Enable [Disabled]
> Uart 1 Enable [Disabled]
> I2C 0 Enable [Disabled]
> I2C 1 Enable [Disabled]
> I2C 2 Enable [Disabled]
> I2C 3 Enable [Disabled]
> Restore On AC Power Loss [Power Off]
> GPIO Devices Support [Disabled]
> ESATA Port On Port 0 [Disabled]
> ESATA Port On Port 1 [Disabled]
> ESATA Port On Port 2 [Disabled]
> ESATA Port On Port 3 [Disabled]
> ESATA Port On Port 4 [Disabled]
> ESATA Port On Port 5 [Disabled]
> ESATA Port On Port 6 [Disabled]
> ESATA Port On Port 7 [Disabled]
> SATA Power On Port 0 [Enabled]
> SATA Power On Port 1 [Enabled]
> SATA Power On Port 2 [Enabled]
> SATA Power On Port 3 [Enabled]
> SATA Power On Port 4 [Enabled]
> SATA Power On Port 5 [Enabled]
> SATA Power On Port 6 [Enabled]
> SATA Power On Port 7 [Enabled]
> SATA Port 0 MODE [Auto]
> SATA Port 1 MODE [Auto]
> SATA Port 2 MODE [Auto]
> SATA Port 3 MODE [Auto]
> SATA Port 4 MODE [Auto]
> SATA Port 5 MODE [Auto]
> SATA Port 6 MODE [Auto]
> SATA Port 7 MODE [Auto]
> SATA Hot-Removabel Support [Disabled]
> SATA 6 AHCI Support [Disabled]
> Int. Clk Differential Spread [Disabled]
> SATA MAXGEN2 CAP OPTION [Disabled]
> SATA CLK Mode Option [INT 100MHz]
> Aggressive Link PM Capability [Enabled]
> Port Multiplier Capability [Enabled]
> SATA Ports Auto Clock Control [Enabled]
> SATA Partial State Capability [Enabled]
> SATA FIS Based Switching [Enabled]
> SATA Command Completion Coalescing Support [Disabled]
> SATA Slumber State Capability [Enabled]
> SATA MSI Capability Support [Disabled]
> SATA Target Support 8 Devices [Disabled]
> Generic Mode [Disabled]
> SATA AHCI Enclosure [Disabled]
> SATA SGPIO 0 [Disabled]
> SATA SGPIO 1 [Disabled]
> SATA PHY PLL [Disabled]
> AC/DC Change Message Delivery [Disabled]
> TimerTick Tracking [Enabled]
> Clock Interrupt Tag [Enabled]
> EHCI Traffic Handling [Disabled]
> Fusion Message C Multi-Core [Disabled]
> Fusion Message C State [Disabled]
> SPI Auto Mode [Disabled]
> SPI Read Mode [Default]
> SPI 100MHz Support [Enabled]
> SPI Normal Speed [33MHz]
> SPI Fast Read Speed [Default]
> SPI Burst Write [Disabled]
> I2C 0 D3 Support [Enabled]
> I2C 1 D3 Support [Enabled]
> I2C 2 D3 Support [Enabled]
> I2C 3 D3 Support [Enabled]
> UART 0 D3 Support [Enabled]
> UART 1 D3 Support [Enabled]
> SATA D3 Support [Enabled]
> EHCI D3 Support [Enabled]
> XHCI D3 Support [Enabled]
> SD D3 Support [Enabled]
> S0I3 [Disabled]
> Chipset Power Saving Features [Enabled]
> SB Clock Spread Spectrum [Enabled]
> SB Clock Spread Spectrum Option [-0.375%]
> HPET In SB [Enabled]
> MsiDis in HPET [Disabled]
> _OSC For PCI0 [Enabled]
> USB Phy Power Down [Disabled]
> PCIB_CLK_Stop Override [0]
> USB MSI Option [Disabled]
> LPC MSI Option [Disabled]
> PCIBridge MSI Option [Disabled]
> AB MSI Option [Disabled]
> SB C1E Support [Disabled]
> SB Hardware Reduced Support [Disabled]
> GPP Serial Debug Bus Enable [Disabled]
> Fast Boot [Enabled]
> Next Boot after AC Power Loss [Normal Boot]
> Boot Logo Display [Auto]
> POST Delay Time [3 sec]
> Boot up NumLock State [Enabled]
> Wait For 'F1' If Error [Enabled]
> Option ROM Messages [Enabled]
> Interrupt 19 Capture [Disabled]
> Setup Mode [Advanced Mode]
> Launch CSM [Enabled]
> Boot Device Control [UEFI and Legacy OPROM]
> Boot from Network Devices [Legacy only]
> Boot from Storage Devices [Legacy only]
> Boot from PCI-E Expansion Devices [Legacy only]
> OS Type [Other OS]
> SATA Boot Only [Disabled]
> USB Boot [Enabled]
> Watchdog Support [Disabled]
> ASUS RMT Tool Support [Disabled]
> Setup Animator [Disabled]
> Load from Profile [1]
> Profile Name [Fans_set]
> Save to Profile [1]
> CPU Core Voltage [Auto]
> VDDSOC Voltage [Auto]
> 1.8V PLL Voltage [Auto]
> BCLK Frequency [Auto]
> CPU Ratio [Auto]
> Bus Interface [PCIEX16_1]
> 
> 
> 
> computer info dump
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> HWiNFO64 Version 5.60-3280
> 
> WHITEBOX
> 
> [Current Computer]
> Computer Name: WHITEBOX
> Computer Description: White_box
> [Operating System]
> Operating System: Microsoft Windows 10 Professional (x64) Build 16299.125 (1709/RS3)
> UEFI Boot: Present
> 
> Central Processor(s)
> 
> [CPU Unit Count]
> Number Of Processor Packages (Physical): 1
> Number Of Processor Cores: 16
> Number Of Logical Processors: 32
> 
> AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X
> 
> [General Information]
> Processor Name: AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X
> Original Processor Frequency: 4100.0 MHz
> Original Processor Frequency [MHz]: 4100
> CPU ID: 00800F11
> Extended CPU ID: 00800F11
> CPU Brand Name: AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X 16-Core Processor
> CPU Vendor: AuthenticAMD
> CPU Stepping: ZP-B1
> CPU Code Name: ThreadRipper
> CPU Technology: 14 nm
> CPU Platform: SP3r2 (TR4)
> Microcode Update Revision: 8001129
> SMU Firmware Revision: 4.25.100.0
> Number of CPU Cores: 16
> Number of Logical CPUs: 32
> [Operating Points]
> CPU HFM (Maximum): 4100.0 MHz = 41.00 x 100.0 MHz
> CPU CPB: [Unlimited]
> CPU Current: 2199.5 MHz = 22.00 x 100.0 MHz @ 1.4500 V
> CPU Bus Type: UMI
> [Cache and TLB]
> L1 Cache: Instruction: 16 x 64 KBytes, Data: 16 x 32 KBytes
> L2 Cache: Integrated: 16 x 512 KBytes
> L3 Cache: 2 x 16 MBytes
> Instruction TLB: Fully associative, 64 entries
> Data TLB: Fully associative, 64 entries
> [Standard Feature Flags]
> FPU on Chip Present
> Enhanced Virtual-86 Mode Present
> I/O Breakpoints Present
> Page Size Extensions Present
> Time Stamp Counter Present
> Pentium-style Model Specific Registers Present
> Physical Address Extension Present
> Machine Check Exception Present
> CMPXCHG8B Instruction Present
> APIC On Chip / PGE (AMD) Present
> Fast System Call Present
> Memory Type Range Registers Present
> Page Global Feature Present
> Machine Check Architecture Present
> CMOV Instruction Present
> Page Attribute Table Present
> 36-bit Page Size Extensions Present
> Processor Number Not Present
> CLFLUSH Instruction Present
> Debug Trace and EMON Store Not Present
> Internal ACPI Support Not Present
> MMX Technology Present
> Fast FP Save/Restore (IA MMX-2) Present
> Streaming SIMD Extensions Present
> Streaming SIMD Extensions 2 Present
> Self-Snoop Not Present
> Multi-Threading Capable Present
> Automatic Clock Control Not Present
> IA-64 Processor Not Present
> Signal Break on FERR Not Present
> Streaming SIMD Extensions 3 Present
> PCLMULQDQ Instruction Support Present
> MONITOR/MWAIT Support Present
> Supplemental Streaming SIMD Extensions 3 Present
> FMA Extension Present
> CMPXCHG16B Support Present
> Streaming SIMD Extensions 4.1 Present
> Streaming SIMD Extensions 4.2 Present
> x2APIC Not Present
> POPCNT Instruction Present
> AES Cryptography Support Present
> XSAVE/XRSTOR/XSETBV/XGETBV Instructions Present
> XGETBV/XSETBV OS Enabled Present
> AVX Support Present
> Half-Precision Convert (CVT16) Present
> [Extended Feature Flags]
> FPU on Chip Present
> Enhanced Virtual-86 Mode Present
> I/O Breakpoints Present
> Page Size Extensions Present
> Time Stamp Counter Present
> AMD-style Model Specific Registers Present
> Machine Check Exception Present
> CMPXCHG8B Instruction Present
> APIC On Chip Present
> SYSCALL and SYSRET Instructions Present
> Memory Type Range Registers Present
> Page Global Feature Present
> Machine Check Architecture Present
> CMOV Instruction Present
> Page Attribute Table Present
> 36-bit Page Size Extensions Present
> Multi-Processing / Brand feature Not Present
> No Execute Present
> MMX Technology Present
> MMX+ Extensions Present
> Fast FP Save/Restore Present
> Fast FP Save/Restore Optimizations Present
> 1 GB large page support Present
> RDTSCP Instruction Present
> x86-64 Long Mode Present
> 3DNow! Technology Extensions Not Present
> 3DNow! Technology Not Present
> Bit Manipulation Instructions Set 1 Present
> Bit Manipulation Instructions Set 2 Present
> Advanced Vector Extensions 2 (AVX2) Present
> Advanced Vector Extensions 512 (AVX-512) Not Present
> AVX-512 Prefetch Instructions Not Present
> AVX-512 Exponential and Reciprocal Instructions Not Present
> AVX-512 Conflict Detection Instructions Not Present
> AVX-512 Doubleword and Quadword Instructions Not Present
> AVX-512 Byte and Word Instructions Not Present
> AVX-512 Vector Length Extensions Not Present
> AVX-512 52-bit Integer FMA Instructions Not Present
> Secure Hash Algorithm (SHA) Extensions Present
> Software Guard Extensions (SGX) Support Not Present
> Supervisor Mode Execution Protection (SMEP) Present
> Supervisor Mode Access Prevention (SMAP) Present
> Hardware Lock Elision (HLE) Not Present
> Restricted Transactional Memory (RTM) Not Present
> Memory Protection Extensions (MPX) Not Present
> Read/Write FS/GS Base Instructions Present
> Enhanced Performance String Instruction Not Present
> INVPCID Instruction Not Present
> RDSEED Instruction Present
> Multi-precision Add Carry Instructions (ADX) Present
> PCOMMIT Instructions Not Present
> CLFLUSHOPT Instructions Present
> CLWB Instructions Not Present
> TSC_THREAD_OFFSET Not Present
> Platform Quality of Service Monitoring (PQM) Not Present
> Platform Quality of Service Enforcement (PQE) Not Present
> FPU Data Pointer updated only on x87 Exceptions Not Present
> Deprecated FPU CS and FPU DS Not Present
> Intel Processor Trace Not Present
> PREFETCHWT1 Instruction Not Present
> AVX-512 Vector Bit Manipulation Instructions Not Present
> User-Mode Instruction Prevention Not Present
> Protection Keys for User-mode Pages Not Present
> OS Enabled Protection Keys Not Present
> AVX-512 VPOPCNTD/VPOPCNTQ Instructions Not Present
> Read Processor ID Not Present
> SGX Launch Configuration Not Present
> AVX-512 Deep Learning Enhanced Word Variable Precision Not Present
> AVX-512 Deep Learning Floating-point Single Precision Not Present
> LAHF/SAHF Long Mode Support Present
> Core Multi-Processing Legacy Mode Present
> Secure Virtual Machine Present
> Extended APIC Register Space Present
> LOCK MOV CR0 Support Present
> Advanced Bit Manipulation Present
> SSE4A Support Present
> Misaligned SSE Mode Present
> PREFETCH(W) Support Present
> OS Visible Work-around Support Present
> Instruction Based Sampling Not Present
> XOP Instruction Support Not Present
> SKINIT, STGI, and DEV Support Present
> Watchdog Timer Support Present
> TBM0 Instruction Support Not Present
> Lightweight Profiling Support Not Present
> FMA4 Instruction Support Not Present
> Translation Cache Extension Present
> NodeId Support Not Present
> Trailing Bit Manipulation Not Present
> Topology Extensions Present
> Core Performance Counter Extensions Present
> NB Performance Counter Extensions Present
> Streaming Performance Monitor Architecture Not Present
> Data Breakpoint Extension Present
> Performance Time-Stamp Counter Not Present
> L2I Performance Counter Extensions Present
> MWAITX/MONITORX Support Present
> [Enhanced Features]
> Core Performance Boost Supported, Disabled
> [Memory Ranges]
> Maximum Physical Address Size: 48-bit (256 TBytes)
> Maximum Virtual Address Size: 48-bit (256 TBytes)
> [MTRRs]
> Range 0-80000000 (0MB-2048MB) Type: Write Back (WB)
> Range 7C000000-80000000 (1984MB-2048MB) Type: Uncacheable (UC)
> 
> Motherboard
> 
> [Computer]
> Computer Brand Name: Unknown on Noname
> [Motherboard]
> Motherboard Model: ASUS ROG ZENITH EXTREME
> Motherboard Chipset: AMD X399 (Promontory)
> Motherboard Slots: 4xPCI Express x1, 1xPCI Express x2, 2xPCI Express x4, 2xPCI Express x8, 2xPCI Express x16
> PCI Express Version Supported: v3.0
> USB Version Supported: v3.1
> [BIOS]
> BIOS Manufacturer: American Megatrends
> BIOS Date: 12/13/2017
> BIOS Version: 0901
> AMD AGESA Version: ThreadRipperPI-SP3r2-0.0.6.0
> UEFI BIOS: Capable
> Super-IO/LPC Chip: ITE IT8665E
> 
> ACPI Devices
> 
> AMD I2C Controller
> 
> Device Name: AMD I2C Controller
> [Assigned Resources]
> IRQ: 10
> [Alternative 1]
> Memory Location: FEDC2000 - FEDC2FFF
> IRQ: 10
> 
> AMD GPIO Controller
> 
> Device Name: AMD GPIO Controller
> [Assigned Resources]
> IRQ: 7
> [Alternative 1]
> Memory Location: FED81500 - FED818FF
> IRQ: 7
> 
> AMD GPIO Controller
> 
> Device Name: AMD GPIO Controller
> [Assigned Resources]
> Memory Location: FEC30000 - FEC30FFF
> [Alternative 1]
> Memory Location: FEC30000 - FEC30FFF
> 
> Programmable interrupt controller
> 
> Device Name: Programmable interrupt controller
> [Assigned Resources]
> I/O Port: 0020 - 0021
> IRQ: 65792
> [Alternative 1]
> I/O Port: 0020 - 0021
> I/O Port: 00A0 - 00A1
> 
> System timer
> 
> Device Name: System timer
> [Assigned Resources]
> I/O Port: 0040 - 0043
> [Alternative 1]
> I/O Port: 0040 - 0043
> IRQ: 0
> 
> High precision event timer
> 
> Device Name: High precision event timer
> [Assigned Resources]
> Memory Location: FED00000 - FED003FF
> [Alternative 1]
> Memory Location: FED00000 - FED003FF
> IRQ: 0
> IRQ: 8
> 
> Direct memory access controller
> 
> Device Name: Direct memory access controller
> [Assigned Resources]
> I/O Port: 0089 - 008B
> DMA: 4
> [Alternative 1]
> I/O Port: 0000 - 000F
> I/O Port: 0081 - 0083
> I/O Port: 0087
> I/O Port: 0089 - 008B
> I/O Port: 008F
> I/O Port: 00C0 - 00DF
> DMA: 4
> 
> System speaker
> 
> Device Name: System speaker
> [Assigned Resources]
> I/O Port: 0061
> [Alternative 1]
> I/O Port: 0061
> 
> PCI Express Root Complex
> 
> Device Name: PCI Express Root Complex
> [Assigned Resources]
> I/O Port: 0000 - FFFFFFFF
> I/O Port: 0000 - 7FFF
> Memory Location: ECC00000 - ECBFFFFF
> [Alternative 1]
> I/O Port: 0000 - 03AF
> I/O Port: 03E0 - 0CF7
> I/O Port: 0000 - 7FFF
> Memory Location: 000C0000 - 000DFFFF
> Memory Location: ECC00000 - EFFFFFFF
> 
> PCI Express Root Complex
> 
> Device Name: PCI Express Root Complex
> [Assigned Resources]
> I/O Port: 03B0 - 03AF
> Memory Location: 000A0000 - 000BFFFF
> [Alternative 1]
> I/O Port: 03B0 - 03DF
> I/O Port: 8000 - FFFF
> Memory Location: 000A0000 - 000BFFFF
> Memory Location: CE000000 - ECBFFFFF
> 
> System CMOS/real time clock
> 
> Device Name: System CMOS/real time clock
> [Assigned Resources]
> I/O Port: 0070 - 0071
> [Alternative 1]
> I/O Port: 0070 - 0071
> 
> System board
> 
> Device Name: System board
> [Assigned Resources]
> Memory Location: F0000000 - F7FFFFFF
> [Alternative 1]
> Memory Location: F0000000 - F7FFFFFF
> 
> Motherboard resources
> 
> Device Name: Motherboard resources
> [Assigned Resources]
> I/O Port: 02A0 - 02AF
> [Alternative 1]
> I/O Port: 02A0 - 02AF
> I/O Port: 0230 - 023F
> I/O Port: 0290 - 029F
> 
> Motherboard resources
> 
> Device Name: Motherboard resources
> [Assigned Resources]
> Memory Location: ECB00000 - ECB7FFFF
> [Alternative 1]
> Memory Location: ECB00000 - ECB7FFFF
> 
> Motherboard resources
> 
> Device Name: Motherboard resources
> [Assigned Resources]
> Memory Location: FEB00000 - FEBFFFFF
> [Alternative 1]
> Memory Location: FEB00000 - FEBFFFFF
> 
> Motherboard resources
> 
> Device Name: Motherboard resources
> [Assigned Resources]
> I/O Port: 0010 - 001F
> I/O Port: 0067 - 006F
> I/O Port: 0088
> I/O Port: 00B1
> I/O Port: 04D6
> I/O Port: 0C52
> I/O Port: 0000 - 0C6E
> I/O Port: 0CD2 - 0CD3
> I/O Port: 0800 - 089F
> I/O Port: 0910 - 091F
> Memory Location: 00000000 - 0000008F
> IRQ: 1114369
> IRQ: 1114369
> [Alternative 1]
> I/O Port: 0010 - 001F
> I/O Port: 0022 - 003F
> I/O Port: 0063
> I/O Port: 0065
> I/O Port: 0067 - 006F
> I/O Port: 0072 - 007F
> I/O Port: 0080
> I/O Port: 0084 - 0086
> I/O Port: 0088
> I/O Port: 008C - 008E
> I/O Port: 0090 - 009F
> I/O Port: 00A2 - 00BF
> I/O Port: 00B1
> I/O Port: 00E0 - 00EF
> I/O Port: 04D0 - 04D1
> I/O Port: 040B
> I/O Port: 04D6
> I/O Port: 0C00 - 0C01
> I/O Port: 0C14
> I/O Port: 0C50 - 0C51
> I/O Port: 0C52
> I/O Port: 0C6C
> I/O Port: 0C6F
> I/O Port: 0CD0 - 0CD1
> I/O Port: 0CD2 - 0CD3
> I/O Port: 0CD4 - 0CD5
> I/O Port: 0CD6 - 0CD7
> I/O Port: 0CD8 - 0CDF
> I/O Port: 0800 - 089F
> I/O Port: 0B00 - 0B0F
> I/O Port: 0B20 - 0B3F
> I/O Port: 0900 - 090F
> I/O Port: 0910 - 091F
> Memory Location: FEC00000 - FEC00FFF
> Memory Location: FEC01000 - FEC01FFF
> Memory Location: FEDC0000 - FEDC0FFF
> Memory Location: FEE00000 - FEE00FFF
> Memory Location: FED80000 - FED8FFFF
> Memory Location: FED61000 - FED70FFF
> Memory Location: FEC10000 - FEC10FFF
> Memory Location: FF000000 - FFFFFFFF
> 
> Microsoft ACPI-Compliant Embedded Controller
> 
> Device Name: Microsoft ACPI-Compliant Embedded Controller
> [Assigned Resources]
> I/O Port: 0062
> [Alternative 1]
> I/O Port: 0062
> I/O Port: 0066
> 
> SMBIOS DMI
> 
> BIOS
> 
> BIOS Vendor: American Megatrends Inc.
> BIOS Version: 0901
> BIOS Release Date: 12/13/2017
> BIOS Start Segment: F000
> BIOS Size: 16384 KBytes
> System BIOS Version: 5.13
> ISA Support: Not Present
> MCA Support: Not Present
> EISA Support: Not Present
> PCI Support: Present
> PC Card (PCMCIA) Support: Not Present
> Plug-and-Play Support: Not Present
> APM Support: Present
> Flash BIOS: Present
> BIOS Shadow: Present
> VL-VESA Support: Not Present
> ESCD Support: Not Present
> Boot from CD: Present
> Selectable Boot: Present
> BIOS ROM Socketed: Present
> Boot from PC Card: Not Present
> EDD Support: Present
> NEC PC-98 Support: Not Present
> ACPI Support: Present
> USB Legacy Support: Present
> AGP Support: Not Present
> I2O Boot Support: Not Present
> LS-120 Boot Support: Not Present
> ATAPI ZIP Drive Boot Support: Not Present
> IEE1394 Boot Support: Not Present
> Smart Battery Support: Not Present
> BIOS Boot Specification Support: Present
> Function key-initiated Network Service Boot Support: Not Present
> Targeted Content Distribution Support: Present
> UEFI Specification Support: Present
> Virtual Machine: Not Present
> 
> System
> 
> System Manufacturer: System manufacturer
> Product Name: System Product Name
> Product Version: System Version
> Product Serial Number: System Serial Number
> UUID: {AD0BEAE0-7AD1-11E7-B2D1-107B44913567}
> SKU Number: SKU
> Family: To be filled by O.E.M.
> 
> Mainboard
> 
> Mainboard Manufacturer: ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC.
> Mainboard Name: ROG ZENITH EXTREME
> Mainboard Version: Rev 1.xx
> Mainboard Serial Number: 170706735801743
> Asset Tag: Default string
> Location in chassis: Default string
> 
> System Enclosure
> 
> Manufacturer: Default string
> Case Type: Desktop
> Version: Default string
> Serial Number: Default string
> Asset Tag Number: Default string
> 
> On Board Device
> 
> Device Description: To Be Filled By O.E.M.
> Device Type: Video Adapter
> Device Status: Enabled
> 
> OEM Strings
> 
> System Configuration Options
> 
> System Boot Information
> 
> Boot Status: No error occured
> 
> Additional Information
> 
> On Board Device
> 
> Device Description: Onboard IGD
> Device Type: Video Adapter
> Device Status: Enabled
> 
> On Board Device
> 
> Device Description: Onboard LAN
> Device Type: Ethernet Adapter
> Device Status: Enabled
> 
> On Board Device
> 
> Device Description: Onboard 1394
> Device Type: Unknown
> Device Status: Enabled
> 
> L1 - Cache
> 
> Socket Designation: L1 - Cache
> Cache State: Enabled
> Cache Type: Internal, Unified
> Cache Scheme: Write-Back
> Supported SRAM Type: Pipeline Burst
> Current SRAM Type: Pipeline Burst
> Cache Speed: 1 ns
> Error Correction Type: Multi-bit ECC
> Maximum Cache Size: 1536 KBytes
> Installed Cache Size: 1536 KBytes
> Cache Associativity: 8-way Set-Associative
> 
> L2 - Cache
> 
> Socket Designation: L2 - Cache
> Cache State: Enabled
> Cache Type: Internal, Unified
> Cache Scheme: Write-Back
> Supported SRAM Type: Pipeline Burst
> Current SRAM Type: Pipeline Burst
> Cache Speed: 1 ns
> Error Correction Type: Multi-bit ECC
> Maximum Cache Size: 8192 KBytes
> Installed Cache Size: 8192 KBytes
> Cache Associativity: 8-way Set-Associative
> 
> L3 - Cache
> 
> Socket Designation: L3 - Cache
> Cache State: Enabled
> Cache Type: Internal, Unified
> Cache Scheme: Write-Back
> Supported SRAM Type: Pipeline Burst
> Current SRAM Type: Pipeline Burst
> Cache Speed: 1 ns
> Error Correction Type: Multi-bit ECC
> Maximum Cache Size: 32768 KBytes
> Installed Cache Size: 32768 KBytes
> Cache Associativity: 32-way Set-Associative
> 
> Processor
> 
> Processor Manufacturer: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
> Processor Version: AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X 16-Core Processor
> External Clock: 100 MHz
> Maximum Clock Supported: 4200 MHz
> Current Clock: 4100 MHz
> CPU Socket: Populated
> CPU Status: Enabled
> Processor Type: Central Processor
> Processor Voltage: 1.5 V
> Processor Upgrade: Socket SP3r2
> Socket Designation: SP3r2
> 
> Memory Devices
> 
> 32-bit Memory Error Information
> 
> Physical Memory Array
> 
> Array Location: System board
> Array Use: System memory
> Error Detecting Method: None
> Memory Capacity: 512 GBytes
> Memory Devices: 8
> 
> Memory Array Mapped Address
> 
> Starting Address: 00000000
> Ending Address: 03FFFFFF
> Partition Width: 8
> 
> 32-bit Memory Error Information
> 
> Memory Device
> 
> Total Width: 64 bits
> Data Width: 64 bits
> Device Size: 8192 MBytes
> Device Form Factor: DIMM
> Device Locator: DIMM 0
> Bank Locator: P0 CHANNEL A
> Device Type: DDR4
> Device Type Detail: Synchronous
> Memory Speed: 2933 MHz
> Manufacturer: Unknown
> Serial Number: 00000000
> Part Number: F4-3200C16-8GTZKW
> Asset Tag: Unknown
> 
> Memory Device Mapped Address
> 
> Starting Address: 00000000
> Ending Address: 00FFFFFF
> Partition Row Position: Unknown
> Interleave Position: Unknown
> Interleave Data Depth: Unknown
> 
> 32-bit Memory Error Information
> 
> Memory Device
> 
> Total Width: 64 bits
> Data Width: 64 bits
> Device Size: 8192 MBytes
> Device Form Factor: DIMM
> Device Locator: DIMM 1
> Bank Locator: P0 CHANNEL A
> Device Type: DDR4
> Device Type Detail: Synchronous
> Memory Speed: 2933 MHz
> Manufacturer: Unknown
> Serial Number: 00000000
> Part Number: F4-3200C16-8GTZSW
> Asset Tag: Unknown
> 
> Memory Device Mapped Address
> 
> Starting Address: 00000000
> Ending Address: 00FFFFFF
> Partition Row Position: Unknown
> Interleave Position: Unknown
> Interleave Data Depth: Unknown
> 
> 32-bit Memory Error Information
> 
> Memory Device
> 
> Total Width: 64 bits
> Data Width: 64 bits
> Device Size: 8192 MBytes
> Device Form Factor: DIMM
> Device Locator: DIMM 0
> Bank Locator: P0 CHANNEL B
> Device Type: DDR4
> Device Type Detail: Synchronous
> Memory Speed: 2933 MHz
> Manufacturer: Unknown
> Serial Number: 00000000
> Part Number: F4-3200C16-8GTZKW
> Asset Tag: Unknown
> 
> 32-bit Memory Error Information
> 
> Memory Device
> 
> Total Width: 64 bits
> Data Width: 64 bits
> Device Size: 8192 MBytes
> Device Form Factor: DIMM
> Device Locator: DIMM 1
> Bank Locator: P0 CHANNEL B
> Device Type: DDR4
> Device Type Detail: Synchronous
> Memory Speed: 2933 MHz
> Manufacturer: Unknown
> Serial Number: 00000000
> Part Number: F4-3200C16-8GTZSW
> Asset Tag: Unknown
> 
> 32-bit Memory Error Information
> 
> Memory Device
> 
> Total Width: 64 bits
> Data Width: 64 bits
> Device Size: 8192 MBytes
> Device Form Factor: DIMM
> Device Locator: DIMM 0
> Bank Locator: P0 CHANNEL C
> Device Type: DDR4
> Device Type Detail: Synchronous
> Memory Speed: 2933 MHz
> Manufacturer: Unknown
> Serial Number: 00000000
> Part Number: F4-3200C16-8GTZKW
> Asset Tag: Unknown
> 
> 32-bit Memory Error Information
> 
> Memory Device
> 
> Total Width: 64 bits
> Data Width: 64 bits
> Device Size: 8192 MBytes
> Device Form Factor: DIMM
> Device Locator: DIMM 1
> Bank Locator: P0 CHANNEL C
> Device Type: DDR4
> Device Type Detail: Synchronous
> Memory Speed: 2933 MHz
> Manufacturer: Unknown
> Serial Number: 00000000
> Part Number: F4-3200C16-8GTZSW
> Asset Tag: Unknown
> 
> 32-bit Memory Error Information
> 
> Memory Device
> 
> Total Width: 64 bits
> Data Width: 64 bits
> Device Size: 8192 MBytes
> Device Form Factor: DIMM
> Device Locator: DIMM 0
> Bank Locator: P0 CHANNEL D
> Device Type: DDR4
> Device Type Detail: Synchronous
> Memory Speed: 2933 MHz
> Manufacturer: Unknown
> Serial Number: 00000000
> Part Number: F4-3200C16-8GTZKW
> Asset Tag: Unknown
> 
> 32-bit Memory Error Information
> 
> Memory Device
> 
> Total Width: 64 bits
> Data Width: 64 bits
> Device Size: 8192 MBytes
> Device Form Factor: DIMM
> Device Locator: DIMM 1
> Bank Locator: P0 CHANNEL D
> Device Type: DDR4
> Device Type Detail: Synchronous
> Memory Speed: 2933 MHz
> Manufacturer: Unknown
> Serial Number: 00000000
> Part Number: F4-3200C16-8GTZSW
> Asset Tag: Unknown
> 
> Port Connectors
> 
> Network Port
> 
> Port Type: Network Port
> Internal Reference: M.2(WIFI)
> Internal Connector Type: None
> External Reference: M.2(WIFI)
> External Connector Type: Unknown
> 
> USB
> 
> Port Type: USB
> Internal Reference: U31G1_5678
> Internal Connector Type: None
> External Reference: U31G1_5678
> External Connector Type: Access Bus (USB)
> 
> USB
> 
> Port Type: USB
> Internal Reference: U31G1_34
> Internal Connector Type: None
> External Reference: U31G1_34
> External Connector Type: Access Bus (USB)
> 
> USB
> 
> Port Type: USB
> Internal Reference: U31G1_12
> Internal Connector Type: None
> External Reference: U31G1_12
> External Connector Type: Access Bus (USB)
> 
> USB
> 
> Port Type: USB
> Internal Reference: U31G2_EC1
> Internal Connector Type: None
> External Reference: U31G2_EC1
> External Connector Type: Access Bus (USB)
> 
> USB
> 
> Port Type: USB
> Internal Reference: U31G2_E2
> Internal Connector Type: None
> External Reference: U31G2_E2
> External Connector Type: Access Bus (USB)
> 
> Network Port
> 
> Port Type: Network Port
> Internal Reference: LAN
> Internal Connector Type: None
> External Reference: LAN
> External Connector Type: RJ-45
> 
> Audio Port
> 
> Port Type: Audio Port
> Internal Reference: AUDIO
> Internal Connector Type: None
> External Reference: AUDIO
> External Connector Type: Unknown
> 
> Port Connector
> 
> Port Type: Unknown
> Internal Reference: CPU_FAN
> Internal Connector Type: Unknown
> External Reference: Unknown
> External Connector Type: None
> 
> Port Connector
> 
> Port Type: Unknown
> Internal Reference: CPU_OPT
> Internal Connector Type: Unknown
> External Reference: Unknown
> External Connector Type: None
> 
> Port Connector
> 
> Port Type: Unknown
> Internal Reference: H_AMP_FAN
> Internal Connector Type: Unknown
> External Reference: Unknown
> External Connector Type: None
> 
> Port Connector
> 
> Port Type: Unknown
> Internal Reference: CHA_FAN1
> Internal Connector Type: Unknown
> External Reference: Unknown
> External Connector Type: None
> 
> Port Connector
> 
> Port Type: Unknown
> Internal Reference: CHA_FAN2
> Internal Connector Type: Unknown
> External Reference: Unknown
> External Connector Type: None
> 
> Port Connector
> 
> Port Type: Unknown
> Internal Reference: W_PUMP+
> Internal Connector Type: Unknown
> External Reference: Unknown
> External Connector Type: None
> 
> Port Connector
> 
> Port Type: Unknown
> Internal Reference: W_FLOW
> Internal Connector Type: Unknown
> External Reference: Unknown
> External Connector Type: None
> 
> Port Connector
> 
> Port Type: Unknown
> Internal Reference: W_IN
> Internal Connector Type: Unknown
> External Reference: Unknown
> External Connector Type: None
> 
> Port Connector
> 
> Port Type: Unknown
> Internal Reference: W_OUT
> Internal Connector Type: Unknown
> External Reference: Unknown
> External Connector Type: None
> 
> Port Connector
> 
> Port Type: Unknown
> Internal Reference: WB_SENSOR
> Internal Connector Type: Unknown
> External Reference: Unknown
> External Connector Type: None
> 
> Port Connector
> 
> Port Type: Unknown
> Internal Reference: COV_FAN
> Internal Connector Type: Unknown
> External Reference: Unknown
> External Connector Type: None
> 
> Port Connector
> 
> Port Type: Unknown
> Internal Reference: EXT_FAN
> Internal Connector Type: Unknown
> External Reference: Unknown
> External Connector Type: None
> 
> Port Connector
> 
> Port Type: Unknown
> Internal Reference: T_SENSOR1
> Internal Connector Type: Unknown
> External Reference: Unknown
> External Connector Type: None
> 
> Port Connector
> 
> Port Type: Unknown
> Internal Reference: T_SENSOR2
> Internal Connector Type: Unknown
> External Reference: Unknown
> External Connector Type: None
> 
> SATA
> 
> Port Type: SATA
> Internal Reference: SATA6G_12
> Internal Connector Type: SAS/SATA Plug Receptacle
> External Reference: Unknown
> External Connector Type: None
> 
> SATA
> 
> Port Type: SATA
> Internal Reference: SATA6G_34
> Internal Connector Type: SAS/SATA Plug Receptacle
> External Reference: Unknown
> External Connector Type: None
> 
> SATA
> 
> Port Type: SATA
> Internal Reference: SATA6G_56
> Internal Connector Type: SAS/SATA Plug Receptacle
> External Reference: Unknown
> External Connector Type: None
> 
> Port Connector
> 
> Port Type: Unknown
> Internal Reference: M.2_1(SOCKET3)
> Internal Connector Type: Unknown
> External Reference: Unknown
> External Connector Type: None
> 
> Port Connector
> 
> Port Type: Unknown
> Internal Reference: U.2
> Internal Connector Type: Unknown
> External Reference: Unknown
> External Connector Type: None
> 
> USB
> 
> Port Type: USB
> Internal Reference: U31G2_1
> Internal Connector Type: Access Bus (USB)
> External Reference: Unknown
> External Connector Type: None
> 
> USB
> 
> Port Type: USB
> Internal Reference: U31G1_910
> Internal Connector Type: Access Bus (USB)
> External Reference: Unknown
> External Connector Type: None
> 
> USB
> 
> Port Type: USB
> Internal Reference: U31G1_1112
> Internal Connector Type: Access Bus (USB)
> External Reference: Unknown
> External Connector Type: None
> 
> USB
> 
> Port Type: USB
> Internal Reference: U31G1_1314
> Internal Connector Type: Access Bus (USB)
> External Reference: Unknown
> External Connector Type: None
> 
> Port Connector
> 
> Port Type: Unknown
> Internal Reference: RGE_HEADER1
> Internal Connector Type: Unknown
> External Reference: Unknown
> External Connector Type: None
> 
> Port Connector
> 
> Port Type: Unknown
> Internal Reference: RGE_HEADER2
> Internal Connector Type: Unknown
> External Reference: Unknown
> External Connector Type: None
> 
> Port Connector
> 
> Port Type: Unknown
> Internal Reference: LED_CON1
> Internal Connector Type: Unknown
> External Reference: Unknown
> External Connector Type: None
> 
> Port Connector
> 
> Port Type: Unknown
> Internal Reference: LED_CON2
> Internal Connector Type: Unknown
> External Reference: Unknown
> External Connector Type: None
> 
> Port Connector
> 
> Port Type: Unknown
> Internal Reference: LED_CON3
> Internal Connector Type: Unknown
> External Reference: Unknown
> External Connector Type: None
> 
> Port Connector
> 
> Port Type: Unknown
> Internal Reference: OLED_HEADER
> Internal Connector Type: Unknown
> External Reference: Unknown
> External Connector Type: None
> 
> Port Connector
> 
> Port Type: Unknown
> Internal Reference: ADD_HEADER
> Internal Connector Type: Unknown
> External Reference: Unknown
> External Connector Type: None
> 
> Port Connector
> 
> Port Type: Unknown
> Internal Reference: AAFP
> Internal Connector Type: Unknown
> External Reference: Unknown
> External Connector Type: None
> 
> Port Connector
> 
> Port Type: Unknown
> Internal Reference: TMP
> Internal Connector Type: Unknown
> External Reference: Unknown
> External Connector Type: None
> 
> Port Connector
> 
> Port Type: Unknown
> Internal Reference: F_PANEL
> Internal Connector Type: Unknown
> External Reference: Unknown
> External Connector Type: None
> 
> System Slots
> 
> PCIEX16_1
> 
> Slot Designation: PCIEX16_1
> Slot Type: PCI Express
> Slot Usage: In use
> Slot Data Bus Width: 16x / x16
> Slot Length: Long
> 
> PCIEX8_2
> 
> Slot Designation: PCIEX8_2
> Slot Type: PCI Express
> Slot Usage: In use
> Slot Data Bus Width: 8x / x8
> Slot Length: Long
> 
> PCIEX4
> 
> Slot Designation: PCIEX4
> Slot Type: PCI Express
> Slot Usage: In use
> Slot Data Bus Width: 4x / x4
> Slot Length: Short
> 
> PCIEX16_3
> 
> Slot Designation: PCIEX16_3
> Slot Type: PCI Express
> Slot Usage: In use
> Slot Data Bus Width: 16x / x16
> Slot Length: Long
> 
> PCIEX1
> 
> Slot Designation: PCIEX1
> Slot Type: PCI Express
> Slot Usage: In use
> Slot Data Bus Width: 1x / x1
> Slot Length: Short
> 
> PCIE_X8/X4_4
> 
> Slot Designation: PCIE_X8/X4_4
> Slot Type: PCI Express
> Slot Usage: In use
> Slot Data Bus Width: 8x / x8
> Slot Length: Long
> 
> Memory
> 
> [General information]
> Total Memory Size: 64 GBytes
> Total Memory Size [MB]: 65536
> [Current Performance Settings]
> Current Memory Clock: 1466.4 MHz
> Current Timing (tCAS-tRCD-tRP-tRAS): 16-18-18-38
> Command Rate: 1T
> Read to Read Delay (tRD_RD) Same Rank: 6T
> Read to Read Delay (tRD_RD) Different DIMM: 5T
> Write to Write Delay (tWR_WR) Same Rank: 6T
> Write to Write Delay (tWR_WR) Different DIMM: 7T
> Read to Precharge Delay (tRTP): 12T
> Write to Precharge Delay (tWTP): 33T
> Write Recovery Time (tWR): 22T
> Row Cycle Time (tRC): 69T
> Refresh Cycle Time (tRFC): 514T
> Four Activate Window (tFAW): 31T
> 
> Row: 0 - 8 GB PC4-25600 DDR4 SDRAM G Skill F4-3200C16-8GTZKW
> 
> [General Module Information]
> Module Number: 0
> Module Size: 8 GBytes
> Memory Type: DDR4 SDRAM
> Module Type: Unbuffered DIMM (UDIMM)
> Memory Speed: 1600.0 MHz (DDR4-3200 / PC4-25600)
> Module Manufacturer: G Skill
> Module Part Number: F4-3200C16-8GTZKW
> Module Revision: 0.0
> Module Serial Number: 0
> Module Manufacturing Date: N/A
> Module Manufacturing Location: 0
> SDRAM Manufacturer: SK Hynix
> DRAM Steppping: 0.0
> Error Check/Correction: None
> [Module Characteristics]
> Row Address Bits: 16
> Column Address Bits: 10
> Module Density: 8192 Mb
> Number Of Ranks: 1
> Device Width: 8 bits
> Bus Width: 64 bits
> Die Count: 1
> Module Nominal Voltage (VDD): 1.2 V
> Minimum SDRAM Cycle Time (tCKAVGmin): 0.93800 ns
> Maximum SDRAM Cycle Time (tCKAVGmax): 1.60000 ns
> CAS# Latencies Supported: 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16
> Minimum CAS# Latency Time (tAAmin): 13.750 ns
> Minimum RAS# to CAS# Delay (tRCDmin): 13.750 ns
> Minimum Row Precharge Time (tRPmin): 13.750 ns
> Minimum Active to Precharge Time (tRASmin): 33.000 ns
> Supported Module Timing at 1066.1 MHz: 15-15-15-36
> Supported Module Timing at 1000.0 MHz: 14-14-14-33
> Supported Module Timing at 933.3 MHz: 13-13-13-31
> Supported Module Timing at 866.7 MHz: 12-12-12-29
> Supported Module Timing at 800.0 MHz: 11-11-11-27
> Supported Module Timing at 733.3 MHz: 11-11-11-25
> Supported Module Timing at 666.7 MHz: 10-10-10-22
> Minimum Active to Active/Refresh Time (tRCmin): 46.750 ns
> Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC1min): 350.000 ns
> Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC2min): 260.000 ns
> Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC4min): 160.000 ns
> Minimum Four Activate Window Delay Time (tFAWmin): 21.000 ns
> Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Different Bank Group (tRRD_Smin): 3.700 ns
> Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Same Bank Group (tRRD_Lmin): 5.300 ns
> Minimum CAS to CAS Delay Time - Same Bank Group (tCCD_Lmin): 5.625 ns
> [Features]
> Module Temperature Sensor (TSOD): Not Supported
> Module Nominal Height: 31 - 32 mm
> Module Maximum Thickness (Front): 1 - 2 mm
> Module Maximum Thickness (Back): 1 - 2 mm
> Address Mapping from Edge Connector to DRAM: Standard
> [Intel Extreme Memory Profile (XMP)]
> XMP Revision: 2.0
> [Certified Profile [Enabled]]
> Module VDD Voltage Level: 1.35 V
> Minimum SDRAM Cycle Time (tCKAVGmin): 0.625 ns
> CAS# Latencies Supported: 16
> Minimum CAS# Latency Time (tAAmin): 10.000 ns
> Minimum RAS# to CAS# Delay (tRCDmin): 11.250 ns
> Minimum Row Precharge Time (tRPmin): 11.250 ns
> Minimum Active to Precharge Time (tRASmin): 23.750 ns
> Supported Module Timing at 1600.0 MHz: 16-18-18-38
> Minimum Active to Active/Refresh Time (tRCmin): 35.000 ns
> Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC1min): 350.000 ns
> Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC2min): 260.000 ns
> Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC4min): 160.000 ns
> Minimum Four Activate Window Delay Time (tFAWmin): 24.000 ns
> Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Different Bank Group (tRRD_Smin): 3.500 ns
> Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Same Bank Group (tRRD_Lmin): 5.000 ns
> 
> Row: 1 - 8 GB PC4-25600 DDR4 SDRAM G Skill F4-3200C16-8GTZSW
> 
> [General Module Information]
> Module Number: 1
> Module Size: 8 GBytes
> Memory Type: DDR4 SDRAM
> Module Type: Unbuffered DIMM (UDIMM)
> Memory Speed: 1600.0 MHz (DDR4-3200 / PC4-25600)
> Module Manufacturer: G Skill
> Module Part Number: F4-3200C16-8GTZSW
> Module Revision: 0.0
> Module Serial Number: 0
> Module Manufacturing Date: N/A
> Module Manufacturing Location: 0
> SDRAM Manufacturer: SK Hynix
> DRAM Steppping: 0.0
> Error Check/Correction: None
> [Module Characteristics]
> Row Address Bits: 16
> Column Address Bits: 10
> Module Density: 8192 Mb
> Number Of Ranks: 1
> Device Width: 8 bits
> Bus Width: 64 bits
> Die Count: 1
> Module Nominal Voltage (VDD): 1.2 V
> Minimum SDRAM Cycle Time (tCKAVGmin): 0.93800 ns
> Maximum SDRAM Cycle Time (tCKAVGmax): 1.60000 ns
> CAS# Latencies Supported: 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16
> Minimum CAS# Latency Time (tAAmin): 13.750 ns
> Minimum RAS# to CAS# Delay (tRCDmin): 13.750 ns
> Minimum Row Precharge Time (tRPmin): 13.750 ns
> Minimum Active to Precharge Time (tRASmin): 33.000 ns
> Supported Module Timing at 1066.1 MHz: 15-15-15-36
> Supported Module Timing at 1000.0 MHz: 14-14-14-33
> Supported Module Timing at 933.3 MHz: 13-13-13-31
> Supported Module Timing at 866.7 MHz: 12-12-12-29
> Supported Module Timing at 800.0 MHz: 11-11-11-27
> Supported Module Timing at 733.3 MHz: 11-11-11-25
> Supported Module Timing at 666.7 MHz: 10-10-10-22
> Minimum Active to Active/Refresh Time (tRCmin): 46.750 ns
> Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC1min): 350.000 ns
> Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC2min): 260.000 ns
> Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC4min): 160.000 ns
> Minimum Four Activate Window Delay Time (tFAWmin): 21.000 ns
> Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Different Bank Group (tRRD_Smin): 3.700 ns
> Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Same Bank Group (tRRD_Lmin): 5.300 ns
> Minimum CAS to CAS Delay Time - Same Bank Group (tCCD_Lmin): 5.625 ns
> [Features]
> Module Temperature Sensor (TSOD): Not Supported
> Module Nominal Height: 31 - 32 mm
> Module Maximum Thickness (Front): 1 - 2 mm
> Module Maximum Thickness (Back): 1 - 2 mm
> Address Mapping from Edge Connector to DRAM: Standard
> [Intel Extreme Memory Profile (XMP)]
> XMP Revision: 2.0
> [Certified Profile [Enabled]]
> Module VDD Voltage Level: 1.35 V
> Minimum SDRAM Cycle Time (tCKAVGmin): 0.625 ns
> CAS# Latencies Supported: 16
> Minimum CAS# Latency Time (tAAmin): 10.000 ns
> Minimum RAS# to CAS# Delay (tRCDmin): 11.250 ns
> Minimum Row Precharge Time (tRPmin): 11.250 ns
> Minimum Active to Precharge Time (tRASmin): 23.750 ns
> Supported Module Timing at 1600.0 MHz: 16-18-18-38
> Minimum Active to Active/Refresh Time (tRCmin): 35.000 ns
> Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC1min): 350.000 ns
> Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC2min): 260.000 ns
> Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC4min): 160.000 ns
> Minimum Four Activate Window Delay Time (tFAWmin): 24.000 ns
> Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Different Bank Group (tRRD_Smin): 3.500 ns
> Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Same Bank Group (tRRD_Lmin): 5.000 ns
> 
> Row: 2 - 8 GB PC4-25600 DDR4 SDRAM G Skill F4-3200C16-8GTZKW
> 
> [General Module Information]
> Module Number: 2
> Module Size: 8 GBytes
> Memory Type: DDR4 SDRAM
> Module Type: Unbuffered DIMM (UDIMM)
> Memory Speed: 1600.0 MHz (DDR4-3200 / PC4-25600)
> Module Manufacturer: G Skill
> Module Part Number: F4-3200C16-8GTZKW
> Module Revision: 0.0
> Module Serial Number: 0
> Module Manufacturing Date: N/A
> Module Manufacturing Location: 0
> SDRAM Manufacturer: SK Hynix
> DRAM Steppping: 0.0
> Error Check/Correction: None
> [Module Characteristics]
> Row Address Bits: 16
> Column Address Bits: 10
> Module Density: 8192 Mb
> Number Of Ranks: 1
> Device Width: 8 bits
> Bus Width: 64 bits
> Die Count: 1
> Module Nominal Voltage (VDD): 1.2 V
> Minimum SDRAM Cycle Time (tCKAVGmin): 0.93800 ns
> Maximum SDRAM Cycle Time (tCKAVGmax): 1.60000 ns
> CAS# Latencies Supported: 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16
> Minimum CAS# Latency Time (tAAmin): 13.750 ns
> Minimum RAS# to CAS# Delay (tRCDmin): 13.750 ns
> Minimum Row Precharge Time (tRPmin): 13.750 ns
> Minimum Active to Precharge Time (tRASmin): 33.000 ns
> Supported Module Timing at 1066.1 MHz: 15-15-15-36
> Supported Module Timing at 1000.0 MHz: 14-14-14-33
> Supported Module Timing at 933.3 MHz: 13-13-13-31
> Supported Module Timing at 866.7 MHz: 12-12-12-29
> Supported Module Timing at 800.0 MHz: 11-11-11-27
> Supported Module Timing at 733.3 MHz: 11-11-11-25
> Supported Module Timing at 666.7 MHz: 10-10-10-22
> Minimum Active to Active/Refresh Time (tRCmin): 46.750 ns
> Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC1min): 350.000 ns
> Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC2min): 260.000 ns
> Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC4min): 160.000 ns
> Minimum Four Activate Window Delay Time (tFAWmin): 21.000 ns
> Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Different Bank Group (tRRD_Smin): 3.700 ns
> Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Same Bank Group (tRRD_Lmin): 5.300 ns
> Minimum CAS to CAS Delay Time - Same Bank Group (tCCD_Lmin): 5.625 ns
> [Features]
> Module Temperature Sensor (TSOD): Not Supported
> Module Nominal Height: 31 - 32 mm
> Module Maximum Thickness (Front): 1 - 2 mm
> Module Maximum Thickness (Back): 1 - 2 mm
> Address Mapping from Edge Connector to DRAM: Standard
> [Intel Extreme Memory Profile (XMP)]
> XMP Revision: 2.0
> [Certified Profile [Enabled]]
> Module VDD Voltage Level: 1.35 V
> Minimum SDRAM Cycle Time (tCKAVGmin): 0.625 ns
> CAS# Latencies Supported: 16
> Minimum CAS# Latency Time (tAAmin): 10.000 ns
> Minimum RAS# to CAS# Delay (tRCDmin): 11.250 ns
> Minimum Row Precharge Time (tRPmin): 11.250 ns
> Minimum Active to Precharge Time (tRASmin): 23.750 ns
> Supported Module Timing at 1600.0 MHz: 16-18-18-38
> Minimum Active to Active/Refresh Time (tRCmin): 35.000 ns
> Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC1min): 350.000 ns
> Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC2min): 260.000 ns
> Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC4min): 160.000 ns
> Minimum Four Activate Window Delay Time (tFAWmin): 24.000 ns
> Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Different Bank Group (tRRD_Smin): 3.500 ns
> Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Same Bank Group (tRRD_Lmin): 5.000 ns
> 
> Row: 3 - 8 GB PC4-25600 DDR4 SDRAM G Skill F4-3200C16-8GTZSW
> 
> [General Module Information]
> Module Number: 3
> Module Size: 8 GBytes
> Memory Type: DDR4 SDRAM
> Module Type: Unbuffered DIMM (UDIMM)
> Memory Speed: 1600.0 MHz (DDR4-3200 / PC4-25600)
> Module Manufacturer: G Skill
> Module Part Number: F4-3200C16-8GTZSW
> Module Revision: 0.0
> Module Serial Number: 0
> Module Manufacturing Date: N/A
> Module Manufacturing Location: 0
> SDRAM Manufacturer: SK Hynix
> DRAM Steppping: 0.0
> Error Check/Correction: None
> [Module Characteristics]
> Row Address Bits: 16
> Column Address Bits: 10
> Module Density: 8192 Mb
> Number Of Ranks: 1
> Device Width: 8 bits
> Bus Width: 64 bits
> Die Count: 1
> Module Nominal Voltage (VDD): 1.2 V
> Minimum SDRAM Cycle Time (tCKAVGmin): 0.93800 ns
> Maximum SDRAM Cycle Time (tCKAVGmax): 1.60000 ns
> CAS# Latencies Supported: 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16
> Minimum CAS# Latency Time (tAAmin): 13.750 ns
> Minimum RAS# to CAS# Delay (tRCDmin): 13.750 ns
> Minimum Row Precharge Time (tRPmin): 13.750 ns
> Minimum Active to Precharge Time (tRASmin): 33.000 ns
> Supported Module Timing at 1066.1 MHz: 15-15-15-36
> Supported Module Timing at 1000.0 MHz: 14-14-14-33
> Supported Module Timing at 933.3 MHz: 13-13-13-31
> Supported Module Timing at 866.7 MHz: 12-12-12-29
> Supported Module Timing at 800.0 MHz: 11-11-11-27
> Supported Module Timing at 733.3 MHz: 11-11-11-25
> Supported Module Timing at 666.7 MHz: 10-10-10-22
> Minimum Active to Active/Refresh Time (tRCmin): 46.750 ns
> Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC1min): 350.000 ns
> Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC2min): 260.000 ns
> Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC4min): 160.000 ns
> Minimum Four Activate Window Delay Time (tFAWmin): 21.000 ns
> Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Different Bank Group (tRRD_Smin): 3.700 ns
> Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Same Bank Group (tRRD_Lmin): 5.300 ns
> Minimum CAS to CAS Delay Time - Same Bank Group (tCCD_Lmin): 5.625 ns
> [Features]
> Module Temperature Sensor (TSOD): Not Supported
> Module Nominal Height: 31 - 32 mm
> Module Maximum Thickness (Front): 1 - 2 mm
> Module Maximum Thickness (Back): 1 - 2 mm
> Address Mapping from Edge Connector to DRAM: Standard
> [Intel Extreme Memory Profile (XMP)]
> XMP Revision: 2.0
> [Certified Profile [Enabled]]
> Module VDD Voltage Level: 1.35 V
> Minimum SDRAM Cycle Time (tCKAVGmin): 0.625 ns
> CAS# Latencies Supported: 16
> Minimum CAS# Latency Time (tAAmin): 10.000 ns
> Minimum RAS# to CAS# Delay (tRCDmin): 11.250 ns
> Minimum Row Precharge Time (tRPmin): 11.250 ns
> Minimum Active to Precharge Time (tRASmin): 23.750 ns
> Supported Module Timing at 1600.0 MHz: 16-18-18-38
> Minimum Active to Active/Refresh Time (tRCmin): 35.000 ns
> Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC1min): 350.000 ns
> Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC2min): 260.000 ns
> Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC4min): 160.000 ns
> Minimum Four Activate Window Delay Time (tFAWmin): 24.000 ns
> Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Different Bank Group (tRRD_Smin): 3.500 ns
> Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Same Bank Group (tRRD_Lmin): 5.000 ns
> 
> Row: 4 - 8 GB PC4-25600 DDR4 SDRAM G Skill F4-3200C16-8GTZKW
> 
> [General Module Information]
> Module Number: 4
> Module Size: 8 GBytes
> Memory Type: DDR4 SDRAM
> Module Type: Unbuffered DIMM (UDIMM)
> Memory Speed: 1600.0 MHz (DDR4-3200 / PC4-25600)
> Module Manufacturer: G Skill
> Module Part Number: F4-3200C16-8GTZKW
> Module Revision: 0.0
> Module Serial Number: 0
> Module Manufacturing Date: N/A
> Module Manufacturing Location: 0
> SDRAM Manufacturer: SK Hynix
> DRAM Steppping: 0.0
> Error Check/Correction: None
> [Module Characteristics]
> Row Address Bits: 16
> Column Address Bits: 10
> Module Density: 8192 Mb
> Number Of Ranks: 1
> Device Width: 8 bits
> Bus Width: 64 bits
> Die Count: 1
> Module Nominal Voltage (VDD): 1.2 V
> Minimum SDRAM Cycle Time (tCKAVGmin): 0.93800 ns
> Maximum SDRAM Cycle Time (tCKAVGmax): 1.60000 ns
> CAS# Latencies Supported: 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16
> Minimum CAS# Latency Time (tAAmin): 13.750 ns
> Minimum RAS# to CAS# Delay (tRCDmin): 13.750 ns
> Minimum Row Precharge Time (tRPmin): 13.750 ns
> Minimum Active to Precharge Time (tRASmin): 33.000 ns
> Supported Module Timing at 1066.1 MHz: 15-15-15-36
> Supported Module Timing at 1000.0 MHz: 14-14-14-33
> Supported Module Timing at 933.3 MHz: 13-13-13-31
> Supported Module Timing at 866.7 MHz: 12-12-12-29
> Supported Module Timing at 800.0 MHz: 11-11-11-27
> Supported Module Timing at 733.3 MHz: 11-11-11-25
> Supported Module Timing at 666.7 MHz: 10-10-10-22
> Minimum Active to Active/Refresh Time (tRCmin): 46.750 ns
> Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC1min): 350.000 ns
> Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC2min): 260.000 ns
> Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC4min): 160.000 ns
> Minimum Four Activate Window Delay Time (tFAWmin): 21.000 ns
> Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Different Bank Group (tRRD_Smin): 3.700 ns
> Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Same Bank Group (tRRD_Lmin): 5.300 ns
> Minimum CAS to CAS Delay Time - Same Bank Group (tCCD_Lmin): 5.625 ns
> [Features]
> Module Temperature Sensor (TSOD): Not Supported
> Module Nominal Height: 31 - 32 mm
> Module Maximum Thickness (Front): 1 - 2 mm
> Module Maximum Thickness (Back): 1 - 2 mm
> Address Mapping from Edge Connector to DRAM: Standard
> [Intel Extreme Memory Profile (XMP)]
> XMP Revision: 2.0
> [Certified Profile [Enabled]]
> Module VDD Voltage Level: 1.35 V
> Minimum SDRAM Cycle Time (tCKAVGmin): 0.625 ns
> CAS# Latencies Supported: 16
> Minimum CAS# Latency Time (tAAmin): 10.000 ns
> Minimum RAS# to CAS# Delay (tRCDmin): 11.250 ns
> Minimum Row Precharge Time (tRPmin): 11.250 ns
> Minimum Active to Precharge Time (tRASmin): 23.750 ns
> Supported Module Timing at 1600.0 MHz: 16-18-18-38
> Minimum Active to Active/Refresh Time (tRCmin): 35.000 ns
> Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC1min): 350.000 ns
> Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC2min): 260.000 ns
> Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC4min): 160.000 ns
> Minimum Four Activate Window Delay Time (tFAWmin): 24.000 ns
> Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Different Bank Group (tRRD_Smin): 3.500 ns
> Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Same Bank Group (tRRD_Lmin): 5.000 ns
> 
> Row: 5 - 8 GB PC4-25600 DDR4 SDRAM G Skill F4-3200C16-8GTZSW
> 
> [General Module Information]
> Module Number: 5
> Module Size: 8 GBytes
> Memory Type: DDR4 SDRAM
> Module Type: Unbuffered DIMM (UDIMM)
> Memory Speed: 1600.0 MHz (DDR4-3200 / PC4-25600)
> Module Manufacturer: G Skill
> Module Part Number: F4-3200C16-8GTZSW
> Module Revision: 0.0
> Module Serial Number: 0
> Module Manufacturing Date: N/A
> Module Manufacturing Location: 0
> SDRAM Manufacturer: SK Hynix
> DRAM Steppping: 0.0
> Error Check/Correction: None
> [Module Characteristics]
> Row Address Bits: 16
> Column Address Bits: 10
> Module Density: 8192 Mb
> Number Of Ranks: 1
> Device Width: 8 bits
> Bus Width: 64 bits
> Die Count: 1
> Module Nominal Voltage (VDD): 1.2 V
> Minimum SDRAM Cycle Time (tCKAVGmin): 0.93800 ns
> Maximum SDRAM Cycle Time (tCKAVGmax): 1.60000 ns
> CAS# Latencies Supported: 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16
> Minimum CAS# Latency Time (tAAmin): 13.750 ns
> Minimum RAS# to CAS# Delay (tRCDmin): 13.750 ns
> Minimum Row Precharge Time (tRPmin): 13.750 ns
> Minimum Active to Precharge Time (tRASmin): 33.000 ns
> Supported Module Timing at 1066.1 MHz: 15-15-15-36
> Supported Module Timing at 1000.0 MHz: 14-14-14-33
> Supported Module Timing at 933.3 MHz: 13-13-13-31
> Supported Module Timing at 866.7 MHz: 12-12-12-29
> Supported Module Timing at 800.0 MHz: 11-11-11-27
> Supported Module Timing at 733.3 MHz: 11-11-11-25
> Supported Module Timing at 666.7 MHz: 10-10-10-22
> Minimum Active to Active/Refresh Time (tRCmin): 46.750 ns
> Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC1min): 350.000 ns
> Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC2min): 260.000 ns
> Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC4min): 160.000 ns
> Minimum Four Activate Window Delay Time (tFAWmin): 21.000 ns
> Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Different Bank Group (tRRD_Smin): 3.700 ns
> Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Same Bank Group (tRRD_Lmin): 5.300 ns
> Minimum CAS to CAS Delay Time - Same Bank Group (tCCD_Lmin): 5.625 ns
> [Features]
> Module Temperature Sensor (TSOD): Not Supported
> Module Nominal Height: 31 - 32 mm
> Module Maximum Thickness (Front): 1 - 2 mm
> Module Maximum Thickness (Back): 1 - 2 mm
> Address Mapping from Edge Connector to DRAM: Standard
> [Intel Extreme Memory Profile (XMP)]
> XMP Revision: 2.0
> [Certified Profile [Enabled]]
> Module VDD Voltage Level: 1.35 V
> Minimum SDRAM Cycle Time (tCKAVGmin): 0.625 ns
> CAS# Latencies Supported: 16
> Minimum CAS# Latency Time (tAAmin): 10.000 ns
> Minimum RAS# to CAS# Delay (tRCDmin): 11.250 ns
> Minimum Row Precharge Time (tRPmin): 11.250 ns
> Minimum Active to Precharge Time (tRASmin): 23.750 ns
> Supported Module Timing at 1600.0 MHz: 16-18-18-38
> Minimum Active to Active/Refresh Time (tRCmin): 35.000 ns
> Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC1min): 350.000 ns
> Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC2min): 260.000 ns
> Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC4min): 160.000 ns
> Minimum Four Activate Window Delay Time (tFAWmin): 24.000 ns
> Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Different Bank Group (tRRD_Smin): 3.500 ns
> Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Same Bank Group (tRRD_Lmin): 5.000 ns
> 
> Row: 6 - 8 GB PC4-25600 DDR4 SDRAM G Skill F4-3200C16-8GTZKW
> 
> [General Module Information]
> Module Number: 6
> Module Size: 8 GBytes
> Memory Type: DDR4 SDRAM
> Module Type: Unbuffered DIMM (UDIMM)
> Memory Speed: 1600.0 MHz (DDR4-3200 / PC4-25600)
> Module Manufacturer: G Skill
> Module Part Number: F4-3200C16-8GTZKW
> Module Revision: 0.0
> Module Serial Number: 0
> Module Manufacturing Date: N/A
> Module Manufacturing Location: 0
> SDRAM Manufacturer: SK Hynix
> DRAM Steppping: 0.0
> Error Check/Correction: None
> [Module Characteristics]
> Row Address Bits: 16
> Column Address Bits: 10
> Module Density: 8192 Mb
> Number Of Ranks: 1
> Device Width: 8 bits
> Bus Width: 64 bits
> Die Count: 1
> Module Nominal Voltage (VDD): 1.2 V
> Minimum SDRAM Cycle Time (tCKAVGmin): 0.93800 ns
> Maximum SDRAM Cycle Time (tCKAVGmax): 1.60000 ns
> CAS# Latencies Supported: 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16
> Minimum CAS# Latency Time (tAAmin): 13.750 ns
> Minimum RAS# to CAS# Delay (tRCDmin): 13.750 ns
> Minimum Row Precharge Time (tRPmin): 13.750 ns
> Minimum Active to Precharge Time (tRASmin): 33.000 ns
> Supported Module Timing at 1066.1 MHz: 15-15-15-36
> Supported Module Timing at 1000.0 MHz: 14-14-14-33
> Supported Module Timing at 933.3 MHz: 13-13-13-31
> Supported Module Timing at 866.7 MHz: 12-12-12-29
> Supported Module Timing at 800.0 MHz: 11-11-11-27
> Supported Module Timing at 733.3 MHz: 11-11-11-25
> Supported Module Timing at 666.7 MHz: 10-10-10-22
> Minimum Active to Active/Refresh Time (tRCmin): 46.750 ns
> Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC1min): 350.000 ns
> Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC2min): 260.000 ns
> Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC4min): 160.000 ns
> Minimum Four Activate Window Delay Time (tFAWmin): 21.000 ns
> Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Different Bank Group (tRRD_Smin): 3.700 ns
> Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Same Bank Group (tRRD_Lmin): 5.300 ns
> Minimum CAS to CAS Delay Time - Same Bank Group (tCCD_Lmin): 5.625 ns
> [Features]
> Module Temperature Sensor (TSOD): Not Supported
> Module Nominal Height: 31 - 32 mm
> Module Maximum Thickness (Front): 1 - 2 mm
> Module Maximum Thickness (Back): 1 - 2 mm
> Address Mapping from Edge Connector to DRAM: Standard
> [Intel Extreme Memory Profile (XMP)]
> XMP Revision: 2.0
> [Certified Profile [Enabled]]
> Module VDD Voltage Level: 1.35 V
> Minimum SDRAM Cycle Time (tCKAVGmin): 0.625 ns
> CAS# Latencies Supported: 16
> Minimum CAS# Latency Time (tAAmin): 10.000 ns
> Minimum RAS# to CAS# Delay (tRCDmin): 11.250 ns
> Minimum Row Precharge Time (tRPmin): 11.250 ns
> Minimum Active to Precharge Time (tRASmin): 23.750 ns
> Supported Module Timing at 1600.0 MHz: 16-18-18-38
> Minimum Active to Active/Refresh Time (tRCmin): 35.000 ns
> Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC1min): 350.000 ns
> Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC2min): 260.000 ns
> Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC4min): 160.000 ns
> Minimum Four Activate Window Delay Time (tFAWmin): 24.000 ns
> Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Different Bank Group (tRRD_Smin): 3.500 ns
> Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Same Bank Group (tRRD_Lmin): 5.000 ns
> 
> Row: 7 - 8 GB PC4-25600 DDR4 SDRAM G Skill F4-3200C16-8GTZSW
> 
> [General Module Information]
> Module Number: 7
> Module Size: 8 GBytes
> Memory Type: DDR4 SDRAM
> Module Type: Unbuffered DIMM (UDIMM)
> Memory Speed: 1600.0 MHz (DDR4-3200 / PC4-25600)
> Module Manufacturer: G Skill
> Module Part Number: F4-3200C16-8GTZSW
> Module Revision: 0.0
> Module Serial Number: 0
> Module Manufacturing Date: N/A
> Module Manufacturing Location: 0
> SDRAM Manufacturer: SK Hynix
> DRAM Steppping: 0.0
> Error Check/Correction: None
> [Module Characteristics]
> Row Address Bits: 16
> Column Address Bits: 10
> Module Density: 8192 Mb
> Number Of Ranks: 1
> Device Width: 8 bits
> Bus Width: 64 bits
> Die Count: 1
> Module Nominal Voltage (VDD): 1.2 V
> Minimum SDRAM Cycle Time (tCKAVGmin): 0.93800 ns
> Maximum SDRAM Cycle Time (tCKAVGmax): 1.60000 ns
> CAS# Latencies Supported: 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16
> Minimum CAS# Latency Time (tAAmin): 13.750 ns
> Minimum RAS# to CAS# Delay (tRCDmin): 13.750 ns
> Minimum Row Precharge Time (tRPmin): 13.750 ns
> Minimum Active to Precharge Time (tRASmin): 33.000 ns
> Supported Module Timing at 1066.1 MHz: 15-15-15-36
> Supported Module Timing at 1000.0 MHz: 14-14-14-33
> Supported Module Timing at 933.3 MHz: 13-13-13-31
> Supported Module Timing at 866.7 MHz: 12-12-12-29
> Supported Module Timing at 800.0 MHz: 11-11-11-27
> Supported Module Timing at 733.3 MHz: 11-11-11-25
> Supported Module Timing at 666.7 MHz: 10-10-10-22
> Minimum Active to Active/Refresh Time (tRCmin): 46.750 ns
> Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC1min): 350.000 ns
> Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC2min): 260.000 ns
> Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC4min): 160.000 ns
> Minimum Four Activate Window Delay Time (tFAWmin): 21.000 ns
> Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Different Bank Group (tRRD_Smin): 3.700 ns
> Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Same Bank Group (tRRD_Lmin): 5.300 ns
> Minimum CAS to CAS Delay Time - Same Bank Group (tCCD_Lmin): 5.625 ns
> [Features]
> Module Temperature Sensor (TSOD): Not Supported
> Module Nominal Height: 31 - 32 mm
> Module Maximum Thickness (Front): 1 - 2 mm
> Module Maximum Thickness (Back): 1 - 2 mm
> Address Mapping from Edge Connector to DRAM: Standard
> [Intel Extreme Memory Profile (XMP)]
> XMP Revision: 2.0
> [Certified Profile [Enabled]]
> Module VDD Voltage Level: 1.35 V
> Minimum SDRAM Cycle Time (tCKAVGmin): 0.625 ns
> CAS# Latencies Supported: 16
> Minimum CAS# Latency Time (tAAmin): 10.000 ns
> Minimum RAS# to CAS# Delay (tRCDmin): 11.250 ns
> Minimum Row Precharge Time (tRPmin): 11.250 ns
> Minimum Active to Precharge Time (tRASmin): 23.750 ns
> Supported Module Timing at 1600.0 MHz: 16-18-18-38
> Minimum Active to Active/Refresh Time (tRCmin): 35.000 ns
> Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC1min): 350.000 ns
> Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC2min): 260.000 ns
> Minimum Refresh Recovery Time Delay (tRFC4min): 160.000 ns
> Minimum Four Activate Window Delay Time (tFAWmin): 24.000 ns
> Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Different Bank Group (tRRD_Smin): 3.500 ns
> Minimum Active to Active Delay Time - Same Bank Group (tRRD_Lmin): 5.000 ns
> 
> Bus
> 
> PCI Bus #0
> 
> AMD Zen - Root Complex
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD Zen - Root Complex
> Original Device Name: AMD Zen - Root Complex
> Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
> Revision ID: 0
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:0:0
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1450&SUBSYS_87611043&REV_00
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: N/A
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Disabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
> Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1450&SUBSYS_87611043&REV_00\3&11583659&0&00
> 
> AMD Zen - IOMMU
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD Zen - IOMMU
> Original Device Name: AMD Zen - IOMMU
> Device Class: IOMMU
> Revision ID: 0
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:0:2
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1451&SUBSYS_14511022&REV_00
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: INTA#
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Disabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> 
> AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
> Original Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
> Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
> Revision ID: 0
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:1:0
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1452&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: N/A
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Disabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
> Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1452&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00\3&11583659&0&08
> 
> AMD Zen - PCIe GPP Bridge
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe GPP Bridge
> Original Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe GPP Bridge
> Device Class: PCI-to-PCI Bridge
> Revision ID: 0
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:1:1
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1453&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
> [PCI Express]
> Version: 3.0
> Maximum Link Width: 4x
> Current Link Width: 4x
> Maximum Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
> Current Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
> Device/Port Type: Root Port of PCI Express Root Complex
> Slot Implemented: Yes
> Hot-Plug: Not Capable
> Hot-Plug Surprise: Not Capable
> Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L1
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: Disabled
> L0s Exit Latency: 256 - 512 ns
> L1 Exit Latency: 32 - 64 us
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: N/A
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Enabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
> Driver Description: PCI Express Root Port
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.125
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1453&SUBSYS_87611043&REV_00\3&11583659&0&09
> 
> PCI Express x4 Bus #1
> 
> AMD 300-Series Chipset - USB Controller B
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD 300-Series Chipset - USB Controller B
> Original Device Name: AMD 300-Series Chipset - USB Controller B
> Device Class: USB xHCI Controller
> Revision ID: 2
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 1:0:0
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_43BA&SUBSYS_11421B21&REV_02
> [PCI Express]
> Version: 3.0
> Maximum Link Width: 4x
> Current Link Width: 4x
> Maximum Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
> Current Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
> Device/Port Type: Legacy PCI Express Endpoint
> Slot Implemented: No
> Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L0s and L1
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: Disabled
> L0s Exit Latency: 1 - 2 us
> L1 Exit Latency: >64 us
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: INTA#
> Memory Base Address 0 EF8A0000
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Enabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> USB Version Supported: 3.1
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: Generic USB xHCI Host Controller
> Driver Description: USB xHCI Compliant Host Controller
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.125
> Driver Date: 06-Dec-2017
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_43BA&SUBSYS_11421B21&REV_02\4&5558812&0&0009
> 
> USB Root Hub
> 
> [Port1] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port2] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port3] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port4] : USB Mass Storage Device
> 
> [Device Information]
> Device Manufacturer: Corsair
> Product Name: Slider 3.0
> Serial Number: 1211296954
> USB Version Supported: 3.00
> USB Device Speed: USB 3.0 SuperSpeed
> Driver Description: USB Mass Storage Device
> Hardware ID: USB\VID_1B1C&PID_1A06
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: Compatible USB storage device
> Driver Description: USB Mass Storage Device
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId USB\VID_1B1C&PID_1A06\1211296954
> 
> [Port5] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port6] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port7] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port8] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port9] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port10] : Qualcomm Atheros QCA61x4A Bluetooth 4.1
> 
> [Device Information]
> Device Manufacturer: ASUSTek
> Product Name: -
> Serial Number: -
> USB Version Supported: 1.10
> USB Device Speed: USB 1.1 Full-speed
> Driver Description: Qualcomm Atheros QCA61x4A Bluetooth 4.1
> Hardware ID: USB\VID_0B05&PID_1868
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: Qualcomm Atheros Communications
> Driver Description: Qualcomm Atheros QCA61x4A Bluetooth 4.1
> Driver Provider: Qualcomm Atheros Communications
> Driver Version: 10.0.0.303
> Driver Date: 21-Mar-2017
> DeviceInstanceId USB\VID_0B05&PID_1868\6&61C3BDB&0&10
> 
> [Port11] : USB Composite Device
> 
> [Device Information]
> Device Manufacturer: Logitech
> Product Name: Gaming Mouse G600
> Serial Number: 6EF5641B90870017
> USB Version Supported: 2.00
> USB Device Speed: USB 1.1 Full-speed
> Driver Description: USB Composite Device
> Hardware ID: USB\VID_046D&PID_C24A
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard USB Host Controller)
> Driver Description: USB Composite Device
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId USB\VID_046D&PID_C24A\6EF5641B90870017
> 
> [Port12] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port13] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port14] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port15] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port16] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port17] : USB Mass Storage Device
> 
> [Device Information]
> Device Manufacturer: SanDisk
> Product Name: Ultra Fit
> Serial Number: 4C531001561109103233
> USB Version Supported: 3.00 (Connected to a USB 2.00 Port)
> USB Device Speed: USB 2.0 High-speed
> Driver Description: USB Mass Storage Device
> Hardware ID: USB\VID_0781&PID_5583
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: Compatible USB storage device
> Driver Description: USB Mass Storage Device
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId USB\VID_0781&PID_5583\4C531001561109103233
> 
> [Port18] : USB Composite Device
> 
> [Device Information]
> Device Manufacturer: Logitech
> Product Name: USB Receiver
> Serial Number: N/A
> USB Version Supported: 2.00
> USB Device Speed: USB 1.1 Full-speed
> Driver Description: USB Composite Device
> Hardware ID: USB\VID_046D&PID_C52B
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard USB Host Controller)
> Driver Description: USB Composite Device
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId USB\VID_046D&PID_C52B\6&61C3BDB&0&18
> 
> [Port19] : USB Input Device
> 
> [Device Information]
> Device Manufacturer: AsusTek Computer Inc.
> Product Name: AURA Custom Human interface
> Serial Number: 00000000001A
> USB Version Supported: 2.00
> USB Device Speed: USB 1.1 Full-speed
> Driver Description: USB Input Device
> Hardware ID: USB\VID_0B05&PID_1867
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
> Driver Description: USB Input Device
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId USB\VID_0B05&PID_1867\00000000001A
> 
> [Port20] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port21] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port22] : No Device Connected
> 
> AMD 300-Series Chipset - SATA Controller B
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD 300-Series Chipset - SATA Controller B
> Original Device Name: AMD 300-Series Chipset - SATA Controller B
> Device Class: SATA AHCI Controller
> Revision ID: 2
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 1:0:1
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_43B6&SUBSYS_10621B21&REV_02
> [PCI Express]
> Version: 3.0
> Maximum Link Width: 4x
> Current Link Width: 4x
> Maximum Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
> Current Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
> Device/Port Type: Legacy PCI Express Endpoint
> Slot Implemented: No
> Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L0s and L1
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: Disabled
> L0s Exit Latency: 1 - 2 us
> L1 Exit Latency: >64 us
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: INTB#
> Memory Base Address 5 EF880000
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Enabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [SATA Host Controller]
> Interface Speed Supported: Gen3 6.0 Gbps
> Number Of Ports: 8
> External SATA Support: Capable
> Aggressive Link Power Management: Capable
> Staggered Spin-up: Capable
> Mechanical Presence Switch: Not Capable
> Command Queue Acceleration: Capable
> 64-bit Addressing: Capable
> AHCI Status: Enabled
> AHCI Version: 1.31
> Ports Implemented: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
> [SATA Port#0]
> Port Status: No Device Present
> External SATA Port: Not Capable
> Hot Plug: Not Capable
> [SATA Port#1]
> Port Status: Device Present, Phy communication established
> Current Interface Speed: Gen3 6.0 Gbps
> External SATA Port: Not Capable
> Hot Plug: Not Capable
> Device Type: SATA
> [SATA Port#2]
> Port Status: No Device Present
> External SATA Port: Not Capable
> Hot Plug: Not Capable
> [SATA Port#3]
> Port Status: No Device Present
> External SATA Port: Not Capable
> Hot Plug: Not Capable
> [SATA Port#4]
> Port Status: No Device Present
> External SATA Port: Not Capable
> Hot Plug: Not Capable
> [SATA Port#5]
> Port Status: No Device Present
> External SATA Port: Not Capable
> Hot Plug: Not Capable
> [SATA Port#6]
> Port Status: No Device Present
> External SATA Port: Not Capable
> Hot Plug: Not Capable
> [SATA Port#7]
> Port Status: No Device Present
> External SATA Port: Not Capable
> Hot Plug: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: Standard SATA AHCI Controller
> Driver Description: Standard SATA AHCI Controller
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.98
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_43B6&SUBSYS_10621B21&REV_02\4&5558812&0&0109
> 
> AMD 300-Series Chipset - PCI Express Root Port B (Switch USP)
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD 300-Series Chipset - PCI Express Root Port B (Switch USP)
> Original Device Name: AMD 300-Series Chipset - PCI Express Root Port B (Switch USP)
> Device Class: PCI-to-PCI Bridge
> Revision ID: 2
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 1:0:2
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_43B1&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_02
> [PCI Express]
> Version: 3.0
> Maximum Link Width: 4x
> Current Link Width: 4x
> Maximum Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
> Current Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
> Device/Port Type: Upstream Port of PCI Express Switch
> Slot Implemented: No
> Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L0s and L1
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: Disabled
> L0s Exit Latency: 1 - 2 us
> L1 Exit Latency: >64 us
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: IRQ15
> Interrupt Pin: INTC#
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Enabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
> Driver Description: PCI Express Upstream Switch Port
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.125
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_43B1&SUBSYS_02011B21&REV_02\4&5558812&0&0209
> 
> PCI Express x4 Bus #2
> 
> AMD 300-Series Chipset - GPP-Switch DSP/SATA-e
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD 300-Series Chipset - GPP-Switch DSP/SATA-e
> Original Device Name: AMD 300-Series Chipset - GPP-Switch DSP/SATA-e
> Device Class: PCI-to-PCI Bridge
> Revision ID: 2
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 2:0:0
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_43B4&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_02
> [PCI Express]
> Version: 2.0
> Maximum Link Width: 1x
> Current Link Width: 1x
> Maximum Link Speed: 5.0 GT/s
> Current Link Speed: 2.5 GT/s
> Device/Port Type: Downstream Port of PCI Express Switch
> Slot Implemented: Yes
> Hot-Plug: Not Capable
> Hot-Plug Surprise: Not Capable
> Slot Power Limit: 26.000 W
> Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L0s and L1
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: L0s Entry
> L0s Exit Latency: 1 - 2 us
> L1 Exit Latency: >64 us
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: IRQ11
> Interrupt Pin: INTA#
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Enabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
> Driver Description: PCI Express Downstream Switch Port
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.125
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_43B4&SUBSYS_33061B21&REV_02\5&3809BF7C&0&000209
> 
> PCI Express x1 Bus #3
> 
> Atheros/Qualcomm QCA6174 802.11ac Wireless Network Adapter
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: Atheros/Qualcomm QCA6174 802.11ac Wireless Network Adapter
> Original Device Name: Atheros/Qualcomm QCA6174 802.11ac Wireless Network Adapter
> Device Class: Unknown Network Adapter
> Revision ID: 32
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 3:0:0
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_168C&DEV_003E&SUBSYS_87521043&REV_32
> [PCI Express]
> Version: 1.1
> Maximum Link Width: 1x
> Current Link Width: 1x
> Maximum Link Speed: 2.5 GT/s
> Current Link Speed: 2.5 GT/s
> Device/Port Type: PCI Express Endpoint
> Slot Implemented: No
> Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L0s and L1
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: L0s Entry
> L0s Exit Latency: 2 - 4 us
> L1 Exit Latency: 32 - 64 us
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: INTA#
> Memory Base Address 0 EF400000
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Enabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: Qualcomm Atheros Communications Inc.
> Driver Description: Qualcomm Atheros QCA61x4A Wireless Network Adapter
> Driver Provider: Qualcomm Atheros Communications Inc.
> Driver Version: 12.0.0.309
> Driver Date: 17-Apr-2017
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_168C&DEV_003E&SUBSYS_87521043&REV_32\6&382B5092&0&00000209
> 
> AMD 300-Series Chipset - GPP-Switch DSP/SATA-e
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD 300-Series Chipset - GPP-Switch DSP/SATA-e
> Original Device Name: AMD 300-Series Chipset - GPP-Switch DSP/SATA-e
> Device Class: PCI-to-PCI Bridge
> Revision ID: 2
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 2:1:0
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_43B4&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_02
> [PCI Express]
> Version: 2.0
> Maximum Link Width: 1x
> Current Link Width: 1x
> Maximum Link Speed: 5.0 GT/s
> Current Link Speed: 5.0 GT/s
> Device/Port Type: Downstream Port of PCI Express Switch
> Slot Implemented: Yes
> Hot-Plug: Not Capable
> Hot-Plug Surprise: Not Capable
> Slot Power Limit: 26.000 W
> Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L0s and L1
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: Disabled
> L0s Exit Latency: >4 us
> L1 Exit Latency: >64 us
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: IRQ10
> Interrupt Pin: INTA#
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Enabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
> Driver Description: PCI Express Downstream Switch Port
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.125
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_43B4&SUBSYS_33061B21&REV_02\5&3809BF7C&0&080209
> 
> PCI Express x1 Bus #4
> 
> Wilocity, Device ID: 0310
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: Wilocity, Device ID: 0310
> Original Device Name: Wilocity, Device ID: 0310
> Device Class: Unknown Network Adapter
> Revision ID: 2
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 4:0:0
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1AE9&DEV_0310&SUBSYS_00001AE9&REV_02
> [PCI Express]
> Version: 2.0
> Maximum Link Width: 1x
> Current Link Width: 1x
> Maximum Link Speed: 5.0 GT/s
> Current Link Speed: 5.0 GT/s
> Device/Port Type: PCI Express Endpoint
> Slot Implemented: No
> Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L1
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: Disabled
> L0s Exit Latency: 2 - 4 us
> L1 Exit Latency: 32 - 64 us
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: INTA#
> Memory Base Address 0 EF200000
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Enabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: Qualcomm Atheros
> Driver Description: Qualcomm Atheros Sparrow 11ad Wireless Network Adapter
> Driver Provider: Qualcomm Atheros
> Driver Version: 1.1.5.89
> Driver Date: 10-Mar-2017
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1AE9&DEV_0310&SUBSYS_00001AE9&REV_02\6&2A24000F&0&00080209
> 
> AMD 300-Series Chipset - GPP-Switch DSP/SATA-e
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD 300-Series Chipset - GPP-Switch DSP/SATA-e
> Original Device Name: AMD 300-Series Chipset - GPP-Switch DSP/SATA-e
> Device Class: PCI-to-PCI Bridge
> Revision ID: 2
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 2:2:0
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_43B4&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_02
> [PCI Express]
> Version: 2.0
> Maximum Link Width: 1x
> Current Link Width: 1x
> Maximum Link Speed: 5.0 GT/s
> Current Link Speed: 2.5 GT/s
> Device/Port Type: Downstream Port of PCI Express Switch
> Slot Implemented: Yes
> Hot-Plug: Not Capable
> Hot-Plug Surprise: Not Capable
> Slot Power Limit: 26.000 W
> Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L0s and L1
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: Disabled
> L0s Exit Latency: 1 - 2 us
> L1 Exit Latency: >64 us
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: IRQ15
> Interrupt Pin: INTA#
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Enabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
> Driver Description: PCI Express Downstream Switch Port
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.125
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_43B4&SUBSYS_33061B21&REV_02\5&3809BF7C&0&100209
> 
> PCI Express x1 Bus #5
> 
> Intel I211AT Copper (Pearsonville) Network Adapter
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: Intel I211AT Copper (Pearsonville) Network Adapter
> Original Device Name: Intel I211AT Copper (Pearsonville) Network Adapter
> Device Class: Ethernet Adapter
> Revision ID: 3
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 5:0:0
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_1539&SUBSYS_85F01043&REV_03
> [PCI Express]
> Version: 1.1
> Maximum Link Width: 1x
> Current Link Width: 1x
> Maximum Link Speed: 2.5 GT/s
> Current Link Speed: 2.5 GT/s
> Device/Port Type: PCI Express Endpoint
> Slot Implemented: No
> Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L0s and L1
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: Disabled
> L0s Exit Latency: 1 - 2 us
> L1 Exit Latency: 8 - 16 us
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: INTA#
> Memory Base Address 0 EF700000
> I/O Base Address 2 0
> Memory Base Address 3 EF720000
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Enabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: Intel
> Driver Description: Intel(R) I211 Gigabit Network Connection
> Driver Provider: Intel
> Driver Version: 12.15.184.0
> Driver Date: 07-Dec-2016
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_1539&SUBSYS_85F01043&REV_03\107B44FFFF913A8200
> 
> AMD 300-Series Chipset - GPP-Switch DSP/SATA-e
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD 300-Series Chipset - GPP-Switch DSP/SATA-e
> Original Device Name: AMD 300-Series Chipset - GPP-Switch DSP/SATA-e
> Device Class: PCI-to-PCI Bridge
> Revision ID: 2
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 2:3:0
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_43B4&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_02
> [PCI Express]
> Version: 2.0
> Maximum Link Width: 1x
> Current Link Width: 1x
> Maximum Link Speed: 5.0 GT/s
> Current Link Speed: 2.5 GT/s
> Device/Port Type: Downstream Port of PCI Express Switch
> Slot Implemented: Yes
> Hot-Plug: Not Capable
> Hot-Plug Surprise: Not Capable
> Slot Power Limit: 26.000 W
> Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L0s and L1
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: Disabled
> L0s Exit Latency: >4 us
> L1 Exit Latency: >64 us
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: IRQ5
> Interrupt Pin: INTA#
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Enabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
> Driver Description: PCI Express Downstream Switch Port
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.125
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_43B4&SUBSYS_33061B21&REV_02\5&3809BF7C&0&180209
> 
> PCI Express x1 Bus #6
> 
> AMD 300-Series Chipset - GPP-Switch DSP/SATA-e
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD 300-Series Chipset - GPP-Switch DSP/SATA-e
> Original Device Name: AMD 300-Series Chipset - GPP-Switch DSP/SATA-e
> Device Class: PCI-to-PCI Bridge
> Revision ID: 2
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 2:4:0
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_43B4&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_02
> [PCI Express]
> Version: 2.0
> Maximum Link Width: 4x
> Current Link Width: 4x
> Maximum Link Speed: 5.0 GT/s
> Current Link Speed: 5.0 GT/s
> Device/Port Type: Downstream Port of PCI Express Switch
> Slot Implemented: Yes
> Hot-Plug: Not Capable
> Hot-Plug Surprise: Not Capable
> Slot Power Limit: 26.000 W
> Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L0s and L1
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: Disabled
> L0s Exit Latency: 1 - 2 us
> L1 Exit Latency: >64 us
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: IRQ11
> Interrupt Pin: INTA#
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Enabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
> Driver Description: PCI Express Downstream Switch Port
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.125
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_43B4&SUBSYS_33061B21&REV_02\5&3809BF7C&0&200209
> 
> PCI Express x4 Bus #7
> 
> Aquantia AQtion AQC107 10Gbit Network Adapter
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: Aquantia AQtion AQC107 10Gbit Network Adapter
> Original Device Name: Aquantia AQtion AQC107 10Gbit Network Adapter
> Device Class: Ethernet Adapter
> Revision ID: 2
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 7:0:0
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1D6A&DEV_D107&SUBSYS_872E1043&REV_02
> [PCI Express]
> Version: 3.0
> Maximum Link Width: 4x
> Current Link Width: 4x
> Maximum Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
> Current Link Speed: 5.0 GT/s
> Device/Port Type: PCI Express Endpoint
> Slot Implemented: No
> Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L0s and L1
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: Disabled
> L0s Exit Latency: >4 us
> L1 Exit Latency: >64 us
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: INTA#
> Memory Base Address 0 EF040000
> Memory Base Address 2 EF050000
> Memory Base Address 4 EEC00000
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Enabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: Aquantia
> Driver Description: ROG AREION 10G (NDIS 6.50 Miniport)
> Driver Provider: Aquantia
> Driver Version: 1.40.25.0
> Driver Date: 21-Feb-2017
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1D6A&DEV_D107&SUBSYS_872E1043&REV_02\6&7DB0FF9&0&00200209
> 
> AMD 300-Series Chipset - GPP-Switch DSP/SATA-e
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD 300-Series Chipset - GPP-Switch DSP/SATA-e
> Original Device Name: AMD 300-Series Chipset - GPP-Switch DSP/SATA-e
> Device Class: PCI-to-PCI Bridge
> Revision ID: 2
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 2:9:0
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_43B4&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_02
> [PCI Express]
> Version: 3.0
> Maximum Link Width: 2x
> Current Link Width: 2x
> Maximum Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
> Current Link Speed: 5.0 GT/s
> Device/Port Type: Downstream Port of PCI Express Switch
> Slot Implemented: Yes
> Hot-Plug: Not Capable
> Hot-Plug Surprise: Not Capable
> Slot Power Limit: 26.000 W
> Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L1
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: Disabled
> L0s Exit Latency: 1 - 2 us
> L1 Exit Latency: >64 us
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: IRQ10
> Interrupt Pin: INTA#
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Enabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
> Driver Description: PCI Express Downstream Switch Port
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.125
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_43B4&SUBSYS_33061B21&REV_02\5&3809BF7C&0&480209
> 
> PCI Express x2 Bus #8
> 
> ASMedia ASM2142 USB 3.1 xHCI Controller
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: ASMedia ASM2142 USB 3.1 xHCI Controller
> Original Device Name: ASMedia ASM2142 USB 3.1 xHCI Controller
> Device Class: USB xHCI Controller
> Revision ID: 0
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 8:0:0
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1B21&DEV_2142&SUBSYS_87561043&REV_00
> [PCI Express]
> Version: 3.0
> Maximum Link Width: 2x
> Current Link Width: 2x
> Maximum Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
> Current Link Speed: 5.0 GT/s
> Device/Port Type: Legacy PCI Express Endpoint
> Slot Implemented: No
> Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L0s and L1
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: Disabled
> L0s Exit Latency: 1 - 2 us
> L1 Exit Latency: >64 us
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: INTA#
> Memory Base Address 0 EF600000
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Enabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> USB Version Supported: 3.0
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: Generic USB xHCI Host Controller
> Driver Description: USB xHCI Compliant Host Controller
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.125
> Driver Date: 06-Dec-2017
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1B21&DEV_2142&SUBSYS_87561043&REV_00\6&138EED33&0&00480209
> 
> USB Root Hub
> 
> [Port1] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port2] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port3] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port4] : No Device Connected
> 
> AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
> Original Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
> Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
> Revision ID: 0
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:2:0
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1452&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: N/A
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Disabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
> Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1452&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00\3&11583659&0&10
> 
> AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
> Original Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
> Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
> Revision ID: 0
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:3:0
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1452&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: N/A
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Disabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
> Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1452&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00\3&11583659&0&18
> 
> AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
> Original Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
> Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
> Revision ID: 0
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:4:0
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1452&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: N/A
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Disabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
> Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1452&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00\3&11583659&0&20
> 
> AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
> Original Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
> Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
> Revision ID: 0
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:7:0
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1452&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: N/A
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Disabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
> Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1452&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00\3&11583659&0&38
> 
> AMD Zen - Internal PCIe GPP Bridge 0 to Bus B/C
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD Zen - Internal PCIe GPP Bridge 0 to Bus B/C
> Original Device Name: AMD Zen - Internal PCIe GPP Bridge 0 to Bus B/C
> Device Class: PCI-to-PCI Bridge
> Revision ID: 0
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:7:1
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1454&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
> [PCI Express]
> Version: 3.0
> Maximum Link Width: 16x
> Current Link Width: 16x
> Maximum Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
> Current Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
> Device/Port Type: Root Port of PCI Express Root Complex
> Slot Implemented: No
> Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L0s and L1
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: L0s and L1 Entry
> L0s Exit Latency: < 64 ns
> L1 Exit Latency: < 1 us
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: INTA#
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Enabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
> Driver Description: PCI Express Root Port
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.125
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1454&SUBSYS_14541022&REV_00\3&11583659&0&39
> 
> PCI Express x16 Bus #9
> 
> AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Function
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Function
> Original Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Function
> Device Class: Non-Essential Instrumentation Function
> Revision ID: 0
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 9:0:0
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_145A&SUBSYS_145A1022&REV_00
> [PCI Express]
> Version: 3.0
> Maximum Link Width: 16x
> Current Link Width: 16x
> Maximum Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
> Current Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
> Device/Port Type: PCI Express Endpoint
> Slot Implemented: No
> Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L0s and L1
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: L0s Entry
> L0s Exit Latency: < 64 ns
> L1 Exit Latency: < 1 us
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: N/A
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Enabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: Advanced Micro Devices
> Driver Description: AMD PCI
> Driver Provider: Advanced Micro Devices
> Driver Version: 1.0.0.42
> Driver Date: 09-Oct-2017
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_145A&SUBSYS_145A1022&REV_00\4&C93BEE2&0&0039
> 
> AMD Zen - Cryptographic Coprocessor PSPCPP
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD Zen - Cryptographic Coprocessor PSPCPP
> Original Device Name: AMD Zen - Cryptographic Coprocessor PSPCPP
> Device Class: Unknown En/Decryption
> Revision ID: 0
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 9:0:2
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1456&SUBSYS_14561022&REV_00
> [PCI Express]
> Version: 3.0
> Maximum Link Width: 16x
> Current Link Width: 16x
> Maximum Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
> Current Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
> Device/Port Type: PCI Express Endpoint
> Slot Implemented: No
> Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L0s and L1
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: L0s Entry
> L0s Exit Latency: < 64 ns
> L1 Exit Latency: < 1 us
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: INTB#
> Memory Base Address 2 EFC00000
> Memory Base Address 5 EFBFE000
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Disabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: Advanced Micro Devices Inc.
> Driver Description: AMD PSP 3.0 Device
> Driver Provider: Advanced Micro Devices Inc.
> Driver Version: 4.4.0.0
> Driver Date: 01-Jun-2017
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1456&SUBSYS_14561022&REV_00\4&C93BEE2&0&0239
> 
> AMD Zen - USB3 xHCI Controller
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD Zen - USB3 xHCI Controller
> Original Device Name: AMD Zen - USB3 xHCI Controller
> Device Class: USB xHCI Controller
> Revision ID: 0
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 9:0:3
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_145C&SUBSYS_87611043&REV_00
> [PCI Express]
> Version: 3.0
> Maximum Link Width: 16x
> Current Link Width: 16x
> Maximum Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
> Current Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
> Device/Port Type: PCI Express Endpoint
> Slot Implemented: No
> Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L0s and L1
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: L0s Entry
> L0s Exit Latency: < 64 ns
> L1 Exit Latency: < 1 us
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: INTC#
> Memory Base Address 0 EFA00000
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Enabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> USB Version Supported: 3.0
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: Generic USB xHCI Host Controller
> Driver Description: USB xHCI Compliant Host Controller
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.125
> Driver Date: 06-Dec-2017
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_145C&SUBSYS_87611043&REV_00\4&C93BEE2&0&0339
> 
> USB Root Hub
> 
> [Port1] : Generic USB Hub
> 
> [Device Information]
> Device Manufacturer: Wacom Co., Ltd.
> Product Name: Cintiq 22HDT HUB
> Serial Number: N/A
> USB Version Supported: 2.00
> USB Device Speed: USB 2.0 High-speed
> Driver Description: Generic USB Hub
> Hardware ID: USB\VID_056A&PID_005C
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard USB HUBs)
> Driver Description: Generic USB Hub
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.64
> Driver Date: 23-Oct-2017
> DeviceInstanceId USB\VID_056A&PID_005C\6&1CD5F76C&0&1
> 
> [Port1] : USB Composite Device
> 
> [Device Information]
> Device Manufacturer: Wacom Co.,Ltd.
> Product Name: Cintiq 22HDT TOUCH
> Serial Number: N/A
> USB Version Supported: 2.00
> USB Device Speed: USB 1.1 Full-speed
> Driver Description: USB Composite Device
> Hardware ID: USB\VID_056A&PID_005E
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard USB Host Controller)
> Driver Description: USB Composite Device
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId USB\VID_056A&PID_005E\7&34F0E922&0&1
> 
> [Port2] : Wacom Tablet
> 
> [Device Information]
> Device Manufacturer: Tablet
> Product Name: Cintiq 22HDT Tablet
> Serial Number: N/A
> USB Version Supported: 2.00
> USB Device Speed: USB 1.1 Full-speed
> Driver Description: Wacom Tablet
> Hardware ID: USB\VID_056A&PID_005B
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: Wacom
> Driver Description: Wacom Tablet
> Driver Provider: Wacom
> Driver Version: 3.8.10.3
> Driver Date: 05-Oct-2017
> DeviceInstanceId USB\VID_056A&PID_005B\7&34F0E922&0&2
> 
> [Port3] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port2] : USB Composite Device
> 
> [Device Information]
> Device Manufacturer: N/A
> Product Name: N/A
> Serial Number: REV8
> USB Version Supported: 1.10
> USB Device Speed: USB 1.1 Full-speed
> Driver Description: USB Composite Device
> Hardware ID: USB\VID_B58E&PID_9E84
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard USB Host Controller)
> Driver Description: USB Composite Device
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId USB\VID_B58E&PID_9E84\REV8
> 
> [Port3] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port4] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port5] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port6] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port7] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port8] : No Device Connected
> 
> AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
> Original Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
> Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
> Revision ID: 0
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:8:0
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1452&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: N/A
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Disabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
> Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1452&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00\3&11583659&0&40
> 
> AMD Zen - Internal PCIe GPP Bridge 0 to Bus B/C
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD Zen - Internal PCIe GPP Bridge 0 to Bus B/C
> Original Device Name: AMD Zen - Internal PCIe GPP Bridge 0 to Bus B/C
> Device Class: PCI-to-PCI Bridge
> Revision ID: 0
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:8:1
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1454&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
> [PCI Express]
> Version: 3.0
> Maximum Link Width: 16x
> Current Link Width: 16x
> Maximum Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
> Current Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
> Device/Port Type: Root Port of PCI Express Root Complex
> Slot Implemented: No
> Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L0s and L1
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: L0s Entry
> L0s Exit Latency: < 64 ns
> L1 Exit Latency: < 1 us
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: INTA#
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Enabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
> Driver Description: PCI Express Root Port
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.125
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1454&SUBSYS_14541022&REV_00\3&11583659&0&41
> 
> PCI Express x16 Bus #10
> 
> AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Function
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Function
> Original Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Function
> Device Class: Non-Essential Instrumentation Function
> Revision ID: 0
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 10:0:0
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1455&SUBSYS_14551022&REV_00
> [PCI Express]
> Version: 3.0
> Maximum Link Width: 16x
> Current Link Width: 16x
> Maximum Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
> Current Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
> Device/Port Type: PCI Express Endpoint
> Slot Implemented: No
> Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L0s and L1
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: L0s Entry
> L0s Exit Latency: < 64 ns
> L1 Exit Latency: < 1 us
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: N/A
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Enabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: Advanced Micro Devices
> Driver Description: AMD PCI
> Driver Provider: Advanced Micro Devices
> Driver Version: 1.0.0.42
> Driver Date: 09-Oct-2017
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1455&SUBSYS_14551022&REV_00\4&2B9CC193&0&0041
> 
> AMD Carrizo FCH - SATA AHCI Controller (MS)
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD Carrizo FCH - SATA AHCI Controller (MS)
> Original Device Name: AMD Carrizo FCH - SATA AHCI Controller (MS)
> Device Class: SATA AHCI Controller
> Revision ID: 51
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 10:0:2
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_7901&SUBSYS_87611043&REV_51
> [PCI Express]
> Version: 3.0
> Maximum Link Width: 16x
> Current Link Width: 16x
> Maximum Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
> Current Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
> Device/Port Type: PCI Express Endpoint
> Slot Implemented: No
> Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L0s and L1
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: L0s Entry
> L0s Exit Latency: < 64 ns
> L1 Exit Latency: < 1 us
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: INTB#
> Memory Base Address 5 EFD08000
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Disabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [SATA Host Controller]
> Interface Speed Supported: Gen3 6.0 Gbps
> Number Of Ports: 1
> External SATA Support: Not Capable
> Aggressive Link Power Management: Capable
> Staggered Spin-up: Not Capable
> Mechanical Presence Switch: Capable
> Command Queue Acceleration: Capable
> 64-bit Addressing: Capable
> AHCI Status: Enabled
> AHCI Version: 1.31
> Ports Implemented: 0
> [SATA Port#0]
> Port Status: No Device Present
> External SATA Port: Not Capable
> Hot Plug: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: Standard SATA AHCI Controller
> Driver Description: Standard SATA AHCI Controller
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.98
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_7901&SUBSYS_87611043&REV_51\4&2B9CC193&0&0241
> 
> AMD Zen - HD Audio Controller
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD Zen - HD Audio Controller
> Original Device Name: AMD Zen - HD Audio Controller
> Device Class: Mixed mode device
> Revision ID: 0
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 10:0:3
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1457&SUBSYS_874F1043&REV_00
> [PCI Express]
> Version: 3.0
> Maximum Link Width: 16x
> Current Link Width: 16x
> Maximum Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
> Current Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
> Device/Port Type: PCI Express Endpoint
> Slot Implemented: No
> Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L0s and L1
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: L0s Entry
> L0s Exit Latency: < 64 ns
> L1 Exit Latency: < 1 us
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: IRQ43
> Interrupt Pin: INTC#
> Memory Base Address 0 EFDF8000
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Enabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: Microsoft
> Driver Description: High Definition Audio Controller
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
> Driver Date: 27-Sep-2017
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1457&SUBSYS_874F1043&REV_00\4&2B9CC193&0&0341
> 
> AMD Carrizo FCH - SMBus and ACPI Controller
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD Carrizo FCH - SMBus and ACPI Controller
> Original Device Name: AMD Carrizo FCH - SMBus and ACPI Controller
> Device Class: SMBus (System Management Bus)
> Revision ID: 59
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:20:0
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_790B&SUBSYS_87611043&REV_59
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: N/A
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Disabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc
> Driver Description: AMD SMBus
> Driver Provider: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc
> Driver Version: 5.12.0.38
> Driver Date: 29-Aug-2017
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_790B&SUBSYS_87611043&REV_59\3&11583659&0&A0
> 
> AMD Carrizo FCH - LPC Bridge
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD Carrizo FCH - LPC Bridge
> Original Device Name: AMD Carrizo FCH - LPC Bridge
> Device Class: PCI-to-ISA Bridge
> Revision ID: 51
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:20:3
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_790E&SUBSYS_87611043&REV_51
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: N/A
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Enabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
> Driver Description: PCI standard ISA bridge
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_790E&SUBSYS_87611043&REV_51\3&11583659&0&A3
> 
> AMD Zen - Data Fabric
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
> Original Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
> Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
> Revision ID: 0
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:24:0
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1460&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: N/A
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Disabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
> Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1460&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00\3&11583659&0&C0
> 
> AMD Zen - Data Fabric
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
> Original Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
> Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
> Revision ID: 0
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:24:1
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1461&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: N/A
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Disabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
> Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1461&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00\3&11583659&0&C1
> 
> AMD Zen - Data Fabric
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
> Original Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
> Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
> Revision ID: 0
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:24:2
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1462&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: N/A
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Disabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
> Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1462&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00\3&11583659&0&C2
> 
> AMD Zen - Data Fabric
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
> Original Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
> Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
> Revision ID: 0
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:24:3
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1463&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: N/A
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Disabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
> Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1463&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00\3&11583659&0&C3
> 
> AMD Zen - Data Fabric
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
> Original Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
> Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
> Revision ID: 0
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:24:4
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1464&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: N/A
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Disabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
> Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1464&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00\3&11583659&0&C4
> 
> AMD Zen - Data Fabric
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
> Original Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
> Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
> Revision ID: 0
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:24:5
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1465&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: N/A
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Disabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
> Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1465&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00\3&11583659&0&C5
> 
> AMD Zen - Data Fabric
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
> Original Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
> Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
> Revision ID: 0
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:24:6
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1466&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: N/A
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Disabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
> Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1466&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00\3&11583659&0&C6
> 
> AMD Zen - Data Fabric
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
> Original Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
> Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
> Revision ID: 0
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:24:7
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1467&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: N/A
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Disabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
> Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1467&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00\3&11583659&0&C7
> 
> AMD Zen - Data Fabric
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
> Original Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
> Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
> Revision ID: 0
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:25:0
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1460&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: N/A
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Disabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
> Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1460&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00\3&11583659&0&C8
> 
> AMD Zen - Data Fabric
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
> Original Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
> Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
> Revision ID: 0
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:25:1
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1461&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: N/A
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Disabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
> Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1461&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00\3&11583659&0&C9
> 
> AMD Zen - Data Fabric
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
> Original Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
> Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
> Revision ID: 0
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:25:2
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1462&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: N/A
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Disabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
> Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1462&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00\3&11583659&0&CA
> 
> AMD Zen - Data Fabric
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
> Original Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
> Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
> Revision ID: 0
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:25:3
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1463&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: N/A
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Disabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
> Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1463&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00\3&11583659&0&CB
> 
> AMD Zen - Data Fabric
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
> Original Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
> Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
> Revision ID: 0
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:25:4
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1464&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: N/A
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Disabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
> Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1464&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00\3&11583659&0&CC
> 
> AMD Zen - Data Fabric
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
> Original Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
> Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
> Revision ID: 0
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:25:5
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1465&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: N/A
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Disabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
> Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1465&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00\3&11583659&0&CD
> 
> AMD Zen - Data Fabric
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
> Original Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
> Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
> Revision ID: 0
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:25:6
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1466&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: N/A
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Disabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
> Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1466&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00\3&11583659&0&CE
> 
> AMD Zen - Data Fabric
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
> Original Device Name: AMD Zen - Data Fabric
> Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
> Revision ID: 0
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 0:25:7
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1467&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: N/A
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Disabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
> Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1467&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00\3&11583659&0&CF
> 
> PCI Bus #64
> 
> AMD Zen - Root Complex
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD Zen - Root Complex
> Original Device Name: AMD Zen - Root Complex
> Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
> Revision ID: 0
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 64:0:0
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1450&SUBSYS_87611043&REV_00
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: N/A
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Disabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
> Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1450&SUBSYS_87611043&REV_00\3&2411E6FE&0&00
> 
> AMD Zen - IOMMU
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD Zen - IOMMU
> Original Device Name: AMD Zen - IOMMU
> Device Class: IOMMU
> Revision ID: 0
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 64:0:2
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1451&SUBSYS_14511022&REV_00
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: INTA#
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Disabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: AMD
> Driver Description: AMD IOMMU Device
> Driver Provider: AMD
> Driver Version: 1.2.0.30
> Driver Date: 04-Apr-2016
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1451&SUBSYS_14511022&REV_00\3&2411E6FE&0&02
> 
> AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
> Original Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
> Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
> Revision ID: 0
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 64:1:0
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1452&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: N/A
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Disabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
> Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1452&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00\3&2411E6FE&0&08
> 
> AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
> Original Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
> Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
> Revision ID: 0
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 64:2:0
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1452&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: N/A
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Disabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
> Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1452&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00\3&2411E6FE&0&10
> 
> AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
> Original Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
> Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
> Revision ID: 0
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 64:3:0
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1452&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: N/A
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Disabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
> Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1452&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00\3&2411E6FE&0&18
> 
> AMD Zen - PCIe GPP Bridge
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe GPP Bridge
> Original Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe GPP Bridge
> Device Class: PCI-to-PCI Bridge
> Revision ID: 0
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 64:3:1
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1453&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
> [PCI Express]
> Version: 3.0
> Maximum Link Width: 16x
> Current Link Width: 16x
> Maximum Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
> Current Link Speed: 2.5 GT/s
> Device/Port Type: Root Port of PCI Express Root Complex
> Slot Implemented: Yes
> Hot-Plug: Not Capable
> Hot-Plug Surprise: Not Capable
> Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L1
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: Disabled
> L0s Exit Latency: 256 - 512 ns
> L1 Exit Latency: 32 - 64 us
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: N/A
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Enabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
> Driver Description: PCI Express Root Port
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.125
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1453&SUBSYS_87611043&REV_00\3&2411E6FE&0&19
> 
> PCI Express x16 Bus #65
> 
> GIGABYTE GeForce GTX 980 Ti
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: GIGABYTE GeForce GTX 980 Ti
> Original Device Name: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti (GM200-310)
> Device Class: VGA Compatible Adapter
> Revision ID: A1
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 65:0:0
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_17C8&SUBSYS_36CB1458&REV_A1
> [PCI Express]
> Version: 3.0
> Maximum Link Width: 16x
> Current Link Width: 16x
> Maximum Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
> Current Link Speed: 2.5 GT/s
> Device/Port Type: Legacy PCI Express Endpoint
> Slot Implemented: No
> Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: None
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: Disabled
> L0s Exit Latency: 256 - 512 ns
> L1 Exit Latency: 2 - 4 us
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: IRQ86
> Interrupt Pin: INTA#
> Memory Base Address 0 EB000000
> Memory Base Address 1 D0000000
> Memory Base Address 3 E0000000
> I/O Base Address 5 E000
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Enabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: NVIDIA
> Driver Description: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti
> Driver Provider: NVIDIA
> Driver Version: 23.21.13.8843 (GeForce 388.43)
> Driver Date: 26-Nov-2017
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_17C8&SUBSYS_36CB1458&REV_A1\4&2A522381&0&0019
> 
> NVIDIA GM200 - High Definition Audio Controller
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: NVIDIA GM200 - High Definition Audio Controller
> Original Device Name: NVIDIA GM200 - High Definition Audio Controller
> Device Class: Mixed mode device
> Revision ID: A1
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 65:0:1
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0FB0&SUBSYS_36CB1458&REV_A1
> [PCI Express]
> Version: 3.0
> Maximum Link Width: 16x
> Current Link Width: 16x
> Maximum Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
> Current Link Speed: 2.5 GT/s
> Device/Port Type: PCI Express Endpoint
> Slot Implemented: No
> Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: None
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: Disabled
> L0s Exit Latency: 256 - 512 ns
> L1 Exit Latency: 2 - 4 us
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: IRQ87
> Interrupt Pin: INTB#
> Memory Base Address 0 EC080000
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Enabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: Microsoft
> Driver Description: High Definition Audio Controller
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
> Driver Date: 27-Sep-2017
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0FB0&SUBSYS_36CB1458&REV_A1\4&2A522381&0&0119
> 
> AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
> Original Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
> Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
> Revision ID: 0
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 64:4:0
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1452&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: N/A
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Disabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
> Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1452&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00\3&2411E6FE&0&20
> 
> AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
> Original Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
> Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
> Revision ID: 0
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 64:7:0
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1452&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: N/A
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Disabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
> Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1452&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00\3&2411E6FE&0&38
> 
> AMD Zen - Internal PCIe GPP Bridge 0 to Bus B/C
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD Zen - Internal PCIe GPP Bridge 0 to Bus B/C
> Original Device Name: AMD Zen - Internal PCIe GPP Bridge 0 to Bus B/C
> Device Class: PCI-to-PCI Bridge
> Revision ID: 0
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 64:7:1
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1454&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
> [PCI Express]
> Version: 3.0
> Maximum Link Width: 16x
> Current Link Width: 16x
> Maximum Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
> Current Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
> Device/Port Type: Root Port of PCI Express Root Complex
> Slot Implemented: No
> Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L0s and L1
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: L0s Entry
> L0s Exit Latency: < 64 ns
> L1 Exit Latency: < 1 us
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: INTA#
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Enabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
> Driver Description: PCI Express Root Port
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.125
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1454&SUBSYS_14541022&REV_00\3&2411E6FE&0&39
> 
> PCI Express x16 Bus #66
> 
> AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Function
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Function
> Original Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Function
> Device Class: Non-Essential Instrumentation Function
> Revision ID: 0
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 66:0:0
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_145A&SUBSYS_145A1022&REV_00
> [PCI Express]
> Version: 3.0
> Maximum Link Width: 16x
> Current Link Width: 16x
> Maximum Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
> Current Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
> Device/Port Type: PCI Express Endpoint
> Slot Implemented: No
> Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L0s and L1
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: L0s Entry
> L0s Exit Latency: < 64 ns
> L1 Exit Latency: < 1 us
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: N/A
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Enabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: Advanced Micro Devices
> Driver Description: AMD PCI
> Driver Provider: Advanced Micro Devices
> Driver Version: 1.0.0.42
> Driver Date: 09-Oct-2017
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_145A&SUBSYS_145A1022&REV_00\4&3A3540B1&0&0039
> 
> AMD Zen - Cryptographic Coprocessor PSPCPP
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD Zen - Cryptographic Coprocessor PSPCPP
> Original Device Name: AMD Zen - Cryptographic Coprocessor PSPCPP
> Device Class: Unknown En/Decryption
> Revision ID: 0
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 66:0:2
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1456&SUBSYS_14561022&REV_00
> [PCI Express]
> Version: 3.0
> Maximum Link Width: 16x
> Current Link Width: 16x
> Maximum Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
> Current Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
> Device/Port Type: PCI Express Endpoint
> Slot Implemented: No
> Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L0s and L1
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: L0s Entry
> L0s Exit Latency: < 64 ns
> L1 Exit Latency: < 1 us
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: INTB#
> Memory Base Address 2 EC400000
> Memory Base Address 5 EC3FE000
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Disabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: Advanced Micro Devices Inc.
> Driver Description: AMD PSP 3.0 Device
> Driver Provider: Advanced Micro Devices Inc.
> Driver Version: 4.4.0.0
> Driver Date: 01-Jun-2017
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1456&SUBSYS_14561022&REV_00\4&3A3540B1&0&0239
> 
> AMD Zen - USB3 xHCI Controller
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD Zen - USB3 xHCI Controller
> Original Device Name: AMD Zen - USB3 xHCI Controller
> Device Class: USB xHCI Controller
> Revision ID: 0
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 66:0:3
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_145C&SUBSYS_145C1022&REV_00
> [PCI Express]
> Version: 3.0
> Maximum Link Width: 16x
> Current Link Width: 16x
> Maximum Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
> Current Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
> Device/Port Type: PCI Express Endpoint
> Slot Implemented: No
> Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L0s and L1
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: L0s Entry
> L0s Exit Latency: < 64 ns
> L1 Exit Latency: < 1 us
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: INTC#
> Memory Base Address 0 EC200000
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Enabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> USB Version Supported: 3.0
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: Generic USB xHCI Host Controller
> Driver Description: USB xHCI Compliant Host Controller
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.125
> Driver Date: 06-Dec-2017
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_145C&SUBSYS_145C1022&REV_00\4&3A3540B1&0&0339
> 
> USB Root Hub
> 
> [Port1] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port2] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port3] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port4] : USB Composite Device
> 
> [Device Information]
> Device Manufacturer: Corsair
> Product Name: Corsair K95 RGB Gaming Keyboard
> Serial Number: 1803E012AE3998A453481C20F5001945
> USB Version Supported: 2.00
> USB Device Speed: USB 1.1 Full-speed
> Driver Description: USB Composite Device
> Hardware ID: USB\VID_1B1C&PID_1B11
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard USB Host Controller)
> Driver Description: USB Composite Device
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId USB\VID_1B1C&PID_1B11\1803E012AE3998A453481C20F5001945
> 
> [Port5] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port6] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port7] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port8] : No Device Connected
> 
> AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
> Original Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Host Bridge
> Device Class: Host-to-PCI Bridge
> Revision ID: 0
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 64:8:0
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1452&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: N/A
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Disabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
> Driver Description: PCI standard host CPU bridge
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1452&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00\3&2411E6FE&0&40
> 
> AMD Zen - Internal PCIe GPP Bridge 0 to Bus B/C
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD Zen - Internal PCIe GPP Bridge 0 to Bus B/C
> Original Device Name: AMD Zen - Internal PCIe GPP Bridge 0 to Bus B/C
> Device Class: PCI-to-PCI Bridge
> Revision ID: 0
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 64:8:1
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1454&SUBSYS_00000000&REV_00
> [PCI Express]
> Version: 3.0
> Maximum Link Width: 16x
> Current Link Width: 16x
> Maximum Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
> Current Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
> Device/Port Type: Root Port of PCI Express Root Complex
> Slot Implemented: No
> Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L0s and L1
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: L0s Entry
> L0s Exit Latency: < 64 ns
> L1 Exit Latency: < 1 us
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: INTA#
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Enabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
> Driver Description: PCI Express Root Port
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.125
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1454&SUBSYS_14541022&REV_00\3&2411E6FE&0&41
> 
> PCI Express x16 Bus #67
> 
> AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Function
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Function
> Original Device Name: AMD Zen - PCIe Dummy Function
> Device Class: Non-Essential Instrumentation Function
> Revision ID: 0
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 67:0:0
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1455&SUBSYS_14551022&REV_00
> [PCI Express]
> Version: 3.0
> Maximum Link Width: 16x
> Current Link Width: 16x
> Maximum Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
> Current Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
> Device/Port Type: PCI Express Endpoint
> Slot Implemented: No
> Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L0s and L1
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: L0s Entry
> L0s Exit Latency: < 64 ns
> L1 Exit Latency: < 1 us
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: N/A
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Enabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: Advanced Micro Devices
> Driver Description: AMD PCI
> Driver Provider: Advanced Micro Devices
> Driver Version: 1.0.0.42
> Driver Date: 09-Oct-2017
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1455&SUBSYS_14551022&REV_00\4&1DA3795B&0&0041
> 
> AMD Carrizo FCH - SATA AHCI Controller (MS)
> 
> [General Information]
> Device Name: AMD Carrizo FCH - SATA AHCI Controller (MS)
> Original Device Name: AMD Carrizo FCH - SATA AHCI Controller (MS)
> Device Class: SATA AHCI Controller
> Revision ID: 51
> PCI Address (Busevice:Function) Number: 67:0:2
> PCI Latency Timer: 0
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_7901&SUBSYS_87611043&REV_51
> [PCI Express]
> Version: 3.0
> Maximum Link Width: 16x
> Current Link Width: 16x
> Maximum Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
> Current Link Speed: 8.0 GT/s
> Device/Port Type: PCI Express Endpoint
> Slot Implemented: No
> Emergency Power Reduction: Not Supported
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Support: L0s and L1
> Active State Power Management (ASPM) Status: L0s Entry
> L0s Exit Latency: < 64 ns
> L1 Exit Latency: < 1 us
> [System Resources]
> Interrupt Line: N/A
> Interrupt Pin: INTB#
> Memory Base Address 5 EC500000
> [Features]
> Bus Mastering: Disabled
> Running At 66 MHz: Not Capable
> Fast Back-to-Back Transactions: Not Capable
> [SATA Host Controller]
> Interface Speed Supported: Gen3 6.0 Gbps
> Number Of Ports: 1
> External SATA Support: Not Capable
> Aggressive Link Power Management: Capable
> Staggered Spin-up: Not Capable
> Mechanical Presence Switch: Capable
> Command Queue Acceleration: Capable
> 64-bit Addressing: Capable
> AHCI Status: Enabled
> AHCI Version: 1.31
> Ports Implemented: 0
> [SATA Port#0]
> Port Status: No Device Present
> External SATA Port: Not Capable
> Hot Plug: Not Capable
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: Standard SATA AHCI Controller
> Driver Description: Standard SATA AHCI Controller
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.98
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_7901&SUBSYS_87611043&REV_51\4&1DA3795B&0&0241
> 
> Video Adapter
> 
> NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti
> 
> Video Chipset: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti
> Video Chipset Codename: GM200-310
> Video Memory: 6144 MBytes of GDDR5 SDRAM [Hynix]Video Card: GIGABYTE GeForce GTX 980 Ti
> Video Bus: PCIe v3.0 x16 (8.0 GT/s) @ x16 (2.5 GT/s)
> Video RAMDAC: Integrated RAMDAC
> Video BIOS Version: 84.00.36.00.7e
> Video Chipset Revision: A1
> [Performance]
> Processor Clock: 135.0 MHz
> Video Unit Clock: 405.0 MHz
> Memory Clock: 202.5 MHz (Effective 810.0 MHz)
> Memory Bus Width: 384-bit
> Number Of ROPs: 96
> Number Of Unified Shaders: 2816
> Number Of TMUs (Texture Mapping Units): 176
> ASIC Quality: 67.4 %
> NVIDIA SLI Capability: Capable
> NVIDIA SLI Status: Not Present
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_17C8&SUBSYS_36CB1458&REV_A1
> PCI Location (Busev:Fnc): 65:00:0
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: NVIDIA
> Driver Description: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti
> Driver Provider: NVIDIA
> Driver Version: 23.21.13.8843 (GeForce 388.43)
> Driver Date: 26-Nov-2017
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_17C8&SUBSYS_36CB1458&REV_A1\4&2A522381&0&0019
> 
> Monitor
> 
> ViewSonic [Unknown Model: VSC0C28]
> 
> [General information]
> Monitor Name: ViewSonic [Unknown Model: VSC0C28]
> Monitor Name (Manuf): VX2453 Series
> Serial Number: SDA113616580
> Date Of Manufacture: Week: 36, Year: 2011
> Monitor Hardware ID: Monitor\VSC0C28
> Max. Vertical Size: 29 cm
> Max. Horizontal Size: 52 cm
> Horizontal Frequency: 15 - 83 kHz
> Vertical Frequency: 50 - 76 Hz
> Maximum Pixel Clock: 180 MHz
> [Advanced parameters]
> Input Signal: Digital
> Display Type: RGB color
> Gamma Factor: 2.20
> [DPMS Modes]
> Standby: Not Supported
> Suspend: Not Supported
> Active Off: Supported
> Standard Colour Space: Supported
> Preferred Timing Mode: Supported
> Default GTF Supported: Not Supported
> DFP 1.x Compatible: No
> [Supported Video Modes]
> 1680 x 1050 60 Hz
> 1600 x 1200 60 Hz
> 1440 x 900 60 Hz
> 1400 x 1050 60 Hz
> 1280 x 1024 60 Hz
> 1280 x 960 60 Hz
> 1152 x 864 75 Hz
> 1920 x 1080 520 x 290 mm, Pixel Clock 148.50 MHz
> 
> Unknown
> 
> [General information]
> Monitor Name: Unknown
> Monitor Name (Manuf): Cintiq 22HDT
> Serial Number: 5LAQ000334
> Date Of Manufacture: Week: 50, Year: 2015
> Monitor Hardware ID: Monitor\WAC1037
> Max. Vertical Size: 27 cm
> Max. Horizontal Size: 48 cm
> Horizontal Frequency: 30 - 80 kHz
> Vertical Frequency: 56 - 76 Hz
> Maximum Pixel Clock: 170 MHz
> [Advanced parameters]
> Input Signal: Digital
> Display Type: RGB color
> Gamma Factor: 2.20
> [DPMS Modes]
> Standby: Supported
> Suspend: Supported
> Active Off: Supported
> Standard Colour Space: Not Supported
> Preferred Timing Mode: Supported
> Default GTF Supported: Not Supported
> DFP 1.x Compatible: No
> [Supported Video Modes]
> 1280 x 800 60 Hz
> 1360 x 765 60 Hz
> 1280 x 1024 60 Hz
> 1680 x 1050 60 Hz
> 1920 x 1080 60 Hz
> 1920 x 1080 476 x 268 mm, Pixel Clock 148.50 MHz
> 
> Drives
> 
> (S)ATA/ATAPI Drives
> 
> Samsung SSD 850 EVO 1TB
> 
> [General Information]
> Drive Controller: Serial ATA 6Gb/s @ 6Gb/s
> Drive Model: Samsung SSD 850 EVO 1TB
> Drive Revision: EMT02B6Q
> Drive Serial Number: S2RENXAH309674H
> World Wide Name: 5002538D40C2D44D
> Drive Capacity: 953,869 MBytes (1000 GB)
> Drive Capacity [MB]: 953869
> Media Rotation Rate: SSD Drive (Non-rotating)
> Nominal Form Factor: 2.5"
> ATA Major Version Supported: ATA/ATAPI-5, ATA/ATAPI-6, ATA/ATAPI-7, ATA8-ACS, ACS-2
> ATA Minor Version Supported: ATA8-ACS version 4c
> ATA Transport Version Supported: SATA 3.1
> [Drive Geometry]
> Number of Cylinders: 16383
> Number of Heads: 16
> Sectors Per Track: 63
> Number of Sectors: 16514064
> Total 32-bit LBA Sectors: 268435455
> Total 48-bit LBA Sectors: 1953525168
> Logical Sector Size: 512 Bytes
> Cache Buffer Size: N/A
> [Transfer Modes]
> Sectors Per Interrupt: Total: 1, Active: 1
> Max. PIO Transfer Mode: 4
> Multiword DMA Mode: Total: 2, Active: -
> Singleword DMA Mode: Total: -, Active: -
> Ultra-DMA Mode: Total: 6 (ATA-133), Active: 6 (ATA-133)
> Max. Multiword DMA Transfer Rate: 16.7 MBytes/s
> Max. PIO with IORDY Transfer Rate: 16.7 MBytes/s
> Max. PIO w/o IORDY Transfer Rate: 16.7 MBytes/s
> Native Command Queuing: Supported, Max. Depth: 32
> TRIM Command: Supported (Indeterminate Read After TRIM)
> [Device flags]
> Fixed Drive: Present
> Removable Drive: Not Present
> Magnetic Storage: Present
> LBA Mode: Supported
> DMA Mode: Supported
> IORDY: Supported
> IORDY Disableable: Supported
> [Features]
> Write Cache: Present, Active
> S.M.A.R.T. Feature: Present, Active
> Security Feature: Present, Inactive
> Removable Media Feature: Not Present, Disabled
> Power Management: Present, Active
> Advanced Power Management: Not Present, Inactive
> Packet Interface: Not Present, Disabled
> Look-Ahead Buffer: Present, Active
> Host Protected Area: Present, Enabled
> Power-Up In Standby: Not Suppported, Inactive
> Automatic Acoustic Management: Not Suppported, Inactive
> 48-bit LBA: Supported, Active
> Host-Initiated Link Power Management: Not Supported
> Device-Initiated Link Power Management: Supported, Disabled
> In-Order Data Delivery: Not Supported
> Hardware Feature Control: Supported, Enabled
> Software Settings Preservation: Supported, Enabled
> NCQ Autosense: Not Supported
> Link Power State Device Sleep: Supported, Disabled
> Hybrid Information Feature: Not Supported
> Rebuild Assist: Not Supported
> Power Disable: Not Supported
> All Write Cache Non-Volatile: Not Supported
> Extended Number of User Addressable Sectors: Not Supported
> CFast Specification: Not Supported
> NCQ Priority Information: Not Supported
> Host Automatic Partial to Slumber Transitions: Not Supported
> Device Automatic Partial to Slumber Transitions: Not Supported
> NCQ Streaming: Not Supported
> NCQ Queue Management Command: Not Supported
> DevSleep to Reduced Power State: Supported
> Extended Power Conditions Feature: Not Supported
> Sense Data Reporting Feature: Not Supported
> Free-Fall Control Feature: Not Supported
> Write-Read-Verify Feature: Supported, Disabled
> [Security]
> Security Feature: Supported
> Security Status: Disabled
> Security Locked: Disabled
> Security Frozen: Enabled
> Enhanced Security Erase: Supported
> Sanitize Feature: Not Supported
> Sanitize Device - Crypto Scramble: Not Supported
> Sanitize Device - Overwrite: Not Supported
> Sanitize Device - Block Erase: Not Supported
> Sanitize Device - Antifreeze Lock: Not Supported
> Device Encrypts All User Data: Supported
> Trusted Computing: Supported
> [Self-Monitoring, Analysis and Reporting Technology (S.M.A.R.T.)]
> [05] Reallocated Sector Count: 100/10, Worst: 100
> [09] Power-On Hours/Cycle Count: 99/Always OK, Worst: 99 (1049 hours / 43.7 days)
> [0C] Power Cycle Count: 99/Always OK, Worst: 99 (Data = 448,0)
> [B1] Wear Leveling Count: 99/Always OK, Worst: 99 (Data = 3,0)
> [B3] Used Reserved Block Count (Total): 100/10, Worst: 100
> [B5] Program Fail Count (Total): 100/10, Worst: 100
> [B6] Erase Fail Count (Total): 100/10, Worst: 100
> [B7] Runtime Bad Block (Total): 100/10, Worst: 100
> [BB] Uncorrectable Error Count: 100/Always OK, Worst: 100
> [BE] Airflow Temperature: 65/Always OK, Worst: 54 (35.0 у)
> [C3] ECC Error Rate: 200/Always OK, Worst: 200
> [C7] SATA CRC Error Count: 100/Always OK, Worst: 100
> [EB] POR Recovery Count: 99/Always OK, Worst: 99 (Data = 127,0)
> [F1] Total Host Writes: 99/Always OK, Worst: 99 (Data = 3392298095,1)
> Drive Remaining Life 99%
> 
> Audio
> 
> AMD Zen - HD Audio Controller
> 
> Audio Adapter: AMD Zen - HD Audio Controller
> Audio Controller Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1022&DEV_1457&SUBSYS_874F1043&REV_00
> High Definition Audio Codec: RealTek
> Audio Codec Hardware ID: HDAUDIO\FUNC_01&VEN_10EC&DEV_1220&SUBSYS_00000000
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: Realtek
> Driver Description: Realtek High Definition Audio
> Driver Provider: Realtek Semiconductor Corp.
> Driver Version: 6.0.1.8210
> Driver Date: 10-Jul-2017
> DeviceInstanceId HDAUDIO\FUNC_01&VEN_10EC&DEV_1220&SUBSYS_1043874F&REV_1000\5&1A8BCDA3&0&0001
> 
> NVIDIA GM200 - High Definition Audio Controller
> 
> Audio Adapter: NVIDIA GM200 - High Definition Audio Controller
> Audio Controller Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0FB0&SUBSYS_36CB1458&REV_A1
> 
> Network
> 
> Atheros/Qualcomm QCA6174 802.11ac Wireless Network Adapter
> 
> [General information]
> Network Card: Atheros/Qualcomm QCA6174 802.11ac Wireless Network Adapter
> Vendor Description: Microsoft
> MAC Address: E0-4F-43-70-5E-8E
> [Capabilities]
> Maximum Link Speed: 2460 Mbps
> Transmit Buffer Size: 9 Bytes
> Receive Buffer Size: 9 Bytes
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_168C&DEV_003E&SUBSYS_87521043&REV_32
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: Qualcomm Atheros Communications Inc.
> Driver Description: Qualcomm Atheros QCA61x4A Wireless Network Adapter
> Driver Provider: Qualcomm Atheros Communications Inc.
> Driver Version: 12.0.0.309
> Driver Date: 17-Apr-2017
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_168C&DEV_003E&SUBSYS_87521043&REV_32\6&382B5092&0&00000209
> 
> Wilocity, Device ID: 0310
> 
> [General information]
> Network Card: Wilocity, Device ID: 0310
> Vendor Description: Microsoft
> MAC Address: DC-EF-CA-E7-90-26
> [Capabilities]
> Maximum Link Speed: 54 Mbps
> Transmit Buffer Size: 6201344 Bytes
> Receive Buffer Size: 6201344 Bytes
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1AE9&DEV_0310&SUBSYS_00001AE9&REV_02
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: Qualcomm Atheros
> Driver Description: Qualcomm Atheros Sparrow 11ad Wireless Network Adapter
> Driver Provider: Qualcomm Atheros
> Driver Version: 1.1.5.89
> Driver Date: 10-Mar-2017
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1AE9&DEV_0310&SUBSYS_00001AE9&REV_02\6&2A24000F&0&00080209
> 
> Intel I211AT Copper (Pearsonville) Network Adapter
> 
> [General information]
> Network Card: Intel I211AT Copper (Pearsonville) Network Adapter
> Vendor Description: Intel(R) I211 Gigabit Network Connection
> MAC Address: 10-7B-44-91-35-67
> [Capabilities]
> Maximum Link Speed: 1000 Mbps
> Transmit Buffer Size: 1550336 Bytes
> Receive Buffer Size: 779264 Bytes
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_1539&SUBSYS_85F01043&REV_03
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: Intel
> Driver Description: Intel(R) I211 Gigabit Network Connection
> Driver Provider: Intel
> Driver Version: 12.15.184.0
> Driver Date: 07-Dec-2016
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_1539&SUBSYS_85F01043&REV_03\107B44FFFF913A8200
> 
> Aquantia AQtion AQC107 10Gbit Network Adapter
> 
> [General information]
> Network Card: Aquantia AQtion AQC107 10Gbit Network Adapter
> Vendor Description: Aquantia AQtion Network Adapter
> MAC Address: 10-7B-44-90-B9-AF
> [Capabilities]
> Maximum Link Speed: 1000 Mbps
> Transmit Buffer Size: 18460672 Bytes
> Receive Buffer Size: 4606154 Bytes
> Hardware ID: PCI\VEN_1D6A&DEV_D107&SUBSYS_872E1043&REV_02
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: Aquantia
> Driver Description: ROG AREION 10G (NDIS 6.50 Miniport)
> Driver Provider: Aquantia
> Driver Version: 1.40.25.0
> Driver Date: 21-Feb-2017
> DeviceInstanceId PCI\VEN_1D6A&DEV_D107&SUBSYS_872E1043&REV_02\6&7DB0FF9&0&00200209
> 
> Ports
> 
> Serial Ports
> 
> Parallel Ports
> 
> USB
> 
> USB xHCI Compliant Host Controller
> 
> Root Hub
> 
> [Port1] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port2] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port3] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port4] : USB Mass Storage Device
> 
> [Device Information]
> Device Manufacturer: Corsair
> Product Name: Slider 3.0
> Serial Number: 1211296954
> USB Version Supported: 3.00
> USB Device Speed: USB 3.0 SuperSpeed
> Driver Description: USB Mass Storage Device
> Hardware ID: USB\VID_1B1C&PID_1A06
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: Compatible USB storage device
> Driver Description: USB Mass Storage Device
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId USB\VID_1B1C&PID_1A06\1211296954
> 
> [Port5] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port6] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port7] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port8] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port9] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port10] : Qualcomm Atheros QCA61x4A Bluetooth 4.1
> 
> [Device Information]
> Device Manufacturer: ASUSTek
> Product Name: -
> Serial Number: -
> USB Version Supported: 1.10
> USB Device Speed: USB 1.1 Full-speed
> Driver Description: Qualcomm Atheros QCA61x4A Bluetooth 4.1
> Hardware ID: USB\VID_0B05&PID_1868
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: Qualcomm Atheros Communications
> Driver Description: Qualcomm Atheros QCA61x4A Bluetooth 4.1
> Driver Provider: Qualcomm Atheros Communications
> Driver Version: 10.0.0.303
> Driver Date: 21-Mar-2017
> DeviceInstanceId USB\VID_0B05&PID_1868\6&61C3BDB&0&10
> 
> [Port11] : USB Composite Device
> 
> [Device Information]
> Device Manufacturer: Logitech
> Product Name: Gaming Mouse G600
> Serial Number: 6EF5641B90870017
> USB Version Supported: 2.00
> USB Device Speed: USB 1.1 Full-speed
> Driver Description: USB Composite Device
> Hardware ID: USB\VID_046D&PID_C24A
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard USB Host Controller)
> Driver Description: USB Composite Device
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId USB\VID_046D&PID_C24A\6EF5641B90870017
> 
> [Port12] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port13] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port14] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port15] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port16] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port17] : USB Mass Storage Device
> 
> [Device Information]
> Device Manufacturer: SanDisk
> Product Name: Ultra Fit
> Serial Number: 4C531001561109103233
> USB Version Supported: 3.00 (Connected to a USB 2.00 Port)
> USB Device Speed: USB 2.0 High-speed
> Driver Description: USB Mass Storage Device
> Hardware ID: USB\VID_0781&PID_5583
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: Compatible USB storage device
> Driver Description: USB Mass Storage Device
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId USB\VID_0781&PID_5583\4C531001561109103233
> 
> [Port18] : USB Composite Device
> 
> [Device Information]
> Device Manufacturer: Logitech
> Product Name: USB Receiver
> Serial Number: N/A
> USB Version Supported: 2.00
> USB Device Speed: USB 1.1 Full-speed
> Driver Description: USB Composite Device
> Hardware ID: USB\VID_046D&PID_C52B
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard USB Host Controller)
> Driver Description: USB Composite Device
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId USB\VID_046D&PID_C52B\6&61C3BDB&0&18
> 
> [Port19] : USB Input Device
> 
> [Device Information]
> Device Manufacturer: AsusTek Computer Inc.
> Product Name: AURA Custom Human interface
> Serial Number: 00000000001A
> USB Version Supported: 2.00
> USB Device Speed: USB 1.1 Full-speed
> Driver Description: USB Input Device
> Hardware ID: USB\VID_0B05&PID_1867
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard system devices)
> Driver Description: USB Input Device
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId USB\VID_0B05&PID_1867\00000000001A
> 
> [Port20] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port21] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port22] : No Device Connected
> 
> USB xHCI Compliant Host Controller
> 
> Root Hub
> 
> [Port1] : Generic USB Hub
> 
> [Device Information]
> Device Manufacturer: Wacom Co., Ltd.
> Product Name: Cintiq 22HDT HUB
> Serial Number: N/A
> USB Version Supported: 2.00
> USB Device Speed: USB 2.0 High-speed
> Driver Description: Generic USB Hub
> Hardware ID: USB\VID_056A&PID_005C
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard USB HUBs)
> Driver Description: Generic USB Hub
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.64
> Driver Date: 23-Oct-2017
> DeviceInstanceId USB\VID_056A&PID_005C\6&1CD5F76C&0&1
> 
> [Port1] : USB Composite Device
> 
> [Device Information]
> Device Manufacturer: Wacom Co.,Ltd.
> Product Name: Cintiq 22HDT TOUCH
> Serial Number: N/A
> USB Version Supported: 2.00
> USB Device Speed: USB 1.1 Full-speed
> Driver Description: USB Composite Device
> Hardware ID: USB\VID_056A&PID_005E
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard USB Host Controller)
> Driver Description: USB Composite Device
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId USB\VID_056A&PID_005E\7&34F0E922&0&1
> 
> [Port2] : Wacom Tablet
> 
> [Device Information]
> Device Manufacturer: Tablet
> Product Name: Cintiq 22HDT Tablet
> Serial Number: N/A
> USB Version Supported: 2.00
> USB Device Speed: USB 1.1 Full-speed
> Driver Description: Wacom Tablet
> Hardware ID: USB\VID_056A&PID_005B
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: Wacom
> Driver Description: Wacom Tablet
> Driver Provider: Wacom
> Driver Version: 3.8.10.3
> Driver Date: 05-Oct-2017
> DeviceInstanceId USB\VID_056A&PID_005B\7&34F0E922&0&2
> 
> [Port3] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port2] : USB Composite Device
> 
> [Device Information]
> Device Manufacturer: N/A
> Product Name: N/A
> Serial Number: REV8
> USB Version Supported: 1.10
> USB Device Speed: USB 1.1 Full-speed
> Driver Description: USB Composite Device
> Hardware ID: USB\VID_B58E&PID_9E84
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard USB Host Controller)
> Driver Description: USB Composite Device
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId USB\VID_B58E&PID_9E84\REV8
> 
> [Port3] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port4] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port5] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port6] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port7] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port8] : No Device Connected
> 
> USB xHCI Compliant Host Controller
> 
> Root Hub
> 
> [Port1] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port2] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port3] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port4] : No Device Connected
> 
> USB xHCI Compliant Host Controller
> 
> Root Hub
> 
> [Port1] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port2] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port3] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port4] : USB Composite Device
> 
> [Device Information]
> Device Manufacturer: Corsair
> Product Name: Corsair K95 RGB Gaming Keyboard
> Serial Number: 1803E012AE3998A453481C20F5001945
> USB Version Supported: 2.00
> USB Device Speed: USB 1.1 Full-speed
> Driver Description: USB Composite Device
> Hardware ID: USB\VID_1B1C&PID_1B11
> [Driver Information]
> Driver Manufacturer: (Standard USB Host Controller)
> Driver Description: USB Composite Device
> Driver Provider: Microsoft
> Driver Version: 10.0.16299.15
> Driver Date: 20-Jun-2006
> DeviceInstanceId USB\VID_1B1C&PID_1B11\1803E012AE3998A453481C20F5001945
> 
> [Port5] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port6] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port7] : No Device Connected
> 
> [Port8] : No Device Connected


Damnit ... Thanks for testing.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Brain29*
> 
> 
> I'll take it that far tomorrow but that is kind of absurd to need to take it that far if it works


If SIO is in a faulty state, you have to turn off standby power (PSU) and remove the battery for a few seconds. I don't think that's your problem though.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Brain29*
> 
> @elmor
> 
> 901 -- can't use flashback button no storage devices found in uefi


Flashback button is for USB BIOS Flashback. Is that what's not working, or flashing from the UEFI?


----------



## Brain29

@elmor
for some odd reason when I plug a storage device (corsair (32gb) and sandisk (128gb) I am trying)
uefi cant see it

I unpluged the battery - psu -harddrive .. plugged in the battery & psu .. attempted to do a flashback and nothing happend (board would not boot after attempting this lights were only on for start and reset)

turn on and off psu - I could boot into uefi

turned off the computer attempted to use flashback (nothing) - tried to boot into uefi normally nothing started

turn on and off psu booted into uefi moved usb storage to a usb header (not on the back of the IO) was able to see and flash

trying to jump to 211 then to 901 see if anything changes

**update** after flashing back and forth

nothing changed - but what is weird jumping to 211 I still couldn't see usb drives if they were plugged into the IO .. this was not the case when I first got the board
also the lighting issues were still the same
- there is probably some bad bios history or something isn't be rewritten correctly
- I have noticed that when I restart the " fan changes " I have made don't seem to happen till after Code00 (check cpu) good 3-6 seconds after I restart

I think the only thing that hasn't given me issues with this board is the 10g nic

**next day update** (left the computer unplugged for a few hours)
1/2 the rgb lights on the motherboard (not the side black plate) Have randomly turned on .. they have been missing for a few weeks now - none of the updated programs for aura or oled work ..


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Thanks @elmor for the new test Bios based on the new Agesa code. I will gather some of the reports and pop them into the OP as appropriate. Thanks all for testing.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Brain29*
> 
> @elmor
> 
> 901 Issues *updated form 801 - re-flashed 4 times - cleared cmos each time
> 
> 1) still no lights *present since updating to 804 then reverting back
> 2) fan issues still present (min fan power percentage is all over the place regardless of settings) *present since start
> 3) usb storage plugged into back usb ports no longer read after update *first noticed in 804 but now it seems to only apply to usb ports on the back
> *If i plug them into the usb using the headers on the motherboard they are found
> *windows has no issues seeing/reading storage drives
> 
> NEW to 901
> 4) Temperature reading is inaccurate
> @4.1 I usually hit 70c v1.41 - 801 previous
> with 901
> The board never reports higher then 42c
> (@.4.1 during testing at v1.45)
> 
> *water temp for both test would raise from 25c to about 30-35c
> *external reading for 901 showed 70c ish temps (not accurately tested but far from 42c)
> 
> Image of bios settings and fan curves gonewild
> *what I am trying to show is the min power% all fans are the same fan1 has a fan extender with 5 fans *I have removed the extender with the same results)


Thanks for the report Brain29, added to the OP for easy finding and hopedully some fixes !


----------



## DemonOfElru

Still can't switch PCIEX8/X4_4 to X8 mode in 901.

CPU: 1950X
GFX: 2 x RX Vega 64 in PCIEX16_1 and PCIEX16_3
Memory: G.Skill 32GB (F4-3200C16Q-32GTZR)
Storage: 3xSamsung 960 PRO (1 x Under ROG cover, 2 x in DIMM.2 adapter)

It does the same thing it did on 801 and prior BIOSes. It resets the board/CPU a few times and reverts it back to X4.


----------



## bummerboy

Thanks @elmor for the bios I think it is more ram friendly, considering i am using hynixM

However fan controls is still funky. 3 hours into AIDA64, the chassis fans 1 and 2 spins DOWN to minimum
When i found out, i stop aida stress test, the fans doesnt return to normal state
just stayed that way

so i ran aida stress again. now cpu fan went down, temp went up.. and windows crashed

PS: on 901

To add: CPU temp stops updating itself after some load test
tdie is up to 64+C but cpu temp stays at 43C


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DemonOfElru*
> 
> Still can't switch PCIEX8/X4_4 to X8 mode in 901.
> 
> CPU: 1950X
> GFX: 2 x RX Vega 64 in PCIEX16_1 and PCIEX16_3
> Memory: G.Skill 32GB (F4-3200C16Q-32GTZR)
> Storage: 3xSamsung 960 PRO (1 x Under ROG cover, 2 x in DIMM.2 adapter)
> 
> It does the same thing it did on 801 and prior BIOSes. It resets the board/CPU a few times and reverts it back to X4.


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bummerboy*
> 
> Thanks @elmor for the bios I think it is more ram friendly, considering i am using hynixM
> 
> However fan controls is still funky. 3 hours into AIDA64, the chassis fans 1 and 2 spins DOWN to minimum
> When i found out, i stop aida stress test, the fans doesnt return to normal state
> just stayed that way
> 
> so i ran aida stress again. now cpu fan went down, temp went up.. and windows crashed
> 
> PS: on 901
> 
> To add: CPU temp stops updating itself after some load test
> tdie is up to 64+C but cpu temp stays at 43C


Will add these to the OP as I have heard of a few identical reports for both these issues.


----------



## DemonOfElru

Another one I didn't catch last night. I went back to 801 for the time being. 901 just like 804 makes things worse at least in my case.
Quote:


> *Bug Type*: BIOS
> *Applicable Software/Bios Version*: 901
> *Windows Version & Build:* Microsoft Windows 10 Pro, Version 10.0.16299 Build 16299
> *Bug Description*: Only half of installed RAM is recognized/usable.
> 
> On *801:*
> 
> 32GB installed, 32GB recognized in UEFI/Windows using default settings (2133MHz Auto/Default Profile)
> 32GB installed, 32GB recognized/usable in UEFI/Windows using D.O.C.P (3200MHz)
> On *901:*
> 
> 32GB installed, 16GB recognized in UEFI/Windows using default settings (2133MHz Auto/Default Profile)
> 32GB installed, 16GB recognized/usable in UEFI/Windows using D.O.C.P (3200MHz)
> 
> Memory kit is G.Skill TridentZ RGB F4-3200C16Q-32GTZR (On QVL)
> 
> *Steps to re-produce*:
> 
> Clear CMOS
> Install 901
> Observe usable RAM in Windows show: 32GB (15.9GB Usable). Observe Task Manager report 16GB (half) of memory is Hardware Reserved
> Cold boot into UEFI. Observe RAM reported as 16GB
> Clear CMOS
> Install 801
> Observe usable RAM in Windows show 32GB (31.9 Usable). Observe Task Manager report 125MB of memory is Hardware Reserved
> Cold boot into UEFI. Observe RAM reported as 32GB


----------



## gupsterg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bummerboy*
> 
> Thanks @elmor for the bios I think it is more ram friendly, considering i am using hynixM
> 
> However fan controls is still funky. 3 hours into AIDA64, the chassis fans 1 and 2 spins DOWN to minimum
> When i found out, i stop aida stress test, the fans doesnt return to normal state
> just stayed that way
> 
> so i ran aida stress again. now cpu fan went down, temp went up.. and windows crashed
> 
> PS: on 901
> 
> To add: CPU temp stops updating itself after some load test
> tdie is up to 64+C but cpu temp stays at 43C


Which version of AIDA64 do you use? Did you stop monitoring within it? AIDA64 can send SuperIO chip freaky creating issues of fans, etc.

For me so far 0901 non issue, see screenies, etc in this post.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DemonOfElru*
> 
> Another one I didn't catch last night. I went back to 801 for the time being. 901 just like 804 makes things worse at least in my case.
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> *Bug Type*: BIOS
> *Applicable Software/Bios Version*: 901
> *Windows Version & Build:* Microsoft Windows 10 Pro, Version 10.0.16299 Build 16299
> *Bug Description*: Only half of installed RAM is recognized/usable.
> 
> On *801:*
> 
> 32GB installed, 32GB recognized in UEFI/Windows using default settings (2133MHz Auto/Default Profile)
> 32GB installed, 32GB recognized/usable in UEFI/Windows using D.O.C.P (3200MHz)
> On *901:*
> 
> 32GB installed, 16GB recognized in UEFI/Windows using default settings (2133MHz Auto/Default Profile)
> 32GB installed, 16GB recognized/usable in UEFI/Windows using D.O.C.P (3200MHz)
> 
> Memory kit is G.Skill TridentZ RGB F4-3200C16Q-32GTZR (On QVL)
> 
> *Steps to re-produce*:
> 
> Clear CMOS
> Install 901
> Observe usable RAM in Windows show: 32GB (15.9GB Usable). Observe Task Manager report 16GB (half) of memory is Hardware Reserved
> Cold boot into UEFI. Observe RAM reported as 16GB
> Clear CMOS
> Install 801
> Observe usable RAM in Windows show 32GB (31.9 Usable). Observe Task Manager report 125MB of memory is Hardware Reserved
> Cold boot into UEFI. Observe RAM reported as 32GB
Click to expand...

Fantastic, thank you for filling out a report in the correct format. I have added this to the OP


----------



## bummerboy

Aida64 5.95.4500

i didnt stop monitoring in aida64, the freaky fan control problem doesnt always happen. i can have aida64 run for hours with no issue, then when i try again later, problems appear (still within the same session of windows, no reboot)
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gupsterg*
> 
> Which version of AIDA64 do you use? Did you stop monitoring within it? AIDA64 can send SuperIO chip freaky creating issues of fans, etc.
> 
> For me so far 0901 non issue, see screenies, etc in this post.


----------



## The L33t

@elmor With @DemonOfElru's report we can clearly see this memory disappearing cannot be related to instability, even at default settings with memory at 2133MHz the thing happens and is otherwise stable at 3200Mhz with older bios, so it would have to be diamond hard solid at 2133MHz.

And from other vendors with this AGESA in their BIOS, this does not happen. So I doubt it is related to AGESA, directly anyway.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The L33t*
> 
> @elmor With @DemonOfElru's report we can clearly see this memory disappearing cannot be related to instability, even at default settings with memory at 2133MHz the thing happens and is otherwise stable at 3200Mhz with older bios, so it would have to be diamond hard solid at 2133MHz.
> 
> And from other vendors with this AGESA in their BIOS, this does not happen. So I doubt it is related to AGESA, directly anyway.


I would agree, it seems likely its an Asus issue rather than Agesa.


----------



## nycgtr

Seems hamp fan and water pump header is just not working in 0012. Control wise.


----------



## gupsterg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *bummerboy*
> 
> Aida64 5.95.4500
> 
> i didnt stop monitoring in aida64, the freaky fan control problem doesnt always happen. i can have aida64 run for hours with no issue, then when i try again later, problems appear (still within the same session of windows, no reboot)


As stated in the other ZE thread having same issue with newer version of AIDA64. Elmor has posted in C6H thread a roll out of fix to 3rd party apps is in the pipeline to resolve issue.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Quote:


> Anyone with memory channels dropping, try this test BIOS. Based on 0901.
> 
> http://www.mediafire.com/file/i9xzgsswo2yws20/ROG-ZENITH-EXTREME-ASUS-0019.zip


By @elmor

Also added to OP.


----------



## Kyozon

With the BIOS 0901, it looks like my RAM Settings from 0801 are still working fine.

3600Mhz - Quad Channel - CL15 - 32GB Detected - Quad Channel

Also noticed that:

> 3733Mhz Boots Up Now, and Disables 2 Sticks automatically as consequence, so it only recognizes 16GB out of the 32GB or 2 Sticks - Dual Channel.

> 3866Mhz Also Boots but Disables one more RAM Stick, so it only recognizes 8GB out of the 32GB - Single Channel

It is very interesting to see that it is booting up at those Speeds, perhaps a more polished BIOS/AGESA might allow it to be stable. Also noticed this BIOS 0019, hopefully going to test it out later today.


----------



## VileLasagna

@elmor

A bit off-topic, but someone (Keng?) asked about opening the source for the UEFI, to which you replied no can do on account of proprietary AMI code.

But for a while I've wondered this about the rest of the things. AI Suite, Aura, the OLED control thingie... this is all ASUS' own code, right? Do you know if there was any consideration in opening up the code for any of that? Or at the very least some library with an open API we could tap into?

I ask as I'm a Linux user pretty much exclusively (sadly I have to fix some win stuff at work) and it's always really disappointing how there's never ANY software available for the superior platform. Whereas I don't really care about OCing on the OS and just go straight to BISO/UEFI even if it's available, things like monitoring, fan control and "bling config" is something that would be either nicer to do from the OS or, int the case of the lights and OLED, only make sense (?) to configure from there.

I know it can be a bit of a hard ask in terms of corporate dev investment to "divert" from Windows (even though I expect TR4 to be a platform more linux heavy compared to the more gaming-oriented ones) but we Linux folks are pretty crafty and there's a lot of us, me included, who would actually be thrilled at the possibility of firing up Qt Creator and writing their own little fan and light control software.

Not sure how well you can answer this, but it always baffles me a bit as it sounds like it's a good way to "offload" some support (I mean, this is free stuff built around what you guys actually sell) on a community that would actually like to do it, and at the very least it worked very well for, say, AMD as their open source video driver stack is really good compared to old Catalyst.


----------



## Bartouille

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kyozon*
> 
> With the BIOS 0901, it looks like my RAM Settings from 0801 are still working fine.
> 
> 3600Mhz - Quad Channel - CL15 - 32GB Detected - Quad Channel
> 
> Also noticed that:
> 
> > 3733Mhz Boots Up Now, and Disables 2 Sticks automatically as consequence, so it only recognizes 16GB out of the 32GB or 2 Sticks - Dual Channel.
> 
> > 3866Mhz Also Boots but Disables one more RAM Stick, so it only recognizes 8GB out of the 32GB - Single Channel
> 
> It is very interesting to see that it is booting up at those Speeds, perhaps a more polished BIOS/AGESA might allow it to be stable. Also noticed this BIOS 0019, hopefully going to test it out later today.


Can you get 3600MHz fully stable (hci or sat stable)? I can boot just fine at 3600MHz but I've never been able to stabilize it. Max I can get stable is somewhere between 3533 and 3566.


----------



## elmor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *VileLasagna*
> 
> @elmor
> 
> A bit off-topic, but someone (Keng?) asked about opening the source for the UEFI, to which you replied no can do on account of proprietary AMI code.
> 
> But for a while I've wondered this about the rest of the things. AI Suite, Aura, the OLED control thingie... this is all ASUS' own code, right? Do you know if there was any consideration in opening up the code for any of that? Or at the very least some library with an open API we could tap into?
> 
> I ask as I'm a Linux user pretty much exclusively (sadly I have to fix some win stuff at work) and it's always really disappointing how there's never ANY software available for the superior platform. Whereas I don't really care about OCing on the OS and just go straight to BISO/UEFI even if it's available, things like monitoring, fan control and "bling config" is something that would be either nicer to do from the OS or, int the case of the lights and OLED, only make sense (?) to configure from there.
> 
> I know it can be a bit of a hard ask in terms of corporate dev investment to "divert" from Windows (even though I expect TR4 to be a platform more linux heavy compared to the more gaming-oriented ones) but we Linux folks are pretty crafty and there's a lot of us, me included, who would actually be thrilled at the possibility of firing up Qt Creator and writing their own little fan and light control software.
> 
> Not sure how well you can answer this, but it always baffles me a bit as it sounds like it's a good way to "offload" some support (I mean, this is free stuff built around what you guys actually sell) on a community that would actually like to do it, and at the very least it worked very well for, say, AMD as their open source video driver stack is really good compared to old Catalyst.


I completely agree, but our software/BIOS team doesn't at this time.


----------



## VileLasagna

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *elmor*
> 
> I completely agree, but our software/BIOS team doesn't at this time.


Anyone externally reachable I (and others) could ask this more directly?


----------



## elmor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *VileLasagna*
> 
> Anyone externally reachable I (and others) could ask this more directly?


You can send me an email and I'll try to forward it to the appropriate person. I'll send my address by PM.


----------



## jbach

@elmor

re 901
Have the wrong CPU temp issues been fixed with 904?

Was having the same issue, it seems the 27C offset was not being calculated by TCtl.
http://www.overclock.net/t/1636566/asus-rog-zenith-extreme-x399-threadripper-overclocking-support/2120#post_26514682

Reverted to 804(downloaded from Asus) but wondering if the 012 you posted is more recent and addresses fan issues?

Thanks!


----------



## elmor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jbach*
> 
> @elmor
> 
> re 901
> Have the wrong CPU temp issues been fixed with 904?
> 
> Was having the same issue, it seems the 27C offset was not being calculated by TCtl.
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1636566/asus-rog-zenith-extreme-x399-threadripper-overclocking-support/2120#post_26514682
> 
> Reverted to 804(downloaded from Asus) but wondering if the 012 you posted is more recent and addresses fan issues?
> 
> Thanks!


On 0901 I still have the 27*C offset applied. We can't affect the Tctl reading, only AMD can do that. We do apply an offset for the SIO reading which is based off Tctl, much like the Tdie reading in HWInfo. Which CPU are you using?

An attempt to summarize

Tctl = AMD provided reading
Tdie = HWInfo calculated Tctl-offset (if present, based on known CPU models)

BIOS/AiSuite/SIO CPU temp = ASUS calculated Tctl-offset with additional weighting from the CPU socket thermistor

Adjusting SenseMi Skew or 1.8V PLL Voltage will trick the CPU to read a lower or higher Tctl value.


----------



## jbach

Thanks. 1950x.
Was running 901 fine with correct temps and a simple overclock. ie CPU core ratio 40 and voltage to 1.35, both Overclocking Enhancement and Sense Mi Skew Disabled.

Then enabled DOCP, rebooted and started experiencing low temps issue.
Only way to fix was to clear CMOS.

In 804 finding the manual fan control (Monitor > QFan Control) very finicky. ie took several tries to set the CPU minimum fan speed using PWM, always defaulted to 60%.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Thanks to everyone who is chiming in with a view to getting a more polished Bios. Thanks to @elmor and Asus for working with us. Lets hope 2018 will be the year of good things for the Zenith Extreme !


----------



## yangpingmi

0902 4266C19 set 3200 MT errors


----------



## madno

Dear all,

I am a new user to this board (and others), who is planning to do his first "hand made" water cooled PC.

I like to thank you for the detailed information (and links to other threads) about the state of the Zenith Extreme board.

I already have had decided to buy the Extreme due to the reputation of Asus. I am so lucky I found this thread helping me to avoid a totally wrong decision. Based on all the information I must conclude that the board is not a ready made high end product (with a high end price) but seems to be a beta solution for debugging purposes. I planned to use a high end board because it should not only offer stable operation with a little overclocking (occasionally 24/7 for GPU rendering) but also allow water cooling with PWM enabled components (mainly EKWB) and nice RGB control for a pleasing appearance. All this is advertised on the Asus website and it says a average user can set it up with the Asus software instead of fiddling with Bios settings. As it seems the Extreme does not fulfill all this in reality (as I read the Super IO chip cannot deliver accurate readings which might even harm the hardware in the worst case).

Skipping the Extreme would also change a lot of other components. Plan was to get two Asus Strix 1080 Ti (up to four in the long run) and compatible water blocks.
As I read on tomshardware Asus quietly changed the PCB of the card so that water blocks are not compatible anymore. So buying that card is no option anymore as well. I don't want to handle the situation of incompatible card / block combos (see http://www.tomshardware.com/news/asus-rog-strix-gtx-1080-ti-pcb,36181.html)

Should I conclude that as it stands now, I should avoid Asus and maybe the AMD TR platform at all?

Do you have a hint what might be suitable alternatives?


----------



## Brain29

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *madno*
> 
> Dear all,
> 
> I am a new user to this board (and others), who is planning to do his first "hand made" water cooled PC.
> 
> I like to thank you for the detailed information (and links to other threads) about the state of the Zenith Extreme board.
> 
> I already have had decided to buy the Extreme due to the reputation of Asus. I am so lucky I found this thread helping me to avoid a totally wrong decision. Based on all the information I must conclude that the board is not a ready made high end product (with a high end price) but seems to be a beta solution for debugging purposes. I planned to use a high end board because it should not only offer stable operation with a little overclocking (occasionally 24/7 for GPU rendering) but also allow water cooling with PWM enabled components (mainly EKWB) and nice RGB control for a pleasing appearance. All this is advertised on the Asus website and it says a average user can set it up with the Asus software instead of fiddling with Bios settings. As it seems the Extreme does not fulfill all this in reality (as I read the Super IO chip cannot deliver accurate readings which might even harm the hardware in the worst case).
> 
> Skipping the Extreme would also change a lot of other components. Plan was to get two Asus Strix 1080 Ti (up to four in the long run) and compatible water blocks.
> As I read on tomshardware Asus quietly changed the PCB of the card so that water blocks are not compatible anymore. So buying that card is no option anymore as well. I don't want to handle the situation of incompatible card / block combos (see http://www.tomshardware.com/news/asus-rog-strix-gtx-1080-ti-pcb,36181.html)
> 
> Should I conclude that as it stands now, I should avoid Asus and maybe the AMD TR platform at all?
> 
> Do you have a hint what might be suitable alternatives?


1) you really don't want EK products for any threadripper product
2) this board although has the nicest parts is stuck in alpha build mode since release

good luck


----------



## madno

Quote:


> 1) you really don't want EK products for any threadripper product


Ups,
already ordered XE360 Rad, 3 x Vardar Fans, D5 Pump combo and, unfortunately, monoblock for the board.
Anything wrong with that except for the monoblock of course?

Quote:


> 2) this board although has the nicest parts is stuck in alpha build mode since release


Do you think it will ever be fixed?


----------



## Brain29

you should ask about ek over here :: http://www.overclock.net/t/1641169/ek-threadripper-not-doing-well
(ps the block is complete crap getting out performed by h100i aio's - ek is giving full refunds)
- I also got 2 new rads from ek they spit out metal for a good 2 months after washing them never had an issue with HL black ice

your guess is as good as mine for a stable bios


----------



## madno

Thanks a lot Brain29,

Wrote EKWB to skip the monoblock as I anyway decided to not buy the Asus board.
But I left rad, pump and fans order active. Hope that the rad is ok.


----------



## The L33t

@elmor

Regarding the first bug on the OT by me, happy to report that with the latest bios it boots with all 128GB w/only DOCP enabled and nothing else. Did not test any other bios since I only got home now and decided to go straight to 902 and see what gives.

Further stability testing will have to be done but... it is working. This is with bios *0902*.

The kit is CMD128GX4M8A2666C15 v5.39 (M-die).


----------



## gupsterg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *madno*
> 
> Should I conclude that as it stands now, I should avoid Asus and maybe the AMD TR platform at all?


I maybe in the minority from reading this and other thread







, but I have had very little issues with ZE







. I have had it since launch.

Originally I had a MSI GTX 1080 EK X and later a RX VEGA 64 with EK block. Due meddling with these differing GPUs, cost of WC (as was 1st time doing this) and other things I have not found funds to splurge on more RAM/a NVMe drive.

I use a kit of F4-3200C14D-16GTZ and MX100 256GB SATA SSD plus 2x SATA HDD. The RAM kit can do ~3500MHz as tested on a C6H I own (again from launch I've had). RAM kit didn't do 3333MHz Fast on TR/ZE for a few months but now is sound at that speed.

I use mobo to control 2x set of 3 Arctic Cooling F12 PWM fans and EK D5 PWM plus Be Quiet 140mm fan. I use the UEFI to set "cooling" profile and use loop water temp as source for control via a probe. I have had only 1-2x issue of stuck fan whilst running [email protected] several weeks back, then I have induced the issue using AIDA64 a week or so back. So in past 3mths+ this is all the occurrence of Super IO chip going "senile" I have noted.

I use the rig daily, as I work from home a "usage day" for rig can be or reasonable length IMO. I have also done lengthy continuous stress testing /[email protected]/Bionic on rig.

I use a lot of the rear IO USB ports without issue. I also have case 2.0/3.0 ports connected to mobo headers, besides audio jacks, I also use the onboard WiFi/BT, again no issues.

For me ZE has been sound. As stated before hoping very soon to load her up with more RAM/"modern" storage.


----------



## mypickaxe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *madno*
> 
> ...but seems to be a beta solution for debugging purposes.


They don't release products for debugging purposes. The Zenith Extreme is a high-end board, which shares a lot of "DNA" with the Rampage series, but it is also the first generation of TR4-based Zenith boards on the first generation X399 chipset, so you shouldn't expect a completely refined solution from any vendor.

If I had one bit of advice to offer, it would be to look at the value offered on the Zenith for the price, compared to other solutions available from competitors. Some might like a particular brand / board, and say it meets their needs with "the same" features, but I can't find a single competitive board with the features the Zenith board has.

If you don't care about the "Probelt" voltage readout pads, the ability to turn off individual PCIe slots with dip switches, LN2 support, dedicated liquid cooling PWM and sensor support including monoblock & flow sensors, Aura RGB, in addition to the layout of the board itself (DIMM.2 + m.2 under the PCH cover, x16, x8, 16, x8 PCIe support + a couple of PCIe 2.0 chipset slots, 802.11AD, pre-mounted IO shield, retry and safe boot buttons on the main board, UEFI flash back, etc. etc.) then maybe this isn't the board for you.

I'm running one of the more recent BETA BIOS revisions and I have total stability. I could nitpick about fans and things like that, but I have no reason to, really. I can detect all of my fans and my water pump and set to my preferences. The board is stable (doesn't lock up) and I have all of my DDR4 channels available. I even have 3200 MHz support on my 2800 MHz DDR4 kit from 2014/2015. I can't really complain about that!
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Brain29*
> 
> 1) you really don't want EK products for any threadripper product
> 2) this board although has the nicest parts is stuck in alpha build mode since release
> 
> good luck


There's nothing wrong with EK products. You should specify that you're referring specifically to the CPU blocks they have for sale. I'm sure once they realize everyone else is eating their lunch, they'll do a revision 2.0 with a better design. As it stands now, based on community feedback, I wouldn't recommend an EK CPU block for TR4 (unless you *really* like the aesthetics of the all nickel block, for instance) but any other EK product is just fine for a custom liquid cooling solution for Threadripper.


----------



## The L33t

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The L33t*
> 
> @elmor
> 
> Regarding the first bug on the OT by me, happy to report that with the latest bios it boots with all 128GB w/only DOCP enabled and nothing else. Did not test any other bios since I only got home now and decided to go straight to 902 and see what gives.
> 
> Further stability testing will have to be done but... it is working. This is with bios *0902*.
> 
> The kit is CMD128GX4M8A2666C15 v5.39 (M-die).


Simple DOCP was not stable. Had to;

DRAM > 1.35v.
VSOC > 1.1v.
ProcODT > 48 ohm

For now seems prime stable. Will do an overnight test when possible.

*EDIT*

Got it to 2800Mhz, stable so far. More than this does not seem possible for now with current BIOS/AGESA. Not bad for a 128GB kit/2666 dual rank fully populated slots.


----------



## Aby67

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *madno*
> 
> Dear all,
> 
> I am a new user to this board (and others), who is planning to do his first "hand made" water cooled PC.
> 
> I like to thank you for the detailed information (and links to other threads) about the state of the Zenith Extreme board.
> 
> I already have had decided to buy the Extreme due to the reputation of Asus. I am so lucky I found this thread helping me to avoid a totally wrong decision. Based on all the information I must conclude that the board is not a ready made high end product (with a high end price) but seems to be a beta solution for debugging purposes. I planned to use a high end board because it should not only offer stable operation with a little overclocking (occasionally 24/7 for GPU rendering) but also allow water cooling with PWM enabled components (mainly EKWB) and nice RGB control for a pleasing appearance. All this is advertised on the Asus website and it says a average user can set it up with the Asus software instead of fiddling with Bios settings. As it seems the Extreme does not fulfill all this in reality (as I read the Super IO chip cannot deliver accurate readings which might even harm the hardware in the worst case).
> 
> Skipping the Extreme would also change a lot of other components. Plan was to get two Asus Strix 1080 Ti (up to four in the long run) and compatible water blocks.
> As I read on tomshardware Asus quietly changed the PCB of the card so that water blocks are not compatible anymore. So buying that card is no option anymore as well. I don't want to handle the situation of incompatible card / block combos (see http://www.tomshardware.com/news/asus-rog-strix-gtx-1080-ti-pcb,36181.html)
> 
> Should I conclude that as it stands now, I should avoid Asus and maybe the AMD TR platform at all?
> 
> Do you have a hint what might be suitable alternatives?


If You do light OC and occasional GPU rendering on 2 GPU then you dont have any logicl reason to buy neither x399 platform nor any Intel equivalent.
I would strongly recommend to You to buy a Ryzen 7 system waiting a couple of months so you can get the 12nm Ryzen 2 stuff that should clock 15 20% faster and have more advanced memory controller...it will be cheap, it will be just as good as a 7900X and You will save money , and You will be able to cool it with EK low end stuff(as EK now is a low end watercooling manufacturer as it has not developed anything new since 2012 and even the intel water blocks are obsolete).

That being said EK has a triple A customer support and RMA policy that any company should take example from, but as I said it is disco lights stuff for kids today , rather than proper watercooling components.
AS for Your choice of GPUs, It would be much wiser to choose a founders edition GPU if rendering and water cooling is what You want to do, so not to waste PCIe slots.
You could also opt for a micro ATX system for these kind of specifications You posted.


----------



## Aby67

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mypickaxe*
> 
> They don't release products for debugging purposes. The Zenith Extreme is a high-end board, which shares a lot of "DNA" with the Rampage series, but it is also the first generation of TR4-based Zenith boards on the first generation X399 chipset, so you shouldn't expect a completely refined solution from any vendor.
> 
> If I had one bit of advice to offer, it would be to look at the value offered on the Zenith for the price, compared to other solutions available from competitors. Some might like a particular brand / board, and say it meets their needs with "the same" features, but I can't find a single competitive board with the features the Zenith board has.
> 
> If you don't care about the "Probelt" voltage readout pads, the ability to turn off individual PCIe slots with dip switches, LN2 support, dedicated liquid cooling PWM and sensor support including monoblock & flow sensors, Aura RGB, in addition to the layout of the board itself (DIMM.2 + m.2 under the PCH cover, x16, x8, 16, x8 PCIe support + a couple of PCIe 2.0 chipset slots, 802.11AD, pre-mounted IO shield, retry and safe boot buttons on the main board, UEFI flash back, etc. etc.) then maybe this isn't the board for you.
> 
> I'm running one of the more recent BETA BIOS revisions and I have total stability. I could nitpick about fans and things like that, but I have no reason to, really. I can detect all of my fans and my water pump and set to my preferences. The board is stable (doesn't lock up) and I have all of my DDR4 channels available. I even have 3200 MHz support on my 2800 MHz DDR4 kit from 2014/2015. I can't really complain about that!
> There's nothing wrong with EK products. You should specify that you're referring specifically to the CPU blocks they have for sale. I'm sure once they realize everyone else is eating their lunch, they'll do a revision 2.0 with a better design. As it stands now, based on community feedback, I wouldn't recommend an EK CPU block for TR4 (unless you *really* like the aesthetics of the all nickel block, for instance) but any other EK product is just fine for a custom liquid cooling solution for Threadripper.


EK Block for TR4 is lethal for that CPU...as Yes there is a lot wrong about EK products as even their Intel blocks could be 10degrees C better for sure with a new design rather than a 2012 one....I have EK products , I was happy with them....but today there is so many companies out there that do sooooo much better, that EK has become low end mainstream , You can see this even on their GPU blocks that are still bulky, heavy and full of more and more plastic.
And lets also say that EK has never made once a WS monoblock, when WS motherboards for people who do have tons of stuff to cool are the most sold.....mainstream users tend to buy a AIO or maybe just a cpu block and running 1060 or 1070 like cards dont need to watercool them.....people who need WS motherboards usually run 6 to 7 GPus on them single or dual CPUs and definitely wanna keep those VRMs Ram and chipsets cool, as most of the times such machines are running at 100% loads for weeks.
Today TR4 makes almost 10% of all AMD cpu sales, but it could make definitely 80% of watercooling components sold by a manufacturer especially if they will finally release a damn x399WS motherboard, which hundreds of thousands of content creators and VFX studios are waiting for.
A computer in 2018 should not look like a plumber job with disco lights on it.....watercooling should have evolved by now to be tubeless and using carbon derivates for its blocks not 2 cents acrylyc and meters of rubber plastic tubes than do nothing more than making your system hotter and hotter and hotter, and slower and slower and slower to cool down once loads are done with.


----------



## madno

Thanks for all the feedback.

So far I have decided to just wait longer. Feature and hardware spec. wise the ZE looks good. Still think a premium product like it should work from day one with all advertised features. Minor glitches are ok, but what I read in all those threads seemed major to me. Maybe they and AMD can iron it out. Maybe news from CES in January tell me to wait for something else.

With occasional rendering I meant that from time to time my current Dell dual Xeon workstation runs 24 hours non stop or longer at 100% on all 32 virtual cores. It makes a hell of noise and heats the room, but it runs and runs and runs for more than five years now. The render software I use mostly is still CPU, that's the reason for Threadripper (32 virtual cores like with the two Xeons). But on top of that a better single core performance than the Xeons.
I like to use a GPU enabled render engine in the future as well. So min. 2 GPUs and maybe four later. Have not yet done physics simulations, but that might come in the future. That means as much RAM and as fast as possible. Even with some standard renders I managed to break the 64 GB I have in the Dell (billbord size 3 x 2.5 meters with hdr environment, global illumination and all that fancy stuff).

One reason for the Dell to be that stable was throttling and generally low fail save settings.
This time my goal is to get a faster system without throttling but still stability. As it seems there is now way around water cooling and getting really good hardware. That's why I wanted to go Asus. I don't have own experience but the brand has an very good reputation. That's also the reason to think about Asus GPUs. Custom PCPs made for more stability compared to the FE.

In the end I want to get a high end system that will last for the next five years.

And one more reason (and maybe the real one)









I saw those water cooled systems while gathering information about new hardware and got infected by the modding virus. There are some great looking builds out there. I just like to make one myself.

Yes, I know; normally all what I should ask for, is a TR workstation board with stealth water cooling. But then there is no fun in it









I do this 3D thing as a hobby, but it sometimes ends in deadlines for professional projects. So the new system should be a fun project but also be ready if it gets serious.

Regarding EK:
I skipped the monoblock. The tests I watched now, really showed that product is not state of the art anymore especially for TR. But I kept all the other components because there the test say the opposite. The Vardar Fans are mentioned to be very good and the radiator as well. The Pump anyway has a very good reputation.

Again, thanks for your input (and sorry @ Enterprise for polluting his thread).


----------



## Aby67

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *madno*
> 
> Thanks for all the feedback.
> 
> So far I have decided to just wait longer. Feature and hardware spec. wise the ZE looks good. Still think a premium product like it should work from day one with all advertised features. Minor glitches are ok, but what I read in all those threads seemed major to me. Maybe they and AMD can iron it out. Maybe news from CES in January tell me to wait for something else.
> 
> With occasional rendering I meant that from time to time my current Dell dual Xeon workstation runs 24 hours non stop or longer at 100% on all 32 virtual cores. It makes a hell of noise and heats the room, but it runs and runs and runs for more than five years now. The render software I use mostly is still CPU, that's the reason for Threadripper (32 virtual cores like with the two Xeons). But on top of that a better single core performance than the Xeons.
> I like to use a GPU enabled render engine in the future as well. So min. 2 GPUs and maybe four later. Have not yet done physics simulations, but that might come in the future. That means as much RAM and as fast as possible. Even with some standard renders I managed to break the 64 GB I have in the Dell (billbord size 3 x 2.5 meters with hdr environment, global illumination and all that fancy stuff).
> 
> One reason for the Dell to be that stable was throttling and generally low fail save settings.
> This time my goal is to get a faster system without throttling but still stability. As it seems there is now way around water cooling and getting really good hardware. That's why I wanted to go Asus. I don't have own experience but the brand has an very good reputation. That's also the reason to think about Asus GPUs. Custom PCPs made for more stability compared to the FE.
> 
> In the end I want to get a high end system that will last for the next five years.
> 
> And one more reason (and maybe the real one)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I saw those water cooled systems while gathering information about new hardware and got infected by the modding virus. There are some great looking builds out there. I just like to make one myself.
> 
> Yes, I know; normally all what I should ask for, is a TR workstation board with stealth water cooling. But then there is no fun in it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I do this 3D thing as a hobby, but it sometimes ends in deadlines for professional projects. So the new system should be a fun project but also be ready if it gets serious.
> 
> Regarding EK:
> I skipped the monoblock. The tests I watched now, really showed that product is not state of the art anymore especially for TR. But I kept all the other components because there the test say the opposite. The Vardar Fans are mentioned to be very good and the radiator as well. The Pump anyway has a very good reputation.
> 
> Again, thanks for your input (and sorry @ Enterprise for polluting his thread).


Ok I get where You are coming from...yah back then Intel was corrupting dell by paying them not to use AMD chips, so Dell workstations where sold at the cost of the CPUs a great bargain...but yeah a dust and sound monster system.....
MY advice in this case if You coming from a Dual Xeon System, is NOT TO buy anything until release of Threadripper 2 in the summer.
This is because even 1080ti are almost at end of iife...in march you will get new 1180 Nvidia cards that will for sure go faster than 1080ti ones, so in june you will likely have the new titan and new 1180ti and august new Threadripper,,,,,and who knows maybe on PCIE 4.

What You can do now is buy a couple of cheap waterblocks for the cpu.
You can fit a EK Reservoir DDC combo in the DVD slot and power it with its sata connector....and order at performance PCs, the adapter from 4 pin pwm pin to dell, you will need a couple of those, one you use on the first cpu to manage the pump speed.
the second socket fan pin you will instead attach a long one like 1.5 meters long, and a splitter at the end to power 2 or 3 fans on a radiator size you think You will want to use in Your Threadripper build later in time.
You will need a PCIE pass through for the tubes....look for the thinnest one or a koolance like one where u can unscrew the pass through fittings, because dell has very narrow pcie holes, so you might need to screw them directly on the chassis without the bracket.
You should get your dual xeons at load at 55c maximum even if you add a GPU to the loop, and if u can run dual GPUs in it, then get a bigger rad.

The DDC pumps is best for this kind of configuration as You will have the radiator with tubes 1.5 meters long more or less and the pump will not have any problem with the pressure....It would be best to use small tubing inside and use widest ones on the external.
I know this because We had a couple of these precision workstations on Sandy bridge back then and we did this because the dust and noise was intolerable...not to mention the thermal throttling.
Dell was the reason for which since then we bought only DIY computers.

You will get a bios message when booting, that chassis fans arent working, because You are using the cpu fan plugs with 4 wires instead of 5.....all You will need to do is press F1 every time you boot when it will show up at start up on your display....it is perfectly safe and we have these two machines til working today after so long.
Make sure You buy like a phobya external power supply a small one like 30 or 60 watts , I dont remember what we got, to power the pump when you fill the loop, because the space is very tight, and You WILL get water spills for sure when filling the loop..so best to completely remove thePSU from the workstation after you have tried to power the machine without the PSU connected to the wall so to discharge all the remaining power in it and all the other components.....yes because components do keep power in them even if u unplug the machine from the wall...especially power supplies, can kill You even if they arent plugged in the wall.
Hey Im sorry if, i kinda a turning you off telling You to wait, but to be honest PCI4 is behind the door, all New GPUS the same, i do not think it would make sense to spend 6 10 thousand dollars on a new system if by the time You assemble it, 4 5 months later a whole new one will come out....You wanna make sure You have a machine that will have the longest life cycle as possible..and You never know there will be a 32 core Threadripper that fir sure will be able to run with much much memory timings and speed.


----------



## mypickaxe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Aby67*
> 
> EK Block for TR4 is lethal for that CPU...as Yes there is a lot wrong about EK products as even their Intel blocks could be 10degrees C better for sure with a new design rather than a 2012 one....I have EK products , I was happy with them....but today there is so many companies out there that do sooooo much better, that EK has become low end mainstream , You can see this even on their GPU blocks that are still bulky, heavy and full of more and more plastic.
> And lets also say that EK has never made once a WS monoblock, when WS motherboards for people who do have tons of stuff to cool are the most sold.....mainstream users tend to buy a AIO or maybe just a cpu block and running 1060 or 1070 like cards dont need to watercool them.....people who need WS motherboards usually run 6 to 7 GPus on them single or dual CPUs and definitely wanna keep those VRMs Ram and chipsets cool, as most of the times such machines are running at 100% loads for weeks.
> Today TR4 makes almost 10% of all AMD cpu sales, but it could make definitely 80% of watercooling components sold by a manufacturer especially if they will finally release a damn x399WS motherboard, which hundreds of thousands of content creators and VFX studios are waiting for.
> A computer in 2018 should not look like a plumber job with disco lights on it.....watercooling should have evolved by now to be tubeless and using carbon derivates for its blocks not 2 cents acrylyc and meters of rubber plastic tubes than do nothing more than making your system hotter and hotter and hotter, and slower and slower and slower to cool down once loads are done with.


Lethal? Exaggerate much?

The most I see on all cores when overclocked to 4.1GHz, even with Prime95 running for an hour, is 55C. If you were to add 10 to that, you're still below the point the CPU would throttle itself down.

There's nothing "lethal" about that when the system is properly designed. Optimal? No. Lethal? Get out of here.


----------



## keng

Lets keep it ciivil. Both of you are right.

In order to push 16 cores up past its hardcoded TDP (some leavay with LN2 tricks, which are not likely going to be publicized) you will need to crank some serious juice into the system with like what 100-200 mhz gains? Not really worth it. I mean at 4050 mhz it seems that a 1950x beats a 64 thread EPYC chip(Epic runs with much lower clocks/TDP roughly same) by a handsome clip as the fabric clock is linked to RAM speed as well as the SCL timings (Credit goes to The Stilt, or should I say 2t12t







among other PCI things.

Aby if you need us to run some render tasks, there are a couple guys on here that have 1950s OCd. I personally have linux running openMPI and it is like ...32 threads at 4 gigs vs GPU code, its roughly even for my stuff.

I have to caution that there are some known bugs but even w bugs, it is just a joy overall.


----------



## gupsterg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mypickaxe*
> 
> Lethal? Exaggerate much?
> 
> The most I see on all cores when overclocked to 4.1GHz, even with Prime95 running for an hour, is 55C. If you were to add 10 to that, you're still below the point the CPU would throttle itself down.
> 
> There's nothing "lethal" about that when the system is properly designed. Optimal? No. Lethal? Get out of here.


EK block is crap IMO, there are posts within this thread were I've seen well above 55C at 3.9GHz @ 1.3V.

This is today's [email protected] run, CPU @ stock 28 threads, ~24C room ambient.


----------



## Aby67

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mypickaxe*
> 
> Lethal? Exaggerate much?
> 
> The most I see on all cores when overclocked to 4.1GHz, even with Prime95 running for an hour, is 55C. If you were to add 10 to that, you're still below the point the CPU would throttle itself down.
> 
> There's nothing "lethal" about that when the system is properly designed. Optimal? No. Lethal? Get out of here.


Well Im glad You make 55C with EK block, wy not get an XSPC one......you would get 42 C with it if You get 55 with EK

Or Even the new watercoool heatkiller maybe get below 40 C with it.


----------



## Brain29

back to bugs

@elmor

current corrupted uefi 902 with missing led firmware


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Brain29*
> 
> back to bugs
> 
> @elmor
> 
> current corrupted uefi 902 with missing led firmware


Good Spot, added to the OP


----------



## Brain29

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ENTERPRISE*
> 
> Good Spot, added to the OP


http://www.overclock.net/t/1636566/asus-rog-zenith-extreme-x399-threadripper-overclocking-support/2180#post_26525789

@gupsterg
seems to not have this issue at all have no clue what happened or how

@Kyozon
has ended up in the same boat as me he too doesn't seem to know how

http://www.overclock.net/t/1636566/asus-rog-zenith-extreme-x399-threadripper-overclocking-support/2160#post_26524254


----------



## keng

look into flashing from windows or linux. you should be able to over-write the NVRAM. from my experience it takes two consecutive bios/uefis, where the 1st uefi is the very first (0211) and second is the latest ie 804. I think the reason for this working is that the actual mircocode get overwritten and that probably forces NVRAM to be written as well as the PSP rom stuff. I've been trolling the dumped ROM file and it has all sorts of things stored in there like the settings you used previously and other things.


----------



## mypickaxe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Aby67*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *mypickaxe*
> 
> Lethal? Exaggerate much?
> 
> The most I see on all cores when overclocked to 4.1GHz, even with Prime95 running for an hour, is 55C. If you were to add 10 to that, you're still below the point the CPU would throttle itself down.
> 
> There's nothing "lethal" about that when the system is properly designed. Optimal? No. Lethal? Get out of here.
> 
> 
> 
> Well Im glad You make 55C with EK block, wy not get an XSPC one......you would get 42 C with it if You get 55 with EK
> 
> Or Even the new watercoool heatkiller maybe get below 40 C with it.
Click to expand...

I think you read that wrong. I have an XSPC block and said *if you add 10 degrees to that* (implying the hypothetical EK block increase) it would still be comfortable. There's nothing "lethal" there in either case.

First of all, I live in Texas. Second of all, if you're getting 42 degrees on small after an hour on Prime95 with a 4.1 GHz overclock on a 1950X, good for you. That is *not the point.* Also, you have to talk about Delta T, not "my temp is this, therefore you should get this temp" otherwise you come off as unprepared to be having this conversation.


----------



## Aby67

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mypickaxe*
> 
> I think you read that wrong. I have an XSPC block and said *if you add 10 degrees to that* (implying the hypothetical EK block increase) it would still be comfortable. There's nothing "lethal" there in either case.
> 
> First of all, I live in Texas. Second of all, if you're getting 42 degrees on small after an hour on Prime95 with a 4.1 GHz overclock on a 1950X, good for you. That is *not the point.*


I think You miss read...there is no way i get 42 C...
I think that unless there is something special that were not aware of, You are getting possibly the best 4.1 OC temperature I have ever herd of.....most get 62 64 C on XSPC block and the EK one is always 12C more.
I absolutely do not doubt that You claim to get those temps in good faith, but as the discrepancy with many others is so wide, I suspect that the sensor s on Your socket might possibly read better temperatures for You than YOu are actually truly getting....I hope not, but is is very possible and likely.
Truth is that almost every one that has an OC 1950x with a EK block will get in best case scenarios 75 78 C and in some cases above 80C, certainly in those hot summer days above 80 can be a regular temp unless you go hard core with air conditioning and then go to sleep as if a bulldozer ran over Your head.

EK had a lot of people ask to return the blocks and be refunded, some asked a refund because they were disappointed a lot by the performance others returned the item without even trying it because it simply was not what it was advertised it was... and EK totally refunded every single client who asked for a refund.

Now fact is that there is a person who wanted to jump on theadripper on EK cooling....(coughs)

and the minimum i can say is that yes EK block for TR4 is lethal indeed, because i would very much wanna see pictures of those who still keep one running with a OC 1950x how that socket will look like after a year...and trust me it will not shine gold and it will look very much smoked up, especially u get a lot of dust or you smoke while working on the computer.
Nor it will boost as it would or as it is designed to do.
Why should he spend money on a whole custom loop if he can get same or better temps on air cooling?!
A OC 1950X that hit above 80C will never again perform as good as one that like yours hit tops 55C, nor it will live anywhere as close as Your CPU, the motherboard will deprecate very fast as well....and these are cpus that can be still very useful to have around even 10 years from now if the motherboard will take it and is treated with care.
I understand I sound exaggerated to you, but i think I am not exaggerating at all and I have no hard feeling if you said so.

Happy new year btw!


----------



## Aby67

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *keng*
> 
> Lets keep it ciivil. Both of you are right.
> 
> In order to push 16 cores up past its hardcoded TDP (some leavay with LN2 tricks, which are not likely going to be publicized) you will need to crank some serious juice into the system with like what 100-200 mhz gains? Not really worth it. I mean at 4050 mhz it seems that a 1950x beats a 64 thread EPYC chip(Epic runs with much lower clocks/TDP roughly same) by a handsome clip as the fabric clock is linked to RAM speed as well as the SCL timings (Credit goes to The Stilt, or should I say 2t12t
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> among other PCI things.
> 
> Aby if you need us to run some render tasks, there are a couple guys on here that have 1950s OCd. I personally have linux running openMPI and it is like ...32 threads at 4 gigs vs GPU code, its roughly even for my stuff.
> 
> I have to caution that there are some known bugs but even w bugs, it is just a joy overall.


Well render tasks I am interested is purely Vray renders or Vray Benchmark.....I would be very very very interested if You got high end GPUs and still have a High end Intel CPu, to see if eg a OC intel will push your gpu vray benchmark fast than a Threadripper OC cpu pushing a the same gpus...
I am standing by to commit on threadripper until there is a WS motherboard for it...and I found some alibaba retailers that are selling GP100 with hard discount...so I might wanna buy a bunch of those as soon as Nvidia replaces them with GV100, as those f...kers run twice as fast as titans in raytracing loads...


----------



## keng

oh well can't help ya there

I did however run some ethereum *mining* to test the thermals as I am running quad gpu blower stock cooling with a closed case, and figured if cards are going to overheat, that should get them there.

Long story short, forgot about the box, left it running over night. No issues was still mining away at 130 Mh/s, earned me a *cool $7*, best mistake ever, going for those sweet mcdonalds cheeseburgers and treating the PC to anything it likes ( I have a feeling it might order a SATA drive







)

as a plus side, I now have a hair-dryer, as simply bending the case PCI slot metal so it is perpendicular, you have a hot stream of air with which you can probably dry your hair at max load (1000 watts w 4 blowers @100%, it will do the trick tried drying some kitchen towels). Cool...or rather toasty.

Anyhow, this mini supercomputer is done, windows 10 is nuked, never installing that again, linux'd up, ssh up, now need a cool corner to park it and forget it. Have fun, OC hard and code hard in 2018


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Hey guys,

This thread is for bug tracking primarily. The other conversations would be better suited here: http://www.overclock.net/t/1636566/asus-rog-zenith-extreme-x399-threadripper-overclocking-support/0_50

Thanks,

E


----------



## yangpingmi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ENTERPRISE*
> 
> Hey guys,
> 
> This thread is for bug tracking primarily. The other conversations would be better suited here: http://www.overclock.net/t/1636566/asus-rog-zenith-extreme-x399-threadripper-overclocking-support/0_50
> 
> Thanks,
> E


4266C19 memory can not be stable 3200 frequency, memtest a lot of mistakes。3200c14 memory can be memtest 800%


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yangpingmi*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ENTERPRISE*
> 
> Hey guys,
> 
> This thread is for bug tracking primarily. The other conversations would be better suited here: http://www.overclock.net/t/1636566/asus-rog-zenith-extreme-x399-threadripper-overclocking-support/0_50
> 
> Thanks,
> E
> 
> 
> 
> 4266C19 memory can not be stable 3200 frequency, memtest a lot of mistakes。3200c14 memory can be memtest 800%
Click to expand...

What memory modules are you using. We need specific model please. Also you would be very lucky to run 4266Mhz on th TR Platform at the moment, I would shoot for 3466Mhz.


----------



## madno

Hi,
sorry, again polluting the thread, but could not resist.

Attached is a screenshot of my system while running a test render using the new release of my main 3D software. All virtual cores at 100%. It goes like this until the render finishes. This simple scene took 20 mins and total system RAM used was 14 GB. My workstation is sounding like those cyclone type vacuum cleaners which make a hell of a noise. That's why I am in search of a high speed, stable, silent new system.


----------



## VileLasagna

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *madno*
> 
> Hi,
> sorry, again polluting the thread, but could not resist.
> 
> Attached is a screenshot of my system while running a test render using the new release of my main 3D software. All virtual cores at 100%. It goes like this until the render finishes. This simple scene took 20 mins and total system RAM used was 14 GB. My workstation is sounding like those cyclone type vacuum cleaners which make a hell of a noise. That's why I am in search of a high speed, stable, silent new system.


Hey, TL;DR:
TR4 is a good way to go if you need a bajillion threads but, as you saw, the platform still has some annoying teething issues.
For noise and cooling, strapping some watercooling to it will make your life much better. Look to the Enermax solutions if you're after an AIO, if you're going custom loop you MAY want to stay away from EK for the CPU block. It's all right, as in "will cool your cpu acceptably" but performance is very sub-par compared to other solutions as pointed out. For TR4 I'd say you want a triple rad, especially if you're concerned with noise (I myself am going with an RX 480 from XSPC and some Gentle Typhoon fans). So worth checking out what exactly you want to spec out.

You might want to ask around in the Zenith Overclocking Thread instead of this one as that one is a bit more general and this one is trying to stay more in topic


----------



## yangpingmi

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ENTERPRISE*
> 
> What memory modules are you using. We need specific model please. Also you would be very lucky to run 4266Mhz on th TR Platform at the moment, I would shoot for 3466Mhz.


f4-4266c19d-16gtzr X2 can not be stable 3200 frequency...Not compatible


----------



## Brain29

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *yangpingmi*
> 
> f4-4266c19d-16gtzr X2 can not be stable 3200 frequency...Not compatible


Most people I see on the form have 4 or 8 gb with 2 to 4 sticks able to hit high speeds. Haven't noticed anyone with high ram able to do the same yet. Try 2933 without manually tweeking dialing in the numbers beyond is questionable. The ASRock boards seem to be the best for ram auto xmp speeds based on the forum


----------



## christefan26

new issues--cant install win 10 build 1607, tired a variety of ways it reads the source starts to work and nothing happens; next setup a 960 evo raid of 2 1tb drives and when first mounted they were reading at 5.8gb read and 3.8 gb write and now they are reading at 3.8 gb and 4.1 gb write what the hell is up with that shift--and finally sound issues which improved somewhat after ez updated had me install a chipset patch 1/2/18 that seems like it should have already been a cleared issue but some problems still exist; running a video source to the computer for recording and the sound seems to record fine as i have checked some files but it will not consistently playable properly as it is being recorded at the computer drops out garbled and broken sometimes a frequency shifts which boost treeble for instance and decreases bass--where the blank did that kind of performance come from havent seen that in years


----------



## farkadonitis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Brain29*
> 
> Most people I see on the form have 4 or 8 gb with 2 to 4 sticks able to hit high speeds. Haven't noticed anyone with high ram able to do the same yet. Try 2933 without manually tweeking dialing in the numbers beyond is questionable. The ASRock boards seem to be the best for ram auto xmp speeds based on the forum


ASRock is a subsidiary of Asus..or?


----------



## The L33t

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *farkadonitis*
> 
> ASRock is a subsidiary of Asus..or?


Was a couple of years ago. Not anymore.

ASRock is owned by Pegatron.


----------



## farkadonitis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The L33t*
> 
> Was a couple of years ago. Not anymore.
> 
> ASRock is owned by Pegatron.


Thank you very much! I just had the impression she was


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Updated OP to show which bugs are fixed, which are still pending and ones that cannot be reproduced. Please see drop downs to see comments by @elmor


----------



## Ramad

Did anyone try flashing/updating the BIOS using UEFI Shell instead of EZflash and Flashback to find out if it solves some of the issues?


----------



## Brain29

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Ramad*
> 
> Did anyone try flashing/updating the BIOS using UEFI Shell instead of EZflash and Flashback to find out if it solves some of the issues?


no - for as new as tr4 is and how easy I have seen my bios (maybe)"corrupt" it-self since day one i see it either definitely working or definitely bricking my board //







so not it


----------



## christefan26

Aisuite is suddenly coming up 'server error' after the microsoft push of the patch for intels problems


----------



## Brain29

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *christefan26*
> 
> Aisuite is suddenly coming up 'server error' after the microsoft push of the patch for intels problems


https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?98800-AI-Suite-3-Beta-Version-3-00-10-user-test-report-thread

There is a new beta but while it may open they usually have issues with the platform of our board. It's been really buggy since day one "most" seem to stay away from it, if you do use it watch your voltages it caused funny issues (overrides) with my OC.


----------



## nycgtr

Seems to break live dash as well the new ms update. I don't have aisuite installed as I have no need for it.


----------



## Brain29

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nycgtr*
> 
> Seems to break live dash as well the new ms update. I don't have aisuite installed as I have no need for it.


Live dash and Aura have been broken for me since 804 it was working in 801. It might not be related to the new release.


----------



## ReHWolution

It is. I'm on 0801 and I'm getting the same error.


----------



## nycgtr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Brain29*
> 
> Live dash and Aura have been broken for me since 804 it was working in 801. It might not be related to the new release.


Mine has always worked thru every uefi. Installed kb and live dash crashes, aura still fine


----------



## Brain29

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nycgtr*
> 
> Mine has always worked thru every uefi. Installed kb and live dash crashes, aura still fine


Im jealous


----------



## ReHWolution

Sorry @OP, the bugs I found out were not fixed, not without breaking something else. AURA is not very usable except for static mode, and everything else is the same.


----------



## The L33t

With the storm around Intel CPUs and the need to update not only every single bios from x99 motherboard up but also laptops, servers etc... I'm not sure we'll get new bios anytime soon. BIOS team's are scrambling big time.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The L33t*
> 
> With the storm around Intel CPUs and the need to update not only every single bios from x99 motherboard up but also laptops, servers etc... I'm not sure we'll get new bios anytime soon. BIOS team's are scrambling big time.


Please avoid swearing 

However yeah, I kind of hope these issues do not cause to much of a hinderance. To be honest though I doubt they will commit time to updating all the boards affected by this as that would be a large range of products going back approx 10 Years.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Infact they are going back to the 6th Series: https://www.asus.com/News/V5urzYAT6myCC1o2


----------



## The L33t

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ENTERPRISE*
> 
> Infact they are going back to the 6th Series: https://www.asus.com/News/V5urzYAT6myCC1o2


Yeah I know, I posted that info on the main thread discussing this here. http://www.overclock.net/t/1645071/various-spectre-meltdown-critical-vulnerabilities-in-modern-processors/750#post_26535518

Although microcode updates seem to be easier on Intel's side, that's still a huge amount of code to be validated.

Laptops from that era are also going to be updated.

Server motherboards from Asus same probably even going back further since those are critical and have a different kind of support.

Mini PC's. Etc..etc...etc...

This is a major burden put on those teams and you can bet they're going to shift some priorities because let's face it...The Intel installed base has been the bread and butter of Asus and this industry for quite some time and that has to take priority.

I just hope someone at Asus has the sense to not completely "abandon" the platform that maybe just maybe has some bright future and is not affected by these issues in the same level for a very good reason, true innovation and a better understanding of security importance at AMD.

Actually even Nvidia seems to be affected by this while again AMD due having a hardware scheduler may not....some retesting of Nvidia gpus will have to be done and some driver updates about this are going to be released be sure.

EDIT.....Yep!

https://nvidia.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/4611


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Only time will tell regarding their resources unfortunately but I would imagine it will take longer for a working BIOS to come our way...you never know though, we may be pleasantly surprised


----------



## The L33t

Yeah, one may have already been in the pipeline when this hit


----------



## Brain29

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ENTERPRISE*
> 
> Only time will tell regarding their resources unfortunately but I would imagine it will take longer for a working BIOS to come our way...you never know though, we may be pleasantly surprised


This truthful comment makes me so sad and depressed. I'm tired of having to check hardware forms for updates to a board I bought 4 months ago still doesnt work correctly.

So sad to see such a nicely spec hardware be destroyed by non existent software


----------



## Brain29

So far customer service only has the helpful suggestion of installing the new aisuite after listing problems with the UEFI ... not sure they know what uefi is


----------



## The L33t

Unfortunately for most "big" companies the support lines tend to be like that, mostly automated like responses and no more.

I realize they must have a big amount of question sand problems that are... well, user error, but I also feel that some products like the ROG should have a different support like, more direct, more informed. This is the upper echelon at Asus (Price/performance wise) and in essence it is a product for someone who likes to thinker/tweak so... a more informed line should be available, even if it was a second line passed on by the first filter line.

But that wont happen.

I do hope EVGA one day soon decides to open up and do some AMD boards.... With Ryzen "on the rise", makes sense. I doubt on the graphic card front since the NVIDIA deal os too good to risk but on the CPU side.... even Nvidia promoted "threadripper" officially so...

EVGA support from experience is a completely different level.


----------



## ReHWolution

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The L33t*
> 
> Unfortunately for most "big" companies the support lines tend to be like that, mostly automated like responses and no more.
> 
> I realize they must have a big amount of question sand problems that are... well, user error, but I also feel that some products like the ROG should have a different support like, more direct, more informed. This is the upper echelon at Asus (Price/performance wise) and in essence it is a product for someone who likes to thinker/tweak so... a more informed line should be available, even if it was a second line passed on by the first filter line.
> 
> But that wont happen.
> 
> I do hope EVGA one day soon decides to open up and do some AMD boards.... With Ryzen "on the rise", makes sense. I doubt on the graphic card front since the NVIDIA deal os too good to risk but on the CPU side.... even Nvidia promoted "threadripper" officially so...
> 
> EVGA support from experience is a completely different level.


Last May in Taipei I talked with the Global PR guy from EVGA, he said EVGA is pretty sure that it's never gonna make AMD boards or graphics card. I also talked with Nick Shih, and he said there won't be even an X399 OC Formula or any AMD OCF (at least for now) 'cause AMD locks their BIOS code much more than Intel...


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ReHWolution*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *The L33t*
> 
> Unfortunately for most "big" companies the support lines tend to be like that, mostly automated like responses and no more.
> 
> I realize they must have a big amount of question sand problems that are... well, user error, but I also feel that some products like the ROG should have a different support like, more direct, more informed. This is the upper echelon at Asus (Price/performance wise) and in essence it is a product for someone who likes to thinker/tweak so... a more informed line should be available, even if it was a second line passed on by the first filter line.
> 
> But that wont happen.
> 
> I do hope EVGA one day soon decides to open up and do some AMD boards.... With Ryzen "on the rise", makes sense. I doubt on the graphic card front since the NVIDIA deal os too good to risk but on the CPU side.... even Nvidia promoted "threadripper" officially so...
> 
> EVGA support from experience is a completely different level.
> 
> 
> 
> Last May in Taipei I talked with the Global PR guy from EVGA, he said EVGA is pretty sure that it's never gonna make AMD boards or graphics card. I also talked with Nick Shih, and he said there won't be even an X399 OC Formula or any AMD OCF (at least for now) 'cause AMD locks their BIOS code much more than Intel...
Click to expand...

It would likely be the cause for some of the issues faced in this platform if AMD do lock there code down more so than Intel. Though of course I do not know that for sure.


----------



## The L33t

EVGA is afraid of the XFX effect... Do you remember what happened? Of course never is a strong word but still it is highly doubtful they will make AMD stuff I do agree.

Regarding ASUS and making formula etc, maybe looking at the Zenith it is best they don't.... Even locked out and without many options this is what we get... Then I imagine with more options..

AMD may open them one day, AMD is way more sensitive to pressure and user input and openness than Intel is.. So..


----------



## VileLasagna

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The L33t*
> 
> EVGA is afraid of the XFX effect... Do you remember what happened? Of course never is a strong word but still it is highly doubtful they will make AMD stuff I do agree.
> 
> Regarding ASUS and making formula etc, maybe looking at the Zenith it is best they don't.... Even locked out and without many options this is what we get... Then I imagine with more options..
> 
> AMD may open them one day, AMD is way more sensitive to pressure and user input and openness than Intel is.. So..


One of the things that keep me an AMD fanboy is their incentives to open software. Heck, their Linux GPU drivers are an open stack these days and it's paying off. Don't expect BIOS and such to go that far, necessarily, but hope it gets looser, for sure.

Regarding XFX: No, I do not. Waht happen?
I had a pair of XFX 5770s and they were decent, as far as reference cooler models go. Lasted me quite a few years, crossfire carried them pretty far =P


----------



## The L33t

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *VileLasagna*
> 
> One of the things that keep me an AMD fanboy is their incentives to open software. Heck, their Linux GPU drivers are an open stack these days and it's paying off. Don't expect BIOS and such to go that far, necessarily, but hope it gets looser, for sure.
> 
> Regarding XFX: No, I do not. Waht happen?
> I had a pair of XFX 5770s and they were decent, as far as reference cooler models go. Lasted me quite a few years, crossfire carried them pretty far =P


XFX used to be NVIDIA only, then decided to make some AMD (ATI then) cards and NVIDIA cut them off completely... They almost went bankrupt during the "transition" period!


----------



## VileLasagna

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The L33t*
> 
> XFX used to be NVIDIA only, then decided to make some AMD (ATI then) cards and NVIDIA cut them off completely... They almost went bankrupt during the "transition" period!


Oopsie... Well, fanboy confirmation bias: reinforced =P


----------



## mypickaxe

Finally not a complaint. Bought the G.SKILL Flare X F4-3200C14Q-32GFX kit, and it is working like a champ on the Zenith. Even tried "The Stilt's" 1.4V profile and the system just feels...I don't know...snappier.


----------



## The L33t

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *VileLasagna*
> 
> Oopsie... Well, fanboy confirmation bias: reinforced =P


They also made motherboards, with Nvidia chipsets. Well... nvidia did make Chipsets for AMD some time ago... I had one from ABIT, Nforce 2 chipset.... good old days.... http://abit.ws/page/en/motherboard/[email protected]_NAME=NF7-S&fMTYPE=Socket+A

If not EVGA I wish XFX made some motherboards.... since they are now AMD only... their designs for RX cards have been pretty solid, nice VRM, good cooling and warranty... not RGB or gaming centric... If even NZXT makes motherboards now.... XFX can too I'm sure







.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mypickaxe*
> 
> Finally not a complaint. Bought the G.SKILL Flare X F4-3200C14Q-32GFX kit, and it is working like a champ on the Zenith. Even tried "The Stilt's" 1.4V profile and the system just feels...I don't know...snappier.


Flare X line and the GTZR"X" for the RGB stuff are definitely a good way to avoid many issues on these new AMD platforms...


----------



## ReHWolution

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The L33t*
> 
> EVGA is afraid of the XFX effect... Do you remember what happened? Of course never is a strong word but still it is highly doubtful they will make AMD stuff I do agree.
> 
> Regarding ASUS and making formula etc, maybe looking at the Zenith it is best they don't.... Even locked out and without many options this is what we get... Then I imagine with more options..
> 
> AMD may open them one day, AMD is way more sensitive to pressure and user input and openness than Intel is.. So..


Wait, wait, wait. We're not talking about open source vs closed source. We're talking about giving manufacturers "carte blanche" for features, and overclock. The platform _per se_ has no problems whatsoever (and I can confirm by telling you that AORUS Gaming 7, ASRock X399 Professional Gaming and Taichi don't have any software issues), it's ASUS, that has problems with its current lineup of mainboards on both sides of HEDT. I have heard several complaints from RVIE owners too, software wise.
However, "open-ness" is not a given when it comes to BIOSes. I doubt we'll see a OCF X*99 for AMD soon.


----------



## The L33t

I think that day will come, once the Zen Architecture matures and takes some market share. Maybe AMD does not want to risk it this early on? Intel has been working from the same pool base for quite some time so the confidence level is different I guess.

Some leeway is given, for example, on the Asrock motherboards for TR (maybe Ryzen too) if I remember correctly ASRock is in essence ignoring some of the "Auto" control the CPU does voltage wise and they are doing their own thing. This was pointed for example on OC3D's review of the Taichi model (X399).

The feeling from the reviewer is this was best, as the AMD way of doing things maybe uses less power etc but adds a level of complexity, because it is "out of your control" and the beast becomes more difficult to tame on the Asus front.

In some ways I think this is definitely a shortcoming on the Asus side, because they have a myriad of options and not a solid way of rounding that all up, they just keep adding stuff, exposing it to all, without even explaining what it is supposed to do and how it may or may not interact with other settings.

I understand this is a Tweakers board, but it needs to be controllable and useful, otherwise it is just adding to the confusion.

Add Aura, OLED and software parade on the mix.... and we have the Zenith.

Yeah on the Intel side I've seen complaints for sure.


----------



## gupsterg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The L33t*
> 
> Some leeway is given, for example, on the Asrock motherboards for TR (maybe Ryzen too) if I remember correctly ASRock is in essence ignoring some of the "Auto" control the CPU does voltage wise and they are doing their own thing. This was pointed for example on OC3D's review of the Taichi model (X399).


Hmmm, not sure on this TBH.

Ryzen/ThreadRipper does not have VID programmed to it, like other past gen CPUs. The SMU profiles CPU and sets voltage as needed. When we switch say PStates to custom in AMD CBS, the VID seen there is a ceiling VID. I have seen differing CPUs on same board showing same VID in PStates *but* when under load it will not use voltage. This context is without placing CPU in OC mode.

It would be extremely difficult for ASRock to fine tune UEFI to have "VID table" which would work with every CPU IMO. If they have setup a VID table it would be over set to allow for worst case, which could mean not optimal for every CPU IMO.

I do view OC3D reviews at times, TTL is by no means technically sound IMO to reference concerning what ASRock may and may not have done. As far as I am concerned I want technical on Ryzen/ThreadRipper, then this is the man.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The L33t*
> 
> The feeling from the reviewer is this was best, as the AMD way of doing things maybe uses less power etc but adds a level of complexity, because it is "out of your control" and the beast becomes more difficult to tame on the Asus front.
> 
> In some ways I think this is definitely a shortcoming on the Asus side, because they have a myriad of options and not a solid way of rounding that all up, they just keep adding stuff, exposing it to all, without even explaining what it is supposed to do and how it may or may not interact with other settings.


No issues taming Ryzen or ThreadRipper, used both C6H/ZE quite a lot for CPU non PState and PState OC, with and without RAM OC. Dunno if because I had a C6H and followed that thread, but no way do I feel lost with ZE concerning most settings. Some yes I have searched for on web and found an answer, some not. I have never noted any board manufacturer giving full information on options. What I have noted is Elmor/Raja/The Stilt have been active on giving information on OCN. I have seen no ASRock or Gigabyte rep active within Ryzen or ThreadRipper threads TBH here on OCN. Each time I have viewed some boards UEFIs they are worse than ASUS.

For example on ASRock it was a monthly moan by Buildzoid, on YT, on X370. Gigabyte I recall seeing a post where members highlighted they had to set RAM timings per channel. On MSI (and others) I have seen some labels of UEFI options not being as clearly labeled or following widely used convention (which makes sense IMO). For example SOC voltage on MSI Titanium was not using that term, but IIRC something like NB voltage.

I have been happy with C6H and ZE, would not change them for another board TBH.


----------



## The L33t

@gupsterg

No board is perfect that much we know.

Regardless, the feedback on most owners of the X399 from Asrock you know and have seen here is... Good. On Newegg same and on almost any other source.

This is not true on the Zenith, even if you are one of the few with mostly no issues. This is not related to sold units....from feedback I have from stores round me and that that have public sell numbers Asrock as sold just as many as Asus on these markets.

Asrock ia still the only vendor rocking the most recent AGESA. Without any noteworthy problems(it's final and public build!). Asus... Had to revert it! Could not even build a decent BETA from it let alone something minimally really for the general public. Does that mean anything? Probably.

Regarding the VID Table. One reported "issue" on the asrock X399 boards was in fact a hotter chip than on other boards...Look it up. That would lend credence to your assessment.

Elmor is indeed a good send, but the support for this product should not stand on the shoulders of this fellow alone. Even the oficial ROG Fórum seems abandoned on the zenith. The users are the ones sharing the bios from elmor there... Does that make any sense? NO.


----------



## gupsterg

@The L33t

I agree no board is perfect, my gripes have just been so minor with ASUS boards that is all I can say. For whatever my uses maybe they fulfill their roles well IMO.

Dunno if the higher reports of issues are down to more people having purchased ASUS. I really can't comment on who is selling more units etc. I have spoken to no etailers/retailers or really been looking at reviews from purchasers either TBH. All I do is every so often is float in and read general forum threads regrading xyz and catch up on things.

Dunno why the new AGESA is an issue for ASUS. I can only say in my configuration UEFI 0901 with latest AGESA is sound, I have been using it since ~15th Dec 17. I am using highest RAM speed I have achieved so far on TR/ZE, with not loose timings, without excessive SOC/VDIMM, with very decent stability IMO. Last night to break my setup I flashed to UEFI 0902, reverted to UEFI 0901 and restored saved settings from USB. So far passed ~9hrs of Y-Cruncher and now on P95 (8K 4096K 12000MB).



I then let board idle to see if PWM had got stuck (board has had more uptime than shown in these screenies).



Then went to P95.



I don't know the last time the ZE was fully switched off in past week or so, as you may have seen I have been at tuning 3466MHz for length from posts in other thread.

Thank you for the info on ASRock. IIRC from having read the X399 owners thread here at times, LLC is set high as well on ASRock as default?


----------



## Brain29

attempting RMA ( for software issues) before I explode

found this

aisuite 3 3.00.10

dose not display correct serial number


----------



## christefan26

try not to explode

New bug etc--gee got this board 10 days ago and couldn't install win 10 build 1607 and now after the patches for the intel problems took a shot at an install today and guess what installed to a amd raid of 2 nvme drives in raid no problem and after various software additions and drivers is working without issues--i would say that at Asus they are taking somewhat dumb choices to modify what should be operating software with tweeks that really don't belong and destroying capatilibily for more operating systems--next im going to give win 7 a try because any attempt to install that a week ago failed immediately. Next point is my setup of overclocking and what worked is now in the trash can and has to be redone after the intel patches , what was perfectly stable for tests that were run now fails in the same teests after the patch adjustments whatever thosee really were


----------



## Brain29

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *christefan26*
> 
> try not to explode
> 
> New bug etc--gee got this board 10 days ago and couldn't install win 10 build 1607 and now after the patches for the intel problems took a shot at an install today and guess what installed to a amd raid of 2 nvme drives in raid no problem and after various software additions and drivers is working without issues--i would say that at Asus they are taking somewhat dumb choices to modify what should be operating software with tweeks that really don't belong and destroying capatilibily for more operating systems--next im going to give win 7 a try because any attempt to install that a week ago failed immediately. Next point is my setup of overclocking and what worked is now in the trash can and has to be redone after the intel patches , what was perfectly stable for tests that were run now fails in the same teests after the patch adjustments whatever thosee really were


what uefi version ?
*I personally wouldn't install os on a raid with this board every update it will have to be rebuilt


----------



## Brain29

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Brain29*
> 
> back to bugs
> 
> @elmor
> 
> current corrupted uefi 902 with missing led firmware


@elmor

@ENTERPRISE

After going from 804 to 901 4+ weeks ago I ran into the rgb corruption issue I quoted

I have had 902 a few week since its release I have reflashed - powered down - power cycled - unpluged everything replugged everything with no change... then randomly today it corrected itself

"magically" corrected it self *after today I strongly believe there is bad memory/cache corrupting the installs of new uefi

It has to be something that is able to retain its settings or state for a long time because unplugging the system from power and battery for 2 days did not correct the issues

the bugs that carried over to 902 still present
(started with 901) -bug of USB storage devices not being seen in uefi on back io (cant use (button)flashback as result)
(present since start) -fan power % random min
(present since start) -aisuit (fans undetected but present in uefi PWM/DC bug)


----------



## christefan26

902 havee run a couple others and 902 has worleed finee for me


----------



## VileLasagna

So I've just put my system together and am starting to install all the OSes and etc, such that I'm finally actually running on my own Zenith.
Straight off the box, first thing I did when this powered on was EZ Flash UEFI 902. Seems to all be working fine (though I haven't installed any sort of software in Windoze such as Aura, AISuite, etc..) on the board side (had to RMA some RAM) with one exception. I couldn't find out how to set up RAID.
For my build I have 3 NVMe which are going to be the system drives for Windoze and Linux. These are all properly set, partitioned and working all fine. My plan is also to have 4 1TB HDDs on RAID 10 as my long term storage, shared between the two systems.

I however could not find the RAID utility on the UEFI. In fact, if I change the SATA controller from AHCI to RAID, the drives seem to not be detected at all, neither by the OSes nor by the UEFI (SMART info shows N/A in the drive drop down). Shouldn't this utility be there?

I also tried to go into Windows and set things up from there using RAIDExpert2, but that also didn't work. It complains that "oh noes! You're running from an NVMe! You can't build a RAID from the drive you're on, silly" and never lets me go forward. This is regardless of whether there are other drives (SATA or NVMe) available.

So at least not something urgent but something annoying nonetheless. My plan is to try and get some raid tools from within Linux tonight and seeing if I can probe something that way instead. As I've been going through the motions of initial setup, I haven't had a chance to explore much yet (although I must say that tacking on that -j24 to the build script for GCC 5 was delicious) but given the way UEFI is behaving I'm not expecting much success.

Do we know if this got (re)moved or something? I was expecting to just boot straight to RAID utility, hook the drives up then boot an OS and partition/format the array.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *VileLasagna*
> 
> So I've just put my system together and am starting to install all the OSes and etc, such that I'm finally actually running on my own Zenith.
> Straight off the box, first thing I did when this powered on was EZ Flash UEFI 902. Seems to all be working fine (though I haven't installed any sort of software in Windoze such as Aura, AISuite, etc..) on the board side (had to RMA some RAM) with one exception. I couldn't find out how to set up RAID.
> For my build I have 3 NVMe which are going to be the system drives for Windoze and Linux. These are all properly set, partitioned and working all fine. My plan is also to have 4 1TB HDDs on RAID 10 as my long term storage, shared between the two systems.
> 
> I however could not find the RAID utility on the UEFI. In fact, if I change the SATA controller from AHCI to RAID, the drives seem to not be detected at all, neither by the OSes nor by the UEFI (SMART info shows N/A in the drive drop down). Shouldn't this utility be there?
> 
> I also tried to go into Windows and set things up from there using RAIDExpert2, but that also didn't work. It complains that "oh noes! You're running from an NVMe! You can't build a RAID from the drive you're on, silly" and never lets me go forward. This is regardless of whether there are other drives (SATA or NVMe) available.
> 
> So at least not something urgent but something annoying nonetheless. My plan is to try and get some raid tools from within Linux tonight and seeing if I can probe something that way instead. As I've been going through the motions of initial setup, I haven't had a chance to explore much yet (although I must say that tacking on that -j24 to the build script for GCC 5 was delicious) but given the way UEFI is behaving I'm not expecting much success.
> 
> Do we know if this got (re)moved or something? I was expecting to just boot straight to RAID utility, hook the drives up then boot an OS and partition/format the array.


The RAID utility is not obvious but it is there, I am just to remember what sub menu it is under, anyone ?


----------



## vsimone67

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ENTERPRISE*
> 
> The RAID utility is not obvious but it is there, I am just to remember what sub menu it is under, anyone ?


In 0801 I had to do the following:

To enable RAID Expert in the BIOS you have to enable CSM mode in Advanced/Boot .
Then you have to make sure all the options below are set to UEFI Only, save settings then reboot back into bios.

There was also a NVMe raid option that you had to turn on (sorry I am not in front of my computer so I do not remember the menu).


----------



## gupsterg

I have CSM: Disabled. Set SATA Mode to RAID, save and reboot and gain the RAIDXpert2 menu.



Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!










The location for NVMe RAID option is in Advanced > AMD PBS , screenie in OP of this thread.


----------



## Bartouille

Anyone has the problem where sometimes the system boots and everything is extremely laggy and the system clock doesn't even increase at a steady pace? I suspect this is a problem with some timers... very annoying. I need to reboot everytime it does that. I've tried like 5 bios so far and they all have this problem. It screws everything up, even Package Power is wrong in HWiNFO when it happens, idles at like 150w.


----------



## VileLasagna

@vsimone67

Playing around with the CSM setting is what did it for me. Found it this time and it's detecting the SATA drives again.

Thx everyone for the help. Can't wait to be back from work and set this up later today

EDIT: Nvm later... ended up playing with that instead of having breakfast. oopsie. Managed to set it up and initialize it in windoze. Seems to be all working fine. Will have to get the Arch side set up later, though.

RE-EDIT:

My RAID is apparently up, still struggling to pick it up from Linux though. Kinda curious, expected it to be the easier platform.
As I look, though, I've found this PDF which more officially details things a bit better, including the settings that got me this far in the first place:

AMD Raid Quickstart guide


----------



## VileLasagna

Huh, okay, this is new.

Investigating right now. I'm on 902, my VGA is a Quadro 2000D and this is on Windows boot (superior OS working fine, it seems).

I did mess with SATA settings as I'm still struggling to get my Linux to recognize the storage RAID (each OS is on its individual NVMe), but I don't think that's the cause.

The one VGA related thing I did was installing CUDA 8.0

Pretty bizarre even for me, and I complain about Windows at basically every chance I get. Thinking I'll end up having to reinstall the OS. It was a new install as I put this rig together last weekend and still hadn't managed to get itself fully up to date (remember when you could tell Windows to update (or otherwise)? Good times)



hahahaha, nvm. Looks like my google-fu is a bit better when I'm not struggling to just stay awake.

So, the answer I found is on the Overclocking thread here.

Disabling Advanced/AMD PBS/Enumerate all IOMMU in IVRS is what fixed it for me.

What led me to enable this in the first place, though, was the fact that I'm getting an AMD-Vi bug report during lInux Boot. Since I do plan on playing around with VMs in this rig, I need to go and check if it'll indeed be a problem

Code:



Code:


[    0.031913] [Firmware Bug]: AMD-Vi: IOAPIC[130] not in IVRS table
[    0.031918] AMD-Vi: Disabling interrupt remapping
[    0.031922] Switched APIC routing to physical flat.

MAYBE I can try enabling it and THEN re-installing Windows? This IS one of those situations where the longer the wait, the greater the pain.... hmmmm

In the end, it just made me look dumb by double posting for no good reason because I didn't scroll my phone properly

MOAR EDITS:


__
https://www.reddit.com/r/721s6z/threadripperasrock_x399_taichi_windows_10_needs/
Time to go back to trying that, then. The internets never lie, misrepresent or overstate


----------



## Brain29

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *VileLasagna*
> 
> Huh, okay, this is new.
> 
> Investigating right now. I'm on 902, my VGA is a Quadro 2000D and this is on Windows boot (superior OS working fine, it seems).
> 
> I did mess with SATA settings as I'm still struggling to get my Linux to recognize the storage RAID (each OS is on its individual NVMe), but I don't think that's the cause.
> 
> The one VGA related thing I did was installing CUDA 8.0
> 
> Pretty bizarre even for me, and I complain about Windows at basically every chance I get. Thinking I'll end up having to reinstall the OS. It was a new install as I put this rig together last weekend and still hadn't managed to get itself fully up to date (remember when you could tell Windows to update (or otherwise)? Good times)
> 
> 
> 
> hahahaha, nvm. Looks like my google-fu is a bit better when I'm not struggling to just stay awake.
> 
> So, the answer I found is on the Overclocking thread here.
> 
> Disabling Advanced/AMD PBS/Enumerate all IOMMU in IVRS is what fixed it for me.
> 
> What led me to enable this in the first place, though, was the fact that I'm getting an AMD-Vi bug report during lInux Boot. Since I do plan on playing around with VMs in this rig, I need to go and check if it'll indeed be a problem
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> [    0.031913] [Firmware Bug]: AMD-Vi: IOAPIC[130] not in IVRS table
> [    0.031918] AMD-Vi: Disabling interrupt remapping
> [    0.031922] Switched APIC routing to physical flat.
> 
> MAYBE I can try enabling it and THEN re-installing Windows? This IS one of those situations where the longer the wait, the greater the pain.... hmmmm
> 
> In the end, it just made me look dumb by double posting for no good reason because I didn't scroll my phone properly
> 
> MOAR EDITS:
> 
> 
> __
> https://www.reddit.com/r/721s6z/threadripperasrock_x399_taichi_windows_10_needs/
> Time to go back to trying that, then. The internets never lie, misrepresent or overstate






I might be saying something unhelpful but I did have allot of funky (boot errors) things happen when I didn't have my card in the top slot ... (Non-quadro just fyi)


----------



## VileLasagna

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Brain29*
> 
> I might be saying something unhelpful but I did have allot of funky (boot errors) things happen when I didn't have my card in the top slot ... (Non-quadro just fyi)


I thought of that as well, tbh. It's on my list of "well, try that, then". I've elected to leave my Quadro on slot 2 as that is where it will probably ultimately end up living when I get a couple Vegas (probably staggered acquisition?) in the future, or if I'm allowed to borrow once more the cards I was planning on using until that day comes (had to give them back prematurely, sadly). So I'm just slightly worried at least one of the OSes might freak out by having to load the nvidia driver but for a different PCI slot and then loading an AMD driver for a different card in that first slot. Potentially just paranoia, though. This quadro's function is basically "You must have a cuda device to be able to work from home from time to time"

For the moment I'm trying to update my Windows install. I apparently have everything I can without being on Fall Creator's update. Hower I couldn't boot after said update and Windows reverted back.
After that update I was getting BSOD on loading of _rcbottom.sys_, which is one of the drivers for the mobo's fakeRAID controller.

Also fun fact with those drivers. The setup program for AMD RAIDXpert never ran with me. I have my C: on an NVMe and am using 4HDDs on RAID10 as long-term storage and shared drive between Windows and Linux. However the setup program would complain that because Windows is running off the NVMe, I couldn't RAID the NVMe, and it just quits even though that was never my intention at all.

I managed to install the drivers through Device Manager. Just right clicked the RAID devices and told it to look for drivers, which it found, on the folder where the installer for RAIDXpert had been extracted. It worked perfectly until just now. Luckily, the drives are still pretty much empty, so I'm going to uninstall these drivers, try to update Windows again. And if that works, go back to dealing with RAID later.

EDIT:

All right. Windows up-to date, fall creators, many boots, many tears, a million shovelware installed on the machine AGAIN...
AND can confirm that this enabled me to boot Windows with IOMMU enabled. It fixed the hang on B1.

Next step (might be final step on the Windows side, actually) for me is getting the RAID driver back so I can access storage. Already pretty late, so not sure I'll do it today


----------



## ENTERPRISE

After having spoken to @elmor there is no update on a future BIOS for the Zenith unfortunately. It seems much of Asus resources are being focused on Ryzen 2. I have asked what the feeling is with regards to future support for the Zenith, I can only assume it will continue but I am hoping we are not going to be forgotten quickly. The Zenith afterall is a Flagship product.

If Asus bypass the Zenith due to Ryzen 2, it will be my last Asus motherboard.


----------



## mypickaxe

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ENTERPRISE*
> 
> After having spoken to @elmor
> there is no update on a future BIOS for the Zenith unfortunately. It seems much of Asus resources are being focused on Ryzen 2. I have asked what the feeling is with regards to future support for the Zenith, I can only assume it will continue but I am hoping we are not going to be forgotten quickly. The Zenith afterall is a Flagship product.
> 
> If Asus bypass the Zenith due to Ryzen 2, it will be my last Asus motherboard.


We still don't know whether or not Threadripper 2 will support existing SP3 / TR4 boards, correct? I know they've stated X370 will be forwards compatible with Ryzen 2 (Zen+) processors.


----------



## The L33t

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ENTERPRISE*
> 
> After having spoken to @elmor
> there is no update on a future BIOS for the Zenith unfortunately. It seems much of Asus resources are being focused on Ryzen 2. I have asked what the feeling is with regards to future support for the Zenith, I can only assume it will continue but I am hoping we are not going to be forgotten quickly. The Zenith afterall is a Flagship product.
> 
> If Asus bypass the Zenith due to Ryzen 2, it will be my last Asus motherboard.


Since the support is anything but flagship I cannot consider it so. Both must be at the same level.

TR2 I'm sure will use the same socket and at that time a new bios will probably come out giving support but that won't fix current issues of course, not on anything related to specific Asus features like Aura, fan control etc...

Remember the promises about fixing once and for all the fan issues? Yep, won't happen anytime soon if ever.. And a decent time has passed already.

Not that happy with AMD too. Not at this time.

Something is also missing on AMD's end, the update on AGESA front is also far behind Ryzen. We know 1.0.0.4 exists and had some issues but what's next for TR? Nada? They do keep pumping videos on YouTube about how good TR is... Like that's important...

If MSI and gigabyte are also not touching the bios (agesa still on 1.0.0.3)... something is absolutely missing on AMD's front. AMD also has to push board vendors and actually fix the AGESA and pump them out. If AMD does not board vendors are more than likely doing the same. Just not caring that much.


----------



## gupsterg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ENTERPRISE*
> 
> After having spoken to @elmor
> there is no update on a future BIOS for the Zenith unfortunately. It seems much of Asus resources are being focused on Ryzen 2. I have asked what the feeling is with regards to future support for the Zenith, I can only assume it will continue but I am hoping we are not going to be forgotten quickly. The Zenith afterall is a Flagship product.
> 
> If Asus bypass the Zenith due to Ryzen 2, it will be my last Asus motherboard.


I would be disappointed if this is the case







. Perhaps he has meant there is no ETA he can share on when next release would be? I'd be doubtful if this is it in the short term for UEFI updates







.


----------



## nycgtr

New platform comes out old one gets thrown aside nothing new here. Look at z170 and z270 boards they arent getting anything or much either since release lol. I've owned a lot of asus boards never saw bios support for ages. Maybe once in a while a bios pops up but at the end of the day nothing ever worked perfect. Right now the only issue I have is a random fan that goes to max speed but I only have 1 fan hooked up to the board so it's not a huge deal as it's once in a while. I have no stability issues nor ram issues. As far as I am concerend this platform hotness and attention is over and honestly, I understand some users have major issues but I know a good bunch of zenith owners and none of them have usage breaking issues all pretty minor. Does it suck? Yes but at the end of the day I don't remember one flagship board that was spotless.


----------



## The L33t

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nycgtr*
> 
> New platform comes out old one gets thrown aside nothing new here. Look at z170 and z270 boards they arent getting anything or much either since release lol. I've owned a lot of asus boards never saw bios support for ages. Maybe once in a while a bios pops up but at the end of the day nothing ever worked perfect. Right now the only issue I have is a random fan that goes to max speed but I only have 1 fan hooked up to the board so it's not a huge deal as it's once in a while. I have no stability issues nor ram issues. As far as I am concerend this platform hotness and attention is over and honestly, I understand some users have major issues but I know a good bunch of zenith owners and none of them have usage breaking issues all pretty minor. Does it suck? Yes but at the end of the day I don't remember one flagship board that was spotless.


The difference between z170 and z270 etc are not that significant. Intel is working from the same pool for quite a while and as such the "stability" as a whole is better because of this. Nothing major changes just step upgrades,has been like this for years.

Ryzen/TR is worlds different from anything previously released from AMD and as such requires a lot more "love" and care in the beginning.

That work is what is going to get zen+ a much better start than what zen gen1 did.

Our platform (X399) only has a few months and it's not like in the beginning a lot of attention was given and then diminished.. It was like this, lacking from the start.

I'm happy with the development on my X370 from Asus.

On X399? Absolutely not. But I also blame AMD.

I understand Ryzen is the bigger thing, it is the base..and has more iterations (Apu), it sells loads more and TR was a side project.

But that side project deserves some attention, specially since it stems from ryzen and passing those optimizations to our side is a lot easier once done on ryzen... Same cores! Just some glue here and there...


----------



## gupsterg

Hmmm I wouldn't be happy with "New platform comes out old one gets thrown aside nothing new here." regardless of AMD or Intel mobo. More people have an expectation that AMD mobo will last them longer for future CPUs. IF vendors are rolling up support to just plough resources into new that would be a real shame IMO.

Prior to C6H/ZE I had ASUS Maximus VII Ranger, this was far from flagship mobo. I bought for ~£133, it received 12 UEFIs as shown on support site, date range from 12/05/14 to 23/11/15. Any betas/ones removed I have no idea.

The C6H so far on support site has had 8 UEFIs, date range 13/03/17 to 13/12/17. I know for a fact some "official" UEFIs for C6H have gone from the site for whatever reason, then we have had a lot of betas in the thread.

ZE has only had 6 "official" releases so far. Far few betas but no way the same count as C6H.

RGB, Aura, Ai Suite, a care not for. Sound UEFI is highest priority for me TBH.


----------



## nycgtr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *gupsterg*
> 
> Hmmm I wouldn't be happy with "New platform comes out old one gets thrown aside nothing new here." regardless of AMD or Intel mobo. More people have an expectation that AMD mobo will last them longer for future CPUs. IF vendors are rolling up support to just plough resources into new that would be a real shame IMO.
> 
> Prior to C6H/ZE I had ASUS Maximus VII Ranger, this was far from flagship mobo. I bought for ~£133, it received 12 UEFIs as shown on support site, date range from 12/05/14 to 23/11/15. Any betas/ones removed I have no idea.
> 
> The C6H so far on support site has had 8 UEFIs, date range 13/03/17 to 13/12/17. I know for a fact some "official" UEFIs for C6H have gone from the site for whatever reason, then we have had a lot of betas in the thread.
> 
> ZE has only had 6 "official" releases so far. Far few betas but no way the same count as C6H.
> 
> RGB, Aura, Ai Suite, a care not for. Sound UEFI is highest priority for me TBH.


I own both boards. The c6h was a crap storm from the getgo. TR has not been. It took maybe 7 betas before people would run certain ram. Hell 2/3 uefis straight up killed the board. So I wouldn't go by number count. What are the main issues these days anyway with the zenith? I know the fan and recent windows update causes an issue with live dash. TR had wayyyyy less issues than ryzen from the getgo it's not surprising there is much less snappy bios schedule.

I am not to fond of the schedule either but I am sure there is gonna be a zenith 2 later this year and asus will pay attention to that zenith. Sucks as it may be but not surprised.


----------



## gupsterg

The C6H regarding bricking was solved with ~10 days or so of thread starting, which was pretty much launch. I had pre-ordered my C6H at launch, before I actually had it in my hands from Amazon UK the anti brick UEFI was on OCN/ASUS site.

Yes we had to wait for AGESA 1.0.0.6 to get access to RAM timings, further "ratios", can we hold ASUS accountable for that? no IMO. Yes I had a CPU early on which would not do more than 2800MHz on F4-3200C14D-16GTZ. Yes I opted to get another CPU to try and on same "setup" I got 3200MHz. Later as UEFI had developed and AMD via AGESA exposed CLDO_VDDP I was able to resolve the memory hole on another CPU that had been behaving like my 1st. Clearly some of the RAM issues were down to AMD AGESA being what it was.

Yes there was a lot of confusion on CPU temps, I for one had none. Even when I went to a X CPU which had temp offset vs on X which did not. People just did not get what to be viewing/using, etc, etc. You could only so many times keep explaining IMO. I use the C6H to control fans for air cooling from 1st day of build and only had issue for ~couple of weeks and as soon as Mumak sorted how HWINFO accessed monitoring so SuperIO chip did not go loopy all was well.

On ZE for me even on fully updated Windows 10 Pro x64 Fall Creators update I have no issues with OLED (LiveDash). I have not noted any performance issue based on OS being updated vs earlier usage. For me up until The Stilt released 0801-SP42M I could not get 3333MHz stable, even with slack timings like C15. I was on 3200MHz C14. Only from his UEFI ~Nov 17 I have gained 3333MHz Fast. Now on ASUS UEFI 0901 and 0019 I have 3466MHz The Stilt preset working.

For me the issues with ZE are minor to non existent. I have had SuperIO chip crapping out 2-3 times since having it. Then I have explained OC attained/issue above. I do not use AURA, Ai Suite, etc, so if they do not work I care not.

*What I do care?*

Even if I do not have NVMe RAID setup, I would like latest AGESA/UEFI to have support for all functions that it should have. UEFI 0019 does not have this option. UEFI 0901 does. For some UEFI 0901 is dropping RAM channels, others not. So for some UEFI 0019 is better but then they lose NVMe RAID if they need.

I have been on UEFI 0901 (AGESA 1.0.0.4) since mid Dec and no issue for me. It has taken me a few days "back to back" stress testing to regain 3466MHz The Stilt on UEFI 0019. So far only major issue I see with it is as highlighted above.

I have now got some like drives together to setup RAID 0, also gonna aim to go multiOS and start using VM with OC profile on 0019. So perhaps I will find something to highlight, perhaps not.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

I have just switched to the 0019 BIOS with hopes of pushing to 3466Mhz something I hope to be able to do in Quad Channel without a future BIOS. I would love it if I could run at 3600Mhz in the future but I will not hold my breath.


----------



## nycgtr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ENTERPRISE*
> 
> I have just switched to the 0019 BIOS with hopes of pushing to 3466Mhz something I hope to be able to do in Quad Channel without a future BIOS. I would love it if I could run at 3600Mhz in the future but I will not hold my breath.


Sorry but I gotta say something here. This is the mentality of enthuasist which I can relate to, at the same time we've seen already that over 3200 mhz actually more like 3000 performance gain is beyond marginal. Now I understand you may not be so antsy about it, but there are people crying about not running ram at 3400 when AMD or Asus never promised you be able to and have no requirement to deliver such things.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nycgtr*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ENTERPRISE*
> 
> I have just switched to the 0019 BIOS with hopes of pushing to 3466Mhz something I hope to be able to do in Quad Channel without a future BIOS. I would love it if I could run at 3600Mhz in the future but I will not hold my breath.
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry but I gotta say something here. This is the mentality of enthuasist which I can relate to, at the same time we've seen already that over 3200 mhz actually more like 3000 performance gain is beyond marginal. Now I understand you may not be so antsy about it, but there are people crying about not running ram at 3400 when AMD or Asus never promised you be able to and have no requirement to deliver such things.
Click to expand...

I have no real issue with not being able to achieve higher than 3200Mhz, but hey when you have RAM that is capable...that little voice inside says why not try and push for it. I am not saying Asus has a responsibility to bring 3466Mhz + to all but if they want to push their platform then it makes sense for them to make it a high performing platform with regards to not just raw numbers but compatibility also. It is not so much what I want...or what they promised, it is about what they want to deliver as a company to its consumers.


----------



## nycgtr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ENTERPRISE*
> 
> I have no real issue with not being able to achieve higher than 3200Mhz, but hey when you have RAM that is capable...that little voice inside says why not try and push for it. I am not saying Asus has a responsibility to bring 3466Mhz + to all but if they want to push their platform then it makes sense for them to make it a high performing platform with regards to not just raw numbers but compatibility also. It is not so much what I want...or what they promised, it is about what they want to deliver as a company to its consumers.


I wasn't accusing you of it. Your post just happens to be an example of what I see about ram speed. There are others who feel that if they cant run their ram at 3400 or whatever it says on the box they need bios updates to kingdom come. Anyone here with x299 as well will mention that 3400 int even a 100% easy for sure on that platform and intel has a far better memory controller, and considering these kits are all binned on intel platforms for the most part.


----------



## Brain29

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ENTERPRISE*
> 
> After having spoken to @elmor
> there is no update on a future BIOS for the Zenith unfortunately. It seems much of Asus resources are being focused on Ryzen 2. I have asked what the feeling is with regards to future support for the Zenith, I can only assume it will continue but I am hoping we are not going to be forgotten quickly. The Zenith afterall is a Flagship product.
> 
> If Asus bypass the Zenith due to Ryzen 2, it will be my last Asus motherboard.


So I pay 550 for a board that only half works .. and Asus doesn't care

I started an RMA process .. then I got an email saying that the windows Intel stuff was fixed and have a good day ... Even though that was never my problem.


----------



## VileLasagna

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nycgtr*
> 
> (...) there are people crying about not running ram at 3400 when AMD or Asus never promised you be able to and have no requirement to deliver such things.


Well, they might not have PROMISED on the manual and such but



The marketing w*nk is pretty stronk. I myself bought the mobo and RAM (3600C16 from GSkill) expecting to struggle to get it past 3200 (haven't done any OCIng yet, and am waiting on replacement on one of my 2 kits as one of the sticks was faulty) but... yeah, you go to the official website (which is quite annoying and honestly a bit 90s-gamer-dumb, especially considering the platform) and that's the first thing they shove in your face.


----------



## Brain29

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *VileLasagna*
> 
> Well, they might not have PROMISED on the manual and such but
> 
> 
> 
> The marketing w*nk is pretty stronk. I myself bought the mobo and RAM (3600C16 from GSkill) expecting to struggle to get it past 3200 (haven't done any OCIng yet, and am waiting on replacement on one of my 2 kits as one of the sticks was faulty) but... yeah, you go to the official website (which is quite annoying and honestly a bit 90s-gamer-dumb, especially considering the platform) and that's the first thing they shove in your face.


when the board was originally for sall it said only 3200 or 3400 After the Taichi came out they changed it to 3600+OC to match * should had been the first red flag


----------



## AgnomK

I'd like to give my 2 cents. If I'm wrong, please correct me... This whole memory frequency/latency depends on the IMC / AGESA right? If that's true, I think it's quite unfair to blame ASUS for an AMD issue. That, however, doesn't exonerate them from the inexcusable lack of support from features that were advertised. AURA doesn't work for me, the board keeps on the RGB loop, doesn't detect my Corsair memory modules (And half of them don't even light up) and the fan PWM control is completely botched. Those are ASUS issues that are ludicrous for a 550 USD motherboard.


----------



## Brain29

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *AgnomK*
> 
> I'd like to give my 2 cents. If I'm wrong, please correct me... This whole memory frequency/latency depends on the IMC / AGESA right? If that's true, I think it's quite unfair to blame ASUS for an AMD issue. That, however, doesn't exonerate them from the inexcusable lack of support from features that were advertised. AURA doesn't work for me, the board keeps on the RGB loop, doesn't detect my Corsair memory modules (And half of them don't even light up) and the fan PWM control is completely botched. Those are ASUS issues that are ludicrous for a 550 USD motherboard.


AGESA right now as of today is 100% an Asus Issue only. As they have been sitting on the update for close to two months

The problem right now is that there seems to be no one at ASUS that can program for AMD that is why we have a allot of flip floppy back and forth updates

as the board and software stands today ASUS is lacking on levels


----------



## BNEA02

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Brain29*
> 
> AGESA right now as of today is 100% an Asus Issue only. As they have been sitting on the update for close to two months
> 
> The problem right now is that there seems to be no one at ASUS that can program for AMD that is why we have a allot of flip floppy back and forth updates
> 
> as the board and software stands today ASUS is lacking on levels


Which AGESA would you guys say, is most stable today?

I'm on 804 and are afraid of updating BIOS back and forth as it seem to corrupt the AGESA and some BIOS settings etc.

The Ripped


----------



## ReHWolution

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ENTERPRISE*
> 
> After having spoken to @elmor
> there is no update on a future BIOS for the Zenith unfortunately. It seems much of Asus resources are being focused on Ryzen 2. I have asked what the feeling is with regards to future support for the Zenith, I can only assume it will continue but I am hoping we are not going to be forgotten quickly. The Zenith afterall is a Flagship product.
> 
> If Asus bypass the Zenith due to Ryzen 2, it will be my last Asus motherboard.


Well, that's against the law in EU. Many things still don't work properly on the board, and that is against the consumers not to cover with support for 24 months after the purchase. Also, by favouring a newer platform, it goes against the same planned obsolescence law in France, the very same law that started a class action against Apple. I DEMAND updates and fixes for the platform I bought 4 months ago, Threadripper+ is expected later this year and 'till then it's unbelievable that the other platforms are going to be deprecated. With that in mind, why even bothering supporting products at all? There's always going to be something newer coming up sooner or later.


----------



## elmor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ENTERPRISE*
> 
> After having spoken to @elmor
> there is no update on a future BIOS for the Zenith unfortunately. It seems much of Asus resources are being focused on Ryzen 2. I have asked what the feeling is with regards to future support for the Zenith, I can only assume it will continue but I am hoping we are not going to be forgotten quickly. The Zenith afterall is a Flagship product.
> 
> If Asus bypass the Zenith due to Ryzen 2, it will be my last Asus motherboard.


No update at the moment is not the same as there won't any.


----------



## ReHWolution

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *elmor*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ENTERPRISE*
> 
> After having spoken to @elmor
> there is no update on a future BIOS for the Zenith unfortunately. It seems much of Asus resources are being focused on Ryzen 2. I have asked what the feeling is with regards to future support for the Zenith, I can only assume it will continue but I am hoping we are not going to be forgotten quickly. The Zenith afterall is a Flagship product.
> 
> If Asus bypass the Zenith due to Ryzen 2, it will be my last Asus motherboard.
> 
> 
> 
> No update at the moment is not the same as there won't any.
Click to expand...

Thanks for saying it, it is a big difference to what enterprise said, but why there's statements from you guys only when class actions and lawsuits are even remotely mentioned. That's sad. But I'm sure it's just coincidence


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *elmor*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ENTERPRISE*
> 
> After having spoken to @elmor
> there is no update on a future BIOS for the Zenith unfortunately. It seems much of Asus resources are being focused on Ryzen 2. I have asked what the feeling is with regards to future support for the Zenith, I can only assume it will continue but I am hoping we are not going to be forgotten quickly. The Zenith afterall is a Flagship product.
> 
> If Asus bypass the Zenith due to Ryzen 2, it will be my last Asus motherboard.
> 
> 
> 
> No update at the moment is not the same as there won't any.
Click to expand...

Indeed. However I am just voicing some concerns from past situations where support for a product has dwindled massively once a new revision is upon release such as Ryzen 2 for example. I am sure Asus will provide further support for the Zenith and it wont end up as an afterthought.


----------



## elmor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ReHWolution*
> 
> Thanks for saying it, it is a big difference to what enterprise said, but why there's statements from you guys only when class actions and lawsuits are even remotely mentioned. That's sad. But I'm sure it's just coincidence


Because a statement doesn't solve anything, I prefer to get back to you when I've got something.


----------



## gupsterg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ENTERPRISE*
> 
> After having spoken to @elmor
> there is no update on a future BIOS for the Zenith unfortunately. It seems much of Asus resources are being focused on Ryzen 2. I have asked what the feeling is with regards to future support for the Zenith, I can only assume it will continue but I am hoping we are not going to be forgotten quickly. The Zenith afterall is a Flagship product.
> 
> If Asus bypass the Zenith due to Ryzen 2, it will be my last Asus motherboard.
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *gupsterg*
> 
> I would be disappointed if this is the case
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> . Perhaps he has meant there is no ETA he can share on when next release would be? I'd be doubtful if this is it in the short term for UEFI updates
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *elmor*
> 
> No update at the moment is not the same as there won't any.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


----------



## keng

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *elmor*
> 
> Because a statement doesn't solve anything, I prefer to get back to you when I've got something.


Hah if only someone called the tried and true *"Dazzle and switch"* where mobo makers have a long list of features which are never made fully operational before the next generation of products rolls out.
The sucker who pays for it is, yup us, enthusiasts.








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *keng*
> 
> The custom ICs...are just micro controllers that hold some lousy code to make sure PC boots and applies user or "optimized" voltages and speeds and clocks. I suspect their code is never updated or debugged ever as there is no way ever to get their info. Hell, *even ASUS* gave up on their own EPU/TPU and custom clock chips which are the exact chips they used in 2015. There is no utility updates and utilities do not work with current BIOS.
> 
> It seems a lot of the "FEATURES" are there just for the launch with support ending after the major reviewers release their reviews.
> Then, there is no review updates ever just the first reviews hang around search engines due to how the SEO works and it is easy profit.
> 
> By the time complaints pile up, role out new product. Community goes, ooh just get XYZ, much better
> 
> .
> 
> .
> 
> .
> 
> Repeat, profit
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> However, reviewers like Linus are staaaaarting to catch on, esp w the VEGA frontier version, and rips them a new hole. That hurts sales huge and ultimately makes sure manufacturers pay attention to the crap they roll out.


Despite me having this board and having a pretty awesome system running now, it took way too long to get stable.

My personal recommendation regarding this product, level of ASUS support and quality of Asus software/UEFI/BIOS is a firm:

*DO NOT BUY* (unless you enjoy spending large amount of time tinkering with hardware, uefi, etc). JUST TO BE CLEAR: this is not a dig against ASUS, but rather a product specific, architecture specific instance, where the quality of everything surrounding this motherboard has been less than expected, but this may be due to the price tag and expected quality of this EXTREME line of products.

Asus has a market cap twice that of AMD. The honourable thing to do is to damage control, as I suspect some false advertisement did take place, and I am no lawyer and no technology expert witness, but this is generally not a road that is anyone's best interest. What is true, is that people spent an unreasonable amount of time setting up this personal computing motherboard, also features promised to consumers were not functional and this should be offset in some way by ASUS as going to court over this product is not a profitable way to settle things. To be honest, the negative PR surrounding this product will hurt the stock price of ASUS as soon as it reaches mainstream media, even medium fish like Linus and not to mention more mainstream sites. Therefore, while ASUS feels like they have some time to make this a better product and compensate the public, I think we need to remind ASUS that we will get the word out and PETITION reviewers such as Linus, hardware Canucks, and others to issue redo reviews of this motherboard.


----------



## BNEA02

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *keng*
> 
> Hah if only someone called the tried and true *"Dazzle and switch"* where mobo makers have a long list of features which are never made fully operational before the next generation of products rolls out.
> The sucker who pays for it is, yup us, enthusiasts.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Despite me having this board and having a pretty awesome system running now, it took way too long to get stable.
> 
> My personal recommendation regarding this product, level of ASUS support and quality of Asus software/UEFI/BIOS is a firm:
> 
> *DO NOT BUY* (unless you enjoy spending large amount of time tinkering with hardware, uefi, etc). JUST TO BE CLEAR: this is not a dig against ASUS, but rather a product specific, architecture specific instance, where the quality of everything surrounding this motherboard has been less than expected, but this may be due to the price tag and expected quality of this EXTREME line of products.
> 
> Asus has a market cap twice that of AMD. The honourable thing to do is to damage control, as I suspect some false advertisement did take place, and I am no lawyer and no technology expert witness, but this is generally not a road that is anyone's best interest. What is true, is that people spent an unreasonable amount of time setting up this personal computing motherboard, also features promised to consumers were not functional and this should be offset in some way by ASUS as going to court over this product is not a profitable way to settle things. To be honest, the negative PR surrounding this product will hurt the stock price of ASUS as soon as it reaches mainstream media, even medium fish like Linus and not to mention more mainstream sites. Therefore, while ASUS feels like they have some time to make this a better product and compensate the public, I think we need to remind ASUS that we will get the word out and PETITION reviewers such as Linus, hardware Canucks, and others to issue redo reviews of this motherboard.


Just fix a way to get a reliable AGESA/BIOS update/reset is good enough for me, then fix all the rest.

(Aimed at ASUS/AMD or to whomever has the clutch)

I have done the BIOS 0nnn -> 0211 as Keng advertised and it worked








The RipThreader


----------



## VileLasagna

Right, so I have a pretty bad memory issue and I'm hoping for some help before I start doing stuff..

This week I RMA'd one of my RAM kits, I have two G.Skill Trident RGB F4-3600C16D-GTZR (edit: And just before someone starts on memory compatibility and speed limits etc... I haven't done any overclocking at all yet. I'm just trying to run things stock for now)

And I was getting tremendously frustrated because when I had one of my sticks in, the mobo would crash and burn so bad it would power cycle immediately and keep on that loop forever. Got the new kit, tried putting it in, same thing.... Now more rested, experimented some more and the way this mobo seems to work is as follows:

If my mobo doesn't have a stick in slot A1 (closest to IO, grey). the mobo fails to POST. I can add other sticks in but if slot C1 gets populated (first grey after the CPU) then as soon as mobo reaches stage D0 of memory detection and tries to power up the sticks (LEDs briefly come up) I get to the same issue where I power cycle infinitely. Tried clearing CMOS on a hope and prayer, not enough prayer it seems. So I have a last option of attempting to flash BIOS and hoping it solves my issue before I have to take the mobo down, replace stock cooler and go back to the store looking like an idiot (at least I can look like an idiot on my own?).

I'm on BIOS 902, previous one was 901 where some people were having memory issues and there's a BETA BIOS, 0019. is 0019 beta FOR 902, is it beta for a potential 903 in the future? Are my hopes futile? Shut up and do it? Get packing?

Any educated guesses? I'm shooting in the dark here =(


----------



## keng

yeah...ram is complicated on this board.
You need to follow the steps I have in the PSA thread with some hope of having your ram work.

Essentially, do you know if you have single or dual rank ram.
That is the single most import thing. Most people have no idea, and more importantly, they do not know if that is at all important.

Seems like ASUS does not know either, or they simply do the genius thing of making QVL list, which by the way is like saying our motherboard only supports windows 10 because you don't know how to install Linux on it. Silly, but true....


----------



## gupsterg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *VileLasagna*
> 
> I'm on BIOS 902, previous one was 901 where some people were having memory issues and there's a BETA BIOS, 0019. is 0019 beta FOR 902, is it beta for a potential 903 in the future? Are my hopes futile? Shut up and do it? Get packing?
> 
> Any educated guesses? I'm shooting in the dark here =(


I use slots A1 and C1, F4-3200C14D-16GTZ.

0019 is 0901, AGESA 1.0.0.4, etc.

0019 has a patch to resolve issues with memory, that some RAM setups encounter on 0901.


----------



## VileLasagna

All sticks are the same (won't lie, was worried about this a bit), according to Thaiphoon Burner, Samsung B-Die single rank. They do have different temperature sensors, which was curious



I don't think that's the problem. That seems to be an issue when people start pushing or that memory doesn't detect properly...
My motherboard power cycles during memory detection. Part of me THINKS this might be busted, but it's not a happy prospect at all.

I'll try the other BIOS, it's not like there's much else I can do... Hopes aren't high, though, and I really needed this rig to be porperly up and functional by next up


----------



## The L33t

If any of the dissatisfied customers of this board purchased it through Amazon, contact them and explain the issues your facing, they will accept the board back and issue a full refund. No point in begging for support.


----------



## gupsterg

@VileLasagna

I'd use flashback method. For me this removes any doubt of bad flash. You don't even need CPU/RAM, etc in board to do it.


----------



## VileLasagna

As expected, no dice... Also realized I mixed up the slots... I'm using C1 and D1 right now. A1 is the one that gives me the power cycle. Board seems to really not like anything in the black slots. C2+D2 power cycles even faster, A2+B2 post hangs in memory detection



Bonus points for the black and grey slots being opposite on my mobo and the manual?

So yeah... I think I need a new board. Intense sadness detected


----------



## gupsterg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *VileLasagna*
> 
> 
> 
> Bonus points for the black and grey slots being opposite on my mobo and the manual?


I qualify for bonus points too







.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *VileLasagna*
> 
> As expected, no dice... Also realized I mixed up the slots... I'm using C1 and D1 right now. A1 is the one that gives me the power cycle. Board seems to really not like anything in the black slots. C2+D2 power cycles even faster, A2+B2 post hangs in memory detection
> 
> So yeah... I think I need a new board. Intense sadness detected


Ahh







....


----------



## elmor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *keng*
> 
> Hah if only someone called the tried and true *"Dazzle and switch"* where mobo makers have a long list of features which are never made fully operational before the next generation of products rolls out.
> The sucker who pays for it is, yup us, enthusiasts.


I wish this would be the case, there needs to be more scrutiny in this industry. The ones who have the power to make a dent are the reviewers, but most are busy trading good reviews for advertisement deals.


----------



## The L33t

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *elmor*
> 
> I wish this would be the case, there needs to be more scrutiny in this industry. The ones who have the power to make a dent are the reviewers, but most are busy trading good reviews for advertisement deals.


Now THAT IS THE TRUTH... Specialty the Youtube branch. Unfortunately, the saying "with power comes responsibility" does not seem to clue some or most of them in. Not at all... They are having a big party mostly looking to be entertainers and not reviewers in a true sense, not at all. The product is not important!

I'm always amazed to seem someone like der8auer (among others) having very few subscribes and then someone like Kyle or Paul having so many. This is also "our" fault, because we give value/power to the wrong folks.

This can be observed other places and in our society generally speaking, it is NOT exclusive to "our branch".


----------



## Brain29

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *elmor*
> 
> I wish this would be the case, there needs to be more scrutiny in this industry. The ones who have the power to make a dent are the reviewers, but most are busy trading good reviews for advertisement deals.


This was very apparent with all the X399 EK block reviews

P.S. @elmor
Thanks for sticking with us / keeping us updated -- dealing with our frustration with Asus


----------



## Brain29

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The L33t*
> 
> If any of the dissatisfied customers of this board purchased it through Amazon, contact them and explain the issues your facing, they will accept the board back and issue a full refund. No point in begging for support.


I made the mistake of buying the motherboard on newegg they have the worst RMA service all 4 times it took close to 2 weeks for a new board. It sat in process for days.

now its software that is driving me up the wall


----------



## nycgtr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Brain29*
> 
> I made the mistake of buying the motherboard on newegg they have the worst RMA service all 4 times it took close to 2 weeks for a new board. It sat in process for days.
> 
> now its software that is driving me up the wall


I don't even play with newegg when it comes to mobos. I am lucky to have microcenters. I just buy a bunch on launch lol. If theres anything funny I just return it


----------



## Brain29

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nycgtr*
> 
> I don't even play with newegg when it comes to mobos. I am lucky to have microcenters. I just buy a bunch on launch lol. If theres anything funny I just return it


I wish the other companies in my area would had let my microcenter stay open, but there unforgiving


----------



## The L33t

Here in Euroland the laws are very clear, newegg would have no option but to refund really.

I do prefer Amazon to all others because they cover the shipping cost and even provide prepaid labels, the process is hassle-free.

PCComponentes is also very good withing the 30 day period at least, never used the RMA process but I heard good things, they are based in Spain. In this case they even send the shipping company here to my home for pickup, on Amazon I do have to drop it off.


----------



## keng

Honestly, I am extremely happy with my thread ripper system and I am definitely out of the honeymoon window and yes some part like my ram have issues and yes the various software that comes with the board is just non-ware, it is ok. However, if I am to advise novice-intermediate system builders or people building rigs for other people, this is like buying a 67 chevy from a scrapyard in regards to amount of work necessary needed to make it look presentable (parts are actually really good, but some tuning is necessary).

Once again, releasing source code for UEFI and having the whole world work on it with your engineers still being involved in oversight would make your products for one secure, and your software which powers your hardware more optimized. I do understand that open sourcing firmware can lead to bricked hardware which might seem a great way to lose money, but it only takes one bit of faulty firmware and some sort of exploit/large corporate lawsuit to send your entire stock and all of your company into the hole from which there may or may not be recovery.


----------



## VileLasagna

Well, I'm almost very happy with it? It looks amazing, this 1920X compiles like a monster and I haven't been able to push it over 40C according to the OLED display (haven't OC'd it yet, though).

The big one is the ram issue. It's going to be a major pain taking this rig apart (Well... I can get away with not too much. Still removing the blocks will be tremendously annoying) and then god knows how long until ASUS authorizes me getting a new mobo.

A mid-priority complaint is that I haven't been able to get the RAID controller to be properly recognized by Linux. It's working fine for windows but couldn't get dmraid to detect it. I tried downloading the source code for the raid controller driver for x370, hoping it'd be more or less the same one but although I DID manage to get the system to recognize the existence of an additional device, it couldn't read or write to and from it, so I couldn't actually find the partitions and mount them. Had to later remove the driver as it prevented me from being able to boot at one point.

and a minor one is that CPU and CPU-Optional cannot be set to different speeds from the UEFI setup. Got my PWM D5 connected to CPU-optional and wanted to give it full chooch to see if I can get rid of some air that's still trapped in but couldn't do it so I'm assuming it's tied to whatever values are being set to CPU header. Will have to think some way to reroute this because, somewhat surprisingly (?) I actually saturated this board with fans.... Case has three 140s, then there's 4 fans for each loop, CPU loop is using the EXT header and the CPU fan, GPU loop is setup to use... some header in the bottom of the board to feed a Phanteks PWM fan hub, and the pumps need to be one controlled and one monitored. so... yeah... Will say that I am using the three provided temperature probes, right on the extension board and did put a water temp sensor in each rad, going to the W_IN and OUT ports... so making use of those as well...

Regarding fans and temps, lm_sensors on Linux also doesn't seem to pick up anything on the board. This is pretty sad, I was hoping to use it as a backend and write my own controller app

It's really a fantastic system, marred by a pretty random and bad issue as well as some minor annoyances....

I did try going back to 902, still no good. BIOS Flashback did give me additional headache, though, as it uninstalled GRUB from the EFI and would just send me straight to windows (why do you want me to suffer, ASUS?). Lucky I still had an Arch install USB, so I just had to boot back into it, chroot in the installed system and run grub-install again. Not a beginner's board, though. As much as you could arguably say that from TR4 as a whole, things like these do require a fairly high level of comfort and savvy

EDIT: Well, add one more issue. With all this back and forth seems every file I had on my RAID was corrupted. Windows still sees the files listed but they're all bad, it seems, none can be open. New files that have just been put on the disk are fine. Lucky for me, I have very little on it so far, as I'm still setting up but my goal with this volume and the reason I want to use the on-board controller is precisely because I want this to be my "safe storage" for long term media and data. If I can't trust the volume to be gracefully remounted, then this entirely defeats the purpose and I need to find a different solution


----------



## ReHWolution

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *elmor*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *keng*
> 
> Hah if only someone called the tried and true *"Dazzle and switch"* where mobo makers have a long list of features which are never made fully operational before the next generation of products rolls out.
> The sucker who pays for it is, yup us, enthusiasts.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I wish this would be the case, there needs to be more scrutiny in this industry. The ones who have the power to make a dent are the reviewers, but most are busy trading good reviews for advertisement deals.
Click to expand...

Yup, you're totally right. It's our fault (reviewers), if mainboards and, in general, hw products, started taking away quality and support for tempered glass, looks and RGB. Right? It's our fault that a almost 600$ mainboard doesn't perform properly, 'cause we're involved with R&D, right? Because if we talk about the flaws in a critical way, wanna know what happens? We lose brands. We lose partnerships with those very same brands that have people like you going out on Reddit and forums telling "oh, it's not our fault, reviewers don't say anything about the issues", well, EXCUSE ME, it's YOUR JOB AS A COMPANY to be sure that a product works properly before launch. Our job is to talk about those products, and it's not like everyone's LinusTechTips, that can talk ***** about a product as much as they want because, you know, they have the power to do it without really being affected economically. It's not our fault if you decide to put efforts in making a product beautiful rather than stable, or performing, or somewhat reliable. I'm tired of the bs you spread everywhere, everytime you can, 'cause in the end, all we get from you are sporadic BIOSes (that often break more features than they fix) and sporadic software updates (that often require further updates because they break other softwares, e.g. LiveDash breaking AURA).

I haven't reviewed the Zenith Extreme yet, and you know why? Because I really like ASUS products, and I don't wanna talk ***** about them, despite not working together with ASUS here in Italy because they barely have any products to send (oh yeah, they focus on smartphones, but that's another tale). So, again, before talking ***** about reviewers, think SERIOUSLY about what we go through with *****ty products (like the ZE, an instant regret), because it is always more difficult to see the beam in our own eye than the splinter in someone else's eye.


----------



## elmor

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ReHWolution*
> 
> Yup, you're totally right. It's our fault (reviewers), if mainboards and, in general, hw products, started taking away quality and support for tempered glass, looks and RGB. Right? It's our fault that a almost 600$ mainboard doesn't perform properly, 'cause we're involved with R&D, right? Because if we talk about the flaws in a critical way, wanna know what happens? We lose brands. We lose partnerships with those very same brands that have people like you going out on Reddit and forums telling "oh, it's not our fault, reviewers don't say anything about the issues", well, EXCUSE ME, it's YOUR JOB AS A COMPANY to be sure that a product works properly before launch. Our job is to talk about those products, and it's not like everyone's LinusTechTips, that can talk ***** about a product as much as they want because, you know, they have the power to do it without really being affected economically. It's not our fault if you decide to put efforts in making a product beautiful rather than stable, or performing, or somewhat reliable. I'm tired of the bs you spread everywhere, everytime you can, 'cause in the end, all we get from you are sporadic BIOSes (that often break more features than they fix) and sporadic software updates (that often require further updates because they break other softwares, e.g. LiveDash breaking AURA).
> 
> I haven't reviewed the Zenith Extreme yet, and you know why? Because I really like ASUS products, and I don't wanna talk ***** about them, despite not working together with ASUS here in Italy because they barely have any products to send (oh yeah, they focus on smartphones, but that's another tale). So, again, before talking ***** about reviewers, think SERIOUSLY about what we go through with *****ty products (like the ZE, an instant regret), because it is always more difficult to see the beam in our own eye than the splinter in someone else's eye.


There are several existing issues with this and other products. Every single motherboard manufacturer has. But how much ammunition do you think we have to convince people to fix things inside the company when all the review sites are giving the boards their best awards? All we have are the forums with actual users and their reported problems, but unfortunately that does not echo as loudly.


----------



## nycgtr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *elmor*
> 
> There are several existing issues with this and other products. Every single motherboard manufacturer has. But how much ammunition do you think we have to convince people to fix things inside the company when all the review sites are giving the boards their best awards? All we have are the forums with actual users and their reported problems, but unfortunately that does not echo as loudly.


Honesty I dont think a lot of reviewers go around trying to do as much as the avg enthusiasts who doesn't have a laundry list of products they need to go test with lol.


----------



## The L33t

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nycgtr*
> 
> Honesty I dont think a lot of reviewers go around trying to do as much as the avg enthusiasts who doesn't have a laundry list of products they need to go test with lol.


They most certainly don't. I'm not even talking about pushing overclock to the absolute max etc.

But more simple things like:

- See if the advertised functions work(even the software package).

- Test a couple memory kits with different kinds of size and speed trying to get a sense of memory compatibility.

- Push the platform. Meaning... Add a couple different pci-e cards and see if issues rise (not only vga but others). Populate the most you can with hardware you have on hand.. Ssd m.2 USB peripherals etc...

In essence making use the platform is stable and funcional to most readers, who use such things. Because what we see is a very basic setup giving all the right odds of everything being just fine...

We know, ASUS has to do this internally, but the permutations of hardware are immense, so if the average reviewer did this.. I think we'd be in a better place too.

This platform particularly is aimed at people with work to do.. With 128gb kits.. Many storage options... Various graphics cards for compute/AI etc but we don't see any attempt at trying any of these situations even when they can and have the hardware to do it. The platform is reviewed the same a b350 board would be for example.


----------



## ReHWolution

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *elmor*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ReHWolution*
> 
> Yup, you're totally right. It's our fault (reviewers), if mainboards and, in general, hw products, started taking away quality and support for tempered glass, looks and RGB. Right? It's our fault that a almost 600$ mainboard doesn't perform properly, 'cause we're involved with R&D, right? Because if we talk about the flaws in a critical way, wanna know what happens? We lose brands. We lose partnerships with those very same brands that have people like you going out on Reddit and forums telling "oh, it's not our fault, reviewers don't say anything about the issues", well, EXCUSE ME, it's YOUR JOB AS A COMPANY to be sure that a product works properly before launch. Our job is to talk about those products, and it's not like everyone's LinusTechTips, that can talk ***** about a product as much as they want because, you know, they have the power to do it without really being affected economically. It's not our fault if you decide to put efforts in making a product beautiful rather than stable, or performing, or somewhat reliable. I'm tired of the bs you spread everywhere, everytime you can, 'cause in the end, all we get from you are sporadic BIOSes (that often break more features than they fix) and sporadic software updates (that often require further updates because they break other softwares, e.g. LiveDash breaking AURA).
> 
> I haven't reviewed the Zenith Extreme yet, and you know why? Because I really like ASUS products, and I don't wanna talk ***** about them, despite not working together with ASUS here in Italy because they barely have any products to send (oh yeah, they focus on smartphones, but that's another tale). So, again, before talking ***** about reviewers, think SERIOUSLY about what we go through with *****ty products (like the ZE, an instant regret), because it is always more difficult to see the beam in our own eye than the splinter in someone else's eye.
> 
> 
> 
> There are several existing issues with this and other products. Every single motherboard manufacturer has. But how much ammunition do you think we have to convince people to fix things inside the company when all the review sites are giving the boards their best awards? All we have are the forums with actual users and their reported problems, but unfortunately that does not echo as loudly.
Click to expand...

If you (companies) accepted those very same critics you're asking for, instead of cutting us out of any possible collaboration when highlighting problems with your products, ALL OF US would gladly report the issues. What the heck, I reported the problems with AURA, AI Suite and LiveDash several times, and in this very same thread it got checked as FIXED but it really wasn't. I said that too, but no one noticed.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nycgtr*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *elmor*
> 
> There are several existing issues with this and other products. Every single motherboard manufacturer has. But how much ammunition do you think we have to convince people to fix things inside the company when all the review sites are giving the boards their best awards? All we have are the forums with actual users and their reported problems, but unfortunately that does not echo as loudly.
> 
> 
> 
> Honesty I dont think a lot of reviewers go around trying to do as much as the avg enthusiasts who doesn't have a laundry list of products they need to go test with lol.
Click to expand...

I do, I do memory overclocking on all the mainboards I test (and memory kits too, anyways) and many times I hit a memory limit (despite having high bin RAM sticks), I test the software and report it both in the reviews (done it with Gigabyte and ASRock, recently, the only two motherboard manufacturers that seem to accept critical POVs of their products trying to improve those), FFS I even try to compete with my scores on HWBot to show that a board is capable (or not), efficiency wise. If you want us to test high end boards with LN2, though, please consider that it's very expensive, it's difficult, it takes time, and often we only have less than a couple of weeks to test a product before sending it back to the manufacturer (yeah, we don't really keep much stuff). Speaking of time, there's many things that happen much later than 2 weeks after launch, so we can't possibly report EVERYTHING that happens on a platform if we don't phisically have time to do it.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *The L33t*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *nycgtr*
> 
> Honesty I dont think a lot of reviewers go around trying to do as much as the avg enthusiasts who doesn't have a laundry list of products they need to go test with lol.
> 
> 
> 
> They most certainly don't. I'm not even talking about pushing overclock to the absolute max etc.
> 
> But more simple things like:
> 
> - See if the advertised functions work(even the software package).
> 
> - Test a couple memory kits with different kinds of size and speed trying to get a sense of memory compatibility.
> 
> - Push the platform. Meaning... Add a couple different pci-e cards and see if issues rise (not only vga but others). Populate the most you can with hardware you have on hand.. Ssd m.2 USB peripherals etc...
> 
> In essence making use the platform is stable and funcional to most readers, who use such things. Because what we see is a very basic setup giving all the right odds of everything being just fine...
> 
> We know, ASUS has to do this internally, but the permutations of hardware are immense, so if the average reviewer did this.. I think we'd be in a better place too.
> 
> This platform particularly is aimed at people with work to do.. With 128gb kits.. Many storage options... Various graphics cards for compute/AI etc but we don't see any attempt at trying any of these situations even when they can and have the hardware to do it. The platform is reviewed the same a b350 board would be for example.
Click to expand...

- I do that
- I do that too
- As said a few lines before, I do that too. Audio cards, or when I have a couple of identical cards in testing, CrossfireX and SLI

ASUS has to do this internally, sure the permutations are close to impossible to test as a whole, but what's the point of having QVLs and stuff if those don't work either, 99% of the times? Also, compute and AI cards are expensive and often out of interest of both companies that send samples and users that read the average revuews, The platform is reviewed the same as ANY platform, because they belong to the very same category of hardware products. Again, having samples rotating between various media, you don't always have the same hardware in the office, so it's difficult to have the same testing environment. Finally, just to give you an example, ASUS Italy doesn't have any ZE available to review. AMD didn't have any 1950X. G.Skill sends to very few medias here. I spent *2000€* between CPU, mainboard and memory kits (actually, closer to 2500)(yes, kits, because I bought 2 32GB kits, which none work at 3200 C14 despite being muuuuch higher frequency-rated), as a consumer I feel betrayed in the brand trust that I built up in 15 years of use of ASUS products. I've been doing this job for 9 years, I've been through several Rampage Extreme boards (I, II, IV and V) and I never had any major issue, but with the ZE, oh man, it's a crapfest. And it's not because of reviewers, it's because of ASUS.


----------



## ReHWolution

@Enterprise again, the bugs that I reported haven't been fixed yet. Please put them into the unsolved ones.


----------



## Brain29

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ReHWolution*
> 
> @Enterprise again, the bugs that I reported haven't been fixed yet. Please put them into the unsolved ones.


I'm still waiting for my lights to work I think a firmware bricked the lights controller on my board at some point half the lights on my board are missing in aura


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *elmor*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ReHWolution*
> 
> Thanks for saying it, it is a big difference to what enterprise said, but why there's statements from you guys only when class actions and lawsuits are even remotely mentioned. That's sad. But I'm sure it's just coincidence
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because a statement doesn't solve anything, I prefer to get back to you when I've got something.
Click to expand...

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ReHWolution*
> 
> @Enterprise again, the bugs that I reported haven't been fixed yet. Please put them into the unsolved ones.


Will do later after the Downtime, a little busy with moving OCN at the moment 

*EDIT*

Actually as far as Asus are aware this is fixed, some steps to re-produce/a video would go a long way. Without some other reproducibility I cannot move this to the Bug section.


----------



## Bartouille

Honestly it's hard to tell what problems are ASUS or AMD fault when it comes to memory compatibility. At the end of the day, TR is rated for DDR4-2666 max and anything above is considered overclocking and is not guaranteed to work, regardless of what mobo manufacturer says. So that's all you can really ask for. Also remember those G.SKILL kits for TR? I highly doubt they will ever get released, at least for the DDR4-3466/3600 variants. It requires too much luck and experimentation to get RAM working at those speeds on this platform, and G.SKILL probably knows that people will just RMA the kits because they can't get them working at their rated speeds.


----------



## ReHWolution

ENTERPRISE said:


> Quote:Originally Posted by *elmor*
> Quote:Originally Posted by *ReHWolution*
> 
> Thanks for saying it, it is a big difference to what enterprise said, but why there's statements from you guys only when class actions and lawsuits are even remotely mentioned. That's sad. But I'm sure it's just coincidence
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because a statement doesn't solve anything, I prefer to get back to you when I've got something.
> 
> 
> Quote:Originally Posted by *ReHWolution*
> 
> @Enterprise again, the bugs that I reported haven't been fixed yet. Please put them into the unsolved ones.
> 
> 
> Will do later after the Downtime, a little busy with moving OCN at the moment
> 
> *EDIT*
> 
> Actually as far as Asus are aware this is fixed, some steps to re-produce/a video would go a long way. Without some other reproducibility I cannot move this to the Bug section.


The steps are still the same as my report, nothing changed


----------



## mumford

mumford said:


> Frak. I just odered this board on Thusday. You guys are scaring me already.



I am quoting myself. What-the-frak. Well, I finally got around to put all the stuffs inside those brown boxes together, and my conclusion is that it is not as bad as I expected. At first, ZE would not boot with 4 sticks of Ram. I booted with 1 stick and flashed Bios to 902. Now, Asus ZE booted on my XMP (G Skill B-dies 3733Mhz 8GBx4 C17) and even ran, with extreme instability at 3733Mhz with 1.35V. I selected an overclocked memory profile (3466Mhz C14 1.40V) from a long list on the bios menu. I four-passed memtest86. I passed two turns of 64M prime. I am on Linux, so none of those Asus Windows apps are installed. Nvidia graphic card, Usb sound and Solarflare 10G Nic work fine.

I guess I just want to add a bit of cheer on this thread. Hope you guys don't mind.


----------



## PuffinMyLye

Should one be steering clear of this board? It's the one X399 board I've found with both onboard 10Gb and USB 3.1 motherboard header but I've read a lot of negative reviews. This thread just being in existence is not making me exude confidence in this board either.


----------



## Bartouille

PuffinMyLye said:


> Should one be steering clear of this board? It's the one X399 board I've found with both onboard 10Gb and USB 3.1 motherboard header but I've read a lot of negative reviews. This thread just being in existence is not making me exude confidence in this board either.


Board seems fine as long as you stay away from the RGB crap, AI Suite and potentially RAID and 128GB of RAM. Lots of complaints here but tbh all X399 are far from perfect. Personally I haven't had any major problem with this board.


----------



## gupsterg

+1 to Bartouille info.

Only ASUS SW I install in OS is WiFi driver and ASUS MemTweakIt. I set RGB to static red on 1st install back in Sep 17 using AURA, OS was wiped straight after doing that "function".

Only real issue I have had is occasionally the PWM on fan headers will crap out. This can lead to either fans stuck at x% duty cycle or at min %. Min % is the bigger issue as I WC the EK D5 PWM pump can be at 800RPM = 40C+ water loop temp :/ . This issue has happened ~4-5 times in ownership. Last two occasions was on a 2x ~24hr+ continuous usage runs. If board is given the opportunity to repost then the Super IO chip does not have PWM issue. This is the only sure fire "work around" I have found.

I was initially on F4-3200C14D-16GTZ I reached 3466MHz C15. Today I installed F4-3200C14Q-32GVK, so far  .

[@]elmor[/@]

I was wondering any chance of having UEFI development team add option for shutdown based on temp from say a sensor?

In may case where I use T_Sensor to measure water temp it would be handy. When Super IO chip craps out and sticks water pump on min % rig could turn off safely.


----------



## Bartouille

Nice. Curious to see how your OC will turn out now that you got quad channel going.  I'm almost done tweaking timings for my 3466MHz profile.

Here is how it's looking thus far.

https://imgur.com/C1nMZWF

I only validated (8 hours of HCI, SAT, y-cruncher & P95) primaries and tWR so far but most of the other timings got at least 2 hours of HCI, SAT and y-cruncher.

Edit: Thought it was the overclocking / support thread, my bad.


----------



## Brain29

Tried 0019 for a few days

*fans min% still wacked out
*usb storage still unreadable in uefi if plugged into back I/O
*usb flashback button disabled

*memory - instant crash with settings that were very stable with 902 and all previous
**jumped back to 902 everything worked perfectly

upon installing UEFI I had a bricked board I had to depower the unit for a few min before it would turn on
Lights stayed that was a plus however I have lost the back side rgb's during an update a while ago and they have never returned


----------



## gupsterg

[@]Bartouille[/@]

So far quad channel going good IMO  .

So as said in a recent post, on two occasions recently of doing normal profile testing/usage of ~24hrs+ continuous I encountered stuck PWM. Now I have done ~45hrs continuous uptime with no issues. This occasion I have not used CPU-Z within screenshots, nor have I used AIDA64 RAM bench, why I have avoided these programs is that they do access Super IO chip. I am only using HWINFO.

*CPU:* TR 1950X
*MOBO:* ASUS ZE UEFI 0019
*RAM:* F4-3200C14Q-32GVK
*GPU:* RX VEGA 64

*Storage:* 2x SATA SSD MX100 256GB, 1x SATA HDD HGST 2TB, 1x SATA HDD Seagate 2TB.

*Cooling:* EK TR block, EK D5 PWM (using HAMP), 2x MagiCool G2 Slim 360mm, per rad 3x Arctic Cooling F12 PWM, each using 4in1 cable, top rad using CHA_FAN1, front using CHA_FAN2, Be Quiet Silent Wings 3 using CPU_FAN, all fan profiles customised and set via UEFI. T_Sensor1 used to monitor loop temp and set as source for HAMP, CHA_Fan1/2.

*OS:* Windows 10 Pro x64 all updates as of post date plus AMD Chipset/GPU drivers.

*Rear IO USB used by:* Cherry MX Board 3.0, Logitech G700S receiver, Logitech G700S charge cable, MS Xbox 360 receiver.

*Observations:* Fan PWM all good, USB ports/flashback functioning, turning on and off BT/WiFi non issue, all in all  .

Changing from F4-3200C14D-16GTZ to F4-3200C14Q-32GVK painless and "play'n'play". Loaded The Stilt 3333MHz Fast timings, used 3200MHz frequency, set SOC: 1.05V and VDIMM: 1.35V, ProcODT/CAD Bus all [Auto].

~49hrs HWINFO CSV / screenies in ZIP (best to organise files by date to see process in order).

Planning on some Bionic/[email protected] and some rerunning of tests without reposting rig. Then some smaller length of testing with reposts between them.


----------



## elmor

Can I get a summary of the Aura and LiveDash issues again? With specific version information and steps to replicate? Especially if it's marked as fixed in a newer version but it's not.

I'm told we have a new BIOS version coming with the fan tuning issue fixed. It will probably still be on AGESA 1.0.0.3 since I think AMD did not issue an official fix for the DRAM dropping yet. I can try to get a test version which is based on the next release but 1.0.0.4 patched like 0019.


----------



## gupsterg

elmor said:


> I can try to get a test version which is based on the next release but 1.0.0.4 patched like 0019.


Would be interested in this  , my HW seems to luv 0901/0019  .

On another note avoiding apps which access SuperIO chip has yielded so far ~59hrs continuous usage with no issues  .


----------



## axrinas

elmor said:


> I can try to get a test version which is based on the next release but 1.0.0.4 patched like 0019.


I cant awaiting the new beta bios


----------



## elmor

gupsterg said:


> Would be interested in this  , my HW seems to luv 0901/0019  .
> 
> On another note avoiding apps which access SuperIO chip has yielded so far ~59hrs continuous usage with no issues  .


SuperIO access conflict solution is making good progress as well.


----------



## Brain29

elmor said:


> Can I get a summary of the Aura and LiveDash issues again? With specific version information and steps to replicate? Especially if it's marked as fixed in a newer version but it's not.
> 
> I'm told we have a new BIOS version coming with the fan tuning issue fixed. It will probably still be on AGESA 1.0.0.3 since I think AMD did not issue an official fix for the DRAM dropping yet. I can try to get a test version which is based on the next release but 1.0.0.4 patched like 0019.


Aura 1.05.32.02
LED EC1 AUMA0-E6K5-0105
LED EC2 AULA0-S072-0201

1) upon every boot there is a message
BIOS is updating LED firmware.
Do not shut down or reset the system to prevent system failure
**sometimes it hangs on this message for 10 seconds
other times its fast a blip - but it always present


2)rgb lights on the side strip panel do not work even though they are set in what I think is the setting in aura 
(Back-io rgb nodes do not effect or turn on the side panel strip)


3)aura - funny nodes clutter the area options for areas to light
ie
nodes labeled
- VRM (there are 6 of them)
- LOGO (there are 27 of them)
- CPU (there are 29 of them)
-Back-IO ( I think this is for the side strip but since it has no function I will add to the funny nodes list)

LiveDash
- I only notice that if set a gif after a few hours or so the image will become stuck or frozen 
(this might just be the nature (full memory) of the chip used as the controller) 

request
It would be nice to set/read the temp sensors in live dash - beyond CPU and PCH


----------



## gupsterg

elmor said:


> SuperIO access conflict solution is making good progress as well.


Nice  .

You may have missed Brain29 posts before on where he has EC FW issue, have view of this post and please comment  .


----------



## Brain29

gupsterg said:


> Nice  .
> 
> You may have missed Brain29 posts before on where he has EC FW issue, have view of this post and please comment  .


yeah that was weird from uefi 804 to 902 my led version number disappeared 

http://www.overclock.net/photopost/data/1693955/d/d0/d0c32f26_901_issues.jpeg

after 902 instead of being blank it was N/A

after 4 weeks there was flicker during the boot and the lights came back to where they are now except the side lights


----------



## gupsterg

Mines been AOK on that front TBH, UEFI MOBO page screenie link.

Called it a day on 3200MHz quad on UEFI 0019, final ZIP of ~72hrs continuous testing link.

So my issues list is still the same, which IMO is minor and I having working workarounds  .

i) PWM crapping out seems to be when multiple apps may have accessed SuperIO chip. This only seems to need to be a small instance of occurrence which may not cause crap out for that post of rig but transpire later. So either I stick to one type of app access per post or if I opened say CPU-Z to log settings for a profile, whilst HWINFO was open to gather monitoring then do a repost.

ii) Sandisk Ultra Flair 3.0 64GB is only USB stick out of several differing brands/sizes that seems to have an issue on USB 3.0 on case, connected to mobo. So either I don't use that stick or just use other ports.

iii) UEFI 0019 and prior all freeze when doing a screenie in UEFI if low free space on USB stick, ~<60MB IIRC. So I just keep excess space  .

For me ASUS ZE is still nerdy wet dream  .


----------



## gupsterg

double post  .


----------



## Brain29

gupsterg said:


> For me ASUS ZE is still nerdy wet dream  .


I wish I could say the same this software has been hell since release

a constant circle of things working then breaking

Asus support was completely unhelpful

Every time I would email in I get a response from someone who said they could fix anything then every email back it was a new employee asking the same stupid questions

One of the 8 different people who responded finally gave up and just said that they were gonna make an RMA

after about 8 days I randomly got an RMA ticket number it took them 8 days to make a ticket number ***

I have lost all faith in Asus and this board

Will probably never buy an Asus branded product again

Can't trust the online reviews or Asus support

Judging by the complaints now coming out of the other Asus x399 boards its all the same crap we have been dealing with

my tune would be different if there was something that has been constantly stable

But every new UEFI I am left wondering if its worth it, because the way every other update has been I could easily see it corrupting and bricking it self - especially since there is no way to cleanly write a new UEFI without bad history left from the previous one - no way to know if your led firmware is corrupted and if it is well it doesn't matter you have one shot at updating it.
*maybe I'm blowing steam at the wrong company and this is all AMD fault

Maybe this is type of stability/ non-support you should expect from a $550 board

I know [@]elmor[/@] is doing is best and i would give a nerd salute to him if I could but Asus has botched this big time

1 to 3 times a year I have do very large orders for desktops usally I/we stick to Asus 
I was going to replace all my studio computers with x399 asus boards
my co-worker ordered the AsRock - and are up/downtime vs trouble shooting time has been a night and day difference

One of the only reasons why throw much mud towards Asus --
AsRock in the past has literally been the awkward cousin in motherboard land , below gigabyte in some cases

Asus has all the funds - design - production the marketing the support if they really wanted to support it
but they keep fumbling the basic stuff - they have been since x99 it seems its been slowly getting worse not as bad as this though

and destroyed any trust or thought in quality I have in them
*its been 5 months after release


----------



## elmor

Brain29 said:


> Aura 1.05.32.02
> LED EC1 AUMA0-E6K5-0105
> LED EC2 AULA0-S072-0201
> 
> 1) upon every boot there is a message
> BIOS is updating LED firmware.
> Do not shut down or reset the system to prevent system failure
> **sometimes it hangs on this message for 10 seconds
> other times its fast a blip - but it always present
> 
> 
> 2)rgb lights on the side strip panel do not work even though they are set in what I think is the setting in aura
> (Back-io rgb nodes do not effect or turn on the side panel strip)
> 
> 
> 3)aura - funny nodes clutter the area options for areas to light
> ie
> nodes labeled
> - VRM (there are 6 of them)
> - LOGO (there are 27 of them)
> - CPU (there are 29 of them)
> -Back-IO ( I think this is for the side strip but since it has no function I will add to the funny nodes list)
> 
> LiveDash
> - I only notice that if set a gif after a few hours or so the image will become stuck or frozen
> (this might just be the nature (full memory) of the chip used as the controller)
> 
> request
> It would be nice to set/read the temp sensors in live dash - beyond CPU and PCH


1) This is most likely because of old Aura software present on your system. Uninstall Aura, reboot twice and make sure it doesn't show up again. Then install latest version.

2) It's always off? Could be the cable from the MB is loose, it's located at the top left under the I/O cover.

3) Can you send me a screenshot?

4) LiveDash - Can you take a picture or better a video of it being stuck and a screenshot of the software settings?




gupsterg said:


> Nice  .
> 
> You may have missed Brain29 posts before on where he has EC FW issue, have view of this post and please comment  .





Brain29 said:


> yeah that was weird from uefi 804 to 902 my led version number disappeared
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/photopost/data/1693955/d/d0/d0c32f26_901_issues.jpeg
> 
> after 902 instead of being blank it was N/A
> 
> after 4 weeks there was flicker during the boot and the lights came back to where they are now except the side lights


I have not missed it, but it's difficult to diagnose. I'm working on updating the c6h aura_update software to be able to read/write to the newer controller on ZE so it can be dumped and analyzed. Otherwise you'd basically have to send the board to us for diagnostics.


----------



## gupsterg

Brain29 said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> I wish I could say the same this software has been hell since release
> 
> a constant circle of things working then breaking
> 
> Asus support was completely unhelpful
> 
> Every time I would email in I get a response from someone who said they could fix anything then every email back it was a new employee asking the same stupid questions
> 
> One of the 8 different people who responded finally gave up and just said that they were gonna make an RMA
> 
> after about 8 days I randomly got an RMA ticket number it took them 8 days to make a ticket number ***
> 
> I have lost all faith in Asus and this board
> 
> Will probably never buy an Asus branded product again
> 
> Can't trust the online reviews or Asus support
> 
> Judging by the complaints now coming out of the other Asus x399 boards its all the same crap we have been dealing with
> 
> my tune would be different if there was something that has been constantly stable
> 
> But every new UEFI I am left wondering if its worth it, because the way every other update has been I could easily see it corrupting and bricking it self - especially since there is no way to cleanly write a new UEFI without bad history left from the previous one - no way to know if your led firmware is corrupted and if it is well it doesn't matter you have one shot at updating it.
> *maybe I'm blowing steam at the wrong company and this is all AMD fault
> 
> Maybe this is type of stability/ non-support you should expect from a $550 board
> 
> I know [@]elmor[/@] is doing is best and i would give a nerd salute to him if I could but Asus has botched this big time
> 
> 1 to 3 times a year I have do very large orders for desktops usally I/we stick to Asus
> I was going to replace all my studio computers with x399 asus boards
> my co-worker ordered the AsRock - and are up/downtime vs trouble shooting time has been a night and day difference
> 
> One of the only reasons why throw much mud towards Asus --
> AsRock in the past has literally been the awkward cousin in motherboard land , below gigabyte in some cases
> 
> Asus has all the funds - design - production the marketing the support if they really wanted to support it
> but they keep fumbling the basic stuff - they have been since x99 it seems its been slowly getting worse not as bad as this though
> 
> and destroyed any trust or thought in quality I have in them
> *its been 5 months after release


Feel your pain bro  , but as my experience differs I can only state that  . I do feel bad at times sharing this experience as think others who have an issue will think _"Whhaaattt! is gup on"_.

Only a few days ago I viewed each X399 board to see which allow loop temp to control fans/pump as on ZE. Out of 9 boards I looked at only 5 did and 3 of them were ASUS. Yes Aquareo unit offers more features than what mobos which have WC oriented headers, *but* TBH I think what is being offered is all what is needed. As an Aquareo LT unit will set me back £50-£100 I think the boards which have WC oriented headers really up the ante on value for such a user. 



elmor said:


> I have not missed it, but it's difficult to diagnose. I'm working on updating the c6h aura_update software to be able to read/write to the newer controller on ZE so it can be dumped and analyzed. Otherwise you'd basically have to send the board to us for diagnostics.


Ahh cool, thank you for the time to comment and support us :grouphug:.


----------



## Brain29

elmor said:


> 1) This is most likely because of old Aura software present on your system. Uninstall Aura, reboot twice and make sure it doesn't show up again. Then install latest version.
> 
> 2) It's always off? Could be the cable from the MB is loose, it's located at the top left under the I/O cover.
> 
> 3) Can you send me a screenshot?
> 
> 4) LiveDash - Can you take a picture or better a video of it being stuck and a screenshot of the software settings?


the warning I see everyboot
http://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=64233&stc=1&d=1517298529

the rgb thats out is the one on the side (I think its plugged under the back plate but I could be wrong - never took it off)
*it worked before 1.0.0.13
*it was working after I installed it
*I have moved it a few times from table to table **maybe .. its a very time consuming process to take it out 
http://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=64225&stc=1&d=1517298529

added - screen shots of nodes I see apparently they grew in number from my last post they now go to 70
http://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=64217&stc=1&d=1517298529

livedash 1.01.08 (think thats the recent)
ill try to record the live dash thing it takes a while for it to stop the only setting that I applied was one of the gif backgrounds that are default 
*example-- the spaceman or the dancers will just freeze in place until reboot

I'm guessing your not located in the sf bay area .. or I would drive it to you


----------



## JokesOn

Any one else have a hard ware bug on the M.2 heatsink screws? Any one struggle or find it hard to remove? Anyone strip their screws? It's the 3 screws that are on the M.2 panel on the M.2 heatsink panel on the bottom right area. The shiny glossy thing.


----------



## Brain29

JokesOn said:


> Any one else have a hard ware bug on the M.2 heatsink screws? Any one struggle or find it hard to remove? Anyone strip their screws? It's the 3 screws that are on the M.2 panel on the M.2 heatsink panel on the bottom right area. The shiny glossy thing.


soft screws really aren't a bug just an unthought-out implementation - black screws are typically softer and more expensive so there not cheap ... its putting them on a cover that you might need to remove more then once and having blue -having an extremely shallow head- thread lock that is causing headaches

I for one am more annoyed that they put a bar-code sticker on the part that's supposed to light up on mine 



gupsterg said:


> _"Whhaaattt! is gup on"_.


your awesome but I do hate your low issue board - let me know if the next uefi update corrupts your board like mine did so I can have a smile.


----------



## gupsterg

Brain29 said:


> your awesome but I do hate your low issue board - let me know if the next uefi update corrupts your board like mine did so I can have a smile.


Will do   .


----------



## elmor

Brain29 said:


> the warning I see everyboot
> http://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=64233&stc=1&d=1517298529
> 
> the rgb thats out is the one on the side (I think its plugged under the back plate but I could be wrong - never took it off)
> *it worked before 1.0.0.13
> *it was working after I installed it
> *I have moved it a few times from table to table **maybe .. its a very time consuming process to take it out
> http://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=64225&stc=1&d=1517298529
> 
> added - screen shots of nodes I see apparently they grew in number from my last post they now go to 70
> http://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=64217&stc=1&d=1517298529
> 
> livedash 1.01.08 (think thats the recent)
> ill try to record the live dash thing it takes a while for it to stop the only setting that I applied was one of the gif backgrounds that are default
> *example-- the spaceman or the dancers will just freeze in place until reboot
> 
> I'm guessing your not located in the sf bay area .. or I would drive it to you


Thanks, no I'm located in Taipei 

The LED firmware message does not disappear after uninstalling Aura? (first reboot it would still show, the second reboot should be ok)


----------



## ReHWolution

elmor said:


> Can I get a summary of the Aura and LiveDash issues again? With specific version information and steps to replicate? Especially if it's marked as fixed in a newer version but it's not.
> 
> I'm told we have a new BIOS version coming with the fan tuning issue fixed. It will probably still be on AGESA 1.0.0.3 since I think AMD did not issue an official fix for the DRAM dropping yet. I can try to get a test version which is based on the next release but 1.0.0.4 patched like 0019.


BIOS 0801, the one that is giving me less issues.
LiveDash sometimes doesn't apply the changes, while AURA often freezes when selecting Music modes. Also, as you can see by the attachment to this post, the Rainbow mode is different when the PC on vs PC off. The rainbow mode should be the default one without Aura installed, and it's the one that the PC shows by default when it's off, why those options are different, if it's the same thing? There's already a color cycle effect in the list of effects. It often doesn't work when you select "Color cycle" in the Rainbow mode, and as I said, music modes often freeze, especially when switching between different presets for Music mode.

This, with the latest versions of the softwares downloadable from the ZE support website.


----------



## Brain29

elmor said:


> Thanks, no I'm located in Taipei
> 
> The LED firmware message does not disappear after uninstalling Aura? (first reboot it would still show, the second reboot should be ok)


no, the LED firmware message has been there for months after the last firmware update --I have done countless reinstalls of programs and windows

the only thing that changes is the time of the message

sometimes its a good few seconds other times it lasts as long as the start up beep (just a flash of text)


----------



## axrinas

any news about a new bios update?


----------



## elmor

axrinas said:


> any news about a new bios update?


Seems we're going straight for AGESA 1.0.0.5. Internal evaluation at the moment.


----------



## spadizzle

Brain29 said:


> no, the LED firmware message has been there for months after the last firmware update --I have done countless reinstalls of programs and windows
> 
> the only thing that changes is the time of the message
> 
> sometimes its a good few seconds other times it lasts as long as the start up beep (just a flash of text)



Question: Have you re-flashed the same version bios? Reason I'm asking is that with 902, I had some weird deals happen.

ie... During post the BIOS stated, "Evaluation Copy" and in the BIOS for the display post screen blah blah. It went all hexadecimal on me. I am not sure why or what the hell was going on. I know I was having issues with Aura. Anyways I reflashed the 902 and all is well again.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

elmor said:


> Seems we're going straight for AGESA 1.0.0.5. Internal evaluation at the moment.


That is good new hopefully, have AMD stated what is different within that AGESA ?


----------



## ReHWolution

Day by day, I think of getting a SKL-X CPU and getting rid of this platform. The lack of support is frustrating.



ENTERPRISE said:


> That is good new hopefully, have AMD stated what is different within that AGESA ?


Probably a preliminary support for upcoming CPUs and nothing much more than that


----------



## The L33t

ReHWolution said:


> Day by day, I think of getting a SKL-X CPU and getting rid of this platform. The lack of support is frustrating.


That was my unfortunate conclusion as well. (I know all about spectre and meltdown, not worried)

A once a full AMD system (TR+vega) has gone completely rogue, now Intel and Nvidia. I was going to keep the Vega but... selling it on ebay has given me € to buy a 1080TI.. with spare money. Odd times!

I'll revisit AMD when Zen2 arrives, but I will definitely will not be buying anything AMD at Launch. The prices drop way too soon and the issues take more time than adequate to figure out, so I will wait if I need a new system at that time, hopefully they have the Zen arch figured-out then.


----------



## Brain29

spadizzle said:


> Question: Have you re-flashed the same version bios? Reason I'm asking is that with 902, I had some weird deals happen.
> 
> ie... During post the BIOS stated, "Evaluation Copy" and in the BIOS for the display post screen blah blah. It went all hexadecimal on me. I am not sure why or what the hell was going on. I know I was having issues with Aura. Anyways I reflashed the 902 and all is well again.


yes


----------



## ReHWolution

The L33t said:


> That was my unfortunate conclusion as well. (I know all about spectre and meltdown, not worried)
> 
> A once a full AMD system (TR+vega) has gone completely rogue, now Intel and Nvidia. I was going to keep the Vega but... selling it on ebay has given me € to buy a 1080TI.. with spare money. Odd times!
> 
> I'll revisit AMD when Zen2 arrives, but I will definitely will not be buying anything AMD at Launch. The prices drop way too soon and the issues take more time than adequate to figure out, so I will wait if I need a new system at that time, hopefully they have the Zen arch figured-out then.


I'm "glad" to see that I'm not the only one thinking about it in this way. I already have everything else, all I need is a SKL-X CPU, and yeah, the loss of value is another important thing: I spent 1500€ on CPU+Mainboard, and now the total price for NEW dropped to less than 1200€. I'll get rig of both for about 1000€ and get a 7900X or a 7920X. So, I'll be able to enjoy, finally, 64GB of RAM and get a nice boost when editing 4K videos.
I've been also reviewing a Vega 56, and the outcome won't be anything good. I'm disappointed for being once again an AMD early adopter (since I also got a 290X reference and that was a ugly experience too). Same for me, in the end: no early adopter fee for AMD anymore.

Truth to be told, I've been buying Intel products on day one and never really had such problems. Not even with a 5960X. Sooooooo I don't know. I feel so ripped off for losing 500€ in less than 6 months (accounting the price I should sell my things for), it never happened to me despite buying several new platforms in the last 10 years.


----------



## The L33t

I did not loose one cent fortunately. Amazon received my complaint and issued a full refund on both the Zenith and 1950x.


----------



## Brain29

elmor said:


> Thanks, no I'm located in Taipei
> 
> The LED firmware message does not disappear after uninstalling Aura? (first reboot it would still show, the second reboot should be ok)


the back rgbs not unplugged - so its either crappy hardware or crappy software


----------



## Martin778

Well, that doesn't sound too motivating. I was thinking about getting rid of my Apex and 7920X for a 1950X being done with Intel's latest policies and because these SKU's don't come with any kind of warranty (in other words, you must delid it before it becomes usable, the goop between the die and IHS will dried up in a month and it was hitting the Tjmax even at 4.2GHz).


----------



## ReHWolution

The L33t said:


> I did not loose one cent fortunately. Amazon received my complaint and issued a full refund on both the Zenith and 1950x.


Lucky you. I wasn't able to get those on Amazon, as the Zenith actually came out in OCTOBER on it.



Martin778 said:


> Well, that doesn't sound too motivating. I was thinking about getting rid of my Apex and 7920X for a 1950X being done with Intel's latest policies and because these SKU's don't come with any kind of warranty (in other words, you must delid it before it becomes usable, the goop between the die and IHS will dried up in a month and it was hitting the Tjmax even at 4.2GHz).


Lol wanna trade?


----------



## The L33t

ReHWolution said:


> Lucky you. I wasn't able to get those on Amazon, as the Zenith actually came out in OCTOBER on it.


Well now that I think about it... I do have a bran new heatkiller block for tr4 and one for the vega unused. So unless I manage to sell them I will lose something.


----------



## ReHWolution

The L33t said:


> Well now that I think about it... I do have a bran new heatkiller block for tr4 and one for the vega unused. So unless I manage to sell them I will lose something.


Oh, thankfully I never buy full cover waterblocks or CPU-specific blocks. I have 2 Eisblock XPXs with a TR4 bracket, now I'm glad I never really bought or asked for a sample for something TR4 specific.


----------



## TheGovernment

ReHWolution said:


> I'm "glad" to see that I'm not the only one thinking about it in this way. I already have everything else, all I need is a SKL-X CPU, and yeah, the loss of value is another important thing: I spent 1500€ on CPU+Mainboard, and now the total price for NEW dropped to less than 1200€. I'll get rig of both for about 1000€ and get a 7900X or a 7920X. So, I'll be able to enjoy, finally, 64GB of RAM and get a nice boost when editing 4K videos.
> I've been also reviewing a Vega 56, and the outcome won't be anything good. I'm disappointed for being once again an AMD early adopter (since I also got a 290X reference and that was a ugly experience too). Same for me, in the end: no early adopter fee for AMD anymore.
> 
> Truth to be told, I've been buying Intel products on day one and never really had such problems. Not even with a 5960X. Sooooooo I don't know. I feel so ripped off for losing 500€ in less than 6 months (accounting the price I should sell my things for), it never happened to me despite buying several new platforms in the last 10 years.


Common now, I build a brand new pc every year, the high end intel drop just as much as the TR's did. Have you forgot about how gad damn awful X99 was when it came out? It roasted my 6950x in the first 20 seconds I had the system booted. Both my chip and Asus WS-E went up in a cloud of smoke... then there weren't any WS-E boards to replace it with, had to wait a month and a half to get another one. ...That was like $2800 at the time. In 4 months the Chip had dropped $460 and the board 250$, ram to less than half..... Don't act like this platform is the only one to drop. The all drop, thats the price to pay to be a early adopter.

I have't really had any issues with my TR/Zenith setup other than just adjusting to AMD's bios. I'm still on the second Bios actually, still works fine for me.


----------



## Brain29

TheGovernment said:


> Common now, I build a brand new pc every year, the high end intel drop just as much as the TR's did. Have you forgot about how gad damn awful X99 was when it came out? It roasted my 6950x in the first 20 seconds I had the system booted. Both my chip and Asus WS-E went up in a cloud of smoke... then there weren't any WS-E boards to replace it with, had to wait a month and a half to get another one. ...That was like $2800 at the time. In 4 months the Chip had dropped $460 and the board 250$, ram to less than half..... Don't act like this platform is the only one to drop. The all drop, thats the price to pay to be a early adopter.
> 
> I have't really had any issues with my TR/Zenith setup other than just adjusting to AMD's bios. I'm still on the second Bios actually, still works fine for me.


you must have bought all the parts they gave out with the review samples - or have a very limited set up to be on 305 - my 64gb of ram would crash like crazy until 503


----------



## Martin778

TheGovernment said:


> Common now, I build a brand new pc every year, the high end intel drop just as much as the TR's did. Have you forgot about how gad damn awful X99 was when it came out? It roasted my 6950x in the first 20 seconds I had the system booted. *Both my chip and Asus WS-E went up in a cloud of smoke*... then there weren't any WS-E boards to replace it with, had to wait a month and a half to get another one. ...That was like $2800 at the time. In 4 months the Chip had dropped $460 and the board 250$, ram to less than half..... Don't act like this platform is the only one to drop. The all drop, thats the price to pay to be a early adopter.
> 
> I have't really had any issues with my TR/Zenith setup other than just adjusting to AMD's bios. I'm still on the second Bios actually, still works fine for me.


This wasn't an X99 problem but rather ASUS's and they never responded to it. I had an X99 Deluxe that fried my 6950X too but it took it a bit longer, if you do some reading on the internet, you'll find that ASUS X99 boards were notorious for frying CPUs.
Also, when BW-E came out, X99 was already a pretty old platform.


----------



## ReHWolution

TheGovernment said:


> Common now, I build a brand new pc every year, the high end intel drop just as much as the TR's did. Have you forgot about how gad damn awful X99 was when it came out? It roasted my 6950x in the first 20 seconds I had the system booted. Both my chip and Asus WS-E went up in a cloud of smoke... then there weren't any WS-E boards to replace it with, had to wait a month and a half to get another one. ...That was like $2800 at the time. In 4 months the Chip had dropped $460 and the board 250$, ram to less than half..... Don't act like this platform is the only one to drop. The all drop, thats the price to pay to be a early adopter.
> 
> I have't really had any issues with my TR/Zenith setup other than just adjusting to AMD's bios. I'm still on the second Bios actually, still works fine for me.


Not for me. I bought a 5960X in 2014 for ~ 950€, and managed to sell it for ~ 700€ in September 2017. Meanwhile, the 1950X costed me 1000€ and now NEW costs 760€. I didn't lose much, considering 3 years of usage.
Also, I've been on: RVE, X99 Extreme9, X99 WS-E/10G, X99 Taichi, X99 Gaming i7 and the CPU ran just fine. Let's talk about Threadripper, instead: poor BIOS and software support, issues on many boards, slower in games than a 5960X, despite having roughly 2 times its computing power and having, synthetic benchmark-wise, the same single threaded computing power. That's utterly ridiculous.



Martin778 said:


> This wasn't an X99 problem but rather ASUS's and they never responded to it. I had an X99 Deluxe that fried my 6950X too but it took it a bit longer, if you do some reading on the internet, you'll find that ASUS X99 boards were notorious for frying CPUs.
> Also, when BW-E came out, X99 was already a pretty old platform.


Correct, X99 came out in 2014, and the 6950X was honestly a stupid CPU to buy: 700€ more for 2 more cores?


----------



## christefan

With the latest patches win 10 now boots and then drops the mouse and keyboard shortly after login--i have to plug them into other ports to recover them , time for asus to post usb drivers for this board


----------



## Brain29

christefan said:


> With the latest patches win 10 now boots and then drops the mouse and keyboard shortly after login--i have to plug them into other ports to recover them , time for asus to post usb drivers for this board


is it the back io usb or all usb ?


----------



## TheGovernment

Martin778 said:


> This wasn't an X99 problem but rather ASUS's and they never responded to it. I had an X99 Deluxe that fried my 6950X too but it took it a bit longer, if you do some reading on the internet, you'll find that ASUS X99 boards were notorious for frying CPUs.
> Also, when BW-E came out, X99 was already a pretty old platform.


They responded to it, the first ones had some sort of weird power delivery that was changed in new Bios's. it was all over the Asus threads. Raja helped me out as I was the first one he know of that has the issue. It was still unstable as balls for 3/4 of a year. I've had fairly good luck with my TR build but this is my last Asus board ever, they really just don't care.


----------



## elmor

Brain29 said:


> the back rgbs not unplugged - so its either crappy hardware or crappy software


Still didn't answer my question. If you uninstall Aura and then reboot twice, do you still get the message?


----------



## gupsterg

christefan said:


> With the latest patches win 10 now boots and then drops the mouse and keyboard shortly after login--i have to plug them into other ports to recover them , time for asus to post usb drivers for this board


W10 Pro x64 FCU ISO installed all current updates, no issues here. I use AMD chipset drivers package which has all I'd need in this context. I use rear IO USB for:-

i) Cherry MX Board 3.0
ii) Logitech G700S receiver
iii) Logitech G700S charge cable
iv) Microsoft Xbox 360 receiver

Then at times other rear USB ports of sticks, etc. Mobo USB 2.0/3.0 headers connected to case ports.


----------



## Brain29

elmor said:


> Still didn't answer my question. If you uninstall Aura and then reboot twice, do you still get the message?


yes the message is still present

-uninstalled aura restarted 3 times

-Back rgb strip started to work (default rainbow mode)

- message still there

- installed aura 1.05.32.02

- back rgb strip disappeared

- uninstalled restarted 3 times

- default rainbow mode came back

- message still there

- reinstalled aura 1.05.32.02

- back rgb strip now working

- message still there

** stopped there as uninstalling aura and reinstalling might take my back rgbs out again


----------



## christefan

had a corsair rgb95 and a catz pro mouse connected to the 2 ports under the lan connector from the start if the build and after the microsoft patch that recently came out i would boot into windows 10 creators edition the desktop would come up a bit of churning and then i would lose the keyboard and mouse -keyboard went dark and mouse dark and no response--if i go plug the 2 devices into another usb port poof the keyboard is back up and so is the mouse. then say reboot with the devices plugged in to the new porets they are occupying and the same thing happens and then say you plug them into the 2 ports under the lan connector and they are back to operational--silly stuff going on and i think we need a separate usb3.0 and 3.1 drivers to maybe cure this


----------



## spadizzle

christefan said:


> With the latest patches win 10 now boots and then drops the mouse and keyboard shortly after login--i have to plug them into other ports to recover them , time for asus to post usb drivers for this board


Turn power off; unplug(switch off PSU)


----------



## ReHWolution

It's been kind of a rollercoaster, but I'm finally Threadripper (And ZENITH) free now. 7920X on an ASRock board. I don't think I'll get the Rampage Vi Extreme, the lack of support for this board disappointed me too much. Wish you the best guys!


----------



## Brain29

ReHWolution said:


> It's been kind of a rollercoaster, but I'm finally Threadripper (And ZENITH) free now. 7920X on an ASRock board. I don't think I'll get the Rampage Vi Extreme, the lack of support for this board disappointed me too much. Wish you the best guys!


+1 wish you the best - if I didn't have my back up workstation I would ditched this long ago


----------



## gupsterg

For me, every time I see the ZE through the glass panel it struts it's stuff like









and every time I use it the result is this :drool: . Been on quad channel 3200MHz using The Stilt's 3333MHz Fast timings on UEFI 0019 for over 2 weeks now and all good. Was very easy to setup IMO, USB ports, SATA, WiFi, etc all sound so far.

Yes I don't use Ai Suite and yes AURA is also another thing I don't use.


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

gupsterg said:


> every time I see the ZE through the glass panel it struts it's stuff like
> 
> View attachment 79001


I could never put a glass plate between me and that!

Can reach out and touch here...

I have come to this platform late admittedly...had no problems getting it up and running...smooth sailing so far...love it!


----------



## gupsterg

Arne Saknussemm said:


> I could never put a glass plate between me and that!


LOOL, I agree cold and heartless of me  .


----------



## ReHWolution

Brain29 said:


> +1 wish you the best - if I didn't have my back up workstation I would ditched this long ago


Thanks a lot man, I didn't have a backup system anymore, that's why I switched back to Intel, and I'll also get an 8700K as second system too. I'm done with AMD for now, at least as an early adopter. I got a 7920X NEW on Amazon for 870€, I'm fine forever (or at least 6 months ) AND now I can use my 64GB at 3600 MHz, rock solid. And 4.5 GHz @1.24v. With 60 °C without delidding under AIDA64 FPU+CPU. Man, I'm sorry for AMD but damn.


gupsterg said:


> For me, every time I see the ZE through the glass panel it struts it's stuff like
> 
> View attachment 79001
> 
> 
> and every time I use it the result is this :drool: . Been on quad channel 3200MHz using The Stilt's 3333MHz Fast timings on UEFI 0019 for over 2 weeks now and all good. Was very easy to setup IMO, USB ports, SATA, WiFi, etc all sound so far.
> 
> Yes I don't use Ai Suite and yes AURA is also another thing I don't use.


Same but I did the mistake to choose form over fuction with the ZE, and I won't do the same mistake again, I needed AISuite and AURA to manage a lot of stuff (fans and lighting, primarily) for video purposes (needing to change colors in the background since I have my PC behind me AND regulate the fans because I watch TV and movies on my PC too), and it didn't work out for me.



Arne Saknussemm said:


> I could never put a glass plate between me and that!
> 
> Can reach out and touch here...
> 
> I have come to this platform late admittedly...had no problems getting it up and running...smooth sailing so far...love it!


Lovely build!


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

ReHWolution said:


> Lovely build!


Thanks ReHWolution! 

Good luck with your new build...I'm sure it'll fly!


----------



## Brain29

anyone else get the funniness were windows reports 4.6 usage where everything else reads just under 4 http://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=83129&thumb=1


----------



## gupsterg

ReHWolution said:


> Same but I did the mistake to choose form over fuction with the ZE, and I won't do the same mistake again, I needed AISuite and AURA to manage a lot of stuff (fans and lighting, primarily) for video purposes (needing to change colors in the background since I have my PC behind me AND regulate the fans because I watch TV and movies on my PC too), and it didn't work out for me.


I too am an advocate of function over form , but for me the ASUS ZE fulfils both in spades  . Shame it has not worked out for you, wish you luck with this or whatever next you have :grouphug:.



Brain29 said:


> anyone else get the funniness were windows reports 4.6 usage where everything else reads just under 4 http://www.overclock.net/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=83129&thumb=1


Issue not limited to TR/ZE. Is it OS? IDK, is it UEFI/AGESA? IDK, is it a combo of both? IDK, I just ignore it for now  .

*** edit ***

Well I sort of have a theory. When we OC, W10 Task Manager shows base speed as OC. As Ryzen/Threadripper has no HW for BCLK read back I think what the alternative methods are that can be used, are not correctly used by W10 TM, so we see wacko CPU MHz when OC. As stated this is my own theory and could be wrong  .


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

Windows goes gaga when you OC...always has...seems to peg your OC as base speed and then adds random to that

Would this get me in the 5.0 GHz club?


----------



## nycgtr

Do any of beta bios address a fix that actually stops the stupid ch1 fan from going 100% and then never coming back down.


----------



## JBauer

I'm having trouble keeping my nvme drive cool.

Using the DIMM.2 slot, as I was concerned about using the chipset heatsink, where I'd have to apply the thermal pad to my expensive 960 Pro. (And not sure in the end how much cooler it would make it)

With the board power supply cable RIGHT in front of the DIMM.2 slot, and my AIO radiator in the front of the case... Not a lot of airflow making it to the drive. Pretty high temperatures even under low load (Minimum high 70's degC)

Oh and it's super crowded in the area, with the main power to the board, the ram slots, etc... Very hard to fit a cooling fan in there.

Wondering how other people are dealing with this. I'd prefer not to open the top of my case (Fractal R6) to install more fans. I can do one of the following:

1) Add a thermal pad to the SSD controller
2) Somehow get a fan in there as the air is pretty stagnant now I think.
3) Move the SSD to the chipset heatsink (not sure that will make a huge difference if my low load temps are so high)
4) Open up the top of my case, maybe moving the radiator for my AIO there, reversing the fans to blow out, bringing a ton more air in through the unobstructed front. 

None are perfect. #4 is the best for cooling, but at the expense of making my system a lot louder.


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

I believe there is a bracket included for mounting above the DIMM2 slot... for installing a memory fan for just this kind of situation...

I have my 950 pro under the chipset heatsink....I have good airflow over this so temps are excellent...the thermal pad will do nothing to your SSD except cool it


----------



## RoBiK

JBauer said:


> I'm having trouble keeping my nvme drive cool.
> 
> Using the DIMM.2 slot, as I was concerned about using the chipset heatsink, where I'd have to apply the thermal pad to my expensive 960 Pro. (And not sure in the end how much cooler it would make it)
> 
> With the board power supply cable RIGHT in front of the DIMM.2 slot, and my AIO radiator in the front of the case... Not a lot of airflow making it to the drive. Pretty high temperatures even under low load (Minimum high 70's degC)
> 
> Oh and it's super crowded in the area, with the main power to the board, the ram slots, etc... Very hard to fit a cooling fan in there.
> 
> Wondering how other people are dealing with this. I'd prefer not to open the top of my case (Fractal R6) to install more fans. I can do one of the following:
> 
> 1) Add a thermal pad to the SSD controller
> 2) Somehow get a fan in there as the air is pretty stagnant now I think.
> 3) Move the SSD to the chipset heatsink (not sure that will make a huge difference if my low load temps are so high)
> 4) Open up the top of my case, maybe moving the radiator for my AIO there, reversing the fans to blow out, bringing a ton more air in through the unobstructed front.
> 
> None are perfect. #4 is the best for cooling, but at the expense of making my system a lot louder.


I am not sure why you see applying thermal pads as a problem.
Another option is to install a heatsink onto the drive installed in the DIMM.2 card. Something like this: https://www.ekwb.com/shop/water-blocks/ssd-blocks/m2-heatsinks


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

nycgtr said:


> Do any of beta bios address a fix that actually stops the stupid ch1 fan from going 100% and then never coming back down.


Is this happening with more than one type of fan?

I have to say I have no such problems here...noctua pwm. Bios 0902...fan control from BIOS.


----------



## JBauer

Arne Saknussemm said:


> I believe there is a bracket included for mounting above the DIMM2 slot... for installing a memory fan for just this kind of situation...
> 
> I have my 950 pro under the chipset heatsink....I have good airflow over this so temps are excellent...the thermal pad will do nothing to your SSD except cool it


Yes the memory fan... I'm aware, it's just the area is sooo crowded, so fitting in the fan isn't easy. Probably do'able.

The thermal pad idea... (whether in the DIMM.2 slot or under the chipset heatsink)... Well I'm just concerned about later removing it for warranty service.

I went all-out and got the 2TB 960 pro... (So I'd never have to really worry about endurance) And with such an investment I'd hate to have problems getting warranty done because I put a thermal pad over the existing (somewhat crappy) copper cooling label.

May I ask what your current chipset temp is from HWINFO? And the temp of the 950 pro under it? My PCH under no real load is currently 57C.

Thanks for the insight... RoBiK too!


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

I'm on my phone at the moment...will post that info up in a bit...but my build is on a test bench with a fan blowing over that area...so not quite comparable to a case.

The thermal pad is not really going to stick to your SSD by the way...it's spongy and gives the impression of sticky but it comes away no problem and as far as i can tell doesn't react with surface in contact in any way...


----------



## JBauer

Arne Saknussemm said:


> Is this happening with more than one type of fan?
> 
> I have to say I have no such problems here...noctua pwm. Bios 0902...fan control from BIOS.


I have strange things happening with my COV fan.

My chasis fan, if anything, doesn't turn fast enough. I do run into some strange situations with my COV fan where it sounds like it surges temporarily. Right now it doesn't even show up in HWINFO, and in AI Suite it shows as 0%. Maybe because load is low, but still it should be in HWINFO. Peculiar.

Ran into another random issue yesterday. Due to my high HD temps I decided to turn off my PC before going to bed. 10 minutes later (or so), it turns itself on. It was off, not on sleep. The only thing I didn't do is turn the power supply to off.

Just yesterday I was thinking to myself that this board is pretty good, not having so many issues really. Ignoring my SSD issue above, which is more a case airflow "issue" and a concern for warranty on my SSD... Much less of board design issue (Although the DIMM.2 slot is really well hidden from airflow from the main board power cable)

But then this self turn-on problem, and also my no-load, in BIOS, fluctuation of core CPU voltage causing fairly wide swings in CPU temperature and fan speed. Ugh.


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

The thing is...you are really supposed to be providing enough airflow for an enthusiast platform.

My cov fan has not even twitched once...since i have a dedicated fan for the vrm...vrm heatsink on back and front of board.

I can't remember looking at the options for it in BIOS since i knew it wasn't going to be a concern here...but there must be options for getting it spinning up at a lower temp and lower rpm at lower temp?

Disable wake timers in power plan maybe for the phantom start ups?

I don't ever install AI suite so no help there from me I'm afraid....not sure what issues it can cause these days...


----------



## JBauer

Arne Saknussemm said:


> I'm on my phone at the moment...will post that info up in a bit...but my build is on a test bench with a fan blowing over that area...so not quite comparable to a case.
> 
> The thermal pad is not really going to stick to your SSD by the way...it's spongy and gives the impression of sticky but it comes away no problem and as far as i can tell doesn't react with surface in contact in any way...


Ok thanks...

The data I seek will help me determine what the temp differential is (of course), and it might be indicative of the temp "rise" (over my current chipset temp) I'd see if I popped mine in there.

I really wish I was only having to chase one problem. But I have three. Maybe four, but the fourth might be addressed by one of the other three.


----------



## Brain29

nycgtr said:


> Do any of beta bios address a fix that actually stops the stupid ch1 fan from going 100% and then never coming back down.


No - most of the fan issues have not been fixed yet

they have been attempted but the min-power % is still wack 

and the 100% bug still occurs (if you let your computer sleep for a few hours it almost always happens but i have had instances where it ramps up randomly for no reason while logged on) 

*the one bug that has been fixed is the sensors temp read- in previous versions of the uefi when you set the temp reader for a fan to be anything other then the cpu - it wouldn't work then default back to the cpu temps although in the uefi it would state a different temp header being used it would only read the cpu temp instead of the other node


----------



## Brain29

JBauer said:


> I have strange things happening with my COV fan.
> 
> My chasis fan, if anything, doesn't turn fast enough. I do run into some strange situations with my COV fan where it sounds like it surges temporarily. Right now it doesn't even show up in HWINFO, and in AI Suite it shows as 0%. Maybe because load is low, but still it should be in HWINFO. Peculiar.
> 
> Ran into another random issue yesterday. Due to my high HD temps I decided to turn off my PC before going to bed. 10 minutes later (or so), it turns itself on. It was off, not on sleep. The only thing I didn't do is turn the power supply to off.
> 
> Just yesterday I was thinking to myself that this board is pretty good, not having so many issues really. Ignoring my SSD issue above, which is more a case airflow "issue" and a concern for warranty on my SSD... Much less of board design issue (Although the DIMM.2 slot is really well hidden from airflow from the main board power cable)
> 
> But then this self turn-on problem, and also my no-load, in BIOS, fluctuation of core CPU voltage causing fairly wide swings in CPU temperature and fan speed. Ugh.


cov curve can be changed in uefi 

your cpu voltage issues are multiplied by the asus ai suit **threadripper has an auto oc that is supposed to change your voltage but for some reason with aisuit installed with everything on default auto it jumps up higher then if aisuit isnt installed 
- if you delete it the swing wont be as dramatic ... to completely get rid of it you have to set the OC manually 
4.0 at v1.35 is usally the best starting point for most people from there you can dial up and down

*if you change this in the uefi with aisuit installed there is a good chance aisuit will override your uefi changes after boot .. it doesn't play nice with self
* fan control is also worse in ai suit as in some cases fans will have disappeared even though they are in the uefi


----------



## JBauer

I'm planning to default the bios settings later, and see if within bios (uefi) the cpu temp stabilizes. If it does, then yeah AI Suite is being removed permanently.

I really don't NEED to OC, but if I get this thing stable stock, I'll probably do a minor OC.


----------



## JBauer

Arne Saknussemm said:


> The thing is...you are really supposed to be providing enough airflow for an enthusiast platform.
> 
> My cov fan has not even twitched once...since i have a dedicated fan for the vrm...vrm heatsink on back and front of board.
> 
> I can't remember looking at the options for it in BIOS since i knew it wasn't going to be a concern here...but there must be options for getting it spinning up at a lower temp and lower rpm at lower temp?
> 
> Disable wake timers in power plan maybe for the phantom start ups?
> 
> I don't ever install AI suite so no help there from me I'm afraid....not sure what issues it can cause these days...


Curious to see what that fan looks like on the back of your board? You have a picture handy?

Wake timers... Well I never touched them since my clean install of Win10. So I'd be surprised if they are set. I'll take a look later (as I'm getting ready for work now). Thanks for the tip.


----------



## gupsterg

JBauer said:


> I have strange things happening with my COV fan.
> 
> My chasis fan, if anything, doesn't turn fast enough. I do run into some strange situations with my COV fan where it sounds like it surges temporarily. Right now it doesn't even show up in HWINFO, and in AI Suite it shows as 0%. Maybe because load is low, but still it should be in HWINFO. Peculiar.


By default the COV fan (VRM fan) is set to stop when VRM is below min temp, thus it will not show in HWINFO/Ai Suite. Go to Monitor page > Q-Fan configuration and keeping scrolling down until you see section as below. 

View attachment 2 COV Fan.BMP


----------



## JBauer

I assumed it wasn't showing because it wasn't on. That is peculiar though that they'd configure the sensor to just disappear when not running?


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

This is my set-up...board is on 20mm standoffs so air flows underneath over mosfets on back of board as well as over heatsink. And further down chipset..

Not sure which one is chipset temp....but drive temp shows there..22 degree ambient here

OK found it PCH temp...


----------



## gupsterg

JBauer said:


> I assumed it wasn't showing because it wasn't on. That is peculiar though that they'd configure the sensor to just disappear when not running?


It probably wasn't on.

By default the fan is set to stop, when VRM is below min temp. When it is stopped monitoring data will not show. When it starts as VRM temp exceeds min temp it will show in monitoring data.

In the screen shot min temp is 70C, so when the VRM temp is below 70C the fan will stay off, which will mean no monitoring data in app. Once VRM temp exceeds 70C and fan come on, there will be monitoring data.


----------



## JBauer

Just officially adding the link to my bug thread on the core performance boost "bug". (At least I think it's a BIOS bug, running 0902)

http://www.overclock.net/forum/11-a...th-extreme-cpu-core-voltage-oscillations.html

Summary - if I turn off core performance boost, dead stable Vcore voltage when in BIOS. With CPB enabled (or AUTO), wild swings in voltage and CPU temperature in BIOS. No real apps loaded, yet CPU is surging to 4.1GHz (and back down) and voltage, CPU temp, and fans all follow.

Asus support says to send the board in for service. I have yet to convince myself they are right, seems like a bios bug to me. Pics in my other thread. (Didn't really think of it as a defect when I started investigating, was more trying to find out what was going on... Now I'm fairly convinced it's a bug)


----------



## gupsterg

UEFI is unlike legacy BIOS, it is mini operating system, this creates load on "platform".

In your stated test case when you have CPB [Auto] / [Enabled] the CPU can use Precision Boost/Extended Frequency Range. So you see clocks and voltages in that context.

When you set CPB [Disabled] CPU *can not* use Precision Boost/Extended Frequency Range. It can only go to PState 0 (ie Base clock), in the case of 1950X this ceiling VID of 1.1625V. It is a ceiling VID as when CPU is stock the SMU determines based on silicon characteristics what VID to set, so if you had same all kit except differing CPU you would see differing actual VCORE for same setttings.

View attachment Stock PState 0 1950X.BMP


When you OC you OC PState 0 (ie Base clock). So again you will see clocks/voltage in UEFI based on those settings.


----------



## gupsterg

nycgtr said:


> Do any of beta bios address a fix that actually stops the stupid ch1 fan from going 100% and then never coming back down.


Dunno, don't have issue. I was wondering have you tried the fan extension board that came with mobo? that has Winbond/Nuvoton control chip.


----------



## Brain29

gupsterg said:


> Dunno, don't have issue. I was wondering have you tried the fan extension board that came with mobo? that has Winbond/Nuvoton control chip.


I think hes talking about the bug were if you let your computer wake from sleep or hibernate after a few hours your fans will be pinned at 100% with no control


----------



## mypickaxe

Anyone else having issues with Intel NVMe devices when attempting to use NVMe RAID with non-Intel devices? 

My configuration is one (1) Intel Optane 900p as my boot device and four (4) Samsung 960 Pro NVMe devices (spread across DIMM.2, under the PCH heat sink and the second PCIe x16 slot. 

Anytime the Optane device is installed, I'm unable to create an NVMe RAID array with the Samsung devices. As soon as I remove the Optane device, the problem disappears, I can create an array, even load and boot Windows from it. 

There's no issue with Windows software RAID across the Samsung 960 Pros while booting from Optane. Of course, there's no TRIM and I doubt performance is optimal.

I read on an Intel forum this seems to be an issue with any Intel NVMe device. I may try my Intel 750 Series 1.2TB in place of the Optane to see if this holds true, but I want to see what can be done, if anything about this issue. 

It feels like an awful waste of money to not be able to use this system to its full potential.


----------



## gupsterg

nycgtr said:


> Do any of beta bios address a fix that actually stops the stupid ch1 fan from going 100% and then never coming back down.
> 
> 
> 
> gupsterg said:
> 
> 
> 
> Dunno, don't have issue. I was wondering have you tried the fan extension board that came with mobo? that has Winbond/Nuvoton control chip.
> 
> 
> 
> Brain29 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think hes talking about the bug were if you let your computer wake from sleep or hibernate after a few hours your fans will be pinned at 100% with no control
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Not happening here. Last night was torture night on TR/ZE :h34r-smi . I had rig like this. Then I stopped it and did a sleep/resume and no issue, I forgot to grab screenie but a HWiNFO CSV is in this ZIP plus 2x sleep/resume and CB15 runs.

For me my list of any bugs on ZE are very small to inconsequential. Recently I swapped out the EK TR block for Bykski, this has RGB. Board had been set to static red way back in Sep 17 on initial install, OS wiped which had AURA, numerous UEFI used, etc since then, here is how block looks using mobo header.

For me it is strutting it's stuff and going on and on like the Duracell Bunny  .


----------



## Brain29

gupsterg said:


> Not happening here...
> ...
> For me my list of any bugs on ZE are very small to inconsequential.


You sure you have a motherboard made by Asus?


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

Question: Does setting an offset voltage disable down-volting on this platform?

I am on BIOS 0902 and if I set offset for a normal OC or if I set offset of a P-State OC the processor downclocks but does not downvolt.

Anyone else confirm this before I complete Raja's bug report form and make a tit of meself :blushsmil

Or do I have my Intel head on and offset....nah right?


----------



## gupsterg

Brain29 said:


> You sure you have a motherboard made by Asus?


Mine is a special edition  , forged deep in mount ASUS. Raja orchestrated the gathering, where Shaminio cast it on the forge, as Elmor imbued it with Norse magic, Der8auer added strength of German engineering, The Stilt finished it off with his magical coding. It is the one board to rule them all :coolsmile .


----------



## Brain29

gupsterg said:


> Mine is a special edition  , forged deep in mount ASUS. Raja orchestrated the gathering, where Shaminio cast it on the forge, as Elmor imbued it with Norse magic, Der8auer added strength of German engineering, The Stilt finished it off with his magical coding. It is the one board to rule them all :coolsmile .


smeagol wants it!


----------



## gupsterg

Brain29 said:


> smeagol wants it!


My Precioussss!  .



Arne Saknussemm said:


> Question: Does setting an offset voltage disable down-volting on this platform?
> 
> I am on BIOS 0902 and if I set offset for a normal OC or if I set offset of a P-State OC the processor downclocks but does not downvolt.
> 
> Anyone else confirm this before I complete Raja's bug report form and make a tit of meself :blushsmil
> 
> Or do I have my Intel head on and offset....nah right?


Nope, from what I tested it could be you have something which is running in the background that doesn't have huge CPU load and cause it to keep voltage high. I tested High Performance at min CPU 20% as you posted on ROG and other settings, post link.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Fingers crossed we get word on the new AGESA Bios soon.


----------



## Kyozon

ENTERPRISE said:


> Fingers crossed we get word on the new AGESA Bios soon.


Oh, that would be awesome!


----------



## JBauer

Kyozon said:


> Oh, that would be awesome!


Forgive the newbie question, but what value will that bring? Thanks...


----------



## Brain29

JBauer said:


> Forgive the newbie question, but what value will that bring? Thanks...


AMD Generic Encapsulated Software Architecture (AGESA), is a bootstrap protocol by which system devices on AMD64-architecture mainboards are initialized. The AGESA software in the BIOS of such mainboards is responsible for the initialization of the processor cores, memory, and the HyperTransport controller.


----------



## Brain29

gupsterg said:


> Not happening here. Last night was torture night on TR/ZE :h34r-smi . I had rig like this. Then I stopped it and did a sleep/resume and no issue,


what power settings do you have 

I have been using balance
1 hour screen
2 hour sleep

*maybe AMD balanced or high performance will make a diffrence


----------



## gupsterg

Brain29 said:


> what power settings do you have
> 
> I have been using balance
> 1 hour screen
> 2 hour sleep
> 
> *maybe AMD balanced or high performance will make a diffrence


I use customised default OS Balanced. I also never install the AMD Balanced profile from chipset drivers, last time I used it on Ryzen/C6H it made my rig have oddities in OS. Only changes I make in my custom plan is:-



3 min Screen off
Never Sleep
25% Processor performance core parking min cores (this setting only visible with registry mod)

I placed rig to sleep from start menu option.


----------



## JBauer

Brain29 said:


> AMD Generic Encapsulated Software Architecture (AGESA), is a bootstrap protocol by which system devices on AMD64-architecture mainboards are initialized. The AGESA software in the BIOS of such mainboards is responsible for the initialization of the processor cores, memory, and the HyperTransport controller.


I read the wikipedia article yesterday - what I am not understanding yet is if there is a specific update in the next version that will help us somehow?


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

Anyone confirm/deny

When I select a RAM profile such as "Stilt 3200...." it sets the timings and voltage but does not set the RAM frequency in Extreme Tweaker Tab

Also...when flashing BIOS...if last OC was say 4.1GHz...on main tab of newly flashed BIOS target frequency is 4100MHz...hanging over from last BIOS

??

Tried 0804 0902 0019


----------



## gupsterg

JBauer said:


> I read the wikipedia article yesterday - what I am not understanding yet is if there is a specific update in the next version that will help us somehow?


I doubt any of us know of a specific update. As AGESA includes CPU microcode/SMU & IMC firmware updates it may improve an aspect of platform or not. A newer UEFI may have a bug fix which "we" need and could have potential for a new one to occur. 



Arne Saknussemm said:


> Anyone confirm/deny
> 
> When I select a RAM profile such as "Stilt 3200...." it sets the timings and voltage but does not set the RAM frequency in Extreme Tweaker Tab
> 
> Also...when flashing BIOS...if last OC was say 4.1GHz...on main tab of newly flashed BIOS target frequency is 4100MHz...hanging over from last BIOS
> 
> ??
> 
> Tried 0804 0902 0019


RAM MHz after preset loaded it is the same on my board/C6H as it is for you.

After a flash my board does not retain settings, I did check while back when another had stated issue.


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

gupsterg said:


> RAM MHz after preset loaded it is the same on my board/C6H as it is for you.
> 
> After a flash my board does not retain settings, I did check while back when another had stated issue.


Thanks again gupsterg! The retaining settings bit is a bit weird I think I'll have to RMA this board :-( just to sleep sound at nights....


----------



## Brain29

gupsterg said:


> I use customised default OS Balanced. I also never install the AMD Balanced profile from chipset drivers, last time I used it on Ryzen/C6H it made my rig have oddities in OS. Only changes I make in my custom plan is:-
> 
> 
> 
> 3 min Screen off
> Never Sleep
> 25% Processor performance core parking min cores (this setting only visible with registry mod)
> 
> I placed rig to sleep from start menu option.


Manually placing my rig to sleep dose not create the issue. Only when the timer goes through its process and the sleep has been active for a few hours is the bug created. If I wake the commuter in a short amount of time it seems to be random. Only after the few hours dose it seem to be a 100% issue.


----------



## Brain29

Arne Saknussemm said:


> Thanks again gupsterg! The retaining settings bit is a bit weird I think I'll have to RMA this board :-( just to sleep sound at nights....


I have never had the settings save after updated or downgrading uefi -- if that's what your talking about. Also non of the saved profiles created with the OC profile translate to any uefi different then what is created


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

Brain29 said:


> if that's what your talking about


Sorry, not talking about profiles and normal settings. Those, of course don't save between BIOS updates, nor should they since a new BIOS really means new settings, even if they are similar to previous.

What was happening was that I was running a 4.1 GHz OC ...clearing CMOS...flashing BIOS and seeing 4100MHz as target frquency on "main" tab...which I don't think should be happening...


----------



## gupsterg

Brain29 said:


> Manually placing my rig to sleep dose not create the issue. Only when the timer goes through its process and the sleep has been active for a few hours is the bug created. If I wake the commuter in a short amount of time it seems to be random. Only after the few hours dose it seem to be a 100% issue.


Please be seated when I share next set of results  .



Arne Saknussemm said:


> Sorry, not talking about profiles and normal settings. Those, of course don't save between BIOS updates, nor should they since a new BIOS really means new settings, even if they are similar to previous.
> 
> What was happening was that I was running a 4.1 GHz OC ...clearing CMOS...flashing BIOS and seeing 4100MHz as target frquency on "main" tab...which I don't think should be happening...


His settings are not being recalled after a UEFI flash either Arne  .



Brain29 said:


> *I have never had the settings save after updated or downgrading uefi* -- if that's what your talking about. Also non of the saved profiles created with the OC profile translate to any uefi different then what is created


Arne in the other ZE thread it was @Kyozon that was seeing memory related settings being recalled after UEFI flash IIRC, that was when I did a video showing I didn't have issue. Dunno if it resolved itself or not for him.


----------



## Brain29

Arne Saknussemm said:


> Sorry, not talking about profiles and normal settings. Those, of course don't save between BIOS updates, nor should they since a new BIOS really means new settings, even if they are similar to previous.
> 
> What was happening was that I was running a 4.1 GHz OC ...clearing CMOS...flashing BIOS and seeing 4100MHz as target frquency on "main" tab...which I don't think should be happening...


The default target has always been 4.1 since first release out of 4 boards i have had - it has has always started at 4.1 in uefi as high as 1.45 v
(I don't think its all cores though)
after booting to the os though it will read as 3.5 (unless its using the boost)


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

Board is all over the place here...

I set F5 defaults and reboot...speed is 3700MHz but RAM is still 3200

F5 again and reboot speed 3700MHz and ram now 2133 where it should be.

F5 defaults sometimes board light go back to default cycling colours...sometimes stay solid red after the aura hack...

I've never had these kinds of quirks before from a BIOS...and if 4100MHz is default speed why do I have 3700? but CPU boosting to 4.1+?

Target on extreme tweaker tab is 3500...as I'd expect...


----------



## gupsterg

@Arne Saknussemm

In screenie the blue boxed area is hardware monitor, at stock due to Core Performance Boost/Precision Boost/Extend Frequency Range CPU can boost high. See this recent thread on ROG. I'm gonna add this in OP of my thread here, but got delayed as had to unbork it from forum SW changes.



Spoiler















@Brain29

Organise files by date/time in this ZIP, I'll continue testing and if anything change will let you/Elmor know.

I was doing some testing of RGB recently I can lose RGB on IO/PCH under certain conditions, posted info on ROG forum. Even then I did not get the firmware update message at post though.


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

Yeah..that pert works fine..it's live so no problem there...just tells you what's happening.

It's the other part that refuses to correct until second reboot and even after flash...not sure if this reads from CPU or what...

New board here Thursday so I guess I'll find out....


----------



## gupsterg

Dunno why you have the RAM MHz quirk, hopefully other member that had it will chime in how/if resolved for him. I can only say I don't have issue, which doesn't help much .

The reason you see 3700MHz on the Main page is as it displays the all core frequency in that section.



Spoiler


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

gupsterg said:


> I can only say I don't have issue, which doesn't help much .
> 
> The reason you see 3700MHz on the Main page is as it displays the all core frequency in that section.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler


Yeah that helps...I haven't had this kind of behaviour on other ASUS boards...and if you don't have it on yours then board is likely candidate for problem....might be CPU but I have to go with the obvious...

And yeah, that makes sense (3700)...what doesn't make sense is me setting all core OC 4.1 and it still appearing after a BIOS flash...something is rotten in the state of Denmark! It's like the BIOS here is taking 2 or three restarts to pass along my settings...if at all...


----------



## Brain29

Arne Saknussemm said:


> Yeah that helps...I haven't had this kind of behaviour on other ASUS boards...and if you don't have it on yours then board is likely candidate for problem....might be CPU but I have to go with the obvious...
> 
> And yeah, that makes sense (3700)...what doesn't make sense is me setting all core OC 4.1 and it still appearing after a BIOS flash...something is rotten in the state of Denmark! It's like the BIOS here is taking 2 or three restarts to pass along my settings...if at all...


you might have a mild corruption in your uefi from flashing. I would get crazy weridness everytime I flashed and it would take close to a few weeks for the board to go through garbage collect or I had to sit there and reflash over and over until it randomly came back. it got so bad that the versions numbers in the uefi would dissapear and just be ---


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

Brain29 said:


> you might have a mild corruption in your uefi from flashing. I would get crazy weridness everytime I flashed


Well, I just don't know...we'll see when new board arrives...I've never had a bad flash, BIOS flashback method, before but this is the first board I've had with no removable BIOS chip and no dual BIOS...

Two reboots to get to F5 defaults is not how it should work!


----------



## Brain29

Arne Saknussemm said:


> Well, I just don't know...we'll see when new board arrives...I've never had a bad flash, BIOS flashback method, before but this is the first board I've had with no removable BIOS chip and no dual BIOS...
> 
> Two reboots to get to F5 defaults is not how it should work!


this is common place with this board I'm afraid


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

Brain29 said:


> this is common place with this board I'm afraid


Oh man...don't say that...it'll be seriously disappointing if new BIOS system is buggy. I was already pretty disappointed there was no dual BIOS for flagship AMD board!


----------



## gupsterg

My last 3 boards from ASUS have all been single bios chip with flashback feature.

M7R owned ~1.5yrs and OC'd like a bitach on sterioids, definitely not flagship mobo for that socket but a real corker IMO. Then had the C6H ~1yr and good results within the context of Ryzen. ZE ~6mths and again good results in context of Threadripper.

I am a profuse meddler with my rig, I have no qualms flashing back and forth regularly on these boards and not encountered an issue in this context. I also take screenies of main mobo page to note any EC FW changes and CPU page for microcode. I have not encountered any borked flashes TBH, bugged version number displayed as Brain29.


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

What kind of BIOS chip...the old, 8-legged, extractable or this new fangled soldered in chip? just out of interest....


----------



## Brain29

gupsterg said:


> I use customised default OS Balanced.


Just tried your settings and tried 3 other random ones and they all create the 100% power issue after wake


----------



## gupsterg

Dunno chap, are you still using AURA? Ai Suite?


----------



## Brain29

gupsterg said:


> Dunno chap, are you still using AURA? Ai Suite?


I have had latest Ai Suite for a week still buggy gonna clean it out when I find the time .. but this problem with the fan has been happening since release before I ever installed Ai Suite


----------



## mypickaxe

I was able to get this working, albeit with a slow POST (not too bad, just 30 seconds or so before Windows begins to boot from the NVMe RAID.)

The key was to remove the Optane 900P from the system, initialize the four Samsung 960 Pros with NVMe RAID enabled, create the array, install windows...

...and then, shut down, install the Optane 900P in another PCIe slot, boot Windows, run diskpart and delete all partitions...

...finally, I could create a new volume for use by Windows, assign it a drive letter, and use the Optane 900P. 

It would be nice to be able to boot from the 900P while NVMe RAID is enabled. As it stands, this does not seem to be possible. You simply can't initialize an Intel NVMe device (Optane 900p, possibly 750 Series) from within RAIDXpert2.



mypickaxe said:


> Anyone else having issues with Intel NVMe devices when attempting to use NVMe RAID with non-Intel devices?
> 
> My configuration is one (1) Intel Optane 900p as my boot device and four (4) Samsung 960 Pro NVMe devices (spread across DIMM.2, under the PCH heat sink and the second PCIe x16 slot.
> 
> Anytime the Optane device is installed, I'm unable to create an NVMe RAID array with the Samsung devices. As soon as I remove the Optane device, the problem disappears, I can create an array, even load and boot Windows from it.
> 
> There's no issue with Windows software RAID across the Samsung 960 Pros while booting from Optane. Of course, there's no TRIM and I doubt performance is optimal.
> 
> I read on an Intel forum this seems to be an issue with any Intel NVMe device. I may try my Intel 750 Series 1.2TB in place of the Optane to see if this holds true, but I want to see what can be done, if anything about this issue.
> 
> It feels like an awful waste of money to not be able to use this system to its full potential.


----------



## Arne Saknussemm




----------



## elmor

Arne Saknussemm said:


>


Sorry for the delay. Got a test BIOS here with AGESA 1.0.0.5. This is still dropping DIMMs when training fails instead of recovering, seems it's a "feature" from AMD. It seems to drop less frequently than before, only at the very edge of stability. But let's see what kind of results you guys get. Still waiting for an answer on if there's anything done for fan control in this one.

http://www.mediafire.com/file/zduvm27bco6rqnn/ROG-ZENITH-EXTREME-ASUS-0001.zip


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

Haha...be careful what you wish for eh? Thanks elmor...I'll give this a go and see what it does!

:thumb:


----------



## ENTERPRISE

elmor said:


> Sorry for the delay. Got a test BIOS here with AGESA 1.0.0.5. This is still dropping DIMMs when training fails instead of recovering, seems it's a "feature" from AMD. It seems to drop less frequently than before, only at the very edge of stability. But let's see what kind of results you guys get. Still waiting for an answer on if there's anything done for fan control in this one.
> 
> http://www.mediafire.com/file/zduvm27bco6rqnn/ROG-ZENITH-EXTREME-ASUS-0001.zip


Thanks bud! 

Does anyone know what if any other changes where made in this AGESA version ?


----------



## elmor

Already got a new test version, this one does not seem to drop DIMMs http://www.mediafire.com/file/t9dq2djxcbkcoce/ROG-ZENITH-EXTREME-ASUS-0002.zip



ENTERPRISE said:


> Thanks bud!
> 
> Does anyone know what if any other changes where made in this AGESA version ?


Can't share the change log ... But mainly fixes/workarounds for different erratas. Quite a few patches for sleep/resume related problems.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

elmor said:


> Already got a new test version, this one does not seem to drop DIMMs http://www.mediafire.com/file/t9dq2djxcbkcoce/ROG-ZENITH-EXTREME-ASUS-0002.zip
> 
> 
> 
> Can't share the change log ... But mainly fixes/workarounds for different erratas. Quite a few patches for sleep/resume related problems.


Understood, but sounds like a few good fixes !


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

The good:

0002 works good enough here. Same as 0019 Get the same RAM profiles working 3200 even 3600...

The bad:

Have to use keyboard to get around BIOS since mouse is kind of laggy...slow...inaccurate to place

Still don't get my 1920X downvolting on P-State OC or if I set a multiplier...downclocks but no downvolt...


----------



## elmor

Arne Saknussemm said:


> The good:
> 
> 0002 works good enough here. Same as 0019 Get the same RAM profiles working 3200 even 3600...
> 
> The bad:
> 
> Have to use keyboard to get around BIOS since mouse is kind of laggy...slow...inaccurate to place
> 
> Still don't get my 1920X downvolting on P-State OC or if I set a multiplier...downclocks but no downvolt...


Make sure offset mode is selected and Advanced\AMD CBS\Zen Common Options\Global C-states Control = Enabled


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

elmor said:


> Make sure offset mode is selected and Advanced\AMD CBS\Zen Common Options\Global C-states Control = Enabled


Thanks for taking the time to reply elmor

I'm not sure if I've got a bugged CPU or what here.

I have double and triple checked this and I can't get P-State to work or setting a multiplier with offset voltage. In both instances the CPU downclocks no problem just does not downvolt.

I have reinstalled windows...tried all the power plans (with necessary edits for min processor speed)

I just set exactly as you indicate and get the same.

I have tried editing FID and VID....FID alone...Fid with offset

You can see in the pic...the green box downclocked....the red box in Ryzen Master the VID ....the red box in CPUz the VID+offset

I don't have anything running that would keep voltage up...for all my looking

I've compared settings with gupsterg on his 1950X and done exact same things and no joy. He can edit FID and VID without setting offset or enabling global control and it works....

Is it possible my CPU is defective in this one regard? At stock it works fine


----------



## elmor

Arne Saknussemm said:


> Thanks for taking the time to reply elmor
> 
> I'm not sure if I've got a bugged CPU or what here.
> 
> I have double and triple checked this and I can't get P-State to work or setting a multiplier with offset voltage. In both instances the CPU downclocks no problem just does not downvolt.
> 
> I have reinstalled windows...tried all the power plans (with necessary edits for min processor speed)
> 
> I just set exactly as you indicate and get the same.
> 
> I have tried editing FID and VID....FID alone...Fid with offset
> 
> You can see in the pic...the green box downclocked....the red box in Ryzen Master the VID ....the red box in CPUz the VID+offset
> 
> I don't have anything running that would keep voltage up...for all my looking
> 
> I've compared settings with gupsterg on his 1950X and done exact same things and no joy. He can edit FID and VID without setting offset or enabling global control and it works....
> 
> Is it possible my CPU is defective in this one regard? At stock it works fine


Test step by step.

Start with defaults and make sure that's downvolting, then set P-states to enabled but default values. After that change settings one by one until it does not downvolt any longer.


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

OK I have done step by step

F5 defaults=downclock downvolt
Global C State Control Enabled downclock downvolt
OC mode customized (but left auto) downclock downvolt
Custom PState 0 set to custom but left alone...F10 screenie below downclock downvolt max boost is still 4.2
Edit FID to 9A for 3850 (so no voltage offset...no other changes F10 screenie below) downclock no downvolt max frequency is 3850


Also on F5 defaults...if i set multi to 38 no other changes...I get downclocking but no downvolting


----------



## spadizzle

I am down about 10-15% speed for memory with this latest bios. I ran same memory settings from last bios.


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

Which BIOS?

Within the variation of AIDA I have had pretty much the same performance on all these BIOS

0902 vs 0002 (both channel/local setting for RAM)


----------



## Brain29

elmor said:


> Sorry for the delay. Got a test BIOS here with AGESA 1.0.0.5. This is still dropping DIMMs when training fails instead of recovering, seems it's a "feature" from AMD. It seems to drop less frequently than before, only at the very edge of stability. But let's see what kind of results you guys get. Still waiting for an answer on if there's anything done for fan control in this one.
> 
> http://www.mediafire.com/file/zduvm27bco6rqnn/ROG-ZENITH-EXTREME-ASUS-0001.zip


COOL !

also

I am a bit confused by your comment of the reason why the DIMMS are dropping because on my system I dropped to 2133 default and they were still gone 4 of the 8 -- but because I didn't have an OC based on I should have seen them ?? -- just curious if theirs a specific setting for me to play with if I see channels dropping when I get to test !


----------



## spadizzle

Arne Saknussemm said:


> Which BIOS?
> 
> Within the variation of AIDA I have had pretty much the same performance on all these BIOS
> 
> 0902 vs 0002 (both channel/local setting for RAM)


Memory is down 10k points for me for read/write etc...

Wait....how do you have 0002?

Just noticed elmor's link changed in the post... I will check that 0002 out!

Edit: I will post 3 screenshots relating to (Agesa 1003)902, [(Agesa 1005)0001, 0002] in a bit.

Edit 2: 3 different bios's. Agesa 1003, I scored better and while playing "Overwatch" I would have no stuttering issue. Agesa 1005 BIOS, I am having stuttering issues while gaming and memory scores are terrible along with the CPU suffering also. NOTE: All 3 benchmarks were ran 3 times with each BIOS(choosing the best) and exactly the same settings in BIOS. 

Guess I'll wait for the next revision to try out unless someone can help me over come the issues that I am having.


----------



## elmor

spadizzle said:


> Memory is down 10k points for me for read/write etc...
> 
> Wait....how do you have 0002?
> 
> Just noticed elmor's link changed in the post... I will check that 0002 out!
> 
> Edit: I will post 3 screenshots relating to (Agesa 1003)902, [(Agesa 1005)0001, 0002] in a bit.
> 
> Edit 2: 3 different bios's. Agesa 1003, I scored better and while playing "Overwatch" I would have no stuttering issue. Agesa 1005 BIOS, I am having stuttering issues while gaming and memory scores are terrible along with the CPU suffering also. NOTE: All 3 benchmarks were ran 3 times with each BIOS(choosing the best) and exactly the same settings in BIOS.
> 
> Guess I'll wait for the next revision to try out unless someone can help me over come the issues that I am having.


From the benchmark scores (lower bandwidth but lower latency) it looks like the default NUMA mode is changed. 

Advanced\AMD CBS\DF Common Options\Memory Interlaving

I suspect Channel is the default on 0001/0002. Try changing it to Die and you should get similar results.


----------



## spadizzle

*Agesa 10005*



elmor said:


> From the benchmark scores (lower bandwidth but lower latency) it looks like the default NUMA mode is changed.
> 
> Advanced\AMD CBS\DF Common Options\Memory Interlaving
> 
> I suspect Channel is the default on 0001/0002. Try changing it to Die and you should get similar results.




First is with DIE and 2nd is Channel. Overall the computer feels sluggish and gaming still gets a stutter now every 30 seconds or so for video. Thanks for the replies... I will keep messing around but am still open for help. thank you


----------



## gupsterg

elmor said:


> From the benchmark scores (lower bandwidth but lower latency) it looks like the default NUMA mode is changed.
> 
> Advanced\AMD CBS\DF Common Options\Memory Interlaving
> 
> I suspect Channel is the default on 0001/0002. Try changing it to Die and you should get similar results.


Die (UMA) for me on 0001/0002.


----------



## spadizzle

Got home last night and loaded default settings for BIOS 0002. At that point I just loaded Stilts 3333 Fast and turned on NVME raid. Rebooted and ran the mem benchmark. Scores were in the 85's for the memory. Restarted and set memory interweaving to, "Channel". Ran the test again and now was pretty much 100k across the memory. (read/write/copy/ latency was 65ish if I remember correctly. 

At that point I started making some changes in the BIOS to see what I had done to cause the memory slow down I mentioned on my earlier posts. I made some voltage changes, couple changes under advanced and disabled un-used sensors under Monitoring. 

Rebooted and could pretty much tell something was wrong. Ran the test and memory was now benching mid to low 80's. At that point I started putting one setting at a time back to default and would run the test again. Haven't had success yet in locating a bug/or me just screwing up. I ended up getting tired and going to bed before I could find it and will attempt again when I get home tonight after work.


Just thought I would give an update and will update later on this silliness.


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

spadizzle said:


> will update later on this silliness.


Heh...waiting for the result...that's weird! but interesting...


----------



## gupsterg

@spadizzle

So far every UEFI has defaulted to Memory mode:- Distributed / UMA / Memory Interleaving [Auto] = Die

Perhaps you set to Local (NUMA) via Ryzen Master and forgot? and starting thinking default was the faster speed memory result ....


----------



## spadizzle

Arne Saknussemm said:


> Heh...waiting for the result...that's weird! but interesting...


It is! The thing is its going to be something stupid, and most likely my fault. 



gupsterg said:


> @spadizzle
> 
> So far every UEFI has defaulted to Memory mode:- Distributed / UMA / Memory Interleaving [Auto] = Die
> 
> Agreed!
> 
> Perhaps you set to Local (NUMA) via Ryzen Master and forgot? and starting thinking default was the faster speed memory result ....


Nope, I am at that stage where I am triple checking settings. I am just slowly peeling away options that I have set to see what has affected the system. I can set either die or channel and the results are the same for benching. Also their is a stutter that happens with video.... so something isn't quite right. Its just weird that it is the same settings that I have used in the last 3 bios's.

Anyways I will be able to play around alittle more in about 7 hours from now.


----------



## spadizzle

So I finally found(discovered?) out what was going on with my lower memory bench marking and computer stuttering. I would always set a Multiplier to 40 for the CPU, nothing crazy, just get a little more out of it. BIOS 902 and previous had no issues, always had a score in the low 100k for memory(Aida64). Now fast forward to BIOS 0001,0002. The higher the CPU multiplier, the lower my memory score was each time. The screen shots will show 40,38,37 and Auto multiplier. Also, I always run my memory in "Channel Interleaving" mode. The auto setting is also showing a higher multiplier because its throttling around like a bunny rabbit.

Anyways, here they are and maybe ya'll can explain why this is happening and maybe a possible fix? I also re-installed Win1064bit and ran the tests. Some how I lost the 40 one. but here are the rest.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

spadizzle said:


> So I finally found(discovered?) out what was going on with my lower memory bench marking and computer stuttering. I would always set a Multiplier to 40 for the CPU, nothing crazy, just get a little more out of it. BIOS 902 and previous had no issues, always had a score in the low 100k for memory(Aida64). Now fast forward to BIOS 0001,0002. The higher the CPU multiplier, the lower my memory score was each time. The screen shots will show 40,38,37 and Auto multiplier. Also, I always run my memory in "Channel Interleaving" mode. The auto setting is also showing a higher multiplier because its throttling around like a bunny rabbit.
> 
> Anyways, here they are and maybe ya'll can explain why this is happening and maybe a possible fix? I also re-installed Win1064bit and ran the tests. Some how I lost the 40 one. but here are the rest.


Nice find. Possibly needs fixing @elmor


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

Confirmed! (not that there was any doubt)

3200 Auto

3200 Multi set (offset voltage)

Memory performance down and in my case 1920X no downvolting when CPU downclocks


----------



## christefan

what voltage we're you running for this performance? on memory and cpu


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

christefan said:


> what voltage we're you running for this performance? on memory and cpu


Hi christefan...not sure who you are asking but just in case....

This is stock voltage for first so whatever the CPU sets and 1.35v RAM and 1.025 SOC

Second is 4100MHz all core so 1.325v for that and RAM same as before...

So went back to agesa 1.0.0.4 BIOS 0019

Not happening there

3200 auto 

vs 3200 41multi

Stopping on 0019 for now


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Is it me or is AMD really struggling with memory on this platform ? Seems to be something that is always on the Ropes with BIOS/Agesa updates.


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

It does seem the IMC was a little under-worked...not sure what improvements we can expect...don't know if there is much more that new BIOS can bring....if there is, I hope ASUS get on and bring it!

I hope memory performance can be maintained and memory compatibility/stability improved...not one at the cost of the other...

We'll see I guess....

TR2 already in the news...and "Castle Peak"


----------



## spadizzle

i want to run 0019 but alas, i am using M2 raid


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

0019 not have the necessary for RAID?

Hmmm...waiting for a well rounded BIOS...


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

If I leave things at stock...as you all know...the XFR/performance boost will try for 4.2GHz on some cores and you see voltage spiking to the 1.5v mark

Since I can run my CPU at 4.1 at 1.325v and 4.2 at 1.35v I was naturally assuming a negative offset would bring this spike voltage down...and it does

I set -0.09v and I drop that spike to 1.4v....I am still working on getting this down but obviously somewhere the negative offset will be too low for idle (0.785 at the moment) so I'm not going to push it.

BUT

How come if I set the multi at 41 for an all core OC I have to set offset to +0.075 to get 1.325v?

Is there something fubar with the vid multi tables in the BIOS?


----------



## Brain29

ENTERPRISE said:


> Is it me or is AMD really struggling with memory on this platform ? Seems to be something that is always on the Ropes with BIOS/Agesa updates.


My buddy's Asrock board has close to no issue compared my Asus -- I don't doubt that amd agesa has/creates issues -- so far asrock as been less of a roller coaster ride


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Brain29 said:


> My buddy's Asrock board has close to no issue compared my Asus -- I don't doubt that amd agesa has/creates issues -- so far asrock as been less of a roller coaster ride


Yeah I hear that all the time, Asrock seem to have it locked down a little more compared to Asus but I cannot comment as to why or if that is fact...just something I have heard.


----------



## elmor

Sorry for the delays, it will still be a while until we're back on track with latest AGESA etc. We're keeping any official BIOS on AGESA 1.0.0.3 until we've sorted out the issues. What I've got right now is a beta BIOS 1001 with fixes for fan tuning (randomly detecting 9x%).

http://www.mediafire.com/file/x0iyimm4knbr54f/ROG-ZENITH-EXTREME-ASUS-1001.zip


----------



## ENTERPRISE

elmor said:


> Sorry for the delays, it will still be a while until we're back on track with latest AGESA etc. We're keeping any official BIOS on AGESA 1.0.0.3 until we've sorted out the issues. What I've got right now is a beta BIOS 1001 with fixes for fan tuning (randomly detecting 9x%).
> 
> http://www.mediafire.com/file/x0iyimm4knbr54f/ROG-ZENITH-EXTREME-ASUS-1001.zip


Thanks bud ! Thanks for the update and new test BIOS.


----------



## farkadonitis

Thanks for the update Elmor


----------



## Brain29

elmor said:


> Sorry for the delays, it will still be a while until we're back on track with latest AGESA etc. We're keeping any official BIOS on AGESA 1.0.0.3 until we've sorted out the issues. What I've got right now is a beta BIOS 1001 with fixes for fan tuning (randomly detecting 9x%).
> 
> http://www.mediafire.com/file/x0iyimm4knbr54f/ROG-ZENITH-EXTREME-ASUS-1001.zip


haven't played with anything else but qfan .. haven't noticed a difference

the 2 colors are 2 different fan types but the same config on each header - each get a different min %power

*it would be very nice to have a way to bypass the q fan settings and manually control the min power %


----------



## elmor

Brain29 said:


> haven't played with anything else but qfan .. haven't noticed a difference
> 
> the 2 colors are 2 different fan types but the same config on each header - each get a different min %power
> 
> *it would be very nice to have a way to bypass the q fan settings and manually control the min power %


Thanks, forwarded the info and your request.


----------



## st4v0

I have a small request elmor.
Im still struggling with the coldboot issue on any ram speed above 2133.
It might help people like myself and others if settings that are set to auto actually showed what it was choosing for that auto setting.
Most do not.


----------



## elmor

st4v0 said:


> I have a small request elmor.
> Im still struggling with the coldboot issue on any ram speed above 2133.
> It might help people like myself and others if settings that are set to auto actually showed what it was choosing for that auto setting.
> Most do not.


Sorry, not possible with the current BIOS structure. I do agree this would be useful as well. Which sticks and configuration do you have that causes you to have issues that bad? How does this cold boot issue manifest?


----------



## st4v0

elmor said:


> Sorry, not possible with the current BIOS structure. I do agree this would be useful as well. Which sticks and configuration do you have that causes you to have issues that bad? How does this cold boot issue manifest?


Thanks for the reply,this is the original thread for my problem.

https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthre...ent-Z-32GB-cold-boot-problems&highlight=St4v0

which starts like this....

G.Skill Trident Z 32GB (4x8GB) DDR4 PC4-3200C18 4000MHz 

At default spd 2133mhz it runs just fine and starts from cold off and restarts just fine.
However,at anything above that and it will restart fine and bench all the way up to 3200Mhz.
But as soon as you shut it down completely and try and do a coldboot and it will power on for maybe 3 seconds and then shut off completely.
Is this where its failing training? is their a way to disable this?
All I do know for sure is 3200Mhz is 100% prime stable .
Any help or suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
thanks
st4v0


----------



## Brain29

elmor said:


> Thanks, forwarded the info and your request.


** just an update

nothing has changed but nothing is worse either  ++ (unlike the last few uefi changes were the leds or something has gone out might just be a random occurrence)

** for the bug where fans get pinned at 100% after sleep my friend noticed something that might help --

When the computer first is powered on all fans are at 100% until the uefi boots and takes over (loads the fan profile)

When the computer wakes from sleep the state of 100% power to fans is the same as if - first power

but where thinking because the computer is in sleep and technically not off - the uefi to save time ignores its normal boot function that includes the fan profiles to load

but fan profile load call might be missing or ignored while waking from sleep or hibernate
or the fan controller is bugged/glitched and can't read a sensor correctly IE .. I have no fan in cpu header so it is set to ignore worse case scenario I would guess would be after wake it assumes there is a cpu fan(because that is default 101 uefi settings) but then a glitch happens and everything is ignored.. (when normally you would be presented with an f1 please boot because it is a wake state boot it is bypassed for the OS) 
(just a some crazy thoughts) 
**


----------



## AgnomK

elmor said:


> Sorry for the delays, it will still be a while until we're back on track with latest AGESA etc. We're keeping any official BIOS on AGESA 1.0.0.3 until we've sorted out the issues. What I've got right now is a beta BIOS 1001 with fixes for fan tuning (randomly detecting 9x%).
> 
> http://www.mediafire.com/file/x0iyimm4knbr54f/ROG-ZENITH-EXTREME-ASUS-1001.zip


What AGESA version is in this BIOS? I've tried both 0001 and 0002 with no luck, latency increased, worse stability... And now, with BIOS 1001, everything is better than 0019... Even my SCSI card started to show up during boot, got to crank up my RAM to 3333 MHz stable. All my tests were done with Memory Interlaving set to Channel...

On 0019:









On 0002 (My AIDA version was outdated, so motherboard wasn't detected properly):









On 1001:









FIY, the ram kit is from Corsair, model CMR32GX4M4C3466C16, version 4.31. running at 1,37V


----------



## Brain29

[(Agesa 1005)0001, 0002]


----------



## spadizzle

*Agesa 1005, 1003 or 1004(1002, 902, 0019)*



AgnomK said:


> What AGESA version is in this BIOS? I've tried both 0001 and 0002 with no luck, latency increased, worse stability... And now, with BIOS 1001, everything is better than 0019... Even my SCSI card started to show up during boot, got to crank up my RAM to 3333 MHz stable. All my tests were done with Memory Interlaving set to Channel...
> 
> On 0019:
> 
> 
> On 0002 (My AIDA version was outdated, so motherboard wasn't detected properly):
> 
> 
> On 1001:
> 
> 
> FIY, the ram kit is from Corsair, model CMR32GX4M4C3466C16, version 4.31. running at 1,37V


Set your CPU to Auto Multiplier. Unfortunately 1001,2 has a bug that once you set the Multiplier manually, it starts causing issues with memory speed. I was running the 902, but now I'm back to 1002  Yeah the CPU is running stock with the OC, but the memory timings I seem to be having better luck with. Scroll up a few posts and look for myself, Arne and Gust discussing the issue. The run your running 0019 is with the Agesa 1004, but ASUS said issues and it doesn't include the M2 Raid config


----------



## BrennanMH

First, I want to say thanks for the quick BIOS updates, been great.

I just flashed to 1001 in the hopes that I might be able to get my Tdie to stop reporting 27degs under. First, Yay! It is looking like a real temp now so maybe I can finally tune my fans w/o fear.

But, I get no video during POST, it boots to Windoze and the drivers kick in and viola! But, I need to tweak some BIOS settings and I'm just SOL.

Any ideas? I've tried plugging my monitor into both cards (oh, yeah, dual 1080 TIs) and that didn't help. I do get a monitor flash on boot, it looks like it probes, but then it just goes away.

I do get into the BIOS, it looks like, the LCD says BIOS Setup.

Any help welcome,
Thanks,

=B-)


----------



## Brain29

BrennanMH said:


> First, I want to say thanks for the quick BIOS updates, been great.
> 
> I just flashed to 1001 in the hopes that I might be able to get my Tdie to stop reporting 27degs under. First, Yay! It is looking like a real temp now so maybe I can finally tune my fans w/o fear.
> 
> But, I get no video during POST, it boots to Windoze and the drivers kick in and viola! But, I need to tweak some BIOS settings and I'm just SOL.
> 
> Any ideas? I've tried plugging my monitor into both cards (oh, yeah, dual 1080 TIs) and that didn't help. I do get a monitor flash on boot, it looks like it probes, but then it just goes away.
> 
> I do get into the BIOS, it looks like, the LCD says BIOS Setup.
> 
> Any help welcome,
> Thanks,
> 
> =B-)


maybe -- 
turn off fast boot ?

remove 1 graphics card to see if you can see it then -- if you can then you might have an sli bug


----------



## elmor

@spadizzle @Arne Saknussemm @AgnomK

AGESA 1.0.0.5 with fixed performance when overclocking, please help me verify  http://www.mediafire.com/file/cv29b5c5hl85s7q/ROG-ZENITH-EXTREME-ASUS-0020.zip


----------



## woppy101

elmor said:


> @spadizzle @Arne Saknussemm @AgnomK
> 
> AGESA 1.0.0.5 with fixed performance when overclocking, please help me verify  http://www.mediafire.com/file/cv29b5c5hl85s7q/ROG-ZENITH-EXTREME-ASUS-0020.zip


How long before this is available for the Strix?


----------



## elmor

woppy101 said:


> How long before this is available for the Strix?


No idea, not working with that product.


----------



## MLipfert

@elmor
Will AGESA 1.0.0.5 also fix the virtualization bug, that makes it impossible to boot Linux in a VirtualBox VM, when the CPU is overclocked? I have encountered this bug on a MSI X370 Gaming Pro Carbon with the current BIOS that includes AGESA 1.0.0.1a. With AGESA 1.1.0.1 everything was fine before. Might be related to the memory bandwidth problem while overclocking.


----------



## AgnomK

elmor said:


> @spadizzle @Arne Saknussemm @AgnomK
> 
> AGESA 1.0.0.5 with fixed performance when overclocking, please help me verify  http://www.mediafire.com/file/cv29b5c5hl85s7q/ROG-ZENITH-EXTREME-ASUS-0020.zip


Installed today, didn't get much of a chance to play around, but... My baseline is 0019:










So, 0020 with only memory settings and overclocking enhancement disabled:










And now 0020 with all the same settings I used on 0019:










It seems it's pretty much the same as 0019, but with a newer AGESA...


----------



## spadizzle

*0020*

@elmor

Got home and saw this bios and ran couple quick tests, will work through it more on my days off after tomorrow. 

First run, was a set CPU/FSB Multiplier of 40x100 with custom mem timings. Looks just fine! 

Second run, auto with custom mem timings. Bench is good.

Will research it more over the new few days, thank you for the update and hard work Elmor and Asus Team!


----------



## elmor

Great, thanks for testing. This should mean that we can move over to 1.0.0.5 for future official releases.

Regarding the issue with not being able to boot Linux VMs, it's not something I've tested so I don't know if it has been changed. Are you able to test it yourself? If it still is an issue, I've got a few ideas on what that could be related to.


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

elmor said:


> @spadizzle @Arne Saknussemm @AgnomK
> 
> AGESA 1.0.0.5 with fixed performance when overclocking, please help me verify  http://www.mediafire.com/file/cv29b5c5hl85s7q/ROG-ZENITH-EXTREME-ASUS-0020.zip


Stock and multiplier set...has fixed memory performance...

Still can't get my 1920X to downclock with any P-State permutation...but that might be my sample of one


----------



## MLipfert

elmor said:


> Great, thanks for testing. This should mean that we can move over to 1.0.0.5 for future official releases.
> 
> Regarding the issue with not being able to boot Linux VMs, it's not something I've tested so I don't know if it has been changed. Are you able to test it yourself? If it still is an issue, I've got a few ideas on what that could be related to.


I have only access to a MSI X370 Gaming Pro Carbon. So I have to wait until MSI releases a new Beta-BIOS with the latest AGESA-Module. But maybe other users can test it?! Just try to boot a Linux VM with an overclocked CPU. If it shows a weird exception on booting, the problem is still unfixed.


----------



## elmor

MLipfert said:


> I have only access to a MSI X370 Gaming Pro Carbon. So I have to wait until MSI releases a new Beta-BIOS with the latest AGESA-Module. But maybe other users can test it?! Just try to boot a Linux VM with an overclocked CPU. If it shows a weird exception on booting, the problem is still unfixed.


I'd suggest you to search for "amd ppr family 17h models 00h-0Fh" and check specifically MSRC000_0104. That'd be my first guess.


----------



## FuriousReload

elmor said:


> Great, thanks for testing. This should mean that we can move over to 1.0.0.5 for future official releases.
> 
> Regarding the issue with not being able to boot Linux VMs, it's not something I've tested so I don't know if it has been changed. Are you able to test it yourself? If it still is an issue, I've got a few ideas on what that could be related to.


Any ETA for an official BIOS release?


----------



## newfieboy27

After installing the latest AGESA 1.0.0.5 BIOS - 0002 -- I'm having a horrible time getting my RAM to show anything above 2100Mhz. I pop into the bios, turn on DOCP -- set the RAM to anything above baseline -- reboot and get the double boot RAM training -- then nothing. BIOS still showing that its attempting to set the RAM to the higher speed, but Windows is still showing 2100Mhz in CPUZ. I was on bios 0701 and had no issues (except for the stupid FAN issue). Any idea gents? 

Note -- I had updated to the latest official bios 0902 prior, but it failed to boot with a RAM error. Thats when I moved to the beta bios 0002, and was able to get it to boot but now having issues with memory speed.


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

newfieboy27 said:


> After installing the latest AGESA 1.0.0.5 BIOS - 0002


Latest is 0020 http://www.overclock.net/forum/11-a...aint-bug-tracking-thread-47.html#post26983617


----------



## newfieboy27

Arne Saknussemm said:


> Latest is 0020 http://www.overclock.net/forum/11-a...aint-bug-tracking-thread-47.html#post26983617


Indeed it was a typo. Sorry about that -- but yes, still having issues. I"m going to try 0020 when I get home from work today, and see if that lets me do anything with my memory speed. I really don't want to go back to 0701.


----------



## FuriousReload

newfieboy27 said:


> Indeed it was a typo. Sorry about that -- but yes, still having issues. I"m going to try 0020 when I get home from work today, and see if that lets me do anything with my memory speed. I really don't want to go back to 0701.


I was able to obtain 3600 MHz on my RAM after switching to 0020. Previously I wasn't stable past 3200 MHz. I got 3600 with 14-14-14-14-30-44 @ 1.4v, I am excited about it.


----------



## newfieboy27

FuriousReload said:


> I was able to obtain 3600 MHz on my RAM after switching to 0020. Previously I wasn't stable past 3200 MHz. I got 3600 with 14-14-14-14-30-44 @ 1.4v, I am excited about it.


I'd even be happy with 3200. If possible -- could you do me a favor and take a picture of any settings that you might have changed with 0020 and post it here? I'm going to mess with mine in a few hours -- and could use a little bit of visual guidance.


----------



## FuriousReload

newfieboy27 said:


> I'd even be happy with 3200. If possible -- could you do me a favor and take a picture of any settings that you might have changed with 0020 and post it here? I'm going to mess with mine in a few hours -- and could use a little bit of visual guidance.


I used the same settings I tried on 0902 and didn't have luck then. The AGESA code update really helped I presume. You can use the Ryzen Memory Calculator here on the forums to help with your timings.


----------



## newfieboy27

FuriousReload said:


> I used the same settings I tried on 0902 and didn't have luck then. The AGESA code update really helped I presume. You can use the Ryzen Memory Calculator here on the forums to help with your timings.


Nothing I've done can get it to boot with anything other than default 2133Mhz. I've used the Ryzen Memory Calculator, but it never made a difference. The odd thing is, with BIOS 0701 all I had to do was set the Memory to 2933Mhz with the DOCP enabled. Reboot -- bam. Done. 

Now that I've moved up to the various beta BIOS 0002 or 0020 I cannot get it to change. 

My POST starts out with a single BEEP and a shutdown, then I see it going through all the normal POST codes on the LED. Eventually it will boot with the same results posted -- stuck on 2133Mhz. I'm going to try going back to BIOS 0701. I'll just deal with the crappy fan settings for now. Unless anyone has an idea of whats going on.

It almost seems like the memory isn't training for some reason.


----------



## elmor

newfieboy27 said:


> Nothing I've done can get it to boot with anything other than default 2133Mhz. I've used the Ryzen Memory Calculator, but it never made a difference. The odd thing is, with BIOS 0701 all I had to do was set the Memory to 2933Mhz with the DOCP enabled. Reboot -- bam. Done.
> 
> Now that I've moved up to the various beta BIOS 0002 or 0020 I cannot get it to change.
> 
> My POST starts out with a single BEEP and a shutdown, then I see it going through all the normal POST codes on the LED. Eventually it will boot with the same results posted -- stuck on 2133Mhz. I'm going to try going back to BIOS 0701. I'll just deal with the crappy fan settings for now. Unless anyone has an idea of whats going on.
> 
> It almost seems like the memory isn't training for some reason.



I've got one of those kits on the way, will let you know the results.


----------



## newfieboy27

elmor said:


> I've got one of those kits on the way, will let you know the results.


Hey @elmor. Here are some updated details for you.

Samsung B-Die -- Its a Corsair Vengeance RGB Kit (CMR32GX4M4C3466C16) -- which is not on the supported list as far as I know. As for time -- I have plenty of time to experiment. I can give 0019 a try tonight when I get back home. (A recommendation from Arne-saknussemm)

FYI -- I tossed on my old BIOS 0701 and low-and-behold, the memory trained to 2933Mhz without issue. First time around. I wasn't going to push it any higher for now -- I just wanted to see if I could get any kind of overclock higher than the base 2133Mhz. I have not played around with timings on 0701, as this is mostly a test just to ensure it can train and boot. 

Maybe it has something to do with the newer AGESA. Oh and FYI -- 0902 failed to boot at all with this memory kit. 

Fun times.


----------



## nycgtr

The new beta messed up the temp display on live dash for me.


----------



## elmor

nycgtr said:


> The new beta messed up the temp display on live dash for me.


Any more details than that?


----------



## nycgtr

elmor said:


> Any more details than that?


I don't use the feature much so it doesn't bother me. Like with some of the previous betas, I don't recall the numbers the live dash reads something like 170c or some weird temp. On the test prior and the one before that, it was fine.


----------



## AgnomK

newfieboy27 said:


> Hey @elmor. Here are some updated details for you.
> 
> Samsung B-Die -- Its a Corsair Vengeance RGB Kit (CMR32GX4M4C3466C16) -- which is not on the supported list as far as I know. As for time -- I have plenty of time to experiment. I can give 0019 a try tonight when I get back home. (A recommendation from Arne-saknussemm)
> 
> FYI -- I tossed on my old BIOS 0701 and low-and-behold, the memory trained to 2933Mhz without issue. First time around. I wasn't going to push it any higher for now -- I just wanted to see if I could get any kind of overclock higher than the base 2133Mhz. I have not played around with timings on 0701, as this is mostly a test just to ensure it can train and boot.
> 
> Maybe it has something to do with the newer AGESA. Oh and FYI -- 0902 failed to boot at all with this memory kit.
> 
> Fun times.


There is something fishy here... I have the exact same memory, CMR32GX4M4C3466C16, it worked out of the box with the DOCP profile, but right now I'm running it at 3200 Mhz CR 14-14-14-28 with 1.36V... Could you check which version your RAM is? Mine is Ver. 4.31... (it's printed on the RAM sticker)


----------



## newfieboy27

AgnomK said:


> There is something fishy here... I have the exact same memory, CMR32GX4M4C3466C16, it worked out of the box with the DOCP profile, but right now I'm running it at 3200 Mhz CR 14-14-14-28 with 1.36V... Could you check which version your RAM is? Mine is Ver. 4.31... (it's printed on the RAM sticker)


I'll take a look when I get home in a few hours. I might be able to find out -- on Typhoon Burner from here. Let me see.


----------



## newfieboy27

AgnomK said:


> There is something fishy here... I have the exact same memory, CMR32GX4M4C3466C16, it worked out of the box with the DOCP profile, but right now I'm running it at 3200 Mhz CR 14-14-14-28 with 1.36V... Could you check which version your RAM is? Mine is Ver. 4.31... (it's printed on the RAM sticker)


I guess I'll have to take a look when I get home. Here is the readout from Typhoon Burner -- nothing really too much to see here. Just confirming that its the same as yours (besides the Version).


----------



## AgnomK

newfieboy27 said:


> I guess I'll have to take a look when I get home. Here is the readout from Typhoon Burner -- nothing really too much to see here. Just confirming that its the same as yours (besides the Version).


As soon as I get home, I'll run Taiphoon on mine so you can compare... I'll edit this post with the screenshot.

Here it is: 










Had to turn my ultrawide monitor to portrait mode to take the screenshot, but it's the full report.


----------



## newfieboy27

AgnomK said:


> As soon as I get home, I'll run Taiphoon on mine so you can compare... I'll edit this post with the screenshot.
> 
> Here it is:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Had to turn my ultrawide monitor to portrait mode to take the screenshot, but it's the full report.


As feared -- our RAM is quite different from each other. Might be the "same" RAM Kit, but inherently its not the same. Look at things like the Number of Column Addresses, Row Addresses, Bank Addresses, DRAM Density , DRAM components, DRAM Page Size, Primary Memory bus width. They are quite different from each other -- I couldn't get the RAM version last night (family time) -- but from Taiphoon its pretty obvious that they are different. Silicon lottery at its best. 

Whats your take on this @elmor.


----------



## AgnomK

newfieboy27 said:


> As feared -- our RAM is quite different from each other. Might be the "same" RAM Kit, but inherently its not the same. Look at things like the Number of Column Addresses, Row Addresses, Bank Addresses, DRAM Density , DRAM components, DRAM Page Size, Primary Memory bus width. They are quite different from each other -- I couldn't get the RAM version last night (family time) -- but from Taiphoon its pretty obvious that they are different. Silicon lottery at its best.
> 
> Whats your take on this @elmor.



AFAIK, Taiphoon fetches the data from the SPD and shows it to you. In fact, Taiphoon burner can also flash your SPD to different values... Maybe, just maybe, you got a counterfeit Corsair Kit that someone rewrote the SPD so it'd show the right model, but the actual hardware in there is cheap stuff instead of the "real deal"... This also might be a long shot, but is it possible for your CPU to not be properly seated in the socket? Maybe the pins related to RAM stuff can't make good contact, maybe there is a bent pin? I highly doubt that Corsair would made different modules in the same production line, package it and ship it without testing prior to that...


----------



## elmor

newfieboy27 said:


> As feared -- our RAM is quite different from each other. Might be the "same" RAM Kit, but inherently its not the same. Look at things like the Number of Column Addresses, Row Addresses, Bank Addresses, DRAM Density , DRAM components, DRAM Page Size, Primary Memory bus width. They are quite different from each other -- I couldn't get the RAM version last night (family time) -- but from Taiphoon its pretty obvious that they are different. Silicon lottery at its best.
> 
> Whats your take on this @elmor.


Looks like your SPD is corrupted, what does the checksum say? Could also be that you're using Typhoon burner at the same time as something else is trying to write to the SMBus like Aura or starting any of the monitoring software's.


----------



## newfieboy27

elmor said:


> Looks like your SPD is corrupted, what does the checksum say? Could also be that you're using Typhoon burner at the same time as something else is trying to write to the SMBus like Aura or starting any of the monitoring software's.


Right on the money @elmor. I started in safe mode, and gave it a go again. This time its matching up to exactly what @AgnomK is showing.

Now I'm really confused as to why I cannot get mine to boot with anything higher than 2133Mhz. 

I'll try to get it to overclock on BIOS 0020 tonight once again -- I'll toss that BIOS on and see what luck I get. 

I'll perhaps setup a live-stream tonight -- and show you guys whats going on. Or take a video and post it up, either way getting to the bottom of this is more of a curiosity than anything else. System works with 0701, just with some of those known issues like FAN and what not. 

Either way -- thanks a ton folks.


----------



## newfieboy27

AgnomK said:


> There is something fishy here... I have the exact same memory, CMR32GX4M4C3466C16, it worked out of the box with the DOCP profile, but right now I'm running it at 3200 Mhz CR 14-14-14-28 with 1.36V... Could you check which version your RAM is? Mine is Ver. 4.31... (it's printed on the RAM sticker)


Finally got around today to checking the version number on the memory.

"ver 4.31"

So seems we have the same kit, more or less. At least down to the version as well.


----------



## christefan

loaded the neew 0020 bios and everything seems fine other than with settings on auto it will still boost volts up to 1.531--whats thee best sittings or process for a reasonable load on the cpu volt wise without locking in a ocnstant voltage? more used to working with intel settings on this faceet, thanks for any response


----------



## elmor

newfieboy27 said:


> Finally got around today to checking the version number on the memory.
> 
> "ver 4.31"
> 
> So seems we have the same kit, more or less. At least down to the version as well.



Same version here, haven't been able to find the issue. Could you make a BIOS profile with settings that are not working for you and upload it here including specifying which BIOS version you're on? We might have added a rule around that time for CLDO VDDP Voltage, can you try manually setting it to 900 mV? If that doesn't work try 975 mV.




christefan said:


> loaded the neew 0020 bios and everything seems fine other than with settings on auto it will still boost volts up to 1.531--whats thee best sittings or process for a reasonable load on the cpu volt wise without locking in a ocnstant voltage? more used to working with intel settings on this faceet, thanks for any response



That's AMD default behavior. You can disable CPB but you'll lose out in single threaded performance.


----------



## elmor

Official beta version 1002, similar to 0020 (AGESA 1.0.0.5),

http://www.mediafire.com/file/7fda3rfi7mbf72m/ROG-ZENITH-EXTREME-ASUS-1002.zip


----------



## AgnomK

elmor said:


> Official beta version 1002, similar to 0020 (AGESA 1.0.0.5),
> 
> http://www.mediafire.com/file/7fda3rfi7mbf72m/ROG-ZENITH-EXTREME-ASUS-1002.zip


Can you share what's been changed in this version?


----------



## st4v0

elmor said:


> Official beta version 1002, similar to 0020 (AGESA 1.0.0.5),
> 
> http://www.mediafire.com/file/7fda3rfi7mbf72m/ROG-ZENITH-EXTREME-ASUS-1002.zip


Coldboots still an issue with mine,beyond that it seems all stable.


----------



## elmor

st4v0 said:


> Coldboots still an issue with mine,beyond that it seems all stable.


Did you try adjusting CLDO VDDP? Would be useful to see the Q-Codes that are displayed when this happens.


----------



## st4v0

elmor said:


> Did you try adjusting CLDO VDDP? Would be useful to see the Q-Codes that are displayed when this happens.


Tonight when im back up and mobile Ill assemble a full and more complete breakdown that hopefully explains it all fully for you.


----------



## ManMountain

With AMD confirming the flaws affecting its Platform Security Processor (PSP) and chipset, how will the fixes be applied. Will they be rolled out to ASUS to us via BIOS updates or through AMD's chipset software or a combination of both. 

Just curious how we will all receive them.


----------



## st4v0

elmor said:


> Did you try adjusting CLDO VDDP? Would be useful to see the Q-Codes that are displayed when this happens.


On every bios version so far any ram speed above 2133Mhz simply wont cold boot and will flash with a code 07.
From within windows its rock solid all the way up to 3200Mhz with prime runs exeeding 11 hours
Now this is where it gets weired.
I see two patterns with this bootup problem.
If i power it down and then click the startup button it starts to boot and then roughly 5 seconds in fails and shuts down with code 07.
When I go off to work and the rig is left powered off for rougly 10 and a half hours when I come home it boots up prefectly with no issues.
In this scenario it seems like during the 10+ hours a resistance or voltage or capacitance is changing just enough to allow it to boot.
For any time shorter I have to get it to boot by using the red safeboot button and then press F1 to enter bios,from their I press F10 to save no changes and that shuts it down and cycles it to restart,from this it fully boots.
I have tried a full range of CLDO VDDP tests with no change in pattern unfortunately.


----------



## gupsterg

elmor said:


> Official beta version 1002, similar to 0020 (AGESA 1.0.0.5),
> 
> http://www.mediafire.com/file/7fda3rfi7mbf72m/ROG-ZENITH-EXTREME-ASUS-1002.zip


Been away so catching up  .

Flashed 1002, I had been on 0001. 

Flashing was non issue, setting up base profile and then 3200MHz with The Stilt's safe preset, but TRC 44 TRFC 256, was again non issue.

I set rig to run [email protected] on CPU/GPU, I lost a unit on CPU , then it completed one. I decided to investigate and found Realbench bombed within <5min  . HCI Memtest v6.0 has ran successfully for ~200%. I think I need increased SOC compared with 0002, 0001 and 0901 for same RAM MHz/timings to have [email protected], RB, etc solid. Will be testing further and report back.

Fans/pump working as usual without issue, T_Sensor1 used as source (ie loop water temp). OLED non issue, USB ports, etc all good. Performance on a par with previous UEFIs used on same setup.



Spoiler






















Settings below are SOC as used on 0002, 0001 and 0901, which seems like issue on 1002.

View attachment 1002_T3200G_setting.txt


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

I'm still on 0020...seeing as 1002 is "similar" will wait for official BIOS before detailed testing against 0019...interesting that you need more SOC...that's not a step forward...


----------



## gupsterg

Seems as if that RB fail was just a "gremlin" which isn't repeating itself, [email protected] I haven't rerun yet. Both these tests were done on initial post after setting up RAM tweaks, perhaps some training quirk :headscrat. The Stilt had highlighted at Ryzen launch that memory training on it was the most complicated he'd seen, as Threadripper has 2 IMC I wouldn't be surprised if it's even more so.

So HCI Memtest v6.0 was stopped at ~500% coverage on previously posted settings for UEFI 1002. RealBench v2.56 stress mode 32GB rerun for 15min pass. Bionic hits my loop hard, CPU 32 slots and GPU 3 slots, non issue ~7.5hrs. RB rerun ~1hr, non issue, now doing Y-Cruncher. In between these tests I did reposts cold/warm, again non issue. So seems like I don't need extra SOC on 1002, so same profile as 0002, 0001, 0901. Will carry on testing. Again no PWM issues as well, I tested 4 times "cool down" to see if PWM was stuck, etc.



Spoiler


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

Ah..OK...good to know...gremlins it is then...we all get them time to time...it's a weird two headed beast of an IMC but it works pretty good here...I like it


----------



## gupsterg

Yeah liking TR/ZE a lot TBH, the R7/C6H seems a bit "child's toy" in comparison   .

Y-Cruncher ~2.75hrs  , got some home movies to edit/encode will have a bash at that and later P95. Tomorrow some rinse and repeat. If an issue will share info, but gremlins seem gone  .


----------



## nycgtr

Stability isnt an issue for me. However, since the bios with the fan fixes till now (all revisions in between), my ch1 fan ( that's the only fan header I am using as everything else goes to the aquaero) randomly goes to 100 and does not come back down, until a reboot. The fan is step to a cpu temp curve. Even with the pc idle the fan will randomly shoot to 100% (the curve allows for a max of about 60%) then be stuck at 100%.


----------



## gupsterg

I use:-

i) CPU_FAN header to power/control Be Quiet 140mm 1K RPM as exhaust on case. Set to 100% all temps.
ii) CHA_FAN1 header has 4 in 1 molex powered splitter, supplies PWM to 3x Arctic Cooling F12 PWM on top rad.
iii) CHA_FAN2 header has 4 in 1 molex powered splitter, supplies PWM to 3x Arctic Cooling F12 PWM on front rad.
iv) HAMP header supplies PWM to EK D5 pump, molex powered.

ii, iii, iv use T_SENSOR1 as temperature source, which is water temp at inlet on top rad (ie warmed water from GPU/CPU block).

If and when I have had PWM issues all the headers seem to be either stuck at x % or fully crapped out signal ie stuck lowest speed. I can't recall experiencing PWM stuck at 100%. TBH even the PWM issue has been ~4-5 times since build ~6mths ago. Even after Y-Crunching cooling spun down as it should.

Do you use things like AURA, Ai suite? (ie have situation of multiple apps accessing SIO)


----------



## aTsgRe

Stability seems OK but I will need to test if the idle freeze still exists; fan is again stuck at 100 % and does not drop after reboot (CPU and CPU_OPT). 

Simple steps to reproduce:

1. Login to windows
2. Fire up AIDA64 stability test 
3. Let it run for 10-15 mins
4. Stop it 

Then CPU, CPU_OPT fans will be stuck at 100 % and the only resolution will be to reboot -- please fix this already. @elmor do you have anything to comment regarding that?


My configuration is pretty simple:

1. Enermax TR4 360 with 3 x 120MM fans @ CPU fan header
2. Noctua AF-14 to CPU_OPT
3. TR 1950x
4. AIDA64 Version 5.97.4600 (@gupsterg latest one available at the moment)


----------



## gupsterg

What version of AIDA64 do you use?


----------



## nycgtr

gupsterg said:


> I use:-
> 
> i) CPU_FAN header to power/control Be Quiet 140mm 1K RPM as exhaust on case. Set to 100% all temps.
> ii) CHA_FAN1 header has 4 in 1 molex powered splitter, supplies PWM to 3x Arctic Cooling F12 PWM on top rad.
> iii) CHA_FAN2 header has 4 in 1 molex powered splitter, supplies PWM to 3x Arctic Cooling F12 PWM on front rad.
> iv) HAMP header supplies PWM to EK D5 pump, molex powered.
> 
> ii, iii, iv use T_SENSOR1 as temperature source, which is water temp at inlet on top rad (ie warmed water from GPU/CPU block).
> 
> If and when I have had PWM issues all the headers seem to be either stuck at x % or fully crapped out signal ie stuck lowest speed. I can't recall experiencing PWM stuck at 100%. TBH even the PWM issue has been ~4-5 times since build ~6mths ago. Even after Y-Crunching cooling spun down as it should.
> 
> Do you use things like AURA, Ai suite? (ie have situation of multiple apps accessing SIO)


I dont use aisuite, I do have aura. However, this pwm fan issue has been around for a while. My fan settings all in the bios. I had the same issue using a dc fan. Fan control on this board is so unreliable which is why I use an aquaero, it just sucks that the 1 header I do need is a problem.


----------



## gupsterg

AURA allows a temperature based RGB profile, so I believe it accesses Super IO chip. So using that and say another application that also uses Super IO chip, for example opening up CPU-Z could cause Super IO chip to go wonky = PWM issues.

One time I spent 3 days systematically testing, even if I opened say CPU-Z to show a tab whilst taking a screenie of say a stability test run and had HWINFO loaded as well, I could experience PWM issues at some point on the post of mobo.


----------



## Brain29

gupsterg said:


> AURA allows a temperature based RGB profile, so I believe it accesses Super IO chip. So using that and say another application that also uses Super IO chip, for example opening up CPU-Z could cause Super IO chip to go wonky = PWM issues.
> 
> One time I spent 3 days systematically testing, even if I opened say CPU-Z to show a tab whilst taking a screenie of say a stability test run and had HWINFO loaded as well, I could experience PWM issues at some point on the post of mobo.


i doubt that Aura is the direct cause since aura wouldn't even install for 2 straight months on my board and I still had fan issues

however faulty Super IO chips could be a thing -- 

the 100% and bad qfan power % happens at the uefi -- even if I boot with Linux I get the same fan behavior

could a super IO chip also corrupt the uefi firmware cache ? because that was the major problem I ran into that made my board unbearable


----------



## gupsterg

Brain29 said:


> i doubt that Aura is the direct cause since aura wouldn't even install for 2 straight months on my board and I still had fan issues
> 
> however faulty Super IO chips could be a thing --
> 
> the 100% and bad qfan power % happens at the uefi -- even if I boot with Linux I get the same fan behavior
> 
> could a super IO chip also corrupt the uefi firmware cache ? because that was the major problem I ran into that made my board unbearable


I did not state it is a direct cause, my post was merely to highlight it is as a potential cause.

Faulty Super IO chips? dunno.

Fans going to 100% at post I don't think it occurs for me, on ZE or C6H. The C6H has the same Super IO chip, ITE8665E. I have 4x ThermalRight TY143 on that setup, besides another 3 other fans. They go to 2.5K, at full pelt one sounds as in video below. So I guess I would know if they were going 100% at post, I'll hook up an independent RPM meter to fans on C6H/ZE when time allows to see what occurs at post. 



Spoiler



ThermalRight TY-143



When my C6H/ZE posts there is a momentary higher level of fan speed than what idle would be. To me not obtrusive or excessive, I actually like it, as know all is well, as at idle and low/mid loads both rigs are very silent.

Anyhow, AIDA64 v5.97-4600 is still borked for how it access Super IO chip for monitoring. This testing was with no AURA, Ai Suite, HWINFO, etc. Straight usual setup via UEFI as posted before, ~1hr in CHA_FAN1 and CHA_FAN2 were stuck at 100% PWM.

Testing was CPU > Idle > FPU > Idle > Cache. HWINFO was opened after closing AIDA64 to confirm which headers had PWM issue.



Spoiler






























































As shown in posts 508 and 510 other stability tests with HWINFO for monitoring is not an issue. Below is ~15.5hr [email protected] run and the ~30min idle check after that.



Spoiler






















Here are some other previous PWM checks on UEFI 1002.



Spoiler


----------



## aTsgRe

Sorry I really don't have time to benchmark this nor troubleshoot it... I bought a board that should work -- and I am talking basic stuff here... like *really* basic. No extreme OC, no exotic memory problems etc... I picked up the parts straight up from the QVL list and with the initial bios it was dropping channels and PWM had problems; channels have been fixed but PWM problems are still here. This board almost costs as much as a brand new computer, I don't understand why these issues are there, nor justified given the price-tag.


----------



## nycgtr

gupsterg said:


> I did not state it is a direct cause, my post was merely to highlight it is as a potential cause.
> 
> Faulty Super IO chips? dunno.
> 
> Fans going to 100% at post I don't think it occurs for me, on ZE or C6H. The C6H has the same Super IO chip, ITE8665E. I have 4x ThermalRight TY143 on that setup, besides another 3 other fans. They go to 2.5K, at full pelt one sounds as in video below. So I guess I would know if they were going 100% at post, I'll hook up an independent RPM meter to fans on C6H/ZE when time allows to see what occurs at post.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> ThermalRight TY-143
> 
> 
> 
> When my C6H/ZE posts there is a momentary higher level of fan speed than what idle would be. To me not obtrusive or excessive, I actually like it, as know all is well, as at idle and low/mid loads both rigs are very silent.
> 
> Anyhow, AIDA64 v5.97-4600 is still borked for how it access Super IO chip for monitoring. This testing was with no AURA, Ai Suite, HWINFO, etc. Straight usual setup via UEFI as posted before, ~1hr in CHA_FAN1 and CHA_FAN2 were stuck at 100% PWM.
> 
> Testing was CPU > Idle > FPU > Idle > Cache. HWINFO was opened after closing AIDA64 to confirm which headers had PWM issue.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 132417
> 
> 
> View attachment 132425
> 
> 
> View attachment 132433
> 
> 
> View attachment 132441
> 
> 
> View attachment 132449
> 
> 
> View attachment 132457
> 
> 
> View attachment 132465
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As shown in posts 508 and 510 other stability tests with HWINFO for monitoring is not an issue. Below is ~15.5hr [email protected] run and the ~30min idle check after that.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 132473
> 
> 
> View attachment 132481
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here are some other previous PWM checks on UEFI 1002.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 132489
> 
> 
> View attachment 132497
> 
> 
> View attachment 132505
> 
> 
> View attachment 132513
> 
> 
> View attachment 132521
> 
> 
> View attachment 132529


i cant even uninstall aura. Critical error lol. All i know is that stupid fan still shoots to 100%.


----------



## Brain29

nycgtr said:


> i cant even uninstall aura. Critical error lol. All i know is that stupid fan still shoots to 100%.


I have had that happen .. there is an aura cleaner exe .. but I cant seem to find the link in the forms not sure why its not a sticky 


*side not it doesn't delete everything all of the regedit values 

and hidden temp files *user temp 
@gupsterg

I understood 

** im just worried because the last uefi is supposed to address fan issue and I saw no change 
I sometimes have to do recordings and its just annoying to have to have to wonder if my fans are gonna kick up even though I have 2 3x120mm raids
If I could just fix them at 20% I would but the min power curve bug destroys that chance so I plug them into my other desktop from 2011 because im to lazy to move the fan controller it has over


----------



## christefan

*BIOS 1002*

HAD AN ISSUE BOOTING A PARTITION AND WENT TO PERFORM CHKDSK AND IT WONT DO IT WITH THIS BIOS, HAVE TRIED A COUPLE UTILITIES AND THE BUILT IN PROCESS FROM A COMMAND PROMPT OR EXPLORER--NICE JOB GUYS KEEPING THINGS WORKING. I STILL HAVE ISSUES WITH KEYBOARD AND MOUSE FUNCTIONALITY ON REBOOTS, MAYBE THEY WORK MAYBE I HAVE TO MOVE THEM TO DIFFERENT PORTS OR MAYBE I HAVE TO REBOOT


----------



## Brain29

christefan said:


> HAD AN ISSUE BOOTING A PARTITION AND WENT TO PERFORM CHKDSK AND IT WONT DO IT WITH THIS BIOS, HAVE TRIED A COUPLE UTILITIES AND THE BUILT IN PROCESS FROM A COMMAND PROMPT OR EXPLORER--NICE JOB GUYS KEEPING THINGS WORKING. I STILL HAVE ISSUES WITH KEYBOARD AND MOUSE FUNCTIONALITY ON REBOOTS, MAYBE THEY WORK MAYBE I HAVE TO MOVE THEM TO DIFFERENT PORTS OR MAYBE I HAVE TO REBOOT


you can boot into windows?
are you in windows trying to chkdsk ?
*if you see the harddrive and not the part of the partition its not the mobos fault 

its very easy for a part of a partition to be corrupted or miss formatted to the point were windows cant see it at all 

I would boot with something like ubuntu then look at gparted
*you don't need to install the OS it can run from a usb or cd .. if it doesn't see your drives something bad with the drive or the mobo has happened

*if you have files on it you need you can mount then take it off then reformat it


----------



## aTsgRe

@elmor any updates regarding the new BIOS with the new sensor interface?


----------



## DCswitch

*Fan, Power Options (Sleep, Display Off), and Wi-Fi interim FIX*

Hi, I'm new to the forum and I apologize if someone already pointed this out. This took me a few days to figure out, so I wanted to share. Like many of you my fans change autonomously. Besides my fans changing speeds (or stopping altogether), I noticed that in my Power Options the computer/Windows turns Sleep back on and sometimes changes the amount of time I set for turning off the display. "It" keeps changing the Power Plan to Balanced as well, so I changed the Balanced Power Plan to my liking (especially with Sleep turned off). Wi-fi would also turn on autonomously even though I have it set to only turn on if I manually do so (I think the Wi-Fi issue was from when it actually went/awakened to/from Sleep). The computer/Windows would still change and set itself to go to sleep even under the Balanced Power Plan, but I was able to stop it from engaging Sleeping by doing this:
1. win + R.
2. Type gpedit.msc and press Enter.
3. goto Computer Configuration -- Administrative Templates -- System -- Power Management
4. Change settings from here

Once I did that, I configured my fans again. This time to test it, I set the Turn off Display to 1 minute. After one minute, my fan settings were autonomously changed again (it was never this quick before, so the Turn Off the Display has something to do with major problem). I changed my Turn Off Display setting to Never and kept the computer on overnight. So far so good- no issue with my fan settings changing, my computer didn't go to sleep, and Wi-Fi is still off. I hope this helps to build a permanent fix.


----------



## elmor

New attempt at fixing Q-Fan Tuning, can those with issues test it and report back?

Test BIOS 9931 http://www.mediafire.com/file/26z201s7nlaze63/ROG-ZENITH-EXTREME-ASUS-9931.zip




aTsgRe said:


> @elmor any updates regarding the new BIOS with the new sensor interface?



Not yet.


----------



## st4v0

is that the only changes in this new bios? just so i dont waste testing it for things that arent fan related.


----------



## elmor

st4v0 said:


> is that the only changes in this new bios? just so i dont waste testing it for things that arent fan related.


Yes, you shouldn't bother if that's not a problem for you.


----------



## st4v0

Is their going to be any bios's based on stability/performance improvements any time soon because all current ones seem to soley be based around the fans elmor.


----------



## elmor

st4v0 said:


> Is their going to be any bios's based on stability/performance improvements any time soon because all current ones seem to soley be based around the fans elmor.


Sensor and fan fixes are the priority right now. I've been unable to replicate the specific kit DRAM issues, not sure how to proceed with that one. Is there any specific issue with stability or performance?


----------



## st4v0

for me the coldboot issue still persists at anything above 2133Mhz.


----------



## nycgtr

elmor said:


> Sensor and fan fixes are the priority right now. I've been unable to replicate the specific kit DRAM issues, not sure how to proceed with that one. Is there any specific issue with stability or performance?


Seems temp reading is back to normal. As for the fan it hasn't gone bonkers to 100% yet.


----------



## Ljugtomten

elmor said:


> Sensor and fan fixes are the priority right now. I've been unable to replicate the specific kit DRAM issues, not sure how to proceed with that one. Is there any specific issue with stability or performance?


Thanks for all your support elmor.
Any idea of when the microcode fixes for Spectre II will be included in an EUFI?

https://www.amd.com/en/corporate/security-updates


----------



## nycgtr

elmor said:


> New attempt at fixing Q-Fan Tuning, can those with issues test it and report back?
> 
> Test BIOS 9931 http://www.mediafire.com/file/26z201s7nlaze63/ROG-ZENITH-EXTREME-ASUS-9931.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not yet.


I spoke too soon. ML120 fan still going to max speed on ch1 on it's own.


----------



## VileLasagna

BTW: I remember how nycgtr mentioned way back that the Q-fan app sucks and... omg.... were you bloody right, that interface is a nightmare.
"Surely this'll be at least a bit more convenient than going into the UEFI"
Oh, the innocence.... 
Yeah, geez. I'd code a new interface for that for free just so I could have something, it is so terrible, hard to find anything there.


----------



## elmor

nycgtr said:


> I spoke too soon. ML120 fan still going to max speed on ch1 on it's own.


That's not the issue we were attempting to patch in this BIOS.


----------



## aTsgRe

@elmor so what exactly did you patch in this BIOS regarding the fans?

I am asking so that we can test.


----------



## elmor

aTsgRe said:


> @elmor so what exactly did you patch in this BIOS regarding the fans?
> 
> I am asking so that we can test.


Q-Fan Tuning sometimes detecting minimum fan speed as 9x%


----------



## aTsgRe

@elmor, never had a borked turning process -- at least from the results that are seemingly reported after it; but when running a sensor probing software (such as AIDA64) all hell breaks lose after a (tiny) while. That's my main problem.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

aTsgRe said:


> @*elmor* , never had a borked turning process -- at least from the results that are seemingly reported after it; but when running a sensor probing software (such as AIDA64) all hell breaks lose after a (tiny) while. That's my main problem.


That would be the SuperIO Chip on this board, it goes mental if you have 2 or more applications accessing it. I was kind of hoping Asus/Amd can fix it.


----------



## Brain29

elmor said:


> Q-Fan Tuning sometimes detecting minimum fan speed as 9x%


Previous version was stuck at 60%-90% this version I was able to get down to 5%-20% .. nice !!
(only had it for a few hours)


** new issue noticed since doing some development work at home **
back port I/O USB still have issues with storage devices

If loading linux(ie ubuntu) (first time loading linux on my board since release *sorry im not a true nerd I typically live in windows)
any device connected to back I/O is unreadable and unresponsive including keyboards/storage/usb-network

*** I am wondering if I am missing a driver of some sort 

*** I do not have functional flashback usb bios because uefi is unable to read storage devices

(this happened sometime during or after 804 -- the first 3 bios from release I remember it working - because I had an issue with older uefi versions corrupting and locking features on my board I'm not going to jump around and try to pin point what uefi starts it)

Usb devices plugged into front header or headers from the board are readable/usable no issues only the back I/O usbs


----------



## VileLasagna

Brain29 said:


> *** I am wondering if I am missing a driver of some sort


Shouldn't be.... I'm running Arch myself and had no issues with that. Do you HAVE to be on Ubuntu? On the one hand it's likely to be what was tested. On the other, Ubuntu is just so much pain because everything is so damn old their own packages can't satisfy their dependencies. Heck, their kernel is like two years old with some patching

If you're in the freedom to choose and don't mind, I'd recommend giving a try to some rolling distro, just to make sure you're more up-to-date. OpenSUSE has tumbleweed as a rolling variant now and I've had some play with Antergos while playing around with VMs at home and it looks to have really achieved the "Arch but for people who actually shave and go out into the sunlight and stuff" very well (you know... half of the system Ubuntu claims to be but fails at (with suse being the other half, ironically)).

I ran into only a couple of issues:

lm-sensors doesn't pick up anything other than CPU temp. I find this really annoying.
AMD STILL hasn't released a driver for their x399 fakeRAID controller, so I still can't access my main storage (4 HDDs in RAID10 through BIOS) in my main OS. I've tried building the x370 one but either it's not actually the same controller or I did something wrong as that did not work out (had to remove the driver, system wouldn't boot properly, yada yada).

Other than that and <insert me once again wanting a library to access the MB functionality so I can code some apps to control fans and colour and stuff and then put in on the internet for free just cause I like this stuff providing actual free work for ASUS strenghtening their user ecosystem which they refuse to adress> it's been really smooth


----------



## elmor

Official beta 1003, like 1002 but with the Q-Fan Tuning patch.

http://www.mediafire.com/file/aaxadmboxgl6d6x/ROG-ZENITH-EXTREME-ASUS-1003.zip


----------



## VileLasagna

elmor said:


> Official beta 1003, like 1002 but with the Q-Fan Tuning patch.
> 
> http://www.mediafire.com/file/aaxadmboxgl6d6x/ROG-ZENITH-EXTREME-ASUS-1003.zip


Speaking of Q-fan, it's somewhat annoying that for a board that supports so much "alternative cooling", it has some weird limitations with fans.
Take the CPU-FAN and CPU-OPT headers. I think most people here are running watercooling so they're not necessarily using those fans as CPU fans (I myself have the three EXT fans and the H_AMP as my CPU Rad fans). Instead I use those for some chassis fans instead. But because they're "the cpu fan" I can't dissociate both headers and am not allowed to tie them to another temperature sensor, nor to have them slow down and stop if not required.

Don't suppose that sort of thing is likely to change ever?

Other than that, I must say that the UEFI setup is pretty okay. Actually much better than the Win application, you guys need to hire a proper UX guy for that one =P


----------



## elmor

VileLasagna said:


> Speaking of Q-fan, it's somewhat annoying that for a board that supports so much "alternative cooling", it has some weird limitations with fans.
> Take the CPU-FAN and CPU-OPT headers. I think most people here are running watercooling so they're not necessarily using those fans as CPU fans (I myself have the three EXT fans and the H_AMP as my CPU Rad fans). Instead I use those for some chassis fans instead. But because they're "the cpu fan" I can't dissociate both headers and am not allowed to tie them to another temperature sensor, nor to have them slow down and stop if not required.
> 
> Don't suppose that sort of thing is likely to change ever?
> 
> Other than that, I must say that the UEFI setup is pretty okay. Actually much better than the Win application, you guys need to hire a proper UX guy for that one =P



Yes, CPU Fan headers are a bit limited. IIRC it's because of wanting to keep the CPU Fan implementation the same across the entire range of boards. CPU_OPT is also only hooked up for monitoring, it's connected to the same power source and PWM signal as the CPU_FAN header.


----------



## Brain29

VileLasagna said:


> Shouldn't be.... I'm running Arch myself and had no issues with that. Do you HAVE to be on Ubuntu?


The OS is not my call - I am just running a process batch script on files - in and out kind of deal - not sure if it would work in a different environment 

In the UEFI with no OS I have huge problems with storage devices (if access something in the wrong order it will disappear BACK I/O usb slots only)
If I try to use the USB Flashback button it fails to notice a storage device or grab the ze.cap (usb active light never turns on so im pretty sure the board just doesn't notice the usb )
**In windows I have no issues
** In Ubuntu nothing was recognized I had power to the devices but no data connection of any kind but the headers work


----------



## LtMatt

elmor said:


> Official beta 1003, like 1002 but with the Q-Fan Tuning patch.
> 
> http://www.mediafire.com/file/aaxadmboxgl6d6x/ROG-ZENITH-EXTREME-ASUS-1003.zip


I get an E3 Q code error when resuming from sleep (Hibernate works fine) + a/black screen with Agesa 1.0.0.5 on this board. Any suggestions? 

I've had to roll back to 0901 or 0801 for now.

1920x
Asus Zenith Extreme 1002/03
Vega 64 - 18.3.4 Adrenalin 
Windows 10 Pro 16299
2x Samsung 960 Pro Raid 0 Nvme Raid
18.10 Chipset + Raid Nvme drivers.


----------



## nycgtr

I swapped to a DC fan for the ch1 header fixed my 100% issue. Kinda lame but it works for now. Crosses fingers it doesnt happen with DC as well.


----------



## VileLasagna

elmor said:


> Yes, CPU Fan headers are a bit limited. IIRC it's because of wanting to keep the CPU Fan implementation the same across the entire range of boards. CPU_OPT is also only hooked up for monitoring, it's connected to the same power source and PWM signal as the CPU_FAN header.


Eh, fair enough. It's a bit disappointing but entirely understandable



Brain29 said:


> The OS is not my call - I am just running a process batch script on files - in and out kind of deal - not sure if it would work in a different environment
> 
> In the UEFI with no OS I have huge problems with storage devices (if access something in the wrong order it will disappear BACK I/O usb slots only)
> If I try to use the USB Flashback button it fails to notice a storage device or grab the ze.cap (usb active light never turns on so im pretty sure the board just doesn't notice the usb )
> **In windows I have no issues
> ** In Ubuntu nothing was recognized I had power to the devices but no data connection of any kind but the headers work


From your description, the most bizarre thing to me is the fact that you have no issues in Windows =P

That being the case though, as much as I stab myself in the heart as I say this, I think your easiest options are to look at the "Ubuntu on Windows" see if that can solve your problem and, failing, that, see if you can get things to run in a VM (I mean, we ARE running hobbled Server processors after all, this is what these were made for =P)


----------



## spadizzle

*Concerns and Errors(bugs?)*

So been fiddling with the BIOS, running 1003. 

@elmor I set all values through (amd cbs/dram timing configuration) and certain settings will "not" set. Such as: Memory Clock Speed, TCL, TRCDwr, TRCDrd, TRP, TRAS, and ProcODT. Everything else carries. I have to set those values through (extreme tweaker/dram timing settings). After that everything is set proper according to Ryzen Timing Checker.

On a side note concerning RTC. Through another post http://www.overclock.net/forum/11-amd-motherboards/1683833-resistance-issues.html I contacted @The Stilt and noticed when utilizing TPM Firmware, instead of the default, RTC will not pull resistance values, is this normal?

Anyways, thank you again for bringing us updates! We all love updates!


----------



## elmor

LtMatt said:


> I get an E3 Q code error when resuming from sleep (Hibernate works fine) + a/black screen with Agesa 1.0.0.5 on this board. Any suggestions?
> 
> I've had to roll back to 0901 or 0801 for now.
> 
> 1920x
> Asus Zenith Extreme 1002/03
> Vega 64 - 18.3.4 Adrenalin
> Windows 10 Pro 16299
> 2x Samsung 960 Pro Raid 0 Nvme Raid
> 18.10 Chipset + Raid Nvme drivers.



Think we found the cause for this, can you try setting Advanced\AMD CBS\Zen Common Options\Global C-State Control = Enabled and see if sleep is fixed?




spadizzle said:


> So been fiddling with the BIOS, running 1003.
> 
> @elmor I set all values through (amd cbs/dram timing configuration) and certain settings will "not" set. Such as: Memory Clock Speed, TCL, TRCDwr, TRCDrd, TRP, TRAS, and ProcODT. Everything else carries. I have to set those values through (extreme tweaker/dram timing settings). After that everything is set proper according to Ryzen Timing Checker.
> 
> On a side note concerning RTC. Through another post http://www.overclock.net/forum/11-amd-motherboards/1683833-resistance-issues.html I contacted @The Stilt and noticed when utilizing TPM Firmware, instead of the default, RTC will not pull resistance values, is this normal?
> 
> Anyways, thank you again for bringing us updates! We all love updates!



If I understand you correctly, DRAM settings under AMD CBS are overriden by the Extreme Tweaker option for the same option? That's just the way it is. If there are duplicate settings, please rely on the non-CBS option.


----------



## spadizzle

elmor said:


> Think we found the cause for this, can you try setting Advanced\AMD CBS\Zen Common Options\Global C-State Control = Enabled and see if sleep is fixed?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If I understand you correctly, DRAM settings under AMD CBS are overriden by the Extreme Tweaker option for the same option? That's just the way it is. If there are duplicate settings, please rely on the non-CBS option.


Ok, so no touchy the CBS. Anything about the TPM issue and reading resistance values?


----------



## elmor

spadizzle said:


> Ok, so no touchy the CBS. Anything about the TPM issue and reading resistance values?



Can you refresh my memory about the TPM issue?

I assume you mean reading out values using The Stilts Ryzen Timing Checker? He knows way more about that than me, shouldn't be a BIOS issue.


----------



## spadizzle

elmor said:


> Can you refresh my memory about the TPM issue?
> 
> I assume you mean reading out values using The Stilts Ryzen Timing Checker? He knows way more about that than me, shouldn't be a BIOS issue.


Discreet TPM, his RTC will pull resistance values(will display in app), If you set it to TPM Firmware, RTC will not display values for resistance. So my question is, is the Firmware TPM causing default values or are they still being set and just being blocked and RTC can't display them.


----------



## elmor

spadizzle said:


> Discreet TPM, his RTC will pull resistance values(will display in app), If you set it to TPM Firmware, RTC will not display values for resistance. So my question is, is the Firmware TPM causing default values or are they still being set and just being blocked and RTC can't display them.


Ok, I believe that's an issue for @The Stilt to solve. Might be something like address re-location or additional security being enabled preventing the software from reading those values.


----------



## LtMatt

elmor said:


> Think we found the cause for this, can you try setting Advanced\AMD CBS\Zen Common Options\Global C-State Control = Enabled and see if sleep is fixed?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If I understand you correctly, DRAM settings under AMD CBS are overriden by the Extreme Tweaker option for the same option? That's just the way it is. If there are duplicate settings, please rely on the non-CBS option.


Thank you Elmor, that fixed it!

I was disabling C States and overclocking to 4.1Ghz via P State overclocking. I will re=enable C States for now until you release another update.


----------



## Rhynri

VileLasagna said:


> Other than that and <insert me once again wanting a library to access the MB functionality so I can code some apps to control fans and colour and stuff and then put in on the internet for free just cause I like this stuff providing actual free work for ASUS strenghtening their user ecosystem which they refuse to adress> it's been really smooth


This. This board is for a processor clearly intended for things like virtualization and home-server use, but has next to zero functionality under Linux. No OLED control in BIOS, no temp sensors visible to host OS, no lighting control in BIOS or linux, can't pass through sound card because it's tied to eleventy other things (and poor IOMMU in general). There's even some strangeness on the back I/O where a USB3.0 marked port is appearing on a USB2.0 hub. It's a damn train wreck.


----------



## VileLasagna

Rhynri said:


> This. This board is for a processor clearly intended for things like virtualization and home-server use, but has next to zero functionality under Linux. No OLED control in BIOS, no temp sensors visible to host OS, no lighting control in BIOS or linux, can't pass through sound card because it's tied to eleventy other things (and poor IOMMU in general). There's even some strangeness on the back I/O where a USB3.0 marked port is appearing on a USB2.0 hub. It's a damn train wreck.


I think train wreck is pushing a bit, but I do agree with the general feeling. Haven't tried passing the sound card, but have played with passing stuff in the PCI-E slots and that worked like a charm, also haven't noticed the USB2.0 thing, good thing to check when I'm home.

I guess I'm in a forgiving perspective because my last high end board was a GBT 990FXA-UD7, and that one was just like "lol, man... you just push your clocks and I'll be here pumping them volts through your CPU, no biggie". Really solid but not too fancy, and the Zenith is all about dat fancy bling. 

Bit of a tangent but ASUS TR4 lineup is a bit strange because the Zenith is marketed as a gaming board and the Prime lacks 4-way GPU support so it's a bit... wat? 
The software and driver thing... I think it's partially ASUS and partially AMD to blame, like the lack of a driver for their fakeraid controller, that's entirely on AMD. For the mobo functionality, yeah, that's ASUS dropping the ball and as much as this disappointment is a frequent feeling, it still is really sad. But it's a problem even on windows, their Q-Fan app (Dual Intelligent Processors or whatever it's called) is a nightmare. I mean, BigNG was 10 years ago, how come we have an application now that has an interface so much worse than that? I'd redo the Windows application if I could, even if it wasn't on Linux for the foreseeable future. 

It just looks strange because I thought that between Logitech providing a library to interact with their LCD displays, then Razer with Chroma, everyone following suit... I thought that trend would bring these manufacturers to the realisation that they, as hardware vendors, can make use of their user community to strengthen their software ecosystem, if they only give them the tools. But, nah... Unless it IS buried in the install folders for all this, I haven't seen those tools provided, not even for the inferior OS.

Ultimately, for me the board is still pretty solid, works really well, I'm having a good time playing around with overclocking in it, at least for the bit I did (heck, I've always casually OC'd and this board offers so much I got overwhelmed like it was my first time). But I will not deny I at times do feel a bit regret not going GBT again, because I can't really make too much use of what does make the Zenith more desirable than the Aorus, so it's a bit like "You SURE it was worth the extra?" Cause this board was quite more pricey, and it's like "just a damn good board", which I expect the GBT to be as well. (All that said, I AM populating like all every fan port in this board AND using an additional Phanteks hub so... there's that?)

Community around here is great, but it's a lot of people who, albeit being pretty helpful and interested, are quite frustrated for one reason or another. And massive shoutout to Elmor; not ALL of the people here are comprehensible, kind and/or reasonable but he's stuck around despite those and he's been a massive help, at least from our side. Given the news and updates he brings every once in a while, I imagine from ASUS' side as well.


----------



## Aby67

@elmor
Is there anything You can do to get ASUS to release a WS motherboard that can support 6 GPUs and Linux properly for all of US that are into productivity?
and I have seen some Vray benchmarks with people being able to run 6 1080tis on ryzen and tr4...would u know how it is possible to set that up?!

please check ranked 6th and 14th

thanks


----------



## DCswitch

elmor said:


> Official beta 1003, like 1002 but with the Q-Fan Tuning patch.
> 
> http://www.mediafire.com/file/aaxadmboxgl6d6x/ROG-ZENITH-EXTREME-ASUS-1003.zip


Elmor, I get an error when trying to install the latest beta 1003. I'm currently running 1002 successfully.


----------



## gseeley

Rhynri said:


> This. This board is for a processor clearly intended for things like virtualization and home-server use, but has next to zero functionality under Linux. No OLED control in BIOS, no temp sensors visible to host OS, no lighting control in BIOS or linux, can't pass through sound card because it's tied to eleventy other things (and poor IOMMU in general). There's even some strangeness on the back I/O where a USB3.0 marked port is appearing on a USB2.0 hub. It's a damn train wreck.


I was able to pass through the built-in sound to a VM in ESXi 6.5U1. Make sure you have the Enumerate all IOMMU in IVRS option in UEFI set to Enabled to get the groups set up correctly.


----------



## elmor

Aby67 said:


> @elmor
> Is there anything You can do to get ASUS to release a WS motherboard that can support 6 GPUs and Linux properly for all of US that are into productivity?
> and I have seen some Vray benchmarks with people being able to run 6 1080tis on ryzen and tr4...would u know how it is possible to set that up?!
> 
> please check ranked 6th and 14th
> 
> thanks



There is something in the works, I can't detail anything though.




DCswitch said:


> Elmor, I get an error when trying to install the latest beta 1003. I'm currently running 1002 successfully.



A bit more information on the error would be helpful.


----------



## Rhynri

VileLasagna said:


> I think train wreck is pushing a bit, but I do agree with the general feeling.... ...And massive shoutout to Elmor; not ALL of the people here are comprehensible, kind and/or reasonable but he's stuck around despite those and he's been a massive help, at least from our side. Given the news and updates he brings every once in a while, I imagine from ASUS' side as well.


Yeah, before I forget, massive shout out to @elmor. 

And train wreck is pushing it a bit, but when you can't even use the CPU Fan plugs because having fans tied to CPU temp doesn't make sense (custom WC, for example) and those don't have configurable sources... eh. There's a lot that Asus should be ashamed of design wise for this board; I feel like they may have went a little "It's AMD, who cares" and diluted their ROG value a bit. My X99 Asus ROG board was awesome sauce, all rigged up with speedfan to run everything. Speedfan couldn't see anything on this board even when I had it native Windows, I mean, it's a big difference in the feel between the two boards.

(Somewhat related gripe / Question: will these Beta bios updates delete all my settings and saved configurations like the latest official release version did?)

Edit:


gseeley said:


> I was able to pass through the built-in sound to a VM in ESXi 6.5U1. Make sure you have the Enumerate all IOMMU in IVRS option in UEFI set to Enabled to get the groups set up correctly.


Thanks, I'll look into that, maybe it was just the bios revision / kernel I was using at the time. You have to pass anything else along with it?


----------



## gseeley

Rhynri said:


> Thanks, I'll look into that, maybe it was just the bios revision / kernel I was using at the time. You have to pass anything else along with it?


Yes, the on-board sound is grouped together as a PCI function with one of the AMD SATA controllers and a dummy function device:


Code:


0000:12:00.0  :
         Class 1300: 1022:1455

0000:12:00.2 SATA controller Mass storage controller: Advanced Micro Devices Inc AMD FCH SATA Controller [AHCI Mode] [vmhba1]
         Class 0106: 1022:7901

0000:12:00.3 Audio device Multimedia controller:
         Class 0403: 1022:1457

I'm pretty sure the SATA controller is the M.2_1 (Socket 3) under the chipset heatsink. Luckily I want to pass this to another VM as well


----------



## DCswitch

elmor said:


> There is something in the works, I can't detail anything though.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A bit more information on the error would be helpful.


First off- thank you for all contributions here. My guess is the file itself is corrupted. I downloaded it two different times. I tried renaming it to ZE.cap even though I didn't have to do that with my past BIOS flashes. The process won't even start to flash because the file won't take. Could you try re-uploading the file?


----------



## elmor

DCswitch said:


> First off- thank you for all contributions here. My guess is the file itself is corrupted. I downloaded it two different times. I tried renaming it to ZE.cap even though I didn't have to do that with my past BIOS flashes. The process won't even start to flash because the file won't take. Could you try re-uploading the file?


Where do you get an error? EZFlash? USB BIOS Flashback? Any error message? I really need more details.

I double checked and the download is identical to the original. Can you check the sha256 hash using for example HashMyFiles?

ZIP sha256 0649a63e64446d1e37ca2850b3dba8f2b00023ef1510ec53e01de0935d9ece47
CAP sha256 7d317915eab6c017c8d00b1484b5ce5cae6175ff675514ca43efb2a26cdd17a7


----------



## gupsterg

aTsgRe said:


> Sorry I really don't have time to benchmark this nor troubleshoot it... I bought a board that should work -- and I am talking basic stuff here... like *really* basic. No extreme OC, no exotic memory problems etc... I picked up the parts straight up from the QVL list and with the initial bios it was dropping channels and PWM had problems; channels have been fixed but PWM problems are still here. This board almost costs as much as a brand new computer, I don't understand why these issues are there, nor justified given the price-tag.


I shared what I have noted to help you. Don't have multiple apps access SuperIO chip, ie for monitoring data.



Brain29 said:


> @gupsterg
> 
> I understood
> 
> ** im just worried because the last uefi is supposed to address fan issue and I saw no change
> I sometimes have to do recordings and its just annoying to have to have to wonder if my fans are gonna kick up even though I have 2 3x120mm raids
> If I could just fix them at 20% I would but the min power curve bug destroys that chance so I plug them into my other desktop from 2011 because im to lazy to move the fan controller it has over


I don't think the SuperIO issue has been patched yet. It maybe certain apps need "sorting". Using AIDA64 stills seems the most sure fire way to recreate the SuperIO chip crapping out for PWM control for me.

So far 1002 has been fine me (just like past UEFIs), as long as I avoid multiple apps accessing SuperIO and AIDA64.

Going to 1003 today  .



Rhynri said:


> Yeah, before I forget, massive shout out to @elmor.
> 
> And train wreck is pushing it a bit, but when you can't even use the CPU Fan plugs because having fans tied to CPU temp doesn't make sense (custom WC, for example) and those don't have configurable sources... eh. There's a lot that Asus should be ashamed of design wise for this board; I feel like they may have went a little "It's AMD, who cares" and diluted their ROG value a bit. My X99 Asus ROG board was awesome sauce, all rigged up with speedfan to run everything. Speedfan couldn't see anything on this board even when I had it native Windows, I mean, it's a big difference in the feel between the two boards.
> 
> (Somewhat related gripe / Question: will these Beta bios updates delete all my settings and saved configurations like the latest official release version did?)


I use WC on ZE. I have a temp probe in loop plugged into T_SENSOR1 and used as source for top rad fans plugged into CHA_FAN1, front rad fans on CHA_FAN2 and water pump uses HAMP. CPU_FAN, CPU_OPT and W_PUMP+ do not allow a differing temp source. You can also use the addon board to gain more headers with selectable temp source.


----------



## DCswitch

elmor said:


> Where do you get an error? EZFlash? USB BIOS Flashback? Any error message? I really need more details.
> 
> I double checked and the download is identical to the original. Can you check the sha256 hash using for example HashMyFiles?
> 
> ZIP sha256 0649a63e64446d1e37ca2850b3dba8f2b00023ef1510ec53e01de0935d9ece47
> CAP sha256 7d317915eab6c017c8d00b1484b5ce5cae6175ff675514ca43efb2a26cdd17a7



I used EZ Flash under the 1002 BIOS and the error message was, "Reading failed!"
The CAP sha256 was 7d317915eab6c017c8d00b1484b5ce5cae6175ff675514ca43efb2a26cdd17a7
and that matches. I'll try a different method to update and get back to you.


----------



## gupsterg

Used UEFI 1003 posted by Elmor, flashed using flashback method; no issues to report in that context.

Setup base profile and then 3200MHz The Stilt Safe, but with TRC 44 and TRFC 256. Some benches done, all seemed as usual.



Spoiler






















So far ~1hr Y-Cruncher passed.



Spoiler














View attachment 1003_T3200G_setting.txt


Only settings not in txt that changed from defaults are:-

i) BankGroupSwap = [Disabled]
ii) BankGroupSwapAlt = [Enabled]
iii) Memory Interleaving = [Channel] (ie NUMA/Local)

*** edit ***

7hrs pass and PWM check after.



Spoiler






















If other tests fail will report back  .


----------



## ENTERPRISE

gupsterg said:


> Used UEFI 1003 posted by Elmor, flashed using flashback method; no issues to report in that context.
> 
> Setup base profile and then 3200MHz The Stilt Safe, but with TRC 44 and TRFC 256. Some benches done, all seemed as usual.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 161801
> 
> 
> View attachment 161809
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So far ~1hr Y-Cruncher passed.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 161785
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 161793
> 
> 
> Only settings not in txt that changed from defaults are:-
> 
> i) BankGroupSwap = [Disabled]
> ii) BankGroupSwapAlt = [Enabled]
> iii) Memory Interleaving = [Channel] (ie NUMA/Local)
> 
> *** edit ***
> 
> 7hrs pass and PWM check after.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 161937
> 
> 
> View attachment 161929
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If other tests fail will report back  .


Thanks for your hard work bud !


----------



## aTsgRe

pretty please fix the sensor monitoring issue -- not having the AIDA64 logging is a pain...


----------



## gupsterg

ENTERPRISE said:


> Thanks for your hard work bud !


NP  , so far reposts, etc all sound. Gonna dabble with some more OC'ing soon.



aTsgRe said:


> pretty please fix the sensor monitoring issue -- not having the AIDA64 logging is a pain...


I do believe some apps are at issue, so not an AMD/ASUS issue. AIDA64 is the worst offender for creating PWM issues from what I have experienced.

Below is full set so far of UEFI 1003 testing on my setup, each time I did PWM check, last screenie has task manager showing uptime of a day. You'll note at times I opened CPU-Z and HWINFO was open, so I had multiple apps doing monitoring momentarily. Every time I have tested AIDA64 for lengthy use (ie upto 6hrs) I have failed to keep rig from crapping out PWM for that post. So I reckon they need to do something to the app.



Spoiler


----------



## ENTERPRISE

UEFI 1003 Seems to be playing well with my system so far, will need to bench to fully test but nothing odd thus far, may see if I can push my memory higher than 3200Mhz but not massively hopeful.


----------



## gupsterg

My 1st pass of 3466MHz The Stilt on UEFI 1003. This is same settings as previous UEFIs where I gained 3466S, but using ProcODT 53.3 :headscrat .



Spoiler






















Will continue testing  .


----------



## ENTERPRISE

I need to brush up on the finer tuning in order to get up to 3466 as 3200 works out of the box and rock solid stable after a few tweaks but I have not messed with ProcODT yet. What are the main settings you are adjusting and where in order to achieve 3466 ?

Any advice is greatly received.


----------



## gupsterg

Dunno if I can explain my process as like a "how to"  .

Let's say I target 3466MHz :-


If at OS load rig or just after, rig freeze /crash, etc I'll bump SOC. SOC I tune, in that I set it first same as when UEFI is at defaults, then increase as needed. From previous experience with kit you sorta can guess roughly what you'd be needing, loosely speaking  .

VDIMM/VBOOT I sorta guess where I'd expect it to be from experience of the RAM kit. The F4-3200C14D-GTZ and F4-3200C14Q-32GVK behave pretty similar for frequency scaling at x voltage. Then if I have time later I see if I can lower it, tune profile better, etc.

ProcODT seems can only be set via trial and error. You'll find your setup will not post when it is set too low or high. You'll be able to post on a range of ProcODT, but stability will be affected when it's incorrect. So this is where finer tuning of it from stability testing will come in.

CAD Bus doesn't seem to affect postability like ProcODT, but aids stability in OS related testing from what I have experienced. Usually I bump:-

MemCadBusClkDrvStren [Auto] to [30Ω]
MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [Auto] to [30Ω]
MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [Auto] to [30Ω]
MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [Auto] to [30Ω]

But I have sometimes seemed to have needed to tune one of them down to 24Ω. Perhaps my testing was not sound, dunno. As long as what I fiddle with to get profile sound passes reruns of same testing, I think it's sound.

After HCI I did 2hrs Y-Cruncher and 1hr RB.



Spoiler






















Seems all reasonably sound so far. Will just dump settings and attach to post.

*** edit ***

View attachment 1003_T3466S_Alpha_setting.txt


Will see if I can lower SOC/VDIMM in 1003_T3466S_Beta  .


----------



## Gadfly

@gupsterg looking good. 

Well... I am out of time and I need to order an X399 board within the next few days, I had been waiting to see how thing pan out on this board; Are things better now? Do you still recommend the ROG over the X399 Taichi?


----------



## gupsterg

@Gadfly

I have not used any other board on AM4/sTR4 other than ASUS. To me they have it all that I want.

For example, as using WC cooling, I have set water temp as source for headers used by fans on rads/water pump. The add on board allows even more temp sensors and fan headers. Again these can have differing and multiple sources. Yes it's no Aquaero setup, but even a LT board from them is ~£50. So ASUS boards having WC friendly options is a plus IMO. Another thing I value the most when considering a mobo is UEFI. To me ASUS have always hit the mark in the past and currently. I have subbed to various AM4/sTR4 board owners threads here and there. I recall seeing on AM4 Gigabyte were doing DRAM timings per channel on their flagship board, what a PITA to setup IMO. AsRock I recall virtually monthly rants by Buildzoid on how the UEFI was. Then there's how boards display what they do in HWINFO, for me again ASUS ticks the boxes.

I guess ultimately you have to look to see what you want. I can only say my experience with ASUS has been sound to recommend them. I currently have the C6H, ZE and C7H, the ZE is :king: out of them all IMO. The C6H and ZE have gone strength to strength on UEFI improvement IMO. All are launch boards, just getting the C7H rolling today or so  .

I was initially struggling with gaining >3200MHz on even F4-3200C14D-16GTZ on ZE early on at release. I knew the kit could hit ~3500MHz as had used it on C6H. Few months in a UEFI by The Stilt hit 3333MHz and 3466MHz. Later I went F4-3200C14Q-32GVK. Again hit >3200MHz.

3466S is going well on UEFI 1003 for me. Early indications are I may actually lower SOC/VDIMM than past forays with this RAM MHz/Timings. Passed 8hrs of HCI, 1hr RB and on same post now going for Y-Cruncher.



Spoiler


----------



## ENTERPRISE

gupsterg said:


> Dunno if I can explain my process as like a "how to"  .
> 
> Let's say I target 3466MHz :-
> 
> 
> If at OS load rig or just after, rig freeze /crash, etc I'll bump SOC. SOC I tune, in that I set it first same as when UEFI is at defaults, then increase as needed. From previous experience with kit you sorta can guess roughly what you'd be needing, loosely speaking  .
> VDIMM/VBOOT I sorta guess where I'd expect it to be from experience of the RAM kit. The F4-3200C14D-GTZ and F4-3200C14Q-32GVK behave pretty similar for frequency scaling at x voltage. Then if I have time later I see if I can lower it, tune profile better, etc.
> ProcODT seems can only be set via trial and error. You'll find your setup will not post when it is set too low or high. You'll be able to post on a range of ProcODT, but stability will be affected when it's incorrect. So this is where finer tuning of it from stability testing will come in.
> CAD Bus doesn't seem to affect postability like ProcODT, but aids stability in OS related testing from what I have experienced. Usually I bump:-
> 
> MemCadBusClkDrvStren [Auto] to [30Ω]
> MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren [Auto] to [30Ω]
> MemCadBusCsOdtDrvStren [Auto] to [30Ω]
> MemCadBusCkeDrvStren [Auto] to [30Ω]
> 
> But I have sometimes seemed to have needed to tune one of them down to 24Ω. Perhaps my testing was not sound, dunno. As long as what I fiddle with to get profile sound passes reruns of same testing, I think it's sound.
> 
> After HCI I did 2hrs Y-Cruncher and 1hr RB.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 169137
> 
> 
> View attachment 169145
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seems all reasonably sound so far. Will just dump settings and attach to post.
> 
> *** edit ***
> 
> View attachment 169153
> 
> 
> Will see if I can lower SOC/VDIMM in 1003_T3466S_Beta  .


Thanks for the guidance bud. 

I actually went for 3466 at my current setting for the hell of it just to see and to my surprise with BIOS 1003 it worked, looks like the advancements made in this BIOS have aided me. I ran a quick 15min run of RealBench as a dirty test of stability and it passed just fine. I will do further tests to confirm, if not stable then I will see if some finer tweaks will get me stable. Ideally 3466 was what I have been aiming for on this platform. My RAM is a 3600 Kit but I have no expectations of achieving that in all honesty.


----------



## gupsterg

NP  , glad to read you gained what you were after.

I updated my post to Gadfly, I also sandwiched 1hr of RB between HCI and Y-Cruncher. I've called it a day on Y-Cruncher for now.









I may try a little run of P95 with high RAM load and then see if can lower SOC/VDIMM some more, 1.087V/1.39V isn't too bad for 24/7 use IMO.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

I have to admit I am playing it fairly safe with the voltage side of things regarding keeping the OC Stable I have SOC at 1.1v and Core at 1.4v. I could likely work on this.


----------



## gupsterg

Dunno because of the pricetag of TR and or cost of RAM, I just can't bring myself to go past SOC 1.1V and or VDIMM 1.4V.

Past 1.1V I didn't gain 3600MHz on R7+C6H either, yeah it was post/bench stable only. ~3500MHz was max I got as stable MEMCLK on that setup. To me I prefer 3200MHz The Stilt Safe with TRC 44 TRFC 256 both on C6H and ZE. It just needs so low levels of SOC and stock VDIMM. Next up I target 3333MHz The Stilt Fast. 3466MHz always just seem bigger jumps of SOC/VDIMM than latter two setups.


----------



## Juggalo23451

New bios

Version 1003
2018/05/04

ROG ZENITH EXTREME BIOS 1003
1. Update AGESA Code to 1.0.0.5
Note: Global C-States can only be set in Enabled or Auto mode. Do not update to BIOS 1003 if you wish to set Global C-state to "Disabled".

http://dlcdnet.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb...27.1275568516.1525467060-583022398.1524783547


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Juggalo23451 said:


> New bios
> 
> Version 1003
> 2018/05/04
> 
> ROG ZENITH EXTREME BIOS 1003
> 1. Update AGESA Code to 1.0.0.5
> Note: Global C-States can only be set in Enabled or Auto mode. Do not update to BIOS 1003 if you wish to set Global C-state to "Disabled".
> 
> http://dlcdnet.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb...27.1275568516.1525467060-583022398.1524783547


I wonder if they changed anything from the Beta 1003 to the official 1003, I am going to assume nothing due to the fact the name has not changed.


----------



## gupsterg

In the past any release that Elmor has shared on OCN and became official later, have been identical byte for byte when compared in hex editor. I can't see this aspect would have changed. So we did have access ~4weeks earlier.

W10P x64 did the 1803 feature update, not noted any issues, still on UEFI 1003 which was released by Elmor in this thread.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

That sounds good to me bud. I am applying the Win10 April update in a few days so its good to hear no problems.


----------



## gupsterg

Yeah it can be daunting going through those updates.

Was doing some core overclocking last night and taskmanager seems fixed now to show more accurate clocks.


----------



## KojacFTW

Updated yesterday, it's the same bios that Elmor posted a couple of weeks ago (even the same build date). No changes. I still have some random PWM issues with this bios too on windows (with AiSuite installed). H_AMP and CPU_FAN just goes 100% in idle for no reason or gets stuck on the lowest rpm. So i swiched to another PWM" controller and no problemes. Other than that, no issues from 902. I'm on W10 April Update, and yes, Task Manager does show more accuarate clock speeds.


----------



## mariusaz

*Major Problems*

This new BIOS is incredibly laggy and my nvme drives are no longer being detected. Nothing shows up in RAID management now other than SATA devices. My 128GB RAM won't clock to 3200 as well still. I can only use 64GB clocked at 3200.


----------



## mariusaz

*Update*



mariusaz said:


> This new BIOS is incredibly laggy and my nvme drives are no longer being detected. Nothing shows up in RAID management now other than SATA devices. My 128GB RAM won't clock to 3200 as well still. I can only use 64GB clocked at 3200.


RAID seems to be working fine, I jumped the gun. Settings were changed a bit from 0902 to 1003. I can't seem to get 128GB of G.Skill TridentZ F4-3200C14Q-64GTZR RAM to work using DOCP. 64GB works just fine. I'll try tweaking some things manually to see if I can get the machine to boot. I should clarify that 128GB RAM clocked at 3200 DOCP has never worked.


----------



## Fitzcaraldo

KojacFTW said:


> Updated yesterday, it's the same bios that Elmor posted a couple of weeks ago (even the same build date). No changes. I still have some random PWM issues with this bios too on windows (with AiSuite installed). H_AMP and CPU_FAN just goes 100% in idle for no reason or gets stuck on the lowest rpm. So i swiched to another PWM" controller and no problemes. Other than that, no issues from 902. I'm on W10 April Update, and yes, Task Manager does show more accuarate clock speeds.


Have you tried what happens on the newest BIOS revision when you don't use AISuite? Either thru uninstallation and rebooting twice or disabling the AISuite services in windows. AISuite always was a wonky tool to begin with and it would be interesting to know if there is any interference happening.

Also: With which PWM headers did you roll?


----------



## elmor

ZE BIOS 9950 http://www.mediafire.com/file/27hvc92bjldh5kt/ROG-ZENITH-EXTREME-ASUS-9950.zip

- AGESA 1.0.7.0
- Early test version, would appreciate feedback


----------



## gupsterg

OOoo, NICEE!  .

Are we gonna see the increase RAM MHz settings that Pinnacle Ridge AGESA bought to AM4 on sTR4? cheers  .


----------



## ENTERPRISE

gupsterg said:


> OOoo, NICEE!  .
> 
> Are we gonna see the increase RAM MHz settings that Pinnacle Ridge AGESA bought to AM4 on sTR4? cheers  .


That is what I would like to see.


----------



## slxar

elmor said:


> ZE BIOS 9950 http://www.mediafire.com/file/27hvc92bjldh5kt/ROG-ZENITH-EXTREME-ASUS-9950.zip
> 
> - AGESA 1.0.7.0
> - Early test version, would appreciate feedback


All USB port using motherboard USB pin will not usable after flashing this beta


----------



## LtMatt

slxar said:


> All USB port using motherboard USB pin will not usable after flashing this beta


Can confirm i see the same issue, half of my USB ports are non functional.

Also experienced a system hang in the bios at stock settings after leaving the system idle for 10 minutes. 

Once i applied my personal memory settings (no CPU overclock) system has been running fine for hours in Windows. 

Rolling back to 1003 as i need my USB ports.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Bugger, I was going to test, but not point if the USB's are getting messed up as I kind of need those lol.


----------



## gupsterg

USB 2.0 from ROG_EXT gone  , then also USB 3.0 header gone  , no Pinnacle Ridge AGESA RAM MHz settings  . I could live without USB just to be able to see if I could get the F4-3200C14Q-32GVK setup at 3400MHz as tested on C6H.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

gupsterg said:


> USB 2.0 from ROG_EXT gone  , then also USB 3.0 header gone  , no Pinnacle Ridge AGESA RAM MHz settings  . I could live without USB just to be able to see if I could get the F4-3200C14Q-32GVK setup at 3400MHz as tested on C6H.


I thought you already had that running at 3466 ?
@elmor 

Are there any specific changes you can tell us about this BIOS aside from the obvious AGESA upgrade ?


----------



## gupsterg

ENTERPRISE said:


> I thought you already had that running at 3466 ?


Yep can do 3466MHz on quite a few past UEFIs.

On TR+ZE I need SOC 1.025V for 3200MHz, VDIMM 1.35V. For 3466MHz I need close to SOC 1.1V, VDIMM 1.4V. Yeah last UEFI I had a sweeter ride at 1.087 1.39V.

Now when I plugged the same RAM I use on TR into R7 setup. 3400MHz was possible with SOC 1.037V VDIMM 1.365V. This seems very optimal for daily use.

Not saying the voltages discussed for 3466MHz are crazy high, I just prefer picking what I think is sweetest spot on all fronts.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

gupsterg said:


> Yep can do 3466MHz on quite a few past UEFIs.
> 
> On TR+ZE I need SOC 1.025V for 3200MHz, VDIMM 1.35V. For 3466MHz I need close to SOC 1.1V, VDIMM 1.4V. Yeah last UEFI I had a sweeter ride at 1.087 1.39V.
> 
> Now when I plugged the same RAM I use on TR into R7 setup. 3400MHz was possible with SOC 1.037V VDIMM 1.365V. This seems very optimal for daily use.
> 
> Not saying the voltages discussed for 3466MHz are crazy high, I just prefer picking what I think is sweetest spot on all fronts.


Oh right ok, sweet deal. I am going to tweak using some of your settings as a guideline to get 3466Mhz a little more stable as it BSOD'ed a few times for me.


----------



## gupsterg

There are quite few more MHz setting without needing to play with BCLK on Pinnacle Ridge AGESA. So how I see it we'd be able to find more sweeter setups or attainable ones for our setups.

Well I'm running my preferred 3200MHz The Stilt Safe but TRC 44 TRFC 256 on UEFI 9950 and so far HCI is sound. Will try other RAM MHz attained in the past.

What sorta SOC/VDIMM you use for 3200MHz? I was surprised by another member's share in other ZE thread, especially when we had near identical RAM kit.


----------



## spadizzle

elmor said:


> ZE BIOS 9950 http://www.mediafire.com/file/27hvc92bjldh5kt/ROG-ZENITH-EXTREME-ASUS-9950.zip
> 
> - AGESA 1.0.7.0
> - Early test version, would appreciate feedback


Like others have said, USB issues, other than that. Working great. 

I shall try for higher speeds and see if this new AGESA helps out


----------



## gupsterg

@ENTERPRISE

Dialled in 3466S as a previous HCI 8hr pass.



Spoiler












































The Y-Cruncher screenie is just to show voltages, ref averages in mobo section. In UEFI SOC 1.087V, VDIMM 1.39V, VTT 0.7V.


 @spadizzle

Yep device manager shows same for me, W10P x64 1803.


----------



## elmor

slxar said:


> All USB port using motherboard USB pin will not usable after flashing this beta





LtMatt said:


> Can confirm i see the same issue, half of my USB ports are non functional.
> 
> Also experienced a system hang in the bios at stock settings after leaving the system idle for 10 minutes.
> 
> Once i applied my personal memory settings (no CPU overclock) system has been running fine for hours in Windows.
> 
> Rolling back to 1003 as i need my USB ports.





gupsterg said:


> USB 2.0 from ROG_EXT gone  , then also USB 3.0 header gone  , no Pinnacle Ridge AGESA RAM MHz settings  . I could live without USB just to be able to see if I could get the F4-3200C14Q-32GVK setup at 3400MHz as tested on C6H.



Thanks, will find out why this is happening.




ENTERPRISE said:


> I thought you already had that running at 3466 ?
> 
> @elmor
> 
> Are there any specific changes you can tell us about this BIOS aside from the obvious AGESA upgrade ?



As far as I know it's just the AGESA change.


----------



## spadizzle

Well, back to 1003. Getting hard locks well trying to game. Think it might've been related to SLI. Who knows. I will wait here patiently for the next revision.


----------



## gupsterg

Running Y-Cruncher on 3466S on UEFI 9950 was getting mouse pointer sticking every so often  .


----------



## st4v0

I found this new bios way too unstable at my normal 3200Mhz on ram,to the point where windows eventually wouldnt boot.
Usb,s are fudged but everyones already reported that.
Back to the previous bios I go,all the stability but with the coldboot problem,oh well.


----------



## elmor

ZE BIOS 9952 http://www.mediafire.com/file/29gnc35b81soh60/ROG-ZENITH-EXTREME-ASUS-9952.zip

- Front panel/header USB ports working again


----------



## gupsterg

elmor said:


> ZE BIOS 9952 http://www.mediafire.com/file/29gnc35b81soh60/ROG-ZENITH-EXTREME-ASUS-9952.zip
> 
> - Front panel/header USB ports working again


Did a rerun of Y-Cruncher on 3466S just now on 9950 and keyb, mouse(ie rig) seems freezing.

Appreciate this  , rolling to it now  .


----------



## spadizzle

elmor said:


> ZE BIOS 9952 http://www.mediafire.com/file/29gnc35b81soh60/ROG-ZENITH-EXTREME-ASUS-9952.zip
> 
> - Front panel/header USB ports working again



USB seems fine.

Flashed the bios and loaded same settings that I would in 1003. Reboots and loads windows like normal. Run a few benches. Perfect. Reboots and gets to loading Windows and bluescreen error Everytime, "HAL intialization failed". At that point I turn off the PSU and try again.

This time will failed to post and will error out on memory fail count. Also note that when I was in windows and tried to game, the CPU would hard locks forcing me to reboot and run into the HAL issue.

I am back to 1003.


----------



## st4v0

spadizzle said:


> USB seems fine.
> 
> Flashed the bios and loaded same settings that I would in 1003. Reboots and loads windows like normal. Run a few benches. Perfect. Reboots and gets to loading Windows and bluescreen error Everytime, "HAL intialization failed". At that point I turn off the PSU and try again.
> 
> This time will failed to post and will error out on memory fail count. Also note that when I was in windows and tried to game, the CPU would hard locks forcing me to reboot and run into the HAL issue.
> 
> I am back to 1003.


thats exactly the problems i was getting as well.


----------



## elmor

spadizzle said:


> USB seems fine.
> 
> Flashed the bios and loaded same settings that I would in 1003. Reboots and loads windows like normal. Run a few benches. Perfect. Reboots and gets to loading Windows and bluescreen error Everytime, "HAL intialization failed". At that point I turn off the PSU and try again.
> 
> This time will failed to post and will error out on memory fail count. Also note that when I was in windows and tried to game, the CPU would hard locks forcing me to reboot and run into the HAL issue.
> 
> I am back to 1003.



Can you upload the profile with your settings? Which CPU and memory modules including part number?


----------



## Albesa

*Same problem*

The same thing happens to me, I had to go back to BIOS 1003. My system is:
AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X
Asus ROG Zenith Extreme
G.Skill Trident Z RGB DDR4 3200 PC4-25600 64GB 4x16GB CL14
Samsung SSD 960 PRO NVMe M.2 512GB
Asus GeForce GTX 1080Ti Poseidon Platinum 11GB GDDR5X
Microsoft Windows 10 Pro 64Bits. 1803
Seasonic PRIME 850W Titanium


----------



## spadizzle

elmor said:


> Can you upload the profile with your settings? Which CPU and memory modules including part number?


 @elmor

Win10 pro 64bit


These settings were pulled from the 1003 bios, but its the same exact settings that were attempted in the 9952. I also tried safer settings like the stilt 3200 safe.


----------



## gupsterg

9952 restored USB, didn't have BSOD, did seem not as stable as 1003 (or even other past UEFI for me). In that on 3466S I was getting freezing mouse, keyb (sorta the rig) whilst under load from Y-Cruncher.

I reverted to 1003, tried P95/Y-Cruncher and didn't have the freezing issue. I will be revisiting 9952 again.


----------



## aTsgRe

@elmor with 1003 (vs 1002) and windows 1803 the DOCP with F4-3200C16-8GTZR is not stable at rated speed when using a 39 multiplier in a 1950X; also system seems to be much less responsive.


----------



## slxar

9952 have HAL BOSD when loading windows.
I have this happen after tweaking overclock setting in BIOS, but if you only apply the setting immediately after flashing the BIOS, that will not happen.
Once you have BOSD, cannot get into windows even restore BIOS to default setting and 9952 cannot flash back to any earlier BIOS using flash utility, must use USB to flash back.

Apart, 9952 is less stable than 1003,
I can get 1.275V 3.8G/ 3200(16-17-17-17-39) 1.36V stable on 1003,
but needed to have 1.29V 3.8G/ 3200(16-18-18-18-42) 1.36V on 9952 and sometimes having stability issue with windows(passed prime 95 custom 128k for 1 hour).

All in all, thank for the beta BIOS update!


----------



## ENTERPRISE

aTsgRe said:


> @*elmor* with 1003 (vs 1002) and windows 1803 the DOCP with F4-3200C16-8GTZR is not stable at rated speed when using a 39 multiplier in a 1950X; also system seems to be much less responsive.


This points to an unstable OC. You may need to have a tweak.


----------



## aTsgRe

@ENTERPRISE I only used the default settings -- nothing else; the parameters that I changed where to just enable DOCP and change the multiplier. It was stable before.


----------



## Sicness

Back after quite a few busy months. Became father of twin baby girls ... it's like ordering Ryzen but receiving Threadripper 

Anyway, I updated to 1003 and my 32GB FlareX B-Die can run both Stilt's 3200 Fast, 3333, and even 3466 in HCI Memtest for days. But the best I can do with Y-Cruncher or Prime95 is 3200 Safe. I've been trying all ProcODT between 80 and 43, SoC 1.10-1.25V, VDIMM 1.40-1.45V but no dice. Y-Cruncher would always crap out after 2 or 3 tests. CPU runs at stock settings. What am I missing?


----------



## ManMountain

I installed 1003 and system no longer wakes from sleep state. Tried returning to 1002 but the problem continues, previously it woke on 1002 without any issues.


----------



## aTsgRe

@elmor so with all bioses so far, if I leave my computer idle and locked (in windows) after a while it locks and I have to hard reset -- idling without locking (e.g. just letting the computer idle without password lock) is fine. Please also fix this (this happens regardless of OC).


----------



## spadizzle

I have had zero issues returning from sleep state. 3200 mem speed and 4 ghz oc. 1003 bios


----------



## gupsterg

Sicness said:


> Back after quite a few busy months. Became father of twin baby girls ... it's like ordering Ryzen but receiving Threadripper
> 
> Anyway, I updated to 1003 and my 32GB FlareX B-Die can run both Stilt's 3200 Fast, 3333, and even 3466 in HCI Memtest for days. But the best I can do with Y-Cruncher or Prime95 is 3200 Safe. I've been trying all ProcODT between 80 and 43, SoC 1.10-1.25V, VDIMM 1.40-1.45V but no dice. Y-Cruncher would always crap out after 2 or 3 tests. CPU runs at stock settings. What am I missing?


Congrats :thumb: .

Regarding ZE see my recent post in OC related thread of it  , perhaps tinkering as such will aid you. I have nailed 3466MHz in the past on few UEFIs, but I get close to SOC: ~1.1V VDIMM: ~1.395V settings in UEFI. As posted in here when UEFI 1003 was released it allowed improving on SOC/VDIMM for my HW combo on 3466MHz. And my recent attempts are bearing fruit  .


----------



## Sicness

gupsterg said:


> Congrats :thumb: .
> 
> Regarding ZE see my recent post in OC related thread of it  , perhaps tinkering as such will aid you. I have nailed 3466MHz in the past on few UEFIs, but I get close to SOC: ~1.1V VDIMM: ~1.395V settings in UEFI. As posted in here when UEFI 1003 was released it allowed improving on SOC/VDIMM for my HW combo on 3466MHz. And my recent attempts are bearing fruit  .


Thanks gup!


----------



## OrionBG

Hey guys,
After so many months have passed (and BIOS Revisions) would you recommend this board? I was thinking of replacing my AsRock X399 Taichi with it for various reasons...


----------



## kossiewossie

changing from the AsRock x399, I personally wouldn't, the Zenith is good but it still has a few issues, and with the new Threadrippers CPUs out soon, and with the arrival of x499 MBs. Id personally wait and upgrade then, and hopefully all the small issues are ironed out (like Virtual machine bug thats effects Threadripper CPUs, etc).


----------



## The EX1

kossiewossie said:


> changing from the AsRock x399, I personally wouldn't, the Zenith is good but it still has a few issues, and with the new Threadrippers CPUs out soon, and with the arrival of x499 MBs. Id personally wait and upgrade then, and hopefully all the small issues are ironed out (like Virtual machine bug thats effects Threadripper CPUs, etc).


I'm a little late to the Zenith/Threadripper party, but what is the current VM bug? I built a system with this board and a 1920X and run 3 gaming VMs for LAN nights at my house. The setup has been awesome.


----------



## OrionBG

My reasons are mainly availability of accessories... By that I mean water blocks. The ASUS boards are the only x399 boards that somebody other than EK made a VRM cooler for. Heatkiller have made VRM water block for ASUS but only for them... The only choice I have with the AsRock Taichi is to use EK's monoblock and although it looks very nice, I'm experiencing some heavy CPU cooling problems with it right now.
My previous board was an ASUS ROG Crosshair VI Hero and I had a lot of issues with it's "features" but I'm willing to try again with an ROG product just so I can have access to more cooling solutions...
I don't know... I'm quite disappointing with my experience lately... I mean... What the heck is going on with today's hardware?!? I've been building and repairing PC for almost 20 years now and today's quality control is ridiculous! How ASUS ask us to give them more than $500 USD for a motherboard when it is full of issues! The even better question is why they even released a product with so many issues?
Nowadays companies don't seem to care at all about quality but only quantity... They don't seem to understand that once the alienate their most loyal customers, there won't be many people left to by their high-end products...


----------



## ENTERPRISE

OrionBG said:


> My reasons are mainly availability of accessories... By that I mean water blocks. The ASUS boards are the only x399 boards that somebody other than EK made a VRM cooler for. Heatkiller have made VRM water block for ASUS but only for them... The only choice I have with the AsRock Taichi is to use EK's monoblock and although it looks very nice, I'm experiencing some heavy CPU cooling problems with it right now.
> My previous board was an ASUS ROG Crosshair VI Hero and I had a lot of issues with it's "features" but I'm willing to try again with an ROG product just so I can have access to more cooling solutions...
> I don't know... I'm quite disappointing with my experience lately... I mean... What the heck is going on with today's hardware?!? I've been building and repairing PC for almost 20 years now and today's quality control is ridiculous! How ASUS ask us to give them more than $500 USD for a motherboard when it is full of issues! The even better question is why they even released a product with so many issues?
> Nowadays companies don't seem to care at all about quality but only quantity... They don't seem to understand that once the alienate their most loyal customers, there won't be many people left to by their high-end products...





Made a small adjustment to your post, please do not swear on OCN


----------



## spadizzle

*BIOS new AGESA*

@elmor

Anything going on with that new agesa? Were you able to replicate the issues myself and others were experiencing, or do you need more information. I will go great lengths to support the product.  Any information is always appreciated.





OT: I kept hitting new thread and totally posted 2 accidents in the main area! argh! 3rd times a charm.


----------



## OrionBG

ENTERPRISE said:


> Made a small adjustment to your post, please do not swear on OCN


Apologies ENTERPRISE! I usually put stars on most of the symbols of such words so they look nasty. Maybe I've missed that one.
I'll be more careful.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

OrionBG said:


> Apologies ENTERPRISE! I usually put stars on most of the symbols of such words so they look nasty. Maybe I've missed that one.
> I'll be more careful.


No problem, but I should also point out that we do not allow the use of asterisk symbols to obfuscate swearing either as part of our Community Guidelines


----------



## OrionBG

ENTERPRISE said:


> No problem, but I should also point out that we do not allow the use of asterisk symbols to obfuscate swearing either as part of our Community Guidelines


I see. I'll refrain from using them in the future.


----------



## elmor

Beta BIOS 1102 edit: link removed for now

- AGESA 1.0.7.1
- Fixes an issue where the boot option might reset when two operating systems are installed on the same drive



spadizzle said:


> @elmor
> 
> Anything going on with that new agesa? Were you able to replicate the issues myself and others were experiencing, or do you need more information. I will go great lengths to support the product.  Any information is always appreciated.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OT: I kept hitting new thread and totally posted 2 accidents in the main area! argh! 3rd times a charm.



Sorry, I don't have time to personally verify issues at the moment. Hopefully clears up ~mid June.


----------



## LtMatt

elmor said:


> Beta BIOS 1102 http://www.mediafire.com/file/21ok2m7rdq8cg9l/ROG-ZENITH-EXTREME-ASUS-1102.zip
> 
> - AGESA 1.0.7.1
> - Fixes an issue where the boot option might reset when two operating systems are installed on the same drive
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry, I don't have time to personally verify issues at the moment. Hopefully clears up ~mid June.


I updated to this bios from 1003, i then tried to roll back to 1003 and it said invalid BIOS image. 

I used USB flashback to flash back to 1003 and after the flashback had finished the system powered on and said BIOS is updating and it has been stuck doing that for 20 minutes.

What should i do now?

EDIT

Gave up after 30 mins and restarted, system posts but DRAM LED stays on and says updating EC1 code but nothing happens. 

Will try and use USB Flashback to get back to the new bios, but its not looking good. :/

EDIT 2

Phew, i managed to reflash the new BIOS. My aida scores and latency are worse and it seems i can't flash back to 1003, but at least things are working again. 

EDIT 3 

XFR is not working in 1102, rolling back to 9952 fixes XFR. 
@elmor Is there anyway i can roll back to 1003? Aside from the C States issue, that was the best BIOS for me so far.


----------



## LtMatt

LtMatt said:


> I updated to this bios from 1003, i then tried to roll back to 1003 and it said invalid BIOS image.
> 
> I used USB flashback to flash back to 1003 and after the flashback had finished the system powered on and said BIOS is updating and it has been stuck doing that for 20 minutes.
> 
> What should i do now?
> 
> EDIT
> 
> Gave up after 30 mins and restarted, system posts but DRAM LED stays on and says updating EC1 code but nothing happens.
> 
> Will try and use USB Flashback to get back to the new bios, but its not looking good. :/
> 
> EDIT 2
> 
> Phew, i managed to reflash the new BIOS. My aida scores and latency are worse and it seems i can't flash back to 1003, but at least things are working again.
> 
> EDIT 3
> 
> XFR is not working in 1102, rolling back to 9952 fixes XFR.
> 
> @elmor Is there anyway i can roll back to 1003? Aside from the C States issue, that was the best BIOS for me so far.


Hallelujah praise the lord. I USB'd flashbacked to 9950 and that enabled me to USB Flashback to 1003. All is well with the world!


----------



## spadizzle

elmor said:


> Beta BIOS 1102 http://www.mediafire.com/file/21ok2m7rdq8cg9l/ROG-ZENITH-EXTREME-ASUS-1102.zip
> 
> - AGESA 1.0.7.1
> - Fixes an issue where the boot option might reset when two operating systems are installed on the same drive
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry, I don't have time to personally verify issues at the moment. Hopefully clears up ~mid June.


1102 Working fine for me, no issues. 

Did some gaming and smooth as can be. No apparent fan issues for myself either. Thank you!


When updating my bios I always use the method described through this post. http://www.overclock.net/forum/11-a...yzen-bios-mods-how-update-bios-correctly.html


----------



## LtMatt

spadizzle said:


> 1102 Working fine for me, no issues.
> 
> Did some gaming and smooth as can be. No apparent fan issues for myself either. Thank you!
> 
> 
> When updating my bios I always use the method described through this post. http://www.overclock.net/forum/11-a...yzen-bios-mods-how-update-bios-correctly.html


Having rolled back to 1003, it seems like my Aida scores and latency are only slightly worse, i guess something else changed on my OS to cause the drop.

XFR is not working in 1102 though which is a problem for me as i tend to use that. It last worked in 9952.


----------



## spadizzle

LtMatt said:


> Having rolled back to 1003, it seems like my Aida scores and latency are only slightly worse, i guess something else changed on my OS to cause the drop.
> 
> XFR is not working in 1102 though which is a problem for me as i tend to use that. It last worked in 9952.



9952 was absolute hell for me. I did revert back to 1003 after 9952. This 1102 seems to be working quite well though.

Edit: Checking XFR


----------



## NHKJL

updated to this bios?why not AGESA 1.0.7.1?still display AGESA 0.0.6.0?this problem me too


----------



## NHKJL

*updated to this bios?why not AGESA 1.0.7.1?still display AGESA 0.0.6.0?this problem m*



spadizzle said:


> 1102 Working fine for me, no issues.
> 
> Did some gaming and smooth as can be. No apparent fan issues for myself either. Thank you!
> 
> 
> When updating my bios I always use the method described through this post. http://www.overclock.net/forum/11-a...yzen-bios-mods-how-update-bios-correctly.html


updated to this bios?why not AGESA 1.0.7.1?still display AGESA 0.0.6.0?this problem me too


----------



## LtMatt

spadizzle said:


> 9952 was absolute hell for me. I did revert back to 1003 after 9952. This 1102 seems to be working quite well though.
> 
> Edit: Checking XFR


3.7Ghz is as far as my CPUs boost on the new BIOS, however i can definitely get my memory settings tighter vs 1003. Previously Geardown disabled was a no no, but it seems like i have stability with it off which is nice. 

I may use P State overclocking for now and ditch XFR until the next BIOS release.


----------



## LtMatt

1950X 







[


1920X


----------



## gupsterg

UEFI 1102 flash went sweet as usual, flashback method used.

PB/XFR is not working, even with Core Performance Boost set to Enabled or Auto. Doing further tests.


----------



## LtMatt

gupsterg said:


> UEFI 1102 flash went sweet as usual, flashback method used.
> 
> PB/XFR is not working, even with Core Performance Boost set to Enabled or Auto. Doing further tests.


If you are feeling brave, use USB flashback to reflash 1003 and let me know how you get on.


----------



## gupsterg

LtMatt said:


> If you are feeling brave, use USB flashback to reflash 1003 and let me know how you get on.


Always do   .

Well flashback to 1003 seems to be stuck. The flashback process occurred as usual without a hitch. Rig posted, then on monitor I see:-

BIOS is updating.
Do not shut down or reset the system to prevent system bootup failure.

OLED is showing:-

Code 70:
Updating EC1 code

The green Boot QLED is stuck green.

Been ~5min rig this way...

*** edit ***

Waited ~20min, rig was still as above. Reset rig and had ROG logo with press del to enter BIOS text, still had updating EC1 on OLED. Still stuck rig.

Re-did flashback of 1003, rig posts after while and stuck on ROG logo and OLED still has updating EC1. Seems like board is bricked  .


----------



## LtMatt

gupsterg said:


> Always do   .
> 
> Well flashback to 1003 seems to be stuck. The flashback process occurred as usual without a hitch. Rig posted, then on monitor I see:-
> 
> BIOS is updating.
> Do not shut down or reset the system to prevent system bootup failure.
> 
> OLED is showing:-
> 
> Code 70:
> Updating EC1 code
> 
> The green Boot QLED is stuck green.
> 
> Been ~5min rig this way...
> 
> *** edit ***
> 
> Waited ~20min, rig was still as above. Reset rig and had ROG logo with press del to enter BIOS text, still had updating EC1 on OLED. Still stuck rig.
> 
> Re-did flashback of 1003, rig posts after while and stuck on ROG logo and OLED still has updating EC1. Seems like board is bricked  .


Don't worry, i have the solution i know as i went through it if you scroll back a page you will see my pain. 

You need to use USB Flashback and and reflash the previous bios, then the previous bios before that, then the previous bios before that. If you do it in that order, you will recover. Just reflash back to the BIOS you want to use. 

I wanted to roll back to 1003 so after flashing 1102, i had to flash 9952, 9950, then finally 1003. You should be able to recover so don't panic, it just takes some time.

EDIT -

If you want to use 1102 again, just USB Flashback to 1102 and it will start working again.


----------



## gupsterg

I went to 1102, rig was fine other than PB/XFR not working.

Flashbacked 1003 rig stuck as described.

Flashbacked 1102 rig stuck as described.

So I will flash 9952, then 9950, then 1003, all using flashback. Did you make board post between flashbacks? cheers  .

Bank holiday fun has begun early!


----------



## LtMatt

gupsterg said:


> I went to 1102, rig was fine other than PB/XFR not working.
> 
> Flashbacked 1003 rig stuck as described.
> 
> Flashbacked 1102 rig stuck as described.
> 
> So I will flash 9952, then 9950, then 1003, all using flashback. Did you make board post between flashbacks? cheers  .
> 
> Bank holiday fun has begun early!


It's all fun and games. 

Yes let the system post between each flash and if it says BIOS updating, wait a few minutes to see if it updates. I think in my case it did and it should only take a minute or so before restarting and then you can flash the previous BIOS using flashback. 

What a pain!


----------



## gupsterg

NHKJL said:


> updated to this bios?why not AGESA 1.0.7.1?still display AGESA 0.0.6.0?this problem me too


AGESA string seems to rarely get updated , shame really...



LtMatt said:


> It's all fun and games.
> 
> Yes let the system post between each flash and if it says BIOS updating, wait a few minutes to see if it updates. I think in my case it did and it should only take a minute or so before restarting and then you can flash the previous BIOS using flashback.
> 
> What a pain!


I tried 9952 > POST > 9950 > POST > 1003 > POST.

All I get at each post is slow post like you do when UEFI just flashed. DRAM Q-LED stays lit whilst post cycle occurring, OLED is always displaying Code: 70 Updating EC1 code, on screen I get ROG logo with text below to hit DEL/F2. Rig just sits there...  ....

Trying a 2nd time... but I think my board is bricked ... this is very similar to what went on with C6H when a UEFI had EC updates enabled and boards bricked ...

Ahh well still have C7H to play with over weekend  ...


----------



## ENTERPRISE

That is concerning, I know these are test BIOS's...but surely they should not be given out if they Brick boards ?


----------



## LtMatt

gupsterg said:


> AGESA string seems to rarely get updated , shame really...
> 
> 
> 
> I tried 9952 > POST > 9950 > POST > 1003 > POST.
> 
> All I get at each post is slow post like you do when UEFI just flashed. DRAM Q-LED stays lit whilst post cycle occurring, OLED is always displaying Code: 70 Updating EC1 code, on screen I get ROG logo with text below to hit DEL/F2. Rig just sits there...  ....
> 
> Trying a 2nd time... but I think my board is bricked ... this is very similar to what went on with C6H when a UEFI had EC updates enabled and boards bricked ...
> 
> Ahh well still have C7H to play with over weekend  ...


Try a clear CMOS, reflash 1102 via USB then post, let it update and restart, then do the same and back to 9952, 9950 and 1003. 

I'm sure that was the exact step i followed, but perhaps i did something slightly differently. However i saw exactly the same thing as you and i recovered, so there is a way. 

I was able to recover from 1003 not working and get back to 1102 and from there i managed to roll back one bios version at a time.

Hopefully Elmor comes in to help out.


----------



## gupsterg

She lives :band: ...

After having tried several times updating as stated before I had a break. When I mean break I mean broke the cycle of sitting at ROG logo and OLED stating Code 70: Updating EC1 code.

I downed 1st release UEFI from ASUS site, UEFI 0211. Used flashback like I always do. Rig posted and I had still OLED stating Code 70: Updating EC1 code. I still had DRAM Q-LED stuck (orange) as other LEDs cycled as they should several times. This time after the ROG logo I had on screen:-

BIOS is updating.
Do not shut down or reset the system to prevent system bootup failure.

Which had stopped happening before when trying to recover board. Also this time the RGB reset back to rainbow cycle, where as before all times it has been static red as I had it set ages ago (AURA was uninstalled straight after setting this many months ago).

The message:-

BIOS is updating.
Do not shut down or reset the system to prevent system bootup failure.

Did not clear from screen or board reset, etc. SO I waited ~5min and forced board off by holding power button down (again had done this before). Powered off PSU, did CLRCMOS, then powered on and restarted board and this time when the message:-

BIOS is updating.
Do not shut down or reset the system to prevent system bootup failure.

Came up board shutdown and powered up. And now I'm using TR/ZE to write this post  .

Now to flash a newer UEFI! LOL EC FW has gone old, left below is today (time/date wrong), right is past screen capture.

View attachment 200593


----------



## LtMatt

gupsterg said:


> She lives :band: ...
> 
> After having tried several times updating as stated before I had a break. When I mean break I mean broke the cycle of sitting at ROG logo and OLED stating Code 70: Updating EC1 code.
> 
> I downed 1st release UEFI from ASUS site, UEFI 0211. Used flashback like I always do. Rig posted and I had still OLED stating Code 70: Updating EC1 code. I still had DRAM Q-LED stuck (orange) as other LEDs cycled as they should several times. This time after the ROG logo I had on screen:-
> 
> BIOS is updating.
> Do not shut down or reset the system to prevent system bootup failure.
> 
> Which had stopped happening before when trying to recover board. Also this time the RGB reset back to rainbow cycle, where as before all times it has been static red as I had it set ages ago (AURA was uninstalled straight after setting this many months ago).
> 
> The message:-
> 
> BIOS is updating.
> Do not shut down or reset the system to prevent system bootup failure.
> 
> Did not clear from screen or board reset, etc. SO I waited ~5min and forced board off by holding power button down (again had done this before). Powered off PSU, did CLRCMOS, then powered on and restarted board and this time when the message:-
> 
> BIOS is updating.
> Do not shut down or reset the system to prevent system bootup failure.
> 
> Came up board shutdown and powered up. And now I'm using TR/ZE to write this post  .
> 
> Now to flash a newer UEFI! LOL EC FW has gone old, left below is today (time/date wrong), right is past screen capture.
> 
> View attachment 200593


Glad to hear you got there in the end. It's always such a relief isn't it?


----------



## gupsterg

LtMatt said:


> Glad to hear you got there in the end. It's always such a relief isn't it?


LOL! yeah if I said I didn't have a few butt clenching moments I'd be lying  .

I proceeded to flash each "Official" UEFI in order, as on ASUS support page. I went 0211 > 0305 > 0503 > 0701 > 0902 > 1003.

UEFI 0305 contains the EC updates for system/LED, all others flashed did no updates (except 0211 having a downgrade). Looking at past captures I'm back where I should be in this regard. I also retried OLED FW update in OS and that had not been undone from all this.

I think I'll stay on 1003, as 9950 has no functioning mobo USB headers, 9952 gives me "hit'n'miss" lack of GRUB menu, as I have W10 & Linux Mint installed. 1103 has no PB/XFR and I use CPU at stock ~90% of the time.
@Brain29

I recall some while back you having "iffy" EC versions, perhaps try a flash of 0211, then 0305 and finally a newer one. Then check if OLED FW 1.00.13 is needed or not.


----------



## LtMatt

gupsterg said:


> LOL! yeah if I said I didn't have a few butt clenching moments I'd be lying  .
> 
> I proceeded to flash each "Official" UEFI in order, as on ASUS support page. I went 0211 > 0305 > 0503 > 0701 > 0902 > 1003.
> 
> UEFI 0305 contains the EC updates for system/LED, all others flashed did no updates (except 0211 having a downgrade). Looking at past captures I'm back where I should be in this regard. I also retried OLED FW update in OS and that had not been undone from all this.
> 
> I think I'll stay on 1003, as 9950 has no functioning mobo USB headers, 9952 gives me "hit'n'miss" lack of GRUB menu, as I have W10 & Linux Mint installed. 1103 has no PB/XFR and I use CPU at stock ~90% of the time.
> 
> @Brain29
> 
> I recall some while back you having "iffy" EC versions, perhaps try a flash of 0211, then 0305 and finally a newer one. Then check if OLED FW 1.00.13 is needed or not.


1003 has been the best for me so far, bar the C States bug. I'm on 1102 now on both systems and will use this for now, but if i get issues i will dial back to 1003, via 9952 and then 9950.


----------



## gupsterg

I think the CLRCMS gets rid of the stuck EC update after downgrade from 1102. As only 0211 and 0305 has an EC/LED FW update, upto UEFI 1003. Looking at a screenie of 9950 mobo page it matches what I would have from UEFI 0305 except one thing. UEFI 9950 has LED EC2 knocked out for some reason in version table. Don't have screenies for 9952 or 1102 in my records. I may take the adventure once more on 1102  .


----------



## mariusaz

*Frustrated*

Really regret buying into Threadripper / ASUS at this point. Never had problems with ASUS boards before, this has been a nightmare. (Never expected these kind of problems with their flagship board of all things) I think I'm done with this mess.


----------



## LtMatt

@elmor

Bug reports for 1102. 

1. I get a BSOD when i resume from sleep. I can resume from Hibernate okay. C states enabled or disabled same behaviour. Using P State overclocking and bootable Nvme Raid 0. I notice the RaidXpert firmware is updated in this BIOS version, so not sure if that is related or the bug is related to the previous wake from sleep issue mentioned earlier in 1003 BIOS.

2. Temperatures seem to be a bit off, it's like Sense MI Skew is enabled or something. At least i see this behaviour on my 1950X, my 1920X system with the same motherboard and CPU cooler is okay. 

3. My 1920X does not lower voltage despite using offset. Using P state overclocking. Same settings lower voltage on my 1950X so not sure why it does not work on ther 1920X. I notice the second P state is at 3Ghz on the 1920X, but for the 1950X its 2.8Ghz, not sure if that sheds light on the possible cause. 

Let me know if you need more information.


----------



## LtMatt

I posted here last night but can't find my post...
@elmor

I have some bug reports for BIOS 1102. 

1. I get a BSOD message, either critical process died or something to do with USB 3 ports when i try to resume from sleep. Toggling C States does not fix it this time. 

2. RaidXpert firmware has been updated in the BIOS finally in this version (great!), not sure if that is related to bug 1 though. 

3. Temperatures seem to be a bit off on my 1950X system, but my 1920X system seems fine. using P state overclocking on both systems and enabling the default first 4 p states. P state 1 is at 4Ghz. 

I've had to enable Sensi MI Skew to try and gets temps correct. 

I hope there will be an updated BIOS for Agesa 1.0.7.1, as rolling back to an earlier BIOS version with an earlier RaidXpert version takes some of my non raid arrays offline in the AMD RaidXpert software.


----------



## elmor

Trying to find the exact issue and a fix for the EC firmware flash failing. It only seems to happen when using USB BIOS Flashback to go back to an older version.

BIOS 1102 from EC FW 0211 never failed from me so far. USB BIOS Flashback to BIOS 1003 from EC FW 0213 always fails (stuck at trying to update EC1).


----------



## spadizzle

For me, its actually kind of neat to be able to get to experience a 1st generation cpu and board. Been a good experience. Granted all the hiccups, but none the less. fun Has been huge participation by the development crowd. I see intel peeps popping in asking other Dev's is they could do this for their board... etc...


1102 has been a decent experience, besides the boost etc... running really good.



OT: anyone else having issues trying to drop a jpg onto the post?


----------



## ENTERPRISE

spadizzle said:


> For me, its actually kind of neat to be able to get to experience a 1st generation cpu and board. Been a good experience. Granted all the hiccups, but none the less. fun Has been huge participation by the development crowd. I see intel peeps popping in asking other Dev's is they could do this for their board... etc...
> 
> 
> 1102 has been a decent experience, besides the boost etc... running really good.
> 
> 
> 
> OT: anyone else having issues trying to drop a jpg onto the post?


The Upload system is currently down, a fix is in the works


----------



## spadizzle

*Update*

So, been chewing through the 1102. Besides the XFR hiccups and P-State? Sorry, haven't focused on those two values. Everything has been fine until....... Started goofing with the dreaded "Aura" software lol. Intialilly started with a fresh copy of Win10 64bit home. normally run professional. Just wanted to see/feel any difference in lesser resources. *no difference* maybe a touch less memory. *500MB* less. duh Memory wise


Anyways, back to "Aura". Installed 1.06.29, yea....don't use that version, it will forget you had memory and let the mem do its own light thing. So i uninstalled the *.29 version and restarted, so far so good. Log in and think I remember some crazy thing about restarting twice to truly clear settings from Aura. I do that and I get the "beep beep beep" and try again? 

anyways, it fails like it never could boot with the current config"its the default 3200 config i run which I have posted the last few times". 

At this point, im like screw 1102 and considering 1003, but then I'm like, well im lazy and don't feel like going through the hassle of re-flashing blah blah blah. So I just turn off the PSU for like 10 seconds and then boot and get the infamous F1 new bios blah blah. I jump into that and load my 3200 CMO file from the USB and everything is copacetic. I install the *Lighting_Control_1.06.17* and reboot couple times for the giggles to appease the Asus gods and *Aura* is working all perfect all of a sudden. So this is where I am at. 

Thinking, when is the new Threadripper board gonna appear, and should I get it from ASUS.


----------



## LtMatt

@elmor 

Do you know when we can expect an updated BIOS on Agesa 1.0.7.1 that will fix the XFR not working bug and the EC Firmware issue? Not so worried about the EC Firmware issue, but XFR being broken is annoying.


----------



## Juggalo23451

Need help getting my raid 0 working again. Updated bios to 1003 

I am assuming that I can just follow the sets below to getting it working again correct.

Launch CSM: Enabled
Boot Device Control: UEFI Only
Boot from Network Devices: UEFI Driver First*
Boot from Storage Devices: UEFI Driver First*
Boot from PCI-E Expansion Devices: UEFI Driver First*
In the advanced tab do NOT set SATA to RAID. Leave it ACHI
In the advanced tab find the AMD PBS setting and change it to RAID
In the advanced tab you should see the RAIDXpert Raid Configuration option now.


----------



## LtMatt

Make sure to submit motherboard bugs to asus.
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSeZvt0dGCJG47s5ygH4oS1niUcNz0U5v5jn0vmvZcPPkWg1cg/viewform


----------



## Aby67

@ENTERPRISE

I have noticed the biggest bug on this motherboard that HAS NEVER BEEN ADDRESSED, it is not a WS motherboard for a workstation class CPU, it has NO 7 PCIe slots at 16 lenght for a 60 PCIe Lane CPU.
No matter how much i make bios updates and configure, I can't manage to get 7 PCIe slots at 16 lenght working at all..as a result even if I have 4 gpus installed on it and wanna drop more on, I still have 30% PCIe lanes unused sitting there on @asus to deliver.
I am extremely disappointed for @asus to supply and offer such low end motherboards for HPC, ideal also for GPGPU, server grade CPUs...
I also wish to add that no idiot would use more than 1 m.2 or maybe a raid 1 if losing 20 minutes of ur time for a drive failure is too much...there are more than plenty pcie 2 lanes available for all the storage in the world one need , not to mention the 10Gigabit ethernet if u wanna store on your own servers.
If @asus wish to sandbag AMD , please do us all a big favour and just say you will never make a proper WS Threadripper rmotherboard, because You wanna give advantage to Intel platforms, so we can all move on to other manufacturers in peace and forget about your brand for ever.


P.S. Oh yeas i forgot to say....it is veyr laudable @asus, that you have put two 8 pin cpu plugs for this motherboard trying to anticipate AMD eventually dropping out a 32 core gen1 threadripper or maybe maybe a EPYC BIOS update, but then reaaaaaly really how can i get to use 128 PCIe lanes?!...thsi Zenith board should be rated as a entry level Tr4 motherboard and have been branded as Prime x399 rather than zenith...i dont even wanna mention there is no workstation class at all worth paying 5/600 euros for.
If it wasnt for people on these forums, starting these threads helping Us out with your BIOS and overall hardware componentry junk, You would be out of business, very soon.


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

LtMatt said:


> Make sure to submit bug reports for the XFR issue and the voltage not dropping on the 1920x when using p states on BIOS 1102.
> https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSeZvt0dGCJG47s5ygH4oS1niUcNz0U5v5jn0vmvZcPPkWg1cg/viewform


I filled that out weeks ago...months...never heard anything...


----------



## aTsgRe

Please @elmor, we spent a significant chunk of money for this board and none of the issues have been fixed in ages... you released a BETA product and still is in beta. I want my AIDA64 or any other normal monitoring software to work without either shutting my fans or being a spaceship rocket constantly-- PWM on a 500$ board is a mess, like WTH? System with memory is unstable when using DOCP with memory dimms specifically picked from your memory QVL. 

What the hell is going on, care to explain?

Also, if I want to return this motherboard because, really this is an unacceptable kind of support would I be able to? I've been patient enough, as am sure many here...


----------



## dejanh

Just wanted to chime in here and say thanks to everyone for running this thread. I recently jumped on board the Zenith Extreme paired with a 1950x and so far I have had a reasonably good experience, which now I believe has to do a lot with the discussions that have been going on here, so thank you all  I look forward to further updates from Asus to address any remaining bugs.

One quick question for those in this thread - how do I know which AURA/LED firmware my board is using and whether I need to actually run the FW update that is posted here and on ASUS site?


----------



## nycgtr

aTsgRe said:


> Please @elmor, we spent a significant chunk of money for this board and none of the issues have been fixed in ages... you released a BETA product and still is in beta. I want my AIDA64 or any other normal monitoring software to work without either shutting my fans or being a spaceship rocket constantly-- PWM on a 500$ board is a mess, like WTH? System with memory is unstable when using DOCP with memory dimms specifically picked from your memory QVL.
> 
> What the hell is going on, care to explain?
> 
> Also, if I want to return this motherboard because, really this is an unacceptable kind of support would I be able to? I've been patient enough, as am sure many here...


Don't use aida. The issue is annoying and it's not just on the zenith. If ur memory is unstable then manually set your settings using ryzen memory calc.


----------



## gupsterg

dejanh said:


> One quick question for those in this thread - how do I know which AURA/LED firmware my board is using and whether I need to actually run the FW update that is posted here and on ASUS site?


When you run the update it only does it if it's needed  . Version is shown on Main page in UEFI. LED EC2, AULA0-S072-0201 is what is done by OLED/EC FW update v1.00.13.


----------



## aTsgRe

I don't pay 500 $ for a motherboard just to say "don't use AIDA", this is an expensive product -- it's like buying a Ferrari and saying you only have to use the first two gears otherwise it breaks. Also this does not happen only with AIDA, it happens also with HW Monitor as well and it's well known issue, even without using it; search this thread for PWM issues and you will see there are a LOT of problems with it.


----------



## nycgtr

aTsgRe said:


> I don't pay 500 $ for a motherboard just to say "don't use AIDA", this is an expensive product -- it's like buying a Ferrari and saying you only have to use the first two gears otherwise it breaks. Also this does not happen only with AIDA, it happens also with HW Monitor as well and it's well known issue, even without using it; search this thread for PWM issues and you will see there are a LOT of problems with it.


its a super i/o issue. I know what ur talking about as I have the board as well. It only happens with aida for me. It isnt gonna get fixed as asus is throwing it on aida. So you can either return the board or just like i said don't use aida.


----------



## dejanh

gupsterg said:


> When you run the update it only does it if it's needed  . Version is shown on Main page in UEFI. LED EC2, AULA0-S072-0201 is what is done by OLED/EC FW update v1.00.13.


Thank you sir for this excellent feedback  I will verify what I'm on today and update from there if required.


----------



## st4v0

Any news of a new bios release anytime soon please elmor?


----------



## gupsterg

aTsgRe said:


> I don't pay 500 $ for a motherboard just to say "don't use AIDA", this is an expensive product -- it's like buying a Ferrari and saying you only have to use the first two gears otherwise it breaks. Also this does not happen only with AIDA, it happens also with HW Monitor as well and it's well known issue, even without using it; search this thread for PWM issues and you will see there are a LOT of problems with it.


Link, so I'm guessing HW Monitor also needs to use interface that ASUS are rolling out with UEFI updates.



dejanh said:


> Thank you sir for this excellent feedback  I will verify what I'm on today and update from there if required.


NP  .


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Looking forward to see what the new AGESA is capable of, once the bugs are worked out of it. I wonder if they will continue to develop on this board for TR2 ?


----------



## gupsterg

I can't see why not TBH.

The C7H has a "Stealth mode" ie Q-Code display, RGB, etc off options. C6H gained this just around when C7H was gonna hit IIRC. So I do believe the UEFIs go somewhat "hand in hand". The C6H does not lack Precision Boost Override, etc, etc either. TBH the C7H lost TPM header, 3D print mount points and gained some other aspects which some could say are more beneficial or not.


----------



## dejanh

ENTERPRISE said:


> Looking forward to see what the new AGESA is capable of, once the bugs are worked out of it. I wonder if they will continue to develop on this board for TR2 ?


I am going to be shocked if they do not. It is such a new platform and ongoing support will be crucial to keep the initial adopters going and spending. If I notice that the board is not going to be supported I am not going to look at ASUS down the line for my Threadripper needs. This is a workstation board first and foremost despite the gaming associations and should get better support than your run-of-the-mill board. Not to mention that it is one of (if not actually) the most expensive consumer boards around.


----------



## aTsgRe

definitely not the most expensive as Rampage Extreme for X299 is much more expensive and does not include 10G Networking but it's one of the more premium ones (> 500 $)


----------



## dejanh

aTsgRe said:


> definitely not the most expensive as Rampage Extreme for X299 is much more expensive and does not include 10G Networking but it's one of the more premium ones (> 500 $)


Off topic, but RVIE does include 10G Ethernet. Zenith Extreme is basically AMD version of RVIE.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

I have chased @elmor to see if there are any updates for our board.


----------



## aTsgRe

@dejanh yes my bad! I thought it didn't since they don't offer it as a separate card but it's even better since it's integrated... @ENTERPRISE any news on that front?


----------



## ENTERPRISE

aTsgRe said:


> @dejanh yes my bad! I thought it didn't since they don't offer it as a separate card but it's even better since it's integrated... @ENTERPRISE any news on that front?


Not until he chimes in here bud.


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

ENTERPRISE said:


> I have chased @elmor to see if there are any updates for our board.


Thanks for trying to get some news ENTERPRISE.

It seems to me the BIOS support is not quite there for this top end board. Feedback unacknowledged and improvements few and far between...

Still, enjoying the platform as it stands for the most part!


----------



## aTsgRe

@Arne Saknussemm I don't think it's just you... I think it's everyone. This board is half-baked; awesome hardware, crippled by stupid software.


----------



## nycgtr

dejanh said:


> Off topic, but RVIE does include 10G Ethernet. Zenith Extreme is basically AMD version of RVIE.


Close enough. However, the zenith has taken a beating on price. Often for 350 new.


----------



## TheGovernment

Not sure if anyone remembers but I had the Zenith extreme and the 1920x that shorted out. The Zenith ended up with melted pins and the cpu had a few scorch marks.
Anyways, i sent both away for RMA, just taking a shot since it was expensive and actually got a new board and my new 1920x showed up today!. Gotta admit, I was very surprised dealing with Asus before was not a good experience but they came through this time (still dont know what caused the short)
Amd was also great btw.

So good news... except I went out and got a 8700k and msi pro carbon sice i needed a working pc lol.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Just wanted to let you guys know that Elmor has no updates for the moment.


----------



## aTsgRe

@ENTERPRISE that's a shame... it's been a very long time since we last had an official update...


----------



## dejanh

Really hoping we will get some update news soon. Generally I am stable on 1003 but there are some quirks still occurring that people pointed out here. The silence always scares me...


----------



## aTsgRe

@elmor why the radio silence for so long...?


----------



## Martin778

aTsgRe said:


> @elmor why the radio silence for so long...?


Looks pretty obvious to me - ZE will get replaced by ZE2 or something like Z7E for the new 2950X TR launch so they won't bother with ZE anymore.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Martin778 said:


> Looks pretty obvious to me - ZE will get replaced by ZE2 or something like Z7E for the new 2950X TR launch so they won't bother with ZE anymore.


It is possible, the ZE however would be compatible with with TR2, just the OC capability would be hindered. One could argue they are waiting to tinker with a new BIOS for the ZE introducing that compatibility, or ZE is EOL in favour a new board. If it is EOL then I will have to kick up a stink about that as while the platform is there for the most part, there are still issues to be resolved.


----------



## dejanh

Martin778 said:


> Looks pretty obvious to me - ZE will get replaced by ZE2 or something like Z7E for the new 2950X TR launch so they won't bother with ZE anymore.


I certainly hope that is not the case. As I said before, I would seriously reconsider Asus for my future purchases if they decided to do this for a top-end board.


ENTERPRISE said:


> It is possible, the ZE however would be compatible with with TR2, just the OC capability would be hindered. One could argue they are waiting to tinker with a new BIOS for the ZE introducing that compatibility, or ZE is EOL in favour a new board. If it is EOL then I will have to kick up a stink about that as while the platform is there for the most part, there are still issues to be resolved.


Same here. To essentially discontinue the board would be seriously foolish and would definitely shake my confidence in Asus as a viable platform for high-end builds. I haven't had this experience with them in the past, but then again I never purchased into such a new platform as the X399/Threadripper.


----------



## MTH254

dejanh said:


> I certainly hope that is not the case. As I said before, I would seriously reconsider Asus for my future purchases if they decided to do this for a top-end board.
> 
> Same here. To essentially discontinue the board would be seriously foolish and would definitely shake my confidence in Asus as a viable platform for high-end builds. I haven't had this experience with them in the past, but then again I never purchased into such a new platform as the X399/Threadripper.



I'm pretty much done with Asus boards at this point. Looking to replace the ZE with the new Gigabyte TR2 board coming out this summer unless Asrock releases a new board for TR2.

Its such a disappointment to experience this poor level of support on a high end part--I honestly expected more from Asus. I'm convinced Asus either doesn't care for AMD products or they don't have the expertise to properly support the AMD platform that other manufactures have.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

MTH254 said:


> I'm pretty much done with Asus boards at this point. Looking to replace the ZE with the new Gigabyte TR2 board coming out this summer unless Asrock releases a new board for TR2.
> 
> Its such a disappointment to experience this poor level of support on a high end part--I honestly expected more from Asus. I'm convinced Asus either doesn't care for AMD products or they don't have the expertise to properly support the AMD platform that other manufactures have.


I agree, it seems Asus are more invested in Intel so far as my experience has been with Asus. I have had Asus motherboards with a few Intel boards, great support and great products. However over to AMD and it seems to be a completely different story. I would blame AMD but other boards on the X399 seem to be more problem free compared to the ZE, so I have to shift the big question mark over to Asus.

It is unlikely I will go to TR2 due to I have no real need for it, but if I were I would have to reconsider Asus altogether and perhaps jump ship.


----------



## aTsgRe

the board is blatantly broken at this point, like it has fundamental unresolved issues and still feels like a beta platform, definately not a 500$ workstation board. Anyhow, if this remains unresolved over the next few weeks I'll return the board and ask either for Zenith 2 or a refund.


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

ZE is feeling really EOL. A bit galling to say the least. The board has run well for me but within limitations. Limitations that should have been removed by now. Really not sure who to look at...AMD or ASUS.

Anyone know of a 1920X Pstate OC that works on another company's board? Just out of interest...


----------



## MaxHughes

*X399 BUGS*

Stop saying AMD memory steps of 266MHz need the mobo maker to fix with a bios update. Intel is 200MHz steps and no bios code will rip the AMD memory controller out of your processor and intall an Intel memory controller. 1866/2133/2400/2666/2933/3200/3466 are AMD speeds and steps. 3000 isn't an AMD speed. If you insist on buying 2800/3000/3400 MHz memory go buy an Intel cpu. 1866MHZ 4 DS sticks, 2133MHz 4 SS sticks, 2400MHz 2 DS sticks, 2666MHz 2 SS sticks everything else is an overclock. This has been on AMD's web site for 14 months. Ryzen speeds apply to Threadripper because an eight core is one Ryzen die. A sixteen core is two Ryzen dies. It's not ASUS it's not ASRock, the problem is you. One monitized Youtube channel calls their stupidity a problem with AMD that your bios can fix and every copycat monitized channel copies that to make money on Utube. It appears to me that anything over 2933 is going to need SAMSUNG B-die memory. Companies like Corsair that refuse to tell you what chips are in which packages should create BUYER RESISTENCE. The only bug in buying the wrong memory kit is you.


----------



## Lemon Wolf

I am also very disappointed with this mainboard.
Yes there have been numerous beta bioses but thats the problem they are beta.
Some of them fix an issue or two but then other bugs appear that are sometimes even worse.
The board feels like a rushed product even after almost 1 year.
Someone asked 9 days ago on the official Asus forums if the board will get a bios update for Threadripper 2. There is still no answer!
And i dont think there will be one as there are rarely any dev responses. Which means that this very expensive board will most likely not support Threadripper 2.
I have been a happy Asus customer for years. I have two Asus monitors an Asus GFX Card the ZE and another Intel mainboard, however i will never ever touch an Asus product again.


----------



## aTsgRe

not being able to run a PWM reliably is just unheard of; I've had many boards over the years and this is the *first* one which had issues with PWM; if that does not work when basic functions of my computer cannot reliably work, CPU overheads, water pump goes crazy, and fans spins like my computer wants to take off constantly. I leave a week at time my computer on so having these issues is costing me both time and money -- I cannot believe how one can ask such a high sticker price and can't get right stuff that 80$ boards do. I just can't...

Not to mention that DRAM is not stable at rated QVL speeds...


----------



## elmor

Martin778 said:


> Looks pretty obvious to me - ZE will get replaced by ZE2 or something like Z7E for the new 2950X TR launch so they won't bother with ZE anymore.



Rather the opposite, busy enabling TR2 on this board at the moment.




ENTERPRISE said:


> I agree, it seems Asus are more invested in Intel so far as my experience has been with Asus. I have had Asus motherboards with a few Intel boards, great support and great products. However over to AMD and it seems to be a completely different story. I would blame AMD but other boards on the X399 seem to be more problem free compared to the ZE, so I have to shift the big question mark over to Asus.
> 
> It is unlikely I will go to TR2 due to I have no real need for it, but if I were I would have to reconsider Asus altogether and perhaps jump ship.



Every single vendor is more invested in Intel than AMD.


ACPI WMI solution for SIO issues is coming, but it takes way longer than I expected.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

elmor said:


> Rather the opposite, busy enabling TR2 on this board at the moment.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Every single vendor is more invested in Intel than AMD.
> 
> 
> ACPI WMI solution for SIO issues is coming, but it takes way longer than I expected.


Thanks for the update. 

I have no doubt every vendor is more invested in Intel. One day hopefully this will change. As for TR2 on this board, good news. However would you happen to know if this board can handle an OC on the TR2 CPU's ? 

Cheers !


----------



## lowdog

Arne Saknussemm said:


> ZE is feeling really EOL. A bit galling to say the least. The board has run well for me but within limitations. Limitations that should have been removed by now. Really not sure who to look at...AMD or ASUS.
> 
> Anyone know of a 1920X Pstate OC that works on another company's board? Just out of interest...




Pstate OC with down volting only seems to work with 1950X cpu for some reason. Tried both 1920X and 1900X on Asrock X399 Fat Pro Gaming and it's a no go for down volting at idle with Pstat OC. Been confirmed that 1950X on Asrock Taichi X399 down volts at idle wirh Pstate OC and Asrock TSD have confirmed the same a as I have just been over the whole issue with them via email.

Looks like something is going on in AMD's AGESA code with power delivery for different TR chips????, who knows it's beyond me and my understanding.


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

lowdog said:


> Pstate OC with down volting only seems to work with 1950X cpu for some reason. Tried both 1920X and 1900X on Asrock X399 Fat Pro Gaming and it's a no go for down volting at idle with Pstat OC. Been confirmed that 1950X on Asrock Taichi X399 down volts at idle wirh Pstate OC and Asrock TSD have confirmed the same a as I have just been over the whole issue with them via email.
> 
> Looks like something is going on in AMD's AGESA code with power delivery for different TR chips????, who knows it's beyond me and my understanding.


Thanks for confirming that lowdog! I hope AMD sort that out! They've had enough time!

I'm not sure where to take this...I've tried to write an email to AMD technical support...will see what, if anything, they say/do.

Not happy functionality is missing from these chips compared to 1950X!


----------



## sevriety

Is making zen2 available on this board @elmor going to help the people in this thread on zen?


----------



## gupsterg

I was just viewing other sTR4 boards web pages, none really seem ahead in frequency or number of UEFIs released TBH. Comparative was "official" releases on competing boards and ZE.

On the whole really haven't got any real gripes on ZE. Regardless still up for trying a new UEFI  .


----------



## dejanh

gupsterg said:


> I was just viewing other sTR4 boards web pages, none really seem ahead in frequency or number of UEFIs released TBH. Comparative was "official" releases on competing boards and ZE.
> 
> On the whole really haven't got any real gripes on ZE. Regardless still up for trying a new UEFI  .


This is true. I noticed the same thing upon review. The thing is, for me I compare my experience to how ASUS supports their top-end Intel boards and I do expect the same here. Based on elmor's last update it sounds like they are working on things actively which is really good.


----------



## aTsgRe

@elmor any updates?


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

10 days later I have an answer from AMD technical support acknowledging my support ticket and asking me questions I already gave the answers to in my initial contact...yawn...have replied...let's see how long it takes for them to understand what's going on with P-State OC for 1920X and 1900X...


----------



## LtMatt

Arne Saknussemm said:


> 10 days later I have an answer from AMD technical support acknowledging my support ticket and asking me questions I already gave the answers to in my initial contact...yawn...have replied...let's see how long it takes for them to understand what's going on with P-State OC for 1920X and 1900X...


Can you send me a pm with the message you sent and received to AMD Support?


----------



## VileLasagna

Why, hello again, friends. I am back despite the new forum trying its very best to make me drift back into oblivion by messing with the following of threads.

Pretty happy to hear Zen+ is a priority for this board. I know I don't NEED it, but I am already pre-tempted to put my 1920X for sale and grab a 32-core once it's out. I might need to re-watch Buildzoid's video to see but my guess regarding OCing TR2 on this board is that thanks to the active cooling on the VRM we should be fine even if you're not like me and just dropped a waterblock there instead. From what I remember we shouldn't have problems with the Zenith at the very least for regular OCing (air and water). VRM on the Zenith is the same as the x299 Rampage and x299 is way more power hungry than we're expecting TR2 to be.

Still need to come back to reality and give up on the changing CPUs but.... `make -j64` just sounds SO DELICIOUS. Also need to catch up with more recent BIOS and go back for a second round of OCing on my 1920. I had taken it to 4150 pretty easily before but my block wasn't properly seated and it turns out I've got the short end of the stick on the silicon lottery and my CPU gets REALLY uncooperative if it goes over 67C. Also made the choice to give up on the FakeRAID controller for this board and so far that is turning out to be a good choice, though I DID need to buy an actual raid controller and if you don't have some server scrap available that can be some pretty unreasonably expensive stuff


----------



## ENTERPRISE

VileLasagna said:


> Why, hello again, friends. I am back despite the new forum trying its very best to make me drift back into oblivion by messing with the following of threads.
> 
> Pretty happy to hear Zen+ is a priority for this board. I know I don't NEED it, but I am already pre-tempted to put my 1920X for sale and grab a 32-core once it's out. I might need to re-watch Buildzoid's video to see but my guess regarding OCing TR2 on this board is that thanks to the active cooling on the VRM we should be fine even if you're not like me and just dropped a waterblock there instead. From what I remember we shouldn't have problems with the Zenith at the very least for regular OCing (air and water). VRM on the Zenith is the same as the x299 Rampage and x299 is way more power hungry than we're expecting TR2 to be.
> 
> Still need to come back to reality and give up on the changing CPUs but.... `make -j64` just sounds SO DELICIOUS. Also need to catch up with more recent BIOS and go back for a second round of OCing on my 1920. I had taken it to 4150 pretty easily before but my block wasn't properly seated and it turns out I've got the short end of the stick on the silicon lottery and my CPU gets REALLY uncooperative if it goes over 67C. Also made the choice to give up on the FakeRAID controller for this board and so far that is turning out to be a good choice, though I DID need to buy an actual raid controller and if you don't have some server scrap available that can be some pretty unreasonably expensive stuff


I have to admit I am tempted by the 32 Core TR2, I may make the leap after I see what our current Zenith can do with it. I would imagine we are well equipped to OC the TR2 with this board. It would be even nicer if I can remain using my Enermax Liqtech 360 AIO as well, does a great job with my 1950X.


----------



## VileLasagna

ENTERPRISE said:


> I have to admit I am tempted by the 32 Core TR2, I may make the leap after I see what our current Zenith can do with it. I would imagine we are well equipped to OC the TR2 with this board. It would be even nicer if I can remain using my Enermax Liqtech 360 AIO as well, does a great job with my 1950X.


As long as I don't draw this limited a chip again (and don't convince myself to listen to reason and stay with my 1920) yeah should be good.

And my understanding is you don't get much better than the Liqtech for TR, don't think even my setup, as overkill as it is (an RX480 just for the CPU and the VRM) gives me much over it. It's just annoying that I can't seem to take heat off the CPU fast enough. The only thing to consider would be maybe the VRMs but in a Zenith I think mostly the VRM fan could get annoyingly whiny. This is one of the good things in this board, it's pretty "future-proof" in that sense and as much as I dislike it, that fan was a good choice by asus in the sense that it does enable us to push that somewhat compact VRM a bit harder even if you don't drop a block there.


----------



## delerious

VileLasagna said:


> As long as I don't draw this limited a chip again (and don't convince myself to listen to reason and stay with my 1920) yeah should be good.
> 
> And my understanding is you don't get much better than the Liqtech for TR, don't think even my setup, as overkill as it is (an RX480 just for the CPU and the VRM) gives me much over it. It's just annoying that I can't seem to take heat off the CPU fast enough. The only thing to consider would be maybe the VRMs but in a Zenith I think mostly the VRM fan could get annoyingly whiny. This is one of the good things in this board, it's pretty "future-proof" in that sense and as much as I dislike it, that fan was a good choice by asus in the sense that it does enable us to push that somewhat compact VRM a bit harder even if you don't drop a block there.


Heatkiller IV or XSPC Raystorm look good if you want custom loop. https://www.hardocp.com/article/2018/02/22/heatkiller_iv_pro_threadripper_water_block_review/3


----------



## ENTERPRISE

VileLasagna said:


> As long as I don't draw this limited a chip again (and don't convince myself to listen to reason and stay with my 1920) yeah should be good.
> 
> And my understanding is you don't get much better than the Liqtech for TR, don't think even my setup, as overkill as it is (an RX480 just for the CPU and the VRM) gives me much over it. It's just annoying that I can't seem to take heat off the CPU fast enough. The only thing to consider would be maybe the VRMs but in a Zenith I think mostly the VRM fan could get annoyingly whiny. This is one of the good things in this board, it's pretty "future-proof" in that sense and as much as I dislike it, that fan was a good choice by asus in the sense that it does enable us to push that somewhat compact VRM a bit harder even if you don't drop a block there.


I agree the Zenith is fairly future proof, I have good case air flow (Though I pay for it in the sense my system is rather audible) so my VRM's always tend to remain nice and cool even at load which fills me with confidence should I go with TR2 but I will wait to see how the Zenith stands up with TR2 after some reviews.


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

Arne Saknussemm said:


> 10 days later I have an answer from AMD technical support acknowledging my support ticket and asking me questions I already gave the answers to in my initial contact...yawn...have replied...let's see how long it takes for them to understand what's going on with P-State OC for 1920X and 1900X...


Today AMD support asked me " What do you mean by P-State overclocking "

I was tempted to ask them what they meant and see if we could go around like that for a while...but I was a good boy...but it may be a while before 1920X or 1900X downvolt with a P-State OC


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Looking forward to the next BIOS which I should imagine will focus on the intro of TR2 to the board over any other fixes, but one can hope other bugs get squashed at the same time. While I am considering the upgrade to TR2 I am certainly keeping with the Zenith as it is very capable, will be interesting to see some of the reviews with people using TR2 in this board to see what the end results and temps are of the VRM's. I refuse to upgraded my board for the newer chipset because A. The improvements are minimal B. Considering the fiasco and fight we have had to get the X399 Zenith right, I do not need to repeat the battle with a new board.


----------



## aTsgRe

Totally agree @ENTERPRISE, besides we are *still* waiting for the Zenith board to be (finally) stable... as a side note, @elmor can you please give an update regarding the ACPI WMI interface BIOS update? Why is it taking so long?


----------



## x3sphere

Seems like a lot of other manufacturers have already pushed out new BIOS updates with TR2 compatibility, when is the update from Asus coming?

I'm not getting TR2 but apparently the new AGESA build used fixes a lot of issues in Linux, like the PCI reset issue. So I'm really looking forward to a new update


----------



## Bartouille

I've been experimenting with UEFI 1003 for a while now and I can't seem to get 3466MHz stable anymore, even with crappy JEDEC timings, UNLESS I do a first time boot with PSU off. What's up with that? Anyone has a clue on what the very first boot does differently from the rest in term of memory training? Did anyone else experience/notice this?


----------



## aTsgRe

And yet, almost every other board manufacturer has already released updates for TR2 and we are still waiting for a fully-featured stable BIOS for Zenith... (tagging @elmor, yet again).

https://wccftech.com/amd-x399-motherboards-bios-support-2nd-gen-ryzen-threadripper-cpus/


----------



## elmor

aTsgRe said:


> Totally agree @ENTERPRISE, besides we are *still* waiting for the Zenith board to be (finally) stable... as a side note, @elmor can you please give an update regarding the ACPI WMI interface BIOS update? Why is it taking so long?



I'm as frustrated about these delays as you are. I still can't give a time frame for when it will be ready.




aTsgRe said:


> And yet, almost every other board manufacturer has already released updates for TR2 and we are still waiting for a fully-featured stable BIOS for Zenith... (tagging @elmor, yet again).
> 
> https://wccftech.com/amd-x399-motherboards-bios-support-2nd-gen-ryzen-threadripper-cpus/



The current TR2 BIOS has re-introduced the memory cold boot issues, I will release something here when that's fixed.


----------



## Boydo

I seem to be running stable on 1003 with 64GB (4 x 16GB G.Skill CL14 3200) but I still have 125MB of hardware reserved memory. I did try flashing back to 0902 which purportedly fixed that issue but no dice.


Is there some sort of memory remapping or blackhole stuff going on with this BIOS or a known error?


I've tried all sorts of combinations of reflashing, clearing CMOS, removing all but one DIMM, different slots, etc. All have resulted in 125MB of hardware reserved memory. I know I am not short on memory, so I guess this is a case of #firstworldproblems but it'd be nice to resolve that issue as it's the last niggle remaining for me on this board.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

elmor said:


> aTsgRe said:
> 
> 
> 
> Totally agree @ENTERPRISE, besides we are *still* waiting for the Zenith board to be (finally) stable... as a side note, @elmor can you please give an update regarding the ACPI WMI interface BIOS update? Why is it taking so long?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm as frustrated about these delays as you are. I still can't give a time frame for when it will be ready.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> aTsgRe said:
> 
> 
> 
> And yet, almost every other board manufacturer has already released updates for TR2 and we are still waiting for a fully-featured stable BIOS for Zenith... (tagging @elmor, yet again).
> 
> https://wccftech.com/amd-x399-motherboards-bios-support-2nd-gen-ryzen-threadripper-cpus/
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The current TR2 BIOS has re-introduced the memory cold boot issues, I will release something here when that's fixed.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the update. We look forward to the new BIOS. Out of interest is the new BIOS only bringing TR2 support or are there other fixes inbound ?


----------



## spadizzle

Are people pushing above 3200 with only 2 sticks? I can't seem to get anything stable above 3200 with 4 sticks R2.  I've given the voltage, real safe tRFC, set the initial timings to 15's etc... and im still dropping couple errors here and their. 

Since I can finally post pictures again, I will celebrate by posting what I'm doing with G.Skill F4-3200C14-16GTZR compared to the 8GTZR(dual vs single) Noticeably, copy has improved drastically bench wise. First one should be with single and 2nd one dual.


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

All my RAM OCing was with 4 sticks...maybe I should try 2 sticks for 4000...


----------



## Palulukas

elmor said:


> I'm as frustrated about these delays as you are. I still can't give a time frame for when it will be ready.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The current TR2 BIOS has re-introduced the memory cold boot issues, I will release something here when that's fixed.


Thank you elmor for your answer. Really appreciate your... endurance with your work and with us.^^
Looking forward to see further improvements for 1st gen Ryzen TR on ZE even after introduction of Zen+ TR.

Kind regards

Palulukas


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Doing some research to see what kind of TDP the Zenith can push for TR2 for Overclocking gains. I think I will end up waiting to see someone who gets TR2 with this board and see how they fair with it.


----------



## FlyingBear

*Slow NVME read, benchmarks differ*

I'm trying to finish up a new build, and would be very grateful for some advice. 

ROG Zenith Extreme, 1950X, 4x8GB Corsair Vengeance 3600MHz (QVL ok), GTX 1080Ti, EKWB loop.
2x1TB 970 Pro (DIMM2) with fan, 2TB 970 EVO under cover, 2x4TB 860 EVO.


No RAID. BIOS optimized defaults. No other software and definitely no AI Suite. HPET is not enabled.


On a fresh Windows 10 1803 install onto a 500GB partition on one of the 970 Pros, ATTO shows write performance capping out at 2.51GB/s, and read AT ONLY 1.82GB/s (see image).

Creating a 500GB partition on the other 970 Pro (i.e. the non-boot drive), installing the Samsung Nvme driver 3.0, overclocking memory to 3200 and CPU to 4GHz improves performance, with write still capping at 2.52GB/s, and read increasing to 2.43GB/s. The 2TB 970 Evo in the slot under the cover has the same issues.

None of the Samsung drives are overheating....temps are below 50degC.

AS-SSD shows similar results. But CrystalDiskMark shows respectable 970 Pro numbers. Weird.

This happens with BIOS 0902 and 1003. If I RAID 0 the 970 Pros, ATTO shows roughly 5GB/s write, 3.6GB/s read. HWINFO shows that all the NVME drives are Gen 3, PCIe x4.

Copying a 10GB file between the two 970 Pros, it goes at 1.5GB/s. That's not bad, but I expected more.

Does anyone have any ideas why the read performance is so poor please? Many thanks!


----------



## ENTERPRISE

@elmor Do you think the new TR2 support BIOS will be out prior to release ?


----------



## dejanh

@FlyingBear I'm watching for an answer to this question as well. I have a single Samsung 970 Pro 512GB and I also find that the performance is not that great. I have seen faster performance with an older NVMe drives on older platforms. I was frankly surprised, especially with 4K IOPS. They are way below Samsung specs and in my case, like in yours, everything is spot on, fresh install, and temps are under control.


----------



## spadizzle

Arne Saknussemm said:


> All my RAM OCing was with 4 sticks...maybe I should try 2 sticks for 4000...



Our scores would drop to half, like the AM4 I'm sure. The thing is, we are suppose to have 4 dedicated memory channels, correct? I think I remember @thestilt mentioning a bottle neck with the TR4. I am no wizzard though. At the moment am feeling depressed and feel like I should be punishing myself. Guess I'll go load up 1102 bios and smash myself up into oblivion. 

It is tempting though to remove couple sticks just to see if can push higher though, isn't it?  I am also lazy though. So many issues lately lol


----------



## spadizzle

dejanh said:


> @FlyingBear I'm watching for an answer to this question as well. I have a single Samsung 970 Pro 512GB and I also find that the performance is not that great. I have seen faster performance with an older NVMe drives on older platforms. I was frankly surprised, especially with 4K IOPS. They are way below Samsung specs and in my case, like in yours, everything is spot on, fresh install, and temps are under control.



I blame Spectre for this. No idea if true, but my benches were always on track performance wise before hand and then after all that fiasco, lost the need for speed. Can neither confirm or deny.


----------



## FlyingBear

spadizzle said:


> I blame Spectre for this. No idea if true, but my benches were always on track performance wise before hand and then after all that fiasco, lost the need for speed. Can neither confirm or deny.


I'd forgotten about Spectre; you could well be correct.

I switched memory mode to from UMA to NUMA (or, in Ryzen Master parlance, from Distributed to Local). Still using memory at 3200, and CPU at 4000, the Atto results got way better, while CrystalDiskMark got way worse for 4KiB Q8T8. This problem was also reflected in the AS-SSD benchmark.

What to make of this? I don't know, except that something broke between the glowing performance reviews at the launch of this motherboard, and now. BIOS is the likely culprit. I do hope that this gets fixed in upcoming BIOS releases.


----------



## spadizzle

FlyingBear said:


> I'd forgotten about Spectre; you could well be correct.
> 
> I switched memory mode to from UMA to NUMA (or, in Ryzen Master parlance, from Distributed to Local). Still using memory at 3200, and CPU at 4000, the Atto results got way better, while CrystalDiskMark got way worse for 4KiB Q8T8. This problem was also reflected in the AS-SSD benchmark.
> 
> What to make of this? I don't know, except that something broke between the glowing performance reviews at the launch of this motherboard, and now. BIOS is the likely culprit. I do hope that this gets fixed in upcoming BIOS releases.



Decided to run the same benches as you. Looks like the 970 doing better in some areas, 4K etc.. I am currently running 3x960 PRO raid 0


----------



## FlyingBear

Thank you, @spadizzle, for going to this much trouble. It's disappointing that the board's i/o performance is so poor. This is my first AMD build, and I'm beginning to wish that I'd gone for a Rampage VI Extreme + 18C/36T Intel, despite the extra $1000 or so in cost.

My hope is that, despite variable and puzzling benchmarks, real world usage is still good.

Fingers crossed for some BIOS improvements.


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

spadizzle said:


> Our scores would drop to half, like the AM4 I'm sure. The thing is, we are suppose to have 4 dedicated memory channels, correct? I think I remember @thestilt mentioning a bottle neck with the TR4. I am no wizzard though. At the moment am feeling depressed and feel like I should be punishing myself. Guess I'll go load up 1102 bios and smash myself up into oblivion.
> 
> It is tempting though to remove couple sticks just to see if can push higher though, isn't it?  I am also lazy though. So many issues lately lol


LOL!

I haven't budged BIOS from 0020...1102 was withdrawn before I got to download it...good thing from what I read...

Not sure about channels...each Chip has an IMC so we have 2 IMCs with two channels each?....TR2 will have IMCs we don't get to use on these boards? or?...

Yeah, RAM tweaking...you have to be in the mood for it...which is not every day for me...:thumb:

AMD are testing P-State OC on 1920X and 1900X at the moment...at least that's what they said...they might be down the beach eating ice-cream....

Waiting for a BIOS that supports P-State downvolt for 1920X/1900X, TR2, 4000MHz quad channel


----------



## dejanh

FlyingBear said:


> Thank you, @spadizzle, for going to this much trouble. It's disappointing that the board's i/o performance is so poor. This is my first AMD build, and I'm beginning to wish that I'd gone for a Rampage VI Extreme + 18C/36T Intel, despite the extra $1000 or so in cost.
> 
> My hope is that, despite variable and puzzling benchmarks, real world usage is still good.
> 
> Fingers crossed for some BIOS improvements.


I don't see much impact in daily usage. Things are quick, though I definitely do not see any of the hyper-fast startups that I have seen on the mainstream Intel platforms. It's more comparable to what I was seeing on my X58 and X79 Intel builds of yore. I suspect it is a combination of the complexity of the board and all of the features it is initializing, as well as the TR architecture itself, and then on top of that the somewhat crippled NVMe performance. I'm feeling okay about the whole thing, but not blown away by the performance for sure.


----------



## aTsgRe

@elmor, here on ASUS promotional material states BIOS versions that have not been released or beta tested; the numbers for ZE are quite higher than the last one you previously posted -- care to comment?

https://wccftech.com/asus-x399-cooling-kits-ryzen-threadripper-wx-cpus-announced/


----------



## ENTERPRISE

aTsgRe said:


> @elmor, here on ASUS promotional material states BIOS versions that have not been released or beta tested; the numbers for ZE are quite higher than the last one you previously posted -- care to comment?
> 
> https://wccftech.com/asus-x399-cooling-kits-ryzen-threadripper-wx-cpus-announced/


I did PM him, just waiting now. These cooling kits which I will need to get, is this something we have to get from Asus direct or through standard resellers ? Also an additional cost, They say the board is compatible with TR2, and technically it is but I never though an additional compatibility kit was required.


----------



## aTsgRe

@ENTERPRISE, well given how they handled ZE stability and BIOS woes this ought to be expected...


----------



## ENTERPRISE

aTsgRe said:


> @ENTERPRISE, well given how they handled ZE stability and BIOS woes this ought to be expected...


Lol, fair point !


----------



## nycgtr

Any1 else notice the heatsink takes up 2 mobo mount holes lol.


----------



## FlyingBear

@nycgtr, oh wouldn't it be nice if heatsink installation involved removing those two mobo mount screws, slathering on some paste, and dropping the heatsink on, then installing longer screws. Versus taking everything apart.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Fingers crossed we do not need to remove the mobo to fit these extras, from what I can see, no you dont..plug and play if you will. Guess ill be buying this then.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Small update, I have contacted Asus about the Cooling Kit in order to get one shipped out to me, so far as I know, if you can prove the mobo purchase they will send to you for free. Ill let you guys know what happens.


----------



## spadizzle

ENTERPRISE said:


> Small update, I have contacted Asus about the Cooling Kit in order to get one shipped out to me, so far as I know, if you can prove the mobo purchase they will send to you for free. Ill let you guys know what happens.


who did you contact?


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

I went into my ASUS account where I register my stuff and sent an e-mail from there requesting one...see what gives...


----------



## ENTERPRISE

spadizzle said:


> who did you contact?


Standard Asus Contact Form. Will contact them again today through my registered account just in case.


----------



## aTsgRe

on other news, every other MB manufacturer has already TR2 BIOSes and now we have a launch date which is next week... those buying TR2 with Zenith are going to have a fun time... given how tested are these "internal" BIOSes that are yet to be released and tested by a wider audience -- I hope that I would be pleasantly surprised but I given their track record I sincerely doubt it...
@elmor, any news on the BIOS support and ACPI WMI interface?


----------



## ENTERPRISE

This is kind of turning into an unfortunate joke. This theme is getting very common from Asus now. They are the last to bring out a BIOS for TR2 and there is no update as to progress from them on this front. They still have time, but they are choosing to cut it rather fine. 

Not only that but Asus do not seem to be very forthcoming with a clear path on requesting the cooling kit. Granted we can contact Asus Support, but that is not really the most efficient way to claim. As TR2 is compatible with this board I am sticking with it, but after that point my next motherboard may have to be from another manufacturer, or stick with Asus only for Intel products.


----------



## spadizzle

Did we have a 1303 bios rev. yet? I don't recall and maybe that is the new bios?  Just something I noticed on the extra fan cooling kit picture from ASUS(https://cdn.wccftech.com/wp-content...yzen-Threadripper-WX-Series_Cooling-Kit_1.png). 


Side Note: Just contacted ASUS (English 1-888-678-3688) motherboard support and I was told the ASUS X399 Cooling kit was not in their system and I would be getting a call back when it was. I did mention that the TR2 will be out on the 13th. I did have to quote the article posted to get anywhere in the conversation. 


Question: Interesting that their will be a heatsink for the SOC now. Does anyone have some SOC temps? Just wondering if our SOC's are causing OC'ing issues? I am still in limbo anytime I go over 3200. but run pretty nice timings for the 3200 spec.


----------



## aTsgRe

@spadizzle, no I first saw that particular BIOS version on the promotional ASUS material -- from my understanding this is UNTESTED from the public so it's going to be a mess (tagging @elmor, should he wants to dispute that). @ENTERPRISE, Zenith Extreme has been a 500$ joke from the start; the support quality has been that of a 80$ MB at best.

Also, since the problems are so blatant (and the reviews on all major e-tailers are critical) I don't understand how most publications give it raving reviews...


----------



## Brain29

**Venting**
I have been really surprised how horrible Asus has been with this board (?apparently they are with all AMD products?*reading forms*) the first 3 months of this board the system was completely unusable . If it wasn't for the help on this form especially @elmor I would had thrown it in the street and ran it over. Maybe its my fault thinking if I spent an extra +200 for the board the company was advertising as the best of the best would have support or less issues then the cheaper competition. 

I'm hoping with the announcement of the kit it means there starting to address some of the issues head on. As it stands it seems like only a few programmers are attempting to fix the board on there lunch breaks if that.Maybe they made Amd mad and there getting the short end of the straw


----------



## mumford

I think we should all be very happy that there is not a x499 chipset, so manufacturers have to continue working on x399 bugs.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

mumford said:


> I think we should all be very happy that there is not a x499 chipset, so manufacturers have to continue working on x399 bugs.


That may be so, but I will wait to be happy when I have the cooling kit, and a TR2 BIOS that hopefully does not kill any functionality. Im still waiting to hear back from my query on the cooling kit, if nothing I will be calling them. They must have an inventory of them and know of the product lol


----------



## elmor

*ZE BIOS 1402* http://www.mediafire.com/file/rtbvdrv21i3rpo5/ROG-ZENITH-EXTREME-ASUS-1402.zip/file

- Only test if you're brave enough
- AGESA 1.1.0.1a
- TR2 ready
- Cold boot should be fixed again, let me know otherwise
- EC firmware update (MBEC-X399-0218)
- Flashing to older versions disabled

Note1: I have not been able to test this version myself

Note2: There's an issue with EC FW updates on the recent BIOS versions, which means that if you flash this version and then go back using USB BIOS Flashback you might get stuck updating the EC firmware. From what I've found it will not brick the board, you can use USB BIOS Flashback to the new version again and it will work again. There should also be older BIOS versions available that works for EC flashing. 0305 for example is the first BIOS with MBEC-X399-0211, and should not have this issue. After flashing 0305 you can flash whichever later version you want.


*Threadripper 2 info*

Any existing motherboard will have major problems when overclocking the new 24/32C CPUs. The very low output voltage (default can be as low as 0.900V) really kills VRM efficiency. SOC current is almost doubled due to twice the number of dies being active, it can reach 60-70A when running memory at 3200MHz and above at increased SOC voltages. Additionally voltage monitoring on the board is reading way off under load due to the extreme currents. We have implemented improved EC readings from the VRM controllers for CPU/SOC/DRAM which will be available whenever we get a bios with ACPI WMI. Those voltages are not yet used by BIOS or AiSuite, I'll attempt to get that as well.




aTsgRe said:


> @elmor, here on ASUS promotional material states BIOS versions that have not been released or beta tested; the numbers for ZE are quite higher than the last one you previously posted -- care to comment?
> 
> https://wccftech.com/asus-x399-cooling-kits-ryzen-threadripper-wx-cpus-announced/



This BIOS version is what went out the the reviewers for TR2.




aTsgRe said:


> on other news, every other MB manufacturer has already TR2 BIOSes and now we have a launch date which is next week... those buying TR2 with Zenith are going to have a fun time... given how tested are these "internal" BIOSes that are yet to be released and tested by a wider audience -- I hope that I would be pleasantly surprised but I given their track record I sincerely doubt it...
> 
> @elmor, any news on the BIOS support and ACPI WMI interface?



I've had test BIOSes since several months... Still waiting for a version which has all the fixes combined. The versions released for C6/C7 were still lacking some parts and had several bugs.




ENTERPRISE said:


> This is kind of turning into an unfortunate joke. This theme is getting very common from Asus now. They are the last to bring out a BIOS for TR2 and there is no update as to progress from them on this front. They still have time, but they are choosing to cut it rather fine.
> 
> Not only that but Asus do not seem to be very forthcoming with a clear path on requesting the cooling kit. Granted we can contact Asus Support, but that is not really the most efficient way to claim. As TR2 is compatible with this board I am sticking with it, but after that point my next motherboard may have to be from another manufacturer, or stick with Asus only for Intel products.



I'll try to get an answer on how to get the cooling kit.


----------



## spadizzle

*1402 Bios*

@elmor

1402 seems to be rocking quite well. Boost is working fine and so far playing with settings hasn't yielded anything negative so far. 

I have loaded my default settings for 3200. Maybe someone else can chime in but my 1950 seems to be running a touch cooler? Normally CPU idle's around 36-38C and now it seems to be hovering around 33-35C. Ambient 23.8-24C. I do not know about P-State OC, I'm sure someone else can chime in on that and fan control seems within norms also.


Will edit this post if I do find anything, thank you for the new present Elmor!


Edit1: Just tossing in in memory variables. Looks like this update broke some Ryzen Timing Checker functions. Not reading any of the resistance values. @The Stilt


----------



## FlyingBear

"SOC current is almost doubled due to twice the number of dies being active"

That explains the SOC heatsink in the cooling kit.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

elmor said:


> *ZE BIOS 1402* http://www.mediafire.com/file/rtbvdrv21i3rpo5/ROG-ZENITH-EXTREME-ASUS-1402.zip/file
> 
> - Only test if you're brave enough
> - AGESA 1.1.0.1a
> - TR2 ready
> - Cold boot should be fixed again, let me know otherwise
> - EC firmware update (MBEC-X399-0218)
> - Flashing to older versions disabled
> 
> Note1: I have not been able to test this version myself
> 
> Note2: There's an issue with EC FW updates on the recent BIOS versions, which means that if you flash this version and then go back using USB BIOS Flashback you might get stuck updating the EC firmware. From what I've found it will not brick the board, you can use USB BIOS Flashback to the new version again and it will work again. There should also be older BIOS versions available that works for EC flashing. 0305 for example is the first BIOS with MBEC-X399-0211, and should not have this issue. After flashing 0305 you can flash whichever later version you want.
> 
> 
> *Threadripper 2 info*
> 
> Any existing motherboard will have major problems when overclocking the new 24/32C CPUs. The very low output voltage (default can be as low as 0.900V) really kills VRM efficiency. SOC current is almost doubled due to twice the number of dies being active, it can reach 60-70A when running memory at 3200MHz and above at increased SOC voltages. Additionally voltage monitoring on the board is reading way off under load due to the extreme currents. We have implemented improved EC readings from the VRM controllers for CPU/SOC/DRAM which will be available whenever we get a bios with ACPI WMI. Those voltages are not yet used by BIOS or AiSuite, I'll attempt to get that as well.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This BIOS version is what went out the the reviewers for TR2.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've had test BIOSes since several months... Still waiting for a version which has all the fixes combined. The versions released for C6/C7 were still lacking some parts and had several bugs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'll try to get an answer on how to get the cooling kit.


Thanks for the PM elmor and the update. As for the cooling kit, I have submitted two requests to Asus (Via their email form) and still waiting. I will also likely give them a call tomorrow as well, but any info you can provide would be appreciated by all. I have the 2990WX on pre-order so would fit the cooling kit before even attempting install, especially since your comments.


----------



## TheGovernment

So a while ago, my 1920x and Extreme board went up in smoke. Rma'd everything and got all new. 
So, even though I built another PC waiting for that stuff to get back, i rebuilt it in a different case etc.
Holy hell, this new chip/board is the most picky for memory Ive even seen in my life. Literally had 5 different 16gb kits (3 b-die, 2 hynix) and nothing would boot unto windows. Infuriating board. Take cpu into msi board, all ram works fine, boots etc. Back into 2nd Extreme board, nothing.... exchange for 3rd board, 1 set will boot at 2133 and no matter what changes, will bsod at any changes.... my local pc store failed as well. 
Eventually, went back to launch bios on first board.... every kit works...... like Jesus man. Back to 1003, nothing.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

TheGovernment said:


> So a while ago, my 1920x and Extreme board went up in smoke. Rma'd everything and got all new.
> So, even though I built another PC waiting for that stuff to get back, i rebuilt it in a different case etc.
> Holy hell, this new chip/board is the most picky for memory Ive even seen in my life. Literally had 5 different 16gb kits (3 b-die, 2 hynix) and nothing would boot unto windows. Infuriating board. Take cpu into msi board, all ram works fine, boots etc. Back into 2nd Extreme board, nothing.... exchange for 3rd board, 1 set will boot at 2133 and no matter what changes, will bsod at any changes.... my local pc store failed as well.
> Eventually, went back to launch bios on first board.... every kit works...... like Jesus man. Back to 1003, nothing.


I will be honest, I am starting to think only elmor works on this board and there is not a team that looks into these things unfortunately. That is the feeling I get from the language used by elmor and the general trend we are seeing, it is really disappointing, I am just glad elmor keeps up with it otherwise we would be stuffed I reckon. What makes me laugh is this board still retails at £499 in the UK. Premium price, premium hardware but no good without support.


----------



## dejanh

Looking to this thread on the cooling kit info. Hopefully soon. I need one before I consider migrating to the 2nd gen Threadripper.


----------



## betam4x

Any word on x399-e updates? Still a few bugs and the board feels neglected. For instance, after extended usage I have had the CPU cooling fans shut off completely.


----------



## Benniphx

Hi I just ordered this (I dont want to promote any company)

http://shop.watercool.de/epages/WatercooleK.sf/de_DE/?ObjectPath=/Shops/WatercooleK/Products/11565

i hope it will Keep the vrm cool for my upgrade from 1950x to 2990WX


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

I received a reply from ASUS re the cooling kit..they said they will not supply it and I would have to buy it from an ASUS retailer.

I have also had my "escalated support ticket" with AMD for the 1920X 1900X P-State OC downvolt problem cancelled with no notice and no reply to a second support ticket asking about it. No resolution or explanation offered.

I have other hobbies so I won't miss enthusiast PC building. The attitude from these companies is staggering.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Arne Saknussemm said:


> I received a reply from ASUS re the cooling kit..they said they will not supply it and I would have to buy it from an ASUS retailer.
> 
> I have also had my "escalated support ticket" with AMD for the 1920X 1900X P-State OC downvolt problem cancelled with no notice and no reply to a second support ticket asking about it. No resolution or explanation offered.
> 
> I have other hobbies so I won't miss enthusiast PC building. The attitude form these companies is staggering.


That is massively POOR. I am about to call my UK Asus centre to see what they have to say on the matter.

*EDIT* 

Even poorer, when you call the UK Support, all component queries have to be carried out via email support. Guess I will have to wait for a reply to my email, lets hope I get one.


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

ENTERPRISE said:


> That is massively POOR.


It is!

I can only hope/wish you better luck!


----------



## Lemon Wolf

Arne Saknussemm said:


> I received a reply from ASUS re the cooling kit..they said they will not supply it and I would have to buy it from an ASUS retailer.


This is a big disappointment.
Did they not advertise this premium motherboard as future proof?
The Zenith was expensive enough if i need to buy this upgrade kit it might be time to just sell the Zenith and buy a MSI MEG X399 Creation.


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

Lemon Wolf said:


> This is a big disappointment.
> Did they not advertise this premium motherboard as future proof?
> The Zenith was expensive enough if i need to buy this upgrade kit it might be time to just sell the Zenith and buy a MSI MEG X399 Creation.


It sucks big time...

Basically I'd be happier if they developed a new ZE2 board with capable power delivery. It seems obvious the ZE is not capable and will probably be handicapped in OCing etc. even with the extra cooling...probably shorter life etc.

If it is comfortably capable to run 32cores then the cooling should be free...especially the SOC heatsink..

Will wait and see what the MSI and Gigabyte reviews are like with the huge VRMs


----------



## Lemon Wolf

Arne Saknussemm said:


> If it is comfortably capable to run 32cores then the cooling should be free...especially the SOC heatsink..
> 
> Will wait and see what the MSI and Gigabyte reviews are like with the huge VRMs


I agree completely.
Just looked up the prices for both the ZE and the MSI MEG, depending on how much the upgrade kit for the ZE will cost you only have to make a small investment for the MSI MEG because the ZE is still going for the same price as last year which means one could sell it for a decent amount. You would get worry free OC and maybe better BIOS support.


----------



## gupsterg

Arne Saknussemm said:


> I received a reply from ASUS re the cooling kit..they said they will not supply it and I would have to buy it from an ASUS retailer.
> 
> I have also had my "escalated support ticket" with AMD for the 1920X 1900X P-State OC downvolt problem cancelled with no notice and no reply to a second support ticket asking about it. No resolution or explanation offered.
> 
> I have other hobbies so I won't miss enthusiast PC building. The attitude form these companies is staggering.


Regarding 1920X 1900X P-State OC downvolt issue, outcome for support via either route, AMD or ASUS, is shocking TBH.

Dunno about this cooling kit TBH.

Would any of the mobo makers have known that TR2 would be 32 core? only person I recall really looking into this publicly was der8auer. IIRC pretty much very early on when TR1 was around he was investigating why 2 dummy dies? are they as dummy as stated?, etc.

I have for a few hours (~4-6hrs) inadvertently had CPU VRM at ~100C when OC'ing. The way the case is setup, airflow is really lacking, but I can't see me improving it much TBH without bigger changes to case/cooling. Now if that's with a 16C CPU I really can't see me gaining 4.0GHz on 32C CPU with the setup I currently have, even if I had additional ASUS cooling kit FOC or not.

It's single weeny fan for CPU VRM, couple with the one under IO shield it would be nasty IMO for noise. SOC heatsink does look interesting, but again with say how airflow is in my setup I just keep thinking how much would it aid me.

If I was honest I'd rather be looking towards another mobo with more VRM phases using same quality components if OC'ing a 32C CPU for 24/7 usage. Besides some more improved cooling, I'd be aiming for dual loop, 1 for GPU other CPU and perhaps WC parts to cool VRM and plumbing that to one of those loops.


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

Lemon Wolf said:


> I agree completely.
> Just looked up the prices for both the ZE and the MSI MEG, depending on how much the upgrade kit for the ZE will cost you only have to make a small investment for the MSI MEG because the ZE is still going for the same price as last year which means one could sell it for a decent amount. You would get worry free OC and maybe better BIOS support.



It's a right shame...I have had a lot of Intel stuff from ASUS and BIOS support was a prime factor in choosing their stuff...but it seems AMD is not a favored partner and the effort level just isn't there...

Will be keeping a close eye on Gigabyte and MSI boards...AMD needs some love from someone...hope they get it...they deserve it with TR



gupsterg said:


> Regarding 1920X 1900X P-State OC downvolt issue, outcome for support via either route, AMD or ASUS, is shocking TBH.


Hey gupsterg!

Yep...shocking is the word...have left feedback for both AMD and ASUS via feedback forms...forums...support channels....not a peep in reply....don't know what to do next...write a post on my ass and run naked across the test match at lords?

You're totally right...it was pretty obvious 4 dies would fit under there and that that was the way it would go...their strategy was not the monolithic die as that costs money when it fails...much better yield making smaller dies and linking them...

New board would seem the way to go with custom designed VRM...

Can't be sure at the moment but the cooling kit smacks of laziness...and I reckon ZE might technically be able to run 32 cores but not comfortably...it's like I can drive route 66 in a Fiat 500...sure but I'd rather drive it in a Mustang


----------



## gupsterg

Hi Arne  .

Dunno if the kit is laziness TBH. The way I experience temps when OC'ing and keeping to visually appealing case, low noise fan profile, etc I just can't think there was a feasible solution to allow 32C CPU to OC on ZE.

I think the 2950X will be nice and will work well on ZE, even on my setup. As I don't really OC core for daily usage I reckon how PB/XFR work on gen 2 it will be more than enough. I think on this aspect VRM gonna be more than ample and when next gen is around I do think ZE will still be viable for 16C CPU.

All the X399 models in this list are pretty much similar for VRM if not the same. Doubt any will really be viable for 32C CPU OC for 24/7 usage with temps that we may be after for VRM, etc with stock or minor changes to cooling on VRM.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

I cant help but think it is time to move away from this board and get the MSI MEG CREATION.


----------



## dejanh

Does anyone have an answer now when this cooling kit will be available and who will sell it? I ask because ASUS "retail partners" rarely stock accessories for sale and buying them is usually a nightmare.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

dejanh said:


> Does anyone have an answer now when this cooling kit will be available and who will sell it? I ask because ASUS "retail partners" rarely stock accessories for sale and buying them is usually a nightmare.


I am yet to receive a response on that question, grown a little inpatient with it now.


----------



## Lemon Wolf

ENTERPRISE said:


> I cant help but think it is time to move away from this board and get the MSI MEG CREATION.


I just ordered mine and will put the ZE up for sale when my new setup is ready.
If you are interested i can let you guys know how it compares to the Asus ZE.


----------



## dejanh

I just ordered the HeatKiller MB-X X399 VRM block as well in the smoked acrylic styling. My main goal is to just have good cooling on the VRM for longevity. Even if I go with the 32C/64T chip for some reason at a future point in time, I won't be doing much overclocking on it. I am not a fan of anything MSI as I found the quality and longevity to be quite poor. Many of their boards also get abandoned early on when it comes to BIOS/UEFI support, at least from my past experience (which is, full disclosure, quite dated at this point). Overall, I am never impressed with the support the manufacturers provide for their boards regardless of who it is. I also think ASUS delayed their release because they wanted to work out some bugs that plagued the MSI and Gigabyte UEFI and if this is really the case then this shows more concern for the end-user experience. I'm not defending ASUS for the record, but I also want to be realistic that we did get continuous maintenance of the ZE board where some of the counterparts have not had updates for months or most of 2018 and then received a bugged-up newest releases for TR2.


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

Lemon Wolf said:


> I just ordered mine and will put the ZE up for sale when my new setup is ready.
> If you are interested i can let you guys know how it compares to the Asus ZE.


Nice!

Yes! Would be very interested in that:thumb:


----------



## x3sphere

None of the first gen TR4 boards have really been that great really IMO. I think some of the issues come from AMD's side too and it isn't just Asus' fault. For example, AMD just fixed the PCI-e reset issue with the agesa update recently, took a year for them to fix that. Fortunately there were some workarounds otherwise I would have jumped ship back to Intel sooner. Anyway, it should have been a higher priority considering it wasn't an issue on regular Ryzen and while the number of consumers that use PCI-e passthrough is low, it is certainly much higher on a platform like TR.

That being said I definitely wouldn't go Asus again with AMD based on my experience with the Zenith. Right now the Meg looks like the best choice. I'm not going to bother switching mobos on the same platform though. If Intel puts out a quality product with next their HEDT line, I might just switch to that. I don't care about spending more, just want something that is super reliable really. TR is only just getting there now.

Also I've read on another forum that the latest update for the Gigabyte mobo causes some new issues in Linux, hopefully the Asus one doesn't, haven't tried yet.


----------



## elmor

A note regarding cold boot issues: with this I mean DRAM training failing after cutting standby power. Several power on/offs after cutting standby is not a bug but by design in order to correctly boot with the right voltages/bclk/dram settings. 



ENTERPRISE said:


> I will be honest, I am starting to think only elmor works on this board and there is not a team that looks into these things unfortunately. That is the feeling I get from the language used by elmor and the general trend we are seeing, it is really disappointing, I am just glad elmor keeps up with it otherwise we would be stuffed I reckon. What makes me laugh is this board still retails at £499 in the UK. Premium price, premium hardware but no good without support.


This is not true, we have several people working on this. But you're right in that it's lower priority, which is not good considering it's supposed to be a premium product. I think you can make an assumption regarding the sales of this product and platform in general, based on the fact that there is no refresh from us.


----------



## aTsgRe

@elmor, that's an interesting statement -- can you compare it to the sales of the Core i9 platform? Also, why charge that much if you cannot provide support on such a high end product...?


----------



## dejanh

elmor said:


> A note regarding cold boot issues: with this I mean DRAM training failing after cutting standby power. Several power on/offs after cutting standby is not a bug but by design in order to correctly boot with the right voltages/bclk/dram settings.
> 
> 
> 
> This is not true, we have several people working on this. But you're right in that it's lower priority, which is not good considering it's supposed to be a premium product. I think you can make an assumption regarding the sales of this product and platform in general, based on the fact that there is no refresh from us.


I would not expect TR4 to be a popular platform. AMD has been out of this game for so long it will take time to build up momentum. I'm personally perfectly fine with no annual refreshes. It makes me feel like I actually bought a product that can last a while (which I did) and not some piece of junk that is outdated in 9-12 months (which it isn't). As long as the mobo continues to get support and bugs are fixed I'm a happy camper. Brief run with 1402 last night did not net any new issues, but I did not test extensively at all and did not try overclocking. My 64GB of dual-rank 16GB/stick 3200MHz CL14 memory is running stable at its rated speed/latency.


----------



## x3sphere

I just installed the 1402 BIOS. I'm running Linux, and PCI passthrough works out of the box now, no need to patch kernel. Also when looking at the IOMMU groups, two of the three USB controllers can now be passed through, which is great.

Still testing stability, but so far so good.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Lemon Wolf said:


> ENTERPRISE said:
> 
> 
> 
> I cant help but think it is time to move away from this board and get the MSI MEG CREATION.
> 
> 
> 
> I just ordered mine and will put the ZE up for sale when my new setup is ready.
> If you are interested i can let you guys know how it compares to the Asus ZE.
Click to expand...

Sounds good.

Im just waiting for it to come up for pre-order in the UK, nothing yet so far from what I can see.


elmor said:


> A note regarding cold boot issues: with this I mean DRAM training failing after cutting standby power. Several power on/offs after cutting standby is not a bug but by design in order to correctly boot with the right voltages/bclk/dram settings.
> 
> 
> 
> ENTERPRISE said:
> 
> 
> 
> I will be honest, I am starting to think only elmor works on this board and there is not a team that looks into these things unfortunately. That is the feeling I get from the language used by elmor and the general trend we are seeing, it is really disappointing, I am just glad elmor keeps up with it otherwise we would be stuffed I reckon. What makes me laugh is this board still retails at £499 in the UK. Premium price, premium hardware but no good without support.
> 
> 
> 
> This is not true, we have several people working on this. But you're right in that it's lower priority, which is not good considering it's supposed to be a premium product. I think you can make an assumption regarding the sales of this product and platform in general, based on the fact that there is no refresh from us.
Click to expand...

Interesting statement. Shame Asus have chosen not to be competitive in this area as other manufacturers have. Its that reason I am leaving Asus as a brand behind. You have other manufacturers creating enthusiast level boards in the X399 refresh, boards arguably more capable for TR2, yet Asus have chosen not to and remain with a board that will have drawbacks for TR2 and reduce it to lower priority support. Makes me wonder if Asus ROG products should continue to remain products we associate at an enthusiast level at least so far as AMD.

Such a shame Asus are so less invested in AMD than they are Intel. My ethos is, if you are not invested in something, don't bother. I personally expected better from a ROG product. We buy these products for a good reason (or so I used to believe) that ROG meant premium. However this is another lesson that money spent does not equate to premium support.

Elmor, I and im sure others appreciate your support on the Zenith, it has needed it but I do not have high hopes for this board after the TR2 BIOS release. Not your fault bud. 

It is with that I think once pre-order in the UK is available with MSI MEG CREATION, I will be moving. Support and overall dedication to the TR4 platform seems to be better over there, or even Gigabyte. 

Thanks for the help and fun though through this thread, I mean that sincerely.


----------



## spadizzle

I am kinda at a loss. I have been stuck at 3200, tried higher voltages, timings, different memory, praying. etc.... always had some error here and their hehe I always kept hope as a new BIOS would come and maybe change just that one thing and set me free above 3200 some. I do run pretty tight timings at 3200 though, so I got that. I also thought being a ROG board, their would be aggressive support from ASUS side. This is their pride and joy and they wouldn't want anything to beat them.

500 friggin bucks for this board and that TR4-2 CPU looks to be a killer on power and I worry about the VRM and SOC being up to the challenge. I mean if I could hit 3200 now, hell, I doubt I will ever get anywhere higher with that new CPU with all that power suckering ability. hearing of a NO refresh hurts even more. The message I just received is this, We at ASUS don't believe we need to refresh the board because we believe its good enough, or We at ASUS have pretty much given up on the TR4 series and will stick with the ZEN/ZEN+ boards and Intel. We all know this board has been wack from the get go so it cant be the first one. I feel sorry for the end users and the team at ASUS that does support this board, we both needed more support on our side and the ASUS support side.

Anyone remember Abit MB's? I always remembered they were pushing the envelope into the OC world, felt like saying that for some reason.


----------



## gupsterg

1402 has been sound for me IMO, so I'd just like to say thanks :clock: Elmor and team :clock:.

3400MHz using The Stilt's 3466MHz timings has worked a treat. I'm classing it as a "plug'n'play" profile like 3200MHz The Stilt is for me. VDIMM is 1.35V and SOC: 1.05V. Dunno if i could get SOC lower, usually for 3200MHz C14 I need 1.025V when using 4x 8GB SR/SS Samsung B die.

Anyhow all tests so far and current settings in this zip, only things not captured are AMD CBS settings of BankGroupSwap: Off, BankGroupSwapAlt: On and setting memory interleaving to channel so I'm in NUMA/Local mode. I did run a short test in UMA as well.


----------



## slxar

1402 BIOS provide much better overclock ability.

In previous build, I can only have 3.9Ghz at 1.352V LLC2 and 3066Mhz CL16-16 at 1.385V (hynix DDR4-3000 CL15-16). With 1402, I can get 3.9Ghz at 1.33V LLC-1(new setting) and 3200Mhz at CL16-17 at 1.375V. Great improvement on overclocking.

Apart, fan speed control and monitoring reading seem to be working well, much less abnormal value appear and all/most temperature sensor appear in monitoring software.

Thanks and great job Elmor and their team for this update.


**Edit
After a day of use, still have some abnormal value shown in monitoring software(e.g. memory min. temperature reading: -19X, max. temperature reading: 20X)
HAMP Fan suddenly return 0rpm reading and after 1-2 minutes, system reset itself.


----------



## Fanu

elmor said:


> This is not true, we have several people working on this. But you're right in that it's lower priority, which is not good considering it's supposed to be a premium product. I think you can make an assumption regarding the sales of this product and platform in general, based on the fact that there is no refresh from us.


if there is no refresh planned and this is the only premium TR board you will be offering, does that mean you have no faith in TR2 and next years TR? 

what if TR2 blows up and becomes a success? ASUS is content with selling the most expensive TR board on the market with subpar support and pissing off its customer base to the point where they are switching to the competition?


general question - were things this bad regarding BIOS/UEFI support on motherboards in the past? its like everyone is just content with selling hardware, but wants to invest nearly 0 into software support

is it because these days companies like ASUS have a load of variations of motherboards based on the same socket? 
for example:

https://www.anandtech.com/show/13130/asus-publishes-list-of-upcoming-intel-z390based-motherboards

really ASUS? you needed 6 different variations of maximus boards for new intel CPUs? 
no wonder you cant keep up with bugs on this boards considering you have to develop and test for all of them (or easier yet, just forget about them and release new hardware..)


if ASUS goes belly up with their software support, who is there left ? every manufacturer offers subpar support for their motherboards - ASUS was touted as exception to this rule, but now it seems like it cant keep up with its product range anymore (I bet the upper management focuses solely on hardware sales while trying to keep software expenses at minimum) 

whats the point of all these premium motherboards anymore if rubbish support prevents you from using them to their fullest potential ?


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

duplicate delete


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

Arne Saknussemm said:


> I have also had my "escalated support ticket" with AMD for the 1920X 1900X P-State OC downvolt problem cancelled with no notice and no reply to a second support ticket asking about it. No resolution or explanation offered.


OK so at least AMD have got back to me...and re-opened the ticket...they say they are trying to reproduce things their end.

Since reproducing it will have taken about 5 minutes I hope that is code for "we are busy sorting it out"



I kind of fancy trying out 1402 but I'm not sure I want to update BIOS until they have 1920X P-State OC downvolt fixed...


----------



## gupsterg

Arne Saknussemm said:


> I kind of fancy trying out 1402 but I'm not sure I want to update BIOS until they have 1920X P-State OC downvolt fixed...


I would try 1402. It still has PB/XFR active if you wanna run stock. TBH yet to encounter an issue non OC related.

Besides being newer on ASUS FW front with EC update, etc. It has new AMD AGESA, CPU Microcode, etc. I assumed you had tried this when recently posting PState OC downvolt issue is still there.

You will be able to revert back to older FW if you want it. I previously flashed to 1102 3 times and gone back. As Elmor has stated for 1402 to get out of the ASUS EC update loop when reverting to older UEFI use a very early UEFI and then flash to more recent you want.

For example say I have 1102 flashed, I flash 0211 using flashback, on post it will state on screen it's doing an update and not to switch off, it may do this twice, once for ASUS EC flash and other RGB EC flash. At this point sometime I have had board freeze, but know the updates occurred as what happens is the RGB changes from static red (I have set prior to process) to rainbow, I hit reset and all good. This is the only functional benefit of RGB for me .

More testing done again of 1402 3400MHz C15 The Stilt setup, same setup as before but now SVM & IOMMU active.



Spoiler






















Each of above is on new post, so I really have not encountered post to post variation of training on RAM profile. Later 3rd post I went to Linux Mint, did alot of updates, repost, did kernel update and repost, plus 2x GSAT 1hrs each on fresh posts.



Spoiler





















Now back in W10 rerunning Y-Cruncher.



Spoiler


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

If it's got the gupsterg seal of approval...I might give it a go tomorrow or the weekend...


----------



## gupsterg

I'll try a PState OC and one off Extreme Tweaker later and let you know.

As you know I use the board to control fans/pump based off loop temperature, all been sound so far. OLED/RGB bling working as well. Tinkered with RAM timings, frequencies, resistances (ProcODT/RTT/CAD Bus) and all seem to be working. Flashing to 1402 uneventful, as it includes EC update had the message stating not to turn off, blah, blah. Board reposted fine, as stated before it's only an issue when reverting from 1402/1102 to an older UEFI/EC.

Even if PState downvolt works I'm looking forward to you causing mischief at Lords  .


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

Thing is P-State on 1950X is no problem...it's 1920X and 1900X that doesn't work on any X399 boards

LOL....hope they sort it before any of us have to see that!


----------



## betam4x

dejanh said:


> I would not expect TR4 to be a popular platform. AMD has been out of this game for so long it will take time to build up momentum. I'm personally perfectly fine with no annual refreshes. It makes me feel like I actually bought a product that can last a while (which I did) and not some piece of junk that is outdated in 9-12 months (which it isn't). As long as the mobo continues to get support and bugs are fixed I'm a happy camper. Brief run with 1402 last night did not net any new issues, but I did not test extensively at all and did not try overclocking. My 64GB of dual-rank 16GB/stick 3200MHz CL14 memory is running stable at its rated speed/latency.



Oh people are buying Threadripper. I've purchased 2 motherboards myself, and may purchase a 3rd when Threadripper 2xxx rolls out depending on the offerings. Those that commit to making Threadripper will get an ever growing piece of market share, those who don't...won't. It's that simple.


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

OK so 1402 up and running here...looks OK so far

One thing...boot time seems to have gone up 5 seconds...


----------



## skedda

Hi, I just bought this board in anticipation of the 2950x. I bought the 1900x to hold me over in the meantime until the 2950x gets released. Is there anything I need to keep in mind? I will receive the parts tomorrow.


----------



## dejanh

betam4x said:


> Oh people are buying Threadripper. I've purchased 2 motherboards myself, and may purchase a 3rd when Threadripper 2xxx rolls out depending on the offerings. Those that commit to making Threadripper will get an ever growing piece of market share, those who don't...won't. It's that simple.


First, the fact that you and I purchased Threadripper does not mean anything. The market share is still very likely very low. Second, of course every purchase of Threadripper increases market share, but that in itself does not make it a success. It is still a fledgling platform, with barely any exposure. I do however believe that AMD has a winning HDET platform right now and that is good for everyone because Intel has quite literally killed all innovation over the past 5-8 years as a consequence of releasing their Core architecture with no competition. Anyway, this is all off-topic...



Arne Saknussemm said:


> OK so 1402 up and running here...looks OK so far
> 
> One thing...boot time seems to have gone up 5 seconds...


I have noticed additional delay during POST. I did not notice any delay once the OS starts booting. Definitely the total time from system off to desktop is longer with this UEFI.


----------



## spadizzle

Why does my BUS clock always report 99.8 Mhz(when set to 100Mhz)?!? /r/mildilyinfuriating I set to manual 100.0000 Mhz, BIOS says 100Mhz, software(HWinfo) states 99.8Mhz, RAM speed also reflects the 0.2 Mhz I set 100.200 Mhz, BIOS says 100.2 Mhz, it reads at 100.2 Mhz in software(HWinfo) and RAM also reports correct. You know what, I betcha if I set 99.8 Mhz in BIOS and check software it will still say 99.8 Mhz. I want my 100 Mhz! Yes I am nitpicking, I fail at anything over the "3200" Mhz clock, but its not even 3200 until I get the BUS at the right freq. I check out other end-users screenies and they say 100 Mhz. 

P.S. Will edit/report what setting 99.8 does.

P.S.S. Yup, 99.8 Mhz relfects 99.8 in BIOS and it also reflects 99.8 Mhz in software. Its amazing! :/ So anyone know how to get my board to actually run at 100 Mhz? Should I kick/tap/spit on a capacitor? something something

@elmor is this an oddity? I don't think this is 1402 related, because I don't recall the last time my board has run at 100 mhz, never really paid attention to that aspect.

Would appreciate anyone else to report their BUS speeds please


Also, this is on a fresh copy of Win10 PRO 64bit, memory is B-Die dual rank


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

Yes, that is irritating...but I have had that on a lot of boards...mine is jumping between 99.9 and 100 here right now!

I found it especially irritating going for round number OCs like say 5.0GHz and ending up with 4996...infuriating


----------



## gupsterg

Arne Saknussemm said:


> Thing is P-State on 1950X is no problem...it's 1920X and 1900X that doesn't work on any X399 boards
> 
> LOL....hope they sort it before any of us have to see that!



I guess just wouldn't be _cricket!_ LOL  .

Aware it's the non 1900/20X CPU issue, but just will check I haven't lost functionality  .



Arne Saknussemm said:


> OK so 1402 up and running here...looks OK so far
> 
> One thing...boot time seems to have gone up 5 seconds...


My end no different to post than past UEFIs.



skedda said:


> Hi, I just bought this board in anticipation of the 2950x. I bought the 1900x to hold me over in the meantime until the 2950x gets released. Is there anything I need to keep in mind? I will receive the parts tomorrow.


Use flashback to have UEFI 1402 on the board, as that is current release that supports gen 2 CPU. You may also need to do another onboard EC update within windows OS, see OP here.



Arne Saknussemm said:


> Yes, that is irritating...but I have had that on a lot of boards...mine is jumping between 99.9 and 100 here right now!
> 
> I found it especially irritating going for round number OCs like say 5.0GHz and ending up with 4996...infuriating


Why this happens is as Ryzen/Threadripper has no hardware for accurate BCLK monitoring. This information has been in OP of Zenith OC thread pretty much on posting it  (Ryzen Essential has had info since early 2017).


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

gupsterg said:


> just will check I haven't lost functionality


Oh, I see what you mean...I hope that's not the solution..

Eh really no slower boot? I'm not a boot seconds worrier but I noticed it was slower so it has to be a lot slower...what did I forget...

EDIT: OK so I forgot to edit the boot delay to 0 sec....which actually shaves more seconds than that...so now 22 seconds instead of 29...more like it...I think it was 20 and a bit before:thumb:


----------



## elmor

spadizzle said:


> Why does my BUS clock always report 99.8 Mhz(when set to 100Mhz)?!? /r/mildilyinfuriating I set to manual 100.0000 Mhz, BIOS says 100Mhz, software(HWinfo) states 99.8Mhz, RAM speed also reflects the 0.2 Mhz I set 100.200 Mhz, BIOS says 100.2 Mhz, it reads at 100.2 Mhz in software(HWinfo) and RAM also reports correct. You know what, I betcha if I set 99.8 Mhz in BIOS and check software it will still say 99.8 Mhz. I want my 100 Mhz! Yes I am nitpicking, I fail at anything over the "3200" Mhz clock, but its not even 3200 until I get the BUS at the right freq. I check out other end-users screenies and they say 100 Mhz.
> 
> P.S. Will edit/report what setting 99.8 does.
> 
> P.S.S. Yup, 99.8 Mhz relfects 99.8 in BIOS and it also reflects 99.8 Mhz in software. Its amazing! :/ So anyone know how to get my board to actually run at 100 Mhz? Should I kick/tap/spit on a capacitor? something something
> 
> @elmor is this an oddity? I don't think this is 1402 related, because I don't recall the last time my board has run at 100 mhz, never really paid attention to that aspect.
> 
> Would appreciate anyone else to report their BUS speeds please
> 
> 
> Also, this is on a fresh copy of Win10 PRO 64bit, memory is B-Die dual rank


This is because when you select 100.0 MHz, it will rely on the internal clock gen which has spread spectrum enabled (AMD default).


----------



## spadizzle

elmor said:


> This is because when you select 100.0 MHz, it will rely on the internal clock gen which has spread spectrum enabled (AMD default).



Ahh, thank you thank you!

Disabled Spread Spectrum and the software is now reporting 100 Mhz along with the hardware. 

Amazing differences for memory benchmark between Spread being on and off. See pictures It has always been a thing to keep Spread off if you want to OC, but recently @1usmus recommended to keep it on. So I have. (Note: Both memory benches are the same exact settings in BIOS except of course Spread Spectrum) 

So no doubt with Spread being off, the memory is transmitting some "dirty" signals hence why the lower scores in write and copy etc.. So to over come that maybe add a little power and/or go a step up in resistance?

EDIT: Ignore the "Spread off" picture. I magically changed trdwr and twrwr and both were set to 6 and should've been 3 and 1.


----------



## Creedcoder

Running 1402 all seems stable and there are only some resistance readout problems.

So far good job elmor!


----------



## Benniphx

why are my read speeds so much differ to yours


----------



## RoBiK

Benniphx said:


> why are my read speeds so much differ to yours


Because you are running in UMA mode. Switch to NUMA.


----------



## Benniphx

in game mode the vals are even worse


----------



## RoBiK

Benniphx said:


> in game mode the vals are even worse


I am just guessing here because i do not have the Ryzen Master installed. AFAIK the game mode disables half the cores, but you see that the latency is better. Disabling half the cores seems to halve the bandwidth scores in this benchmark.


----------



## gseeley

spadizzle said:


> Anyone remember Abit MB's? I always remembered they were pushing the envelope into the OC world, felt like saying that for some reason.


Yes. KR7A was a board I never got running 100% stable so I barely used it. I have thought of that board working with the ZE wondering if I've made the same mistake. 

Its been a bit of work and taken longer than expected, but I've got ZE working as an AIO box (desktop, NAS, infrastructure VMs) using ESXi and I don't think I would have been able get all the hardware crammed into another X399 board (I have all slots populated) so I'm happy I stuck with ZE.


----------



## Bartouille

@elmor

Do you have any idea what differs during memory training on a first time boot (i.e. first time after cutting power) vs all others? I did a lot of tests and unless I do a first time boot my memory oc throws tons of errors. Here are a couple HCI MemTest Pro 100% coverage runs, all using the exact same settings and the only variable being how the system was booted...

First time boot:
FAIL (2 errors - 2 diff by 80000)
PASS
PASS
PASS
PASS

Not first time boot:
FAIL (762 errors - 757 diff by 8, 5 diff by 80000)
FAIL (22 errors - 21 diff by 8, 1 diff by 800)
PASS
FAIL (5 errors - 4 diff by 8)
FAIL (32 errors - 32 diff by 8)

As you can see memory training does a terrible job unless it's a first time boot. And the errors are always differ by 8 over 99% of the time. To me this looks like a bug. This only happens when trying to push higher speeds (i.e. >=3466MHz). I remember older bioses having some inconsistency with memory training but it wasn't alarming. Ever since UEFI 1003 it's really bad. Any idea?


----------



## gupsterg

@Bartouille

Will have to try >3400MHz on UEFI 1402.

Currently still on 3400MHz using The Stilt 3466MHz timings, SOC: 1.05V VDIMM: 1.35V, F4-3200C14Q-32GTZSW.

So far had 1x instance of PWM on fan headers quirk out, hopefully next UEFI has ASUS WMI.



elmor said:


> This is because when you select 100.0 MHz, it will rely on the internal clock gen which has spread spectrum enabled (AMD default).


Added to OP of ZE thread. Something I've always set to [Disabled] on ZE.


----------



## elmor

Update regarding the upgrade kit. It will be either sold separately or provided free of charge after proof of purchase depending on the region/distributor/shop. For a more precise answer, you will have to wait for information provided at a regional level as they have final say over how it's executed. They have not yet been shipped out, I'm told they will be available sometime between end of August/beginning of Sept.




Bartouille said:


> @elmor
> 
> Do you have any idea what differs during memory training on a first time boot (i.e. first time after cutting power) vs all others? I did a lot of tests and unless I do a first time boot my memory oc throws tons of errors. Here are a couple HCI MemTest Pro 100% coverage runs, all using the exact same settings and the only variable being how the system was booted...
> 
> First time boot:
> FAIL (2 errors - 2 diff by 80000)
> PASS
> PASS
> PASS
> PASS
> 
> Not first time boot:
> FAIL (762 errors - 757 diff by 8, 5 diff by 80000)
> FAIL (22 errors - 21 diff by 8, 1 diff by 800)
> PASS
> FAIL (5 errors - 4 diff by 8)
> FAIL (32 errors - 32 diff by 8)
> 
> As you can see memory training does a terrible job unless it's a first time boot. And the errors are always differ by 8 over 99% of the time. To me this looks like a bug. This only happens when trying to push higher speeds (i.e. >=3466MHz). I remember older bioses having some inconsistency with memory training but it wasn't alarming. Ever since UEFI 1003 it's really bad. Any idea?



The difference would be that after returning from no standby power, it will first boot with SPD defaults before applying voltages and resetting with the overclocked DRAM settings. Could it be because of SOC voltage? It will be reset to offset mode for training when you press reset or similar. A better option would be to use "SOC OVERCLOCK VID" under AMD CBS\NBIO Common Options. You could also try manually specifying CLDO_VDDP Voltage in case there's a bug with it being applied in some situations and in others not. DRAM Training can give widely varying results and it's difficult to get a clear co-relation as you see above. In both cases you have passing scenarios, and neither is 100% stable.


----------



## Bartouille

I manually set CLDO_VDDP to 950. I did a 100% coverage run after a first time boot followed by another after a normal boot and both passed. Unfortunately I restarted and did another run and it ended up in a BSOD. Errors began showing the second the test started. I'll give the SOC OVERCLOCK VID a try. Thanks.


----------



## aTsgRe

@elmor, just a question -- is the new bug-free ACPI WMI interface in the new BIOS?


----------



## aTsgRe

sorry, somehow it double posted -- removed.


----------



## Dominican

How do you set XMP Profile on Bios ?


----------



## dejanh

Dominican said:


> How do you set XMP Profile on Bios ?


XMP is an Intel thing but to use the memory profile you want to use the DOCP or DOCP Standard setting. DOCP Standard is more compatible, but DOCP should work fine.


----------



## betam4x

dejanh said:


> XMP is an Intel thing but to use the memory profile you want to use the DOCP or DOCP Standard setting. DOCP Standard is more compatible, but DOCP should work fine.


To be fair, from what I see, D.O.C.P appears to be an ASUS thing? MSI calls it XMP.


----------



## mm1965ra

*BIOS Version/Date	American Megatrends Inc. 1402, 8/3/2018*

This message is for @elmor.

I am new to join this forum, however I am a long time lurker.

I have updated my Asus Zenith Extreme motherboard with the latest bios version 1402. It went through the process of several reboots to update everything, and from a cold boot it works fine. However, everytime I restart the computer from within windows, a warm reboot, it boots into the bios directly without pressing any buttons on the keyboard at all.

Is there anything you could suggest to resolve this issue? 

Thank you for your assistance in advance, any ideas you have are greatly appreciated!

Matt


----------



## dejanh

betam4x said:


> To be fair, from what I see, D.O.C.P appears to be an ASUS thing? MSI calls it XMP.


Maybe so, but I believe XMP was originally an Intel thing. I am all for using the same convention for everything and was thoroughly confused when I looked for XMP on this board and didn't find it.


----------



## gupsterg

Intel XMP, AMD AMP (AFAIK didn't really take off much).

ASUS D.O.C.P (Direct Over Clock Profile). AFAIK is on ASUS AMD boards only, allows you to use XMP profile. It maybe Intel charge some royalties, etc for usage of XMP terminology!? (dunno TBH)



Spoiler



https://youtu.be/O0lQjIEeXFE?t=3m30s


----------



## tcoreprime

So any further info on how well 1402 is working out? Any other reports of oddball fan issues you have noticed @gupsterg?


----------



## mariusaz

*1402 Causing Crashes*

Since installing 1402, applications and games have been randomly crashing. Earlier tonight Windows crashed and I lost my partition altogether and had to re-format. I ended up goin back to 1003. I'm just gonna find another board when I get my TR2, I'm done with this nonsense.


----------



## st4v0

Tried 1402 and found I needed to raise cpu voltage a smidge to get rock stable but since that it has been faultless generally.
The only thing that seems to remain is the coldboot BUT!! this only seems to be an issue in colder weather and when the weather is hot then the coldboot issue goes away,weired as hell.


----------



## dejanh

mariusaz said:


> Since installing 1402, applications and games have been randomly crashing. Earlier tonight Windows crashed and I lost my partition altogether and had to re-format. I ended up goin back to 1003. I'm just gonna find another board when I get my TR2, I'm done with this nonsense.


I have noticed this too. I am not sure what is causing it but judging by the comment above perhaps it is related to CPU voltage being lower than it should? Then again, it could just all be a coincidence and just Windows acting up, especially since I had a number of "cumulative updates" recently.


----------



## spadizzle

dejanh said:


> I have noticed this too. I am not sure what is causing it but judging by the comment above perhaps it is related to CPU voltage being lower than it should? Then again, it could just all be a coincidence and just Windows acting up, especially since I had a number of "cumulative updates" recently.


Huh, with 1402 running same memory settings. I always ran 1.365V, Windows would all of a sudden go blue screen crazy. Reboot after reboot. Went to 1.375V and not one blue screen since. For the CPU, I just run it auto for multiplier and auto voltage.


----------



## gupsterg

tcoreprime said:


> So any further info on how well 1402 is working out? Any other reports of oddball fan issues you have noticed @gupsterg?


This ZIP (~100MB) has all my testing on 1402 so far.

Best to sort files by date, the root of 3400MHz folder is initial testing 7th to 9th Aug. Rerun folder has file ending with lost PWM. I think this is as prior test/screenie of RB I opened CPU-Z only at screenie capture time, whilst HWINFO was running and I never rebooted before the P95 test. The water pump connected to HAMP lost PWM  .

So far I :wubsmiley 1402.

3400MHz has tightened up on secondary/tertiary timings well IMO and knocked some primary ones. That setup is based on The Stilt's 3466MHz timings. Still using VDIMM 1.35V and SOC 1.05V. This same tightened setup but on [email protected] yields some good gains in SuperPi for me. Dunno why TR didn't exhibit same gains, so trying some core OC today.

*** edit ***

View attachment 1402 3400ST SNI_setting.txt


Forgot to omit sections of RTC which are incorrectly read back. DIMM setup is 1DPC-SR, ProcODT is 53.3 ohms, CAD Bus is 24 24 24 24, CAD timings 0/0 0/0 0/0, RTT is Off Off 48 ohms, rest is correct.



mariusaz said:


> Since installing 1402, applications and games have been randomly crashing. Earlier tonight Windows crashed and I lost my partition altogether and had to re-format. I ended up goin back to 1003. I'm just gonna find another board when I get my TR2, I'm done with this nonsense.
> 
> 
> dejanh said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have noticed this too. I am not sure what is causing it but judging by the comment above perhaps it is related to CPU voltage being lower than it should? Then again, it could just all be a coincidence and just Windows acting up, especially since I had a number of "cumulative updates" recently.
Click to expand...

Whilst tightening up 3400MHz I experienced 3x Stopcode/BSOD/full rig freeze on 20/08/18 see relevant folder in linked ZIP. OS survived, I did run SFC afterwards to check all is well and it was for me.



st4v0 said:


> Tried 1402 and found I needed to raise cpu voltage a smidge to get rock stable but since that it has been faultless generally.
> The only thing that seems to remain is the coldboot BUT!! this only seems to be an issue in colder weather and when the weather is hot then the coldboot issue goes away,weired as hell.


Curious to know room ambient when this happens?


----------



## st4v0

gupsterg said:


> This ZIP (~100MB) has all my testing on 1402 so far.
> 
> Best to sort files by date, the root of 3400MHz folder is initial testing 7th to 9th Aug. Rerun folder has file ending with lost PWM. I think this is as prior test/screenie of RB I opened CPU-Z only at screenie capture time, whilst HWINFO was running and I never rebooted before the P95 test. The water pump connected to HAMP lost PWM  .
> 
> So far I :wubsmiley 1402.
> 
> 3400MHz has tightened up on secondary/tertiary timings well IMO and knocked some primary ones. That setup is based on The Stilt's 3466MHz timings. Still using VDIMM 1.35V and SOC 1.05V. This same tightened setup but on [email protected] yields some good gains in SuperPi for me. Dunno why TR didn't exhibit same gains, so trying some core OC today.
> 
> 
> 
> Whilst tightening up 3400MHz I experienced 3x Stopcode/BSOD/full rig freeze on 20/08/18 see relevant folder in linked ZIP. OS survived, I did run SFC afterwards to check all is well and it was for me.
> 
> 
> 
> Curious to know room ambient when this happens?


are you refering to my post?


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

OK, so I just did some quick testing....3600 1T C15 is still stable at same voltages etc as before...passed 30 min RamTest before I got bored...I don't have gupsterg's patience

1402 gets the Arne seal of approval


----------



## gupsterg

st4v0 said:


> are you refering to my post?


Yep  .



Arne Saknussemm said:


> OK, so I just did some quick testing....3600 1T C15 is still stable at same voltages etc as before...passed 30 min RamTest before I got bored...I don't have gupsterg's patience
> 
> 1402 gets the Arne seal of approval


Nice Arne  .

I gotta admit the F4-3200C14Q-32GVK I have, I've now tested as pairs, they tighten up better than a kit of F4-3200C14D-16GTZ; tested at 3466MHz. Which sorta surprised me, just sorta expected the Trident Z to be best, the chunkier heat spreaders really didn't help (LOL).


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

gupsterg said:


> the chunkier heat spreaders really didn't help (LOL).


LOL 

Yeah I would have expected that going on past performance...but these RipjawsV kits have been gold this time around...

I saw a metric in Ryzen DRAM Calculator....chip quality 93% overclock potential 3674 CL14....? Not sure where that's read from....seems I have work to do still


----------



## gupsterg

Dunno on that metric within Ryzen DRAM Calculator, I've only once or twice loaded program up to satisfy some curiosity about it.

I've had the Ripjaws down to ~155ns on TRFC @ 3466MHz, the GTZ/GTZSW flake out at ~160ns 3400MHz/3466MHz. I found too tight a TRFC can make you think other timings have created instability. So far ~160ns (+/- 5ns) seems sweet spot for mentioned RAM MHz when keeping to 1.35V as VDIMM set in UEFI.

TWR and TRTP I've been able to nab lowest settings possible in UEFI on GVK, but only the GTZSW do the same the GTZ have an issue. All test cases with other primary/secondary and tertiary timings meddled with.

Gotta find time to place some of this stuff in the OP of ZE thread here and C7H on ROG forum.


----------



## st4v0

gupsterg,dunno if this was pure fluke but when the summer was in full force and pushing 30C indoors coldboot didnt seem to be an issue at all.
as it cooled down though from 25C and below the coldboot returned.
as i said it could be purely fluke but heat does affect resistance of all the componants,and that will then affect voltages all over the board.
so ghessing which one it is thats possibly changed is endless.


----------



## gupsterg

Some members in the C6H thread had noted the same thing as yourself. Dunno if Threadripper silicon has the issue that Ryzen gen 1 did have. See page 5 of the C6H OC guide.


----------



## Benniphx

@elmor any news about how we can get the cooling kit ? I am from germany and called my retailer (alternate) they have no listing or any information then and if they get it?


----------



## skingun

I am interested in purchasing the kit too.


----------



## elmor

aTsgRe said:


> @elmor, just a question -- is the new bug-free ACPI WMI interface in the new BIOS?


No, I would have mentioned that.



mm1965ra said:


> This message is for @elmor.
> 
> I am new to join this forum, however I am a long time lurker.
> 
> I have updated my Asus Zenith Extreme motherboard with the latest bios version 1402. It went through the process of several reboots to update everything, and from a cold boot it works fine. However, everytime I restart the computer from within windows, a warm reboot, it boots into the bios directly without pressing any buttons on the keyboard at all.
> 
> Is there anything you could suggest to resolve this issue?
> 
> Thank you for your assistance in advance, any ideas you have are greatly appreciated!
> 
> Matt


Your boot drive drops out? AHCI/NVMe?



Benniphx said:


> @elmor any news about how we can get the cooling kit ? I am from germany and called my retailer (alternate) they have no listing or any information then and if they get it?





skingun said:


> I am interested in purchasing the kit too.


I've already given an update, you need to check with the local Asus office and/or the distributor/shop/e-tailer.



elmor said:


> Update regarding the upgrade kit. It will be either sold separately or provided free of charge after proof of purchase depending on the region/distributor/shop. For a more precise answer, you will have to wait for information provided at a regional level as they have final say over how it's executed. They have not yet been shipped out, I'm told they will be available sometime between end of August/beginning of Sept.


----------



## sirspudd

*1402 brought my Linux install to its knees*

Resetting CMOS did not resolve Linux cpu settling instability:

Keep on seeing:

491.141453] INFO: task systemd-udevd:384 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
https://p.chaos-reins.com/asiparutug.cs


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Benniphx said:


> @elmor any news about how we can get the cooling kit ? I am from germany and called my retailer (alternate) they have no listing or any information then and if they get it?


Asus are not making it as easy as they should to obtain the kit IMHO. Half the time you contact them they deny all knowledge of the kit, it is as if the news has not filtered down to Asus support.


----------



## aTsgRe

@elmor I have noticed that my m.2 NVMe drive drops out after persistent heavy usage -- smart is OK and all health metrics seems OK. This started after 1402; I have to wait for a bit to reappear or reboot, is this a known issue?

This does not happen on my 900p drive which is slot based not m.2 -- any info on that?


----------



## mm1965ra

@elmor

Thanks for the reply @elmor. Sorry I didn't mention the drive before, it is a Toshiba RD400 NVMe drive. This drive would not communicate with the hardware on a warm reboot with bios version 1402. I was able to revert to an earlier bios but have been away from my computer for a few days so I am not sure if it is fixed in 1402?



elmor said:


> aTsgRe said:
> 
> 
> 
> @elmor, just a question -- is the new bug-free ACPI WMI interface in the new BIOS?
> 
> 
> 
> No, I would have mentioned that.
> 
> 
> 
> mm1965ra said:
> 
> 
> 
> This message is for @elmor.
> 
> I am new to join this forum, however I am a long time lurker.
> 
> I have updated my Asus Zenith Extreme motherboard with the latest bios version 1402. It went through the process of several reboots to update everything, and from a cold boot it works fine. However, everytime I restart the computer from within windows, a warm reboot, it boots into the bios directly without pressing any buttons on the keyboard at all.
> 
> Is there anything you could suggest to resolve this issue?
> 
> Thank you for your assistance in advance, any ideas you have are greatly appreciated!
> 
> Matt
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Your boot drive drops out? AHCI/NVMe?
> 
> 
> 
> Benniphx said:
> 
> 
> 
> @elmor any news about how we can get the cooling kit ? I am from germany and called my retailer (alternate) they have no listing or any information then and if they get it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> skingun said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am interested in purchasing the kit too.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I've already given an update, you need to check with the local Asus office and/or the distributor/shop/e-tailer.
> 
> 
> 
> elmor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Update regarding the upgrade kit. It will be either sold separately or provided free of charge after proof of purchase depending on the region/distributor/shop. For a more precise answer, you will have to wait for information provided at a regional level as they have final say over how it's executed. They have not yet been shipped out, I'm told they will be available sometime between end of August/beginning of Sept.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


----------



## dejanh

I'm definitely experiencing a lot of BSODs right now. I just did a fresh install as well, to no effect. Major change is that I'm on 1402 now and also using NVMe RAID-0. Besides this, I noticed that the memory voltage was drooping, coming in about 0.025V below the setting in the BIOS. I do not recall this being an issue in 1003. I have been failing Prime95 even without overclocking. I managed to get through a 2 hour test now with voltage for AB and CD set to 1.375V each. Note I am using dual-rank 3200MHz CL14 memory, 16GB per stick, total 4 sticks.

*Edit:* Update from yesterday. It appears I cannot get the memory stable. I went all the way up to 1.425V for DRAM and I am still getting many errors when running memory test. Prime95 is more stable, but it's irrelevant when memory specific tests fail. Now I dropped to JEDEC timings and speed and am running the same test. We will see how it goes. The annoying thing is that now my issue could be any of memory itself, the CPU, the motherboard, or the BIOS. Seeing as I won't be available to test further for a month after this Saturday it will be a while before I know the root cause. I hope that the problem comes down to a failing memory stick, however I have concerns that it may be more serious. I don't have a spare board or CPU to test either so all my focus initially will be on the memory sticks themselves and eventually on the motherboard BIOS. Barring that, I will have to start buying new hardware to do a comparison. Very annoying. I spent a fortune on this setup just a few months back.


----------



## spadizzle

dejanh said:


> I'm definitely experiencing a lot of BSODs right now. I just did a fresh install as well, to no effect. Major change is that I'm on 1402 now and also using NVMe RAID-0. Besides this, I noticed that the memory voltage was drooping, coming in about 0.025V below the setting in the BIOS. I do not recall this being an issue in 1003. I have been failing Prime95 even without overclocking. I managed to get through a 2 hour test now with voltage for AB and CD set to 1.375V each. Note I am using dual-rank 3200MHz CL14 memory, 16GB per stick, total 4 sticks.
> 
> *Edit:* Update from yesterday. It appears I cannot get the memory stable. I went all the way up to 1.425V for DRAM and I am still getting many errors when running memory test. Prime95 is more stable, but it's irrelevant when memory specific tests fail. Now I dropped to JEDEC timings and speed and am running the same test. We will see how it goes. The annoying thing is that now my issue could be any of memory itself, the CPU, the motherboard, or the BIOS. Seeing as I won't be available to test further for a month after this Saturday it will be a while before I know the root cause. I hope that the problem comes down to a failing memory stick, however I have concerns that it may be more serious. I don't have a spare board or CPU to test either so all my focus initially will be on the memory sticks themselves and eventually on the motherboard BIOS. Barring that, I will have to start buying new hardware to do a comparison. Very annoying. I spent a fortune on this setup just a few months back.


I am in the same boat, running at 3200 and i have been getting errors for memory. Tried voltage, timings to no avail. Think I am going to go back to an older BIOS. Frustrating that I know other people are having great success with 1402 also. :/

Edit: Question @dejanh, are you modifing any of the LLC's? I only thought of this after I went back to 1003. One difference I noted is that the CPU LLC has two negative values. I do not know if this is on purpose or a bug/issue; maybe the almighty @elmor can shed some light on that. I always set LLC +2 or +3 for CPU, but since those 2 negative values are their, maybe the first one is really LLC 1? and not LLC -2 and maybe this whole time I have been setting CPU LLC +4 or +5 without realizing it causing instability. I did notice some high spikes(1.5v ish[stock mhz w/boost]) in CPU voltage but never really put the two together. Back on 1003, exact same 3200 settings, zero memory errors. 

I don't think @Arne Saknussemm or @gupsterg change those settings ever when overclocking?


----------



## Brain29

Use only 2 sticks and see if you get the same errors 

I can get 2 sticks to run at the 3200 but if I add all 8 or 4 - im stuck at 2933
*on my friends msi board I am able to get 3200 out of the box wondering if there is a special voltage or timing it changes but this board doesn't


----------



## 00Asgaroth00

sirspudd said:


> Resetting CMOS did not resolve Linux cpu settling instability:
> 
> Keep on seeing:
> 
> 491.141453] INFO: task systemd-udevd:384 blocked for more than 120 seconds.
> https://p.chaos-reins.com/asiparutug.cs



I had the same issue when I upgraded to 1402 as well. It appears to be an issue with the BIOS reporting that it supports SEV when it actually does not. 

There are two ways, at the moment, that you can use to work around this issue:


 One is to apply this submitted patch to your kernel and recompile, or,
Set the kernel option CONFIG_CRYPTO_DEV_SP_PSP to "n" and recompile your kernel.

Ultimately the correct fix, from what I've read, is for the BIOS to correctly report that is does (or does not) support SEV. I guess AMD are aware of this, as it appears that they submitted the patch referenced above


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

I have never touched LLC on this platform just left it to the AUTO (AMD managed) setting and it's always seen me right.

dejanh...how did you update BIOS...EZ flash or BIOS flashback? and have you tried reflashing a fresh BIOS file BIOS Flashback method?


----------



## dejanh

spadizzle said:


> I am in the same boat, running at 3200 and i have been getting errors for memory. Tried voltage, timings to no avail. Think I am going to go back to an older BIOS. Frustrating that I know other people are having great success with 1402 also. :/
> 
> Edit: Question @dejanh, are you modifing any of the LLC's? I only thought of this after I went back to 1003. One difference I noted is that the CPU LLC has two negative values. I do not know if this is on purpose or a bug/issue; maybe the almighty @elmor can shed some light on that. I always set LLC +2 or +3 for CPU, but since those 2 negative values are their, maybe the first one is really LLC 1? and not LLC -2 and maybe this whole time I have been setting CPU LLC +4 or +5 without realizing it causing instability. I did notice some high spikes(1.5v ish[stock mhz w/boost]) in CPU voltage but never really put the two together. Back on 1003, exact same 3200 settings, zero memory errors.
> 
> I don't think @Arne Saknussemm or @gupsterg change those settings ever when overclocking?


Interesting thoughts. I made some progress by raising SOC voltage alongside DRAM voltage. When using offset of +0.06250V (1.155V SOC at idle, 1.177V under load) and DRAM at 1.37500V (1.352V under load) I managed to get through 8 hours of full memory test, with 5 errors in total for the whole run. This to contrast with me getting 100s or 1000s of errors when the SOC voltage is left at Auto even with DRAM at 1.37500V. Like you however, I appear to have had no such issues on UEFI 1003 (I never once had a BSOD in a couple of months running 1003, but since 1402 I've been getting issues regularly). I haven't done anything with LLC at all. I am running stock, except for 3200MHz DRAM so I am trying not to mess around with voltages too much. With that said, I'm not entirely clear what you're seeing. Any chance you can be a bit more specific, perhaps with a screenshot/pic?

I do not want to be shut out of future updates for this board so whatever is going on, I hope @elmor is taking note of this. I do have lots more testing to do and as I said if I don't sort it out by EOD Saturday, I'm unfortunately going to be unavailable to continue testing for a month. I will of course get right back to it as soon as I am back. 


Brain29 said:


> Use only 2 sticks and see if you get the same errors
> 
> I can get 2 sticks to run at the 3200 but if I add all 8 or 4 - im stuck at 2933
> *on my friends msi board I am able to get 3200 out of the box wondering if there is a special voltage or timing it changes but this board doesn't


I did not have this issue prior to 1402. With that said, I cannot confirm if 1402 is the problem, or something else is now the problem.


Arne Saknussemm said:


> I have never touched LLC on this platform just left it to the AUTO (AMD managed) setting and it's always seen me right.
> 
> dejanh...how did you update BIOS...EZ flash or BIOS flashback? and have you tried reflashing a fresh BIOS file BIOS Flashback method?


EZ Flash. I wouldn't normally use flashback, unless I have a corrupt UEFI or some other non-posting issue that I suspect might be UEFI related. Any reason why you're bringing this up? EZ Flash doesn't properly clear out settings or something?


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

dejanh said:


> EZ Flash. I wouldn't normally use flashback, unless I have a corrupt UEFI or some other non-posting issue that I suspect might be UEFI related. Any reason why you're bringing this up? EZ Flash doesn't properly clear out settings or something?


Well I never use anything but BIOS flashback because of sketchy EZ flash results in the past. I once had heaps of weird RAM problems and OS corruption.. all came down to using EZ flash to update BIOS.

BIOS flashback it's easy to clear CMOS before and after flash...I've never had a problem that way since...


----------



## elmor

aTsgRe said:


> @elmor I have noticed that my m.2 NVMe drive drops out after persistent heavy usage -- smart is OK and all health metrics seems OK. This started after 1402; I have to wait for a bit to reappear or reboot, is this a known issue?
> 
> This does not happen on my 900p drive which is slot based not m.2 -- any info on that?





mm1965ra said:


> @elmor
> 
> Thanks for the reply @elmor. Sorry I didn't mention the drive before, it is a Toshiba RD400 NVMe drive. This drive would not communicate with the hardware on a warm reboot with bios version 1402. I was able to revert to an earlier bios but have been away from my computer for a few days so I am not sure if it is fixed in 1402?


Which slot are you two using? Heavy usage means disk I/O? I'll try to have someone look into it.



spadizzle said:


> I am in the same boat, running at 3200 and i have been getting errors for memory. Tried voltage, timings to no avail. Think I am going to go back to an older BIOS. Frustrating that I know other people are having great success with 1402 also. :/
> 
> Edit: Question @dejanh, are you modifing any of the LLC's? I only thought of this after I went back to 1003. One difference I noted is that the CPU LLC has two negative values. I do not know if this is on purpose or a bug/issue; maybe the almighty @elmor can shed some light on that. I always set LLC +2 or +3 for CPU, but since those 2 negative values are their, maybe the first one is really LLC 1? and not LLC -2 and maybe this whole time I have been setting CPU LLC +4 or +5 without realizing it causing instability. I did notice some high spikes(1.5v ish[stock mhz w/boost]) in CPU voltage but never really put the two together. Back on 1003, exact same 3200 settings, zero memory errors.
> 
> I don't think @Arne Saknussemm or @gupsterg change those settings ever when overclocking?


Those LLC values were added for larger than default droop, which was needed when testing 2990WX on LN2. Without it, the VRM would struggle with that chip at 5GHz+ 1.5V+. I'm not aware of any change to the default loadline when overclocking on TR1.



dejanh said:


> Interesting thoughts. I made some progress by raising SOC voltage alongside DRAM voltage. When using offset of +0.06250V (1.155V SOC at idle, 1.177V under load) and DRAM at 1.37500V (1.352V under load) I managed to get through 8 hours of full memory test, with 5 errors in total for the whole run. This to contrast with me getting 100s or 1000s of errors when the SOC voltage is left at Auto even with DRAM at 1.37500V. Like you however, I appear to have had no such issues on UEFI 1003 (I never once had a BSOD in a couple of months running 1003, but since 1402 I've been getting issues regularly). I haven't done anything with LLC at all. I am running stock, except for 3200MHz DRAM so I am trying not to mess around with voltages too much. With that said, I'm not entirely clear what you're seeing. Any chance you can be a bit more specific, perhaps with a screenshot/pic?
> 
> I do not want to be shut out of future updates for this board so whatever is going on, I hope @elmor is taking note of this. I do have lots more testing to do and as I said if I don't sort it out by EOD Saturday, I'm unfortunately going to be unavailable to continue testing for a month. I will of course get right back to it as soon as I am back.
> 
> I did not have this issue prior to 1402. With that said, I cannot confirm if 1402 is the problem, or something else is now the problem.
> 
> EZ Flash. I wouldn't normally use flashback, unless I have a corrupt UEFI or some other non-posting issue that I suspect might be UEFI related. Any reason why you're bringing this up? EZ Flash doesn't properly clear out settings or something?


We did do some changes to SOC Voltage Auto rules on TR2, not sure if that was also applied to TR1. It's also possible to use SOC Overclock VID under AMD CBS\NBIO Common Options to adjust the voltage, which will then always be applied even during training. I have not seen any proof that it's better, but theoretically it should be better. The value is entered in hex and is calculated as 1.55V - value*0.00625V. For example "30" hex would be 48 decimal, so 1.55 - 48*0.00625 = 1.55 - 0.3 = 1.25V.

Another thing that was discussed internally is the VDDP CLDO value (Tweaker's paradise), which I believe we had an Auto rule for to be set at 925mV. I don't know if that's still the case.


----------



## spadizzle

Back on 1402, I tried everything auto for the "Extreme Tweaker" minus the boot voltage. Still blue screened every boot. I then set what I normally would with the 1003 bios. LLC +3 CPU. Blue screened also. So I set LLC lvl 1 for CPU and no more errors. Not sure what that means, however I will do a cold boot and run some mem tests to see.

Edit: Cold boot, just ran to 100%. 1 error. Please somebody take a look at the screen shots of CPU power and tell me is this normal? Under load looking at about 1.25v core and idle load 1.35-1.4ish volts? Seems like a big swing in volts. CPU is set to auto voltage and stock mhz/boost


----------



## dejanh

Decided to flash back to 1003 last night. Immediate change seems to be that I am not longer getting BSODs all the time. I ran Memtest HCI for 10 hours and passed the first 100% without any errors. The 400% test resulted in 4 errors in total (400%-pass test is to detect intermittent instability). (The 400% test is pretty rigorous and I am unlikely to see much in the way of faults of any kind on day to day usage with so few intermittent errors.)

This is all on stock settings and voltages, just with the D.O.C.P profile applied. 1402 could not get close to this. One other observation that I noted right away was that DRAM voltage of 1.35V in 1003 was reading as 1.33V when under load where as 1402 would read as 1.30V under load. I am running some additional testing now to try to remove the remaining intermittent errors from 1003 by bumping the VDDSOC voltage up a bit to around 1.11V-1.13V but right now I am definitely leaning to there being some serious problems with 1402 regarding memory/system stability. I cannot say whether the same issues would exist if I were using a 2nd generation chip as this UEFI and the included AGESA are primarily meant to support the new generation of chips.
@elmor - I tried your suggestion of settings the SOC voltage via a hex value in AMD CBS\NBIO Common Options under 1402. Unless I'm misunderstanding something and this setting is not supposed to actually exhibit any increase in SOC voltage when reading the voltage, the setting actually does not work. I tried several different hex values to get a certain resulting voltage and all of them would constantly read as 1.09V in HWINFO, which corresponds to the "Auto" value settings selected when I simply apply the D.O.C.P profile.


----------



## elmor

spadizzle said:


> Back on 1402, I tried everything auto for the "Extreme Tweaker" minus the boot voltage. Still blue screened every boot. I then set what I normally would with the 1003 bios. LLC +3 CPU. Blue screened also. So I set LLC lvl 1 for CPU and no more errors. Not sure what that means, however I will do a cold boot and run some mem tests to see.
> 
> Edit: Cold boot, just ran to 100%. 1 error. Please somebody take a look at the screen shots of CPU power and tell me is this normal? Under load looking at about 1.25v core and idle load 1.35-1.4ish volts? Seems like a big swing in volts. CPU is set to auto voltage and stock mhz/boost


Sounds normal dropping from 1.37V down to 1.25V with LLC1.



dejanh said:


> Decided to flash back to 1003 last night. Immediate change seems to be that I am not longer getting BSODs all the time. I ran Memtest HCI for 10 hours and passed the first 100% without any errors. The 400% test resulted in 4 errors in total (400%-pass test is to detect intermittent instability). (The 400% test is pretty rigorous and I am unlikely to see much in the way of faults of any kind on day to day usage with so few intermittent errors.)
> 
> This is all on stock settings and voltages, just with the D.O.C.P profile applied. 1402 could not get close to this. One other observation that I noted right away was that DRAM voltage of 1.35V in 1003 was reading as 1.33V when under load where as 1402 would read as 1.30V under load. I am running some additional testing now to try to remove the remaining intermittent errors from 1003 by bumping the VDDSOC voltage up a bit to around 1.11V-1.13V but right now I am definitely leaning to there being some serious problems with 1402 regarding memory/system stability. I cannot say whether the same issues would exist if I were using a 2nd generation chip as this UEFI and the included AGESA are primarily meant to support the new generation of chips.
> 
> @elmor - I tried your suggestion of settings the SOC voltage via a hex value in AMD CBS\NBIO Common Options under 1402. Unless I'm misunderstanding something and this setting is not supposed to actually exhibit any increase in SOC voltage when reading the voltage, the setting actually does not work. I tried several different hex values to get a certain resulting voltage and all of them would constantly read as 1.09V in HWINFO, which corresponds to the "Auto" value settings selected when I simply apply the D.O.C.P profile.


You also need to make sure that the VID is not overriden with Manual mode SOC voltage. Set SOC Voltage to Offset mode +0.00625.


----------



## dejanh

elmor said:


> Sounds normal dropping from 1.37V down to 1.25V with LLC1.
> 
> 
> 
> You also need to make sure that the VID is not overriden with Manual mode SOC voltage. Set SOC Voltage to Offset mode +0.00625.


Thanks for the tip. The SOC voltage was actually set to Auto...but maybe the offset mode changes things?

As it stands right now 1402 is so unstable with my memory running at its rated speed and timings that there is no possibility for me to go back to that UEFI. Again, I am not sure if it is that the tweaks for TR2 just broke TR1 compatibility, or the two are just innately not compatible, or what, but 1402 really renders my system defective. Switching back to 1003 made it possible for me to now get 400% test coverage in Memtest HCI with full 64GB of memory running at its rated speeds with zero errors. I had 4 errors in 1003 at 400% coverage with VDDSOC at 1.09V under load, and now with VDDSOC at 1.112V-1.134V under load I go 400% coverage with no errors. This is literally impossible in 1402.

I cannot believe that this does not affect others as well. I presume it does. I have been in this boat before and every time, at the end of the line, what I observed applied commonly, as long as equivalent setups were used. What is going on here is worth investigating internally and I hope that it will be. If I can help in any way when I'm back in October I will gladly assist.

Edit: I just repeated the test. This time ran to 300% coverage and zero errors on the memory. 1003 is totally fine. 1402 no go.


----------



## 00Asgaroth00

I have the same issue as @dejanh, with 1402 my memory refuses to run stable. With 1003 I could run my memory at it's rated 3333MHz D.O.C.P settings without issues. I have no experience with OC'ing so I've not tried any of the above changes (SOC voltage etc).


I'm stuck between a rock and a hard place though as 1402 fixes the bus reset issue that was present in 1003 when passing through a gpu to a vm, guess I have to run my memory at 2133MHz until a fix is found


----------



## x3sphere

00Asgaroth00 said:


> I have the same issue as @dejanh, with 1402 my memory refuses to run stable. With 1003 I could run my memory at it's rated 3333MHz D.O.C.P settings without issues. I have no experience with OC'ing so I've not tried any of the above changes (SOC voltage etc).
> 
> 
> I'm stuck between a rock and a hard place though as 1402 fixes the bus reset issue that was present in 1003 when passing through a gpu to a vm, guess I have to run my memory at 2133MHz until a fix is found



Can't you just drop back down to like 2933 or 3000 MHz?

Personally my 3200 MHz RAM has never been stable at its rated speed on the Zenith. I tested it on an Intel platform and worked fine, so it's not the RAM.

I am able to run it stable at 2933 MHz though even on the 1402 BIOS. It's a 64GB kit, which seems to be more difficult to get working >3000 MHz judging from other experiences here. I don't like to fiddle around with too many settings so dropping down to 2933 works well for me.


----------



## branana

You guys do know that this could be just as much because of the zen 1 integrated memory controller not being stellar right? A 2950x might have no issue with the memory you have.



x3sphere said:


> 00Asgaroth00 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have the same issue as @dejanh, with 1402 my memory refuses to run stable. With 1003 I could run my memory at it's rated 3333MHz D.O.C.P settings without issues. I have no experience with OC'ing so I've not tried any of the above changes (SOC voltage etc).
> 
> 
> I'm stuck between a rock and a hard place though as 1402 fixes the bus reset issue that was present in 1003 when passing through a gpu to a vm, guess I have to run my memory at 2133MHz until a fix is found /forum/images/smilies/frown.gif
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Can't you just drop back down to like 2933 or 3000 MHz?
> 
> Personally my 3200 MHz RAM has never been stable at its rated speed on the Zenith. I tested it on an Intel platform and worked fine, so it's not the RAM.
> 
> I am able to run it stable at 2933 MHz though even on the 1402 BIOS. It's a 64GB kit, which seems to be more difficult to get working >3000 MHz judging from other experiences here. I don't like to fiddle around with too many settings so dropping down to 2933 works well for me.
Click to expand...


----------



## LtMatt

Has anyone managed to flash back to 1003 from 1402 BIOS versions? Currently stuck updating ECC after using USB flashback. 

Also tried @elmor suggestion of USBing back to 0305, albeit from 1003, and that didn't work either. 

This is the path i took via USB Flashback 1402 > 1003 (EC Bug) > 0305 (EC Bug) > 1003 (EC Bug) > 1402 (EC Bug). Now I'm stuck and not sure what to do. I'm back on 1402 but it's stuck updating EC. 

I find that Hibernate no longer works for me on 1402, Windows hangs on resume, so would like to revert to 1003 where it worked normally.


----------



## LtMatt

LtMatt said:


> Has anyone managed to flash back to 1003 from 1402 BIOS versions? Currently stuck updating ECC after using USB flashback.
> 
> Also tried @elmor suggestion of USBing back to 0305, albeit from 1003, and that didn't work either.
> 
> This is the path i took via USB Flashback 1402 > 1003 (EC Bug) > 0305 (EC Bug) > 1003 (EC Bug) > 1402 (EC Bug). Now I'm stuck and not sure what to do. I'm back on 1402 but it's stuck updating EC.
> 
> I find that Hibernate no longer works for me on 1402, Windows hangs on resume, so would like to revert to 1003 where it worked normally.


Panic over, i managed to find the right flashing combination and im back on 0305. Looks like its recovered and i will now update to 1003.


----------



## aTsgRe

@elmor is by any chance ECC memory "supported" in Zenith? TR supports it no problems but if I install ECC modules will it work like in MSI or Gigabyte regardless of it been not "officially" tested?


----------



## sblantipodi

Is the extreme worth the 200 euros more than the strix?
If yes why?

I would use it on a 2950x


----------



## sblantipodi

skingun said:


> I am interested in purchasing the kit too.


Is this kit really needed.
Do the small stock fan on the mobo does some udible noise?


----------



## skingun

I doubt it. My VRMs are watercooled. I just want the SOC heatsink for the epeen.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

sblantipodi said:


> skingun said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am interested in purchasing the kit too.
> 
> 
> 
> Is this kit really needed.
> Do the small stock fan on the mobo does some udible noise?
Click to expand...


You may get away with not needing the cooling kit with the 2950X. You would however need it or make yourself one if you were going with the 2990WX due to the increased TDP. 

The cooling kit by Asus is a poor venture. The additional heatsink in the kit is ok, but the little fan they include for the VRM is woeful at best and ultimately will make no difference. It is a quick band aid by Asus so they could advertise the Zenith as a motherboard fully supporting the 2nd Gen Threadripper all the way up to the 2990WX. In reality the Zenith as per reviews ive seen gets punished with the 2990WX, even with the cooling kit. 

Due to the BIOS fiasco, Slow development and poor attempt at making Zenith fully compatible for 2nd Gen TR and general arrogance that they do not need to release an X399 refresh board, I have moved to the MSI MEG Creation. Beast of a board !

Elmor has done a fantastic job supporting the Zenith for us, I just wish Asus gave the Zenith the attention it deserves and allocated more resources for it. Asus is not invested in the Threadripper line, hence why no refresh and overall dwindling resources for its support.


----------



## aTsgRe

@ENTERPRISE, for that amount of money I wish MEG Creation included a 10 Gbe... it's intended to be used in workstations after all...


----------



## sblantipodi

ENTERPRISE said:


> You may get away with not needing the cooling kit with the 2950X. You would however need it or make yourself one if you were going with the 2990WX due to the increased TDP.
> 
> The cooling kit by Asus is a poor venture. The additional heatsink in the kit is ok, but the little fan they include for the VRM is woeful at best and ultimately will make no difference. It is a quick band aid by Asus so they could advertise the Zenith as a motherboard fully supporting the 2nd Gen Threadripper all the way up to the 2990WX. In reality the Zenith as per reviews ive seen gets punished with the 2990WX, even with the cooling kit.
> 
> Due to the BIOS fiasco, Slow development and poor attempt at making Zenith fully compatible for 2nd Gen TR and general arrogance that they do not need to release an X399 refresh board, I have moved to the MSI MEG Creation. Beast of a board !
> 
> Elmor has done a fantastic job supporting the Zenith for us, I just wish Asus gave the Zenith the attention it deserves and allocated more resources for it. Asus is not invested in the Threadripper line, hence why no refresh and overall dwindling resources for its support.


do you suggest MEG or Zenith?
can you tell us why choose one instead of the other?

I'm not interested in extreme OC or ultra high end hedt, I would like to run 2950X at the max he can go and as far as I read from the review the Zenith have better automatic boost in frequencies over MEG,
am I wrong?


----------



## ENTERPRISE

sblantipodi said:


> do you suggest MEG or Zenith?
> can you tell us why choose one instead of the other?
> 
> I'm not interested in extreme OC or ultra high end hedt, I would like to run 2950X at the max he can go and as far as I read from the review the Zenith have better automatic boost in frequencies over MEG,
> am I wrong?


The Zenith should be fine for the 2950X as it only has an 180Watt TDP rating. You ought to be able to OC its maximum potential. 

The MEG is only better than the Zenith due to its much better power delivery and on-board cooling for the VRM'S. In my humble opinion the MEG is the only choice (Unless on board 10GBe is a must) if you are using a CPU like the 2990WX due to its increased power needs. 

As for the boost, too early to say right now as I have only really started to play with the MEG, so I cannot give a clear answer there.


----------



## sblantipodi

ENTERPRISE said:


> The Zenith should be fine for the 2950X as it only has an 180Watt TDP rating. You ought to be able to OC its maximum potential.
> 
> The MEG is only better than the Zenith due to its much better power delivery and on-board cooling for the VRM'S. In my humble opinion the MEG is the only choice (Unless on board 10GBe is a must) if you are using a CPU like the 2990WX due to its increased power needs.
> 
> As for the boost, too early to say right now as I have only really started to play with the MEG, so I cannot give a clear answer there.


ok in this case I will buy the zenith hoping to not have too much problems


----------



## ENTERPRISE

sblantipodi said:


> ok in this case I will buy the zenith hoping to not have too much problems


Isn't the MEG and Zenith still similar pricing ? Personally if I had the money for the Zenith/Meg I would go for the Meg as it is far more future proof IMHO.


----------



## sblantipodi

double post


----------



## sblantipodi

ENTERPRISE said:


> Isn't the MEG and Zenith still similar pricing ? Personally if I had the money for the Zenith/Meg I would go for the Meg as it is far more future proof IMHO.


never had an MSI mobo, don't know how good are their software, bios, features, long term support.
I trust Asus, they have some problems in every release, but they are often acceptable.

very undecided, hope that someone will help me solving the riddle...


----------



## branana

sblantipodi said:


> ENTERPRISE said:
> 
> 
> 
> Isn't the MEG and Zenith still similar pricing ? Personally if I had the money for the Zenith/Meg I would go for the Meg as it is far more future proof IMHO.
> 
> 
> 
> never had an MSI mobo, don't know how good are their software, bios, features, long term support.
> I trust Asus, they have some problems in every release, but they are often acceptable.
> 
> very undecided, hope that someone will help me solving the riddle... /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif
Click to expand...

I think a lot of users have said that MSIs bios is really basic, is restrictive and missing power user features.


----------



## skingun

No news on the cooling kit. I emailed ASUS and was simply told that it's not available. Big let down for such a big company.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

skingun said:


> No news on the cooling kit. I emailed ASUS and was simply told that it's not available. Big let down for such a big company.


Honestly, I think they are done with Threadripper and the Zenith, wont be long and development will dwindle even more I reckon.


----------



## sblantipodi

ENTERPRISE said:


> Honestly, I think they are done with Threadripper and the Zenith, wont be long and development will dwindle even more I reckon.


why you say that, as far as I know there is a new bios made recently.
what else do they should do?


----------



## Bartouille

There is a bug with UEFI 1402. Sometimes the SOC Voltage simply doesn't get applied and it takes a couple restarts for it to finally get applied. Anyone else can confirm? No wonder my memory OC has been so random lately lol


----------



## Bartouille

SOC OVERCLOCK VID doesn't work. I did everything correctly, set SOC Offset to +0.00625V and SOC OVERCLOCK VID to 40h, which should give 1.55 - 64 * 0.00625 + 0.00625 = 1.15625V. The problem is that offset mode isn't relative to the SOC OVERCLOCK VID but to 1.1V (the auto voltage when overclocking memory). I don't even understand why it's relative to 1.1V in the first place, AFAIK stock SOC voltage is around 0.9V and should be relative to that if SOC OVERCLOCK VID isn't set.

Even not considering SOC OVERCLOCK VID problems, the manual SOC voltage simply doesn't get applied in some instances like I mentioned in the previous post.

Hope this gets fixed soon, because I can't even flash to UEFI 0902 (the last bios without randomness) because it says it's not a valid bios file??

EDIT: Confirmed with a DMM and SOC OVERCLOCK VID has no effect. What I did not know was that SOC OVERCLOCK VID is secretly 1.1v, so it all makes sense now.


----------



## sblantipodi

Bartouille said:


> SOC OVERCLOCK VID doesn't work. I did everything correctly, set SOC Offset to +0.00625V and SOC OVERCLOCK VID to 40h, which should give 1.55 - 64 * 0.00625 + 0.00625 = 1.15625V. The problem is that offset mode isn't relative to the SOC OVERCLOCK VID but to 1.1V (the auto voltage when overclocking memory). I don't even understand why it's relative to 1.1V in the first place, AFAIK stock SOC voltage is around 0.9V and should be relative to that if SOC OVERCLOCK VID isn't set.
> 
> Even not considering SOC OVERCLOCK VID problems, the manual SOC voltage simply doesn't get applied in some instances like I mentioned in the previous post.
> 
> Hope this gets fixed soon, because I can't even flash to UEFI 0902 (the last bios without randomness) because it says it's not a valid bios file??


but is it worth the effort to OC a TR CPU?
isn't it better to use Precision Boost?


----------



## ENTERPRISE

sblantipodi said:


> why you say that, as far as I know there is a new bios made recently.
> what else do they should do?


Asus are not invested in the Threadripper platform, this is why there was no refresh board from them, just some silly cooling kit. They are continuing support for the Zenith, but I personally do not expect it to last too long after they have fixed the main niggles with TR2. Their history for support of this board has been poor at best (Just read through this thread), only elmor and a couple of others on his team help to develop for the Zenith but I only expect that to last short term. Asus at least for now are not very invested in the TR line and are much more heavily invested in Intel products. Both of these specifics regarding lack of investment for TR and heavier investment in Intel have come from the horses mouth (Elmor), so this is not jut my opinion but a confirmation. 

As I say, I jumped from this board to the MEG due to the insanity of a premium product which was continuously buggy as well as the clear indication that Asus are not all that interested. I am not sticking with a product that has lackluster and dwindling support, not when you spend hundreds of pounds/dollars on it.

Hell just to make things work, this ''Cooling Kit'' they are offering for the Zenith in order to keep up with the higher TDP TR Line is not only hugely lackluster, Asus generally denies its existence or any real knowledge about it when you speak with them. They do not event know their own products lol. Even though the new TR line is out, still no word on this magic cooling kit they have semi advertised. 

For me, it has been poor support, Seemingly buggy BIOS Builds (fix one thing and break another) and a clear lack of real dedication for Asus on what is a Flagship motherboard. If I go Asus, it will always be for Intel as they have vastly better support. Asus and AMD are not a good mix.


----------



## sblantipodi

ENTERPRISE said:


> Asus are not invested in the Threadripper platform, this is why there was no refresh board from them, just some silly cooling kit. They are continuing support for the Zenith, but I personally do not expect it to last too long after they have fixed the main niggles with TR2. Their history for support of this board has been poor at best (Just read through this thread), only elmor and a couple of others on his team help to develop for the Zenith but I only expect that to last short term. Asus at least for now are not very invested in the TR line and are much more heavily invested in Intel products. Both of these specifics regarding lack of investment for TR and heavier investment in Intel have come from the horses mouth (Elmor), so this is not jut my opinion but a confirmation.
> 
> As I say, I jumped from this board to the MEG due to the insanity of a premium product which was continuously buggy as well as the clear indication that Asus are not all that interested. I am not sticking with a product that has lackluster and dwindling support, not when you spend hundreds of pounds/dollars on it.
> 
> Hell just to make things work, this ''Cooling Kit'' they are offering for the Zenith in order to keep up with the higher TDP TR Line is not only hugely lackluster, Asus generally denies its existence or any real knowledge about it when you speak with them. They do not event know their own products lol. Even though the new TR line is out, still no word on this magic cooling kit they have semi advertised.
> 
> For me, it has been poor support, Seemingly buggy BIOS Builds (fix one thing and break another) and a clear lack of real dedication for Asus on what is a Flagship motherboard. If I go Asus, it will always be for Intel as they have vastly better support. Asus and AMD are not a good mix.


can you elaborate better what is breaked please?
is it a stable motherboard? what is broken?


----------



## Jerky_san

Apparently they are releasing it "October 16, 2018" lol

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/prod...mNkeSFzoHABrTqlfmKWk-5IBekaAmZiEALw_wcB&smp=y


Also guess I wish I would of saw this thread before I bought a Zenith since I had an ASRock Taichi that didn't work with my LSI9201-16i so I bought this on recommendation from tons of people that it worked. But its weird how the IOMMU is done for the wireless and guess without this cooling kit I shouldn't be doing anything fun with my 2990wx...


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Jerky_san said:


> Apparently they are releasing it "October 16, 2018" lol
> 
> https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/prod...mNkeSFzoHABrTqlfmKWk-5IBekaAmZiEALw_wcB&smp=y
> 
> 
> Also guess I wish I would of saw this thread before I bought a Zenith since I had an ASRock Taichi that didn't work with my LSI9201-16i so I bought this on recommendation from tons of people that it worked. But its weird how the IOMMU is done for the wireless and guess without this cooling kit I shouldn't be doing anything fun with my 2990wx...


To be honest bud, even with the woeful cooling kit I would not recommend any OC on the Zenith on a long term basis with the 2990WX. A review which I will find again showed the Zenith at OC with the 2990WX and ultimately it was in the failure zone due to VRM temps. 

The Zenith will cope with a 2990WX at stock, but due to the extra power requirements required to OC every core on this beast, I would not expect the Zenith to sustain a stable OC, or any OC for long periods. It just isnt designed for it This was another reason I decided a refresh X399 board was the way to go. I went with the MEG Creation due to its crazy amount of phases it has as well as the improved cooling for its VRM/Mosfets. The MEG, was a mobo designed to OC a 2990WX.


----------



## delerious

ENTERPRISE said:


> To be honest bud, even with the woeful cooling kit I would not recommend any OC on the Zenith on a long term basis with the 2990WX. A review which I will find again showed the Zenith at OC with the 2990WX and ultimately it was in the failure zone due to VRM temps.
> 
> The Zenith will cope with a 2990WX at stock, but due to the extra power requirements required to OC every core on this beast, I would not expect the Zenith to sustain a stable OC, or any OC for long periods. It just isnt designed for it This was another reason I decided a refresh X399 board was the way to go. I went with the MEG Creation due to its crazy amount of phases it has as well as the improved cooling for its VRM/Mosfets. The MEG, was a mobo designed to OC a 2990WX.


I linked one with KitGuru that compared the MSI, Asrock and Asus. https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...g-creation-x399-motherboard.html#post27604558


----------



## elmor

ENTERPRISE said:


> To be honest bud, even with the woeful cooling kit I would not recommend any OC on the Zenith on a long term basis with the 2990WX. A review which I will find again showed the Zenith at OC with the 2990WX and ultimately it was in the failure zone due to VRM temps.
> 
> The Zenith will cope with a 2990WX at stock, but due to the extra power requirements required to OC every core on this beast, I would not expect the Zenith to sustain a stable OC, or any OC for long periods. It just isnt designed for it This was another reason I decided a refresh X399 board was the way to go. I went with the MEG Creation due to its crazy amount of phases it has as well as the improved cooling for its VRM/Mosfets. The MEG, was a mobo designed to OC a 2990WX.



There's no stability issue when overclocking a 2990WX on Zenith, the VRM just gets too hot under longer sustained loads (Prime95, Blender, etc) and will cause throttling. From what I've heard this will happen on the X399 MEG creation as well, around 3.8G 1.2V IIRC. 



Bartouille said:


> SOC OVERCLOCK VID doesn't work. I did everything correctly, set SOC Offset to +0.00625V and SOC OVERCLOCK VID to 40h, which should give 1.55 - 64 * 0.00625 + 0.00625 = 1.15625V. The problem is that offset mode isn't relative to the SOC OVERCLOCK VID but to 1.1V (the auto voltage when overclocking memory). I don't even understand why it's relative to 1.1V in the first place, AFAIK stock SOC voltage is around 0.9V and should be relative to that if SOC OVERCLOCK VID isn't set.
> 
> Even not considering SOC OVERCLOCK VID problems, the manual SOC voltage simply doesn't get applied in some instances like I mentioned in the previous post.
> 
> Hope this gets fixed soon, because I can't even flash to UEFI 0902 (the last bios without randomness) because it says it's not a valid bios file??
> 
> EDIT: Confirmed with a DMM and SOC OVERCLOCK VID has no effect. What I did not know was that SOC OVERCLOCK VID is secretly 1.1v, so it all makes sense now.


Hmm, alright. Let me get back to you on that, won't be until ~October though.


----------



## Bartouille

elmor said:


> Hmm, alright. Let me get back to you on that, won't be until ~October though.


Great! Btw SOC offset mode seems to get applied just fine all the time. Override mode is the problematic one.


----------



## sblantipodi

ENTERPRISE said:


> To be honest bud, even with the woeful cooling kit I would not recommend any OC on the Zenith on a long term basis with the 2990WX. A review which I will find again showed the Zenith at OC with the 2990WX and ultimately it was in the failure zone due to VRM temps.
> 
> The Zenith will cope with a 2990WX at stock, but due to the extra power requirements required to OC every core on this beast, I would not expect the Zenith to sustain a stable OC, or any OC for long periods. It just isnt designed for it This was another reason I decided a refresh X399 board was the way to go. I went with the MEG Creation due to its crazy amount of phases it has as well as the improved cooling for its VRM/Mosfets. The MEG, was a mobo designed to OC a 2990WX.


surely if I would go for 2990WX + OC MEG is better but 2990WX is really a focused CPU so I doubt that many users will buy it.
for all other CPUs like 2950X the Zenith seems to be the best bet due to better BIOS.

on january we will see X499, who knows what to expect from the new chipset.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

sblantipodi said:


> surely if I would go for 2990WX + OC MEG is better but 2990WX is really a focused CPU so I doubt that many users will buy it.
> for all other CPUs like 2950X the Zenith seems to be the best bet due to better BIOS.
> 
> on january we will see X499, who knows what to expect from the new chipset.


The 2950X will be fine on the Zenith due to the fact its a 16 core variant and is essentially just a refresh of the 1950X. The Zenith certainly has a power user BIOS, but that in itself does not guarantee a better BIOS by any means, that in reality all comes down to user preference as well as stability.


----------



## AllenG

*Wow*

Can't say i've ever had to baby sit a computer before now. So, atleast 4 times now i've had all fans quit spinning completely... Resulting in a machine that is about ready to turn into a fireball. I've usually caught it pretty quick thankfully, but if this thing were left on over night and did this i almost guarantee it would reduce itself to a pile of slag. 

Does Asus have a policy in place regarding replacing completely slagged out rigs, by their hand? Possibly even fire hazards to include the room or house? I honestly don't even understand how these products could be considered release worthy with an issue as BIG as this.

At first i thought, "I better RMA this." But here i am, reading that this type of issue plagues all of the Asus X399 boards, and all their poor users. For what it matters, i'm on a Prime x399-a BIOS 0807, 1950X, 4x 2400 JEDEC Samsung ECC UDIMM. All stock bios settings. (Box freaking stock, like any normal person buying would run it.)

Now at this point i'm not sure what to do with this thing, it's basically useless the way it sits. I've come to the conclusion of running an externally powered fan controller and not attaching it to the motherboard as a work around, but that's really not the point. Part of me says to let this thing burn itself to a pile of rubble and send it back to asus... with further action.

How many other people have had this issue here and what have you all done about it?


----------



## AllenG

Yeah, this is a total joke. This is class action lawsuit worthy, going to be talking with my lawyer. I'd recommend others do the same as well.


----------



## sblantipodi

AllenG said:


> Can't say i've ever had to baby sit a computer before now. So, atleast 4 times now i've had all fans quit spinning completely... Resulting in a machine that is about ready to turn into a fireball. I've usually caught it pretty quick thankfully, but if this thing were left on over night and did this i almost guarantee it would reduce itself to a pile of slag.
> 
> Does Asus have a policy in place regarding replacing completely slagged out rigs, by their hand? Possibly even fire hazards to include the room or house? I honestly don't even understand how these products could be considered release worthy with an issue as BIG as this.
> 
> At first i thought, "I better RMA this." But here i am, reading that this type of issue plagues all of the Asus X399 boards, and all their poor users. For what it matters, i'm on a Prime x399-a BIOS 0807, 1950X, 4x 2400 JEDEC Samsung ECC UDIMM. All stock bios settings. (Box freaking stock, like any normal person buying would run it.)
> 
> Now at this point i'm not sure what to do with this thing, it's basically useless the way it sits. I've come to the conclusion of running an externally powered fan controller and not attaching it to the motherboard as a work around, but that's really not the point. Part of me says to let this thing burn itself to a pile of rubble and send it back to asus... with further action.
> 
> How many other people have had this issue here and what have you all done about it?


Asus is certainly known to have some serious problems with the qfan control, even my x99 deluxe still have some problems with fans.

Have you tried disabling the auto fan stop in bios?
Do you have some software running that can cripple the onboard fan controller?
Try to remove all software that can access motherboard sensors and controller and see if this is fixed.


----------



## sblantipodi

If you have pwm fan set it as pwm on bios, if you have DC fan set it as DC.
If this does not solve and you have pwm fans, set it as DC fans and then see.

On my x99 deluxe I have the opposite problem. Fans spin at 100% and there is no way to lower it.
I solved by setting my pwm fan to DC fan in bios


----------



## sblantipodi

Another possible solution.
Rerun the qfan test again in bios, it store the minimum voltage/rpm needed to get the fan stop and if you set that fans must never stop, it should not stop.


----------



## AllenG

I've gone so far as to turn off off qfan control all together, using pretty much every combo in between. Using fans that are PWM, or straight DC it doesn't really matter; It will shut off either type of fan all together, it is not limited to just the PWM side of things. The fan off option applies to the COV fan only from what i can tell, I have disabled that too though just incase. This issue rears its head with no use of monitoring software, just sitting at the desktop with nothing open on fresh install of Windows 10, or 7... heck, it does it under ESXi 6.7 even. Unless the mobo monitoring itself for it's own use is causing the problem? We don't get to change that though. Ball is back in ASUS court there.


----------



## AllenG

What do ya know? Other boards of the ASUS line up having the same problems. https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?104377-Crosshair-VII-Hero-PWM-Fan-Issue

Everyone thinks its only the PWM that has the problem, it's a problem on the DC voltage line too. You don't have to be using PWM for this to affect you.


----------



## branana

AllenG said:


> What do ya know? Other boards of the ASUS line up having the same problems. https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?104377-Crosshair-VII-Hero-PWM-Fan-Issue
> 
> Everyone thinks its only the PWM that has the problem, it's a problem on the DC voltage line too. You don't have to be using PWM for this to affect you.


How is this reproduced? Fans just straight up stop working on all asus amd boards?


----------



## red-ray

*Test ZE BIOS 0001 with ASUS WMI support*



aTsgRe said:


> @elmor, just a question -- is the new bug-free ACPI WMI interface in the new BIOS?





gupsterg said:


> @BartouilleSo far had 1x instance of PWM on fan headers quirk out, hopefully next UEFI has ASUS WMI.


I have the ZE Test BIOS 0001 with ASUS WMI support, but as I don't have a ZE I can't test it. I can make it available to anyone who wishes to test SIV on their ZE system and send me the SIV save files so I can check all is OK.

It should ASUS WMI wise be much the same as the C7H 0012 test BIOS, see https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...-vii-overclocking-thread-83.html#post27618490 + https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...-vii-overclocking-thread-83.html#post27619622


----------



## MikeSanders

Is there any fix for the on/off/on procedure after every cold start? Anything i can try to set in the UEFI? This happens every cold start for me. I have got 64GB of 3200MHZ RAM running @auto.
I appreciate any help. Thank you.


----------



## gupsterg

Firstly sorry for delayed responses members  .



spadizzle said:


> I don't think @Arne Saknussemm or @gupsterg change those settings ever when overclocking?


For 24/7 OC setups never.



sblantipodi said:


> Is the extreme worth the 200 euros more than the strix?
> If yes why?
> 
> I would use it on a 2950x
> 
> 
> 
> sblantipodi said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is this kit really needed.
> Do the small stock fan on the mobo does some udible noise?
Click to expand...

The Prime / Strix / Zenith all use the same VRM. So I would check feature sets and decide, I believe also the Zenith has more UEFI settings available, note I said believe so check it out in reviews where UEFI screenshots are etc.

2950X non issue IMO. After seeing a review where a 2990WX was used on ZE with a 4GHz OC I reckon with improved cooling on VRM (ie not the ASUS cooling kit but just a 120mm fan directed at it, etc) you'd be sound.









Screens above from below video on YT (Will be looking out for more info)



Spoiler











I've had ZE from launch. Initially nVidia GTX 1080 and 2x 8GB in build, later increased amount of SATA drives, then went RX VEGA 64 and also 4x 8GB and finally dual boot W10 & Linux. For me been a *NERDGASM* of a mobo  . Planning on getting a nvme drive soon and perhaps gen 2 TR  .



red-ray said:


> I have the ZE Test BIOS 0001 with ASUS WMI support, but as I don't have a ZE I can't test it. I can make it available to anyone who wishes to test SIV on their ZE system and send me the SIV save files so I can check all is OK.
> 
> It should ASUS WMI wise be much the same as the C7H 0012 test BIOS, see https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...-vii-overclocking-thread-83.html#post27618490 + https://www.overclock.net/forum/11-...-vii-overclocking-thread-83.html#post27619622


Will get on it  , are you aware if it has later AGESA so can test 3400MHz RAM setup? as I've done quite a bit of testing of UEFI 1402 and would like to use same settings for comparison.

On UEFI 1402 I've had TR 1950X ~3-4 days at 3.8GHz & 3.9GHz PState 0 OC with 3400MHz C15 1T my own setup, no issues regarding stability or PWM, etc. Majority of the time the CPU has been kept stock since going to 3400MHz RAM. Below is [email protected] @ ~82hrs continuous (this is rerun 3  , profile got plenty of other tests under it's belt).



Spoiler














I update [email protected] client and as fans/pump responded to lowered water temp I can't say had PWM issues. My setup is as such that mobo controls all fans/pump via UEFI setup based on t_sensor. Now currently on ~108hrs continuous uptime.


Spoiler
















MikeSanders said:


> Is there any fix for the on/off/on procedure after every cold start? Anything i can try to set in the UEFI? This happens every cold start for me. I have got 64GB of 3200MHZ RAM running @auto.
> I appreciate any help. Thank you.


Power switched off to PSU?


----------



## red-ray

*I have PMed you a link*



gupsterg said:


> Will get on it  , are you aware if it has later AGESA so can test 3400MHz RAM setup? as I've done quite a bit of testing of UEFI 1402 and would like to use same settings for comparison.


I don't know, but once you have installed it SIV will report the AGESA version on the top line of it's display along with the CPU µCode release date. It will be about 6 seconds before this is reported as reading the whole 16MB BIOS ROM takes a while.

Once your have installed it please will you send me the SIV 5.33 *Menu->File->Save Local* files so I can check the ASUS WMI information is correct.


----------



## gupsterg

Thanks  .

View attachment 0001WMI.zip


Contains:-

i) SIV main page screenie and files you requested.
ii) 0001WMI_Base_setting.txt = UEFI settings.

UEFI 0001 designation had been used before back in March IIRC, but this is defo later build and has later AGESA  . So now starting like for like settings testing :thumb: .

@ subscribers

I was on UEFI 1402. Used Flashback to go to UEFI 0211 (ie first release). After flashback finish I powered off PSU, pressed power button on rig to make off, etc, did CMOSCLR. On post I had message LED Firmware updating, mobo reboot by itself once update done, next had message was related to EC flash updating, mobo power cycle fully by itself, after this finish I powered it off. Then applied UEFI 0001 (WMI) via flashback, again powered off mobo after flashback, did exact same things as UEFI 0211.

Onboard USB port headers working, Precision Boost/XFR is working, just for those that maybe apprehensive to try this UEFI as a past beta had these knocked out.


----------



## delerious

gupsterg said:


> Firstly sorry for delayed responses members  .
> 
> 
> 
> For 24/7 OC setups never.
> 
> 
> 
> The Prime / Strix / Zenith all use the same VRM. So I would check feature sets and decide, I believe also the Zenith has more UEFI settings available, note I said believe so check it out in reviews where UEFI screenshots are etc.
> 
> 2950X non issue IMO. After seeing a review where a 2990WX was used on ZE with a 4GHz OC I reckon with improved cooling on VRM (ie not the ASUS cooling kit but just a 120mm fan directed at it, etc) you'd be sound.
> 
> View attachment 218360
> 
> 
> Screens above from below video on YT (Will be looking out for more info)
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> https://youtu.be/-MRAOzQI4t0


VRM on 4 boards tested.


----------



## gupsterg

@delerious

Seen that today as well  .



Spoiler














I've read a lot of stick at times been given to ASUS, not a employee or "blinkered" fan, clearly there are areas they can improve on but TBH fantastic HW and FW IMO.

IIRC the AsRock X399 are not dual 8pin mobos even if they have very similar VRM to ASUS. Gigabyte had only 2 SOC phases up until Aorus Extreme released recently (all others 3). On these points of fact I believe the ASUS Zenith Extreme was ahead of the game, it had dual 8 pin and 3 phase SOC. I was disappointed with Gigabyte Aorus Extreme even before seeing these reviews, as when the went 10x VCORE phases they opted for 50A phases. So again the ZE (and others) were not shabby with say 8x60A.

HCI passed ~200% on UEFI 0001 with 3400MHz tweaked settings.



Spoiler














HWINFO picked up the WMI implementation as smoothly as a freshly born baby's bottom  .


Spoiler














The readings with (VRM) are pretty spot on IMO, below is non WMI UEFI 1402.



Spoiler


----------



## CaptainFist

Hi,

Anyone have Random freezes in unreal engine 4 Games? (Playerunknown/Conan Exiles/Fortnite) 

I think its Hardware relatet to this Mainboard... 

Sometimes i can play for Hours without any crash... sometimes the screen went black, sound continues and then after 10- 20 Sec a bluescreen appears.

after 10 - 20 crashes (randomly more or less) then without any change the games run smooth without crash. 

Some USB device stop funktion after the crashes (Mouse / Keyboard < Logitech)


I use Windows 10 up to date with all updates and drivers.

Nvidia 780ti sli and 1950x TR a the moment nothing is overclocked... Have the Problem sind the first Bios installed (1402)


----------



## aTsgRe

@elmor, since the new BIOS both of my NVMe SSD drives have been basically unusable. The exact same thing happens in both drives (m2 based, either in chipset slot or DIMM m2). After using them a bit they lock up and throw constantly Error 51 with the description:

An error was detected on device \Device\Harddisk4\DR4 during a paging operation.

This is always preceded with the following two errors:

Error 11: The driver detected a controller error on \Device\RaidPort3.
Error 129: Reset to device, \Device\RaidPort3, was issued.


----------



## red-ray

*Please try SIV 5.34 Beta-01*



gupsterg said:


> SIV main page screenie and files you requested.


Thank you for running the tests and sorry for the delay in replying, you did not quote me and I only noticed your post today. I was rather surprised you are in the UK, Birmingham I guess. I hope you are recovering well, what happened?

When I checked SIV worked mostly as I hoped, but there was one minor issue which 5.34 Beta-01 should fix. I have also changed to use the EC in preference to the SIO reported voltages when both are present so SIV should now report *DRAM +1.20 +1.20* on the initial screen.

Please may I have new save files generated by SIV 5.34 Beta-01 or later.

I see you were only running SIV which does not really test the ASUS WMI BIOS level locking fixes. To test these you need to do *SIV64X -NOWMI-LOCK* to tell SIV not to do the mutex locking work around and then run one or more of the other programs.


----------



## gupsterg

red-ray said:


> Thank you for running the tests and sorry for the delay in replying, you did not quote me and I only noticed your post today. I was rather surprised you are in the UK, Birmingham I guess. I hope you are recovering well, what happened?
> 
> When I checked SIV worked mostly as I hoped, but there was one minor issue which 5.34 Beta-01 should fix. I have also changed to use the EC in preference to the SIO reported voltages when both are present so SIV should now report *DRAM +1.20 +1.20* on the initial screen.
> 
> Please may I have new save files generated by SIV 5.34 Beta-01 or later.
> 
> I see you were only running SIV which does not really test the ASUS WMI BIOS level locking fixes. To test these you need to do *SIV64X -NOWMI-LOCK* to tell SIV not to do the mutex locking work around and then run one or more of the other programs.


No worries Ray  .

Firstly view the 3400MHz folder within this ZIP, link. Organise flies my time, today basically ~8hrs AIDA64 passed on my rig without PWM issues. I have never been able to pass more than ~4hrs before, tested few times over the course of owning ZE.

Next I tried the beta. I seemed to have 3 full locks of rig .









View attachment SIV_Beta.zip


Basically run 0 and 4 empty folders due to this, the 3rd lock was just using the app in background whilst browsing, etc web. I also have video of [Lock Handle] page where I did use -NOWMI-LOCK (run 5 is files from that dump in zip).



Spoiler


----------



## red-ray

*Looking Good*



gupsterg said:


> Next I tried the beta. I seemed to have 3 full locks of rig .


Thank you for testing the beta and it's looking good as far as I can see. *[Lock Handles]* only looked to show CPUZ + HWiNFO holding the lock which is correct as *-NOWMI-LOCK* was specified, though SIV does claim *Global\Access_SMBUS.HTP.Method* while reading the DIMM temperatures.

In general it's best not to use *-NOWMI-LOCK* so SIV can coexist with such as *OHM* and other programs that fail to use ASUS WMI.

I don't think CPUZ does much with ASUS WMI and suspect it would be better to test with HWMonitor.

Next I would like to see ASUS WMI available on Intel X299 motherboards and I can think of a few SIV users that would like it on their Rampage V Extreme X99 boards.


----------



## gupsterg

red-ray said:


> Thank you for testing the beta and it's looking good as far as I can see. *[Lock Handles]* only looked to show CPUZ + HWiNFO holding the lock which is correct as *-NOWMI-LOCK* was specified, though SIV does claim *Global\Access_SMBUS.HTP.Method* while reading the DIMM temperatures.
> 
> In general it's best not to use *-NOWMI-LOCK* so SIV can coexist with such as *OHM* and other programs that fail to use ASUS WMI.
> 
> I don't think CPUZ does much with ASUS WMI and suspect it would be better to test with HWMonitor.
> 
> Next I would like to see ASUS WMI available on Intel X299 motherboards and I can think of a few SIV users that would like it on their Rampage V Extreme X99 boards.


No thank you for taking the time to see data and providing a great app :thumb: .

HWMonitor has always been bad for me on giving wild readings, even on stock, etc. After having a taste of ASUS WMI on the C6H/C7H I was so looking forward to it on ZE. As TBH the voltages in monitoring from EC where totally pants for say SOC/VDIMM. At idle the (VRM) values are spot on.









Which if IIRC from a previous post of Elmor's, he'd stated under load readings were a little out on say TR2 so seem it maybe the same on TR1. I've also done some OC'ing on the core on this UEFI now and looks good TBH.

IMO this will be most sound release of UEFI so far.


----------



## elmor

delerious said:


> VRM on 4 boards tested.
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YxX-1e-n0Mk



Certainly interesting, though more information would be needed to verify there's no throttling etc going on. Reported VRM temperatures might also differ between boards based on placement etc. The Zenith is having issues with keeping VRM temperatures in check with high overclocks + sustained load on 2990WX, so this is rather making the refresh boards look bad.













gupsterg said:


> As TBH the voltages in monitoring from EC where totally pants for say SOC/VDIMM.


Not sure if I got it correctly, but the EC voltage monitoring values should be spot on. They are the ones that are marked (VRM).


----------



## MikeSanders

gupsterg said:


> Power switched off to PSU?


Yes this only happens when i turn off the power strip.
Is there a bios setting to prevent the on/off/on feature after that?


----------



## Benniphx

@elmor prime stress test vrm 39 degrees  under water after 1 hour


----------



## aTsgRe

@elmor do you have any updates on the NVMe SSD Drives write problems in 1402? It's kind of urgent as this made my drives unusable...


----------



## red-ray

*Is amddvr.exe leaking handles ?*



gupsterg said:


> IMO this will be most sound release of UEFI so far.


It looks good to me as well and I hope ASUS release it soon. I soak tested the locking for a coupe of hours it on a TR2, it worked well and the DIMM voltages were correct, 1.190 to 1.210, average 1.200 after 4,514 samples (2.5 hours)

I noted the amddvr.exe handle count was rather high (4,469) on your system, does it keep increasing?

I just spotted HWM is using 433 MB of memory so it must be leaking memory. Franck is now "on the case".



elmor said:


> Not sure if I got it correctly, but the EC voltage monitoring values should be spot on. They are the ones that are marked (VRM).


I suspect he must have as the range is 1.350 to 1.360 volts in the SIV save file from his system. BTW what is the EC granularity? Does it vary from input to input?


----------



## sblantipodi

Benniphx said:


> @elmor prime stress test vrm 39 degrees  under water after 1 hour


they seems pretty easy to cooldown, nice!


----------



## elmor

aTsgRe said:


> @elmor, since the new BIOS both of my NVMe SSD drives have been basically unusable. The exact same thing happens in both drives (m2 based, either in chipset slot or DIMM m2). After using them a bit they lock up and throw constantly Error 51 with the description:
> 
> An error was detected on device \Device\Harddisk4\DR4 during a paging operation.
> 
> This is always preceded with the following two errors:
> 
> Error 11: The driver detected a controller error on \Device\RaidPort3.
> Error 129: Reset to device, \Device\RaidPort3, was issued.





aTsgRe said:


> @elmor do you have any updates on the NVMe SSD Drives write problems in 1402? It's kind of urgent as this made my drives unusable...



Sorry, I have no update on this.



red-ray said:


> I suspect he must have as the range is 1.350 to 1.360 volts in the SIV save file from his system. BTW what is the EC granularity? Does it vary from input to input?



It's reported in 1mV steps from the EC, but the source also needs to be considered. In this case, the various VRM controllers. On ZE, they should report in 1mV steps for Core/SOC and 10mV for DRAM.


----------



## MikeSanders

MikeSanders said:


> Is there any fix for the on/off/on procedure after every cold start? Anything i can try to set in the UEFI? This happens every cold start for me. I have got 64GB of 3200MHZ RAM running @auto.
> I appreciate any help. Thank you.


No one?


----------



## red-ray

*Now the readings make sense*



elmor said:


> It's reported in 1mV steps from the EC, but the source also needs to be considered. In this case, the various VRM controllers. On ZE, they should report in 1mV steps for Core/SOC and 10mV for DRAM.


Thank you and now the readings make sense. I was trying to figure out why the DIMMs only ever seemed to be the expected value ± 0.010 volts.

After thinking about this I would like to be able to get the granularity from ASUS WMI, would ASUS consider adding this to the ACPI INFO method packages, either add a sixth item to the package to redefine the fifth item to be the granularity.


----------



## sblantipodi

MikeSanders said:


> No one?


what is the onoffon problem you are asking for?


----------



## MikeSanders

If you turn on the pc after it was completely turned off (power strip) the mainboard shuts down after 1 second when turning the pc on. it immidiately turns on again and boots up fine. the "double start" is quite annoying.
This only happens with fast RAM speed afair.
Maybe there is a bios setting to turn off the memory training or something?


----------



## red-ray

*APM Configuration?*



MikeSanders said:


> No one?


Maybe the APM Configuration


----------



## gupsterg

MikeSanders said:


> Yes this only happens when i turn off the power strip.
> Is there a bios setting to prevent the on/off/on feature after that?


This is normal AFAIK and my own experience with ASUS AMD/Intel boards. Also reference this thread and especially post 8.



red-ray said:


> It looks good to me as well and I hope ASUS release it soon. I soak tested the locking for a coupe of hours it on a TR2, it worked well and the DIMM voltages were correct, 1.190 to 1.210, average 1.200 after 4,514 samples (2.5 hours)
> 
> I noted the amddvr.exe handle count was rather high (4,469) on your system, does it keep increasing?
> 
> I just spotted HWM is using 433 MB of memory so it must be leaking memory. Franck is now "on the case".


After the testing previously provide I've ran 3.8GHz ACB 3400MHz 1T C15 tweakied timings for ~28hrs solid, no issues. Currently running 3.85GHz ACB with same RAM setup for ~12hrs+, no issues again with PWM/monitoring. I open up at least 2 instances of beta CPU-Z 1.86.1 whilst HWINFO is open and all sound. The latest beta for C7H also seems to have resolved ASUS WMI issues as far as I can tell in ~24hrs+ testing. Only really waiting on the C6H one to be released.

Will check out amddvr.exe and HWINFO :thumb:, I recall at one point this was an issue and fixed.

*** edit ***

Seems amddvr is fine IMO, I see a rise to 4,47x when start doing screen capture from 4067, then rolls down once stop. Dunno why HWINFO had a leak before , seems fine at present, been on logging ~24hrs.



Spoiler


----------



## red-ray

*It's HWM not HWiNFO that leaks memory.*



gupsterg said:


> Dunno why HWINFO had a leak before , seems fine at present, been on logging ~24hrs.


OK, but I specified it's HWM not HWiNFO that leaks memory.


----------



## elmor

aTsgRe said:


> @elmor, since the new BIOS both of my NVMe SSD drives have been basically unusable. The exact same thing happens in both drives (m2 based, either in chipset slot or DIMM m2). After using them a bit they lock up and throw constantly Error 51 with the description:
> 
> An error was detected on device \Device\Harddisk4\DR4 during a paging operation.
> 
> This is always preceded with the following two errors:
> 
> Error 11: The driver detected a controller error on \Device\RaidPort3.
> Error 129: Reset to device, \Device\RaidPort3, was issued.


Which drive is it you are using?


----------



## gupsterg

red-ray said:


> OK, but I specified it's HWM not HWiNFO that leaks memory.


Ahh I see you mean in your posted sceenshot  , sorry my bad  .

I don't touch HWMonitor with a barge pole TBH.

On another note it's been ~5days of continuously loading the ZE "day and night"  . No issues to report on PWM, etc, so to team *ASUS* :thumb: .


----------



## aTsgRe

@elmor I am using a pretty standard Samsung 970 1TB Evo which I have tried installing on the chipset slot and both of the DIMM m.2. It has to be noted that my main drive, Intel 900p 480GB works flawlessly. I don't have any other drives to test...

The drive SMART wise reports it's fine and I have tested it on a ASUS Hero VI with no issues (albeit with a much lower speed due to the m.2 being PCI-e 2.0 x 2).

edit: I do have to mention that on initial installation with the shipped firmware of the SSD it didn't even allow me to format it -- after upgrading the drive to the latest one I could format it but continuous to be in an unusable state... Swapping the drive to ASUS Hero VI and the drive has no problems and works as it should (albeit slower).


----------



## sovereignty68

1402 killed the ability to recognize any drive installed on DIMM.2 Slot 1 and the NVME slot onboard. Right now, the only slot that works is DIMM.2 Slot 2. Tested Samsung 970 Pro, Samsung 960 Pro, ADATA S8200.
Hyper X16 was only able to recognize 3 drives when it was installed in PCIEX16_3, but after I installed it in PCIEX16_1, it was able to recognize all 4 drives. All drives are Samsung 970 Pro 1TB.


----------



## aTsgRe

@sovereignty68, glad more people are having these issues in hopes that ASUS can fix this sooner...


----------



## elmor

sovereignty68 said:


> 1402 killed the ability to recognize any drive installed on DIMM.2 Slot 1 and the NVME slot onboard. Right now, the only slot that works is DIMM.2 Slot 2. Tested Samsung 970 Pro, Samsung 960 Pro, ADATA S8200.
> Hyper X16 was only able to recognize 3 drives when it was installed in PCIEX16_3, but after I installed it in PCIEX16_1, it was able to recognize all 4 drives. All drives are Samsung 970 Pro 1TB.





aTsgRe said:


> @elmor I am using a pretty standard Samsung 970 1TB Evo which I have tried installing on the chipset slot and both of the DIMM m.2. It has to be noted that my main drive, Intel 900p 480GB works flawlessly. I don't have any other drives to test...
> 
> The drive SMART wise reports it's fine and I have tested it on a ASUS Hero VI with no issues (albeit with a much lower speed due to the m.2 being PCI-e 2.0 x 2).
> 
> edit: I do have to mention that on initial installation with the shipped firmware of the SSD it didn't even allow me to format it -- after upgrading the drive to the latest one I could format it but continuous to be in an unusable state... Swapping the drive to ASUS Hero VI and the drive has no problems and works as it should (albeit slower).


Trying to debug this, so far it's fine with a Samsung 970 Evo. Can you detail further your system spec and if you're overclocked? Does it happen even without overclocking at 2133 MHz memory?


----------



## aTsgRe

@elmor, am running everything on Auto using a 1950X with a 39 Multiplier and my ram is 4 x 8GB sticks @ 3200 (default DOCP) model F4-3200C16Q-32GTZR. My storage configuration is Intel 900p 480 on PCI-e (works fine), 970 Evo 1TB on any M.2 slots (does not work); other PCI-e devices: Intel x520 T2 and 2 GPU's one 750 Ti and one 1080 Ti. Please let me know what else you want to know.

As I said before, I don't think it's the drive as it works on another computer perfectly fine.

edit: also, if it helps -- when the drive is "stuck" on task manager, apart from the error messages in event viewer, shows 100 % usage with 0 bytes reads/writes...

edit2: I cannot test this on Linux and used only Windows as both Ubuntu and Fedora live cd's fail to boot for weird reasons that I don't want to bother to debug.


----------



## knightriot

aTsgRe said:


> @elmor, am running everything on Auto using a 1950X with a 39 Multiplier and my ram is 4 x 8GB sticks @ 3200 (default DOCP) model F4-3200C16Q-32GTZR. My storage configuration is Intel 900p 480 on PCI-e (works fine), 970 Evo 1TB on any M.2 slots (does not work); other PCI-e devices: Intel x520 T2 and 2 GPU's one 750 Ti and one 1080 Ti. Please let me know what else you want to know.
> 
> As I said before, I don't think it's the drive as it works on another computer perfectly fine.
> 
> edit: also, if it helps -- when the drive is "stuck" on task manager, apart from the error messages in event viewer, shows 100 % usage with 0 bytes reads/writes...


i found a bug at 1402 , CBS settings will not reset when you press clear bios, so it can make some issue, the only way to clear all is biosflashback. I using sm951 1TB + intel 600p 1TB both in DIMM.2


----------



## FreeElectron

I am thinking of getting this with the AMD 2950x.
Is there any serious bug that should make me reconsider?


----------



## aTsgRe

@elmor, any updates?


----------



## Jerky_san

@elmor I have a 2990wx with zenith using it on Unraid. I also have NVME m.2 problems. Device would just randomly reset causing my entire OS to crash. Also could the IOMMU groups be improved further? The wireless and 
USB controller: ASMedia Technology Inc. ASM2142 USB 3.1 Host Controller
USB controller: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. [AMD] X399 Series Chipset USB 3.1 xHCI Controller (rev 02)

Appears in the same group with a bunch of PCIe Port and chipset sata controller pieces making them very hard to use without issue. 

Lastly and this is a BIG ONE!!
Please fix the CPU designations. I am trying to properly pin cores to certain work loads but the problem is my CPU's appear in a completely different order than people with other boards(an ASROCK, MSI, and gigabyte)
Because of this is appears nearly impossible to pin CPU's properly to certain VM's and dockers. This is especially important with the memory controllers only being present on two dies on the 2990wx.
Below is my system using LSTOPO. If I assign the whole second die with NUMA#2(which has my gpu and such connected to it) to a VM and pass the GPU through. I get horrendous performance.
However if I pass just the odd cores of what should be the second and third Green bricks (NUMANode P#2 & NUMANcodeP#1) I get excellent performance which just a little hiccup here and there.


----------



## aTsgRe

@Jerky_san what linux distro are you using? I tried with Ubuntu 17.10, 18.04, Fedora 28 with no luck -- stuck at booting screen; or you had to use hacks to get it working?

Also please get more attention to those NVMe issues as they are basically making my new drives unusable...


----------



## delerious

aTsgRe said:


> @Jerky_san what linux distro are you using? I tried with Ubuntu 17.10, 18.04, Fedora 28 with no luck -- stuck at booting screen; or you had to use hacks to get it working?
> 
> Also please get more attention to those NVMe issues as they are basically making my new drives unusable...


He'a using Unraid. https://unraid.net/


----------



## branana

Using 1402 here with 2950x. At the top of the extreme tweaking teen in the bios, is it supposed to always say LN2 mode regardless of how the LN2 mode jumper is set?


----------



## skingun

Board does not work with 2x 20 series Nvidia cards or 1x 20 series plus another card. 

See this link:

https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?95413-Zenith-Extreme-Beta-UEFI-0901/page11

Seems to be a BIOS issue?
@elmor


----------



## Smarter

*v1402 Latest Beta Bios Temp Issues*

@elmor 

On a brand new ZE I just bought (broke my last one), it came with 1003 loaded. I upgraded to 1402 and if I change NO settings in the BIOS it will display, sorta proper temps...

Via AIDA64 the CPU temp NEVER leaves 28C, but the CPU Diode rolls all the way up to 59C under load (using Noctua 14S Cooler). 

If I change ANY setting in the BIOS, it will start showing temps of 4C then 255C and alternate back and forth from 1-4C and 243-254C. 

I am in the process of USB Flashbacking to 0305 then to 0902 as that was the last successful BIOS I was running on my last board.


----------



## Brain29

Smarter said:


> @elmor
> 
> On a brand new ZE I just bought (broke my last one), it came with 1003 loaded. I upgraded to 1402 and if I change NO settings in the BIOS it will display, sorta proper temps...
> 
> Via AIDA64 the CPU temp NEVER leaves 28C, but the CPU Diode rolls all the way up to 59C under load (using Noctua 14S Cooler).
> 
> If I change ANY setting in the BIOS, it will start showing temps of 4C then 255C and alternate back and forth from 1-4C and 243-254C.
> 
> I am in the process of USB Flashbacking to 0305 then to 0902 as that was the last successful BIOS I was running on my last board.


sounds like your stuck in uefi hell ** there is a random bug that I have had were this will happen after I flash a new uefi .. its hard to see anything wrong without seeing funny things happen like no lights and temps - the problem usually corrects it self after sometimes two weeks - like it deleted hidden cache 

a few times when this happened to me I was able to correct the issues by flashing back and forth 3 - 5 times
another time I just unplugged the system from the wall and battery for a few hours (i went to work) and things came back

* I haven't had this happen to me for the last 3 uefi updates so I figured they might had addressed it or cleaned the process a bit


----------



## dejanh

What is the latest beta bios out for this board now? I noticed a couple of pages back conversation about some UEFI 0001, which appeared to be more stable and a later build than 1402, but I don't see the link to it posted anywhere. 1402 was a no-go for me because of memory instability that does not exist in 1003 so I had to roll back to 1003. Anybody have a link to this mysterious 0001 UEFI that @gupsterg said works the best so far?


----------



## skingun

I've raised a support ticket for the SLI issue with 20 series cards. I encourage anyone else with this problem to do the same. The more noise that is made the quicker it should get dealt with.


----------



## dejanh

dejanh said:


> What is the latest beta bios out for this board now? I noticed a couple of pages back conversation about some UEFI 0001, which appeared to be more stable and a later build than 1402, but I don't see the link to it posted anywhere. 1402 was a no-go for me because of memory instability that does not exist in 1003 so I had to roll back to 1003. Anybody have a link to this mysterious 0001 UEFI that @gupsterg said works the best so far?


Any info on this from anyone? Is this UEFI available to download?


skingun said:


> I've raised a support ticket for the SLI issue with 20 series cards. I encourage anyone else with this problem to do the same. The more noise that is made the quicker it should get dealt with.


I don't have 20 series cards so I can't help, but hopefully somebody else can.


----------



## elmor

skingun said:


> I've raised a support ticket for the SLI issue with 20 series cards. I encourage anyone else with this problem to do the same. The more noise that is made the quicker it should get dealt with.


I'll try to verify this tomorrow.


----------



## skingun

elmor said:


> skingun said:
> 
> 
> 
> I've raised a support ticket for the SLI issue with 20 series cards. I encourage anyone else with this problem to do the same. The more noise that is made the quicker it should get dealt with.
> 
> 
> 
> I'll try to verify this tomorrow.
Click to expand...

Thank you @elmor. It's been reported on Reddit, Nvidia Geforce forum and ASUS ROG forum. So far it feels like nothing is being done about it. I'm therefore extremely grateful to have received your response.

If there was sent word of assurance that it will be fixed I could continue my build and use the dip switches to disable one of the PCIE lanes until an updated BIOS is pushed. As it stands I'm facing a difficult decision to replaced the motherboard with a different brand, which I'd really rather not do as when the Zenith works it's an excellent board.


----------



## skingun

Duplicate post. Deleted.


----------



## lumen

*bug collection*

Hi folks, I was always happy with ASUS mainboards, but with the Zenith Extreme I really have a hard time.
1) The memory cold boot problem (reported here as well) is not nice, but ok, I can live with it
2) The fan expert software does not work properly with my Liqtech TR4 cooler, so I have to set the fan speed in bios (annoying)
3) The AURA Sync software (LighningService) is reported as cheat by some anti cheat programs, so I have to disable it when playing e.g. farcry 5 etc.
4) AURA Sync nearly uses one complete core when setting it to rainbow effect, so I have to use another. (By the way, why is there no "smart with gradient" setting?)
5) But the worst one is the bios bug that prevents me using my second 2080 ti graphic card (as reported already above)
If there is a beta bios I could try, please tell me.


----------



## skingun

@lumen multiple posts have been made about the BIOS bug preventing the running of multiple 20 series cards in ROG forum, Nvidia forum, Reddit and here. It seems @elmor is the only one doing anything about it. I am so glad to have his reply because it restores a little hope in me although I worry why he is the only one who has stepped forward so far. No reply from reps on official ROG forum is disconcerting.


----------



## Jerky_san

lumen said:


> Hi folks, I was always happy with ASUS mainboards, but with the Zenith Extreme I really have a hard time.
> 1) The memory cold boot problem (reported here as well) is not nice, but ok, I can live with it
> 2) The fan expert software does not work properly with my Liqtech TR4 cooler, so I have to set the fan speed in bios (annoying)
> 3) The AURA Sync software (LighningService) is reported as cheat by some anti cheat programs, so I have to disable it when playing e.g. farcry 5 etc.
> 4) AURA Sync nearly uses one complete core when setting it to rainbow effect, so I have to use another. (By the way, why is there no "smart with gradient" setting?)
> 5) But the worst one is the bios bug that prevents me using my second 2080 ti graphic card (as reported already above)
> If there is a beta bios I could try, please tell me.



Is your Liqtech TR4 cooler the enermax II that came out? Did you buy it recently or right when it came out? If you bought it right when it came out the pump might eventually have issues.. I'm getting an RMA soon on mine.


----------



## elmor

Can someone detail exact steps, settings and parts to replicate the Nvidia dual GPU issues? It works fine for me and I can't help you without being able to trigger it.

ZE BIOS 1402
1950X/2990WX
4x16GB F4-3600C16-16GTZ
2x Strix RTX 2080 Ti + NVLink


----------



## aTsgRe

@elmor, did you manage to replicate the NVMe issues? If not, what more information would you like?


----------



## elmor

aTsgRe said:


> @elmor, did you manage to replicate the NVMe issues? If not, what more information would you like?


I quickly checked it and could not find any issue with a Samsung 970 EVO. Re-booted ~20 times and always showed up, tried stressing with various benchmarks and it was fine. Tested both DIMM.2 and on-board slots. I did not have time to re-test but might find some time next week. Is there a reliable way to make it fail?


----------



## FuriousReload

elmor said:


> Can someone detail exact steps, settings and parts to replicate the Nvidia dual GPU issues? It works fine for me and I can't help you without being able to trigger it.
> 
> ZE BIOS 1402
> 1950X/2990WX
> 4x16GB F4-3600C16-16GTZ
> 2x Strix RTX 2080 Ti + NVLink


Elmor, I have this issue as well using 2x 2080 Ti Founders Edition cards. System works fine if I set one dip switch off for one of the cards. But will not Post with both cards. I have a 2950x and I am on the 1402 BIOS with 64 GB (8 sticks of 8gb) G.Skill 3200 RAM. Both cards work individually and do run in NVLINK on a seperate system. Hope this helps, we need a resolution!


----------



## Creedcoder

elmor said:


> Can someone detail exact steps, settings and parts to replicate the Nvidia dual GPU issues? It works fine for me and I can't help you without being able to trigger it.
> 
> ZE BIOS 1402
> 1950X/2990WX
> 4x16GB F4-3600C16-16GTZ
> 2x Strix RTX 2080 Ti + NVLink


 @elmor Just simply try 2x Nvidia 2080 TI.
This issue is driving me nuts. I tried everything from multiple bios flashes, refits of the cards nothing worked. My Vega 64 Crossfire worked before.

See here for more complains on Reddit, its only a ZE issue!


----------



## skingun

@elmor Unfortunately I am away from my system until the weekend. Looks like others are stepping up to provide information. Hopefully this will be sufficient.


----------



## Jerky_san

I can say on the NVME thing it doesn't seem to happen all the time for me. It just randomly started reseting after a few days and it got progressively worse.


----------



## beavermatic

Also just encountered the 2x2080Ti NVLink issue on my ZE as I received them last night (2080TI FE's from nvidia store). 

"Load VGA Bios" Error message and doesn't get to post. Only happens with both cards connected. Once I remove a 2080ti, it boots fine with a single 2080ti gpu.

Running 1402 BIOS (latest) on the zenith extreme. 2950x TR, 32GB of Corsair RGB DDR4 (3600mhz, but clocked to 3200mhz for stability). Have confirmed all GPU's are properly seated in 16x PCIE channels (not loose) and both 8-pin psu connectors on each card are connected firmly. Can also confirm both cards power on.

Was just running fine with the prior SLI'd Titan Xp's in same configuration. Even reinserted them to test SLI again with the Titan Xp's, and booted no problem. Defintley a 2080/ti and/or nvlink related issue with this board.

Obviously this is a widespread issue as it's being reported almost in every instance with this board and dual 2080(ti) gpus. Wonder how long it will take Asus to address with bios update?


----------



## lumen

*Nvidia dual GPU issue*



elmor said:


> Can someone detail exact steps, settings and parts to replicate the Nvidia dual GPU issues? It works fine for me and I can't help you without being able to trigger it.
> 
> ZE BIOS 1402
> 1950X/2990WX
> 4x16GB F4-3600C16-16GTZ
> 2x Strix RTX 2080 Ti + NVLink


 Hello elmor. Thank you for taking up that problem. As you are saying it works for you with two Strix 2080 ti, it might be a problem with the founders edition??? Or has anybody the same problem with other cards than the nvidia ones?


Edit: Found someone with the same problem and Asus cards: https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?95413-Zenith-Extreme-Beta-UEFI-0901/page11 "I have the same issue with 2x Asus Dual RTX 2080 Ti cards loaded in the Zenith board..."


----------



## lumen

@Jerky_san The liqtech cooler is not the new one. The pump is ok I think. When I use the fan expert 4 software to set them up and use the automatic calibration, the fans do not react any more and stay at a constant rpm. I have the feeling that the pwm mode is not recognised and set to dc mode... Only setting it again in bios settings makes them work properly again and react to changing temperatures.


----------



## aTsgRe

@elmor, the drive shows up but freezes after stressing it a bit -- do you have anything else loaded on the system? I am using quite a few of the PCI-e lanes:

2 x 16x (PCI-e 3.0) for two GPU (1080 Ti on Slot 1 on the board, the one just below CPU socket; 750 Ti Slot 4)
1 x 4x (PCI-e 2.0) for the Network card (Slot 3)
1 x 4x (PCI-e 3.0) for the 900p ssd (Slot 6)

maybe this issue appears when you have all of these PCI-e lanes populated? Also the issue appears regardless of where I put it on the M.2 slots available directly on board -- I've ordered a hyper card to see if putting it directly a slot changes things. Finally, what firmware does your Samsung 970 EVO have? I used the latest one available from Magician (as of 1/10).


----------



## skingun

lumen said:


> Hello elmor. Thank you for taking up that problem. As you are saying it works for you with two Strix 2080 ti, it might be a problem with the founders edition??? Or has anybody the same problem with other cards than the nvidia ones?
> 
> 
> Edit: Found someone with the same problem and Asus cards: https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?95413-Zenith-Extreme-Beta-UEFI-0901/page11 "I have the same issue with 2x Asus Dual RTX 2080 Ti cards loaded in the Zenith board..."


 @lumen please can you save a copy of your BIOS settings and PM them to elmor.


----------



## beavermatic

Im thinking it's a bigger issue with the 2080/ti cards on the ZE board than just nvlink support.

I am able to boot with a single 2080ti FE card, but the post process seems slower, and i keep seeing "092 Test NVRAM" at boot which causes a delay before the system actually posts. Likewise, I can get to safemode on Win10, and I was able to get my desktop (without safemode) before installing the drivers, but after installing the the latest nvidia 4xx drivers for Win10 for the 2080 series, Win10 will load but then screen goes black just after load/circle screen, just prior to login screen, and it will eventually blue screen with a NVKLDM.DLL (or some file like that related to vga subsystem) error and reboot. Even after clean install of drivers in safe mode, still same. For reference, my system is all at stock settings for cpu, ram, etc. Also have a 1200w PSU and no prior issues.

However, if i take out the 2080ti, and replace it with either my 980ti hybrid or Titan Xp, literally not a single issue, boots fine, no post delay, no windows issues.

I've tried both my 2080ti's just to rule out bad cards. And of course, the nvlink 0E VGA BIOS error when you try to link them together like everyone else.

Now, this all leads me to believe there is likely A LOT more that needs to be done to get this card supported on the ZE boards and it's not quite stable with even a single 2080/ti card.

btw, Skingun and Harley, I'm watching you both very closely on the ROG Forums and other sites as well to monitor any progress. I saw where Asus had mentioned to you that they have their engineers looking at it and awaiting BIOS/fix eta. Unfortunately i can't respond on the ROG Forums due to "limited account wait period" before posting (why?).


----------



## skingun

@beavermatic Regarding making posts and commenting on the ROG forum, you need to DM silent_scone to have permissions raised. 

I can't offer any more insight until Sunday, at which point I will be able to download a copy of my BIOS settings to share. I hope someone can do this before me...


----------



## PwrSuprUsr

What is the current consensus with the Zenith Extreme and 2nd gen Threadripper? These kinds of threads are generally overly negative and kind of skewed but are there any better alternative high end boards for X399 that people recommend?


----------



## skingun

PwrSuprUsr said:


> What is the current consensus with the Zenith Extreme and 2nd gen Threadripper? These kinds of threads are generally overly negative and kind of skewed but are there any better alternative high end boards for X399 that people recommend?


Fine for anything up to x2950. From what I have heard, and I'll stand corrected if evidence is 
provided to the contrary, you'll have cooling issues with a 2990WX unless you can get your hands on an aftermarket cooling kit for the SOC and VRM. Maybe water-cooling the VRM alone is enough without the SOC heatsink but I have no user experience so take this with a pinch of salt.

If I was buying new I'd get a MSI MEG Creation. Massive VRM for handing high core count CPU variants and no issues with running multiple 20 series cards.

I cannot comment further on the MSI board as I don't own one, for now.


----------



## skingun

Hi,

Managed to get a quick play on my PC. Didn't think I'd have time until Sunday. Strange things are happening. It booted with 2 x 2080 TI in SLI with NVLink connected. Not sure how that happened or what I changed. Unless it starts crapping out I'm not going to be able to help find the cause. Can someone who is still having this problem please upload their BIOS settings?

Without this detail the problem is unlikely to get resolved as elmor cannot reproduce the fail to post issue on his system.


----------



## Creedcoder

skingun said:


> Hi,
> 
> Managed to get a quick play on my PC. Didn't think I'd have time until Sunday. Strange things are happening. It booted with 2 x 2080 TI in SLI with NVLink connected. Not sure how that happened or what I changed. Unless it starts crapping out I'm not going to be able to help find the cause. Can someone who is still having this problem please upload their BIOS settings?
> 
> Without this detail the problem is unlikely to get resolved as elmor cannot reproduce the fail to post issue on his system.


Can you post your bios settings, so we can compare them?


----------



## dinerman

*my bios settings hope this helps rtx bug*

here are my bios setting ihave the 2 rtx2080 card bug


----------



## FuriousReload

I can fully boot if I take all RAM out except a stick in slot B1, with both cards in and enabled. Hope this helps. Not a great solution, but it may help ASUS out with troubleshooting.


----------



## beavermatic

Interesting observation:

I leave a single 2080ti GPU plugged into PCIE16x_1 (the very first PCIE port just below the cpu\ram bank) the system will begin to kind of freak out with 'NVRAM test' code reading, though it will sometimes go away and start Windows (or sometimes will just hang system at post asus splash screen). Windows will hang/black screen before I can get to login screen after load screen, unless I boot to safemode. 

However, if I move that same 2080ti GPU down to PCIE16x_3 slot (see ZE manual for PCIE port numbering), not a single issue at boot or windows occurs. Boots perfect, no error codes flash, can install nvidia driver no issue. Runs fine.

Now, if I install *both* 2080ti gpu's (one into pcie16x_1 and one into pcie16x_3), it will hang sometimes with "NVRAM test" code error (or flash briefly and then display the vga bios 0e code error), or it will just hang at post Asus logo screen with LOAD VGA BIOS 0E error. However, if i leave both cards installed in the respective pcie slots, and use the DIP switch to disable PCI16x_1 (which is DIP switch #1), of course the gpu on that port is disabled, and it boots normally without issue from the gpu on pcie16x_3 just fine.

**Note: for testing purposes and to rule out bad mobo, If I swap back to my single 980ti or my titan XP's in SLI on the same ports, literally no issues at all, whether in SLI or single card mode.


I've attached my BIOS screenshots for reference. When these screenshots were taken, both 2080ti's were installed in the pcie ports mentioned above, but with DIP switch #1 disabled so I could boot off a single card.


Also for reference are my system specs:

Asus Zenith Extreme x399 (1402 bios) 
AMD Threadripper 2950x @ stock speed/precision boost 
Artic LiquidFreezer 360mm AIO CPU cooler 
EVGA SuperNOVA G3 1200w PSU 
Corsair Vengenance RGB 32GB DDR4 (8GBx4) 3600MHZ (clocked to 3200mhz) with modules in DIMM C1, D1, A1, B1 slots.
Samsung 960 Pro 512GB NVMe - OS partition 
2xSamsung 950 SSD 1TB in RAID0 - Game partition 
2xWestern Digital 1TB HDD - Data partitions 
2xNvidia Geforce 2080ti FE RTX GPU's with NVLINK on a LG 4k HDR 65' TV monitor (via hdmi) 
Deepcool Quadstellar ATX case 
Corsair gaming mouse via USB 
Bloody mechanical Laser-switch USB keyboard 
Windows 10 Pro x64 with latest updates, drivers, etc.


----------



## dinerman

rtx2080 sli no boot
rtx2080 and gtx980 boots
gtx980 sli it boots
single rtx2080 it boots in any slot
could it be that the cards don't have enough pcie lanes to boot,skingun can you post your bios settings
so they can be compared because you say yours boots now,we could see if yours matches ours


----------



## skingun

I can post my settings in about 14 hours.


----------



## beavermatic

Wondering if this is related to RAM combination and/or RAM type with the 2080 cards? Or a PCIE/RAM issue with the 208x series

Noticed someone above say if they remove all modules except b1 slot, they can boot with both 2080 gpu's fine.

And then if I put a GPU either in single card (or multi card) on PCIEX16x_1 slot, I get a random code of 92 "test nvram" warning either by itself or in combination with the 0E load vga bios error if using both gpus. A single GPU in pcie16x_3 slot does not produce this error.

Anyone else here using Corsair vengenance RGB? Have the 8gbx4module 32gb kit, doenclocked to 3200ghz from it's rated 3600mhz? Just trying to find a common identifier in this issue.


----------



## elmor

I'm trying to find Founder's edition or other cards to test with. If someone is able to test with only bare minimums attached that would help rule things out (CPU, 1x memory stick, 2x 2080/Ti). Also remove USB devices, use CMOS default settings etc.


----------



## beavermatic

elmor said:


> I'm trying to find Founder's edition or other cards to test with. If someone is able to test with only bare minimums attached that would help rule things out (CPU, 1x memory stick, 2x 2080/Ti). Also remove USB devices, use CMOS default settings etc.


 @elmor
All of my testing so far has been done at stock/cleared cmos settings, with the exception of setting the data mode from ahci to raid. Have tried clearing cmos numerous times. 

Only USB devices plugged in right now are bloody keyboard and Corsair mouse.

Have not yet tried removing down to single stick of ram yet, but will do so once home from work.

if you would like to do a Skype conference where you can see my rig with the two Founders editions in there and I can test some things for you I'm more than happy to help.


----------



## lumen

elmor said:


> I'm trying to find Founder's edition or other cards to test with. If someone is able to test with only bare minimums attached that would help rule things out (CPU, 1x memory stick, 2x 2080/Ti). Also remove USB devices, use CMOS default settings etc.


 @elmor: You tested with a 1950X? Could the 2950X cause the problem?


----------



## Creedcoder

lumen said:


> @elmor: You tested with a 1950X? Could the 2950X cause the problem?


I have the same problem with the 1950X.


----------



## beavermatic

Another thing, it doesn't seem to matter the combination of the PCIE slot being used. If i plug in to 16x slot 1 and slot 3, OE vga bios issue occurs. If I moved either card to 8x slot and leave the other on 16x slot 1 or 3, same error occurs. It's literally as soon as you attempt to connect a second matching 2080/ti to any other pcie slot, the issue occurs.


----------



## dinerman

latest news posted on rog forum 

I called Asus support the night before last and the agent told me they were receiving many escalations regarding this 2080 issue and their engineering team is currently working on resolution. The only information they could provide me was it is indeed related to nvlink interface incompatibility with current BIOS/board, and users of the 20xx series GPU's, whether multipgpu or single gpu may face issues and instability until BIOS update is released.

They also stated there is other issues related to the 20xx series GPU's and screens going black prior to login screen in windows/drive instability with boards at the moment, and this is affecting other boards as well (not just the ZE) and they are working on BIOS updates for these issues too.

They said to expect BIOS updates "soon" and their L2 teams will keep in touch.

Seems the NVlink interface, regardless of multigpu or single, is causing issues with ASUS mobos in general for many. I suspect they never really added support for it since it was technically outside the scope of the market these boards were intended for (well, until now).


----------



## dinerman

i think we are getting somewhere


----------



## skingun

It's working with BIOS version 1003.


----------



## dinerman

i had 1003 before i updated to latest bios and it still would not load


----------



## FuriousReload

elmor said:


> I'm trying to find Founder's edition or other cards to test with. If someone is able to test with only bare minimums attached that would help rule things out (CPU, 1x memory stick, 2x 2080/Ti). Also remove USB devices, use CMOS default settings etc.


Elmor, I have removed everything down to the CPU, Gpu’s and RAM. It didn’t work in that config, so I left everything unplugged and took out all but 1 RAM stick, it then worked flawlessly. It worked even with everything plugged back on. I need my RAM so I went back to full config with 1 GPU enabled for now. I did get to test it with two cards and it ran great. I am wondering if this has anything to do with the FEs BIOS that I’ve read is encrypted different if I read that right. I am going to check that both cards have the same BIOS tonight and see what I can find out.


----------



## dinerman

asus have said its nvlink interface issue they are working on a bios update


----------



## skingun

*Working BIOS Settings for 2080 Ti SLI*

Here are my working settings.

I also have .CMO file but overclock.net won't let me upload it. This is using BIOS version 1003. If you want a copy DM me your email address.


----------



## beavermatic

skingun said:


> Here are my working settings.
> 
> I also have .CMO file but overclock.net won't let me upload it. This is using BIOS version 1003. If you want a copy DM me your email address.



Thanks Skingun! Unfortunately, using 2950x and i guess that processor isn't supported in BIOS 1003. Only other fix for time being to get it to work is to remove all RAM except for the one in B1 slot (which effectively reduices me down to 8gb, lol). Still fingers crossed for a updated BIOS by EOW.


----------



## skingun

beavermatic said:


> Thanks Skingun! Unfortunately, using 2950x and i guess that processor isn't supported in BIOS 1003. Only other fix for time being to get it to work is to remove all RAM except for the one in B1 slot (which effectively reduices me down to 8gb, lol). Still fingers crossed for a updated BIOS by EOW.


Yes. This is a problem with 2950x. Must use 1402. I tried.


----------



## lxvrgs

I've noticed people have issues with the higher core TR sku's however I'm planning on purchasing the 12 core 2920x (or possibly the 1920x if the prices drop more) obviously I'm going to try and OC it a bit would I run into similar VRM issues on this board?


----------



## elmor

ZE 1501 https://www.mediafire.com/file/n9mikbzdi8h9bbv/ROG-ZENITH-EXTREME-ASUS-1501.zip/file

- Should solve 2x RTX 2080 getting stuck at 0E

This was just released internally, someone else seems to have fixed it for us


----------



## skingun

elmor said:


> ZE 1501 https://www.mediafire.com/file/n9mikbzdi8h9bbv/ROG-ZENITH-EXTREME-ASUS-1501.zip/file
> 
> - Should solve 2x RTX 2080 getting stuck at 0E
> 
> This was just released internally, someone else seems to have fixed it for us /forum/images/smilies/smile.gif


Fantastic!


----------



## dinerman

is this the fix for asus zenith extreme x399 rtx2080 problem


----------



## dinerman

i can confirm it works yipppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee


----------



## aTsgRe

@elmor, does it fix anything else? or contain any other fixes?


----------



## dinerman

ok first of all its not showing my 2 rtx2080 cards in windows 10 or gpuz it shows them in bios thou cart see any new features yet ,i don't think we are there yet


----------



## dinerman

at least i can boot with both cards in till bug fixed


----------



## knightriot

I can confirm bios 1501 fixed "CBS settings not clear when press clear bios button" and "after a time, all fan run at max speed" too.


----------



## dinerman

both cards show in cpu z but not in control panal or gpuz


----------



## elmor

aTsgRe said:


> @elmor, does it fix anything else? or contain any other fixes?


Not as far as I'm aware.


----------



## dinerman

ok sorted it had to install nvidia drivers again ,rebooted went back into bios settings to tools selected gpu 1 slot again ,booted up its working both cards detected


----------



## dinerman

my steps to updating to 1501

so i tried it what to expect updating to 1501 and steps i had to make it detect both cards

1 update bios when its updating your fans will spin faster and faster till it updates
go back into bios tools check to see if slot one is first boot 
2 boot into windows 10 reinstall invida display drivers ,or wont see both cards
3 reboot check to see both cards are detected
4 enjoy


----------



## dinerman

elmor thanks for trying to help us, you have been great spending your time trying to sort us out 

regards 
David


----------



## CaptainFist

aTsgRe said:


> @*elmor* , does it fix anything else? or contain any other fixes?


 @elmor i am interested to, changelog?


----------



## beavermatic

@elmor thanks much for the help thus far! appreciate the beta bios

Sadly, the new 1501 beta bios only gets me halfway there it seems. After updating to new bios, the OE Vga bios error is no longer present with 2x2080ti's in nvlink mode, and I can now (kinda-sorta) get to windows with nvlink, though the mobo is continuously throwing a 92 TEST NVRAM code, with delayed posts, system halts after post, issues after windows loads (freezing, screen goes black, system reboots, windows runs at like 1fps when moving mouse). 

After rigourous testing this morning and trial and error... I can narrow it down to my PCIE16X_1 slot. It seems this particular slot hates either of my 2080ti's. If either 2080ti gpu is in this slot, it starts pitching the TEST NVRAM error with very erratic windows behavior, hangs, halts, etc. It does not matter if im running in multipgpu with second card, or if either single card is in that slot. If i put the 2080ti's in any other slot (8x_2/4 or 16x_3), boom... system works fine. No NVRAM test error, no problem. And i can even put in a 2080ti in PCIE16X_3 and the other card in PCIE8X_2, and no issue or error. Runs fine.

It's *literally* as soon as i try plugging in either 2080ti into just the PCIE16X_1 slot either by itself running as single gpu, or with a second 2080ti gpu in another slot. Same outcome.

I have tried everything, clearing CMOS, default settings, even stripping components down to the bare minimum, only KB/M plugged into USB, nothing else except ram and NVMe drive plugged into mobo. Same outcome.


Now one may easily assume its just a bad PCIE16X_1 slot and the board should be replace (and that does seem logical), except here's the odd thing that contradicts that assumption: If I plug any of my older GPU's into PCIE16X_1, either my 980ti or one of my Titan Xp's, not a single problem. No errors with those cards, system boots and runs fine. It's *literally* only occuriung with my 2080ti's (and ive tested both 2080's to rule out a faulty gpu). So... Now i don't even know what to think, lol.


Any suggestions at all would be greatly appreciated because I'm completely lost at this point. Seems there are far more sinister forces at work here in my case :/

For reference, I posted my system specs a few comments back, and this NVRAM issue was occurring prior to 1501 bios update (almost mentioned in my prior comment).


----------



## skingun

Found a flaw with 1003. When DIMM.2 is plugged in get error code 43 on one card. Remove DIMM.2 and it doesn't error.

I will try with new BIOS and see if it fixes this.

Edit: same problem with new BIOS. Reinstalling GPU drivers fixes but when reboot same problem.


----------



## dinerman

is your card seated properly and connected up right no lose connections on card and psu ,have you tried leaving rtx card in and doing a bios reset 
sorry i cant help you


----------



## dinerman

Beavermatic is your card seated properly and connected up right no lose connections on card and psu ,have you tried leaving rtx card in and doing a bios reset
sorry i cant help you


----------



## Brain29

beavermatic said:


> Any suggestions at all would be greatly appreciated because I'm completely lost at this point. Seems there are far more sinister forces at work here in my case :/


This might sound silly but do you think your power supply is big enough in reviews they say 2080 ti grab over 300 watts at load so for two you want 800 watts head room alone 
- the cards are only 20 idle but maybe on boot they try to run at 100%

sadly im not seeing posts like this on other x399 motherboards or i missed them


----------



## dejanh

I just installed the new 1501 UEFI to test it and I’m missing NVME RAID. I have the option present to enable it under PBS and I do, but when I go back into the UEFI, the Raid2Expert option is not there. It’s nowhere to be found in fact. NVME raid is enabled in the UEFI all this time. Thoughts?


----------



## dejanh

Just flashed 1402 to test and I can see the NVMe drives without any issues and can build raid. 1402 works fine with the drives and RAID. Flashing back to 1501 and the same problem returns. NVMe drives plugged into DIMM 2 are not detected and RAID cannot be built. I really don’t get how stuff like this gets past QC. This UEFI is totally borked. 1402 had memory issues, this one does not work for NVMe RAID. What’s next? Version 16xx can’t boot at all?


----------



## aTsgRe

@dejanh, I don't think they do much QA tbh... I am still waiting for the correct WMI interface (for a permanent pwm fix) which is still nowhere to be found... also my NVMe drives do not work properly as well...


----------



## dejanh

Yeah, I’m getting quite fed up with this. I’m stuck on 1003 if I want the system to remotely work correctly. Two subsequent UEFI releases are both with serious faults and neither is usable. What is going on here? Can we get these bugs sorted ASAP?


----------



## skingun

The problem with 1003: If NVME connected to DIMM.2 and 2x 2080 Ti cards connected second card gets error code 43. 

If DIMM.2 not connected both cards work.

So it seems of I want to run 2x 2080 Ti I cannot use DIMM.2.

New BIOS is a discussion for 2nd gen TR as 1403 won't boot at all with 2x 2080 Ti.

@elmor


----------



## dinerman

i dont have this problem 2 rtx2080s both m.2 drives detected


----------



## dinerman

have you tried using the m.2 drives as single drives that's what i did never could get raid to work


----------



## gupsterg

FreeElectron said:


> I am thinking of getting this with the AMD 2950x.
> Is there any serious bug that should make me reconsider?


Had 1950X+ZE since launch, all I can say is it's :specool: .



dejanh said:


> Anybody have a link to this mysterious 0001 UEFI that @gupsterg said works the best so far?


UEFI is same as 1402 AFAIK, but has ASUS WMI implementation. This is the fix so PWM is not lost on fan headers when multiple apps access Super IO chip. This is a "two prong fix" besides the UEFI applications need to be used that use ASUS WMI or you could still encounter issues.

I'm still on UEFI 0001 and no issues to report TBH. Besides doing RAM tweaks I've had now PState 0 OC of 3.9GHz going for few weeks. Only last night and this morning rerun some GSAT tests and no issues, just like other tests done on same profile earlier on in usage.



PwrSuprUsr said:


> What is the current consensus with the Zenith Extreme and 2nd gen Threadripper? These kinds of threads are generally overly negative and kind of skewed but are there any better alternative high end boards for X399 that people recommend?


I :wubsmiley da ZE TBH.



lxvrgs said:


> I've noticed people have issues with the higher core TR sku's however I'm planning on purchasing the 12 core 2920x (or possibly the 1920x if the prices drop more) obviously I'm going to try and OC it a bit would I run into similar VRM issues on this board?


1920X you can't do a PState 0 OC and have CPU drop to lower states, AFAIK a bug from AMD AGESA side. IIRC same occurs on 1900X. Dunno if 2920X would exhibit same issue.


----------



## dejanh

dinerman said:


> have you tried using the m.2 drives as single drives that's what i did never could get raid to work


RAID with two M.2 970 PRO drives plugged into the DIMM.2 slot works fine in 1003 and 1402. It is completely broken in 1501, to the point where the moment I enable RAID in PBS, UEFI stops detecting the 970 drives all together and even disabling RAID at that point does not make the drives visible. I have to do a full CMOS reset on 1501 just to get the system to detect the drives again. Whatever was done in this UEFI release seriously broke proper storage support.

I'm not interested in using them as single drives. I need RAID support.

Edit: Progress, finally! I am able to see the RAIDExpert2 option in the UEFI if I disable all legacy option ROM booting or at the very least set UEFI first on all CSM options. Didn't have this issue to my knowledge. Anyway, testing the memory now since I can now boot Windows and memory stability was an issue for me in 1402.


----------



## gupsterg

Just a heads up peeps, UEFI 1501 does not have ASUS WMI implementation :thumbsdow .









So multiple apps accessing Super IO chip could lead to it going wacko, resulting in fan header PWM crap out  .


----------



## dejanh

Back on UEFI 1003 again. UEFI 1501, just like UEFI 1402 is unstable with my memory. It cannot run the rated 3200MHz and causes memory errors under MemtestHCI. Going back to 1003 resolves all issues and memory runs again just fine at the rated 3200MHz.


----------



## lumen

I can confirm that 1501 still has the fan header and memory problem. Dual GPU is working fine now.


----------



## gupsterg

lumen said:


> I can confirm that 1501 still has the fan header and memory problem. Dual GPU is working fine now.


Yeah I was very surprised 1501 does not have ASUS WMI implementation.

For my HW/configuration, on dual boot W10/Linux Mint UEFI 0001 with ASUS WMI implementation has been sweet, I reverted back last night straight away.


----------



## knightriot

gupsterg said:


> Yeah I was very surprised 1501 does not have ASUS WMI implementation.
> 
> For my HW/configuration, on dual boot W10/Linux Mint UEFI 0001 with ASUS WMI implementation has been sweet, I reverted back last night straight away.


Did 0001 bios support tr2?


----------



## gupsterg

I would assume so, as it uses same AGESA as 1402. I have not noted any lack of options vs 1402 either.


----------



## kossiewossie

gupsterg said:


> Yeah I was very surprised 1501 does not have ASUS WMI implementation.
> 
> For my HW/configuration, on dual boot W10/Linux Mint UEFI 0001 with ASUS WMI implementation has been sweet, I reverted back last night straight away.


do you have a link for this bios? can't seem to find it (might be blind)


----------



## gupsterg

There is no link  .

I would share, but last time I asked if I could share, I was told the UEFI may have issues. I have come across none so far, been in use for ~1mth.

There is past testing within this thread and the other ZE thread, but here is some without a CORE OC but RAM OC.



Spoiler






















I have had no issues with a PState 0 OC of upto 3.9GHz coupled with 3400MHz C15 1T RAM. UEFI 1402/0001 (WMI) has been great for me with this RAM setup, SOC: 1.05V VDIMM: 1.35V. RTC top section is wrong it should read back as:-

1DPC-SR, ProcODT: 60 Ohms, 0/0, 0/0, 0/0, Disabled, Disabled, 48 Ohms, 24 Ohms, 24 Ohms, 24 Ohms, 24 Ohms.


----------



## thagabe

@gupsterg

Please share the wonders of this magical Bios please!!!


----------



## dejanh

@elmor - Any plans to address the memory issues in 1402 and subsequent UEFI? I cannot use either of these with CL14 3200MHz dual-rank Samsung B-die. 1003 works perfectly fine. Memory is simply unstable at the DOCP settings in 1402 and 1501. I tried tweaking VSOC but that does not seem to have an effect either. Also, voltage for the AB/CD DRAM is not stable like in 1003.


----------



## mariusaz

*Same Here*



dejanh said:


> @elmor - Any plans to address the memory issues in 1402 and subsequent UEFI? I cannot use either of these with CL14 3200MHz dual-rank Samsung B-die. 1003 works perfectly fine. Memory is simply unstable at the DOCP settings in 1402 and 1501. I tried tweaking VSOC but that does not seem to have an effect either. Also, voltage for the AB/CD DRAM is not stable like in 1003.


I've been having the exact same problem, system does not run stable whatsoever and have been running 1003 until they get this fixed. Patiently waiting.................


----------



## dejanh

mariusaz said:


> I've been having the exact same problem, system does not run stable whatsoever and have been running 1003 until they get this fixed. Patiently waiting.................


I don't think anybody is fixing anything, and that's precisely why I am very worried. I do not think that anyone thinks that there is a problem at all. I have not seen any evidence of acknowledgement of this issue and nobody asked me or anyone on here to specifically provide any details to assist in finding the root cause.


----------



## mariusaz

dejanh said:


> I don't think anybody is fixing anything, and that's precisely why I am very worried. I do not think that anyone thinks that there is a problem at all. I have not seen any evidence of acknowledgement of this issue and nobody asked me or anyone on here to specifically provide any details to assist in finding the root cause.


I'm giving it until December and if there isn't any progress I'm dumpin the ZE and goin with MSI MEG X399 Creation. My RAM modules are listed as working fine and there's been no issues with dual 2080 TI's. Cheaper than buying new slower RAM I guess. Gonna need to do more research to confirm that before I drop even more money trying to get things working right.


----------



## aTsgRe

@elmor, I have just tried to benchmark my 970 Evo's under Linux (ubuntu 18.04.1) using a live cd as I managed to get it working; the problem occurs on _both_ drives; after benchmarking them a bit using "gnome-disks" utility they both drop out with a dbus error and they are no longer visible to the OS (under linux). This has to be a PCI-Express problem -- this happens on two drives so I don't think it's the drives themselves as they also work perfectly when plugged in another machine. Tried this on the latest 1501 BIOS posted here. Can you please try to fix this? What more information do you want? I can give you debug logs etc w/e you need to fix this as this is basically makes two perfectly good drives practically unusable on this board.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

I have been keeping an eye on this thread. Looks like Asus still has little investment in this ''Flag ship'' board and things still are not fixed for it from when I left this board. Still looks like I made a good call. Feel bad for those who are still sticking loyal with this board/Asus and still getting very little.


----------



## aTsgRe

@ENTERPRISE, what board are you currently using? MSI MEG?


----------



## elmor

gupsterg said:


> Just a heads up peeps, UEFI 1501 does not have ASUS WMI implementation :thumbsdow .
> 
> View attachment 224286
> 
> 
> So multiple apps accessing Super IO chip could lead to it going wacko, resulting in fan header PWM crap out  .



ACPI WMI is not ready yet for Zenith. The 0001 test BIOS does not have the full solution only a partial one which can still cause issues.




dejanh said:


> @elmor - Any plans to address the memory issues in 1402 and subsequent UEFI? I cannot use either of these with CL14 3200MHz dual-rank Samsung B-die. 1003 works perfectly fine. Memory is simply unstable at the DOCP settings in 1402 and 1501. I tried tweaking VSOC but that does not seem to have an effect either. Also, voltage for the AB/CD DRAM is not stable like in 1003.





mariusaz said:


> I've been having the exact same problem, system does not run stable whatsoever and have been running 1003 until they get this fixed. Patiently waiting.................



I'll try to replicate ... Can I get the exact kit part number and which CPU you're using?




aTsgRe said:


> @elmor, I have just tried to benchmark my 970 Evo's under Linux (ubuntu 18.04.1) using a live cd as I managed to get it working; the problem occurs on _both_ drives; after benchmarking them a bit using "gnome-disks" utility they both drop out with a dbus error and they are no longer visible to the OS (under linux). This has to be a PCI-Express problem -- this happens on two drives so I don't think it's the drives themselves as they also work perfectly when plugged in another machine. Tried this on the latest 1501 BIOS posted here. Can you please try to fix this? What more information do you want? I can give you debug logs etc w/e you need to fix this as this is basically makes two perfectly good drives practically unusable on this board.



I need to be able to replicate it in the lab to have someone try to fix it, can't work blindly without knowing what's causing it. Which CPU? Which slots are you plugging them in? Which drives exactly, size and firmware?


----------



## aTsgRe

@elmor, from my previous posts I have given you all of the details asked -- but for brevity I'll repeat it.

"
elmor , the drive shows up but freezes after stressing it a bit -- do you have anything else loaded on the system? I am using quite a few of the PCI-e lanes:

2 x 16x (PCI-e 3.0) for two GPU (1080 Ti on Slot 1 on the board, the one just below CPU socket; 750 Ti Slot 4)
1 x 4x (PCI-e 2.0) for the Network Intel x540 T2 card (Slot 3)
1 x 4x (PCI-e 3.0) for the 900p ssd (Slot 6)

maybe this issue appears when you have all of these PCI-e lanes populated? Also the issue appears regardless of where I put it on the M.2 slots available directly on board -- I've ordered a hyper card to see if putting it directly a slot changes things. Finally, what firmware does your Samsung 970 EVO have? I used the latest one available from Magician (as of 1/10).
"

Additionally,

CPU is 1950x
RAM: G.SKILL F4-3200C16Q-32GTZR 
SSD Drives: Samsung 970 EVO 1TB (Firmware DMX06B0Q), Toshiba SSD THNS51T0DUK NVME 1TB (Firmware 9VNJH_ZPE) -- Slots either DIMM M.2 or the one on the motherboard, same results/issue is across all three M.2 slots.

I have tried with firmware 1402, 1501 and the issue still persists across both -- it's not easy to flash back at 1003 and the new BIOS is much more stable with my settings than 1003 and I'd rather not go back; the drives were working fine with 1003. Please let me know what more information want me to provide you and I will.

Thanks again...


----------



## Jerky_san

@*elmor* 


On my M.2 drive I would receive this in my syslog before crashing
Sep 26 15:08:57 Tower kernel: iommu ivhd2: AMD-Vi: Event logged [ 



Sep 26 15:08:57 Tower kernel: iommu ivhd2: INVALID_DEVICE_REQUEST device=00:00.0 pasid=0x00000 address=0xfffffffdf8000000 flags=0x0a00


----------



## dejanh

elmor said:


> I'll try to replicate ... Can I get the exact kit part number and which CPU you're using?


Hi @elmor. I am using two kits of G.SKILL TridentZ RGB Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 3200 (PC4 25600) Desktop Memory Model F4-3200C14D-32GTZR, for a total of 64GB of memory running in quad-channel configuration. I have used them successfully since the first day at their rated 3200MHz speed and DOCP timings/settings using the 1003 UEFI. The kit is paired with a Threadripper 1950x chip. The issues only started to show up once I upgraded to UEFI 1402 and they persist in UEFI 1501. I rolled back to UEFI 1003 and issues all disappeared. Upgrading again to 1402 or 1501 causes the same issues again, and again downgrading to 1003 causes the issues to disappear. There is definitely something that changed in 1402 and onward that is causing this memory incompatibility. The issues exhibit as data corruption and BSODs in Windows 10 under 1402 and 1501. MemtestHCI confirms that the memory is unstable by returning errors in many cases with less than 50% passes completed. 1003 does not have any corruption or BSODs and MemtestHCI can pass 400%+ tests without a single problem (doing at least a 400% pass is essential in calling the memory stable). Same exact settings using the DOCP profile. No overclocking is being done. I am running stock on the CPU. Manually fiddling around with VSOC and DRAM voltage in 1402 and 1501 seems to have some marginal effect on improving stability, but no combination is stable. Again, no such issue on 1003 and no manual adjustments are required on 1003.


----------



## Jerky_san

dejanh said:


> Hi @*elmor* . I am using two kits of G.SKILL TridentZ RGB Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 3200 (PC4 25600) Desktop Memory Model F4-3200C14D-32GTZR, for a total of 64GB of memory running in quad-channel configuration. I have used them successfully since the first day at their rated 3200MHz speed and DOCP timings/settings using the 1003 UEFI. The kit is paired with a Threadripper 1950x chip. The issues only started to show up once I upgraded to UEFI 1402 and they persist in UEFI 1501. I rolled back to UEFI 1003 and issues all disappeared. Upgrading again to 1402 or 1501 causes the same issues again, and again downgrading to 1003 causes the issues to disappear. There is definitely something that changed in 1402 and onward that is causing this memory incompatibility. The issues exhibit as data corruption and BSODs in Windows 10 under 1402 and 1501. MemtestHCI confirms that the memory is unstable by returning errors in many cases with less than 50% passes completed. 1003 does not have any corruption or BSODs and MemtestHCI can pass 400%+ tests without a single problem (doing at least a 400% pass is essential in calling the memory stable). Same exact settings using the DOCP profile. No overclocking is being done. I am running stock on the CPU. Manually fiddling around with VSOC and DRAM voltage in 1402 and 1501 seems to have some marginal effect on improving stability, but no combination is stable. Again, no such issue on 1003 and no manual adjustments are required on 1003.



Man i have the kit without RGB.. Mine as well isn't stable even though it at first will pass mem tests but first reboot and bam completely unstable. I hope they fix it since currently I'm running at 2800 since I was even getting errors at 2933..


----------



## Jerky_san

Tried my M.2 samsung 970 nvme today again. Was playing around a little and bam.. dead. everything froze and had to hard reset via power switch. I've tried two different vendors of threadripper boards and it seems like none of them are supported well....


----------



## dejanh

Jerky_san said:


> Tried my M.2 samsung 970 nvme today again. Was playing around a little and bam.. dead. everything froze and had to hard reset via power switch. I've tried two different vendors of threadripper boards and it seems like none of them are supported well....


What are you using the 970 for exactly and on what platform? I have no issues with two 970 PROs on the Zenith. They are working perfectly fine in RAID-0 and individually.


----------



## Jerky_san

dejanh said:


> What are you using the 970 for exactly and on what platform? I have no issues with two 970 PROs on the Zenith. They are working perfectly fine in RAID-0 and individually.



Literally booted up windows 10.. did a disk mark, was installing vmware workstation and in the middle of it I noticed my task manager hung. Clicked a folder on my desktop wouldn't open. After about 5 minutes everything on the screen was entirely frozen. Its like it just gets cut off. I previously posted an error message when I had it in unraid just mounted.



2990wx
Zenith x399
64 GB of ram G.Skill


I was testing latency and was going to mount my unraid through vmware workstation so I wouldn't have to deal with this odd latency. The windows install was from when I was testing the zenith before sticking unraid on it and running my gaming machine via a VM instead. Hence why in a previous post I asked @elenor to look at getting the IOMMU's improved further as they stick everything in large groups unless its from a PCI slot. Even some of the USB controllers are in groups with other things that makes passing them a pain in the ass. 



Lately I've been trying to deal with DPC latency in my gaming VM and I wanted to see if it was any different in a straight install of windows 10 as I hadn't tested that previously. Latency is fairly high whether its normal windows or not sadly.


----------



## x3sphere

How many cores are you passing to your gaming VM? If it's a limited amount, did you make sure they are all on the same NUMA node? 

I run Windows inside a VM for gaming and haven't had any DPC latency issues with my 1950X. However, the key was to pass through cores that are local to a certain NUMA node. If I pass through both the nodes (all cores), latency suffers big time. This is fine anyway as I don't need more than 8 cores for Windows.


----------



## Jerky_san

x3sphere said:


> How many cores are you passing to your gaming VM? If it's a limited amount, did you make sure they are all on the same NUMA node?
> 
> I run Windows inside a VM for gaming and haven't had any DPC latency issues with my 1950X. However, the key was to pass through cores that are local to a certain NUMA node. If I pass through both the nodes (all cores), latency suffers big time. This is fine anyway as I don't need more than 8 cores for Windows.


14 cores if I'm using node 0 because I let core 0/31 be used by the system. All 16 of node 2 of the numa. They are the only two with direct memory access. The latency gets much worse if I say have a plex vm/docker running on one of the other numas. Even the opposite numa that has memory access. Been experimenting basically non stop trying things. But if a plex transcode starts the lag can get pretty damn bad. Should mention this is running on Unraid.. ESXI won't work properly with this board for passthroughs and I've not tried ubuntu with virtio.


----------



## lumen

I am using a M.2 samsung 970 evo and I have the same problem. Sometimes (luckily not every day) the devices disapear in the OS, which then freezes. I had it with 1402 and it is still there in 1501. It seems to happen randomly, no special action, sometimes just after boot up.


----------



## aTsgRe

@lumen, @Jerky_san how many PCI-e lanes are you both using? I think this is a PCI-Express bus problem so it might have to do with how many are used.


----------



## larrydavid

Jerky_san said:


> Man i have the kit without RGB.. Mine as well isn't stable even though it at first will pass mem tests but first reboot and bam completely unstable. I hope they fix it since currently I'm running at 2800 since I was even getting errors at 2933..


We're having the same issues on Asrock boards with dual rank memory. I can only run on recent BIOSes with recent AGESA since I'm on a 2950X. I really hope it gets addressed in a future AGESA update.


----------



## Jerky_san

aTsgRe said:


> @*lumen* , @*Jerky_san* how many PCI-e lanes are you both using? I think this is a PCI-Express bus problem so it might have to do with how many are used.





Using slot 2(8x) slot 3(16x) and 3 HDs attatched to SATA. That's it besides when I have the m.2 plugged in. The Slot 2 one was on the bottom(slot 4) running at 4x since its just an HBA and all disks together couldn't utilize the 4x bw. I moved my cards around trying to get better latency to the GPU.


----------



## aTsgRe

@Jerky_san, so how many ACTIVE PCI-e lanes do you currently have? For example with my two GPU's (2 x 16), network card (1 x 4x), and my PCI-e SSD (1 x 4x) I am at 40 without using the SSD's -- If I put my SSD's that goes up to 48, but they don't work, so they are off my machine currently.


----------



## Jerky_san

aTsgRe said:


> @*Jerky_san* , so how many ACTIVE PCI-e lanes do you currently have? For example with my two GPU's (2 x 16), network card (1 x 4x), and my PCI-e SSD (1 x 4x) I am at 40 without using the SSD's -- If I put my SSD's that goes up to 48, but they don't work, so they are off my machine currently.



24x


----------



## aTsgRe

@Jerky_san, okay this might be related -- @elmor can you check if the issue is present if you have > 44~48 PCI-e lanes active at the same time? (preferably with comparable hardware to mine)


----------



## dejanh

larrydavid said:


> We're having the same issues on Asrock boards with dual rank memory. I can only run on recent BIOSes with recent AGESA since I'm on a 2950X. I really hope it gets addressed in a future AGESA update.


That's discouraging. It sounds like it may be a fundamental problem with the AGESA. I want to see what @elmor comes back with after testing. In the meantime the more we report this the better.


----------



## lumen

aTsgRe said:


> @*lumen* , @*Jerky_san* how many PCI-e lanes are you both using? I think this is a PCI-Express bus problem so it might have to do with how many are used.



2 x 16 for GPUs, 2 x 4 for two M2 SSDs, so 40 lanes. Additionally I have 4 SATA drives connected, but they do not need extra PCIe lanes as they are operated by the 4 extra chipset lanes, right?


----------



## aTsgRe

@lumen, yes that's correct the chipset uses it's own dedicated PCI-e lanes (one x4) -- so okay from my understanding your issue occurs much more frequently than @Jerky_san and you are using similar amount of PCI-e lanes to me so that's a very good hint to @elmor.

I am using the most amount of PCI-e lanes (48) with my two ssd's and 40 when they are not there; @lumen you are using 32 lanes and 40 with the PCI-e and @Jerky_san is using 24x without the SSD's 32x with.

@elmor, please give me an ACK that you read this and will look into it, thanks. If you need anything else, please shout.


----------



## mariusaz

elmor said:


> ACPI WMI is not ready yet for Zenith. The 0001 test BIOS does not have the full solution only a partial one which can still cause issues.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'll try to replicate ... Can I get the exact kit part number and which CPU you're using?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I need to be able to replicate it in the lab to have someone try to fix it, can't work blindly without knowing what's causing it. Which CPU? Which slots are you plugging them in? Which drives exactly, size and firmware?



I'm using TridentZ RGB F4-3200C14Q-64GTZR (DDR4-3200 PC4-25600 16GB X 4 CL 14-14-14-34 1.35 v) AMD Ryzen™ Threadripper™ 1950X Processor
This seems to work fine on 1003 using Standard DOCP, upgrading past that the system crashes on me constantly.


----------



## dejanh

mariusaz said:


> I'm using TridentZ RGB F4-3200C14Q-64GTZR (DDR4-3200 PC4-25600 16GB X 4 CL 14-14-14-34 1.35 v) AMD Ryzen™ Threadripper™ 1950X Processor
> This seems to work fine on 1003 using Standard DOCP, upgrading past that the system crashes on me constantly.


Looks like we're pretty much using the exact same memory with the exact same chip and board, and the exact same experience.


----------



## <sigh>

That memory is not considered AMD compatible by the manufacturer, it's meant for Intel chips.

https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-3200c14q-32gtzr for Intel

https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-3200c14q-32gtzrx for AMD

Granted the specs look identical but GSkill market the (X) versions specifically for AMD, I have the AMD version and have run at 3200 out of the box on both Gen 1 and Gen 2 TR through the last years worth of BIOS revisions with no issues.

Perhaps a support request to GSkill might get you pointed in the right direction. (at least to understand the specific differences)


----------



## mariusaz

Their site doesn't even show a 64GB or 128GB kit @ 3200. I'm guessing the timings are too aggressive for that board/CPU? Does it cause any issues to downclock ram? (There isn't even a 3200 option for TR2) I'm gonna try manually setting the timings to their 2933 RAM and see if it works with the current BIOS.


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

Quick post RE. the 1920X 1900X lack of P-State OC funcionality. (P-State OC will not downvolt at same time as downclock....working on 1950X)

It has been several months since I reported the issue to AMD and all I have to show for my efforts is a wall of silence.

I have to fight constantly to maintain my support ticket open and they have not even acknowledged reproducing the problem, let alone given an ETA for a fix.

Pretty rude basically.

:thumbsdow


----------



## Benniphx

<sigh> said:


> That memory is not considered AMD compatible by the manufacturer, it's meant for Intel chips.
> 
> https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-3200c14q-32gtzr for Intel
> 
> https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-3200c14q-32gtzrx for AMD
> 
> Granted the specs look identical but GSkill market the (X) versions specifically for AMD, I have the AMD version and have run at 3200 out of the box on both Gen 1 and Gen 2 TR through the last years worth of BIOS revisions with no issues.
> 
> Perhaps a support request to GSkill might get you pointed in the right direction. (at least to understand the specific differences)


I have 2 kits of f4-3200c14q-32gtzr in my Zenith so 8 dims and i do not have issues running 64 gB @ 3200 with the docp settings with a 1950x since the beginning as well. what is the difference? they have the same speck


----------



## RoBiK

<sigh> said:


> That memory is not considered AMD compatible by the manufacturer, it's meant for Intel chips.
> 
> https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-3200c14q-32gtzr for Intel
> 
> https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-3200c14q-32gtzrx for AMD
> 
> Granted the specs look identical but GSkill market the (X) versions specifically for AMD, I have the AMD version and have run at 3200 out of the box on both Gen 1 and Gen 2 TR through the last years worth of BIOS revisions with no issues.
> 
> Perhaps a support request to GSkill might get you pointed in the right direction. (at least to understand the specific differences)


The F4-3200C14Q-32GTZR is on the Memory Qualified Vendors List for this board: https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...E/ROG_Zenith_Extreme_Memory_QVL_2133-3600.pdf
Even better, this memory kit is exactly the same kit that AMD has packed inside it's Threadripper review kits alongside the Zenith board... i doesn't get much better than that.


----------



## dejanh

<sigh> said:


> That memory is not considered AMD compatible by the manufacturer, it's meant for Intel chips.
> 
> https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-3200c14q-32gtzr for Intel
> 
> https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-3200c14q-32gtzrx for AMD
> 
> Granted the specs look identical but GSkill market the (X) versions specifically for AMD, I have the AMD version and have run at 3200 out of the box on both Gen 1 and Gen 2 TR through the last years worth of BIOS revisions with no issues.
> 
> Perhaps a support request to GSkill might get you pointed in the right direction. (at least to understand the specific differences)


The memory works perfect fine with Threadripper. It's only UEFI 1402 and newer that have a problem.



mariusaz said:


> Their site doesn't even show a 64GB or 128GB kit @ 3200. I'm guessing the timings are too aggressive for that board/CPU? Does it cause any issues to downclock ram? (There isn't even a 3200 option for TR2) I'm gonna try manually setting the timings to their 2933 RAM and see if it works with the current BIOS.


No, it's not too aggressive. 1003 works fine. Guys, if something works fine on the Zenith on prior UEFI and then it doesn't on newer ones, the problem is not with the memory, it's with the board.



Benniphx said:


> I have 2 kits of f4-3200c14q-32gtzr in my Zenith so 8 dims and i do not have issues running 64 gB @ 3200 with the docp settings with a 1950x since the beginning as well. what is the difference? they have the same speck


Exactly my point. No issues existed prior to the introduction of UEFI 1402. I am running 1003 and I have no problems at all. As soon as I move to 1402 or 1501 problems start.



RoBiK said:


> The F4-3200C14Q-32GTZR is on the Memory Qualified Vendors List for this board: https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/...E/ROG_Zenith_Extreme_Memory_QVL_2133-3600.pdf
> Even better, this memory kit is exactly the same kit that AMD has packed inside it's Threadripper review kits alongside the Zenith board... i doesn't get much better than that.


Thank you  My point exactly. Something got busted by the FW team in the new versions of UEFI. I can even visually see that the DRAM voltages are not stable like in 1003. VSOC also doesn't work properly. It's not the memory. It's the board and in fact it's not the board either, it's the FW of the board, the new UEFI versions that have issues.


----------



## aTsgRe

@elmor, can you please give me a confirmation that you've looked what was said above regarding the NVMe issues and you are/will be investigating it?


----------



## thagabe

Running Samsung 970 PRO 512GB on heat-spreader m.2 and no issues running native windows 10 install there. I am using 2x samsung evo 850 msata with converters to m.2 on the dimm.2 adapter. Both show up and are running on software raid btrfs arch linux partition. No issues 1003, 1401, 1501. Maybe faulty board? Maybe try to re-seat your tr4 because I did experience some issues before re-seating my cpu. 

Using Gskill 2x8gb tridentz made for AMD and timings are found via docp, might fix timing once my next kit arrives next week.

@elmor 

Can I get in on this 0001 WMI bios? I'd like to play around with fan control as I am running a fan heavy case (~9 fans) and some have issues coming back after a system sleep. I have yet to install anything mission critical on my system so I'm ok with bugs and testing.


----------



## elmor

I finally managed to get another EVO drive, will keep testing.

You can try the 0001 BIOS if you want, but it doesn't fully fix the fan problem. It would just make it less prominent.

ZE 0001 https://1drv.ms/u/s!Atmpv-6qHr_6oap4FHiwiYFb31FFDA


----------



## aTsgRe

@elmor, thanks for the update -- please also note that since I think this is a PCI-Express bus bug try to populate as many lanes as possible with comparable hardware to mine... I listed all of the firmware/versions etc. Please let me know if there is anything else you need.

Thanks for being the last man standing with the ZE support saga...

As a side note, do you have any rough outline when the WMI ACPI will be out? Is is months away, or weeks away?


----------



## gupsterg

elmor said:


> You can try the 0001 BIOS if you want, but it doesn't fully fix the fan problem. It would just make it less prominent.
> 
> ZE 0001 https://1drv.ms/u/s!Atmpv-6qHr_6oap4FHiwiYFb31FFDA


I have added this to OP of the other ZE thread. In the UEFI section I placed this between 1402 and 1501 as can only assume by time stamp of UEFIs that it does not contain the RTX fix that UEFI 1501 has?

I think several who have fan problems will appreciate this release  .

I'd say due to how I use the rig, I experienced very little PWM issues, even on past UEFIs. For some this has been a real hair puller. Personally I think ASUS has been dropping the ball on releasing a beta or full fix on this aspect; regardless of other priorities UEFI team have. I believe any purchaser would/will just feel :axesmiley, that a board of this cost can't do fan PWM correctly.


----------



## thagabe

Double post! Deleting this one for uniformity.


----------



## thagabe

elmor said:


> I finally managed to get another EVO drive, will keep testing.
> 
> You can try the 0001 BIOS if you want, but it doesn't fully fix the fan problem. It would just make it less prominent.
> 
> ZE 0001 https://1drv.ms/u/s!Atmpv-6qHr_6oap4FHiwiYFb31FFDA


Thanks! I'll try it tonight.

On a separate note, will asus include a bios option to disable hpet?


----------



## elmor

Still not able to find this PCI-e issue.

CPU default and overclocked to 3.8G
Memory default and overclocked to 3200 MHz

PCIEX16_1 - Titan X (Pascal)
PCIEX8_2 - GTX1080
PCIEX16_3 - GTX1080
PCIEX8/X4_4 - GTX1080Ti

M.2_1 - 970 EVO 250GB
DIMM.2 M.2_1 - 970 EVO 250GB
DIMM.2 M.2_2 - 960 EVO 250GB

CrystalDiskMark running on each drive at the same time as GPUPI 32B running on all cards. Tested several times. Also added a test with all 3 drives in NVMe RAID.


----------



## thagabe

@aTsgRe

I'm running a single Nvme samsung 970 pro under the heatshield removed the 970 sticker from the stick and placed it right under the thermal pad. 1.3 Gbps with temps around 45-50C. Setting are no nvme raid/ 1402 (0001WMI)/ clean install of windows 10 1803/ uefi only no legacy stuff under "boot" in bios/ samsung nvme driver. Any deviation from this? Maybe you need to resit your TR4 and torque it down to spec. Could be faulty nvme drive or maybe the mobo is bad.


----------



## v-snejok

mariusaz said:


> I'm using TridentZ RGB F4-3200C14Q-64GTZR (DDR4-3200 PC4-25600 16GB X 4 CL 14-14-14-34 1.35 v) AMD Ryzen™ Threadripper™ 1950X Processor
> This seems to work fine on 1003 using Standard DOCP, upgrading past that the system crashes on me constantly.


 @elmor Was this fixed? I have the same RAM F4-3200C14Q-64GTZR, it is better not update, and wait for new versions of the BIOS?


----------



## aTsgRe

@elmor, I understand that in your particular configuration it works but in mine it does not... what information you require in order to show you that this is a problem? A video of the crash or something similar would be OK?


----------



## elmor

v-snejok said:


> mariusaz said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm using TridentZ RGB F4-3200C14Q-64GTZR (DDR4-3200 PC4-25600 16GB X 4 CL 14-14-14-34 1.35 v) AMD Ryzen™️ Threadripper™️ 1950X Processor
> This seems to work fine on 1003 using Standard DOCP, upgrading past that the system crashes on me constantly.
> 
> 
> 
> @elmor Was this fixed? I have the same RAM F4-3200C14Q-64GTZR, it is better not update, and wait for new versions of the BIOS?
Click to expand...

I have not been able to locte this kit yet, working on it.



aTsgRe said:


> @elmor, I understand that in your particular configuration it works but in mine it does not... what information you require in order to show you that this is a problem? A video of the crash or something similar would be OK?


I don't doubt that you have a problem, but without being able to replicate it in our lab it's very difficult to find the source. We need to find further clues on what might cause this. Perhaps someone could try downgrading their PCIe link to Gen1/2 in order to rule out signaling issues?


----------



## dejanh

elmor said:


> I have not been able to locte this kit yet, working on it.


2x 32GB kit will work just as well. Not sure if it will be easier to find. I posted the part code some posts back.


----------



## aTsgRe

@elmor, I will be having the Hyper kits delivered to me soon enough I will be able to test more easily with them as now I will be able to test against a PCI-e x4 3.0 on the Hero as well -- am away for a bit though (~15d) so this will take a back seat since I don't have access to the machine atm.


----------



## elmor

ZE 1601 https://www.mediafire.com/file/yx1f7qlk0yzf8kc/ROG-ZENITH-EXTREME-ASUS-1601.zip/file

- No ACPI WMI yet
- Fixes some USB devices not working or stalling at B4
- Fixes "AMD CBS item not resetting after Clear CMOS"
- If we're lucky it might fix more things, didn't have time to try it yet



dejanh said:


> 2x 32GB kit will work just as well. Not sure if it will be easier to find. I posted the part code some posts back.


Finally located one kit and verified it's unstable. But I won't have time to keep testing until Monday.

I have however come up with a few suspects have been changed that along with 2990WX support. Can you see if any of the below makes your memory stable again?

Extreme Tweaker\DRAM Timing Control\
- ProcODT = 60ohm (can also try 53.3ohm)
- MemCadBusClkDrvStren = 24 ohm
- MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren = 24 ohm
- MemCadBusCsOdtStren = 24 ohm
- MemCadBusCkeStren = 24 ohm

AMD CBS\UMC Common Options\DDR4 Common Options\Phy Configuration\PMU Training
- DFE Read Training = Enabled (can also try Disabled)
- FFE Write Training = Enabled (can also try Disabled)


----------



## Jerky_san

elmor said:


> ZE 1601 https://www.mediafire.com/file/yx1f7qlk0yzf8kc/ROG-ZENITH-EXTREME-ASUS-1601.zip/file
> 
> - No ACPI WMI yet
> - Fixes some USB devices not working or stalling at B4
> - Fixes "AMD CBS item not resetting after Clear CMOS"
> - If we're lucky it might fix more things, didn't have time to try it yet
> 
> 
> 
> Finally located one kit and verified it's unstable. But I won't have time to keep testing until Monday.
> 
> I have however come up with a few suspects have been changed that along with 2990WX support. Can you see if any of the below makes your memory stable again?
> 
> Extreme Tweaker\DRAM Timing Control\
> - ProcODT = 60ohm (can also try 53.3ohm)
> - MemCadBusClkDrvStren = 24 ohm
> - MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren = 24 ohm
> - MemCadBusCsOdtStren = 24 ohm
> - MemCadBusCkeStren = 24 ohm
> 
> AMD CBS\UMC Common Options\DDR4 Common Options\Phy Configuration\PMU Training
> - DFE Read Training = Enabled (can also try Disabled)
> - FFE Write Training = Enabled (can also try Disabled)



Going to give it a try in a few minutes. I know we rag on you Elmor but thank you a lot for trying to help us. ASRock wouldn't even respond to my tickets when I complained to them so the fact we at least have someone who is willing to at least listen and even tries to find solutions for us makes me feel a lot better.


Tried both ProcODT and all settings below. Also tried with and without the DFE enabled/disabled. Also boosted the SOC voltage to 1.05 and ddr4 volts to 1.4v just to see. Initially with just the changes it restarted and booted but it wasn't a "cold" boot. Went to mem test and failed with hundreds of errors within 5 minutes. Hit escape and it cold rebooted I am guessing due to the memory errors. After that all settings I tried it would boot from a cold boot and fail to post and ask me to try to fix it before continuing.

Extreme Tweaker\DRAM Timing Control\
- ProcODT = 60ohm (can also try 53.3ohm) 
- MemCadBusClkDrvStren = 24 ohm
- MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren = 24 ohm
- MemCadBusCsOdtStren = 24 ohm
- MemCadBusCkeStren = 24 ohm

AMD CBS\UMC Common Options\DDR4 Common Options\Phy Configuration\PMU Training
- DFE Read Training = Enabled (can also try Disabled)
- FFE Write Training = Enabled (can also try Disabled


----------



## dejanh

elmor said:


> ZE 1601 https://www.mediafire.com/file/yx1f7qlk0yzf8kc/ROG-ZENITH-EXTREME-ASUS-1601.zip/file
> 
> - No ACPI WMI yet
> - Fixes some USB devices not working or stalling at B4
> - Fixes "AMD CBS item not resetting after Clear CMOS"
> - If we're lucky it might fix more things, didn't have time to try it yet
> 
> 
> 
> Finally located one kit and verified it's unstable. But I won't have time to keep testing until Monday.
> 
> I have however come up with a few suspects have been changed that along with 2990WX support. Can you see if any of the below makes your memory stable again?
> 
> Extreme Tweaker\DRAM Timing Control\
> - ProcODT = 60ohm (can also try 53.3ohm)
> - MemCadBusClkDrvStren = 24 ohm
> - MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren = 24 ohm
> - MemCadBusCsOdtStren = 24 ohm
> - MemCadBusCkeStren = 24 ohm
> 
> AMD CBS\UMC Common Options\DDR4 Common Options\Phy Configuration\PMU Training
> - DFE Read Training = Enabled (can also try Disabled)
> - FFE Write Training = Enabled (can also try Disabled)


I am going to try these settings over the weekend and report back. Any particular order you want me to do the test in? One setting at a time or all at once? Any groups of settings to change together?


Jerky_san said:


> Going to give it a try in a few minutes. I know we rag on you Elmor but thank you a lot for trying to help us. ASRock wouldn't even respond to my tickets when I complained to them so the fact we at least have someone who is willing to at least listen and even tries to find solutions for us makes me feel a lot better.
> 
> 
> Tried both ProcODT and all settings below. Also tried with and without the DFE enabled/disabled. Also boosted the SOC voltage to 1.05 and ddr4 volts to 1.4v just to see. Initially with just the changes it restarted and booted but it wasn't a "cold" boot. Went to mem test and failed with hundreds of errors within 5 minutes. Hit escape and it cold rebooted I am guessing due to the memory errors. After that all settings I tried it would boot from a cold boot and fail to post and ask me to try to fix it before continuing.
> 
> Extreme Tweaker\DRAM Timing Control\
> - ProcODT = 60ohm (can also try 53.3ohm)
> - MemCadBusClkDrvStren = 24 ohm
> - MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren = 24 ohm
> - MemCadBusCsOdtStren = 24 ohm
> - MemCadBusCkeStren = 24 ohm
> 
> AMD CBS\UMC Common Options\DDR4 Common Options\Phy Configuration\PMU Training
> - DFE Read Training = Enabled (can also try Disabled)
> - FFE Write Training = Enabled (can also try Disabled


That's discouraging. I will try the settings anyway just to add to this thread but I expect the same net result. Better back-up my OS before I mess around with this though...I am intending to try this with the newest UEFI 1601. What UEFI did you use?


----------



## dejanh

@elmor - Quick update that I did not get a chance to do any testing yet. I had a number of urgent things come up during the weekend that are still dragging on so I will get back to this as soon as my schedule clears up a bit. I expect a few days.


----------



## elmor

dejanh said:


> @elmor - Quick update that I did not get a chance to do any testing yet. I had a number of urgent things come up during the weekend that are still dragging on so I will get back to this as soon as my schedule clears up a bit. I expect a few days.


Yes, still testing.


----------



## elmor

https://www.overclock.net/forum/27694588-post38965.html

I'm really sorry guys, but the will be no Asus support from me anymore.

I did not manage to get my system stable with F4-3200C14Q-64GTZR @ 3200 MHz, but I did get the 1003 settings. At least they should provide a starting point:

RttNom = Off
RttWr = 80 ohm
RttPark = 240 ohm

AddrCmdSetup = 63
CsOdtSetup = 63
CkeSetup = 11

MemCadBusClkDrvStren = 24 ohm
MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren = 24 ohm
MemCadBusCsOdtStren = 24 ohm
MemCadBusCkeStren = 24 ohm


----------



## thagabe

@elmor

I am shooken, sadden, and rattled. But I hope only the best for you, your efforts have been appreciated and the ecosystem is better off because of you.


----------



## skingun

Sad to hear this @elmor Thank you for all your hard work.


----------



## Fitzcaraldo

Zenith is a dead platform with this, basically. Still too many issues. Thank you for your support, @elmor !


----------



## lumen

(( Now I really regret I spent over 500 bucks for the ZE. Until now I had some hope things will get sorted. Was probably my last asus board. Very sad story. Anyhow, thanks @elmor for your support.


----------



## Jerky_san

@elmor sorry to hear that hope your new place is better. Sad face though no more bridge for communication ;-;


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

elmor said:


> I'm really sorry guys, but the will be no Asus support from me anymore.


Thanks for all the help...good luck with the new stuff!


----------



## lumen

Some good news, the 1601 bios fixed for me the fan problems, I can now control the fans with fan xpert. And my memory is more stable, it runs now at 3200. With 1501 I only managed to run the system at 3133. Now even with 3466, it doesn't crash at post. I can boot a linux, but it is not stable, and windows doesn't boot at all. But, higher memory clocks than 3200 are not supposed to work on this platform anyhow, right?


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

lumen said:


> But, higher memory clocks than 3200 are not supposed to work on this platform anyhow, right?


Challenge accepted


----------



## dejanh

elmor said:


> https://www.overclock.net/forum/27694588-post38965.html
> 
> I'm really sorry guys, but the will be no Asus support from me anymore.
> 
> I did not manage to get my system stable with F4-3200C14Q-64GTZR @ 3200 MHz, but I did get the 1003 settings. At least they should provide a starting point:
> 
> RttNom = Off
> RttWr = 80 ohm
> RttPark = 240 ohm
> 
> AddrCmdSetup = 63
> CsOdtSetup = 63
> CkeSetup = 11
> 
> MemCadBusClkDrvStren = 24 ohm
> MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren = 24 ohm
> MemCadBusCsOdtStren = 24 ohm
> MemCadBusCkeStren = 24 ohm


This is very unfortunate news. I'm afraid that for myself at least I am not skilled enough at memory overclocking to really be able to properly troubleshoot and tweak this over time. Unless one of the upcoming UEFI versions stabilizes things or the specific settings you posted above help, I am afraid that I will be stuck on 1003 going forward. I suppose eventually I may be able to get a different board but this hurts a lot considering that I literally paid $700 CAD for this board. Such an expensive product, yet so, so very deficient. I do hope somebody more skilled at memory OCing can help sort this out. Any hope for somebody to at least explain what each of the above settings is supposed to do?
@elmor specifically, I just wish to say thank you for the support that you have provided to date and wish you the best of luck in your new ventures 


lumen said:


> Some good news, the 1601 bios fixed for me the fan problems, I can now control the fans with fan xpert. And my memory is more stable, it runs now at 3200. With 1501 I only managed to run the system at 3133. Now even with 3466, it doesn't crash at post. I can boot a linux, but it is not stable, and windows doesn't boot at all. But, higher memory clocks than 3200 are not supposed to work on this platform anyhow, right?


What memory are you running and how did you determine that you are actually _stable_ at 3200MHz?


----------



## thagabe

@elmor

I know you won't be bug tracking anymore but would you have any info on Asus WMI for the zenith? Since trying WMI I have been convinced that the pwm is much better with this interface.


----------



## Jerky_san

Arne Saknussemm said:


> Challenge accepted



Can you post full timing info? Is it full stable?


----------



## lumen

dejanh said:


> What memory are you running and how did you determine that you are actually _stable_ at 3200MHz?



I have G.Skill Trident Z RGB DIMM 4 x 16GB, DDR4-3466, CL16-18-18-38 (F4-3466C16Q-64GTZR). Stable means for me, that I can use the computer for several days, playing games, encoding videos, running virtual machines, etc. without any blue screens or application errors. OK, it is no real proof, maybe I should use some mem test tools...


Edit: You are right. I did a aida64 stability test, and it failed with 3200MHz, but it ran perfectly at 3133MHz.


Edit 2: And I was too optimistic about the fan control as well. It now works sometimes, but sometimes it completely fails. F...

Let's hope for a wonder / bios 17xx that fixes all. Or buy another board


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

Jerky_san said:


> Can you post full timing info? Is it full stable?


It's the C15 1T 3466 Stilt profile from the ZE BIOS just tuned up to 3600 with 1.5v DRAM voltage and 1.13125 SOC

https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?99129-Goodbye-Intel-hello-AMD/page10#post707629


----------



## dejanh

lumen said:


> I have G.Skill Trident Z RGB DIMM 4 x 16GB, DDR4-3466, CL16-18-18-38 (F4-3466C16Q-64GTZR). Stable means for me, that I can use the computer for several days, playing games, encoding videos, running virtual machines, etc. without any blue screens or application errors. OK, it is no real proof, maybe I should use some mem test tools...
> 
> 
> Edit: You are right. I did a aida64 stability test, and it failed with 3200MHz, but it ran perfectly at 3133MHz.
> 
> 
> Edit 2: And I was too optimistic about the fan control as well. It now works sometimes, but sometimes it completely fails. F...
> 
> Let's hope for a wonder / bios 17xx that fixes all. Or buy another board


So this is very interesting because my memory is 100% stable at 3133Mhz as well in the newer UEFI, but not at 3200MHz. At 3200MHz it is only stable in UEFI 1003 and earlier. Considering that the difference is literally 2.1% I will just run my memory at 3133MHz but I still want to know what is going on here. Now more than ever I am convinced that this is just some idiotic error of a simple setting not getting set automatically to the correct value. 67MHz difference between 100% stability and 100% instability on the same UEFI (and yet 100% stable on UEFI 1003 and before at 3200MHz) literally makes no sense what-so-ever. Can anyone with more knowledge chime in? @elmor, I understand you no longer work for ASUS but you seem knowledgeable about this - any ideas? 

Anyone know of a tool that could be used to extract all of the exact timings and settings for DRAM that are set when the memory is in DOCP mode in 1003 and then in newer UEFI? I suspect that if I can get the exact settings from both sides the difference will become apparent quickly. Is there any tool that can do this?


----------



## gupsterg

@dejanh

Use Ryzen Timings Checker it will pull out all the info you'd need on UEFI's prior to 1402/AGESA that supports TR2. Use also ASUS Turbo V as this will catch things like voltages, etc. This version of ASUS Turbo V has worked well for me on ASUS ZE (used upto UEFI 0001 WMI) and on C6H.

I set a lot of the voltages, etc now within Tweakers Paradise as well, as Turbo V allowed to me to see what UEFI defaults [Auto] was. I had noted on C6H if CPU Aux 3.3V was left [Auto] and we OC it got increased as per an "auto rule", so I reckon ASUS Turbo V is handy to see these changes  .


----------



## dejanh

gupsterg said:


> @dejanh
> 
> Use Ryzen Timings Checker it will pull out all the info you'd need on UEFI's prior to 1402/AGESA that supports TR2. Use also ASUS Turbo V as this will catch things like voltages, etc. This version of ASUS Turbo V has worked well for me on ASUS ZE (used upto UEFI 0001 WMI) and on C6H.
> 
> I set a lot of the voltages, etc now within Tweakers Paradise as well, as Turbo V allowed to me to see what UEFI defaults [Auto] was. I had noted on C6H if CPU Aux 3.3V was left [Auto] and we OC it got increased as per an "auto rule", so I reckon ASUS Turbo V is handy to see these changes  .


Thank you sir! I have downloaded all of the tools and will do some comparisons when I have a bit more time and try to figure out how to make 3200MHz work properly. Hopefully we will get the new AGESA 1.1.0.2 in the meantime as well, since that already rolled out to the new Gigabyte X399 EXTREME board and perhaps some others. As a side note, I ran a quick memory benchmark and I'm quite satisfied with the overall performance even at 3133MHz (I basically see no difference from 3200MHz). For now the system is humming along nicely on UEFI 1601 and memory limited to 3133MHz.


----------



## gupsterg

@dejanh

NP  .

Between 3133 vs 3200 I'd think it's gonna be tight difference. This is one reason why I currently am on 3400MHz vs 3466MHz. As the difference is marginal at best on "performance", but I feel the rig as whole is not being pushed and voltages are basically stock. Other than SOC, even then so low IMO.

Would I jump from ASUS? not really, yes ZE may not have the VRM of MEG, but damn it has all the options in UEFI (link), to eek every thing from HW.


----------



## elmor

thagabe said:


> @elmor
> 
> I know you won't be bug tracking anymore but would you have any info on Asus WMI for the zenith? Since trying WMI I have been convinced that the pwm is much better with this interface.



It was being worked on, and I helped them solve the final issues before I left. There are still people pushing to get this done, but I'm not sure of any timeframe.




dejanh said:


> So this is very interesting because my memory is 100% stable at 3133Mhz as well in the newer UEFI, but not at 3200MHz. At 3200MHz it is only stable in UEFI 1003 and earlier. Considering that the difference is literally 2.1% I will just run my memory at 3133MHz but I still want to know what is going on here. Now more than ever I am convinced that this is just some idiotic error of a simple setting not getting set automatically to the correct value. 67MHz difference between 100% stability and 100% instability on the same UEFI (and yet 100% stable on UEFI 1003 and before at 3200MHz) literally makes no sense what-so-ever. Can anyone with more knowledge chime in? @elmor, I understand you no longer work for ASUS but you seem knowledgeable about this - any ideas?
> 
> Anyone know of a tool that could be used to extract all of the exact timings and settings for DRAM that are set when the memory is in DOCP mode in 1003 and then in newer UEFI? I suspect that if I can get the exact settings from both sides the difference will become apparent quickly. Is there any tool that can do this?



Either some change we did to the "Auto" rules which I posted, but from what I can tell that's not the case. The other possibility is a change from AMD in the firmware controlling the IMC which made the situation worse for some.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

elmor said:


> https://www.overclock.net/forum/27694588-post38965.html
> 
> I'm really sorry guys, but the will be no Asus support from me anymore.
> 
> I did not manage to get my system stable with F4-3200C14Q-64GTZR @ 3200 MHz, but I did get the 1003 settings. At least they should provide a starting point:
> 
> RttNom = Off
> RttWr = 80 ohm
> RttPark = 240 ohm
> 
> AddrCmdSetup = 63
> CsOdtSetup = 63
> CkeSetup = 11
> 
> MemCadBusClkDrvStren = 24 ohm
> MemCadBusAddrCmdDrvStren = 24 ohm
> MemCadBusCsOdtStren = 24 ohm
> MemCadBusCkeStren = 24 ohm


Thanks for all the support you have given the community with the Zenith, I wish you the best of luck in your new venture. I guess we will have to see if Asus continues to support this board in a timely fashion.


----------



## dejanh

elmor said:


> Either some change we did to the "Auto" rules which I posted, but from what I can tell that's not the case. The other possibility is a change from AMD in the firmware controlling the IMC which made the situation worse for some.


Curious. As I mentioned, when I have more time I will get back to this and see if I can find out what happened. Then there is the possibility that new 1.1.0.2 AGESA may address the issue but I don't know when ASUS is planning to integrate it.


----------



## elmor

I managed to modify the latest ZE BIOS 1601 with added ACPI WMI ASUSHW support, the fully fixed version. It's an unofficial modification by myself, which means the BIOS image is not signed and can't be flashed with EZFlash. It can however be flashed using USB BIOS Flashback just like an official BIOS. HWInfo picks up the ACPI WMI support and uses it by default. I didn't have time to try other software.

https://www.mediafire.com/file/wzaawyso6ro2zoy/ROG-ZENITH-EXTREME-ASUS-1601-ASUSHW.zip/file


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

Thanks elmor!

EDIT: working fine here.:thumb:


----------



## dejanh

elmor said:


> I managed to modify the latest ZE BIOS 1601 with added ACPI WMI ASUSHW support, the fully fixed version. It's an unofficial modification by myself, which means the BIOS image is not signed and can't be flashed with EZFlash. It can however be flashed using USB BIOS Flashback just like an official BIOS. HWInfo picks up the ACPI WMI support and uses it by default. I didn't have time to try other software.
> 
> https://www.mediafire.com/file/wzaawyso6ro2zoy/ROG-ZENITH-EXTREME-ASUS-1601-ASUSHW.zip/file


This is great!  Any chance you can post instructions how we could do this ourselves going forward, in case that new UEFI updates are released, ASUS excludes the WMI fixes and you're not around?


----------



## thagabe

@elmor 

O'captain my captain. You are awesome, my friend! 

@dejanh

I think he had to sign NDA's and stuff so he is able to play around with the source. Not something we mere mortals can get our grubby little hands on.


----------



## zodiacsoulmate

@elmor Hope you all the best, before you leave try convice someone to take your position lol


----------



## dejanh

thagabe said:


> I think he had to sign NDA's and stuff so he is able to play around with the source. Not something we mere mortals can get our grubby little hands on.


I'm not sure that's really the case. I have edited many UEFI and BIOS in the past. If you know what modules to replace its usually not too hard. Heck, we should be able to extract the WMI parts from the modified 1601 UEFI and use them again in future UEFI, until ASUS fully bakes this into future releases.


----------



## elmor

dejanh said:


> This is great!  Any chance you can post instructions how we could do this ourselves going forward, in case that new UEFI updates are released, ASUS excludes the WMI fixes and you're not around?





thagabe said:


> @elmor
> 
> O'captain my captain. You are awesome, my friend!
> 
> @dejanh
> 
> I think he had to sign NDA's and stuff so he is able to play around with the source. Not something we mere mortals can get our grubby little hands on.





dejanh said:


> I'm not sure that's really the case. I have edited many UEFI and BIOS in the past. If you know what modules to replace its usually not too hard. Heck, we should be able to extract the WMI parts from the modified 1601 UEFI and use them again in future UEFI, until ASUS fully bakes this into future releases.


I never had access to any special tools or code, things would have been very different if that would have been the case. Still, I can't share too much about the specifics but someone should look into modifying and decompiling ACPI tables (second post here: https://www.win-raid.com/t3835f16-G...n-Skylake-and-Kaby-Lake-motherboards-Z-Z.html) . Or just copy over GUID C118F50D-391D-45F4-B3D3-11BC931AA56D and DAF4BF89-CE71-4917-B522-C89D32FBC59F, but compatibility may break over time.


----------



## Jerky_san

@elmor just a question but is there something I can pass-through from the motherboard to let me read temperatures and stuff inside a VM? Currently I'm running a linux system with virtio but since linux isn't very well developed on on things like temperature reading and such you can't see it very well. If I could pass it to windows I could use windows tools.


----------



## elmor

Jerky_san said:


> @elmor just a question but is there something I can pass-through from the motherboard to let me read temperatures and stuff inside a VM? Currently I'm running a linux system with virtio but since linux isn't very well developed on on things like temperature reading and such you can't see it very well. If I could pass it to windows I could use windows tools.


Really not sure of how it works with virtualization. Temperatures can be read in several different ways. The ACPI WMI functions are probably the least likely to work in a VM. Then there's PciConfig access for reading Tctl, and MMIO or I/O port access to read from the SIO or EC. Only the ACPI WMI, PciConfig or EC I/O access methods will be failure proof.

It should be easier to add Linux support for the ACPI WMI functions.


----------



## thagabe

@elmor 

I like the bios and WMI seems well implemented however I'm experiencing some setting not staying when saving. Also my OC is no longer stable (@4.0 1.35v or 1.36) even with my same set up (usually this was solved by increasing vrm capacity to 140%) maybe i need a higher soc >1.1. Lighting effects turned off while off doesn't stick at all and will just turn on when pc is off. I might revert back to WMI0001. Good steps towards a finalized BIOS!

PS: What is the difference btw D.O.C.P and D.O.C.P standard? WMI0001 has both while unofficial WMI1601 only has D.O.C.P Standard


----------



## twitchyzero

hey guys

system: 1950x stock 128gb g.skill b-dies stock (rated for 3ghz, running at stock 2.1), 1080 ti sli mild overclock

about 2 months ago I had error code to check RAM maybe 2-3 times, after turning PSU off and on, it was fine so I ignored it

recently noticed serious performance slowdowns even doing web browsing

CPU/mem/storage usage is fine

been getting code 68 check CPU, would take several minutes just to boot

BIOS reported 90C temp on CPU, but Corsair Link and Ryzen master says it's fine 
Corsair Link points the 90C being being mobo temp sensor #1

CPU block water pump running fine

just checked BIOS and Corsair Link and it seems to report proper CPU/mobo temps again...performance back to usual for now

any ideas how I should trouble shoot if it comes back?

nowadays I rarely have time to work on and mess with my PC, so would prefer not to run in circles


----------



## dejanh

Anyone else have problem accessing the support page for Zenith Extreme at the following URL https://www.asus.com/ca-en/Motherboards/ROG-ZENITH-EXTREME/HelpDesk/? I tried several browsers and nothing renders. I even tried getting access through the support pages and then navigating to different options, but again, as soon as I land on the Zenith Extreme support page there is no info at all.


----------



## delerious

dejanh said:


> Anyone else have problem accessing the support page for Zenith Extreme at the following URL https://www.asus.com/ca-en/Motherboards/ROG-ZENITH-EXTREME/HelpDesk/? I tried several browsers and nothing renders. I even tried getting access through the support pages and then navigating to different options, but again, as soon as I land on the Zenith Extreme support page there is no info at all.


No problem here using firefox.


----------



## Ljugtomten

dejanh said:


> Anyone else have problem accessing the support page for Zenith Extreme at the following URL https://www.asus.com/ca-en/Motherboards/ROG-ZENITH-EXTREME/HelpDesk/? I tried several browsers and nothing renders. I even tried getting access through the support pages and then navigating to different options, but again, as soon as I land on the Zenith Extreme support page there is no info at all.


I had that problem on Chrome a while ago, sorted when I deleted all cookies and stuff.


----------



## dejanh

Looks like the support site problem was a temporary glitch yesterday. Everything is working as expected now.


----------



## aTsgRe

@elmor, I know you don't work with ASUS but I really need to know if I have a faulty board -- which seems very likely. I just got back to my main PC (AMD 1950x with ZE) where I have used my new Hyper M.2 PCI-e based cards in order to put the NVMe drives and test them. Lo and behold using the Hyper card on the last slot of Zenith Extreme (die #2 as per this video: https://youtu.be/lzzavO5a4OQ?t=301) everything works as it should -- drives are perfect, used three different NVMe drivers, two 970 Evo 1TB and 1TB Toshiba one. I put it on the Chipset M.2 slot or either of the slots on the DIMM.2 and it fails as before. Should I replace the board?

Thanks!


----------



## dejanh

aTsgRe said:


> @elmor, I know you don't work with ASUS but I really need to know if I have a faulty board -- which seems very likely. I just got back to my main PC (AMD 1950x with ZE) where I have used my new Hyper M.2 PCI-e based cards in order to put the NVMe drives and test them. Lo and behold using the Hyper card on the last slot of Zenith Extreme (die #2 as per this video: https://youtu.be/lzzavO5a4OQ?t=301) everything works as it should -- drives are perfect, used three different NVMe drivers, two 970 Evo 1TB and 1TB Toshiba one. I put it on the Chipset M.2 slot or either of the slots on the DIMM.2 and it fails as before. Should I replace the board?
> 
> Thanks!


It sounds like a faulty board. I have two 970 Pro drives and they work just fine even in the latest 1601 UEFI. I would go ahead and replace it if you have a chance.


----------



## elmor

aTsgRe said:


> @elmor, I know you don't work with ASUS but I really need to know if I have a faulty board -- which seems very likely. I just got back to my main PC (AMD 1950x with ZE) where I have used my new Hyper M.2 PCI-e based cards in order to put the NVMe drives and test them. Lo and behold using the Hyper card on the last slot of Zenith Extreme (die #2 as per this video: https://youtu.be/lzzavO5a4OQ?t=301) everything works as it should -- drives are perfect, used three different NVMe drivers, two 970 Evo 1TB and 1TB Toshiba one. I put it on the Chipset M.2 slot or either of the slots on the DIMM.2 and it fails as before. Should I replace the board?
> 
> Thanks!


It's strange that it would work on an older bios version, but if it's a reproducible issue you should be able to RMA the board.


----------



## renjieah

@elmor
I have encountered two strange problems and hope to get your help.
1. After refreshing the bios version after 1402, once the 1950x is automatically lowered to 2.2g, the screen will be stuck, and then all the buttons will be invalid and can only be restarted. (cpu does not overclock, the memory is G.SKILL's 3200c14.)
  2. After refreshing your wmi bios, use aida64 5.97.4600 to check the temperature. After a few minutes, all fans will suddenly become the maximum speed.

I am now back to 1003 and everything is ok. So what should I do?
thanks


----------



## aTsgRe

@elmor, am not sure if it still works on the older BIOS as I have not flashed back to 1003 -- but the issue is reproducible with all of my three drives that I have... I have started an RMA process, hopefully I will be able to get a new board soon.


----------



## Poloasis

elmor said:


> I managed to modify the latest ZE BIOS 1601 with added ACPI WMI ASUSHW support, the fully fixed version. It's an unofficial modification by myself, which means the BIOS image is not signed and can't be flashed with EZFlash. It can however be flashed using USB BIOS Flashback just like an official BIOS. HWInfo picks up the ACPI WMI support and uses it by default. I didn't have time to try other software.
> 
> https://www.mediafire.com/file/wzaawyso6ro2zoy/ROG-ZENITH-EXTREME-ASUS-1601-ASUSHW.zip/file


Genius!


----------



## Jerky_san

So I move my NVME drive to the on-board one that is behind the head spreader. So far I've had no issues with it being there but if I put it on the DIMM ones issues.. That is very strange..


----------



## dejanh

Jerky_san said:


> So I move my NVME drive to the on-board one that is behind the head spreader. So far I've had no issues with it being there but if I put it on the DIMM ones issues.. That is very strange..


Maybe the DIMM.2 slot or the extension card is defective.


----------



## Jerky_san

Wonder why Asus hasn't released AGESA 1.1.0.2.. Would be nice to have considering others are talking about some pretty good improvements.


----------



## dejanh

Jerky_san said:


> Wonder why Asus hasn't released AGESA 1.1.0.2.. Would be nice to have considering others are talking about some pretty good improvements.


It's been very quiet on the update front since 1601. I really do hope this board doesn't end up abandoned by ASUS and that we get AGESA 1.1.0.2 like others are getting.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

dejanh said:


> It's been very quiet on the update front since 1601. I really do hope this board doesn't end up abandoned by ASUS and that we get AGESA 1.1.0.2 like others are getting.


Who knows with Asus and the TR platform, there not invested.


----------



## thagabe

Jerky_san said:


> Wonder why Asus hasn't released AGESA 1.1.0.2.. Would be nice to have considering others are talking about some pretty good improvements.


Judging from history, Asus is always the last major player to update their firmware. Furthermore, we do not yet know when Asus will be finalizing their WMI implementation hence a new update would render WMI useless. The average times of new firmware release (with AGESA) is ((AVERAGEOFOTHERS)+3mos). This seems like they aren't trying but Asus does offer the most in terms of UEFI options right now so, ying yang.


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

For those wondering about the P-State OC saga on 1920X and 1900X

I finally received this from AMD today...6 months after my inquiry

*To address your enquiry, AMD does not officially support p-state overclocking on AMD Ryzen and AMD Ryzen Threadripper processors.


AMD’s motherboard partners have been able to enable this feature through their own engineering efforts. Due to how 1st Gen AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920X and 1900X models are configured, p-state overclocking is not possible.


While not supported, this issue should not be present on 2nd Generation Ryzen Threadripper products, due to the updated algorithm used for Precision Boost 2 and XFR2.
*


----------



## dejanh

Arne Saknussemm said:


> For those wondering about the P-State OC saga on 1920X and 1900X
> 
> I finally received this from AMD today...6 months after my inquiry
> 
> *To address your enquiry, AMD does not officially support p-state overclocking on AMD Ryzen and AMD Ryzen Threadripper processors.
> 
> 
> AMD’s motherboard partners have been able to enable this feature through their own engineering efforts. Due to how 1st Gen AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920X and 1900X models are configured, p-state overclocking is not possible.
> 
> 
> While not supported, this issue should not be present on 2nd Generation Ryzen Threadripper products, due to the updated algorithm used for Precision Boost 2 and XFR2.
> *


Let me translate this for you.

"To resolve your issue, please purchase one of our new chips. Thank you for your time and understanding."


----------



## aTsgRe

It amazes me (in a sad way) that since elmor walked away from ASUS this thread basically just died... do we know if they have any other *reachable* agents around?


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

dejanh said:


> Let me translate this for you.
> 
> "To resolve your issue, please purchase one of our new chips. Thank you for your time and understanding."


Heh, yeah that was not lost on me.

In fact they couched their words even on that..."should"



aTsgRe said:


> It amazes me (in a sad way) that since elmor walked away from ASUS this thread basically just died... do we know if they have any other *reachable* agents around?


Zenith Extreme is old news to ASUS


----------



## AllenG

aTsgRe said:


> It amazes me (in a sad way) that since elmor walked away from ASUS this thread basically just died... do we know if they have any other *reachable* agents around?


LOL. I wonder why he walked? Pretty much sucks ASUS basically didn't support him enough to bring about the known needed changes. They basically threw him to the wolves out here with no weapons. I don't blame him at all.

What I don't understand is how ASUS can be abandoning issues on a platform that is current? If they don't want to support a platform, they just shouldn't release a product for it then. EVGA and Supermicro have done this and it was quite smart on their part. Saves everyone time, money, and headache... including the mfg themselves.


----------



## lumen

On the asus download page seems to be a new USB driver or firmware for the zenith board, ASM3142_FW_171005_70_02_00, but when I download it, the archive seems to be broken. Does someone knows more about it or did manage to install it?


----------



## ENTERPRISE

I hate seeing such good hardware thrown under the best from a support perspective. I could see ASUS was drawing back support and investment board a little while ago, hence why I sold the Zenith while the going was ''Good'' (If you can call it that) and went to MSI. ASUS is simply not invested in AMD as much as they are Intel and they even less invested with AMD HEDT. There was no refresh board for the 2nd Gen TR CPU's and they only released a hard to get hold of ''Cooling Kit'' to make it TR2 ready. Granted the board still holds up fairly well, but ASUS's attempt at keeping the Zenith alive has been poor at best. 

They have certainly lost my AMD business. I have owned ASUS Intel based boards and they have been great and I will buy ASUS with Intel, but AMD ? Forget it.


----------



## aTsgRe

@lumen, I did - don't know what it fixed, if anything, but the installer was OK and the install progress went also without issues...


----------



## lumen

aTsgRe said:


> @*lumen* , I did - don't know what it fixed, if anything, but the installer was OK and the install progress went also without issues...



Found it out. The windows build in zip extension couldn't open the archive, but WinRAR was able to extract it...


----------



## zenith453

*Zenith working with 2 RTX 2080s 1601*

I decided to get 3 RTX 2080s, and started loading them on the board, then realized that I had to remove one card for the system to run. The system doesn't get to bios, with 3 cards, so there may be a pci bus issue. If anyone has been able to get 3 cards running, would be interesting to hear how it was done. Happy Pre New Years!


----------



## Ljugtomten

zenith453 said:


> I decided to get 3 RTX 2080s, and started loading them on the board, then realized that I had to remove one card for the system to run. The system doesn't get to bios, with 3 cards, so there may be a pci bus issue. If anyone has been able to get 3 cards running, would be interesting to hear how it was done. Happy Pre New Years!


Asus had to make an adjustment in the BIOS for dual RTX cards to work, sounds like they stopped at two cards and didn't validate 3 cards and above. 
Have you contacted Asus and opened a ticket?


----------



## MTH254

Seems Asus is working on a ZE replacement... Wonder if this board will have the bugs that are plaguing the current ZE resolved and allow my 128GB kit to actually run at 3200MHz. Not to mention random bsod's.

but screw it... Asus is on my personal ****list from here on out.

https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?107840-Rog-zenith-extreme-alpha


----------



## ENTERPRISE

MTH254 said:


> Seems Asus is working on a ZE replacement... Wonder if this board will have the bugs that are plaguing the current ZE resolved and allow my 128GB kit to actually run at 3200MHz. Not to mention random bsod's.
> 
> but screw it... Asus is on my personal ****list from here on out.
> 
> https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?107840-Rog-zenith-extreme-alpha


Horrible PCI-E Spacing on the new board ! I am with you however, I would not buy it. Asus is on my no go list until they start proving themselves in the AMD end of things.


----------



## MTH254

ENTERPRISE said:


> Horrible PCI-E Spacing on the new board ! I am with you however, I would not buy it. Asus is on my no go list until they start proving themselves in the AMD end of things.



They should offer current ZE owners a trade in option to upgrade to the new board at a fraction of the cost. That may win me back (unless this board is another low effort design with same horrible support). Wish Asus took pride in their products, especially a frickin' high end part!


----------



## ENTERPRISE

MTH254 said:


> They should offer current ZE owners a trade in option to upgrade to the new board at a fraction of the cost. That may win me back (unless this board is another low effort design with same horrible support). Wish Asus took pride in their products, especially a frickin' high end part!


In an ideal world, yeah a Trade Up would be nice but we all know that is not happening. Hell they may have learned a lot about the AMD HEDT platform with the ZE and maybe this board will be great, but you can never really know until you own it, even reviews cannot really shed enough light as they only skim the surface really and cannot take into account your personal usage of the product. Even if it was an awesome board, I still could not live with that PCI-E layout.


----------



## Jerky_san

If this board wasn't the only one I could get confirmation to run an LSI9201 HBA card I'd not use it. I originally bought a X399 Tachi and it ran my 64gb kit stock from the box at 3200 with no a single tweak besides turning on D.O.C.P. Damn thing just wouldn't boot with a LSI9201 card plugged into and got 100% radio silence from ASRock about it. It amazes me these damn boards cost 300+ $ and I can't get a freaken word out of any of them. I was so excited when I found this board and found out someone from Asus was helping here. Gave me hope that this board could be one of the absolute best. Can't say anything about them leaving though. Got to do whats right by yourself and your family before anyone else so can't blame him for moving on. Just wish there was another board that I knew I could jump to.


----------



## gupsterg

For me ZE still sound, if I got a 2950X I'd still use it.

It's nice to see the ZEA shares so much with Intel variant. Agree the PCI-E slot layout seems a let down, personally for me wouldn't be a issue.

To me seems as if the refresh's main point is improved VRM. So I reckon out of the box be great for the 16+ core CPUs. The Probeit points look the same as C7H, I'd think they have the improved accuracy. So again seems an evolution on board. I wonder if it is ASUS T-Topology or become daisy chain, just as C7H did.


----------



## dejanh

As long as they don't cease support for the ZE I will be reasonably happy. Still hoping to get the new AGESA rolled out soon.


----------



## MacMus

Hi guys,

How is the Asus support looking like these days ? I'm thinking about going TR4 platform with new Asus Zenith Extreme Alpha, but I see lot of drama here and not much movment.

Is it better to keep away from Asus and move to MSI instead ?


----------



## gupsterg

I have read some posts here and elsewhere, where users of other X399 have moved to ASUS as it was better supported. Vice a versa there are others that moved away from it.

My personal experience been great with board, again others not so.

I guess best is to see feature set you want and decide what is best for you.


----------



## dejanh

For anyone based in Canada, if you are looking for the Zenith Extreme cooling kit, it looks like PC-Canada is able to procure them. I received mine yesterday afternoon. Cost was reasonable too, around $30 CAD.

Besides this, any ideas when we can expect the new AGESA to roll out for the Zenith Extreme board?


----------



## 00Asgaroth00

Hi All,


Quick question, which cooling solutions are you all using for the ZE? I have a TR 1920X CPU, at stock speeds, and I've been through 3 AIO's now, Kraken X62, Liqtech TR4 280, Liqtech TR4 360. I am currently on the last one mentioned (Liqtech TR4 360) and I have idle temps of 55 degrees celcius with all but 4 logical cores parked. With the first two AIO's the pump failed, and, now it looks like the pump on the TR4 360 is on its way out as well.


I've tried all the usual fixes, re-pasting the thermal paste, made sure the block is seated properly, in fact, I just went through this whole process again yesterday. The TR4 360 was working perfectly when I first got it (idle temps around 35 degress celcius). 



I'm currently looking at the Enermax Liqtech TR4 360 II, but I thought I'd check in with all of you to see what you're all running and what kind of temps I should expect.


Additionally, how are you controlling pump/fan speed, are you using the BIOS Q-Fan monitoring for fan speed control or are you using some other software to monitor the fans?


Any and all tips/suggestions appreciated.


NOTE: If it matters, I'm on BIOS version 1602.


----------



## Ljugtomten

00Asgaroth00 said:


> Hi All,
> 
> 
> Quick question, which cooling solutions are you all using for the ZE? I have a 1920X and I've been through 3 AIO's now, Kraken X62, Liqtech TR4 280, Liqtech TR4 360. I am currently on the last one mentioned (Liqtech TR4 360) and I have idle temps of 55 degrees celcius with all but 4 logical cores parked. With the first two AIO's the pump failed, and, now it looks like the pump on the TR4 360 is on its way out as well.
> 
> 
> I've tried all the usual fixes, re-pasting the thermal paste, made sure the block is seated properly, in fact, I just went through this whole process again yesterday. The TR4 360 was working perfectly when I first got it (idle temps around 35 degress celcius).
> 
> 
> 
> I'm currently looking at the Enermax Liqtech TR4 360 II, but I thought I'd check in with all of you to see what you're all running and what kind of temps I should expect.
> 
> 
> Additionally, how are you controlling pump/fan speed, are you using the BIOS Q-Fan monitoring for fan speed control or are you using some other software to monitor the fans?
> 
> 
> Any and all tips/suggestions appreciated.
> 
> 
> NOTE: If it matters, I'm on BIOS version 1602.


Don't bother with Liqtech.
I have got a gen 2 360 for my 1950X, and as you 50% core park on idle.
Right now, it idles at around 43 degrees, was at 50 the other day but got better after I smacked on the hoses for a bit. 
Enermax responded yesterday that gen 2 does not have any problems as gen 1.
Got a Noctua that I am going to install and open up the Enermax to check for corrosion.


----------



## 00Asgaroth00

Ljugtomten said:


> Don't bother with Liqtech.
> I have got a gen 2 360 for my 1950X, and as you 50% core park on idle.
> Right now, it idles at around 43 degrees, was at 50 the other day but got better after I smacked on the hoses for a bit.
> Enermax responded yesterday that gen 2 does not have any problems as gen 1.
> Got a Noctua that I am going to install and open up the Enermax to check for corrosion.



Are you going with the Noctua U14S or the U12S, looking at Noctua's website the U14S is too big for the ZE, it overlaps the 1st PCIe slot, the U12S is recommended for the ZE. Looking at reviews, they recommend the U14S if you want air cooling


----------



## Ljugtomten

00Asgaroth00 said:


> Are you going with the Noctua U14S or the U12S, looking at Noctua's website the U14S is too big for the ZE, it overlaps the 1st PCIe slot, the U12S is recommended for the ZE. Looking at reviews, they recommend the U14S if you want air cooling


U14S with an extra fan.
I'm going to remove the GPU at the first slot as almost no games have SLI support anymore and keep the GPU that is in the other x16 slot going to CPU.


----------



## <sigh>

@Ljugtomten

I'd be very grateful if you posted here after you check the Liqtech Gen 2, I'm running the Gen 2 360 after disastrous results with the Gen 1 (I may seem to be a glutton for punishment but air cooling isn't a great option when you've got an RTX card inside your case!). It'd be very helpful to know if they really did learn from their mistakes with the Gen 1.

As I write this my 2950x is happily idling around 40C.


----------



## Ljugtomten

<sigh> said:


> @Ljugtomten
> 
> I'd be very grateful if you posted here after you check the Liqtech Gen 2, I'm running the Gen 2 360 after disastrous results with the Gen 1 (I may seem to be a glutton for punishment but air cooling isn't a great option when you've got an RTX card inside your case!). It'd be very helpful to know if they really did learn from their mistakes with the Gen 1.
> 
> As I write this my 2950x is happily idling around 40C.


Yes, I plan to take pictures and post results. 
I'll probably change cooler tomorrow and disassemble in a few days.

Video of the cooler from a few days ago: https://www.ljugtomten.com/Enermax.mp4

Edit: Mounted Noctua U14S TR4-SP3 with an additional 140mm fan today (2019-01-19), first impressions of temperatures are good:


----------



## java4ever

My 2nd Gen LiqTech is also failing (again!), after the 1st Gen LiqTech failed...
Probably building a proper loop now...


----------



## <sigh>

Oh dear, this doesn't bode well.... 

The Noctuas' are great and I have one as a standby after the Gen1 Liqtech died, but that RTX 2080ti dumps so much heat!


----------



## Brain29

sounds like you guys need to jump into custom loops a 2rad with a d5 and xpsc block will run in the 300 range - if you budget correctly it will be closer to 200 if you get the stuff that looks nicer you can easily go above 300

something stops working or you upgrade your system your spending way less then a new all in one - and there is almost nothing stopping you from reusing parts as long as you clean them once a year 

kits are pretty easy to find http://www.performance-pcs.com/rays...0-threadripper-watercooling-kit-amd-str4.html

(any deeper then this would be a different topic)


----------



## neil_tohno

I have some problem, can u give me a hand?

I found the AMD Chipset Driver V18.40.02 is release, but I download three times, it always broken








------------------------------








And I also want kown about ROG RXVEGA64 Graphics Card, use ASUS AMD Driver or adrenalin-2019-edition-19.1.1 Driver,
which is better?


----------



## Ljugtomten

neil_tohno said:


> I have some problem, can u give me a hand?
> 
> I found the AMD Chipset Driver V18.40.02 is release, but I download three times, it always broken
> View attachment 248416
> 
> 
> And I also want kown about ROG RXVEGA64 Graphics Card, use ASUS AMD Driver or adrenalin-2019-edition-19.1.1 Driver,
> which is better?


Can confirm, ZIP archive for chipset driver from ASUS site is broken (reported by both WinRAR and 7zip.

I always download and install such drivers from AMD.

On my laptop (with Vega56) I use the latest driver directly from AMD, works really good.


----------



## 00Asgaroth00

Ljugtomten said:


> Yes, I plan to take pictures and post results.
> I'll probably change cooler tomorrow and disassemble in a few days.
> 
> Video of the cooler from a few days ago: https://www.ljugtomten.com/Enermax.mp4
> 
> Edit: Mounted Noctua U14S TR4-SP3 with an additional 140mm fan today (2019-01-19), first impressions of temperatures are good:



Those are decent idle temps, whats the noctua like under prolonged load though? Does it keep temps sub 60 degrees celcius, or below thermal max 68 degrees celcius (68 degrees I'm basing on the thermal max for the 1920x, not sure what the 1950x's max is)


EDIT: How did you get the ASUS WMI to show up in HWInfo? Mine doesnt show up on the ZE


----------



## Ljugtomten

00Asgaroth00 said:


> Those are decent idle temps, whats the noctua like under prolonged load though? Does it keep temps sub 60 degrees celcius, or below thermal max 68 degrees celcius (68 degrees I'm basing on the thermal max for the 1920x, not sure what the 1950x's max is)
> 
> 
> EDIT: How did you get the ASUS WMI to show up in HWInfo? Mine doesnt show up on the ZE


I have not performed any true stress test, playing Battlefield 5 keeps it at ~53 degrees but that game don't use all cores and my GPU (GTX 980) is the bottleneck.
As for ASUS WMI, I use the modified 1601 UEFI posted by Elmor.


----------



## 00Asgaroth00

Ljugtomten said:


> I have not performed any true stress test, playing Battlefield 5 keeps it at ~53 degrees but that game don't use all cores and my GPU (GTX 980) is the bottleneck.
> As for ASUS WMI, I use the modified 1601 UEFI posted by Elmor.



Are you running in numa mode (channel)? When running a game like bfv, do you set cpu affinity to a numa node so that windows doesn't hop the thread(s) between cores? If so, which tool do you use (something like process lasso)?


----------



## Ljugtomten

00Asgaroth00 said:


> Are you running in numa mode (channel)? When running a game like bfv, do you set cpu affinity to a numa node so that windows doesn't hop the thread(s) between cores? If so, which tool do you use (something like process lasso)?


I use Process Lasso Pro 
Not very expensive and a must have in Windows if you have lots of cores.


----------



## 00Asgaroth00

Ljugtomten said:


> I use Process Lasso Pro
> Not very expensive and a must have in Windows if you have lots of cores.



I use it too (pro), in addition to lsopo (hwloc) to actually check which cores are using which L3/L2/L1 caches and assign them in process lasso. What I'm now trying to figure out is how windows allocates its memory when setting the affinity, will windows allocate memory off of the same numa node that the application (bfv) is running on (node 1 in my case).


----------



## neil_tohno

neil_tohno said:


> I found the AMD Chipset Driver V18.40.02 is release, but I download three times, it always broken


I just ask one of my friend help download the file, It‘s a network problem.
but how it happened, I don’t kown.


I just test the lastest AURA Sync software, Lighting_Control_1.07.35, it works.


----------



## dejanh

Any info on an updated UEFI for this board? I'm getting tired of the random errors I keep having (ever since I moved to 1601 I have to restart my machine after the first boot otherwise memory is unstable).


----------



## aTsgRe

@dejanh I get the same behavior - @ENTERPRISE do you know of any ASUS representative in this forum?


----------



## ENTERPRISE

aTsgRe said:


> @dejanh I get the same behavior - @ENTERPRISE do you know of any ASUS representative in this forum?


None that are active no


----------



## dejanh

It's unbelievable that we pay so much money for a product like this and get such crap service. The Zenith Extreme Alpha is poised to be even more expensive. The entire electronics industry has lost its mind. Their solution to the inability to innovate and differentiate their products is more and more becoming just consumer price gouging to maintain certain revenues or post profits. *Edit:* forgot slapping "AI" on everything. That's the other strategy now it seems. Everything is "AI".


----------



## neil_tohno

How to use this?
DRAM Calculator for Ryzen 1.4.1.exe








I found the DRAM Calculator not support the Hynix TFC Memory
H5AN8G8NAFR-TFC
















Whatever I test change the value over to 1600 MHz, it always get bulesreen.

When I use X.M.P value (1600 MHz / 16-18-18-38 / 1.35 V ), and use aida64 System Stability Test - Stress system memory for
3 hours，aida64 report errors, is the memory unstable?

-


----------



## neil_tohno

The same memory chip,


----------



## gupsterg

dejanh said:


> Any info on an updated UEFI for this board? I'm getting tired of the random errors I keep having (ever since I moved to 1601 I have to restart my machine after the first boot otherwise memory is unstable).


Is a shame no new UEFI has been released.

Doesn't help you but I can only say currently on UEFI 1601 modded by Elmor to have WMI has been as stable as previous ones for me. Still using 3400MHz 1T C15 with 1.05V SOC 1.35V VDIMM.

In the spoiler is:-

[email protected] run of 4.5hrs, reboot and retweak fan profile, do 1.25hrs, retweak again, do 7hrs run and a PWM check screen, another adjustment and 2hrs run, retweak and another 2hrs, another retweak and 3hrs plus PWM check screen, another retweak and 10hrs run plus PWM check.

Note: All settings in regard to CPU/RAM/Fans profile via UEFI setup, no OS utils used.



Spoiler


----------



## dejanh

@gupsterg - It does feel like 1601 may have been the last update, at least for quite some time to come. Considering that they will soon be pushing the Zenith Alpha, I am sadly not too hopeful. A real shame and a real disappointment. ASUS was always my go-to brand, yet this really sours my experience. To think that the Zenith Alpha will be even more expensive!

In all, once I get past the BSOD hurdle on cold-boot the system is rock solid thereafter. Something is just off on the memory configuration/timings. The last UEFI that was perfectly stable for me was 1003. Subsequent releases broke compatibility with my memory despite it being on the QVL and ASUS has done nothing to fix it. I have to run at 3133MHz instead of the rated 3200MHz just to avoid constant corruption. Going back to 1003 fixes it all, but then I lose other improvements made since then and I'm stuck on what is now a relic of a UEFI.


----------



## gupsterg

@dejanh

Previously I looked at other mobo bios support pages and at that time deemed ASUS had been doing AOK. Today I checked again, Gigabyte AORUS Gaming 7 X399 has 5 official updates, link, Taichi has 9, link, I'm counting 10 on ZE page, link.

Based on say C6H/C7H experience I'd say we'll be ok. C7H "officially" gained AGESA 1.0.0.6 on 30/11/18, C6H 13/12/18. In fact a lot of the C6H owners that think the C7H has UEFI development advantage should look at the support pages more closely.



Spoiler














Only the C6E seems to have lag on updates much greater.

Another little known fact is how mobo makers are locked out from tweaking firmware unlike Intel, see this post. By this I do not mean to make your compatibility issue seem smaller.

AFAIK AMD guideline is daisy chain memory topology, I would assume then the FW is tailored towards that. C6H, C6E, ZE, ZEA have T topology. From what I understand this can lengthen the tracing between IMC/DIMM, which could perhaps be unfavourable to some CPU IMC. Why I say that is I have seen some users who had the C6H, changed to another mobo (which is daisy chain) and they gained RAM MHz on same CPU/RAM. To them it seemed the C6H was "bad", to me it seemed they had an outlier CPU/setup that just favoured daisy chain. I used 2x 2700X between C6H/C7H, 2x 8GB of Samsung B die single rank/sided attained same RAM MHz. 4x 8GB was much easier to play with on C6H than C7H. Based on that experience and as TR platform is for someone needed higher "everything" vs normal consumer T topology is the right choice.

As you have dual rank RAM and due to T topology it could be worse combo than having same RAM amount but as single rank/sided dimms. For example on C6H owners that had 2x16GB fared worse than 4x8GB.

TBH 4x8GB on ZE has an advantage over same setup on C6H. TR has 2 IMC, so basically you clocking up 2 dimms per IMC, where as on AM4 it's single IMC and the 4x8GB setup each channel your daisy chaining 2 dimms.


----------



## Jerky_san

I wrote Asus asking when we could see a bios update. There response is below........... So helpful...


I am writing to update you about your case. Our product engineers are already working on a permanent resolution for them to be able to rectify the concern as soon as possible. We implore for your patience and assure you that we are working diligently to have your case closed.


----------



## dejanh

Jerky_san said:


> I wrote Asus asking when we could see a bios update. There response is below........... So helpful...
> 
> 
> I am writing to update you about your case. Our product engineers are already working on a permanent resolution for them to be able to rectify the concern as soon as possible. We implore for your patience and assure you that we are working diligently to have your case closed.


That's very specific. Thanks for the update! /s


----------



## Jerky_san

dejanh said:


> That's very specific. Thanks for the update! /s


Oh it got a lot better LOL.. I complained about how it was a crap answer so they told me this instead

"I appreciate your patience and for giving us time to come up with a resolution for your case. After collaborating with our engineers, we are now able to provide you with a recommendation on how to address your concern.

We actually have an upgrade, there is a Zenith Extreme Alpha that has features upgrades and also BIOS is newest."


----------



## skingun

You've got to be ******* joking. Arse holes!


----------



## Jerky_san

skingun said:


> You've got to be ******* joking. Arse holes!



I'm up to a level 2 support engineer.. wonder what they will tell me.


----------



## dejanh

Jerky_san said:


> Oh it got a lot better LOL.. I complained about how it was a crap answer so they told me this instead
> 
> "I appreciate your patience and for giving us time to come up with a resolution for your case. After collaborating with our engineers, we are now able to provide you with a recommendation on how to address your concern.
> 
> We actually have an upgrade, there is a Zenith Extreme Alpha that has features upgrades and also BIOS is newest."


Did you get this in writing? I'd love to get a copy of this response. I'm trying to push ASUS to admin that ZE is a busted product and to have them issue out ZEA replacements for users with issues. I would love to see your actual exchange with them that led to this answer. We can use this.


----------



## Jerky_san

dejanh said:


> Did you get this in writing? I'd love to get a copy of this response. I'm trying to push ASUS to admin that ZE is a busted product and to have them issue out ZEA replacements for users with issues. I would love to see your actual exchange with them that led to this answer. We can use this.


I do but ironically I didn't read the bottom which has their standard BS boiler plate about not sharing the contents of an email without their "consent". It came after I put a technical support request in for them not releasing the new AGESA update and wanting to know when this would occur since their competitors all have. They replied with the first thing I posted. I then received a survey about how I felt about my support I received to which I wrote a complaint in it about how they didn't answer the question at all and I felt this isn't the support a $400+ board should be receiving. Then received that follow up email which said I could buy their new version. Which I promptly got upset with as well. Then I got an email from a lvl 2 engineer wanting to call me. So we will see how that goes but don't know why they want to call me.


----------



## Brain29

Jerky_san said:


> I do but ironically I didn't read the bottom which has their standard BS boiler plate about not sharing the contents of an email without their "consent". It came after I put a technical support request in for them not releasing the new AGESA update and wanting to know when this would occur since their competitors all have. They replied with the first thing I posted. I then received a survey about how I felt about my support I received to which I wrote a complaint in it about how they didn't answer the question at all and I felt this isn't the support a $400+ board should be receiving. Then received that follow up email which said I could buy their new version. Which I promptly got upset with as well. Then I got an email from a lvl 2 engineer wanting to call me. So we will see how that goes but don't know why they want to call me.


I'm pretty positive that the consent part is not legally binding in any form in the states that is (other countries it is binding). I've been part of legal issues in court were the was content that someone put a privacy disclaimer at the bottom. Multiple times it was rejected and the content was allowed. - Asus however maybe would be allowed to stop responding to you -- so while you might not get sued you could get black balled from support or put in a special group -- so if you do share I would only post bits and pieces like you are


----------



## Ljugtomten

Brain29 said:


> I'm pretty positive that the consent part is not legally binding in any form in the states that is (other countries it is binding). I've been part of legal issues in court were the was content that someone put a privacy disclaimer at the bottom. Multiple times it was rejected and the content was allowed. - Asus however maybe would be allowed to stop responding to you -- so while you might not get sued you could get black balled from support or put in a special group -- so if you do share I would only post bits and pieces like you are


Not only the states, most of the European countries aswell.
I had a support ticket open with Enermax regarding their TR4 Gen2 360 cooler (early batch, serial beginning with 1809, link: https://www.sweclockers.com/forum/post/17765538)
They started to include that footer with the boiler plate that it was a priviledged conversation etc but over here you can share whatever you'd like as long as you were a part of the conversation.
If you had signed a contract that have clauses where you cannot share information, that is something else. As a customer contacting the official support you are under no obligations to not share what information you are given.

Edit: I did recieve a replacement for the cooler shown in the pictures, still unpacked as I switched to a Noctua air cooler with dual fans for my 1950X.


----------



## dejanh

Jerky_san said:


> I do but ironically I didn't read the bottom which has their standard BS boiler plate about not sharing the contents of an email without their "consent". It came after I put a technical support request in for them not releasing the new AGESA update and wanting to know when this would occur since their competitors all have. They replied with the first thing I posted. I then received a survey about how I felt about my support I received to which I wrote a complaint in it about how they didn't answer the question at all and I felt this isn't the support a $400+ board should be receiving. Then received that follow up email which said I could buy their new version. Which I promptly got upset with as well. Then I got an email from a lvl 2 engineer wanting to call me. So we will see how that goes but don't know why they want to call me.


Yeah those disclaimers are BS. That does not apply for communication between consumer and support. That's intended for use to try to loosely protect IP when confidential information is being exchanged. There is nothing confidential about ASUS thinking that they can pawn off a new board on you when you're asking them to fix the existing one. It's such a shame how low ASUS has sunk. I have about two decades of history with them and I have never seen such terrible service from them. Don't even get me started on the product itself. I'm not settling for any less than a ZEA as a replacement or some kind of financial compensation from ASUS. This morning I had to fix my system again because CMOS decided to take a bath and the board would no longer POST. Had to do a full CMOS reset twice and re-enter all settings to get it up and running.


----------



## Jerky_san

dejanh said:


> Yeah those disclaimers are BS. That does not apply for communication between consumer and support. That's intended for use to try to loosely protect IP when confidential information is being exchanged. There is nothing confidential about ASUS thinking that they can pawn off a new board on you when you're asking them to fix the existing one. It's such a shame how low ASUS has sunk. I have about two decades of history with them and I have never seen such terrible service from them. Don't even get me started on the product itself. I'm not settling for any less than a ZEA as a replacement or some kind of financial compensation from ASUS. This morning I had to fix my system again because CMOS decided to take a bath and the board would no longer POST. Had to do a full CMOS reset twice and re-enter all settings to get it up and running.


So they took all this time telling me they'd get back to me with more information to only send me this below. The last sentence doesn't even making sense.

"I appreciate your patience and for giving us time to come up with a resolution for your case. After collaborating with our engineers, we are now able to provide you with a recommendation on how to address your concern.

We have confirmed the case with our R&D and they will date this in the next released BIOS. Thank you"


----------



## dejanh

Jerky_san said:


> So they took all this time telling me they'd get back to me with more information to only send me this below. The last sentence doesn't even making sense.
> 
> "I appreciate your patience and for giving us time to come up with a resolution for your case. After collaborating with our engineers, we are now able to provide you with a recommendation on how to address your concern.
> 
> We have confirmed the case with our R&D and they will date this in the next released BIOS. Thank you"


I officially gave up on the ZE. I picked up the ZEA yesterday and out of the gate it feels like an actual finished product despite its UEFI being immature. Yes, I still cannot run my memory at 3200MHz CL14 as I could on the ZE with 1003 UEFI and earlier, but I am now fairly comfortable knowing that this is the consequence of whatever code ASUS integrated to support 2nd gen chips. ZEA appears to be more stable out of the gate, I don't have any micro-stuttering, and my RAID array seems to be performing much better. I think with some tweaking I can get the memory up to 3200MHz CL14 stable as well.


----------



## Jerky_san

dejanh said:


> I officially gave up on the ZE. I picked up the ZEA yesterday and out of the gate it feels like an actual finished product despite its UEFI being immature. Yes, I still cannot run my memory at 3200MHz CL14 as I could on the ZE with 1003 UEFI and earlier, but I am now fairly comfortable knowing that this is the consequence of whatever code ASUS integrated to support 2nd gen chips. ZEA appears to be more stable out of the gate, I don't have any micro-stuttering, and my RAID array seems to be performing much better. I think with some tweaking I can get the memory up to 3200MHz CL14 stable as well.



When I asked for a date

" I am writing to update you about your case. Our product engineers are already working on a permanent resolution for them to be able to rectify the concern as soon as possible. We implore for your patience and assure you that we are working diligently to have your case closed. "

So there you have it ..

Honestly surprised you went ASUS again given their support for their previous $400+ board.


----------



## dejanh

Jerky_san said:


> When I asked for a date
> 
> " I am writing to update you about your case. Our product engineers are already working on a permanent resolution for them to be able to rectify the concern as soon as possible. We implore for your patience and assure you that we are working diligently to have your case closed. "
> 
> So there you have it ..
> 
> Honestly surprised you went ASUS again given their support for their previous $400+ board.


I didn't have much choice. Options for Threadripper are so limited. The only two boards that would work for longer term are the ASUS Alpha and the MSI Creation. I do not trust the MSI brand (mixed experiences with their products and history of updates in the past) and while I am extremely disappointed by the ZE board and ASUS support thereof, as well as their handing of issues, in the long run I still trust ASUS more than MSI. The ZE was my first (what I would classify as) truly bad experience with ASUS. Already the Alpha feels more like a finished product but we will see how it holds up. My retailer has decided to take the ZE back after 8 months because of all of the issues I had so I am at least supposed to be getting my money back. For the record here, ASUS responded to my escalation and a request to issue a replacement to the ZEA for my ZE, and they refused to do so. They could also not process any advance replacements since they had no stock of ZEs. The only option that was offered to me after all escalations from ASUS was a repair - yet there was nothing to repair.

Regarding your case and the responses, it is sounding like they're just stalling and deflecting. The non-specific nature of the responses reads like that.


----------



## Jerky_san

dejanh said:


> I didn't have much choice. Options for Threadripper are so limited. The only two boards that would work for longer term are the ASUS Alpha and the MSI Creation. I do not trust the MSI brand (mixed experiences with their products and history of updates in the past) and while I am extremely disappointed by the ZE board and ASUS support thereof, as well as their handing of issues, in the long run I still trust ASUS more than MSI. The ZE was my first (what I would classify as) truly bad experience with ASUS. Already the Alpha feels more like a finished product but we will see how it holds up. My retailer has decided to take the ZE back after 8 months because of all of the issues I had so I am at least supposed to be getting my money back. For the record here, ASUS responded to my escalation and a request to issue a replacement to the ZEA for my ZE, and they refused to do so. They could also not process any advance replacements since they had no stock of ZEs. The only option that was offered to me after all escalations from ASUS was a repair - yet there was nothing to repair.
> 
> Regarding your case and the responses, it is sounding like they're just stalling and deflecting. The non-specific nature of the responses reads like that.


I wish I could change but I can't justify the 600$ price tag.. That's insane honestly. Guess I'm going to wait and see what threadripper 3 brings and see how it goes. Wonder if the chiplet design will shake things up a lot.


----------



## Ironjer

New BIOS 1701

ROG ZENITH EXTREME BIOS 1701
Update AGESA 1.1.0.2
Update ASUS user profile module

https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/ROG-ZENITH-EXTREME/HelpDesk_Download/


----------



## gseeley

Ironjer said:


> New BIOS 1701
> 
> ROG ZENITH EXTREME BIOS 1701
> Update AGESA 1.1.0.2
> Update ASUS user profile module
> 
> https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/ROG-ZENITH-EXTREME/HelpDesk_Download/


NOTE: Only visible if you select OS Windows 7 32-bit or Others. FFS Asus!


----------



## Ironjer

gseeley said:


> NOTE: Only visible if you select OS Windows 7 32-bit or Others. FFS Asus!


Windows 10 64-bit works


----------



## x3sphere

Ironjer said:


> New BIOS 1701
> 
> ROG ZENITH EXTREME BIOS 1701
> Update AGESA 1.1.0.2
> Update ASUS user profile module
> 
> https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/ROG-ZENITH-EXTREME/HelpDesk_Download/


Finally a new BIOS... just updated, no issues so far. This fixed the udev errors I was getting on bootup under Linux. Previously had to compile a custom kernel to avoid the issue, but it works fine with a vanilla kernel now.


----------



## dejanh

Jerky_san said:


> I wish I could change but I can't justify the 600$ price tag.. That's insane honestly. Guess I'm going to wait and see what threadripper 3 brings and see how it goes. Wonder if the chiplet design will shake things up a lot.


Well, but the 3rd generation of chips you'd hope that both AMD and the mobo manufacturers would have worked out any serious kinks. ZE board aside, this platform is visibly immature still. I used to be a big AMD user back in the day but been on Intel since, until Threadripper now, and coming from Intel the stability is night and day (Intel is better). Once you get everything tuned in it's fine, but the platform is definitely not for the impatient types.


----------



## Jerky_san

lol guess all my complaints made it somewhere woohoo


----------



## Jerky_san

dejanh said:


> Well, but the 3rd generation of chips you'd hope that both AMD and the mobo manufacturers would have worked out any serious kinks. ZE board aside, this platform is visibly immature still. I used to be a big AMD user back in the day but been on Intel since, until Threadripper now, and coming from Intel the stability is night and day (Intel is better). Once you get everything tuned in it's fine, but the platform is definitely not for the impatient types.


You actually sound a lot like me.. I stuck with AMD till Bulldozer and I wasn't going to buy into that system. I went 2500k and never looked back till ryzen.


----------



## sKutDeath

Hello ladies and Gents,


glad to be here and love all the useful information discussed here. I was a long time lurker but now want to give some of my observations, (and experiences with the ZE & ZEA) and some questions:


1. Has anybody tried SLI with 2 x 3-Slot cards on the ZEA?
2. Has anybody else had problems with RAM in the ZE C1 DIMM Slot, (Will not POST at all)?


I have a couple of months of frustration and lots of time spent on different forums without any good answers... I must say that the 1601 WMI BIOS helped in a lot of areas but I had to RMA the ZE board anyhow. And imagine my frustration when the ZEA PCIE slots put the 2 x 2080 Ti's so close together they actually touch. 



It has been a very long few months and still not really satisfied with these new AMD Threadripper configuration nightmares. I started building AMD machines first with the AMD 3400 64bit Winchester CPU, but went to Intel after it died, but came back for the Threadripper 2970WX.


So looking forward to any help I can offer and of course help that others can offer also...


----------



## dejanh

sKutDeath said:


> Hello ladies and Gents,
> 
> 
> glad to be here and love all the useful information discussed here. I was a long time lurker but now want to give some of my observations, (and experiences with the ZE & ZEA) and some questions:
> 
> 
> 1. Has anybody tried SLI with 2 x 3-Slot cards on the ZEA?
> 2. Has anybody else had problems with RAM in the ZE C1 DIMM Slot, (Will not POST at all)?
> 
> 
> I have a couple of months of frustration and lots of time spent on different forums without any good answers... I must say that the 1601 WMI BIOS helped in a lot of areas but I had to RMA the ZE board anyhow. And imagine my frustration when the ZEA PCIE slots put the 2 x 2080 Ti's so close together they actually touch.
> 
> 
> 
> It has been a very long few months and still not really satisfied with these new AMD Threadripper configuration nightmares. I started building AMD machines first with the AMD 3400 64bit Winchester CPU, but went to Intel after it died, but came back for the Threadripper 2970WX.
> 
> 
> So looking forward to any help I can offer and of course help that others can offer also...


1st and 3rd slot are 16x. Are you using those and the cards are touching?


----------



## sKutDeath

Yes, I am.


----------



## Brain29

sKutDeath said:


> Hello ladies and Gents,
> 
> 1. Has anybody tried SLI with 2 x 3-Slot cards on the ZEA?
> 2. Has anybody else had problems with RAM in the ZE C1 DIMM Slot, (Will not POST at all)?


1) ZE I did but had issues because sli has issues not ZE .. some rendering programs I have was able to farm all slots to gpus

2) are all the slots filled or are you just going 1 by 1 .. ?? rma that sucker


----------



## dejanh

sKutDeath said:


> Yes, I am.


Wow, I am surprised that your cards are touching. I actually haven't seen the RTX 2080 Tis in person and normally only do water-cooling (custom) so it's been a long time since I interacted with air cooled parts anyway. I am so surprised that they are so fat. The spacing between the 1st and 3rd slot is not bad. Very unfortunate for sure.

This is my current setup, single 1080 Ti with the ZEA board.


----------



## sKutDeath

dejanh said:


> Wow, I am surprised that your cards are touching. I actually haven't seen the RTX 2080 Tis in person and normally only do water-cooling (custom) so it's been a long time since I interacted with air cooled parts anyway. I am so surprised that they are so fat. The spacing between the 1st and 3rd slot is not bad. Very unfortunate for sure.
> 
> This is my current setup, single 1080 Ti with the ZEA board.



I am really suprised that all the new ASUS boards have the same problem/challenge, besides all looking the same with the same options, they all have this new PCIE spacing due to the new VRM setup along the top of the board effectively shifting everything down and killing the one slot airgap between 2 MSI RTX 2080 Ti's Lightning Z's. Now of course a person could consider such a configuration a niche market item, but some of us do want Enthusiast Hardware and will continue to buy it. The suppliers should not offer something that is not refined and/or finished... But that is another story....




Brain29 said:


> 1) ZE I did but had issues because sli has issues not ZE .. some rendering programs I have was able to farm all slots to gpus
> 
> 2) are all the slots filled or are you just going 1 by 1 .. ?? rma that sucker



2. I did em in every configuration possible. I could get the whole 4 stick 32Gb kit to work, but with no stickes in C1 or C2. Although if I used the slots like recommended I could get the board to post with 1 DIMM in C2, but it wasn't recognized by BIOS or Windows as being usable, meaning shown but not added to the complete capacity, (only 24 G's shown). I already RMA'd it and am hoping they either fix it or replace it because the spacing of the PCIE Slots are better for the 2 x MSI RTX 2080 Ti Lightning Z's. But 1 stick in C1 and no post whatsoever, not in 1 stick config, not in 2 stick, 3 stick or 4 stick. 



Heres to hoping the Quad Channel RAM problem is sorted...


----------



## goldenleaf

dejanh said:


> Wow, I am surprised that your cards are touching. I actually haven't seen the RTX 2080 Tis in person and normally only do water-cooling (custom) so it's been a long time since I interacted with air cooled parts anyway. I am so surprised that they are so fat. The spacing between the 1st and 3rd slot is not bad. Very unfortunate for sure.
> 
> 
> 
> This is my current setup, single 1080 Ti with the ZEA board.


That's a beauty! 

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


----------



## dejanh

sKutDeath said:


> I am really suprised that all the new ASUS boards have the same problem/challenge, besides all looking the same with the same options, they all have this new PCIE spacing due to the new VRM setup along the top of the board effectively shifting everything down and killing the one slot airgap between 2 MSI RTX 2080 Ti's Lightning Z's. Now of course a person could consider such a configuration a niche market item, but some of us do want Enthusiast Hardware and will continue to buy it. The suppliers should not offer something that is not refined and/or finished... But that is another story....


Agree with all of this. It's time for the XL-ATX format to come back. E-ATX is too small for these new HEDT builds.


goldenleaf said:


> That's a beauty!
> 
> Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


Thanks! It looks better in person actually. Hard to photograph. I have a push-pull 480mm radiator running at the top and another push-pull 360mm at the bottom, dual-bay reservoir and two DDC 3.25s in series. I like to use quick-disconnects as well since they let me change out hardware or service the loop much easier. At some point I'll need to reverse the flow of the loop to stop the intake and outlet piping of the reservoir/pumps from crossing each other just to improve aesthetics, but for now it's good enough.


----------



## sKutDeath

dejanh said:


> Agree with all of this. It's time for the XL-ATX format to come back. E-ATX is too small for these new HDET builds.
> 
> Thanks! It looks better in person actually. Hard to photograph. I have a push-pull 480mm radiator running at the top and another push-pull 360mm at the bottom, dual-bay reservoir and two DDC 3.25s in series. I like to use quick-disconnects as well since they let me change out hardware or service the loop much easier. At some point I'll need to reverse the flow of the loop to stop the intake and outlet piping of the reservoir/pumps from crossing each other just to improve aesthetics, but for now it's good enough.



Couldn't agree more, and yes very nice setup!


----------



## sirlach

I have just moved to a ZEA from my woefull experince with the ZE. 

Agree that it feels like a finished product.Only downside is the GPU spacing. My 2 ASUS Dual 2080ti cards sit very close to each other. There is only a couple of mm gap between the 2 cards and the one closest to the CPU runs 10-15 degrees C hotter under load as a result of the reduced airflow. Waiting for my NVlink bridge to see what the impact is on running together. 

AIDA64 doesn't support monitoring all the FANs yet but AIDA support have advised that they will include the ZEA in the next beta.


----------



## sirlach

64GB of G.Skill Trident Z RGB F4-3200C16D-32GTZRX 32GB (2x16GB) DDR4 AMD @ 3200 XMP works fine on ZEA. 

128GB @ 3200 will not boot. Get all sorts of strange errors. Windows goes into recovery mode. Even got a check CPU error. 

Back to 2133Mhz stock speed and boots as normal. Looks like I have to choose between 128G of stock or 64G of 3200. )


----------



## sKutDeath

sirlach said:


> I have just moved to a ZEA from my woefull experince with the ZE.
> 
> Agree that it feels like a finished product.Only downside is the GPU spacing. My 2 ASUS Dual 2080ti cards sit very close to each other. There is only a couple of mm gap between the 2 cards and the one closest to the CPU runs 10-15 degrees C hotter under load as a result of the reduced airflow. Waiting for my NVlink bridge to see what the impact is on running together.
> 
> AIDA64 doesn't support monitoring all the FANs yet but AIDA support have advised that they will include the ZEA in the next beta.



Please let me know how that works for you. The ZEA shouldn't have any problems with the RAM, But I want to know if you have problems after putting on that 3-Slot NVLink bridge. Still afraid to try again on this board, I was actually waiting till my ZE came back due to the PCIE spacing...


----------



## sirlach

Running the cards in NVLink means they both run hotter and the temps were sitting around 70 degrees on the card with the most restricted airflow. Unless I want to run my Front intake fans at 100% all the time I don't think enough airflow can get between the cards. 

Testing on some games and there still seems to be issues with NVLink / SLI so I have decided to go back to single GPU setup for now. Not worth the hassle.


----------



## sKutDeath

sirlach said:


> Running the cards in NVLink means they both run hotter and the temps were sitting around 70 degrees on the card with the most restricted airflow. Unless I want to run my Front intake fans at 100% all the time I don't think enough airflow can get between the cards.
> 
> Testing on some games and there still seems to be issues with NVLink / SLI so I have decided to go back to single GPU setup for now. Not worth the hassle.



Yes, I am doing the same. The NVLink problems and temps are obviously too high. I hope my ZE comes back fixed. I even built in two 120 MM Fans on the case side panel, and push or pull, little to no difference whatsover. They are just too close together on this board...


----------



## sirlach

I think the only thing you could do if you really needed SLI was to get the thinner cards like the Turbo cards but then they might not be as efficient in getting the heat off the chip itself.


----------



## 00Asgaroth00

Anyone tried the new 1701 BIOS update yet?


----------



## bbowseroctacore

havent seen any probs on bios 1701 yet - been running since day it came out - if anything ram clocks are requiring less v


----------



## 00Asgaroth00

bbowseroctacore said:


> havent seen any probs on bios 1701 yet - been running since day it came out - if anything ram clocks are requiring less v



Do you know if they have fixed/included the WMI stuff in this BIOS?


----------



## bbowseroctacore

still on the oc bench atm whilst testing different ram/gpu combo's - havent looked into much of that yet - have extensive overkill cooling and fans are all at 100% - most monitoring software is untrustworthy atm so im just using coretemp as a guide - will be keen to see if anything can be reported accurately when i get some more time to look into it after deciding on what combo to continue with. had some success with modded 1601 so hopefully this will have the goods


----------



## delerious

sirlach said:


> I think the only thing you could do if you really needed SLI was to get the thinner cards like the Turbo cards but then they might not be as efficient in getting the heat off the chip itself.


Or use water blocks.


----------



## Brain29

anyone else on 1701 having issues were you cant shut down your system after you hit shutdown in windows ? windows shuts down my screens turn off but my fans and lights never turn off they just stay on until i hold the power button ??


----------



## aTsgRe

so did we figure out if the new WMI is included or not...?


----------



## Ljugtomten

aTsgRe said:


> so did we figure out if the new WMI is included or not...?


I believe Elmor wrote that it did. 
I have not yet upgraded to it, when I do I'll also verify that WMI sensors can be read in Linux.


----------



## thagabe

WMI was included and works on both Windows and Linux


----------



## sKutDeath

So, just got word back from Caseking in Germany and my ZE is on the way back "Repaired"? Yep, scared the **** outta me also. So I give them a ring and they said that evidently there were some bent or dirty pins on the socket keeping DIMM slot C1 from posting. Suppossedly they, (ASUS), checked it out and everthing is ok now... We will soon see. I really do like the ZEA, but I want to utilize both MSI RTX 2080 Ti Lightning Z's which not only don't really fit together on the ZEA, but also don't work for **** with the current initial 0207 BIOS at all, (mucho stuttering in 3D programs and games). I will report back when I get it back in. Another thing I will miss about the ZEA is the EXT FAN card and 10G Network card onboard. The EXT FAN card is so much nicer than the ZE, and the PCIE 10G add in card won't fit with the 2 Lightnings, but the NVLink is more important to me than the other two atm. I will keep the ZEA just in case because it is a great board in everything but the 3-Slot SLI/NVLink cards.


----------



## MacMus

I'm not sure if that is the place to report bugs of Asus Zenith Extreme Alpha but here are mine findings:

- VRM fan curve is very aggressive and cannot be adjusted in properly for high temps. Casing loud operations of the board two little fans. Manual curive is not possible. The best result are when connecting those VRM fan headers to some other header on mobo.

- RAM compatibility sucks. 3600 any CAS is not bootable on this board. Higest stable i got is 3466 with CAS16. Flow readings are completly out of the blue (350l/m)

- Headers readings including CPU are waked. Temps are dropping below zero!

Initial operations:





Starting to drop temperatures:






Here i go below zero!


----------



## Brain29

ZEA seems to be going through the same beginning bugs as ZE


----------



## MacMus

i foudn the issue. It was cause by overclocking enchancment from BIOS!. It was enables. Once set to auto it revelse true temperatures.

With new temperatures i'm disappointed. 

https://www.overclock.net/forum/61-...-ek-supremacy-str4-rgb-nickel-waterblock.html


----------



## sKutDeath

Finally got my ZE up to speed and working with the 2 x 2080 Ti's in SLI/NVLink. Turns out there were bent pins on the socket keeping the Quad Memory Controller from Running Quad RAM. To make it short and simple, fired up the first time with 4 DIMMS filled with 3200Mhz CL.14 RAM. Booted the very first time and everything works. Been tweaking and testing the last week and have got it running with my 2970WX @ 4.2. SLI/NVLink installed without one single hikkup or problem. Have even re-installed Afterburner and have the 2 cards clocked @ +48Mhz Core & +1000Mhz VRAM with temps not going over 79° during BFV or Port Royal DLSS Test, (with a very ambitious fan curve). Not sure what to say other than I tried SLI/NVLink with 2 x 2080 Ti's on 2 different systems, one the x399 ZEA and the other a X99 system with a Core i7 5960X and both had problems due to the 3-Slot design. The 4-Slot design with this ZE worked before and works now with no problems. The other 2 always led to some type of VBIOS corruption after a crash or BOD. BFV did cause 1 BOD in the beginning but has since not been a problem. I do have frame drops now and then and I am still investigating my background processes and trying to get my Project Lasso correctly configured but all in all I am satisfied atm.


And before anybody reminds me YES, I know that BFV doesn't support SLI/NVLink in DX12. But my card that does get utilized was getting real poor performance before with the ZEA when I had both cards installed. Now it runs like I only have one installed. Let just hope multi GPU will get support in the future in more DX12 games.


----------



## dejanh

New UEFI is out for the Zenith Extreme Alpha. It has an ambiguous change log saying "Enhanced Security". No stability improvements with DRAM. No visible changes.


----------



## neil_tohno

I found a bug?

When I chang the Distributed (UMA) to Local (NUMA) memory mode in BIOS，


















the DRAM became unstable until I remove and reinsert the memory sticks.


4 x F4-3200C16S-16GTZR, Distributed mode, Latency=101ns


----------



## Brain29

dejanh said:


> New UEFI is out for the Zenith Extreme Alpha. It has an ambiguous change log saying "Enhanced Security". No stability improvements with DRAM. No visible changes.


maybe there just changing the master keys for the auto updates since there auto update tool and servers were compromised a month ago
"they say it just effects laptops" 



neil_tohno said:


> I found a bug?
> 
> When I chang the Distributed (UMA) to Local (NUMA) memory mode in BIOS，
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the DRAM became unstable until I remove the memory and before reinserting the memory.
> 
> 
> 4 x F4-3200C16S-16GTZR, Distributed mode, Latency=101ns


change your speed manually to 2933 after setting the profile overclock - it should be stable then - this has been an issue since the release of ZE - if you only use 2 sticks of ram you should have a better chance of being stable
*it could be heat related but I personally didn't see anything outline with my build
*the more cores on your chip also seem create a limit too (just by reading issues on forms I am assuming this) 

my friend has an asrock board and we didn't have this issue


----------



## MacMus

Brain29 said:


> change your speed manually to 2933 after setting the profile overclock - it should be stable then - this has been an issue since the release of ZE - if you only use 2 sticks of ram you should have a better chance of being stable
> *it could be heat related but I personally didn't see anything outline with my build
> *the more cores on your chip also seem create a limit too (just by reading issues on forms I am assuming this)


that is actually true with AZA .. it looks like timings or something is getting messed up.
Each time i want to test new Frequency and timing on RAM i have to clear cmos and load a new profile. This is the best chance that new values are actually getting assigned.


----------



## Brain29

MacMus said:


> i have to clear cmos and load a new profile. This is the best chance that new values are actually getting assigned.


clearing cmos on this board doesn't work correctly nor dose re flashing a fresh bios - there is weird ghosting history that lingers that usually takes 3-4 weeks to garbage collect itself out of the uefi chip 

its a fun guessing game but every problem I have had with this board has lead back to something strange with the UEFI chip and old history sometimes re-flashing 10 times in a row will completely correct this -- I have yet to see a error free release from asus i think 802 or 902 was the closest then amd released a new update and asus seemed to just port an older uefi with the update and reverted back


----------



## MacMus

Brain29 said:


> clearing cmos on this board doesn't work correctly nor dose re flashing a fresh bios - there is weird ghosting history that lingers that usually takes 3-4 weeks to garbage collect itself out of the uefi chip
> 
> its a fun guessing game but every problem I have had with this board has lead back to something strange with the UEFI chip and old history sometimes re-flashing 10 times in a row will completely correct this -- I have yet to see a error free release from asus i think 802 or 902 was the closest then amd released a new update and asus seemed to just port an older uefi with the update and reverted back


i must agree with you there is something really strange .. some ghost in the machine **** going on with AZE and now also present with Alpha .. i have a good experience with that while trying to overclock the RAM... sometimes new settings got "saved" right away (in this case lot of changes in timings etc) sometimes it just take several reloads or cmos reset to see it happens. The best way to experience is to save profile to usb drive and try to joggle between them. Sometimes new settings just not get saved or something... Very annoying bug.

Anyways .. anyhow knows how to save preset of bios to actually store it on board not on usb drvie ? I don't see that is possible on that board, eventhough i save it to "1" and give it a name it not there anymore once the PC reboots and I reenter the bios.


----------



## MacMus

what LLC setting you guys are using on your threadrippers?


----------



## skingun

MacMus said:


> what LLC setting you guys are using on your threadrippers?


Whatever stock is.


----------



## MacMus

i found out that LLC5 is much more stable


----------



## skingun

MacMus said:


> i found out that LLC5 is much more stable


I have zero stability issues. 1950x. 2x 2080Ti. Trident Z RGB (For AMD)] F4-3200C14Q-32GTZRX @ 3200mHz.


----------



## MacMus

*macmus*

what oc, voltage, ram u running ?


----------



## skingun

MacMus said:


> what oc, voltage, ram u running ?


DOCP


----------



## thagabe

@skingun

EDIT: (BIG EDIT) This is under Zenith Extreme Alpha, I did not have many of these issues with the OG Zenith Extreme.


Yeah, I doubt you are "stable" unless your definition of stability is no BSOD. I'm kinda stable with 2 ram errors in 8 hours using Stilt's Safe 3200 4xsamsung b-die Preset applied on a freshly flashback OG BIOS (because 0405 gave me some weird smp error under linux). I cannot get 100% error free memory whether or not I OC the CPU, unless running JDEC 2133. 

CPU: [email protected] 1.125V
SOC: 1.0185 V
RAM: 4x8gb Trident Z MADE FOR RYZEN "X" @3200MHz 1.4V

With this set up I got myself a stable CPU (enermax 360 AIO II idles 37->41 C) and a *mostly* stable RAM @3200MHz 1.4V with 2 errors in 8 hours of karhu (tho some say it can push much higher but @3466 it passed 1smus's v3 test but not karhu ram test)


----------



## skingun

OK. Different boards I use Zenith non alpha version. 

I am stable. 48 hours memtest with 0 errors.


----------



## MacMus

Asus Zenith Extreme Alpha... Once upon a day board decided not to boot anymore. Instead it was stuck on 00 code with fans blowing to max.
Solution was to remove the battery and leave it for some time!


----------



## MacMus

this happend to me again this morning... what'up up Mobo is dying ?


----------



## Martin778

CPU/board/socket is either dying or about to.


----------



## goldenleaf

MacMus said:


> this happend to me again this morning... what'up up Mobo is dying ?


I've had issues too . Do you ever hit that safe boot button on the motherboard? Sometimes I have success wishing the power supply off and then back on to do a hard reset when the motherboard seems to freeze up. From the accounts I've read it seems that the original zenith extreme is a little bit more stable than the zenith extreme alpha.

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


----------



## MacMus

look like alpha is a step back from original extreme ;-(


----------



## neil_tohno

About the new 1701 BIOS, ZE + 2950X

I found the CPU Core Voltage Offset mode can't working, unlike old BIOS(1601-ASUSHW)，

When use PBO + CPU Core Voltage Offset [-0.025 v] , I run several times System Stability Test in aida64,
my pc can't pass stress FPU for 15mins, the computer freezing.

Now，I just set CPU Core Voltage to Auto mode.


Spoiler




View attachment N2_0527_setting.zip




(⁎˃ᴗ˂⁎)

And finally I solve the DRAM stability issues, (4 x F4-3200C16S-16GTZR, Distributed mode)

I just set 3200MHZ 16-18-18-38-56 1.35v, and ProcODT 60Ω, CAD_BUS 24 24 24 24 
leave other Timings Auto.


Spoiler


----------



## Brain29

kind of curious if anyone else over has done this .. 

I have having buggy issues with my 10g card so I updated it directly from the Aquantia site with the 107 driver and updated the firmware from asus current 1.5 to auantia current 3.1

it seems solid its been about a week my pings times and ms have been allot more stable and consistent

wondering if there was someone out there that experienced a negative -


----------



## Ljugtomten

Brain29 said:


> kind of curious if anyone else over has done this ..
> 
> I have having buggy issues with my 10g card so I updated it directly from the Aquantia site with the 107 driver and updated the firmware from asus current 1.5 to auantia current 3.1
> 
> it seems solid its been about a week my pings times and ms have been allot more stable and consistent
> 
> wondering if there was someone out there that experienced a negative -


No issues for me using ASUS drivers and FW, connected to a TP-Link T1700G-28TQ V2 with Mikrotik S+RJ10 10000Mbit/s SFP+ modules


----------



## Brain29

internally mine was dropping with windows or software issues - trying to drop or change the gateway type stuff really weird .. but there was no change on my router or other devices just the nic would drop


----------



## MacMus

fix to scheduler is came in may update of windows. However it looks like it needs also FW and chipset updates...

I wonder if that force Asus to work on this board finnaly.


----------



## gupsterg

W10 x64 1903 aka May update is fine on ZEA, you don't need updated firmware and or chipset drivers to take advantage of scheduler fix.

UEFI CPPC2 (Collaborative Power And Performance Control) is a Ryzen 3rd gen feature, link. So you'd need 3rd gen Threadripper, besides FW/SW updates.


----------



## MacMus

gupsterg said:


> W10 x64 1903 aka May update is fine on ZEA, you don't need updated firmware and or chipset drivers to take advantage of scheduler fix.
> 
> UEFI CPPC2 (Collaborative Power And Performance Control) is a Ryzen 3rd gen feature, link. So you'd need 3rd gen Threadripper, besides FW/SW updates.


oh.. but there are some fixes for us or not ;D


----------



## gupsterg

3x 3DM FS 1809 vs 1903

Stock 1950X, 3400MHz C15 1T Quad NUMA, RX VEGA 64 PowerPlay reg mod, GPU clock MHz in 1903 runs is incorrect.


----------



## Brain29

MacMus said:


> oh.. but there are some fixes for us or not ;D


Considering the Asus development team on X399 has been disbanded and moved to the server side zen architecture id be surprised to see any improvements that weren't just a direct port from 3party suppliers that they seem to be ignoring too

* you can thank the ceo so said that threadripper was a disappointment and the only real growth the company has is on the server side since asus only has about "1%" however they measured that number


----------



## Ljugtomten

Brain29 said:


> * you can thank the ceo so said that threadripper was a disappointment and the only real growth the company has is on the server side since asus only has about "1%" however they measured that number


Heh, ASUS components in a server.. No thanks.
It may be something for one-off builds or custom workstations, but they will never be able to get any part of the market at a big company with professional datacenters.
RGB and bling-bling is not something for a DC, where performance, reliability, power consumption and cost are the major selling points.


----------



## Brain29

Ljugtomten said:


> Heh, ASUS components in a server.. No thanks.
> It may be something for one-off builds or custom workstations, but they will never be able to get any part of the market at a big company with professional datacenters.
> RGB and bling-bling is not something for a DC, where performance, reliability, power consumption and cost are the major selling points.


I don't know what your talking about I think every IT team wants to turn every server room into a dance party room


----------



## goldenleaf

Brain29 said:


> I don't know what your talking about I think every IT team wants to turn every server room into a dance party room


I'd like a little bit better single core speed on the next Threadripper. Not sure if I want 64-cores. My 32 is total overkill.

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


----------



## MacMus

32 cores is a sweet spot... 64 cores are f.. insane.


----------



## goldenleaf

If anyone is trying to upgrade to Windows build 1903 and is unable to do it meaning of keeps failing and rebooting and undoing the update try disabling the Wi-Fi and Bluetooth and your bios

I ended up doing a clean install and it failed to boot into Windows for an unknown error after that I disable the Wi-Fi and Bluetooth and the install went fine.

I suspect that I didn't need to do a clean install but only needed to disable Wi-Fi and Bluetooth because the 1903 update is almost like a fresh install of Windows

This is advice for those that have a zenith extreme alpha motherboard

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


----------



## 00Asgaroth00

*1901 BIOS (ZE)*

Hi,


Has anyone tried out the new 1901 BIOS for the ZE (not Alpha) board? 



I cant find a change log anywhere either, does anyone have any info on what the new BIOS has to offer?


EDIT: I wonder if they have fixed the temperature issue mentioned here, where temperature reporting is wonkey when "Overclocking Enhancement" is Enabled/Auto and "Core Performance Boost" is Enabled/Auto when trying to overclock your CPU, or load the 4GHz overclock profile in the BIOS.


----------



## gupsterg

00Asgaroth00 said:


> EDIT: I wonder if they have fixed the temperature issue mentioned here, where temperature reporting is wonkey when "Overclocking Enhancement" is Enabled/Auto and "Core Performance Boost" is Enabled/Auto when trying to overclock your CPU, or load the 4GHz overclock profile in the BIOS.


Extreme Tweaker > Overclocking Enhancement [Disabled]
Extreme Tweaker > Tweakers Paradise > Sense MI Skew [Disabled]

I set above on all ZE UEFIs (last used was 1701, had setup since launch) and never encountered issue on CPU temperature, may that have been stock 1950X + OC RAM or OC 1950X+RAM.


----------



## 00Asgaroth00

gupsterg said:


> Extreme Tweaker > Tweakers Paradise > Sense MI Skew [Disabled]



What does the above setting do?


Did you have Core Performance Boost set to Enabled/Auto at the same time?


----------



## gupsterg

When enabled or if [Auto] is defaulting to enabled, it will skew tCTL based on Sense MI Offset.

Core Performance Boost: [Enabled] when CPU stock, [Disabled] when OC'd as have 1950X. If I had a 2xxx series and was doing PBO/PE OC then I'd use [Enabled], if I was doing manual OC then [Disabled]. Regardless of CPU used if manual OC is done, ie +25MHz over base clock, as CPU would enter OC mode it gets disabled even if you try to force it on.


----------



## dejanh

Careful with the new 1901 UEFI on the Zenith Alpha board (perhaps the same applies to original Zenith). One user reported exacerbated memory issues with this release. Not sure if flashback is possible. I do not dare test ATM because I need my machine to work.


----------



## neil_tohno

dejanh said:


> Careful with the new 1901 UEFI on the Zenith Alpha board (perhaps the same applies to original Zenith). One user reported exacerbated memory issues with this release. Not sure if flashback is possible. I do not dare test ATM because I need my machine to work.


Thanks.

Too late, I'm trapped :no-smile









They add the change log:


> Version 1901
> 2019/06/115.67 MBytes
> ROG ZENITH EXTREME BIOS 1901
> Improve hardware monitoring compatibility with 3rd party applications.
> Fixed a boot issue when using a Quadro K6000 GPU.
> " Before running the USB BIOS Flashback tool, please rename the BIOS file (ZE.CAP) using BIOSRenamer.''




I found another problem ...

[Bluetooth] can’t send files to computer from smartphone
https://social.technet.microsoft.co...puter-from-smartphone?forum=win10itprogeneral


----------



## MacMus

- 1901 broke memory support for Asus line
- New Chipset drivers broke StoreMI support

Well done AMD/Asus Zenith line was already bad as it is now it's just worthless.


----------



## dejanh

MacMus said:


> - 1901 broke memory support for Asus line
> - New Chipset drivers broke StoreMI support
> 
> Well done AMD/Asus Zenith line was already bad as it is now it's just worthless.


I do have to say that I have never seen this level of incompetence. It is downright mind-boggling. How can they be so bad? Are they not qualifying any hardware on these things and just doing the fixes and keeping their fingers crossed for an improvement? Absolutely stunning.



neil_tohno said:


> Thanks.
> 
> Too late, I'm trapped :no-smile


Flashback to prior release works thankfully. Just download the previous UEFI/BIOS and rename the file to ZE.CAP (for Zenith Extreme) or ZEA.CAP (for Zenith Extreme Alpha), put it in the root of a USB stick and use the flashback function at the back. To flashback:
- machine off, put USB into the appropriate flashback port
- press and hold the flashback button until it starts to blink at a steady rate
- leave alone until it stops flashing
- reboot, clear CMOS, then reboot again and set up your settings once more


----------



## gupsterg

For me UEFIs so far on ZEA have had minor quirks.

0207 & 0405 both need CPU voltage mode changed from Auto to Offset/+/Auto to have stock clocks/voltages on 1950X. Both attained 3400MHz C15 1T using tightened other timings with SOC: 1.056 VDIMM: 1.355. This is +6mV on SOC & +5mV VDIMM than same CPU/RAM used on ZE.

1901 has the voltage quirk solved. Only issue so far I have had is ASUS TurboV Core v1.02.02 can freeze data under ASUS WMI section of HWINFO. PWM of headers is still reactive, I need to close TurboV and reopen HWINFO to gain back functioning monitoring data under header ASUS WMI. I have done a lot reruns of 3400MHz C14 1T now on 1901. I bumped SOC to 1.062V just thinking it may build some over provisioning in profile, I need at least 1.38V VDIMM to gain POST to OS if use C14 @ 3400MHz, below is longest run so far of RAM Test.



Spoiler














From above I have tweaked:-

tRCDWR from 15 to 14
tRAS from 32 to 30
tRC from 46 to 44
tFAW from 32 to 30
tRFC from 274 to 272

I did bump VDIMM to 1.4V just to over provision for extra stability without testing a lot.



Spoiler














I am also now using a higher bit pattern in the PMU training menu, originally 5 was used for 3400MHz C15/14 and now with more tightening down using 7. Below are result files from 3DM, been get some nice consistent runs now on W10 1903.

View attachment 3DMFS_3400L.zip


----------



## neil_tohno

OH,NO

Two Days, I found nothing to make the memory stabilize.

I have flashed the 1701-BIOS, unplug the battery on the main board and re-install the battery, it's look like a foolish thing.



--------------------------
Edited,

Today, I flashed the 1701-BIOS again, it works. :hmmsmiley


----------



## MacMus

neil_tohno said:


> OH,NO
> 
> Two Days, I found nothing to make the memory stabilize.
> 
> I have flashed the 1701-BIOS, unplug the battery on the main board and re-install the battery, it's look like a foolish thing.
> 
> 
> 
> --------------------------
> Edited,
> 
> Today, I flashed the 1701-BIOS again, it works. :hmmsmiley
> 
> View attachment 277646


AZEA or OG? 

so now works on new BISO ?


----------



## Chasse

*1901 Weirdness.*

Rog Zenith Extreme Alpha Bios 1901.



O.K I have been striking some very odd problems.


1) Occasional complete power off for no apparent reason.


2) During a run of 3D Mark Time Spy Stress test saw the CPU temperature go to -128 and stay there, BTW at this point the CPU fans both stopped and you could fry and Egg on the cooler.


3) Sometimes on reboot it starts memory training in an very odd manner and eventually after about two mins go's to the oc fail screen, I haven't set any overclock other than specifying the memory as D.O.C.P standard and setting the voltages to 1.35 for my 3200Mhz corsair RGB memory 4 x 16GB.


4) I have found now twice the machine in a powered off state and it will not power on again until the mains power is cut, a count of 5 done and mains power re-established - at which times it boots normally.


At this time considering switching back to the original bios to see if these issues continue there.


----------



## MacMus

Chasse said:


> Rog Zenith Extreme Alpha Bios 1901.
> O.K I have been striking some very odd problems.
> 1) Occasional complete power off for no apparent reason.
> 2) During a run of 3D Mark Time Spy Stress test saw the CPU temperature go to -128 and stay there, BTW at this point the CPU fans both stopped and you could fry and Egg on the cooler.
> 3) Sometimes on reboot it starts memory training in an very odd manner and eventually after about two mins go's to the oc fail screen, I haven't set any overclock other than specifying the memory as D.O.C.P standard and setting the voltages to 1.35 for my 3200Mhz corsair RGB memory 4 x 16GB.
> 4) I have found now twice the machine in a powered off state and it will not power on again until the mains power is cut, a count of 5 done and mains power re-established - at which times it boots normally.
> At this time considering switching back to the original bios to see if these issues continue there.


Your problems aren't odd i went thru all above 4. Let me help you.

1. This is due to Asus SW or any "incompatible" monitoring software. Try removing first all asus OC/FAN related SW, you should stop having that.
2. Disable OC Enchancment in BIOS. This lowers temperature of sensor, so to enable greater OC. For me this is just stiupid feature, don't know what braindead engineer designed it.
3. Yep memory settings on this MOBO are nightmare. For me default "clean" BIOS settings do not work. Nether of BIOS presets nor DOCP profile. It took me many many hours to have it working stable @ 3200 or now at 3400. I figured out that on "cold boot" when PC always turn on twice it was always booting @ 3200. 
I disabled S3+S5 so it will not put mobo in standby. Now it always boots up at 3200
4. HW monitoring software are not working nicly with this mobo, and they most of the time are causing it. Remove all monitoring SW and you will never experience power off again.


----------



## MacMus

i am scared to upgrade 1701 .. maybe i will wait for next one gr.. it cost me weeks to have it working in this state. Playing with OC, voltage, RAM and god know what ..


----------



## dejanh

MacMus said:


> Your problems aren't odd i went thru all above 4. Let me help you.
> 
> 1. This is due to Asus SW or any "incompatible" monitoring software. Try removing first all asus OC/FAN related SW, you should stop having that.
> 2. Disable OC Enchancment in BIOS. This lowers temperature of sensor, so to enable greater OC. For me this is just stiupid feature, don't know what braindead engineer designed it.
> 3. Yep memory settings on this MOBO are nightmare. For me default "clean" BIOS settings do not work. Nether of BIOS presets nor DOCP profile. It took me many many hours to have it working stable @ 3200 or now at 3400. I figured out that on "cold boot" when PC always turn on twice it was always booting @ 3200.
> I disabled S3+S5 so it will not put mobo in standby. Now it always boots up at 3200
> 4. HW monitoring software are not working nicly with this mobo, and they most of the time are causing it. Remove all monitoring SW and you will never experience power off again.


What ram do you have?


----------



## neil_tohno

Today, I changed the settings about memory, and It cause a memory stability issues.















Then I pressed Clear CMOS Button, but it doesn't work anymore.
I have flashed 1701-BIOS three times, until I use Afuefix64.efi, again, the problem is solved.
https://www.overclock.net/forum/26403470-post1.html








It's weird. Is there some problems in BIOS？:stun:

In last few days, my computer sometimes freezes on post, the LiveDash OLED shows "checking NVRAM", I have to press Clear CMOS Button to end this process.


1701-BIOS-ZE.CAP


----------



## 1stFalloutBoy

dejanh said:


> What ram do you have?


I managed to track this problem down to dip 5 in the end I only found that after reading some information on a NewEgg review for a purchase, now that DIP5 is uninstalled no crashes in over a week.

My memory is Corsair CMW64GX4M4C3200C16W.

There are still more oddities with this board though...

While CPU-Z shows me the memory correctly - ASUS System Info either lists an empty combo box to select the module to view with or strait out crashes AISuite ( I'm putting this down to bodgy ASUS software .... AGAIN )
MemTweakIt - reports the basic memory timings correctly but not the rest and gives a negative score for ram efficiency - yet another ASUS botch job.
Updating EZUpdate from the ASUS website resulted in Could not load AsIo.sys (5) **** ASUS.

Thaiphoon Burner a program to read what sort of memory chips you have on your ram reports everything correctly except it reports all my ram as having invalid SPD module checksums.
( I am not making any assumptions here as it could be something ASUS has done or it could be Thaiphoon Burner , ASUS reports the checksums in BIOS as being 1B1D, it could also be because this is R.G.B ram that used SM Bus to sync colours )

ASUS informed of DIP5 issue and told to get their **** together - everyone needs to complain until this is fixed.


----------



## phazedreality81

hey i have a zenith extreme, and am trying to figure out how to switch between uma and numa mode in the bios (i dont use ryzen master)
i see in the memory interleaving option, that there is auto, none, channel, socket, and die, and mmaybe one more. can someone explain to me what each of those mean and which one i should choose if i want uma mode? i think channel is numa mode, and i've tried auto, but whenever i use auto my system crashes when i have long encodes (4k content that takes maybe 5 hours to encode) but doesnt crash when i use channel.

thank you


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

New BIOS 2001 has appeared


----------



## Jerky_san

Arne Saknussemm said:


> New BIOS 2001 has appeared


Yeah I'm scared to update to it..


----------



## dejanh

Jerky_san said:


> Yeah I'm scared to update to it..


Just updated. I am able to boot with the same memory settings as 0405, however I can no longer do so when my CPU is OCd to 4.0GHz. Something has changed and I would have to tweak the OC manually it seems now to make it stable. No time for that now. Back to stock for now. Super flaky platform.


----------



## Arne Saknussemm

I took the plunge and it is working fine here...still get the same good results I always have...so far...


----------



## gupsterg

Today whilst on r/AMD I noted a thread highlighting ASRock X399 Taichi getting AMD AGESA ThreadRipperPI-SP3r2 1.1.0.2. I first thought this was a mistake, as we've had it for a while. I checked the ASRock site and indeed virtually 6mths after ZE the Taichi has updated AGESA.



dejanh said:


> Just updated. I am able to boot with the same memory settings as 0405, however I can no longer do so when my CPU is OCd to 4.0GHz. Something has changed and I would have to tweak the OC manually it seems now to make it stable. No time for that now. Back to stock for now. Super flaky platform.


When I moved same CPU/RAM from ZE to ZEA I lost ability to use 3400MHz, only by tinkering with the PMU menu did I gain back the ability. Perhaps try playing with that section.


----------



## neil_tohno

Just update, performance decreased, just a little.















Local memory mode? so wired.


----------



## neil_tohno

Is anyone upgraded win10 1903?

Again, I found the bluetooth can't working anymore.




> Windows cannot store Bluetooth authentication codes (link keys) on the local adapter. Bluetooth keyboards might not work in the system BIOS during start-up.


----------



## mr_zbrush

*Asus Zenith Bios 2001 all kind of issues*

the new bios 2001 dosnt seem to like my previous settings

frequency and vcore dropping in windows, instability issues, thermal issues, anyone experiencing something similar ?

i've noticed few setting/names has changed coming from 901, i've been running the build @ 3.6Ghz for more than a year doing 3D rendering with no issues till now


----------



## neil_tohno

neil_tohno said:


> Then I pressed Clear CMOS Button, but it doesn't work anymore.
> I have flashed 1701-BIOS three times, until I use Afuefix64.efi, again, the problem is solved.
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/26403470-post1.html



At last, I found the PMU Training have some bugs, :thumbsdow

when I disable PMU Training, everything seems OK.


----------



## dejanh

neil_tohno said:


> At last, I found the PMU Training have some bugs, :thumbsdow
> 
> when I disable PMU Training, everything seems OK.


What UEFI are you on right now? Latest release? Is this still the case for you? After all these months I am wanting to try to get my memory back up to 3200MHz CL14 but I cannot boot at anything past 3000MHz (note that I use 64GB of dual rank memory that used to work at 3200MHz CL14 on the ZE board on UEFI 1003 and earlier, but does not work on later releases). I am using the ZEA board right now.

Also, any thoughts from anyone on whether upgrading to the 2950X instead of the 1950X would allow me to run 3200MHz CL14? Finally, any idea on the increased CPU overclocking room using the 2950X and the ZEA board?


----------



## gupsterg

Just before Christmas I got 2x 2920X, they weren't that great if I really thought about it, see here.

TR2 is Zen+ and compared with my Zen+ AM4 CPUs the IMCs were not great on ones I had. I had 3x 2700X, one reached max 3466MHz on 2x8GB, another 3533MHz and last one I had was 3600MHz. 4x8GB I'd lose significant MHz, ~3333MHz which would be like say 4x16GB on TR2. The Zen+ AM4 CPUs were used on a daisy chain topology.

Also ZE/ZEA use T topology, AFAIK AMD FW is more tuned towards daisy chain topology, AFAIK AMD don't allow vendors to tweak FW like Intel, see this post.

If you don't need the PCI-E lanes of X399 and don't wanna go TR3+TRX40, I'd say your better off going AM4. A R9 3900X does very well against a 2950X and has better RAM MHz/density support, due to the IO die you don't have latency penalty like in UMA mode on TR1/2. You also have option of 3950X, plus AM4 may see Zen3 and AM4 as mainstream gains more UEFI updates than the halo line up.


----------



## dejanh

gupsterg said:


> Just before Christmas I got 2x 2920X, they weren't that great if I really thought about it, see here.
> 
> TR2 is Zen+ and compared with my Zen+ AM4 CPUs the IMCs were not great on ones I had. I had 3x 2700X, one reached max 3466MHz on 2x8GB, another 3533MHz and last one I had was 3600MHz. 4x8GB I'd lose significant MHz, ~3333MHz which would be like say 4x16GB on TR2. The Zen+ AM4 CPUs were used on a daisy chain topology.
> 
> Also ZE/ZEA use T topology, AFAIK AMD FW is more tuned towards daisy chain topology, AFAIK AMD don't allow vendors to tweak FW like Intel, see this post.
> 
> If you don't need the PCI-E lanes of X399 and don't wanna go TR3+TRX40, I'd say your better off going AM4. A R9 3900X does very well against a 2950X and has better RAM MHz/density support, due to the IO die you don't have latency penalty like in UMA mode on TR1/2. You also have option of 3950X, plus AM4 may see Zen3 and AM4 as mainstream gains more UEFI updates than the halo line up.


Thanks for the detailed feedback. I took a quick look at the results you posted and that does seem a bit discouraging. I would have expected 2nd generation of chips to be more, not less forgiving of higher speed memory. I have plenty of issues as-is getting 4x16GB dual-rank running at rated 3200MHz CL14. I do need the PCIe lanes since I use a lot of PCIe storage so that generally rules out mainstream platforms like AM4 (this plus multi-GPU setups is the same reason why I stuck with HEDT platforms for a long time). It sounds to me like your advice would really be to save some pennies and stick with the 1950X for the time being and when I decide to upgrade move up to newer generation of TR. I am not keen on blowing $3K on a new TR3 setup at this stage since I do not have a lot of confidence in early boards for the TR platform (the disaster that was 1st gen has me sufficiently weary).

On a positive note, I came across some useful information from one of the Gigabyte forums of somebody who was running the same dual-rank memory as I am and had plenty of trouble getting 3200MHz CL14 rated going on more recent UEFI, and his brute force solution was actually just rooted in bumping SOC voltage to about 1.12V and driving the actual DRAM with about 1.45V each. Doing the same today in my setup allowed me to get a (for now apparently) stable 4x16GB 3133MHz CL14 with the CPU also overclocked to 4GHz. Next I am going to try for 3200MHz. *fingers crossed*


----------



## dejanh

@gupsterg - Quick question for you...it appears that I can successfully clock my memory to 3133MHz by boosting the SOC and AB/CD DRAM voltage and pass 400%-500% of Memtest HCI and 8 hours of Prime95 Blend test without issues. 1/3 times however when the system is starting from cold boot, the memory training fails and the system goes to the F1 screen after failing to POST. I then literally enter the UEFI, hit F10, the system reboots and posts without issues. Any clue what I may be missing here? This entire issue with the memory, including not being able to run 3200MHz is all training related. I just have no idea what to do about it.


----------



## gupsterg

@dejanh

My experience with dual sided/rank dimms is pretty much none.

If what you say was happening to me on single sided/rank dimms, then it's the usual things to tinker with and see if it solves it.

SOC/VDIMM & VBOOT/VTTDDR/ProcODT/CAD Bus Drive Strengths

Don't over look playing with Phy menu in AMD CBS > UMC Common Options > DDR4 Common Options, near the end is Phy. When I moved a 1950X from ZE to ZEA I found the same CPU & RAM would not do 3400MHz without adjusting Phy menu. I'd been running 3400MHz on ZE since about Aug 18 when it became available in UEFI 1402.

For the single sided/rank 4x8GB kit I had in use, I needed to set on ZEA:-

DFE Read Training [Enable]
FFE Write Training [Disable]
PMU Pattern Bits Control [Manual]
PMU Pattern Bits [6]

Link to post by Elmor on Phy menu.


----------



## dejanh

@gupsterg Thanks for the feedback. Let me play around a bit with those settings and see what comes of it. Seeing as I get immediate failure to train off of a cold boot, I am going to try adjusting Vboot to start and see what impact it has, then go from there.


----------



## gupsterg

@dejanh

NP  , I hope you attain what you'd like. The training issue may not be voltage related. For example I could make POST intermittently fail fully so board reverted to fail safe defaults by using incorrect ProcODT, etc. So you may find a setting, may mask the incorrect setup of another.

There is no doubt in my mind Zen2 is way more forgiving with RAM than Zen/Zen+. So defo don't blow more on X399 and if you can't do without the PCI-E lanes then best is to save up and go TR3+TRX40. It's not just the RAM side of things that have improved.

TR2 exposes core performance ordering to Ryzen Master, but OS can not take advantage of it. Where as Zen2 has CPPC (Collaborative Processor Performance Control), so on TR3 OS will be aware and can take advantage of best cores.


----------



## neil_tohno

dejanh said:


> Thanks for the detailed feedback. I took a quick look at the results you posted and that does seem a bit discouraging. I would have expected 2nd generation of chips to be more, not less forgiving of higher speed memory. I have plenty of issues as-is getting 4x16GB dual-rank running at rated 3200MHz CL14. I do need the PCIe lanes since I use a lot of PCIe storage so that generally rules out mainstream platforms like AM4 (this plus multi-GPU setups is the same reason why I stuck with HEDT platforms for a long time). It sounds to me like your advice would really be to save some pennies and stick with the 1950X for the time being and when I decide to upgrade move up to newer generation of TR. I am not keen on blowing $3K on a new TR3 setup at this stage since I do not have a lot of confidence in early boards for the TR platform (the disaster that was 1st gen has me sufficiently weary).
> 
> On a positive note, I came across some useful information from one of the Gigabyte forums of somebody who was running the same dual-rank memory as I am and had plenty of trouble getting 3200MHz CL14 rated going on more recent UEFI, and his brute force solution was actually just rooted in bumping SOC voltage to about 1.12V and driving the actual DRAM with about 1.45V each. Doing the same today in my setup allowed me to get a (for now apparently) stable 4x16GB 3133MHz CL14 with the CPU also overclocked to 4GHz. Next I am going to try for 3200MHz. *fingers crossed*


Sorry, I don't watch the thread.









About the new 2001 BIOS, ZE + 2950X
Gskill [Trident Z RGB] F4-3200C16S-16GTZR [DDR4-3200 64GB (16GBx4) ]

3200MHZ 16-18-18-38-56 1.36v, and ProcODT 60Ω, CAD_BUS 24 24 24 24

You see, I just bumping SOC voltage to *1.11250V* and adjust the DRAM voltage with *1.36V* (don't need 1.45V that high) , 

and use this setting, the DRAM stability issues is solved:



> DFE Read Training [Enable]
> FFE Write Training [Disable]
> PMU Pattern Bits Control [Manual]
> PMU Pattern Bits [5]


see this, https://github.com/integralfx/MemTestHelper/blob/master/DDR4%20OC%20Guide.md


----------



## myionzolo

Hi I have the asus rog zenith extreme and this ram F4-3200C14Q-32GTZRX, (TOT 64GB) if I make a memtest86 one ram at a time, all the ram are good I have no errors.
While if I use all the RAM in total 64GB I have errors!
I have the latest firmware version especially 2001.
Maybe I should try 1003 and see if I still have errors? has anyone had the same problem and solved it somehow?
I would be glad if anyone could help me.
Thank you


----------



## dejanh

myionzolo said:


> Hi I have the asus rog zenith extreme and this ram F4-3200C14Q-32GTZRX, (TOT 64GB) if I make a memtest86 one ram at a time, all the ram are good I have no errors.
> While if I use all the RAM in total 64GB I have errors!
> I have the latest firmware version especially 2001.
> Maybe I should try 1003 and see if I still have errors? has anyone had the same problem and solved it somehow?
> I would be glad if anyone could help me.
> Thank you


For all intents and purposes, you can't run that ram at 3200MHz in either 8x8GB or 4x16GB configuration with the Zenith Extreme or Zenith Extreme Alpha. There is no real solution for it. You may be able to tune the settings to make it work (very slight possibility) but I suspect that it would take you weeks or longer of trial and error. I run my version of very similar memory at 3000MHz now since it is the fastest that it will go with consistent stability and no random boot-up training problems. Mind you, if you do have the Zenith Extreme, you can downgrade the UEFI version to 1003 and then you should be able to run 3200MHz in a 4x16GB config. I am not sure if you use all 8 DIMM slots (I suspect not).


----------



## SilverCard

No news or hints at a new bios?


----------



## MacMus

what is max ram speed for 8x8 configuration ?


----------



## dejanh

Anyone try the new 2101 UEFI? I cannot make 3000MHz stable using this new UEFI, same settings as 2001.

*Edit:* Apparently none of the settings that I tried for non-JEDEC speeds work. I tried a few combinations at 2933MHz and 3000MHz, even stuff based on the DRAM Calculator for Ryzen and none of them work. I can only run JEDEC now with this UEFI. Any input?


----------



## dejanh

Anyone from the veterans here able to respond to the issue I am seeing? @gupsterg are you still around? Any thoughts as to what could be going on?


----------



## RoBiK

dejanh said:


> Anyone from the veterans here able to respond to the issue I am seeing? @gupsterg are you still around? Any thoughts as to what could be going on?


you might be in the wrong thread. There is no 2101 BIOS for the Zenith Extreme. I think you are talking about the Alpha.


----------



## teroteki

Has anyone had any difficulties upgrading to Windows 20H2?
I'm on Win 1909 with a rock-solid 1402 BIOS and need to update the OS manually but Windows Upgrade Assistant keeps failing on restart, it BSOD's with kmode_exception_not_handled. Interestingly Windows Update never offers me the update and says the system is up to date.

I then updated my BIOS to 2001 but still can't get the upgrade to work.
I've left only kb/mouse/nvidia 3080 gpu and 2x nvme's (non-raid) in my PC.. and I still don't seem to be able to boot from the 20H2 Windows ISO/USB. An older 1903 USB drive boots fine :/
So yea, just wondering if anyone else has had issues with 20H2?


----------



## Ljugtomten

teroteki said:


> Has anyone had any difficulties upgrading to Windows 20H2?
> I'm on Win 1909 with a rock-solid 1402 BIOS and need to update the OS manually but Windows Upgrade Assistant keeps failing on restart, it BSOD's with kmode_exception_not_handled. Interestingly Windows Update never offers me the update and says the system is up to date.
> 
> I then updated my BIOS to 2001 but still can't get the upgrade to work.
> I've left only kb/mouse/nvidia 3080 gpu and 2x nvme's (non-raid) in my PC.. and I still don't seem to be able to boot from the 20H2 Windows ISO/USB. An older 1903 USB drive boots fine :/
> So yea, just wondering if anyone else has had issues with 20H2?


No problems for me, did you create your installation media/USB using the Microsoft Tool?
I always immediatly disable Fast Boot in BIOS, so I can select boot device at boot, make sure to select UEFI boot from the USB stick and not legacy/CSM and it should be fine.


----------



## teroteki

Ljugtomten said:


> No problems for me, did you create your installation media/USB using the Microsoft Tool?
> I always immediatly disable Fast Boot in BIOS, so I can select boot device at boot, make sure to select UEFI boot from the USB stick and not legacy/CSM and it should be fine.


Yea I made it with the Microsoft Media Creation Tool. Thought it might be packaging my drivers into it and causing the BSOD. But I'll try what you've suggested!
At least now I know there's not a known issue with ZE/2001 so I'll keep trying, thanks!


----------



## neil_tohno

New BIOS 2201 out. 



> ROG ZENITH EXTREME BIOS 2201
> "1. Support Windows 11 by default, no settings changes required in the UEFI BIOS.
> Before running the USB BIOS Flashback tool, please rename the BIOS file (ZE.CAP) using BIOSRenamer."


----------



## Ljugtomten

neil_tohno said:


> New BIOS 2201 out.


Upgraded to this earlier today.
Noticed that "Resize BAR" is an option available, but my TR1950X with a 2080Ti will not complete POST with that enabled (I know the HW does not support that feature).

After finally being able to boot, the "ROG AREION 10G" NIC could not load the drivers, had to revert to the old drivers from 2017 for it to work again.

Edit: Despite it saying "Windows 11 support", TPM is by default set to "Discrete" and not fTPM..


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Im surprised they updates this motherboard to be fair.


----------



## kozHITNRUN

teroteki said:


> Has anyone had any difficulties upgrading to Windows 20H2?
> I'm on Win 1909 with a rock-solid 1402 BIOS and need to update the OS manually but Windows Upgrade Assistant keeps failing on restart, it BSOD's with kmode_exception_not_handled. Interestingly Windows Update never offers me the update and says the system is up to date.
> 
> I then updated my BIOS to 2001 but still can't get the upgrade to work.
> I've left only kb/mouse/nvidia 3080 gpu and 2x nvme's (non-raid) in my PC.. and I still don't seem to be able to boot from the 20H2 Windows ISO/USB. An older 1903 USB drive boots fine :/
> So yea, just wondering if anyone else has had issues with 20H2?


yup
decided last week to rebuild and water cool set up in custom desk .
1950x on zenith exteme mobo,2080ti amp exteme, 1 500 gig m.2 ,the other storage I removed due to Windows 10 issues ,1600 watt corsair psu .
well Windows will not or refuses to update ,I've made install media of most recent windows with all the updates on USB,ssd,hhd. nothing works Windows stalls or tells me reboot to finish when I do doesn't work and Windows can't detect 2 monitors and I can't install nivoda drivers (keeps telling me driver not compatible with thos operating system) mind you it's Windows 64bit and I'm trying to put 64 bit driver .I've turned off the whole let Windows install drivers for devices thingy ....even tried to insat driver after using the driver Uninstaller tool in safe mode and have tried to install in safe mode nope sfa..and Windows keeps adding lock screen after I remove it .ant clues


----------



## teroteki

kozHITNRUN said:


> ant clues


For my case it was related to my RAID controller. I have a MegaRAID card which would cause the hang as soon as Windows tried to load.
I contacted both Microsoft and MegaRAID - MegaRAID confirmed the issue and in turn got Microsoft to revert whatever driver change they'd made. The next Win 10 ISO released loaded the controller without issue.
I'm not sure what could be causing your issue, do you maybe have a VR/hdmi device plugged into the GPU? Sometimes on my system the VR headset will 'steal' the primary monitor on a fresh Windows install if I've not allowed the DisplayPort/monitors to register first.
I updated to 2201 BIOS a few weeks ago and there was no issues with Win10.


----------



## Richard Hillman

I’ve read that the memory problems are related to the CPU mounting bracket being “loose”, and I am have the C1/0D problem when trying to boot up my Corsair 8x8Gb Dom Plat 3200Mhz @ anything past 2800Mhz, even on relaxed timings (with only 4x8Gb I can overclock to 3600Mhz+ tho, so I know it’s not my RAM) so I plan on going through the CPU area as it’s the only thing I haven’t tried yet. I am running an EKWB Zenith Extreme specific block but shouldn’t be a problem. OP does not get that error anymore after adjusting/tightening the mount so hoping for the same 🤞🏻 I’ve read more then once the memory controllers on this board are finicky at best in quad channel mode 🫠


----------

